ML21035A204
| ML21035A204 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 01/21/2021 |
| From: | NRC/OCIO |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML21035A187 | List:
|
| References | |
| NRC-2020-000123 | |
| Download: ML21035A204 (378) | |
Text
Turkey Point Plant Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Prepared for: Prepared by:
ecology and environment, inc.
Global Environmental Specialists 1009496.0001.06.02
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page ES EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
.................................................. ES-1 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................. 1-1 1.1 Brief Overview of Automated Monitoring Network ..................................... 1-2 1.2 Quarterly Water Quality Sampling ................................................................ 1-2 1.3 Extent of CCS Water ..................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 CCS Water and Salt Budget ........................................................................... 1-2 1.5 Ecological Monitoring ................................................................................... 1-3 1.6 Interceptor Ditch Operation ........................................................................... 1-3 1.7 Plant Operations and Remedial Activities ..................................................... 1-4 1.8 Data Quality Objectives and Acceptance Criteria ......................................... 1-4 2 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING .................................. 2-1 2.1 Data Collection .............................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Automated Meteorological Results................................................................ 2-1 2.3 Discussion of Results ..................................................................................... 2-2 2.3.1 Rainfall ............................................................................................... 2-2 2.3.2 Temperature ....................................................................................... 2-3 2.3.3 Wind Direction and Speed ................................................................. 2-4 2.4 Atmospheric Deposition and Exchange of Tritium ....................................... 2-4 2.4.1 Sample Collection and Analysis ........................................................ 2-4 2.4.2 Results and Discussion ...................................................................... 2-5 3 GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER MONITORING .. 3-1 3.1 Groundwater Quality ..................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Data Collection .................................................................................. 3-1 3.1.2 Automated Data Results .................................................................... 3-1 3.1.3 Analytical Data Results...................................................................... 3-2 3.1.4 Discussion of Results ......................................................................... 3-3 3.1.4.1 Groundwater Salt Constituents and Tritium ......................... 3-3 3.1.4.2 Groundwater Nutrients.......................................................... 3-9 3.1.4.3 Groundwater Temperature .................................................. 3-10 3.2 Surface Water Quality ................................................................................. 3-11 3.2.1 Data Collection ................................................................................ 3-11 iii
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Table of Contents Section Page 3.2.2 Automated Data Results .................................................................. 3-11 3.2.3 Analytical Data Results.................................................................... 3-11 3.2.4 Discussion of Results ....................................................................... 3-12 3.2.4.1 CCS Stations....................................................................... 3-12 3.2.4.2 Bicayne Bay and Card Sound Stations ............................... 3-14 3.2.4.3 L-31E Canal Stations.......................................................... 3-16 3.2.4.4 S-20 Discharge Canal and Card Sound Canal .................... 3-18 3.2.4.5 ID Stations .......................................................................... 3-19 3.3 Water Levels ................................................................................................ 3-20 3.3.1 Data Collection ................................................................................ 3-20 3.3.2 Groundwater and Surface Water Level Results ............................... 3-20 3.3.3 Discussion of Results ....................................................................... 3-21 3.3.3.1 Groundwater ....................................................................... 3-21 3.3.3.2 Surface Water ..................................................................... 3-22 3.4 Extent of CCS Water ................................................................................... 3-23 4 CCS WATER AND SALT BUDGET ...................................... 4-1 4.1 Model Summary............................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 Model Calibration, Results, and Discussion .................................................. 4-3 4.2.1 Parameter Adjustments......................................................... 4-3 4.2.2 Flow Balance Comparisons .................................................. 4-4 4.2.3 Simulated CCS Water Levels and Salt ................................. 4-6 4.3 Conclusions .................................................................................................... 4-7 5 ECOLOGICAL MONITORING ........................................... 5-1 5.1 Marsh, Mangroves, and Tree Islands ............................................................. 5-1 5.1.1 Results and Discussion ...................................................................... 5-1 5.1.1.1 Community Description ....................................................... 5-1 5.1.1.2 Freshwater Marsh Sampling ................................................. 5-3 5.1.1.3 Mangrove Sampling ............................................................. 5-7 5.2 Biscayne Bay/Card Sound ........................................................................... 5-10 5.2.1 Results and Discussion .................................................................... 5-10 5.2.1.1 Water Depth and Sediment Conditions .............................. 5-10 5.2.1.2 Surface Water Quality ........................................................ 5-11 5.2.1.3 Porewater Quality ............................................................... 5-13 5.2.1.4 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation.......................................... 5-15 5.2.1.5 Seagrass Leaf Nutrients ...................................................... 5-18 6 INTERCEPTOR DITCH OPERATION ................................. 6-1 6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Operational or Structural Changes ................................................................. 6-1 6.3 Interceptor Ditch Operation and Transect Surface Water Levels ................. 6-2 iv
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Table of Contents Section Page 7
SUMMARY
AND INTERPRETATIONS ............................... 7-1 7.1 Meteorological ............................................................................................... 7-2 7.2 Groundwater ................................................................................................. 7-3 7.3 Surface Water ................................................................................................ 7-4 7.4 Water Budget ................................................................................................. 7-5 7.5 Ecological ...................................................................................................... 7-6 7.6 Interceptor Ditch ........................................................................................... 7-6 8 REFERENCES .................................................................. 8-1 Appendices A Additional Monitoring Results B Data Collection Methods C Plant Outage and Operational Data D Automated Station Probe Calibration Logs E Automated Water Quality and Water Level Qualifications F Field Sampling Logs for Groundwater and Surface Water Stations G Data Usability Summaries for Groundwater, Surface Water, Porewater, Rainfall, and Leaf Nutrient Analytical Results H Level 4 Reports I Analytical Outliers J U.S. Geological Survey Induction Logs K Ecological Calculations v
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Table of Contents Section Page L Scientific and Common Names of Organisms Observed during Monitoring M Monthly Water and Salt Balance Tables N Turkey Point Interceptor Ditch Monitoring Data vi
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Tables LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1.1-1 Well Construction Summary...................................................................................... 1-5 1.1-2 Summary of Monitoring Efforts for Reporting Period (June 2018 - May 2019) ...... 1-7 1.8-1 Summary of Data Quality Objective Performance .................................................... 1-8 2.1-1 Parameters Collected at Hourly Intervals Reported by the Meteorological Station at TPM-1 .................................................................................................................... 2-6 2.2-1 Rainfall Recorded at the Meteorological Station TPM-1 and S20F, and Calculated Based on NEXRAD Data (June 2018 - May 2019) .................................................. 2-7 2.2-2 Total Monthly Rainfall in and around the CCS (June 2018 - May 2019) ............... 2-13 2.2-3 Average Monthly Air Temperature in Homestead Airport, Florida (1996 - 2019) . 2-14 2.3-1 Comparison of Historical NEXRAD Rainfall Over CCS (Jan 1996 - May 2019) .. 2-15 2.4-1 Rainfall Tritium Results........................................................................................... 2-16 3.0-1 Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring at Each Station ................................. 3-25 3.0-2 Analytes Measured in Groundwater, Surface Water, and the Cooling Canal System ...................................................................................................................... 3-26 3.1-1 Statistical Summary of Automated Groundwater Specific Conductance (µS/cm) . 3-27 3.1-2 Statistical Summary of Automated Groundwater Salinity (in PSS-78 scale) .......... 3-29 3.1-3 Statistical Summary of Automated Groundwater Temperature (°C)....................... 3-31 3.1-4 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the June 2018 Sampling Event3-33 3.1-5 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the September 2018 Sampling Event ........................................................................................................................ 3-38 vii
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Tables Table Page 3.1-6 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the December 2018 Sampling Event ........................................................................................................................ 3-43 3.1-7 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the March 2019 Sampling Event ........................................................................................................................ 3-48 3.1-8 Range of Ion and Nutrient Concentrations in Groundwater .................................... 3-53 3.2-1 Probe Types/Automated Measurements at Surface Water Stations for the Reporting Period ...................................................................................................... 3-54 3.2-2 Statistical Summary of Automated Surface Water Specific Conductance (µS/cm) 3-55 3.2-3 Statistical Summary of Automated Surface Water Salinity (in PSS-78 scale) ........ 3-56 3.2-4 Statistical Summary of Automated Surface Water Temperature (°C) ..................... 3-57 3.2-5 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the June 2018 Sampling Event ........................................................................................................................ 3-58 3.2-6 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the September 2018 Sampling Event ........................................................................................................ 3-61 3.2-7 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the December 2018 Sampling Event ........................................................................................................................ 3-64 3.2-8 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the March 2019 Sampling Event ........................................................................................................................ 3-67 3.2-9 Range of Ion and Nutrient Concentrations in Surface Water .................................. 3-70 4.2-1 Calibration Parameters ............................................................................................... 4-9 4.2-2 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components for the Period of Record (June 2018 through May 2019) ................................................................................ 4-10 4.2-3 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components for the Period of Record (June 2018 through May 2019) ................................................................................ 4-11 5.0-1 Summary of all Ecological Data Collected and Significance to the Project............ 5-20 5.1-1 Data and Samples Collected from August 2018 through May 2019 ...................... 5-24 5.1-2 Plot Location, Community Description, Dominant Vegetation in Subplots ........... 5-25 viii
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Tables Table Page 5.1-3 Species and Individuals Counted in Subplots for Shannon-Wiener Index of Diversity Calculations in November 2018 ............................................................... 5-27 5.1-4 Shannon-Wiener Index Calculated Values for Plots and Transects in November 2018 with Historical Period of Record Range ......................................................... 5-29 5.1-5 Average Sawgrass Percent Cover per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Average. .................................................. 5-30 5.1-6 Average Sawgrass Height per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range .......................................................................... 5-31 5.1-7 Corrected Live and Total Sawgrass Biomass Equations for Previous and Current Reporting Period Events.. ........................................................................................ 5-32 5.1-8 Average Sawgrass Live Biomass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.. ..................................................... 5-33 5.1-9 Average Sawgrass Total Biomass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.. ..................................................... 5-34 5.1-10 Annual Net Primary Productivity during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.. ......................................................................................... 5-35 5.1-11 Sawgrass Leaf Sclerophylly per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.. ................................................................ 5-36 5.1-12 Average Leaf Carbon for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.. ..................................................... 5-37 5.1-13 Average Leaf Total Nitrogen for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.. .................................... 5-38 5.1-14 Average Leaf Total Phosphorous for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.. .................................... 5-39 5.1-15 Average Leaf Carbon Isotopes for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.. .................................... 5-40 5.1-16 Average Leaf Nitrogen Isotopes for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range... ................................... 5-41 5.1-17 Sawgrass Leaf C:N Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period.. ..................................................................................................................... 5-42 5.1-18 Sawgrass Leaf N:P Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period.. .................................................................................................................... 5-43 ix
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Tables Table Page 5.1-19 Average Specific Conductance (µS/cm) of Porewater at 30 cm Depth during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range. ..................................... 5-44 5.1-20 Average Temperature (°C) of Porewater at 30 cm Depth during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range. ...................................................... 5-45 5.1-21 Marsh Analytical Porewater Results August 2018 .................................................. 5-46 5.1-22 Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater Results November 2018..................... 5-48 5.1-23 Marsh Analytical Porewater Results February 2019 ............................................... 5-52 5.1-24 Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater Results May 2019 .............................. 5-54 5.1-25 Range of Porewater Field Parameters and Ionic and Nutrient Concentrations at the Marsh, Brackish, and Tree Island Plots during the Historical Period of Record and Reporting Period.. .................................................................................................... 5-58 5.1-26 Percent Cover of Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect for the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Average. .............................................................. 5-59 5.1-27 Average Red Mangrove Height per Plot and Transect for the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.. ................................................................ 5-60 5.1-28 Average Red Mangrove Biomass per Plot and Transect for the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.. ................................................................ 5-61 5.1-29 Red Mangrove Sclerophylly per Plot and Transect for the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.. ......................................................... ...5-62 5.1-30 Average Leaf Carbon for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period with Historical Period of Record Range. 5-63 5.1-31 Average Leaf Total Nitrogen for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range. ..................................... 5-64 5.1-32 Average Leaf Total Phosphorus for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range. ................. ..5-65 5.1-33 Average Leaf Carbon Isotopes for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range. ..................................... 5-66 5.1-34 Average Leaf Nitrogen Isotopes for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range. ............................... 5-67 5.1-35 Red Mangrove Leaf C:N Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period. ...................................................................................................................... 5-68 x
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Tables Table Page 5.1-36 Red Mangrove Leaf N:P Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period ....................................................................................................................... 5-69 5.1-37 Range of Porewater Field Parameters and Ionic and Nutrient Concentrations at Mangrove Plots in the Historical Period of Record and Reporting Period .............. 5-70 5.2-1 Latitude and Longitude of Biscayne Bay, Card Sound, and Barnes Sound Ecological Sampling Points ..................................................................................... 5-71 5.2-2 Categories of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Scored Using Braun-Blanquet Cover Abundance Index Method at Each Ecological Sampling Point .................... 5-72 5.2-3 Mean Water Depth, + One Standard Error, by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019 ........................................................................... 5-73 5.2-4 Substrate Type by Transect, Season, and Study Area During Fall 2018 and Spring 2019.......................................................................................................................... 5-74 5.2-5 Percent Light Aenuation Based on Readings (µmols/m2c) Taken Simultaneously in Air and Water in Half Meter Increments at One Point Along Each Transect during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019 ........................................................................... 5-75 5.2-6 Mean Surface Water Quality Variables, +/- One Standard Error, by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019 .................................... 5-76 5.2-7 Mean Bottom Water Quality Variables, +/- One Standard Error, by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019 .................................... 5-77 5.2-8 Comparison of Mean Porewater and Bottom Water Column Temperatures, Salinity, and Specific Conductance by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019 ....................................................................................... 5-78 5.2-9 Porewater Nutrient Concentrations by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019 ....................................................................................... 5-79 5.2-10 Percentage of Quadrats Along Each Transect (n=32) Containing Thalassia testudinum (TT) and/or Halodule wrightii (HW) by Study Area (n=64) and Season during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019 ............................................................... 5-80 5.2-11 Mean Hardbottom Depth, + One Standard Error, by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019 ................................................................... 5-81 5.2-12 Percentage of Sampling Points within Each Study Area (n=16) Having Specific Bottom Conditions during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019 ............................................ 5-82 5.2-13 Mean Braun-Blanquet Coverage Abundance (BBCA) Scores, + One Standard Error, for Total Macrophyte Coverage (Excluding Drift Red Algae), Total xi
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Tables Table Page Seagrass, and Total Macroalgae, by Transect and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019 ....................................................................................................... 5-83 5.2-14 Seagrass Leaf Nutrient Concentrations during Reporting Period Fall 2018............ 5-84 5.2-15 Comparison of Seagrass Leaf Nutrient Molar Ratios during Reporting Period Fall 2018.......................................................................................................................... 5-85 6.3-1 Range in Surface Water Head Differences ................................................................ 6-4 6.3-2 Hours and Volumes of ID Pump Operation per Month (June 2018 through May 2019) .......................................................................................................................... 6-7 6.3-3 Pumping Summary..................................................................................................... 6-8 A.1-1. Additional Data Provided in this Appendix or Associated Data Files ...................... A-3 C-1 June 2018 through May 2019 Outage Summary Report (PTF-01)............................C-1 C-2 June 2018 through May 2019 Outage Summary Report (PTF-02)............................C-1 C-3 June 2018 through May 2019 Outage Summary Report (PTN-03) ...........................C-2 C-4 June 2018 through May 2019 Outage Summary Report (PTN-04) ...........................C-2 C-5 June 2018 through May 2019 Plant Operational Data ...............................................C-3 E-1 Automated Data Qualifiers ........................................................................................ E-1 I-1 Groundwater Data Removed from Analysis ............................................................... I-3 I-2 Historic Well Data Removed from Analysis .............................................................. I-6 I-3 Surface Water Data Removed from Analysis ............................................................. I-7 I-4 Marsh Porewater Data Removed from Analysis ........................................................ I-9 I-5 Mangrove Porewater Data Removed from Analysis ................................................ I-10 I-6 Biscayne Bay Porewater Data Removed from Analysis........................................... I-11 L-1 Terrestrial Plant Taxa Observed During the Reporting Period .................................. L-1 xii
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Tables Table Page L-2 Scientific and Common Names of Organisms Occurring in Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Quadrats during the Reporting Period ..................................................... L-2 M-1 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, June 2018......................M-1 M-2 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, July 2018 ......................M-2 M-3 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, August 2018 .................M-3 M-4 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, September 2018 ............M-4 M-5 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, October 2018 ................M-5 M-6 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, November 2018 ............M-6 M-7 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, December 2018 ............M-7 M-8 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, January 2019 ................M-8 M-9 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, February 2019 ..............M-9 M-10 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, March 2019 ................M-10 M-11 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, April 2019 ..................M-11 M-12 Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components, May 2019....................M-12 M-13 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, June 2018 .....................M-13 M-14 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, July 2018 .....................M-14 M-15 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, August 2018 .................M-15 M-16 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, September 2018 ...........M-16 M-17 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, October 2018 ...............M-17 M-18 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, November 2018 ...........M-18 M-19 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, December 2018 ............M-19 M-20 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, January 2019 ................M-20 M-21 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, February 2019 ..............M-21 M-22 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, March 2019 ..................M-22 M-23 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, April 2019 ....................M-23 M-24 Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components, May 2019 .....................M-24 N.1-1 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events - Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - June 2018 ................................................................................... N-1 xiii
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Tables Table Page N.1-2 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events - Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - July 2018 ................................................................................... N-2 N.1-3 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events - Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - August 2018............................................................................... N-3 N.1-4 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events - Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - September 2018 ......................................................................... N-4 N.1-5 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - October 2018 ............................................................................. N-5 N.1-6 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - November 2018 ......................................................................... N-6 N.1-7 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - December 2018 .......................................................................... N-7 N.1-8 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - January 2019 .............................................................................. N-8 N.1-9 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - February 2019 ............................................................................ N-9 N.1-10 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - March 2019 .............................................................................. N-10 N.1-11 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - April 2019 ................................................................................ N-11 N.1-12 Water Levels, Salinity Measurements and Pumping Events Levee-31, Canal 32, Interceptor Ditch - May 2019 ................................................................................. N-13 xiv
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Figures LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1.1-1 Locations of the Meteorological Station and Rainfall Collectors ............................ 1-15 1.1-2 Locations of Groundwater Monitoring Stations ...................................................... 1-16 1.1-3 Locations of Surface Water Monitoring Stations .................................................... 1-17 1.5-1 Ecological Transect Locations ................................................................................. 1-18 2.1-1 Locations of Rainfall Stations in and around the CCS ............................................ 2-17 2.2-1 Daily Rainfall and Hourly Temperature at TPM-1 for Reporting Period ................ 2-18 2.2-2 Monthly Rainfall Comparisons to Average Historical Data .................................... 2-19 2.2-3 Monthly Temperature Comparisons to Average Historical Data ............................ 2-20 2.2-4 Wind Rose Plots Indicating Wind Speed and Direction at TPM-1 for the Reporting Period (June 2018 - May 2019) .............................................................. 2-21 2.2-5 Wind Speed (Class) Frequency Distribution at TPM-1 for the Reporting Period (June 2018 - May 2019) .......................................................................................... 2-22 2.3-1 Annual Rainfall Totals from 2010-2019 .................................................................. 2-23 2.4-1 Tritium (+/- 1) Values in Rainfall (July 2018 - March 2019) ................................. 2-24 2.4-2 Tritium Values in Rainfall and Evaporation Pans with Distance from the CCS .... 2-25 3.1-1 TPGW-1 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................... 3-72 3.1-2 TPGW-2 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................... 3-73 3.1-3 TPGW-3 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................... 3-74 3.1-4 TPGW-4 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................... 3-75 3.1-5 TPGW-5 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................... 3-76 3.1-6 TPGW-6 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................... 3-77 xv
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Figures Figure Page 3.1-7 TPGW-7 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................... 3-78 3.1-8 TPGW-8 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................... 3-79 3.1-9 TPGW-9 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................... 3-80 3.1-10 TPGW-10 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................. 3-81 3.1-11 TPGW-11 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................. 3-82 3.1-12 TPGW-12 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................. 3-83 3.1-13 TPGW-13 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................. 3-84 3.1-14 TPGW-14 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................. 3-85 3.1-15 Average and Standard Deviation of Specific Conductance Values (µS/cm) for Groundwater Stations............................................................................................... 3-86 3.1-16 Average and Standard Deviation of Salinity (PSS-78) for Groundwater Stations .. 3-87 3.1-17 Average and Standard Deviation of Temperature (°C) for Groundwater Stations .. 3-88 3.1-18 Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Groundwater Chloride (mg/L)
Results ...................................................................................................................... 3-89 3.1-19 Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Groundwater Sodium (mg/L)
Results ...................................................................................................................... 3-90 3.1-20 Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Groundwater Tritium (pCi/L)
Results ...................................................................................................................... 3-91 3.1-21 Historical Range and Reporting Period Semi-Annual Groundwater Nutrient (mg/L) Results ......................................................................................................... 3-92 3.1-22 L-3 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2018 through March 2019 ................................ 3-93 3.1-23 L-5 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2018 through March 2019 ................................ 3-94 3.1-24 G-21 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2018 through March 2019 ............................. 3-95 3.1-25 G-28 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2018 through March 2019 ............................ 3-96 3.1-26 G-35 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2018 through March 2019 ............................. 3-97 3.1-27 L-3 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2018 through March 2019 ......................... 3-98 3.1-28 L-5 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2018 through March 2019 ......................... 3-99 3.1-29 G-21 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2018 through March 2019 ..................... 3-100 3.1-30 G-28 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2018 through March 2019 ..................... 3-101 xvi
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Figures Figure Page 3.1-31 G-35 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2018 through March 2019 ..................... 3-102 3.2-1 TPBBSW-3 Specific Conductance and Temperature ............................................ 3-103 3.2-2 TPBBSW-4 Specific Conductance and Temperature ............................................ 3-104 3.2-3 TPBBSW-5 Specific Conductance and Temperature ............................................ 3-105 3.2-4 TPBBSW-10 Specific Conductance and Temperature .......................................... 3-106 3.2-5 TPBBSW-14 Specific Conductance and Temperature .......................................... 3-107 3.2-6 TPSWC-1 Specific Conductance and Temperature ............................................... 3-108 3.2-7 TPSWC-2 Specific Conductance and Temperature ............................................... 3-109 3.2-8 TPSWC-3 Specific Conductance and Temperature ............................................... 3-110 3.2-9 TPSWC-4 Specific Conductance and Temperature ............................................... 3-111 3.2-10 TPSWC-5 Specific Conductance and Temperature ............................................... 3-112 3.2-11 TPSWCCS-1 Specific Conductance and Temperature .......................................... 3-113 3.2-12 TPSWCCS-2 Specific Conductance and Temperature .......................................... 3-114 3.2-13 TPSWCCS-3 Specific Conductance and Temperature .......................................... 3-115 3.2-14 TPSWCCS-4 Specific Conductance and Temperature .......................................... 3-116 3.2-15 TPSWCCS-5 Specific Conductance and Temperature .......................................... 3-117 3.2-16 TPSWCCS-6 Specific Conductance and Temperature .......................................... 3-118 3.2-17 TPSWCCS-7 Specific Conductance and Temperature .......................................... 3-119 3.2-18 TPSWID-1 Specific Conductance and Temperature ............................................. 3-120 3.2-19 TPSWID-2 Specific Conductance and Temperature ............................................. 3-121 3.2-20 TPSWID-3 Specific Conductance and Temperature ............................................. 3-122 3.2-21 Average and Standard Deviation of Specific Conductance (µS/cm) for Surface Water Stations ........................................................................................................ 3-123 3.2-22 Average and Standard Deviation of Salinity (PSS-78) for Surface Water Stations................................................................................................................... 3-124 3.2-23 Average and Standard Deviation of Temperature (°C) for Surface Water Stations................................................................................................................... 3-125 xvii
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Figures Figure Page 3.2-24 Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Surface Water Chloride (mg/L)
Results .................................................................................................................... 3-126 3.2-25 Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Surface Water Sodium (mg/L)
Results .................................................................................................................... 3-127 3.2-26 Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Surface Water Tritium (pCi/L)
Results .................................................................................................................... 3-128 3.2-27 Reporting Period Semi-Annual Surface Water TN (mg/L) and NH3 (mg/L as N)
Results with Historical Period of Record Range .................................................. 3-129 3.2-28 Reporting Period Semi-Annual Surface Water TP (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Range ........................................................................................ 3-130 3.2-29 Temperature Difference between TPSWCCS-6 and TPSWCCS-1/Cooling in the CCS ........................................................................................................................ 3-131 3.2-30 Comparison of Specific Conductance and Temperature in the L-31E Canal for Top and Bottom Locations..................................................................................... 3-132 3.2-31 TPSWC-3B Qualified Salinity and Difference in Level between TPSWC-3 and TPSWC-5 .............................................................................................................. 3-133 3.2-32 Comparison of Specific Conductance at TPSWC-5 and TPBBSW-4 ................... 3-134 3.3-1 TPGW-1 Water Elevations .................................................................................... 3-135 3.3-2 TPGW-2 Water Elevations .................................................................................... 3-135 3.3-3 TPGW-3 Water Elevations .................................................................................... 3-136 3.3-4 TPGW-4 Water Elevations .................................................................................... 3-136 3.3-5 TPGW-5 Water Elevations .................................................................................... 3-137 3.3-6 TPGW-6 Water Elevations .................................................................................... 3-137 3.3-7 TPGW-7 Water Elevations .................................................................................... 3-138 3.3-8 TPGW-8 Water Elevations .................................................................................... 3-138 3.3-9 TPGW-9 Water Elevations .................................................................................... 3-139 3.3-10 TPGW-10 Water Elevations .................................................................................. 3-139 3.3-11 TPGW-11 Water Elevations .................................................................................. 3-140 3.3-12 TPGW-12 Water Elevations .................................................................................. 3-140 3.3-13 TPGW-13 Water Elevations .................................................................................. 3-141 xviii
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Figures Figure Page 3.3-14 TPGW-14 Water Elevations .................................................................................. 3-141 3.3-15 TPBBSW-3 Water Elevations................................................................................ 3-142 3.3-16 TPBBSW-10 Water Elevations.............................................................................. 3-142 3.3-17 TPBBSW-14 Water Elevations.............................................................................. 3-143 3.3-18 TPSWC-1 Water Elevations .................................................................................. 3-143 3.3-19 TPSWC-2 Water Elevations .................................................................................. 3-144 3.3-20 TPSWC-3 Water Elevations .................................................................................. 3-144 3.3-21 TPSWC-4 Water Elevations .................................................................................. 3-145 3.3-22 TPSWC-5 Water Elevations .................................................................................. 3-145 3.3-23 TPSWCCS-1 Water Elevations ............................................................................. 3-146 3.3-24 TPSWCCS-2 Water Elevations ............................................................................. 3-146 3.3-25 TPSWCCS-3 Water Elevations ............................................................................. 3-147 3.3-26 TPSWCCS-4 Water Elevations ............................................................................. 3-147 3.3-27 TPSWCCS-5 Water Elevations ............................................................................. 3-148 3.3-28 TPSWCCS-6 Water Elevations ............................................................................. 3-148 3.3-29 TPSWCCS-7 Water Elevations ............................................................................. 3-149 3.3-30 TPSWID-1 Water Elevations ................................................................................. 3-149 3.3-31 TPSWID-2 Water Elevations ................................................................................. 3-150 3.3-32 TPSWID-3 Water Elevations ................................................................................. 3-150 3.3-33 Comparison of Time-Series Groundwater Elevations across the Landscape at TPGW-14, TPGW-13, TPGW-4, and TPGW-9 .................................................... 3-151 3.3-34 Comparison of Time-Series Groundwater Elevations across the Landscape at TPGW-10, TPGW-13, TPGW-1, TPGW-5, and TPGW-7 ................................... 3-152 3.3-35 Comparison of Time-Series Groundwater Elevations at TPGW-13S and CCS Surface Water Elevations at TPSWCCS-2 ............................................................ 3-153 3.4-1 Locations of Tritium and Chloride Cross-Sections ............................................... 3-154 3.4-2 Tritium Cross-Section A-A, Current Concentration Isopleths ............................ 3-155 3.4-3 Tritium Cross-Section B-B, Current Concentration Isopleths ............................. 3-156 xix
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Figures Figure Page 3.4-4 Chloride Cross Section A-A ................................................................................. 3-157 3.4-5 Chloride Cross Section B-B ................................................................................. 3-158 4.1-1 Flow into (A) and out of (B) the CCS, Shown in Cross-Section ............................. 4-12 4.2-1 Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flows of Water for the CCS during the Period from June 2018 - May 2019 ......................................................................... 4-13 4.2-2 Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flux of Salt Mass for the CCS during the Period from June 2018 - May 2019 ......................................................................... 4-13 4.2-3 Modeled versus Measured Water Elevations (NAVD 88) in the CCS during the Reporting Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Water Elevation .............................. 4-14 4.2-4 Modeled versus Measured Salinity in the CCS during the Reporting Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Salinity .................................................................................... 4-14 5.1-1 Reporting Period Porewater Sodium (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges. ........................................................................................................ 5-86 5.1-2 Reporting Period Porewater Chloride (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges. ........................................................................................................ 5-87 5.1-3 Reporting Period Semi-Annual Porewater Total Nitrogen (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges. ......................................... ...5-88 5.1-4 Reporting Period Semi-Annual Porewater Total Ammonia (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges ......................................................................... 5-89 5.1-5 Reporting Period Semi-Annual Porewater Total Phosphorus (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges. ........................................................................ 5-90 5.1-6 Reporting Period Porewater Tritium (pCi/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges. ........................................................................................................ 5-91 5.2-1 Reporting Period Bay Porewater Sodium (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges. ........................................................................................................ 5-92 5.2-2 Reporting Period Bay Porewater Chloride (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges. .................................................................................................... 5-93 xx
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Figures Figure Page 5.2-3 Reporting Period Bay Porewater Total Nitrogen (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges. ......................................................... ...5-94 5.2-4 Reporting Period Bay Porewater Total Ammonia (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges ......................................................................................... 5-95 5.2-5 Reporting Period Bay Porewater Total Phosphorus (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges. ........................................................................................ 5-96 5.2-6 Reporting Period Bay Porewater Tritium (pCi/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges ......................................................................................................... 5-97 6.3-1 Historical ID Monitoring Wells and Transects .......................................................... 6-9 6.3-2 Transect A Field-Recorded Water Levels June 2018 through May 2019 ............... 6-10 6.3-3 Transect B Field-Recorded Water Levels June 2018 through May 2019 ................ 6-11 6.3-4 Transect C Field-Recorded Water Levels June 2018 through May 2019 ................ 6-12 6.3-5 Transect D Field-Recorded Water Levels June 2018 through May 2019 ............... 6-13 6.3-6 Transect E Field-Recorded Water Levels June 2018 through May 2019 ................ 6-14 6.3-7 Interceptor Ditch Pump Operation and Rainfall ...................................................... 6-15 A.1-1. TPGW-15 Specific Conductance and Temperature .................................................. A-6 A.1-2. TPGW-16 Specific Conductance and Temperature. ................................................. A-7 A.1-3. TPGW-17 Specific Conductance and Temperature. ................................................. A-8 A.1-4. TPGW-18 Specific Conductance and Temperature .................................................. A-9 A.1-5. TPGW-19 Specific Conductance and Temperature ................................................ A-10 A.1-6. TPGW-20 Specific Conductance and Temperature. ............................................... A-11 A.1-7. TPGW-21 Specific Conductance and Temperature. ............................................... A-12 A.1-8. TPGW-15 Water Elevations. ................................................................................... A-13 A.1-9. TPGW-16 Water Elevations. ................................................................................... A-13 A.1-10. TPGW-17 Water Elevations. ................................................................................. A-14 A.1-11. TPGW-18 Water Elevations .................................................................................. A-14 A.1-12. TPGW-19 Water Elevations. ................................................................................. A-15 A.1-13. TPGW-20 Water Elevations. ................................................................................. A-15 xxi
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 List of Figures Figure Page A.1-14. TPGW-21 Water Elevations. ................................................................................. A-16 A.2-1. TPSWTESTC-1 Specific Conductance and Temperature ....................................... A-17 A.2-2. TPL31E-INTN Specific Conductance and Temperature. ........................................ A-18 A.2-3. TPL31E-INTS Specific Conductance and Temperature. ........................................ A-19 A.2-4. TPBBSW-6 Specific Conductance and Temperature. ............................................. A-20 A.2-5. TPBBSW-7T Specific Conductance and Temperature ........................................... A-21 A.2-6. TPBBSW-7B Specific Conductance and Temperature ........................................... A-22 xxii
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Acronyms and Abbreviations ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
°C degree(s) Celsius
µS/cm microSiemen(s) per centimeter parts per mille Agencies South Florida Water Management District, Miami-Dade County Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources, and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection ANPP Annual Net Primary Productivity BBCA Braun-Blanquet Cover Abundance CA Consent Agreement CCS cooling canal system cm centimeter(s)
C:N carbon to nitrogen CO Consent Order COC Conditions of Certification CSEM Continuous Surface Electromagnetic Mapping DO dissolved oxygen DQO data quality objective DUS data usability summary EDMS Electronic Data Management System EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency EPU Extended Power Uprate FDEP Florida Department of Environmental Protection FDOH-BRC Florida Department of Health - Bureau of Radiation Control FIU-WQMN Florida International University Water Quality Monitoring Network FPL Florida Power & Light Company ft foot/feet g/m2 gram(s) per square meter xxiii
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Acronyms and Abbreviations GPS global positioning system ID Interceptor Ditch LNWR Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge m meter(s) m2 square meter(s)
MDC Miami-Dade County mg/kg milligram(s) per kilogram mg/L milligram(s) per liter mgd million gallons per day Monitoring Plan Florida Power & Light Company Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan (2009) mph miles per hour NAVD 88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988 NEXRAD Next Generation Radar N:P nitrogen to phosphorus NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission OP orthophosphate PAR photosynthetically active radiation pCi/L picocuries per liter PSS-78 Practical Salinity Scale of 1978 PSU practical salinity unit QA quality assurance QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan QC quality control RER (Miami-Dade County) Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources RWS recovery well system SAV submerged aquatic vegetation SFWMD South Florida Water Management District SWI Shannon-Wiener Index (of diversity)
TKN total Kjeldahl nitrogen TN total nitrogen xxiv
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Acronyms and Abbreviations TP total phosphorus Turkey Point Florida Power & Light Company Turkey Point Power Plant UFA Upper Floridan Aquifer USGS United States Geological Survey xxv
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Executive Summary EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Summary Observations from the 2018 - 2019 reporting period demonstrate that the data collection and assessment objectives of the Consent Order (CO), Consent Agreement (CA), and Fifth Supplemental Agreement are being met. The reporting period was generally drier than past years, resulting in limited progress in reducing salinity. However, groundwater, porewater, and surface water monitoring continues to confirm that the extent and movement of water that comes from the cooling canal system (CCS) is relatively well understood.
This report provides a review of the extent and factors affecting the disposition of water, salt, and nutrients in and around the Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) Turkey Point Power Plant (Turkey Point) facility.
Meteorological Meteorologically, this was a drier year with less intense/large rainfall events as compared to historical data. The total rainfall over the CCS for the reporting period was 36.97 inches compared to the 24-year historical average of 43.67 inches, with the deficit occurring in the wet season. The highest daily rainfall total was only 3.87 inches, and the second highest was just 2.30 inches; these two events comprise the only instances of rainfall greater than 2 inches over the reporting period. The lack of a heavy single day rainfall or multi-day events in excess of 5 or 6 inches is a notable meteorological finding for the reporting period. Heavy rain events, which have occurred more frequently in most years, are important in helping lower CCS salinities; these rain events did not occur during this reporting period. Additionally, 4 months in this reporting period had average monthly air temperatures that were some of the highest over the last 23 years of record. Evaporation also exceeded rainfall in the CCS for 11 out of 12 months. As a result, over 19 million gallons per day (mgd) of freshwater left the CCS via evaporation than was added by rainfall.
Groundwater Most of the groundwater data collected during this reporting period were consistent with values and trends measured over the entire monitoring effort. However, there were some exceptions, including the reduction of specific conductance, chloride, and sodium in several shallow wells west of, but closest to, the CCS that coincide with recovery well system (RWS) pumping. This most notably included wells TPGW-1S, TPGW-15S, and, to a lesser extent, TPGW-2S.
Historically, low values in one or more of these parameters were recorded in these wells during the reporting period. No appreciable changes in salt water constituents were noted in these wells at depth. Over 4.9 billion gallons of hypersaline groundwater and over 2 billion pounds of salt have been removed from the Biscayne Aquifer and it was anticipated that these initial reductions in groundwater salt content would be first observed in shallow wells close to the CCS.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Executive Summary Long-term gradual increases in salinity along the base of the Biscayne Aquifer in monitoring wells west of the L-31E canal in the vicinity of Tallahassee Road (TPGW-4D, TPGW-5D, TPGW-7D, and TPGW-L21 [58 feet (ft)]) indicate saltwater is continuing to move westward; however, the rate of movement over the past several reporting periods is either waning or is occurring slowly. For example, the specific conductance at TPGW-7D increased by approximately 5% during this reporting period as compared to 10% during the previous year and over 50% in prior years. Quarterly specific conductance, chloride, and sodium values increased slightly at TPGW-21 (58 ft) during this reporting period, but this slight increase has been consistent since 2010. The highest values of specific conductance (21,034 microSiemens per centimeter [µS/cm]), chloride (7,630 milligrams per liter [mg/L]), and sodium (3,850 mg/L) were all recorded in March 2019 at TPGW-21 (58 ft), which indicate an ongoing gradual increase in saltwater at depth. Tritium concentrations are also slightly increasing in this well over time; however, values remain below 60 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). The inland migration of saltwater is consistent with the South Florida regional saltwater intrusion impacts documented by United States Geological Survey (USGS) monitoring in Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade counties.
The influence of the CCS on groundwater below Biscayne Bay/Card Sound is primarily observed in the deep wells. Groundwater at the base of the Biscayne Aquifer, as observed in two of the three wells located east of the CCS (TPGW-10D and TPGW-11D), have shown gradual increases in saltwater constituents starting in 2012/2013. However, similar to the previous reporting period, the rate of increase in specific conductance in both wells has leveled off. There is little to no sourced CCS groundwater in the shallow wells, and porewater data collected from multiple locations in the Bay do not reveal CCS sourced groundwater seeping up into the Bay.
Surface Water Water quality and automated data from Biscayne Bay/Card Sound from this reporting period indicate no changes in trends or discernible influences from the CCS. Short-term increases in specific conductance, which indicate saltwater, have been noted in the L-31E canal, similar to prior years. Based on the assessment of data and multiple lines of evidence, the cause of saltwater increases in the L-31E canal is not from a CCS-sourced groundwater pathway.
The average specific conductance for the CCS using all seven stations combined during the reporting period (72,556 µS/cm) was almost exactly the same as the previous year (72,227
µS/cm). The average annual salinity for this year, calculated in accordance with Paragraph 29.J of the CO, was 51.1 on the Practical Salinity Scale of 1978 [PSS-78]. Upper Floridan Aquifer (UFA) freshening water was added during the reporting period (approximately 4.15 billion gallons). This non-potable, low-salinity water was instrumental in moderating CCS salinities and it offset some of the evaporative losses of water from the CCS; however, coupled with the lack of larger rainfall events, it was not enough to lower the annual average salinity in the CCS from the previous year.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Executive Summary Conclusion Data collected during this reporting period continue to support the conclusion that the CCS does not have adverse water quality or ecological impacts on surrounding marsh and mangrove areas and seagrass in Biscayne Bay/Card Sound. For example, based on 9 years of twice yearly in-situ observations of seagrass in 256 plots offshore of Turkey Point (640 plots monitored from 2010 through 2012), there has been no evidence of seagrass community transition that would indicate increases in total phosphorus (TP) or impacts from the CCS. The presence and prevalence of seagrasses in the area appear to be primarily influenced by sediment depth, seasonal variability, and regional climatic events.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1
- 1. INTRODUCTION Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) submits this Annual Monitoring Report, as required by Conditions of Certification (COC) X of Site Certification #PA 03-45 (FDEP 2008) for the FPL Turkey Point Power Plant (Turkey Point) Units 3 and 4 Nuclear Power Plant and the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Fifth Supplemental Agreement (SFWMD 2009a). This monitoring report has been prepared in accordance with the FPL Turkey Point Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan, referred to herein as the Monitoring Plan (SFWMD 2009b) and modifications (SFWMD 2013a, b, c), as required by the SFWMD Fifth Supplemental Agreement. The 2009 Monitoring Plan requires the collection of groundwater, surface water, meteorological, and ecological data in and around Turkey Point to establish conditions before and after the uprating of the nuclear units and to determine the horizontal and vertical effects and extent of the cooling canal system (CCS) water on existing and projected surface water, groundwater and ecological conditions surrounding Turkey Point.
FPL has been conducting the above required monitoring since 2010 and has submitted reports semi-annually and annually to the SFWMD, the Miami-Dade County (MDC) Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources (RER), and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), collectively referred to as the Agencies. These reports summarize the extensive collection of monitoring data and provide a discussion of findings. The Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a) was submitted in August 2012 and the Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2016a) was submitted in March 2016.
This monitoring continues that reporting and is primarily associated with the requirements of the SFWMD Fifth Supplemental Agreement and COC X of the site license.
The scope of this Annual Monitoring Report is to summarize the monitoring efforts from June 1, 2018, through May 31, 2019 (herein referred to as the reporting period), to present and summarize the data, and to assess the effects and extent of CCS water on water and ecological conditions surrounding Turkey Point. Some of the information for the reporting period is compared to or shown with data collected over the previous 8 years of monitoring data (June 2010, or since startup of station monitoring, through May 2018), herein referred to as the historical period of record. This includes data previously reported in the February 2019 FPL Semi-Annual Data Delivery (FPL 2019a), the 2018 FPL Annual Monitoring Report (FPL 2018a), the 2017 FPL Annual Monitoring Report (FPL 2017a), the Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2016a), and the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a).
Additional monitoring is conducted as part of the FDEP Consent Order (CO), dated June 2016, and the MDC Consent Agreement (CA), dated October 2015, which are focused on restoration and remediation efforts. Data from the FDEP CO and MDC CA monitoring stations not included in the original 2009 Monitoring Plan and data from CCS freshening wells are provided 1-1
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 in Appendix A to fulfil paragraph 31.b of the FDEP CO. This additional information may be discussed when such data are helpful and relevant in achieving the objectives of this report.
1.1 Brief Overview of Automated Monitoring Network In accordance with the Monitoring Plan, FPL has installed an extensive automated monitoring network comprised of over 110 automated sensors to collect hourly meteorological, groundwater, and surface water data from a broad area surrounding Turkey Point (Figures 1.1-1 to 1.1-3). The methods and details of the collection protocols are outlined in Appendix B. Table 1.1-1 provides a brief summary of the well construction information; further details are provided in the JLA Geosciences, Inc. (2010) Geology and Hydrogeology Report. During the reporting period, risers were installed on the wells at well cluster TPGW-7 to prevent issues with the wells being overtopped with flood waters. The new top of casing elevations have been included in Table 1.1-1.
1.2 Quarterly Water Quality Sampling The monitoring network for groundwater and surface water supports the collection of water samples for laboratory analysis. During the reporting period, samples were collected from the 42 groundwater wells and the 19 surface water stations, excluding TPBBSW-10 and TPBBSW-14, which are automated stations only. Samples were also collected from two depths at five existing historical wells (L-3, L-5, G-21, G-28, and G-35) as part of FPLs routine sampling for interceptor ditch (ID) operation. The samples were analyzed for a variety of laboratory and field parameters based on locations and frequency (Table 1.1-2).
Results of the quarterly monitoring conducted for the reporting period in June 2018, October 2018, December 2018, and March 2019 are included in Section 3 of this report. Analytical results prior to June 2018 can be found in the Turkey Point Plant Annual Monitoring Report (FPL 2017a and 2018a) and the Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2016a).
1.3 Extent of CCS Water FPL conducted assessments of the location and orientation of CCS groundwater conditions in the area surrounding Turkey Point and the CCS in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a) and Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2016a). These assessments were completed using data collected as part of the well installation efforts, automated data and analytical results, United States Geological Survey (USGS) induction logs, and other supporting documentation. Updated information on the extent of CCS water is provided in Section 3 of this report and details will be included in the Remedial Action Annual Status Report that will be submitted to MDC in November 2019.
1.4 CCS Water and Salt Budget FPL has worked closely with the Agencies to develop an approved methodology for calculating monthly CCS water and salt budgets. This methodology was presented in the Comprehensive 1-2
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a), and the same methodology has been used to assess the water and salt budgets for the reporting period. Estimated monthly water budgets and salt loads from June 2018 through May 2019 are included in Section 4 of this report.
1.5 Ecological Monitoring The Monitoring Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) outline an ecological monitoring program for the wetlands and Biscayne Bay/Card Sound/Barnes Sound around the CCS that has been conducted from 2010 to present. The FPL Turkey Point ecological monitoring program collects data from marshes, mangroves, tree islands, and Biscayne Bay/Card Sound. This report presents the results of the quarterly marsh and mangrove monitoring (August 2018, November 2018, February 2019, and May 2019), and the bi-annual Biscayne Bay/Card Sound monitoring (September 2018 and May 2019). Figure 1.5-1 shows the sampling locations, and Table 1.1-2 includes the ecological parameters measured during the reporting period.
Results prior to June 2018 can be found in the Turkey Point Plant Annual Monitoring Report (FPL 2017a and 2018a) and the Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2016a).
Details on the transect plot set-ups, sampling methods, and materials can be found in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a). Findings from a landscape-scale, multiple-depth, porewater monitoring effort in Biscayne Bay/Card Sound and wetlands can be found in the Turkey Point Initial Ecological Characterization Report (FPL 2012c).
1.6 Interceptor Ditch Operation The ID is located immediately west of the CCS and is designed to prevent seasonal inland movement of saltwater from the CCS into the historically fresh/upper portion of the Biscayne Aquifer. Shallow saline groundwater is intercepted by the ID and pumped back to the CCS during the dry season or during other times when the natural gradients are low and the potential for saltwater intrusion exists. FPL began following a revised plan in 2011 (FPL 2011b) that considered the effects of water density, pursuant to requirements in the Fifth Supplemental Agreement. Subsequent refinements were made in 2012 (minor change in pumping triggers)
(FPL 2012b), and FPL has been following the updated version (FPL 2012b) since December 2012 (FPL 2017b).
FPL has been collecting groundwater data west of the CCS and recording the volume of water pumped from the ID as part of ID operation. Results have been included in reports that were submitted on a quarterly and annual basis to the SFWMD. With SFWMDs concurrence, these results (beginning in 2012) are now integrated into the annual reports required as part of the Monitoring Plan and include findings for the reporting period, which is from June of one year to the end of May the next year. ID operation information/results for June 2018 through May 2019 are provided in Section 6 of this report.
1-3
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 1.7 Plant Operations and Remedial Activities FPL continued to operate Nuclear Units 3 and 4 during the reporting period; an outage occurred at Unit 3 from October 1, 2018, through November 9, 2018, and at Unit 4 from March 11, 2019, to April 11, 2019 (Appendix C). Routine outages have short-term effects on specific data collected inside the CCS (such as stage and temperature) as a result of a temporary reduction in CCS circulation pumping rates and reduced thermal loading associated with the outages.
In 2016, FPL initiated freshening activities using five Upper Floridan Aquifer (UFA) wells, which continued to operate during this reporting year, adding up to 14 million gallons per day (mgd) of low salinity UFA water to the CCS. The Turkey Point groundwater recovery well system (RWS), which is required as part of the Consent Agreement with MDC (MDC 2015) and the Consent Order by FDEP (FDEP 2016), became fully operational on May 15, 2018.
Information related to the startup of the RWS and its first year of operation are summarized in the RWS Startup Report (FPL 2018b) and quarterly status reports (FPL 2018c, 2019b, 2019c).
Additional information related to changes in chloride concentrations in the aquifer based on analytical data and Continuous Surface Electromagnetic Mapping (CSEM) surveys and updates to the groundwater model after the first year of operation will be provided in the Remedial Action Status Report, which is scheduled for submittal to MDC in November 2019.
1.8 Data Quality Objectives and Acceptance Criteria The monitoring program is conducted under the guidance of a detailed set of protocols outlined in the project QAPP. These protocols are a compilation of United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), SFWMD, and FDEP methods and processes. The QAPP is a rigorous document defining the tools and techniques used in this program, some of which have been customized for the specific challenging working conditions (e.g., hypersaline matrix) and analyses (e.g., non-standard isotopic analyses). Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) and associated goals for precision, accuracy, analytical sensitivity, completeness, representativeness, comparability, maintainability, and timeliness have also been identified in the QAPP, and FPL consistently meets these DQOs. The QAPP was developed in conjunction with the Agencies and has a number of checks and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) measures that are specific to the project needs and that often exceed state standards.
Data in this program are reviewed multiple times by different scientists/engineers. Qualified automated data are tracked in a qualifications master spreadsheet, while the analytical data are written up in Data Usability Summary (DUS) reports for each event. DQOs are then reported for data precision, accuracy, analytical sensitivity, completeness, representativeness, comparability, maintainability, and timeliness. The DQOs have consistently been met, with a few notable exceptions briefly described in Table 1.8-1. Further details of the procedures used to assess meeting DQOs and acceptance criteria goals can be found in the Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2016a).
1-4
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 TABLES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Table 1.1-1. Well Construction Summary.
Depth to Depth to Bottom of Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Casing Top of Screen Screen from Screen Screen Screen Screen Monitoring Elevation from TOC TOC Length Elevation Elevation Midpoint Well (ft NAVD 88) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft NAVD 88) (ft NAVD 88) (ft NAVD 88)
TPGW-1S 3.82 32.0 34.0 2 -28.18 -30.18 -29.18 TPGW-1M 3.92 52.1 54.1 2 -48.18 -50.18 -49.18 TPGW-1D 4.20 85.3 89.3 4 -81.10 -85.10 -83.10 TPGW-2S1 4.63 28.0 32.0 4 -23.34 -27.34 -25.34 TPGW-2M1 4.56 53.9 55.9 2 -49.32 -51.32 -50.32 TPGW-2D1 4.43 88.8 90.8 2 -84.36 -86.36 -85.36 TPGW-3S1 4.61 30.3 34.3 4 -25.66 -29.66 -27.66 TPGW-3M1 4.49 58.0 62.0 4 -53.48 -57.48 -55.48 TPGW-3D1 4.42 89.9 91.9 2 -85.50 -87.50 -86.5 TPGW-4S 2.24 23.2 25.2 2 -20.96 -22.96 -21.96 TPGW-4M 1.82 38.1 43.1 5 -36.28 -41.28 -38.78 TPGW-4D 1.92 61.6 65.6 4 -59.68 -63.68 -61.68 TPGW-5S 5.35 28.6 32.6 4 -23.25 -27.25 -25.25 TPGW-5M 5.07 49.3 54.3 5 -44.23 -49.23 -46.73 TPGW-5D 5.22 67.0 72.0 5 -61.78 -66.78 -64.28 TPGW-6S2 4.35 25.1 27.1 2 -20.74 -22.74 -21.74 TPGW-6M2 4.43 51.6 55.6 4 -47.18 -51.18 -49.18 TPGW-6D2 4.39 84.7 88.7 4 -80.31 -84.31 -82.31 TPGW-7S3 4.28 24.7 28.7 4 -20.44 -24.44 -22.44 TPGW-7M3 4.33 50.8 54.8 4 -46.45 -50.45 -48.45 TPGW-7D3 4.31 82.8 86.8 4 -78.51 -82.51 -80.51 TPGW-8S 1.98 16.8 20.8 4 -14.82 -18.82 -16.82 TPGW-8M 2.12 34.9 36.9 2 -32.78 -34.78 -33.78 TPGW-8D 2.01 49.2 53.2 4 -47.19 -51.19 -49.19 TPGW-9S 3.63 14.9 18.9 4 -11.27 -15.27 -13.27 TPGW-9M 3.53 34.3 36.3 2 -30.77 -32.77 -31.77 TPGW-9D 3.52 47.9 49.9 2 -44.38 -46.38 -45.38 TPGW-10S* 8.3 36.4 38.4 2 -28.10 -30.10 -29.10 TPGW-10M* 8.3 60.4 64.4 4 -52.10 -56.10 -54.10 TPGW-10D* 8.3 126.5 130.5 4 -118.20 -122.20 -120.10 TPGW-11S* 8.7 39.4 43.4 4 -30.70 -34.70 -32.70 1-5
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Table 1.1-1. Well Construction Summary.
Depth to Depth to Bottom of Top of Bottom of Elevation Top of Casing Top of Screen Screen from Screen Screen Screen Screen Monitoring Elevation from TOC TOC Length Elevation Elevation Midpoint Well (ft NAVD 88) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft NAVD 88) (ft NAVD 88) (ft NAVD 88)
TPGW-11M* 8.7 90.4 94.4 4 -81.70 -85.70 -83.70 TPGW-11D* 8.7 122.4 126.4 4 -113.70 -117.70 -115.70 TPGW-12S1 4.11 25.2 27.2 2 -21.08 -23.08 -22.08 TPGW-12M1 4.14 59.2 63.2 4 -55.07 -59.07 -57.07 TPGW-12D1 4.20 93.2 97.2 4 -89.04 -93.04 -91.04 TPGW-13S1 5.49 33.1 37.1 4 -27.61 -31.61 -29.61 TPGW-13M1 5.38 59.9 63.9 4 -54.57 -58.57 -56.57 TPGW-13D1 5.32 88.0 92.0 4 -82.72 -86.72 -84.72 TPGW-14S* 8.8 32.5 36.5 4 -23.70 -27.70 -25.70 TPGW-14M* 8.8 56.3 60.3 4 -47.50 -51.50 -49.50 TPGW-14D* 8.6 102.2 106.2 4 -93.60 -97.60 -95.60 Note:
- Offshore wells surveyed using GPS are only accurate to 0.1 foot.
1New risers installed in February 2016; TOC elevation and depth from TOC to top and bottom of screen revised based on well survey.
2New risers installed in February 2017; TOC elevation and depth from TOC to top and bottom of screen revised based on well survey.
3New riser installed in April 2019; TOC elevation and depth from TOC to top and bottom of screen revised based on well survey.
Key:
D = Deep. NAVD 88 = North American Vertical Datum of 1988.
ft = Feet. S = Shallow.
M = Intermediate. TOC = Top of casing.
1-6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Table 1.1-2. Summary of Monitoring Efforts for Reporting Period (June 2018 - May 2019).
Month Monitoring Effort Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Automated Data Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous1 Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Collection Field parameters, Field parameters, Field parameters, TDS (GW only), Field parameters, TDS (GW only),
Groundwater and TDS (GW only), anions, cations, TDS (GW only), anions, cations, Surface Water Sampling sodium, chloride silica (SW only), sodium, chloride, silica (SW only),
and tritium tritium and and tritium tritium and nutrients1 nutrients1 Field parameters, Field parameters, Field parameters, TDS (GW only), Field parameters, TDS (GW only),
Historic Groundwater TDS (GW only), anions, cations, TDS (GW only), anions, cations, Well Sampling (G and L sodium, chloride silica (SW only), sodium, chloride, silica (SW only),
series wells) and tritium tritium and and tritium tritium and nutrients1 nutrients1 Marsh and Marsh Marsh Marsh mangrove measurements measurements measurements measurements Marsh and Marsh and mangrove mangrove Marsh porewater Marsh porewater porewater (field porewater (field (field parameters, (field parameters, Ecological Marsh and parameters, parameters, sodium, chloride, sodium, chloride Mangrove Monitoring sodium, chloride, sodium, chloride, and tritium) and tritium) tritium, and tritium, and nutrients) nutrients)
Marsh and mangrove Marsh Vegetation vegetation (nutrients)
(nutrients)
Seagrass measurements Seagrass Porewater (field measurements parameters, Ecological Bay sodium, chloride, Porewater (field Monitoring tritium, and parameters, nutrients) sodium, chloride, tritium, and Vegetation nutrients)
(nutrients)
Meteorological Station Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Continuous Rainfall Collector Tritium Tritium Tritium Tritium Sampling Notes:
Automated data collection includes groundwater and surface water quality and stage.
1Nutrients sampled at all surface water stations, but in groundwater only at selected well clusters.
1-7
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Table 1.8-1. Summary of Data Quality Objective Performance.
Data Quality Objective Comment Precision - To assess precision of the automated probes being used to collect time-series Measure of mutual agreement water quality and water level data, field measurements are taken during (reproducibility) between sampling events and/or during cleaning and calibration events to compare the duplicate or co-located results with the automated probe, mostly for water levels. No automated data measurements of the same were qualified as questionable during the reporting period due to verification analyte. The closer the failures.
numerical values of the measurements are to each A certified weather station calibration validation was conducted by Locher other, the more precise the Environmental on the meteorological station (TPM-1) on June 28, 2018, and measurement. December 26, 2018. Station measurements for air temperature, relative humidity, photosynthetically active radiation, wind speed, wind direction, rainfall and barometric pressure were made and compared to validated measurements with another instrument. All parameters met validation requirements and the station passed certification.
In May 2019, Isotech Laboratories identified a deficiency in their QA/QC of the tritium samples analyzed as a decay correction factor (for half-life of 12.32 years to account for the natural decay between when the sample was collected and analyzed) had not been applied to the data issued. A revised procedure was implemented in July 2019 that revised all the tritium data analyzed by the laboratory since the start of their contract. Although these adjustments were generally minor (2-4%), previously reported results from Isotech have been corrected and are presented in Appendix B. Tritium data analyzed by the USGS and the University of Miami laboratories have been corrected for the decay so no changes are necessary.
The precision of laboratory samples is established by the evaluation of field and laboratory duplicate samples. If the relative percent difference (RPD) between the sample and the duplicate result differ by more than 20%, the results for that analyte in both samples are qualified as estimated (J). While a small percentage (~5%) of sample data has been qualified due to high duplicate RPDs, overall, the analytical results are comparable to duplicate samples for those samples using the same method. These precision results indicate the sampling and analytical procedures are consistently performed and repeatable. Details are provided in the Data Usability Summary (DUS) reports issued for each sampling event.
Accuracy - Each measurement parameter has its own level of accuracy that is either Measure of bias in a defined by the instrument/manufacturer or in the case of laboratory analyses, measurement system. The the acceptance criteria of various quality control (QC) elements (blanks, closer the value of a spikes, duplicates, calibration verifications, etc.) as defined by the analytical measurement is to the true method. Analytical data are also compared to each other, referred to as value, the more accurate the technical comparison checks, to evaluate result accuracy. The instrumentation measurement. for all the automated station instruments and field equipment during the reporting period met the requirements for accuracy per the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). All the analytical data also met the accuracy requirements of the QAPP despite a few issues outlined below. These issues resulted in some data being qualified as estimated; however, all data are considered usable for project purposes. The laboratory is continuing to further improve their processes to enhance data accuracy.
To assess accuracy of the automated stations being used to collect time-series water quality data, each of the 112 probes was checked against standards of 1-8
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Table 1.8-1. Summary of Data Quality Objective Performance.
Data Quality Objective Comment known specific conductance values (verification) and then recalibrated, as necessary during each cleaning and calibration event. As part of the continued data improvement process and as previously reported, a slight revision was implemented to the cleaning calibration protocols in March 2018 after discussion with Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) and several trial runs.
The probe undergoes calibration only when the unit fails to meet the verification requirement, similar to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) protocol. Consequently, if a probe passes verification post-cleaning, a calibration is not necessary before the unit is redeployed; this process has resulted in smoother data with fewer minor shifts post-calibration.
Approximately 99% of the probes for the reporting period of June 2018 through May 2019 passed the verification check conducted during cleaning and calibration (verification check values within 5% of the known standards).
When verification check values differ by more than 5% and less than 30%
from the known standard values, the probe data are qualified as estimated.
When values differ by more than 30%, the data are qualified as questionable.
In both cases, data are qualified back to the previous cleaning and calibration event or, at a minimum, back to an interim point where there is an unexplained shift in the data. Specific conductance data for only one probe out of 998 total probe verification checks had to be qualified as questionable for this reason during the reporting period.
Similarly, probe temperature readings are compared with a highly accurate National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) -certified thermometer during each cleaning and calibration event. If a temperature verification measurement on the NIST thermometer is more than 0.5 degree Celsius (°C) different from the automated probe reading, the data are qualified. During the reporting period, none of the water quality data was qualified for not meeting a field instrument temperature verification reading.
Accuracy of the analytical results is evaluated using percent recoveries of analytes added (termed spiked) to samples (matrix spikes [MSs]) or reagents (laboratory control samples [LCSs]) and carried through the extraction and analysis procedure. Laboratory established acceptance criteria (within method requirements) are used for MS and LCS percent recoveries. The MS percent recoveries have routinely passed acceptance criteria for fluoride, sulfide, boron, strontium, and silica for TestAmerica Laboratories, Inc. (TestAmerica) and all other project analytes by FPL Central Lab, although there are sporadic instances where criteria were not met and data have been qualified. For the initial events following the lab transition in September 2017, many of the MS recoveries for cations and anions could not be evaluated due to the spiking concentration being less than 30% of the parent sample concentration. The FPL Central Lab has worked to correct this issue by increasing spiking concentrations for affected methods and the events in this reporting period have had much fewer instances compared to the initial events. Only 15 instances were noted during this reporting period where the MS recoveries could not be evaluated due to the spiking/analyte concentrations, with the vast majority attributable to sodium. In these instances, the LCS run in a batch can be used for general analytical accuracy, however matrix effects on the data cannot be evaluated. For additional details, refer to the event DUSs (Appendix F). This check, in combination with instrument calibrations, calibration 1-9
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Table 1.8-1. Summary of Data Quality Objective Performance.
Data Quality Objective Comment verifications, LCS recoveries, lab and field duplicate recoveries, and technical consistency checks are used to validate the accuracy of the batch run. Not achieving the MS check alone does not impugn the usability of the data; none of the analytical data has been qualified as questionable (i.e., unusable) due to accuracy; however, some of the data have other qualifiers applied per the QAPP. LCS percent recoveries have consistently passed acceptance criteria for all analyses, indicating that both laboratories extraction and analytical procedures and materials have met method requirements. Refer to the analytical tables in Section 3 and the DUS for details on data qualifications and usability.
In addition to recoveries, accuracy is evaluated using technical comparison checks, including: cation and anion charge balance; cations, anions, and TDS compared with the specific conductance; total ammonia less than total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN); and orthophosphate (OP) less than total phosphorus (TP). As noted in the previous report, the laboratory revised their cation internal SOP in March 2018 to have final measurements fall more in the median of the calibration range and curve rather than doing the minimum dilution. Since the modification, anion and cation results now fall more in line with historical data and are passing technical consistency checks this reporting period.
Comparison of OP/TP, and ammonia/TKN were generally acceptable for the reporting period (i.e., OP should be less than 120% of TP and ammonia should be less than 120% the TKN per FDEP allowed variance limits). There were only four instances where the ammonia was reported with a concentration greater than 120% of the TKN. There were 22 instances where the OP results were greater than 120% of the TP results, primarily in the marine porewater samples. In these cases, samples are qualified as estimated; for further details, refer to the analytical tables and DUSs.
The laboratory QA/QC process identified a deficiency in the TKN analytical procedure. This is related to hypersaline samples creating matrix interference during the analysis. A revised procedure was implemented in April 2019 that has minimized this effect. The review of prior samples continues in order to understand the potential impact to recorded TKN values.
TN results between October and December 2017 were reported with two significant figures while the nitrate/nitrite and TKN results were reported with three, leading to cases where the true sum of nitrate/nitrite and TKN could be higher than the corresponding TN result. This was corrected in January 2018 and will be incorporated going forward.
Technical consistency checks indicated that FPL Central Lab calculates the ammonium and unionized ammonia results using the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) website calculator rather than the QAPP required FDEP standard operating procedures (SOP). The FDEP SOP uses sample temperature and pH to determine fractionation, while the FDEP website calculator uses temperature, pH, and salinity. This change has caused a slight shift in the ammonium and unionized ammonia values; this shift is more pronounced with marine samples but has not made a meaningful impact on data accuracy as the differences are well within laboratory error.
1-10
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Table 1.8-1. Summary of Data Quality Objective Performance.
Data Quality Objective Comment Accuracy can also be evaluated using field blanks (FBs) and method blanks (MBs), which can indicate bias in the associated analytical results. Field blank results over the course of the project and for the majority of analytes have confirmed proper sampling and handling techniques. Instances where the sample results were reported at concentrations less than 10 times the associated blank concentration (indicating potential sample contamination) are qualified as estimated. Over the past year, the MB and FB detections have been minimal and sporadic, with no periods of repeated detections for any analytes. Chloride was the most common analyte detected in FBs; however, the sample concentrations were typically greater than 10 times the blank concentration and, therefore, no qualification was necessary.
Certified Reference Materials (CRMs) are another way to evaluate laboratory accuracy. CRMs are blind samples of known concentrations in seawater. FPL Central Lab analyzed a set of CRMs (two standard solutions and one custom hypersaline blend) in May 2018 and passed the acceptance criteria for each analyte.
Analytical Sensitivity - Project-required MDLs are listed in Table 3.2-1 of the QAPP (FPL 2013). For For data validation, the reporting period of June 2018 through May 2019, the majority of analytical qualification, and reporting detection limits have met the QAPP requirements. For the FPL Central Lab, purposes, analytical sensitivity the analytes with a laboratory MDL set above the QAPP requirement are is expressed by Method ammonia and TP. The MDLs for bicarbonate and total dissolved solids (TDS)
Detection Limits (MDLs). An were modified in March 2019 to levels below the QAPP requirements. The MDL is set so that the laboratory is working to reduce the ammonia and TP MDLs to QAPP minimum concentration of an requirements. If these MDLs cannot be achieved, MDL requirements will be analyte reported is within 99% raised in the next revision of the QAPP to a level that meets the labs confidence that the analyte is capability, subject to regulatory approval.
greater than zero.
In some cases, the laboratory had to dilute the saline samples to keep instruments from being overloaded with the major ionic constituents (i.e.,
chloride, sodium). This resulted in some data reported as not detected, but with detection limits above the QAPP requirements. Any instances where this has occurred are noted in the DUS, although data are not qualified as estimated since the accuracy is not affected.
1-11
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Table 1.8-1. Summary of Data Quality Objective Performance.
Data Quality Objective Comment Completeness - The automated water quality and water level data are collectively 96.7%
Expressed as the percentage of complete for groundwater and 97.4% complete for surface water for the valid or usable measurement to reporting period from June 2018 through May 2019, which is above the 90%
planned measurements. The QAPP completeness goal.
higher the percentage, the more complete the measurement In the past year, there are some individual stations that have one or more process. parameters below the 90% goal, but many stations have data completeness in excess of 99%. The specific conductance probe at TPGW-11M had the lowest percent completeness due to data and probe issues. Probes were swapped on multiple occasions.
All planned groundwater and surface water stations were sampled during the reporting period from June 2018 through May 2019. All planned porewater stations were sampled over the same period; the only exceptions were at porewater locations where conditions were too dry to extract sufficient water for analysis. No analytical data points have been qualified as questionable during the reporting period; therefore, the analytical completeness is 100% and the completeness goal is 95%.
All of the planned ecological measurements have been made.
Representativeness - Based on the monitoring design, the data being collected are representative of Qualitative parameter that the environmental conditions, unless qualified as questionable. Estimated expresses the degree to which values are left in place as they continue to be usable and reasonably represent data accurately and precisely the environmental conditions; however, the results could be biased high or low.
represent the environmental condition. Some of the raw water elevation data at TPGW-2M, TPGW-3D, TPGW-9M, TPGW-13S, TPGW-13D, TPBBSW-10B, TPBBSW-14B, TPSWCCS-3, and TPSWCCS-6 was corrected slightly and qualified as calculated (G) and estimated due to obvious issues with a water level setting or probe hanger.
Additionally, water elevation data at well cluster TPGW-7 had to be adjusted in late April and May 2019 to account for new top of casing elevations. The wells were also purged to remove any overlying fresher water. The corrected data now more accurately reflect the environmental conditions within the well screened interval.
Comparability - Nearly all the analytical data, unless qualified as questionable or unusable for Qualitative parameter other reasons, are comparable. Methods of data collection and analysis have expressing the confidence with primarily remained consistent over the entire monitoring effort, including this which one set of data can be reporting period, with the exception of a few parameters (OP, fluoride, sulfide, compared to another. nitrate/nitrite) reported prior to September 2013 when different analytical methods were used (Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report [FPL 2016a]).
However, as noted above, the primary laboratory for the project was changed from TestAmerica to FPL Central Lab starting in September 2017. While the methods performed by both labs are either the same or comparable, slight variations in specific procedures, instrumentation, etc., may cause differences or shifts from data reported by the previous laboratory (as described in previous sections).
With the lab transition in September 2017, a few methods have been changed from previous events. These include the unionized ammonia calculation and the OP method. As noted in the Accuracy section above, the FPL Central 1-12
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Table 1.8-1. Summary of Data Quality Objective Performance.
Data Quality Objective Comment Lab uses the FDEP website calculator to calculate unionized ammonia results, while the data prior to September 2017 were based on the FDEP SOP. The SOP only uses temperature and pH along with total ammonia to determine fractionation, while the FDEP website calculator uses the additional parameter of salinity, causing a slight difference in values reported, particularly in marine samples. However, the differences are within typical laboratory error and the results are considered comparable with previous data.
Starting in September 2017, the OP method was revised to SM 4500 P F, a manual spectrophotometric method. Previous OP data have been reported using SM 4500 P E, an automated method that allows subtracting natural background fluorescence. The laboratory obtained NELAC certification for the SM 4500 P E method in June 2018 and has incorporated the background correction procedure for all events starting in August 2018. OP results between September 2017 and August 2019 could be potentially biased high due to this background fluorescence. As noted in the accuracy section above, there were 22 instances where the OP was greater than 120% of the TP results during this reporting period.
Availability - The stations that report automated water level, water quality, and Percentage of time that a meteorological data collectively have a high degree of availability. These system or function is available systems operate continuously with the exception of the stations that were for service, according to vandalized or offline during system upgrades. The systems have collectively established criteria and the been operational over 95% of the time.
probability that the system is operating satisfactorily at any There have been, and will likely continue to be, issues with individual stations point in time, excluding times that require systematic troubleshooting efforts to address oscillating and when the system is under erroneous or missing data that impact the availability of data.
repair.
For stations on telemetry, the data are reviewed weekly. However, in non-telemetry stations (see Section 3) the data are reviewed when the data are being qualified (8-10 weeks). The amount of time necessary to resolve the data issues is related to the complexity of the problem.
Reliability - Collectively, the stations that report automated water level, water quality, and Probability of a system meteorological data continue to have nearly 97% reliability in the context of performing a specified function data usability. Non-reliable data are identified by a qualifier and/or the without failure for a specified presence of a data gap. The associated probes that measure and record the data period of time. A failure meet the accuracy requirements and exhibit high percent completeness rates.
occurs when a measurement or control action does not comply with established accuracy, completeness, or timeliness standards. This applies to automated data only.
Maintainability - Per the QAPP, the quality guideline for completion of repairs to components or Ease with which a component equipment is 7 days for 95% of all incidents, with the exception of remote or equipment can be modified stations accessible only by boat or airboat. However, given the size of the to correct faults. system, the remote locations of some stations, and the occasional need for extended troubleshooting efforts, strict compliance with the guideline is not always possible or even appropriate. The automated groundwater and surface water stations (inshore) are easier to maintain than some of the other systems.
Some of the oscillation and daily reporting issues have required, and continue to require, extensive troubleshooting, which has to be conducted in a 1-13
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Table 1.8-1. Summary of Data Quality Objective Performance.
Data Quality Objective Comment systematic fashion.
Timeliness - Automated data are typically available nightly, except for those stations not on Promptness of reporting a telemetry or the occasional non-reporting station. Reporting deficiencies (e.g.,
measurement after it is made, failed probes resulting in lost data, stolen probes) are recorded in a master list reporting deficiencies, that is included on the Electronic Data Management System (EDMS) and as an submitting reports or other appendix in every report submitted.
project documentation, addressing corrective actions, Preliminary lab results are posted to the EDMS (https://www.ptn-combined-and reporting deviations within monitoring.com/) and available to Agencies as soon as FPL receives them from the timeframes specified in the the laboratory.
QAPP or within the Monitoring Plan or the Agreement. All information is provided within the time period required by the Agencies.
1-14
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 FIGURES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Figure 1.1-1. Locations of the Meteorological Station and Rainfall Collectors.
1-15
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Figure 1.1-2. Locations of Groundwater Monitoring Stations.
1-16
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Figure 1.1-3. Locations of Surface Water Monitoring Stations.
1-17
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 1 Figure 1.5-1. Ecological Transect Locations.
1-18
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2
- 2. METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING The 2010 FPL Monitoring Plan requires the collection of rainfall, air temperature, relative humidity, barometric pressure, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), wind direction, and wind speed, in part, to aid in the determination of evaporative losses and water gains to the CCS, as presented in Section 4. Also, the collection and review of meteorological data, particularly precipitation and temperature, facilitates an understanding of the groundwater and surface water results presented in Section 3, and the ecological findings discussed in Section 5.
2.1 Data Collection Rainfall data are reported from the following stations: the on-site meteorological station (TPM-1) from near the center of the CCS (Figure 2.1-1), high-resolution Next Generation Radar (NEXRAD) data from the SFWMD that encompasses the CCS, and the SFWMD long-term S20F gauge site (data from 1968 to 2019). The difference between the NEXRAD data and single-point continuous measurements made at locations such as at TPM-1 and S20F is that the NEXRAD data are being used to calculate average daily rainfall directly into the CCS while the individual stations measure rain at a single location.
Additional meteorological parameters are recorded at TPM-1 in accordance with the Monitoring Plan (Table 2.1-1). Details on these collection methods are outlined in Appendix B. Also, temperature data are obtained from Homestead Airport to facilitate comparisons between the long-term record at this location to TPM-1.
2.2 Automated Meteorological Results Hourly rainfall, temperature, relative humidity, barometric pressure, PAR, wind direction, and wind speed measured at TPM-1 are available in the Electronic Data Management System (EDMS) for the reporting period. Daily rainfall and hourly temperature from TPM-1 are shown on Figure 2.2-1.
Results from a number of sources are presented to enable readers to see conditions within the boundaries of the CCS (TPM-1 and NEXRAD rainfall) as well as regional conditions where longer periods of historical data are available. Table 2.2-1 shows the daily rainfall measured at TPM-1 and S20F, and using NEXRAD for the reporting year. This table shows how much rain occurred on any given day and how often there was little to no rain. Rainfall measurements for these two stations and over the CCS are also provided on a monthly basis for the reporting period (Table 2.2-2). The monthly rainfall totals at S20F and NEXRAD are compared to long-term historical monthly averages; there are more than 51 years of S20F rainfall data and 23 years of NEXRAD data (Figure 2.2-2). These monthly totals show the variability from month to month during the reporting period, differences between locations and methods of collection, and 2-1
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 differences between the historical data. As mentioned above, the NEXRAD data are calculated values over the entire CCS and are not single-point measurements like the other stations; therefore, results are not as directly comparable.
Table 2.2-3 shows the average monthly air temperatures recorded at Homestead Airport from January 1996 to May 2019 and allows a comparison of monthly temperatures for this reporting period to previous months over a longer period of record. Figure 2.2-3 compares monthly temperatures at TPM-1 to monthly air temperatures at Homestead Airport for this reporting period.
Information on wind direction and wind speed from TPM-1 is provided on Figures 2.2-4 and 2.2-
- 5. A summary of these meteorological results is provided below.
2.3 Discussion of Results The reporting period of 2018-2019 was a drier than average year due the relatively dry wet season, which included only one large (>3 inches) rainfall event. The lack of large rainfall event (i.e.,
greater than several inches/day or consecutive-rainfall events totaling 5 to 6 inches) as these types of events cause appreciable declines in CCS salinity since the rainfall inputs greatly exceed evaporative losses.
2.3.1 Rainfall Extended dry periods can result in regionally depressed groundwater tables, lower canal stages, and higher salinities in Biscayne Bay and the CCS. Wet periods have the opposite effect, and heavy rain events (greater than several inches in a day) can cause rapid increases in groundwater, CCS, and canal levels and quickly influence surface water temperatures and salinity.
Based on NEXRAD data, annual rainfall for the reporting year was 36.97 inches, which was below the historical (1996 to 2018) average value of 43.67 inches and similar to several other recent dry reporting periods (June 2013 to May 2014, June 2014 to May 2015, and June 2016 to May 2017) (Figure 2.3-1 and Table 2.3-1). Data collected at S20F shows a similar deficit, with the annual rainfall total for the reporting period of 40.97 inches compared to the average historical annual rainfall of 46.74 inches. In addition to being a drier year on average, other observations for this reporting period include a relatively dry wet season and the lack of intense rainfall.
Based on NEXRAD data, the wet seasons (June through October) rainfall total of 23.07 inches was also lower than the NEXRAD historical wet season average of 28.16 inches. The wet season total at S20F was 23.56 inches, which was below the wet season S20F historical average of 30.34 inches. This drier wet season was preceded by a notable drought, when the first quarter of 2018 (January to March) was the driest first quarter of any year over the past decade (1.69 inches total) and the second driest over the past 51 years based on records at the S20F rainfall station.
2-2
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Meanwhile, the dry season for this reporting period, which typically runs from December to April, was similar to historical averages. For example, a dry season total of 9.41 inches was calculated from NEXRAD for this reporting period, while the historical average was 9.32 inches.
At S20F, the dry season total for the reporting period was 11.04 inches, while the historical average was 9.40 inches.
Based on NEXRAD data, there were 9 events when rainfall totals exceeded 1 inch for this reporting period; however, there were only 2 days when more than 2 inches of rainfall was recorded. The maximum daily rainfall, per NEXRAD data, was 3.87 inches on September 3, 2018. The next highest total for the reporting period was 2.30 inches on December 4, 2018.
Similar rainfall totals were noted for the S20F data3.94 inches on September 3, 2018, and 2.70 inches on November 11, 2018.
In most years there tends to be a greater number of the larger single-day or multi-day rainfall events as compared to this reporting period. These larger rainfall events are helpful in lowering CCS salinity since freshwater inputs greatly exceed evaporative losses. For example, 4 inches of rainfall over the CCS (excluding runoff from the berms) equates to approximately 520 million gallons, while the CCS daily evaporation rate ranges from 27 to 45 million gallons during this reporting period. The average CCS evaporative loss for the entire reporting period was 35.7 mgd. The amount of salinity change in the CCS and the length of time the salinity will stay lower as a result of large rainfall inputs is a function of multiple variables including, but not limited to, air temperature, CCS temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, water level and subsequent rainfall.
Overall, average annual air temperatures during the reporting period were warmer, both at the CCS and regionally, thereby increasing temperatures in Biscayne Bay, the CCS, and other surface water bodies and also increasing evaporative losses.
2.3.2 Temperature A review of regional air temperatures from Homestead Airport indicates that every month of the reporting period had higher average temperatures than the long-term monthly average from 1996-2018 (Figure 2.2-3). During the reporting period, 3 months exhibited some of the highest monthly average temperatures for that same month over the previous 24 years; these were:
February 2019: second highest February temperature (22.6 degrees Celsius [°C], with the highest value the previous year);
April 2019: third highest April temperature (24.3°C); and May 2019: highest May temperature (25.5°C).
2-3
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 At the CCS, air temperature measured at TPM-1 was warmer than the regional air temperature at Homestead Airport, with the monthly average at TPM-1 higher for all 12 months during the reporting period and the long-term monthly averages (Figure 2.2-3). The annual average air temperature for the reporting period at TPM-1 was 26.0°C, while the average air temperature for the same period at Homestead Airport was 24.9°C.
Hourly air temperatures at TPM-1 during the reporting period ranged from 9.2°C to 33.6°C (Figure 2.2-1). The average air temperature from June 2018 through May 2019 at TPM-1 was 0.6°C warmer than the previous reporting period and the historical period of record (June 2010 through May 2018).
2.3.3 Wind Direction and Speed The prevailing wind directions (predominantly onshore, Figure 2.2-4) and average annual relative humidity (72.2%) for the reporting year were similar to previous years (FPL 2016b, 2017a, 2018a). Average wind speed for this period, measured at approximately 16 feet above the ground, was 9.9 miles per hour (mph). The lull wind speeds averaged 5.0 knots (5.7 mph), and the maximum wind gust was 40.1 knots (46.1 mph). Most of the wind speeds were between 7.0 to 11.1 knots (8.1 to 12.8 mph; 44.9% of records), followed by 4.1 to 7.0 knots (4.7 to 8.1 mph; 24.5% of records) for the reporting period (Figure 2.2-5). While the frequency for the 7.0- to 11.1-knot winds was nearly the same as the previous reporting period (i.e., 44.2%), winds in the 4.1- to 7.0-knot category were higher during this reporting period (24.5% compared to 22%
previously), and winds in the 11.1- to 17.1-knot category were lower (20.7% compared to 25.1 previously). With all other factors influencing evaporation being equal, higher velocity winds will result in greater evaporative losses.
2.4 Atmospheric Deposition and Exchange of Tritium Tritium is being used as a tracer to assess the extent to which CCS water occurs in the areas surrounding the facility. At the levels being measured, tritium is not a public health concern and is below the FDEP and EPA drinking water standard of 20,000 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) (FDEP 2012). Tritium from the CCS can migrate to adjacent surface water, porewater, and shallow groundwater by atmospheric transport (wind driven moisture, humidity/dew point, and rainfall),
and can get concentrated due to evaporation. To aid in the understanding of the atmospheric transport of tritium and the degree to which it can influence water samples, FPL has collected rainfall and evaporation pan data from multiple sites surrounding the CCS for many years.
2.4.1 Sample Collection and Analysis Rainfall is collected quarterly at seven locations (Figure 2.1-1) at intervals consistent with the groundwater/surface water quarterly sampling schedule (i.e., June 2018, September 2018, December 2018, and March 2019) and is analyzed for tritium. Details on the collection are outlined in Appendix B. Evaporation pan data were collected by FPL on a monthly basis from March 2011 to October 2015 from a series of stations located in and around the CCS (Figure 2.1-1).
2-4
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 2.4.2 Results and Discussion Low-level atmospheric tritium in the vicinity of the CCS elevates background tritium levels in nearby waterbodies. Atmospheric exchange is highest around the plant (>500 pCi/L) and the values attenuate with distance from the plant; values approaching 40 pCi/L have been observed several miles west of the CCS.
Rainfall tritium values ranged from 2.0 pCi/L at TPRF-12 in June 2018 to 74.0 pCi/L at TPRF-2 in December 2018 during the reporting period (Table 2.4-1). The highest tritium values were observed southwest of the CCS at TPRF-2 (i.e., 74.0 pCi/L) (Figure 2.4-1), with tritium concentrations decreasing with increased distance from the CCS (Figure 2.4-2). These values are within the range of tritium values observed in rainfall within the CCS (2010-2018 maximum:
113 pCi/L at TPRF-2).
Over 4.5 miles west of the CCS at TPRF-7 (co-located with TPGW-7), a value of 39.9 pCi/L was recorded in December 2018, and 20.3 pCi/L was recorded in March 2019. It is important to note that tritium values in excess of 20 pCi/L do occur in rainfall at remote distances from the CCS, and these values vary among quarters at a site. These observations may be influenced by the prevailing wind patterns. Figure 2.2-4 indicates the distribution of wind speeds and directions during the reporting period and shows a predominant onshore breeze from the southeast and east.
Tritium data from the evaporation pans (Figure 2.1-1) collected from 2011-2015, as outlined in Appendix B, indicate that a combination of vapor exchange and rainfall yield higher values than rainfall alone. The pans are influenced by wind-driven CCS vapor, condensation, and concentration by evaporation. As a result of the prevailing wind direction, atmospheric influences of tritium affects areas onshore more often than offshore. The pan data show a clear declining trend in tritium concentrations with increased distance from the CCS (Figure 2.4-2).
These trends are similar to those exhibited by the tritium concentrations in rainfall. The highest concentrations during the period of data collection from 2011 through 2015 (63.7 pCi/L to 1,610.1 pCi/L) were observed at TPEVP-13, which is in the center of the CCS, followed by TPEVP-2 (26.3 pCi/L to 550.0 pCi/L), which is just west of the CCS; the values at TPEVP-5, which is several miles west of the CCS, ranged from 0.0 pCi/L to 63.1 pCi/L. Values in the evaporation pans were also generally higher during the dry season as compared to the wet season, which is most likely due to higher evaporative losses and limited rainfall (FPL 2016a).
The evaporation patterns and values provide an indication of the potential range of the tritium values that may be observed in the surface waters of nearby Biscayne Bay, canals, and marsh/mangrove porewaters.
In conclusion, low-level atmospheric distribution of tritium in the vicinity of the CCS is sufficient to elevate background tritium levels in surface water, porewater, and shallow groundwater without any groundwater transport of CCS water.
2-5
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 TABLES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Table 2.1-1. Parameters Collected at Hourly Intervals Reported by the Meteorological Station at TPM-1.
Parameter Units Accuracy Resolution Better than 5%,
Rainfall - Amount inches 0.001 weather dependent Relative Humidity % +/-3 0.1 Temperature °Celsius +/- 0.3 +/- 0.1 Barometric Pressure mmHg 0.5 0.5 Wind Speed - Average mph 1 ft/sec 0.3 ft/sec Wind Speed - Gusts and mph 1 ft/sec 0.3 ft/sec Lull Wind Direction degrees +/-3 1 Light Level µmol/m2/sec 5-10 µA/100 µmol/m2/sec NA Hail Hits 1 1 Key:
ft/sec = Feet per second.
mmHg = Millimeters of mercury.
mph = Miles per hour.
NA = Not applicable.
mol/m2/sec = Micromoles per square meter per second.
2-6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Table 2.2-1. Rainfall Recorded at the Meteorological Station TPM-1 and S20F, and Calculated Based on NEXRAD Data (June 2018 - May 2019).
NEXRAD NEXRAD TPM-1 S20F TPM-1 S20F Month Date Year (inch) (inch) (inch) (MG) Month Date Year (inch) (inch) (inch) (MG) 6 1 2018 0.000 0.030 0.000 0.00 7 5 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 6 2 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 7 6 2018 0.020 0.000 0.133 16.96 6 3 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 7 7 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 6 4 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 7 8 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 6 5 2018 0.370 0.000 0.064 8.18 7 9 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 6 6 2018 0.000 0.150 0.013 1.64 7 10 2018 0.000 0.000 0.222 28.20 6 7 2018 0.010 0.270 0.003 0.42 7 11 2018 1.230 0.010 1.193 151.84 6 8 2018 0.120 0.010 0.105 13.36 7 12 2018 0.090 1.460 0.008 0.96 6 9 2018 0.060 0.050 0.096 12.25 7 13 2018 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.00 6 10 2018 0.060 0.860 0.086 10.90 7 14 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 6 11 2018 0.060 0.000 0.142 18.10 7 15 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 6 12 2018 0.010 1.020 0.014 1.80 7 16 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.04 6 13 2018 0.120 0.010 0.027 3.38 7 17 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 6 14 2018 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.80 7 18 2018 0.520 0.000 0.632 80.37 6 15 2018 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.00 7 19 2018 0.000 0.210 0.000 0.00 6 16 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 7 20 2018 0.040 0.000 0.226 28.76 6 17 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 7 21 2018 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.00 6 18 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 7 22 2018 0.290 0.000 0.245 31.13 6 19 2018 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.25 7 23 2018 0.030 0.290 0.029 3.72 6 20 2018 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.25 7 24 2018 0.210 0.110 0.237 30.13 6 21 2018 0.830 0.050 0.589 74.99 7 25 2018 0.000 0.060 0.000 0.00 6 22 2018 0.410 0.210 0.460 58.54 7 26 2018 0.000 0.000 0.123 15.65 6 23 2018 0.090 1.540 0.142 18.05 7 27 2018 0.360 0.460 0.071 8.99 6 24 2018 0.030 0.410 0.018 2.35 7 28 2018 0.000 0.010 0.042 5.36 6 25 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 7 29 2018 0.610 0.000 0.605 77.02 6 26 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 7 30 2018 3.160 0.350 1.662 211.47 6 27 2018 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.13 7 31 2018 0.000 0.980 0.016 2.06 6 28 2018 0.820 0.000 0.065 8.33 8 1 2018 0.020 0.120 0.091 11.57 6 29 2018 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.10 8 2 2018 0.000 0.150 0.030 3.85 6 30 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 8 3 2018 0.420 0.020 0.292 37.14 7 1 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 8 4 2018 0.160 0.000 0.072 9.13 7 2 2018 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.10 8 5 2018 0.030 0.140 0.065 8.28 7 3 2018 0.000 0.000 0.063 7.97 8 6 2018 0.040 0.000 0.000 0.00 7 4 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 8 7 2018 0.070 0.010 0.154 19.62 2-7
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Table 2.2-1. Rainfall Recorded at the Meteorological Station TPM-1 and S20F, and Calculated Based on NEXRAD Data (June 2018 - May 2019).
NEXRAD NEXRAD TPM-1 S20F TPM-1 S20F Month Date Year (inch) (inch) (inch) (MG) Month Date Year (inch) (inch) (inch) (MG) 8 8 2018 0.000 0.310 0.000 0.00 9 11 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 8 9 2018 0.030 0.000 0.026 3.31 9 12 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 8 10 2018 2.190 0.000 1.360 173.01 9 13 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 8 11 2018 0.000 0.310 0.019 2.43 9 14 2018 0.010 0.000 0.014 1.72 8 12 2018 1.540 0.010 0.967 123.10 9 15 2018 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.08 8 13 2018 0.000 1.380 0.016 2.05 9 16 2018 0.000 0.000 0.066 8.40 8 14 2018 0.100 0.000 0.237 30.20 9 17 2018 0.180 0.000 0.000 0.00 8 15 2018 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.27 9 18 2018 0.090 0.030 0.024 2.99 8 16 2018 0.000 0.040 0.004 0.49 9 19 2018 0.000 0.000 0.037 4.76 8 17 2018 0.160 0.080 0.032 4.13 9 20 2018 0.000 0.050 0.044 5.61 8 18 2018 0.150 0.040 0.317 40.37 9 21 2018 0.050 0.010 0.214 27.24 8 19 2018 0.410 0.040 0.168 21.42 9 22 2018 0.000 0.140 0.003 0.34 8 20 2018 0.000 0.010 0.000 0.00 9 23 2018 0.020 0.000 0.019 2.37 8 21 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 9 24 2018 0.000 0.110 0.003 0.35 8 22 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 9 25 2018 0.000 0.200 0.000 0.00 8 23 2018 0.110 0.000 0.047 5.99 9 26 2018 0.000 0.000 0.054 6.90 8 24 2018 0.000 0.000 0.030 3.85 9 27 2018 0.050 0.000 0.047 5.95 8 25 2018 0.510 0.280 0.395 50.27 9 28 2018 0.000 0.000 0.054 6.84 8 26 2018 0.000 2.140 0.010 1.22 9 29 2018 0.050 0.420 0.283 35.95 8 27 2018 0.000 0.150 0.078 9.92 9 30 2018 0.000 0.370 0.002 0.24 8 28 2018 0.070 0.020 0.021 2.72 10 1 2018 0.130 0.000 0.033 4.20 8 29 2018 0.050 0.010 0.284 36.11 10 2 2018 0.030 0.000 0.060 7.59 8 30 2018 0.320 0.100 0.291 36.97 10 3 2018 0.000 0.080 0.022 2.82 8 31 2018 0.050 0.090 0.015 1.90 10 4 2018 0.000 0.320 0.061 7.73 9 1 2018 0.010 0.100 0.123 15.70 10 5 2018 0.000 0.020 0.010 1.23 9 2 2018 0.080 0.020 1.785 227.15 10 6 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 9 3 2018 0.380 2.040 3.870 492.45 10 7 2018 0.010 0.000 0.194 24.69 9 4 2018 0.010 2.150 0.054 6.92 10 8 2018 0.110 0.310 0.144 18.37 9 5 2018 0.030 0.000 0.015 1.87 10 9 2018 0.000 0.000 0.014 1.79 9 6 2018 0.230 0.010 0.045 5.68 10 10 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 9 7 2018 0.050 0.010 0.162 20.63 10 11 2018 0.010 0.000 0.980 124.71 9 8 2018 0.090 0.040 0.153 19.50 10 12 2018 0.000 0.450 0.000 0.00 9 9 2018 2.540 1.740 1.817 231.23 10 13 2018 0.280 0.070 0.109 13.88 9 10 2018 0.000 0.640 0.000 0.00 10 14 2018 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.00 2-8
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Table 2.2-1. Rainfall Recorded at the Meteorological Station TPM-1 and S20F, and Calculated Based on NEXRAD Data (June 2018 - May 2019).
NEXRAD NEXRAD TPM-1 S20F TPM-1 S20F Month Date Year (inch) (inch) (inch) (MG) Month Date Year (inch) (inch) (inch) (MG) 10 15 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 18 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 16 2018 0.000 0.000 0.052 6.67 11 19 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 17 2018 0.010 0.070 0.025 3.21 11 20 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 18 2018 0.000 0.010 0.003 0.42 11 21 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 19 2018 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 22 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 20 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 23 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 21 2018 0.020 0.000 0.008 1.07 11 24 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 22 2018 0.010 0.000 0.014 1.83 11 25 2018 0.010 0.000 0.057 7.20 10 23 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 26 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 24 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 27 2018 0.000 0.010 0.000 0.00 10 25 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 28 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 26 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 29 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 27 2018 0.350 0.000 0.085 10.77 11 30 2018 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.40 10 28 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 1 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 29 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 2 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 30 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 3 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 10 31 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 4 2018 2.510 0.000 2.301 292.73 11 1 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 5 2018 0.000 1.820 0.000 0.00 11 2 2018 0.280 0.000 0.425 54.13 12 6 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 3 2018 0.120 0.210 0.000 0.00 12 7 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 4 2018 0.010 0.000 0.008 1.07 12 8 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 5 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.04 12 9 2018 0.170 0.000 0.187 23.81 11 6 2018 0.000 0.050 0.005 0.60 12 10 2018 0.000 0.040 0.000 0.00 11 7 2018 0.000 0.010 0.046 5.84 12 11 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 8 2018 0.030 0.670 0.027 3.46 12 12 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 9 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 13 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 10 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 14 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 11 2018 0.420 2.520 1.812 230.56 12 15 2018 0.090 0.000 0.093 11.83 11 12 2018 0.000 0.180 0.049 6.21 12 16 2018 0.030 0.230 0.000 0.00 11 13 2018 0.000 0.020 0.075 9.50 12 17 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 14 2018 0.000 0.010 0.027 3.41 12 18 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 11 15 2018 0.130 0.400 0.153 19.53 12 19 2018 0.000 0.010 0.000 0.00 11 16 2018 0.000 0.090 0.000 0.00 12 20 2018 0.480 0.000 0.549 69.86 11 17 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 21 2018 0.000 0.960 0.000 0.00 2-9
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Table 2.2-1. Rainfall Recorded at the Meteorological Station TPM-1 and S20F, and Calculated Based on NEXRAD Data (June 2018 - May 2019).
NEXRAD NEXRAD TPM-1 S20F TPM-1 S20F Month Date Year (inch) (inch) (inch) (MG) Month Date Year (inch) (inch) (inch) (MG) 12 22 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 25 2019 0.050 1.340 0.004 0.47 12 23 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 26 2019 0.250 0.050 0.157 20.04 12 24 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 27 2019 0.560 0.350 0.558 70.95 12 25 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 28 2019 0.050 0.550 0.020 2.51 12 26 2018 0.860 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 29 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 27 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.04 1 30 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 28 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 31 2019 0.030 0.000 0.080 10.19 12 29 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 1 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 30 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 2 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 12 31 2018 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 3 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 1 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 4 2019 0.000 0.010 0.000 0.00 1 2 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 5 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 3 2019 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.55 2 6 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 4 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 7 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 5 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 8 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 6 2019 0.000 0.010 0.000 0.00 2 9 2019 0.000 0.000 0.023 2.90 1 7 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 10 2019 0.000 0.140 0.000 0.00 1 8 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 11 2019 0.060 0.000 0.090 11.43 1 9 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 12 2019 0.000 0.220 0.000 0.00 1 10 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 13 2019 0.630 0.000 0.532 67.70 1 11 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 14 2019 0.000 0.730 0.000 0.00 1 12 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 15 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 13 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 16 2019 0.000 0.010 0.000 0.00 1 14 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 17 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 15 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 18 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 16 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 19 2019 0.010 0.000 0.025 3.15 1 17 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 20 2019 0.000 0.050 0.001 0.15 1 18 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 21 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 19 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 22 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 20 2019 0.580 0.000 0.524 66.70 2 23 2019 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.80 1 21 2019 0.000 0.630 0.000 0.00 2 24 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 22 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 25 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 23 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 2 26 2019 0.000 0.010 0.022 2.79 1 24 2019 0.370 0.000 0.564 71.78 2 27 2019 0.010 0.010 0.000 0.00 2-10
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Table 2.2-1. Rainfall Recorded at the Meteorological Station TPM-1 and S20F, and Calculated Based on NEXRAD Data (June 2018 - May 2019).
NEXRAD NEXRAD TPM-1 S20F TPM-1 S20F Month Date Year (inch) (inch) (inch) (MG) Month Date Year (inch) (inch) (inch) (MG) 2 28 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 3 2019 0.000 0.000 0.010 1.23 3 1 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 4 2019 0.100 0.020 0.046 5.86 3 2 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 5 2019 0.000 0.010 0.000 0.04 3 3 2019 0.000 0.070 0.039 4.95 4 6 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 4 2019 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.00 4 7 2019 0.000 0.000 0.010 1.28 3 5 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 8 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 6 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 9 2019 0.860 0.000 0.861 109.61 3 7 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 10 2019 0.000 1.290 0.000 0.00 3 8 2019 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.08 4 11 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 9 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.04 4 12 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 10 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 13 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.03 3 11 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 14 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 12 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 15 2019 0.000 0.000 0.039 4.98 3 13 2019 0.000 0.100 0.000 0.00 4 16 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 14 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 17 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 15 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 18 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 16 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 19 2019 0.570 0.010 0.821 104.44 3 17 2019 0.090 0.000 0.133 16.91 4 20 2019 0.020 0.450 0.000 0.00 3 18 2019 0.000 0.000 0.010 1.25 4 21 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 19 2019 1.500 0.470 1.497 190.45 4 22 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 20 2019 0.080 1.120 0.123 15.60 4 23 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 21 2019 0.000 0.010 0.000 0.00 4 24 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 22 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 25 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 23 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 26 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 24 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 27 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 25 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 28 2019 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.16 3 26 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 29 2019 0.000 0.020 0.000 0.00 3 27 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 30 2019 0.030 0.000 0.018 2.27 3 28 2019 0.000 0.000 0.038 4.87 5 1 2019 0.090 0.000 0.066 8.39 3 29 2019 0.030 0.020 0.015 1.86 5 2 2019 0.020 0.280 0.010 1.23 3 30 2019 0.000 0.030 0.001 0.18 5 3 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 3 31 2019 0.060 0.000 0.005 0.64 5 4 2019 0.000 0.090 0.000 0.00 4 1 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 5 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 4 2 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 6 2019 0.000 0.230 0.033 4.20 2-11
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Table 2.2-1. Rainfall Recorded at the Meteorological Station TPM-1 and S20F, and Calculated Based on NEXRAD Data (June 2018 - May 2019).
NEXRAD TPM-1 S20F Month Date Year (inch) (inch) (inch) (MG) 5 7 2019 0.390 0.050 0.378 48.05 5 8 2019 0.010 0.500 0.000 0.00 5 9 2019 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.00 5 10 2019 0.060 0.000 0.160 20.38 5 11 2019 0.000 0.000 0.062 7.89 5 12 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 13 2019 0.130 0.000 0.083 10.56 5 14 2019 0.560 0.170 0.358 45.50 5 15 2019 0.110 0.320 0.058 7.36 5 16 2019 0.370 0.400 0.472 60.03 5 17 2019 0.000 0.110 0.000 0.00 5 18 2019 0.030 0.000 0.087 11.07 5 19 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 20 2019 0.000 0.000 0.007 0.85 5 21 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 22 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 23 2019 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.10 5 24 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 25 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 26 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 27 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 28 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 29 2019 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 5 30 2019 0.000 0.000 0.020 2.61 5 31 2019 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.25 Key:
MG = Millions of gallons.
2-12
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Table 2.2-2. Total Monthly Rainfall in and around the CCS (June 2018 - May 2019).
S20F Month NEXRAD* (inches) TPM-1 (inches) (inches)
Jun-18 1.84 2.99 4.66 Jul-18 5.51 6.56 4.04 Aug-18 5.02 6.43** 5.45 Sep-18 8.89 3.87** 8.08 Oct-18 1.82 0.98** 1.33 Nov-18 2.69 1.00** 4.17 Dec-18 3.13 4.14** 3.06 Jan-19 1.91 1.89 2.93 Feb-19 0.70 0.71 1.18 Mar-19 1.86 1.76 2.07 Apr-19 1.81 1.58 1.80 May-19 1.80 1.77 2.20 TOTAL 36.97 33.68 40.97 Notes:
- NEXRAD data, averaged over the whole CCS.
- Battery issue may have resulted in under reporting rainfall (data or a total of 309 hours0.00358 days <br />0.0858 hours <br />5.109127e-4 weeks <br />1.175745e-4 months <br /> from August 2018 through December not available) 2-13
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Table 2.2-3. Average Monthly Air Temperature in Homestead Airport, Florida (1996 - 2019).
Temperature (°C)
Annual Year Average January February March April May June July August September October November December 1996 23.7 18.9 18.1 20.0 23.0 26.4 27.0 28.1 27.7 27.7 25.2 22.7 20.0 1997 23.9 19.2 22.4 23.3 24.1 26.0 27.3 27.8 NA NA 25.3 NA 20.0 1998 24.7 20.8 20.7 20.4 23.6 26.3 28.9 28.6 28.7 27.7 26.0 23.2 21.6 1999 23.7 20.1 19.5 19.7 23.9 24.8 26.4 27.5 28.1 27.0 25.2 22.2 20.0 2000 23.3 18.9 19.3 22.2 22.8 25.3 26.6 27.6 NA 27.5 24.5 21.7 19.5 2001 23.8 16.2 22.2 21.9 23.0 23.9 26.9 27.3 27.9 26.7 25.5 22.2 21.4 2002 23.8 19.9 20.2 22.8 24.2 25.7 NA 27.4 27.8 27.4 25.8 21.2 19.7 2003 23.7 15.6 20.6 24.3 22.3 26.1 27.0 27.7 27.2 27.4 25.6 23.2 17.6 2004 23.4 17.9 19.9 21.1 21.6 24.8 27.6 27.2 27.8 27.3 24.9 22.2 18.7 2005 23.0 18.3 18.7 20.2 21.1 24.6 26.7 28.3 28.4 NA 25.3 22.4 18.9 2006 23.4 18.7 17.8 19.9 22.8 24.3 26.7 26.9 27.9 27.4 25.2 21.3 22.2 2007 24.1 20.8 18.6 21.6 22.1 24.4 26.8 28.9 28.6 27.3 26.8 22.2 21.6 2008 23.8 19.2 21.4 21.5 22.8 25.6 27.4 27.4 28.2 27.5 24.6 20.2 20.2 2009 23.9 18.1 17.3 20.5 23.1 25.5 27.4 28.2 28.4 27.8 26.2 22.8 21.0 2010 16.5 15.7 16.2 17.6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2011 24.0 17.7 19.9 21.0 24.4 25.3 26.7 28.0 28.4 27.8 25.2 22.9 20.9 2012 24.0 18.5 21.3 22.2 22.6 25.8 27.2 27.4 27.9 27.8 25.8 20.3 21.0 2013 24.6 21.4 20.7 18.2 23.9 24.8 27.5 27.6 28.6 28.6 26.4 24.7 23.2 2014 24.4 18.8 22.5 21.6 23.7 25.8 26.9 28.6 29.1 27.9 25.8 21.7 20.5 2015 25.5 20.6 18.3 23.7 25.7 25.8 27.7 28.7 28.8 28.7 26.9 25.8 25.3 2016 24.9 19.4 18.7 23.7 23.8 26.2 28.7 29.1 29.1 28.4 26.4 22.3 23.5 2017 24.3 20.1 21.1 21.1 23.7 26.4 27.9 28.9 28.8 NA 26.3 23.2 19.9 2018 24.7 18.2 23.1 20.2 23.9 25.4 27.8 28.7 28.6 28.2 27.1 23.8 20.9 2019 NA 18.9 22.6 22.0 24.3 26.5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Key:
°C = Degrees Celcius.
NA = No data available.
2-14
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Table 2.3-1. Comparison of Historical NEXRAD Rainfall (inches) Over CCS (January 1996 - May 2019).
Reporting Reporting Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Period Total Year (Jun-May) 1995/1996 0.42 0.16 0.37 1.02 2.64 1996/1997 4.10 1.44 2.26 4.17 3.95 0.22 0.31 3.17 0.75 0.81 1.33 2.27 24.77 1997/1998 11.92 2.64 3.84 6.86 1.21 2.47 7.87 1.68 5.68 4.46 0.07 3.14 51.83 1998/1999 1.35 2.04 3.02 8.49 3.79 8.32 0.93 1.82 0.37 0.64 0.48 3.56 34.82 1999/2000 9.55 2.96 8.55 7.01 11.94 2.22 0.43 0.85 0.58 1.46 2.75 1.59 49.88 2000/2001 4.98 4.30 5.66 6.60 12.45 0.16 4.46 0.51 0.09 2.97 NA 3.19 45.36 2001/2002 5.52 6.16 5.95 14.67 8.27 1.54 1.13 0.18 1.12 2.56 0.16 4.04 51.30 2002/2003 12.23 7.08 4.02 3.81 1.03 3.79 3.24 0.35 0.61 5.56 3.21 3.95 48.86 2003/2004 4.55 1.24 5.95 9.39 0.84 4.91 1.22 2.55 1.66 0.39 1.41 1.12 35.23 2004/2005 1.74 4.86 4.63 3.18 5.11 1.34 0.40 0.43 0.28 2.10 1.81 3.00 28.87 2005/2006 14.26 6.16 9.27 7.44 4.57 1.59 0.74 0.63 1.39 0.90 2.02 4.65 53.61 2006/2007 3.63 11.64 5.63 7.93 2.14 2.30 2.75 0.30 1.81 0.45 4.35 6.17 49.10 2007/2008 11.64 7.62 2.43 8.48 8.47 0.11 0.78 0.64 1.51 2.64 1.77 2.17 48.26 2008/2009 4.88 3.20 7.33 2.59 4.45 0.44 0.22 0.13 0.29 2.28 0.55 10.47 36.83 2009/2010 9.48 3.47 3.91 9.99 0.76 4.64 3.52 1.18 3.12 2.27 4.16 4.45 50.95 2010/2011 5.33 4.25 7.69 12.96 2.28 4.59 0.60 3.34 0.12 1.19 1.84 1.18 45.37 2011/2012 1.28 7.85 6.54 6.15 8.99 0.20 0.30 0.50 5.79 0.39 8.55 6.32 52.86 2012/2013 5.02 5.06 6.87 4.96 2.53 0.30 0.35 0.18 0.84 0.84 3.89 8.24 39.08 2013/2014 3.03 8.39 4.75 4.49 1.27 5.49 0.75 1.44 1.57 1.17 0.38 1.20 33.93 2014/2015 4.18 5.31 2.70 3.22 5.62 0.35 2.16 1.85 1.00 1.82 5.95 0.76 34.92 2015/2016 1.21 3.35 5.01 8.64 5.08 5.89 14.94 4.68 2.34 1.98 2.70 5.68 61.50 2016/2017 4.25 2.27 8.67 7.43 4.73 0.26 4.03 1.18 0.92 2.04 1.13 1.38 38.29 2017/2018 6.12 6.10 6.51 8.33 4.34 0.71 0.59 0.96 0.43 0.32 2.40 8.31 45.12 2018/2019 1.84 5.51 5.02 8.89 1.82 2.69 3.13 1.91 0.70 1.86 1.81 1.80 36.97 Historical 5.92 4.88 5.51 7.13 4.72 2.36 2.35 1.30 1.47 1.78 2.42 3.95 43.67 Notes:
- 1. Per SFWMD, data since 2008 may be more accurate due to improvements in technology and processing of data.
- 2. Historical based on data from 1996/1997 to 2017/2018 reporting period.
2-15
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Table 2.4-1. Rainfall Tritium Results.
Concentration (pCi/L)
Rainfall Station Sample Date Value 1-Sigma MDL TPRF-2 6/7/2018 18.4 7.2 6.4 TPRF-3 6/11/2018 16.3 4.6 6.4 TPRF-4 6/7/2018 8.3 5.7 6.4 TPRF-5 6/14/2018 17.5 8.3 6.4 TPRF-7 6/7/2018 18.7 7.3 6.4 TPRF-8 6/14/2018 14.5 7.3 6.4 TPRF-12 6/14/2018 2 6.5 6.4 TPRF-2 9/17/2018 39.3 6.1 6.4 TPRF-3 9/13/2018 5.9 4.4 6.4 TPRF-4 9/18/2018 12.7 8 6.4 TPRF-5 9/11/2018 17.6 5.3 6.4 TPRF-7 9/12/2018 8.3 5.2 6.4 TPRF-8 NA NA NA NA TPRF-12 9/12/2018 12.9 6.9 6.4 TPRF-2 12/6/2018 74 6.9 6.4 TPRF-3 12/6/2018 7.5 7.5 6.4 TPRF-4 12/6/2018 36.8 8.2 6.4 TPRF-5 12/13/2018 53.7 8.9 6.4 TPRF-7 12/10/2018 39.9 7 6.4 TPRF-8 12/13/2018 15.1 7 6.4 TPRF-12 12/11/2018 12.9 7.2 6.4 TPRF-2 3/5/2019 24.1 5.6 6.4 TPRF-3 3/6/2019 20.7 6.9 6.4 TPRF-4 3/13/2019 20.2 6.5 6.4 TPRF-5 3/4/2019 12.5 3.5 6.4 TPRF-7 3/5/2019 20.3 5.0 6.4 TPRF-8 3/14/2019 34.0 9.6 6.4 TPRF-12 3/5/2019 19.2 5.0 6.4 Key:
pCi/L = picoCuries per liter.
MDL = Minimum detection limit.
TPRF = Rainfall.
NA = Not available; filter on collector clogged.
2-16
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 FIGURES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Figure 2.1-1. Locations of Rainfall Stations in and around the CCS.
2-17
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Figure 2.2-1. Daily Rainfall and Hourly Temperature at TPM-1 for Reporting Period.
2-18
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 10 9
8 7
6 Rainfall (inches) 5 4
3 2
1 0
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Month S20F (1968-2018) S20F (2018-2019) NEXRAD (1996-2018) NEXRAD (2018-2019)
Figure 2.2-2. Monthly Rainfall Comparisons to Average Historical Data.
2-19
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 40 35 30 Air Temperature (Celcius) 25 20 15 10 5
0 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Month Homestead Airport (1996-2018) Homestead Airport (2018-2019) TPM-1 (2018-2019)
Figure 2.2-3. Monthly Temperature Comparisons to Average Historical Data 2-20
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 WIND ROSE PLOT: DISPLAY:
Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)
NORTH 20%
16%
12%
8%
4%
WEST EAST WIND SPEED (Knots)
>= 21.58 17.11 - 21.58 11.08 - 17.11 SOUTH 7.00 - 11.08 4.08 - 7.00 0.97 - 4.08 Calms: 0.05%
Figure 2.2-4. Wind Rose Plots Indicating Wind Speed and Direction at TPM-1 for the Reporting Period (June 2018 - May 2019).
2-21
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 50 44.9 40 30 Percentage (%)
24.5 20.7 20 10 5.6 0.7 0.1 0
0.97 - 4.08 4.08 - 7.00 7.00 - 11.08 11.08 - 17.11 17.11 - 21.58 >= 21.58 Wind Speed (Knot) Class Frequency Distribution Note: 3.54% of values missing due to periodic battery failure.
Figure 2.2-5. Wind Speed (Class) Frequency Distribution at TPM-1 for the Reporting Period (June 2018 - May 2019).
2-22
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Rainfall Comparisons 90 80 70 60 Rainfall (inch) 50 40 30 20 10 0
Jun 2010-May 2011Jun 2011-May 2012Jun 2012-May 2013Jun 2013-May 2014Jun 2014-May 2015Jun 2015-May 2016Jun 2016-May 2017Jun 2017-May 2018Jun 2018-May 2019 S20F TPM-1 NEXRAD Note:
- 1. June and July 2010 data are missing at TPM-1. Rainfall data may also be under-reported from late-August to mid-December 2018.
- 2. Historical S20F (1967-2018) rainfall = 46.74 inches; historical NEXRAD (1996-2018) rainfall = 43.61 inches.
Figure 2.3-1. Annual Rainfall Totals from 2010-2019.
2-23
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 TPRF-2 80 TPRF-3 TPRF-4 TPRF-5 TPRF-7 60 TPRF-8 TPRF-12 Tritium (pCi/L) 40 20 NA 0
6/1/2019 6/2018 9/2018 12/2018 3/2019 Date Figure 2.4-1. Tritium (+/- 1) Values in Rainfall (July 2018 - March 2019).
2-24
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 2 Note: 509 pCi/L value (6/14/2016) at TPRF-2 omitted to allow display of the lower values at the other sites.
Figure 2.4-2. Tritium Values in Rainfall and Evaporation Pans with Distance from the CCS.
2-25
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3
- 3. GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER MONITORING Over 4.5 million automated and analytical data points values were collected during the 2018-2019 reporting period. These data points were collected, processed, validated, and reported consistent with the procedures and protocols outlined in the extensive Agencies approved Data Quality Objectives, as outlined in the project Quality Assurance Project Plan.
The monitoring network includes 14 groundwater well clusters, five historical single wells, and 20 surface water stations where water quality and/or water level data are recorded by automated probes (Table 3.0-1). Figures 1.1-2 and 1.1-3 (presented in Section 1) show the locations of these stations. Automated data are collected hourly while water quality samples are collected quarterly, with some parameters analyzed quarterly and other parameters analyzed semi-annually (Table 3.0-2). Automated and analytical data parameters, sampling frequencies, sampling methods and processing protocols are outlined in Appendix B and detailed in the QAPP (FPL, 2013).
3.1 Groundwater Quality 3.1.1 Data Collection There were no changes made to the EPU Monitoring Plan during the reporting period. The only notable monitoring station modification was made to change for monitoring well cluster TPGW-7 which was converted from flush-mounted wells in a vault to riser construction to eliminate over-topping issues caused by flooding. While the vault provided more protection from vandalism, overtopping was impacting the representativeness of water level elevations in the deep well. Water quality results were not impacted. Other wells that were originally constructed as flush-mounted but have been converted to riser construction over the years to address overtopping include TPGW-2, TPGW-3, TPGW-6, and TPGW-12, and TPGW-13.
3.1.2 Automated Data Results Figures 3.1-1 through 3.1-14 are time-series graphs of groundwater specific conductance and temperature at each well. The graphs depict validated data and exclude data that have been qualified as questionable. The time-series graphs show data from the beginning of station reporting in 2010 (various dates depending on station startup) through May 2019 to enable viewing of trends over time. This entire time-series display also allows for a comparison between the reporting period (June 2018 through May 2019) and the historical period of record (June 2010, or as stations became operational, to May 2018). This report includes the validated 3-1
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 time-series data in separate Excel files (provided as Section 3 electronic data files as part of this reporting package) to facilitate closer review of the results by the Agencies and to allow the adjustment of graphic scales presented herein and/or to focus on specific time intervals. The validated data Excel files are also available for download on the FPL EDMS.
Tables 3.1-1, 3.1-2, and 3.1-3 show statistical summaries for time-series automated groundwater specific conductance, salinity, and temperature data, respectively. The tables include monthly average values for each monitoring well, the minimum, maximum, average, and standard deviation for the reporting period (data from June 2018 through May 2019), and the minimum, maximum, average, and standard deviation for the historical period of record (data from station startup through May 2018); these summaries were calculated when at least 21 days of data were available during the month. The calculations have been included in separate Excel files along with this report. The salinity values are also presented since readers often relate more directly to salinity than to specific conductance. The standard deviation for some of the salinity and temperature values is shown as zero, but that is a function of rounding/significant digits. Figures 3.1-15, 3.1-16, and 3.1-17 show the annual average and standard deviation values for specific conductance, salinity, and temperature, respectively, at each groundwater station.
3.1.3 Analytical Data Results Tables 3.1-4 through 3.1-7 provide a summary of the groundwater analytical results from the June 2018 through March 2019 sampling events for well clusters TPGW-1 through TPGW-14 and historical monitoring wells TPGW-L3, TPGW-L5, TPGW-G21, TPGW-G28, and TPGW-G35 (18-foot [ft] and 58-ft sample horizons). Table 3.1-8 includes a summary showing the range of ion and nutrient concentrations. Figures 3.1-18, 3.1-19, and 3.1-20 show the quarterly concentrations for chloride, sodium, and tritium, respectively, along with the historical range in values for all the above-mentioned monitoring wells. Figure 3.1-21 shows semi-annual concentrations for total nitrogen (TN), ammonia, and total phosphorus (TP), along with historical values for a smaller set of monitoring well clusters located in or near the CCS (TPGW-1, TPGW-2, TPGW-10, TPGW-13, and TPGW-14). Per the Monitoring Plan (FDEP 2009), nutrients are collected only semi-annually at these five well clusters.
For the historical monitoring wells (TPGW-L3, TPGW-L5, TPGW-G21, TPGW-G28 and TPGW-35), Figures 3.1-22 through 3.1-31 show the vertical profiles of chloride and temperature.
These figures provide detailed information on the changes in these two parameters from the surface down to the bottom of the well with measurements reported at 1-ft intervals.
Groundwater sampling logs from the June 2018 to March 2019 sampling events are provided in Appendix F of this report. DUS reports for all events are provided in Appendix G, and the detailed Level IV laboratory reports are included in Appendix H. Note that the laboratory reported analytical results to three digits at the request of the Agencies in 2013. However, the third digit is not considered significant by the laboratory and can be misconstrued as indicating a false level of accuracy. Analytical outliers are included in Appendix I.
3-2
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 3.1.4 Discussion of Results The following discussion focuses on tritium, specific conductance, chloride, sodium, nutrients, and temperature in groundwater and surface water. Other parameters (Table 3.0-2) are collected, but most are primarily used for QA/QC consistency checks with information presented in DUSs; therefore, no further discussion of these other parameters is provided below.
3.1.4.1 Groundwater Salt Constituents and Tritium Tritium concentrations are a function of atmospheric exchange and groundwater transport. Both phenomena must be considered when evaluating tritium data and groundwater pathways.
Cooling water containing low levels of non-hazardous wastes (including tritium) are collected during routine power plant maintenance and are allowed to be discharged to the CCS in accordance with U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations and oversight as prescribed in the NRC site license for Turkey Point. These discharges are managed to ensure tritium levels in the CCS do not exceed federal safe drinking water standards, even though the CCS and the groundwater beneath it are designated as non-drinking water sources. Due to the periodic nature of maintenance activities and the resulting discharges, the tritium levels in the CCS fluctuate. The variations in CCS tritium levels are reflected more dynamically in the CCS canals and evaporative waters than in groundwater beneath the CCS where tritium levels are less variable. As a result, tritium levels in surface water, porewater, and shallow groundwater monitoring sites located close to the CCS exhibit higher degrees of variability during the year than groundwater sites.
Tritium is being used along with specific conductance to help distinguish CCS water from ambient marine sourced saline surface and groundwater. However, the use of this isotope of water for quantitative assessments of CCS water does have its limitations. Tritium is present in the CCS at concentrations higher than the surrounding environment (see Section 2). In waters outside of the CCS, particularly in samples near the CCS that exhibit low tritium concentrations (less than 200 pCi/L, but can be higher in certain circumstances), determination of the method by which tritium was transported to the location is complicated, particularly in surface water and porewater but also in shallow groundwater. Determining the mode of transport of tritiated CCS water is important, as the means of transport affects the chemical make-up of the water transported. For example, tritiated water originating from the CCS as evaporation that is deposited on the landscape via rainfall or condensation will be depleted in salts and nutrients as compared to the ionic ratios of water derived from the canals. Similarly, some CCS canal water constituents, such as nitrogen and phosphorus, are reactive to canal sediments, biological processes, and/or aquifer materials that can attenuate the transport of some constituents differently than others as water moves out of the CCS via a groundwater path. Atmospheric transport of tritium has been documented in areas surrounding the CCS based on evaporation pan data collected from 2011 through 2015 (FPL 2016a) and rainfall data collected from 2010 through present. The highest tritium concentrations in rainfall and evaporation pans are reported closest to the CCS and diminish with distance from the CCS. Tritium concentrations in 3-3
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 evaporation pans near TPGW-2/L-31E canal were often in excess of 100 pCi/L to 200 pCi/L, while concentrations in evaporation pans near TPGW-5 were consistently less than 50 pCi/L; however, a maximum value of 63.1 pCi/L has been recorded at that site.
In addition, tritium has a relatively short half-life (12.28 years/half-life), further complicating the determination of contribution of CCS water at sample locations farther from the CCS when the travel times are uncertain. It is important to note that, under this Monitoring Plan, tritium is being measured only as a chemical tracer in order to determine the potential movement of CCS water. At the levels being measured, tritium is not a public health concern and is below the FDEP drinking water standard of 20,000 pCi/L (FDEP 2012). Tritium is also monitored in the CCS by the Florida Department of Health - Bureau of Radiation Control (FDOH-BRC) under a monitoring condition of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission operation license for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4. This information can be found in the FPL EDMS (https://www.ptn-combined-monitoring.com).
Saltwater intrusion in the aquifer underneath and west of Turkey Point has been documented over 4 miles inland prior to the construction of the CCS. The water in this region of the Biscayne Aquifer was (at that time and continues to be) non-potable.
As previously reported (FPL 2011, 2012a, 2016a, 2018), the presence of saltwater in the aquifer west of Turkey Point pre-dates the CCS and was documented well inland in the 1950s (Klein 1957). A more detailed determination of the location and orientation of saline groundwater prior to the construction of the CCS was documented by Golder Associates Inc. (2011b) utilizing over 50 monitoring wells completed to 20-, 40-, and 60-ft-deep zones; this analysis showed saltwater from Biscayne Bay over 4 miles inland from the coast in 1971/1972. The saltwater/freshwater interface and orientation can differ from year to year and responds to changes in rainfall/drought conditions, drainage, land use changes, consumptive use of water, climate changes, storm surges, and sea level rise. Accordingly, distinguishing saltwater originating from Biscayne Bay from saltwater originating from the CCS is complex, and the use of tritium concentrations along with chloride and specific conductance data are helpful in determining the origin of the saltwater.
Chloride and tritium concentrations were highest in the shallow well at TPGW-13S (located within the CCS), with average concentrations of 33,300 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and 6,306 pCi/L, respectively, during the reporting period. Water quality data from this well are more reflective of CCS water compared to the other monitoring wells. Both salinity and tritium concentrations decline significantly laterally from the CCS as hypersaline groundwater moves downward towards the base of the aquifer due to the higher fluid density of the hypersaline CCS water. Laterally, CCS sourced groundwater mixes with fresher non-CCS water, resulting in reductions in both salinity and tritium in the upper portion of the aquifer. This phenomenon is demonstrated by CA monitoring wells TPGW-15S (located at the north western edge of the CCS) and TPGW-16S (located along the south eastern edge of the CCS) which had average chloride and tritium levels for the reporting period of 10,983 mg/L, 463 pCi/L and 22,000 mg/L, 352 pCi/L respectively. Reductions in CCS water constituents occur with distance from the 3-4
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 center of the CCS at depths of over 25 feet indicate limited lateral movement of CCS canal water via groundwater paths in shallow portions of the aquifer.
Outermost well clusters (TPGW-8 and TPGW-9) had average chloride concentrations less than 40 mg/L and average tritium values less than 20 pCi/L. All shallow wells throughout the monitoring network with the exception of TPGW-13S, tend to have lower specific conductance, chloride, sodium, and tritium values, as saline water is denser than freshwater.
Groundwater quality in most wells has changed very little since the start of monitoring, and groundwater quality, with a few exceptions, is buffered against daily and short-term seasonal meteorological conditions, particularly in the intermediate and deep wells. This is still true for the reporting period and is consistent with previous reports (FPL 2016a, 2017a, 2018a).
Specific conductance in most wells varied less than a few percentage points during the reporting period; most of the variability was associated with probe calibration events. For the majority of wells (nearly 90%) during the reporting period, the standard deviations for specific conductance at each individual well were very low (within 5% of the average value). Average specific conductance values from this reporting period were also within 10% (higher or lower) of the historical average values for nearly 75% of the wells, indicating that the values typically have been stable. The same can be said for chloride, sodium, and tritium concentrations, as most concentrations during the reporting period were within 10 mg/L, 10 pCi/L or 10% of historical average values, whichever was higher. However, there are a few notable exceptions, as mentioned below.
Groundwater salt concentrations have remained consistent in the majority of wells; however, there are some exceptions, including notable declines in salt water constituents in shallow western wells close to the CCS that are consistent with the initiation of RWS pumping.
During the reporting period, three wells (TPGW-1S, TPGW-2S, and TPGW-15S) exhibited sustained decreases in specific conductance based on the continuous automated data and quarterly analytical results. Specific conductance at TPGW-1S decreased from slightly over 50,000 microSiemens per centimeter (µS/cm) at the start of the reporting period to around 41,000 µS/cm by the end of the reporting period (Figure 3.1-1); a low automated value of 35,191 µS/cm was recorded in December 2018.
What makes this current trend different from previous fluctuations is that the specific conductance decreased continuously, despite a dry wet season, and exhibited less rebound in values during the 2019 While variable, there is a net decline in shallow wells dry season. The average west of the RWS system.
concentrations of both chloride and 3-5
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 sodium for the reporting period were over 45% lower than the previous reporting period and historical period of record. For example, the average chloride concentration for the 2018/2019 reporting period was 12,810 mg/L, while the historical period of record value is 18,597 mg/L.
The lowest chloride and sodium concentrations on record for TPGW-1S were recorded in December 2018 (9,040 mg/L and 4,730 mg/L respectively). The average tritium concentration at TPGW-1S during the reporting period (492 pCi/L) was over 100% lower than the previous year (1,101 pCi/L) and historical period of record (1,047 pCi/L). The findings at TPGW-1S for this reporting period are similar to what was observed in the FPL-MDC CA monitoring well TPGW-15S (Appendix A), located on the western edge of the CCS, as the decreases in salt constituents and tritium at these two wells appear to be likely influenced by operations of the FPL groundwater remediation system extraction wells which began withdrawing hypersaline groundwater from the base of the Biscayne Aquifer on May 15, 2018 (FPL 2018b). No notable changes were observed in the intermediate and deep wells, other than some decline in tritium concentrations from the previous reporting period and historical period of record at TPGW-1M (9% and 20%, respectively) and TPGW-1D (8% and 13%, respectively), indicating a potential reduction in CCS-sourced groundwater.
The observations at TPGW-2S are more complicated, as a small sustained decrease (approximately 5%) was observed in the automated specific conductance data throughout the entire reporting period, including the dry season (Figure 3.1-2). While this well has historically exhibited fluctuations ranging from around 77,000 to 60,000 µS/cm, the values have never stayed in the low 60,000 µS/cm for an entire year, such as for this reporting period. Average chloride and sodium values were also more than 10% lower during this reporting period compared to the historical period of record. The lowest chloride and sodium values recorded at TPGW-2S (22,800 mg/L and 11,800 mg/L, respectively) were observed during this reporting period. Despite the concentration of salt constituents decreasing, tritium values at TPGW-2S were higher during the reporting period compared to the previous year and historical period of record. The average tritium value for the reporting period (3,715 pCi/L) was 45% higher than the previous reporting period (2,043 pCi/L) and 29% higher than average for the historical period of record. The relationship between salinity and tritium at this station appears to have changed; tritium and chloride values from this station will continue to be monitored closely.
There are several other wells in proximity to the CCS where notable reductions in specific conductance, chloride, and sodium were recorded at shallow depths during the reporting period.
These include historical wells TPGW-L3 and TPGW-L5, which are located approximately 0.2 mile west of the CCS and sampled quarterly at depths of 18 ft and 58 ft below top of well casing for laboratory analysis. Specific conductance is recorded at 1-ft intervals in these wells and converted to chloride values to provide a vertical profile each quarter (Figures 3.1-22 through 3.1-26). The vertical profiles show a sharp transition from slightly brackish/brackish groundwater to hypersaline groundwater, with the hypersaline groundwater below the 18-ft depth. Over the years, the shallow sample zone has exhibited a moderate amount of variability.
For example, specific conductance values at TPGW-L3 have ranged from 657 µS/cm to 18,499
µS/cm over the period of record, depending on the depth of the fresh water/saltwater interface.
During the reporting period, the average specific conductance values at TPGW-L3 (18 ft) and TPGW-L5 (18 ft) were 2,654 mg/L and 1,387 mg/L, respectively, which were over 100% lower than the previous reporting period but within the range of the historical period of record.
3-6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Chloride and sodium followed similar trends, with the average chloride concentrations during the reporting period at TPGW-L3 (18 ft) and TPGW-L5 (18 ft) being 713 mg/L and 313 mg/L, respectively, which were well below the previous reporting period values of 1,862 mg/L and 1,059 mg/L, respectively, and 690 mg/L and 380 mg/L, respectively, for the historical period of record. Average tritium values of 96 pCi/L at TPGW-L3 (18 ft) and 75 pCi/L at TPGW-L5 during the reporting period were within 20 pCi/L of both the previous reporting period and historical period of record values; the lack of change in tritium values coupled with substantial changes in specific conductance indicate there is limited influence of the CCS in this upper shallow zone. It is unclear how much of the freshening in the upper 15 ft of the aquifer was due to normal fluctuations versus the RWS pumping.
A few additional wells (TPGW-12M, -17M, and -19M) also exhibited small declines that warrant continued observations and could be related to the RWS pumping.
Previously reported increases in saltwater constituents and/or induction log reading in deep wells located several miles west of the CCS in the vicinity of Tallahassee Road (TPGW-4D, TPGW-5D, and TPGW-7D) have slowed over the past several years, including this reporting period. Wells farther west (clusters TPGW-8 and TPGW-9) are still fresh at all depths.
FPL previously reported (2016a, 2018a) that there was some sustained inland movement of brackish water several miles west of the CCS in the vicinity of Tallahassee Road. This was demonstrated by increases in bulk conductivity at depths below the lower monitoring well screen interval in TPGW-4D and TPGW-5D and increasing salt water constituents in wells TPGW-7D, and TPGW-G21 (58-ft interval). The rate of increase appears to be limited and/or diminishing over the past few yearsa trend that continued during this reporting period (Section 2, Figures 2.1-4, 2.1-5, and 2.1-7).
While the analytical results at TPGW-4D and TPGW-5D do not show any sustained increases in specific conductance, chloride, sodium, or tritium values, induction log data collected at depths below the deep monitoring interval suggest a small but diminishing increase in bulk conductivity.
Annual induction logs, conducted in March-April 2019, from the deep well at each of the groundwater monitoring sites are included in Appendix J. Per the Monitoring Plan, groundwater induction log data from the monitoring wells are collected annually; the USGS conducts this effort and reports it as part of their regional assessment of coastal saltwater intrusion in South Florida (Valderrama 2017). Periodic induction log data collected from monitoring wells located east of the USGS freshwater-saltwater interface in Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade counties from the late 1990s through 2016 show continuous increases in bulk resistivity/salinity along the base on the Biscayne Aquifer (e.g., PB-1195, PB-1723, G-2478, G-2965, G-3602, G-3604, G-3605, G-3612, G-36-15, G-3699, and G-3887A) (Valderrama 2017). These regional trends are the same as those measured in FPL monitoring wells in the Model Lands basin.
Saltwater has intruded inland in Florida coastal areas due to various factors including the reduction in groundwater levels caused by water supply withdrawals, excessive drainage, reductions in precipitation, and/or increases in sea level (Prinos 2016). While westward migration of hypersaline groundwater from the CCS is a contributing cause of saltwater intrusion 3-7
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 beneath the model lands over the past decades, westward saltwater intrusion can be expected to continue after the CCS hypersaline plume is remediated due to depressed groundwater levels consistent with urban development, droughts, and rising sea levels.
Well TPGW-7D continued to have increases in specific conductance, chloride, and sodium; this was first noted in 2013 and documented in previous reports (FPL 2016a, 2017a, 2018a). The bulk conductivity from induction logs also show an ongoing increasing trend (Appendix J);
however, the rate of increase continues to slow. At the beginning of this reporting period, specific conductance in TPGW-7D was around 10,500 µS/cm based on the automated data; however, by the end of the reporting period (May 2018), the value had risen to slightly over 11,000 µS/cm (Figure 3.1-7), or an approximate 5% increase. The previous reporting period (2017/2018) had a 10%
increase in specific conductance value and The rate of salinity increase in TPGW-7D has some of the prior annual reporting periods had declined over the past two years.
specific conductance increases of well over 50%. The average chloride and sodium values for this reporting period are slightly higher than the previous reporting period; however, similar to specific conductance, the rate of increase has declined in recent years. The average tritium value for this reporting period at TPGW-7D was low (19.2 pCi/L) and similar to the previous reporting period average (22.2 pCi/L).
At TPGW-G21 (58-ft sample depth), located approximately 3.7 miles west of the CCS, the 8-year period of records gradual increase in quarterly specific conductance, chloride, and sodium values continued with a small increase over the reporting period. Tritium values also slightly increased during this reporting period (58.2 pCi/L) compared to the previous year (42.6 pCi/L).
Continued monitoring will determine whether the changes in tritium observed at this station during this reporting period are temporary or indicate a longer-term change.
As previously reported (FPL 2018a), shallow groundwater in the vicinity of well TPGW-4S, which is located nearly 3 miles west of the CCS, was impacted by Hurricane Irma in September 2017, as evidenced by immediate increases in salt water constituents during the passage of the storm. Despite purging during the reporting period, groundwater had not returned to pre-storm conditions. Prior to the hurricane, automated specific conductance readings indicated values were consistently around 2,000 µS/cm, with short-term non-CCS-related increases of 5,000
µS/cm to 6,000 µS/cm during some dry seasons. Following the hurricane, specific conductance values above 6,000 µS/cm were recorded for prolonged periods (Figure 3.1-4). In May 2019, specific conductance values at TPGW-4S were around 10,000 µS/cm. Meanwhile, the average tritium concentration for the reporting period was 16.6 pCi/L, which indicates that these increases in saltwater at TPGW-4S are not related to groundwater influenced by the CCS.
3-8
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Groundwater at the base of the Biscayne Aquifer, as monitored in two monitoring stations located east of the CCS (TPGW-10 and TPGW-11), has experienced gradual increases in saltwater constituents since 2012/2013. However, similar Rates of salinity increase at depth in TPGW-10D and -11D to the previous reporting have leveled off. There is little to no CCS sourced period, the rate of increase in groundwater in the shallow wells at these sites. specific conductance at TPGW-10D and TPGW-11D has leveled off. Automated specific conductance values throughout the entire reporting period are essentially the same. The 2019 induction logs actually show a slight decrease in bulk resistivity compared to the previous year.
The average chloride concentration for the reporting period was 28,325 mg/L, which is similar to values reported over the two previous years, aside from a historically low value reported in June 2017 (19,900 mg/L). Tritium values were virtually identical to the previous years values in these two wells. The primary influence of the CCS on groundwater below Biscayne Bay is observed at the deep wells with sample intervals greater than 100 feet below the bottom of the Bay. There is little to no CCS sourced groundwater in the shallow TPGW-10S and TPGW-11S wells based on the tritium data.
One other well cluster of note is TPGW-3, which is located south of the CCS near Biscayne Bay and generally has specific conductance values over 59,000 µS/cm at all three depths for the duration of monitoring. While the saltwater constituents have not drastically changed and there is no apparent trend in saltwater concentration changes, tritium values in all three wells have declined since monitoring began. Tritium values in the deep and intermediate zones were around 2,000 pCi/L in June 2010 and steadily declined to around 1,250 pCi/L by March 2019. The shallow zone has experienced an even more dramatic long-term decline in terms of percentage, as tritium values in 2010 were over 800 pCi/L and the concentration in March 2019 was 88 pCi/L. This indicates that there may be an ongoing reduction in the influence of CCS water at this location, although the groundwater is still somewhat hypersaline.
3.1.4.2 Groundwater Nutrients With regard to nutrients in the five wells clusters in and around the CCS (TPGW-1, TPGW-2, TPGW-10, TPGW-13 and TPGW-14), the concentrations tend to be more variable from quarter to quarter and annually than the other parameters such as specific conductance, chloride, and sodium. Most of the TN in these wells is in the form of ammonia, with the exception of the two shallow wells, TPGW-10S and TPGW-14S, where roughly 60 to 70% of the TN is organic nitrogen. As noted in Table 1.8-1, TKN in hypersaline samples may be biased low, thus underestimating TN values. Historically, ammonia is highest at depth, with the exception of TPGW-13 where the highest ammonia values are consistently observed in the shallow well.
During the reporting period, all the wells at well cluster TPGW-13 exhibited the highest ammonia values to date. Mann-Kendall statistical analyses were conducted on the five well 3-9
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 clusters for the entire period of record to further assess trends for ammonia. While the results showed some increasing trends at TPGW-13 (all depths) and in the other wells at depth, all of the shallow wells showed no trend or stable results. The only exception was TPGW-1S, which showed a probable increasing ammonia trend; however, the tritium data do not support that the trend is linked to the CCS as the Mann-Kendall statistical analysis at TPGW-1S showed no trend for tritium and a regression analysis showed no statistical relationship between tritium and ammonia.
During the reporting period, TP concentrations at the five well clusters in or close to the CCS were similar to well TPGW-11S in Biscayne Bay, which is a well not influenced by the CCS.
TP concentrations in the majority of monitoring well clusters beneath and near the CCS ranged from 0.0146 mg/L to 0.0886 mg/L for the reporting period. Well TPGW-11S in Biscayne Bay had a TP concentration within that range (i.e., 0.0609 mg/L) but a tritium value of only 6.2 pCi/L in October 2017; this value was higher than what was recorded in most of the CCS influenced wells. The highest value for the reporting year was observed at TPGW-14M (0.219 mg/L) in September 2018; this is a statistical outlier and well above concentrations recorded at any groundwater well since monitoring began. The March 2019 value was 0.057 mg/L which is more aligned with the data record for this station.
3.1.4.3 Groundwater Temperature Well cluster TPGW-13 continues to exhibit the highest average automated groundwater temperatures (reporting period average of 29.5°C shallow, 29.4°C intermediate, and 29.0°C deep, with a maximum of 29.6°C). Wells TPGW-2M and TPGW-2D, which are in proximity to the CCS, had the second-highest well cluster average temperatures (reporting period averages of 26.8°C and 26.9°C, respectively). Similar to previous findings, the groundwater temperatures in all of the other the shallow wells appear to be more seasonally driven, while temperatures in the deep and intermediate wells tend to be stable and lower overall. The exceptions are wells closest to the CCS (TPGW-1 and TPGW-2), which consistently have warmer temperatures at depth.
The vertical profiles for temperature from the historical wells TPGW-L3, TPGW-L5, TPGW-G21, TPGW-G28, and TPGW-L35 (Figures 3.1-27 through 3.1-31) show that groundwater temperatures are more variable and seasonally influenced in the upper 20 to 30 feet of the aquifer than at depth where the temperature is more stable. Aside from the variability in temperature right at the surface, the groundwater temperature at TPGW-L3 and TPGW-L5 typically tends to be higher (1°C to 2°C) at depth. Other than a possible slight influence on temperatures under the CCS and at depth in a few wells closest to the CCS, the effects of temperature on groundwater is inconsequential or non-existent.
3-10
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 3.2 Surface Water Quality 3.2.1 Data Collection Automated and analytical sampling methods and protocols for surface water are outlined in Appendix B and the QAPP (FPL 2013). Most stations are on telemetry, with the exception of Biscayne Bay/Card Sound stations TPBBSW-4 and TPBBSW-5. Table 3.2-1 summarizes the probes currently used at each surface water station and the parameters measured; these are the same as those reported for the previous reporting period.
During this reporting period, surface water quality samples were collected quarterly (June 2018, September 2018, December 2018, and March 2019) for laboratory analyses from 19 stations (28 surface water samples per event, plus QA/QC samples) (Table 3.0-1). Further details are provided in Appendix B.
3.2.2 Automated Data Results The automated surface water data are qualified and validated in the same manner as the automated groundwater data. Appendix D shows the water quality field verification/calibration logs. Appendix E presents the data that were qualified and provides general explanations for the qualifications.
Figures 3.2-1 to 3.2-20 show time-series graphs of specific conductance and temperature at each surface water station. The time-series graphs show data from the beginning of station reporting (various dates depending on station startup) through May 2019 to enable viewing changes over time; validated time-series data are in separate Microsoft Excel files (provided as Section 3 electronic data files as part of this reporting package). The validated data Excel files are also available for download on the FPL EDMS.
Tables 3.2-2 through 3.2-4 show statistical summaries of the time-series data for specific conductance, salinity, and temperature, respectively. The tables include monthly average values for each monitoring station, the minimum, maximum, average, and standard deviations for the reporting period (data from June 2018 through May 2019), and the minimum, maximum, average, and standard deviations for the historical period of record. Summaries were calculated when at least 21 days of data were available during the month. The salinity values are presented, since readers often relate more directly to salinity than to specific conductance. Figures 3.2-21, 3.2-22, and 3.2-23 show the annual average and standard deviation values for specific conductance, salinity, and temperature, respectively, at each surface water station.
3.2.3 Analytical Data Results Tables 3.2-5 through 3.2-8 provide a summary of the surface water analytical results from June 2018 through March 2019. Table 3.2-9 includes a summary showing the range of ion and nutrient concentrations. Surface water sampling logs from the June 2018 through March 2019 sampling events are provided in Appendix F of this report. DUS reports for each event are provided in Appendix G, and detailed Level IV laboratory reports are included in Appendix H.
3-11
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Note that the laboratory reports analytical results to three digits, per a request by the Agencies in 2013. However, the third digit is not considered significant by the laboratory and can be misconstrued as indicating a false level of accuracy. Analytical outliers are included in Appendix I.
Figures 3.2-24, 3.2-25, and 3.2-26 show the quarterly concentrations of chloride, sodium, and tritium, respectively, along with the historical range in values for surface water stations (TPSWCCS-1 through TPSWCCS-7, TPSWID-1 through TPSWID-3, TPSWC-1 through TPSWC-6, and TPBBSW-3 through TPBBSW-5). Figure 3.2-27 shows semi-annual concentrations for TN and ammonia along with historical values, while Figure 3.2-28 shows the same information for TP.
3.2.4 Discussion of Results Waters in the study area ranged from fresh to hypersaline, based on location and time of year, with many of the stations exhibiting conditions similar to those observed in previous years.
Compared with the groundwater time-series graphs, the surface water time-series graphs show greater variability, most of which are related to seasonal and meteorological conditions. Figures 3.2-21, 3.2-22, and 3.2-23 show the average and standard deviations for specific conductance, salinity, and temperature, respectively, for all surface water stations. Note that the standard deviations for many of the stations are an order of magnitude greater than the groundwater stations.
Seasonally, most stations are more saline during the dry season and less saline during the wet season. A heavy rainfall event or tropical system can cause dramatic changes in specific conductance, chloride, and sodium concentrations in less than a day or in the weeks following an event. Nutrient concentrations can also be affected by stormwater runoff and/or discharges from area flood control canals.
Overall, water quality at stations in the CCS, Biscayne Bay/Card Sound, marine canal stations (TPSWC-4 and TPSWC-5), and the ID were within historical ranges for specific conductance, chloride, and sodium; however, above average tritium values in the CCS in December 2018 appear to have influenced December 2018 tritium values (higher concentrations) in nearby surface water stations as a result of atmospheric exchange. The data do not support a conclusion that higher tritium values are the result of a groundwater pathway from the CCS, as discussed below.
3.2.4.1 CCS Stations Multiple factors resulted in little to no decrease in the average annual CCS salinity calculated for this reporting period as compared to the previous year. The principal factor was an overall drier than average year and evaporative losses that averaged 35.7 MGD.
3-12
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 The CCS is characterized as having hypersaline water, with specific conductance, density, chloride, and sodium values consistently being higher in the CCS than the surrounding water.
High salinity and associated elevated fluid density will result in CCS water sinking through the aquifer system to the base of the aquifer and then spreading out laterally instead of flowing out horizontally at shallow depth. During the reporting period, average daily specific conductance values typically ranged between approximately 60,000 µS/cm to 90,000 µS/cm. The highest values occurred at the end of the reporting period in May 2019, at the end of the dry season. The lowest values were reported in September 2018 following heavy rainfall on September 3, 2018.
During the dry season in 2019, station TPSWCCS-7 exhibited the most variability since this station was influenced by interceptor ditch discharges, which are fresher than the CCS and cause a localized short-term decrease in specific conductance. While there are some short-term fluctuations in values at all stations in response to rainfall and/or freshening and ID operations, there has been a general increase in specific conductance values from mid-September 2018 to the end of the reporting period on May 31, 2019. The average automated specific conductance for the CCS using all seven stations combined during the reporting period was 72,556 µS/cm. This was almost exactly the same as the previous reporting period average specific conductance value of 72,532 µS/cm. The annual average salinity in the CCS, calculated in accordance with Paragraph 29.J of the CO for the reporting period, was 51.1 on the Practical Salinity Scale of 1978 [PSS-78]. The chloride and sodium data support the automated data, with the average chloride and sodium concentrations of the CCS being 28,932 mg/L and 14,711 mg/L, respectively, during the reporting period. These values are within a few percent of the previous reporting period, indicating the addition of UFA water is instrumental in moderating CCS salinities and can offset some of the evaporative losses; however, the drier than normal year and evaporative losses prevented reductions in CCS salinity this reporting period.
Tritium concentrations in the CCS ranged from 1,265 pCi/L to 18,529 pCi/L during the reporting period, with an average CCS tritium concentration of 17,469 pCi/L in December 2018. The surface water tritium concentrations in the CCS are more variable than the groundwater concentrations at TPGW-13, as the surface water is more directly affected by plant operations and meteorological conditions. Variations in tritium concentrations in the CCS can result in variable tritium concentrations in nearby surface water and pore water as a result of atmospheric transport. Higher December 2018 tritium values were also recorded in Biscayne Bay, L-31E, and porewater, concurrently (see Sections 3.2.4.2 and 3.2.4.3 and Section 5). Regardless, all tritium values were below the FDEP and EPA drinking water standard of 20,000 pCi/L (FDEP 2012).
Nutrient samples were collected in September 2018 and March 2019 in the CCS. The average CCS TN and TP concentrations were 3.58 mg/L and 0.029 mg/L, respectively, during the September 2018 sampling event and 2.50 mg/L and 0.046 mg/L, respectively, during the March 2019 sampling event. Most of the TN in the CCS surface water is in the form of organic nitrogen, and ammonia values are much lower than TN. CCS ammonia concentrations were below 0.200 mg/L and averaged 0.095 mg/L for the reporting period, which was less than the average reporting period ammonia value of 0.115 mg/L in the Biscayne Bay/Card Sound reference station BBSW-5. As noted in Table 1.8-1, TKN in hypersaline samples may be biased low, thus underestimating TN values.
3-13
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 During this reporting period, the best sustained cooling efficiency was achieved in the CCS since the start of EPU monitoring.
The highest water temperatures at all surface water stations are found in the CCS, as expected.
The average CCS surface water temperature for the reporting period was 31.2°C, which is 0.7°C warmer than the previous reporting period but 2.3°C degrees cooler than the 2014/2015 reporting period when CCS temperatures were the highest. The temperature in the CCS is not only affected by plant operations and the cooling efficiency of the CCS but also by meteorological conditions. The air temperatures were warmer during this reporting year than the previous reporting year by approximately 0.5°C and, thus, the reason for the increase in average CCS water temperature. Within the CCS, the water temperature varies based on location, with the warmest temperatures closest to the plant discharge into the CCS at TPSWCCS-1 and the coolest temperatures near the return canal intake on the east side of the plant at TPSWCCS-6. During the reporting period, the average temperatures were 37.9°C at TPSWCCS-1 and 28.6°C at TPSWCCS-6. This equates to an average temperature reduction of 9.3°C between TPSWCCS-1 and TPSWCCS-6, which is a slight increase over the previous reporting period and the best performance since the start of EPU monitoring. Figure 3.2-29 shows the average annual temperature difference between TPSWCCS-1 and TPSWCCS-6 starting in June 2011, when a full reporting period of data was available, through this reporting period.
3.2.4.2 Biscayne Bay and Card Sound Stations There continues to be no adverse impact of CCS water on the Biscayne Bay/Card Sound monitoring sites based on water quality, nutrient quality, and temperature data; values observed were within naturally occurring ranges for the Bay.
Water quality and temperature data from the three Biscayne Bay/Card Sound stations (TPBBSW-3, TPBBSW-4, and TPBBSW-5) that are sampled quarterly and have automated probes deployed continue to indicate there is no influence from the CCS. Tritium concentrations at the Biscayne Bay/Card Sound stations were all low, ranging from 3.0 pCi/L to 35.4 pCi/L (annual average of 17.5 pCi/L), with all three stations having their highest (or one of their highest) values in December 2018 when the CCS tritium values were higher, which is consistent with atmospheric exchange. Concentrations of saltwater constituents followed naturally occurring seasonal trends (including naturally occurring hypersaline conditions). The other two Bay stations (TPBBSW-10 and TPBBSW-14) are not sampled quarterly per the Monitoring Plan but have automated water quality probes that also do not indicate an influence from the CCS.
The highest specific conductance, chloride, and sodium values in Biscayne Bay/Card Sound for the reporting period occurred during the dry season, mostly in March 2019, while the lowest values were observed during the wet season, mostly in September 2018. Based on the continuous automated data, the highest specific conductance values for the reporting period were reached at all of the Bay stations (TPBBSW-3, TPBBSW-4, and TPBBSW-5, TPBBSW-10, and 3-14
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 TPBBSW-14) toward the end of the dry season in May 2019. Maximum specific conductance values in the Bay stations approached or slightly exceeded 60,000 µS/cm (salinities approaching or exceeding 40 in the PSS-78 scale), indicating hypersaline conditions that have also naturally occurred in other dry seasons (i.e., 2011, 2014, 2015, 2017, and 2018) (FPL 2018a). Salinities approaching or exceeding 40 on the PSS 78 scale have been observed in the dry season throughout Biscayne Bay for a number of years (Lohmann et al. 2012). Thus, the findings at FPL monitoring stations are consistent with findings at other locations in the Bay.
The average specific conductance for the five current automated Bay stations combined for the reporting period was 51,600 µS/cm (average salinity of 34.5 PSS-78). This is higher than the average value for the historical period of record of 47,973µS/cm (31.8 PSS-78) for the same stations in part due to fewer large regional rainfall events, which lowered the Bays salinity.
TPBBSW-10 still exhibits substantial variability in specific conductance, since this northernmost station is influenced by surface water drainage canals north of Turkey Point, with short-term drops from a few days to a few weeks that can exceed 20,000 µS/cm. While the CO target for the CCS is 34 practical salinity units (PSU) or PSS-78, the Biscayne Bay average does exceed that value seasonally and, for some years, annually, such as for this reporting period.
Chloride concentrations ranged from 16,300 mg/L to 23,100 mg/L, while sodium concentrations ranged from 8,460 mg/L to 11,200 mg/L; all were within historical ranges. For comparison, the average chloride concentration for seawater at 3.5% salinity is 19,600 mg/L (Turekian 1968).
Average sodium levels in seawater are 11,050 mg/L at a salinity of 35 on the PSS-78 scale (Millero 1996), but can approach 14,000 mg/L in Biscayne Bay, depending on the location and time of year (Reich et al. 2006). In most years, dry season chloride concentrations in Biscayne Bay/Card Sound naturally exceed 21,000 mg/L. Over the entire monitoring effort, with quarterly data from June 2010 through March 2019, the average chloride and sodium concentrations were approximately 19,200 mg/L and 10,100 mg/L, respectively, and consistent with data reported by others (e.g., Reich et al. 2006; Turekian 1968; Millero 1996).
Biscayne Bay/Card Sound stations consistently had the lowest surface water TN concentrations, ranging from 0.53 mg/L to 0.91 mg/L during the reporting period. The majority of nitrogen at each station is organic nitrogen. These Bay stations had low ammonia concentrations, ranging from 0.03 mg/L to 0.20 mg/L during the reporting period, with the highest value at the background station TPBBSW-5. TP at all of the Biscayne Bay/Card Sound stations was non-detect based on a detection limit of 0.005 mg/L or 0.009 mg/L, which is below or near historical values reported in the Bay. The Florida International University Water Quality Monitoring Network (FIU-WQMN) reported an average value of <0.01 mg/L over a 13-year period (1993 to 2005) at a sample location offshore and southeast of Turkey Point (Site 122).
Water temperatures in the Bay followed historic annual trends/patterns and were driven by meteorological conditions. The average annual combined temperature for the reporting period (27.1°C) was 0.9°C warmer than the previous reporting period and 0.6°C warmer than the historical period of record. Compared to the average annual CCS temperature for this reporting period, the combined Bay stations were 4.1°C cooler.
3-15
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 3.2.4.3 L-31E Canal Stations Sharp increases in saltwater constituents are observed at the L-31E canal every year, including this reporting period; however, review of multiple factors indicate that saltwater entering the canal is Biscayne Bay marine groundwater and is not linked to the CCS In the L-31E canal stations which are located due west of the CCS (TPSWC-1, TPSWC-2, and TPSWC-3), the water historically ranges from fresh to brackish, depending on the time of year.
Specific conductance values in the upper zone of the water column in the L-31E canal (1 ft below the surface) are Salinity changes in TPSWC-3B with water level changes at consistently lower than the TPSWC-5B. See Figure 3.2-31 for details.
bottom station (Figure 3.2-30).
Historically, increases in specific conductance have been observed whenever tidal water elevations exceed the water levels in the L-31E canal. This occasionally occurs during the dry season and at other times of the year when there are exceptionally high tides (i.e., king tides). Figure 3.2-31 and the inserted graphic show the L-31E canals response in specific conductance when saline tidal water levels are higher than L-31E canal water levels. Elevated specific conductance events in the L-31E canal are typically observed first in the TPSWC-3B station, with increases measured at TPSWC-2B shortly after, although to a much lower degree. Increases in specific conductance at TPSWC-1B in response to tidal high water events are more temporally delayed and more muted compared with TPSWC-2B and 3B. Both the frequency and magnitude of the tidal high water events and the associated elevated specific conductance levels appear to be on the rise. Specific conductance values from the three L-31E bottom monitoring stations from September 2010 through May 2019 are shown on Figure 3.2-30. There were five elevated specific conductance events that exceeded 10,000
µS/cm from September 2010 through September 2016, with a maximum value of 22,400 µS/cm (May 26, 2011), while there were five from October 2016 through May 2019 (a sixth was associated with Hurricane Irma), four of which had specific conductance values between 23, 000
µS/cm and 44,000 µS/cm.
3-16
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 In order to further evaluate the potential for CCS influence on the elevated specific conductance events, water elevations between monitoring stations TPSWC-3T and TPSWCCS-3B were compared to determine whether there was a prevailing westward gradient from the CCS toward the L-31 monitoring stations (refer to transect E Figure 6.3-6). These data show an eastward gradient from the L-31E canal toward the CCS, with water levels in the L-31E canal consistently on the order of at least 0.5 ft higher than concurrent levels in the CCS. Next, tritium data collected at the time of the high salinity events were examined. The available data show tritium values in the L-31E canal are within the ranges observed from atmospheric deposition and do not respond commensurately and consistently with changes in specific conductance which otherwise would be expected if there was a CCS sourced groundwater pathway (see graphic on right).
While increases in specific conductance values at theTPSWC-3B station are typically several times to an order of magnitude greater than the values in the other L-31E canal monitoring stations, this station consistently has the lowest tritium concentrations. In addition, quarterly vertical specific conductance profiles from monitoring wells located adjacent to the L-31E canal (TPGW-L3 and TPGW-L5; Figures 3.1- There is no relationship between tritium and 22 and 3.1-23) indicate the sharp interface salinity at TPSWC-3B in the L-31E Canal between the fresher/slightly brackish (p>0.10; R2 = 0.006).
groundwater and saline/hypersaline groundwater is roughly 10 ft deeper than the bottom of L-31E canal.
These data demonstrate the intermittent elevated salinity events measured are caused by high tidal events in which Biscayne Bay/Card Sound water levels exceed the stages in the L-31E canal, allowing coastal saline water to seep into the bottom of the deep canal cuts through porous rock. It is anticipated that, as sea levels continue to gradually increase, the frequency, duration, and salinity of these events will increase.
Increases in saltwater constituents in the L-31E canal seem to consistently occur during the few times a year when saline Biscayne Bay influenced water levels are higher than fresher water levels in the L-31E canal.
The automated data for this reporting period support the above findings. Specific conductance, chloride, and sodium values are within historical limits and exhibit similar trends. Increased specific conductance values were noted several times during the reporting period, including in June 2018, December 2018, and March/April 2019, and were most notable at TPSWC-3, which is the farthest L-31E station west of the CCS (Figure 3.2-31). For example, specific conductance values at TPSWC-3B (bottom) began to increase in late November 2018 and reached a peak value of 18,824 µS/cm on December 7, 2018, before waning in early January 2019. A larger increase occurred in early March 2019 and peaked on March 20, 2019 (33,662 µS/cm, based on 3-17
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 automated data) and then declined over the next several months. Meanwhile, tritium values in December 2018 and March 2019 at the bottom of TPSWC-3 were 94.9 pCi/L and 36.9 pCi/L, respectively, which were lower than tritium values at the other stations despite those stations having much lower specific conductance values. If there was a groundwater source of tritium from the CCS, then one would expect that the station with much higher specific conductance values would also have much higher tritium values and stations with lower tritium would have lower specific conductance; however, this is not the case.
Increases in nutrients in the L-31E canal cannot be explained by a CCS groundwater pathway due, in part, to low tritium values.
TP values during the reporting period ranged from non-detect to 0.023 mg/L and were within historical limits. TN values ranged from 0.069 mg/L to 1.54 mg/L during the reporting period and also were within historical limits. Most of the TN recorded for this reporting period, as well as historically, is in the form of organic nitrogen. This may be a result of the biological decomposition of algae and aquatic vegetation at the bottom of the canal. On a few occasions, dissolved oxygen (DO) levels drop at a few stations and a larger percentage of the TN is in the form of ammonia. In March 2019, ammonia at TPSWC-3 was 0.63 mg/L. As discussed above, the tritium value in March 2019 was only 36.9 pCi/L, which does not support a supposition that the source of ammonia or any appreciable contribution is from CCS groundwater.
Water temperatures in the L-31E canal vary among stations but were collectively, on average, 0.8°C warmer than the previous reporting periods average. Coincidentally, the average water temperature of the five Bay/Sound monitoring stations for this reporting period was also 0.8°C warmer as compared with the previous reporting periods average and equal to the L-31E canal bottom average annual temperatures of 26.3°C during the 2017-2018 reporting period, and 27.1°C for this reporting period. As discussed in Section 2, regional air temperatures during the 2018-2019 reporting period exhibited some of the highest monthly values recorded over the previous 24 years. Average L-31E canal temperatures measured near the canal surface during the reporting period were 0.6°C warmer than the canal bottom temperatures, thereby indicating air temperature influences. Similarities between L-31E canal bottom and Bay/Sound bottom temperatures combined with average cooler canal bottom temperatures than shallow canal temperatures do not support the supposition that warmer hypersaline waters from the CCS are influencing the elevated salinity excursions in the L-31E canal.
3.2.4.4 S-20 Discharge Canal and Card Sound Canal Station TPSWC-4 is located in the S-20 discharge canal, and TPSWC-5 is located in the Card Sound canal. Periodically, both stations experience limited flushing, which can result in poorer water quality, particularly at the bottom, as compared to the Biscayne Bay stations.
While TPSWC-4 can be affected by releases from the S-20 structure and can transition quickly from saline to fresh or brackish conditions, as observed in September 2018 when it appears the S-20 gate was open, the water is oftentimes stagnant. A weir structure constructed in early 2014 3-18
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 restricts water exchange upstream and downstream of the weir. As a result, saline tidal waters can get trapped upstream of the weir during high tides and become concentrated by evaporation over extended dry periods. The water temperatures also get warmer. Depending on water elevations in Biscayne Bay, there may or may not be an exchange of water with the Bay. There are a series of culverts in the former Sea-Dade canal that allow high flows to discharge more naturally as sheet flow to Card Sound but also allow high flood tides to reach the S-20 discharge canal on occasion, adding salinity to the area. Chloride and sodium values at TPSWC-4 were within historical ranges during the reporting period, with the highest concentrations in December 2018 at the bottom (20,900 mg/L and 11,000 mg/L, respectively); these values were typical values and similar to those reported in Biscayne Bay. The automated data indicate that specific conductance values have risen steadily at TPSWC-4 during the dry season, with values by the end of the reporting period in excess of 63,000 µS/cm, which was over 3,000 µS/cm higher than nearby Biscayne Bay stations. All tritium values at TPSWC-4 were within historical limits and within ranges associated with atmospheric influences. The highest concentration during the reporting period (269 pCi/L) was measured at the surface and occurred in December 2018 when the CCS had higher tritium values. These above average tritium values in the CCS appear to have influenced December 2018 tritium values in nearby surface water stations as a result of atmospheric exchange.
TPSWC-5 is located in a remnant canal that is over 20 ft deep. This station reflects marine conditions and, during the reporting period, appeared to generally follow specific conductance of the nearby Card Sound station TPBBSW-4B. There were several periods (a few weeks up to several months) when there was a notable increase in specific conductance at the bottom station where specific conductance values were higher than those observed in Biscayne Bay. One such increase, based on automated data, was noted in early May 2018 and extended into the reporting period through early July 2018, which was longer than typical (Figure 3.2-32). Sampling results from June 2018 showed chloride and sodium concentrations at the bottom of TPSWC-5 were 24,400 mg/L and 13,600 mg/L, respectively, while values at the nearby Biscayne Bay station TPBBSW-4 were over 20% lower. Tritium values were well within historical limits and consistent with values reflecting atmospheric influences. The highest tritium value at TPSWC-5 for the reporting period was measured in June 2018 (107.8 pCi/L) at the bottom sample depth when tritium in Biscayne Bay was 8.0 pCi/L at TPBBSW-4B.
3.2.4.5 ID Stations Findings in this reporting period are similar to previous reporting periods. The ID specific conductance, chloride, and sodium values are affected by the amount of water pumped from the ID. During non-pumping periods, water in the ID is fresh to brackish; however, during periods of heavy pumping, the water becomes saline and tritium increases in the pumped segments.
These increases are expected since the ID is intercepting CCS groundwater when there is an inland gradient. Specific conductance values in the ID are always below the values in the CCS and reflect a mix of fresh and saline groundwater.
Similar to observation at other surface water stations, the tritium values were highest in the ID in December 2018 when the CCS tritium levels were highest. Higher CCS tritium levels increase the tritium concentration associated with atmospheric influences. ID pumping did not occur until 3-19
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 several weeks after the sampling event; therefore, the higher tritium levels were not the result of pumping. The highest tritium value observed in the ID was at TPSWID-1 at the top station (322.3 pCi/L), which is within the range observed from atmospheric deposition adjacent to the CCS. For additional details on operations of the ID pumps during the reporting period, refer to Section 6 and Appendix N.
3.3 Water Levels 3.3.1 Data Collection Water levels provide insight into groundwater hydrology as well as groundwater and surface water interactions; levels are collected at all groundwater stations and most surface water stations for the monitoring effort. Currently, only two automated water quality stations in Biscayne Bay (TPBBSW-4 and TPBBSW-5) do not have stage recorders.
3.3.2 Groundwater and Surface Water Level Results Data validation and qualification of the automated water level data is a multi-step process, and details can be found in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a) and the QAPP (FPL 2013). Over 99% of the automated water level data for the reporting period were deemed valid and usable.
The accuracy of the land-based station survey is typically within hundredths of a foot.
Groundwater and stilling well locations in Biscayne Bay and Card Sound may have a lower level of accuracy because those stations could only be surveyed with global positioning system (GPS) units. Thus, the survey accuracy limits should be considered when interpreting the results to hundredths of a foot or, in the case of the Biscayne Bay wells, to several tenths of a foot.
Changes in the salinity at the well screen interval, leakage of rainwater, or groundwater at or near the surface can result in stratification in the well casing, which can influence the representativeness of water levels. While the impact to the data is minimal for the reporting period, there are a few wells, such as TPGW-14D, where the water levels have been estimated since there appears to be leakage of Biscayne Bay water into the well casing. This leakage is causing stratification, which appears to impact water levels by several tenths of a foot (water levels slightly higher); therefore, care should be taken when interpreting the results.
Figures 3.3-1 through 3.3-14 are time-series graphs of water elevations at all automated groundwater stations, and Figures 3.3-15 through 3.3-32 are time-series graphs of surface water station elevations. The graphs depict validated data and exclude data that have been qualified as questionable. The time-series graphs show data from the beginning of station reporting (various dates depending on station startup) through May 2019 to enable viewing changes over time; validated time-series data are in separate Microsoft Excel files (provided as Section 3 electronic data files as part of this reporting package). The validated data Excel files are also available for download on the FPL EDMS.
3-20
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 3.3.3 Discussion of Results 3.3.3.1 Groundwater Water levels in TPGW-1S and -2S were slightly higher than their corresponding intermediate (M) and deep (D) wells due to the shallow zone becoming less saline, likely due to RWS pumping.
During the reporting period, there was nothing atypical about the groundwater levels, other than measured water levels at TPGW-1S and TPGW-2S becoming slightly higher relative to the intermediate and deep water levels (Figures 3.3-1 and 3.3-2). This is likely in response to the shallow zone becoming less saline, potentially as a result of RWS pumping. Other findings in the Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2016a) remain valid for this reporting period. These findings are listed below:
Water levels change very quickly in response to rainfall events. This is most evident in stations not significantly influenced by tides (TPGW-1, TPGW-2, TPGW-4 through TPGW-9, and TPGW-13). Typically, when there is a spike in water levels on the time-series graphs, there is a corresponding rainfall event.
At each well cluster, fluctuations in stage for all three depth intervals track closely, indicating good hydrologic connection between intervals.
Water levels at stations in or immediately adjacent to Biscayne Bay (TPGW-3, TPGW-10, TPGW-11, TPGW-12, and TPGW-14) exhibited tidal influence at all three depths.
The amplitude of the tidal changes decreases across the landscape from north to south.
Thus, TPGW-10 has a larger range of water levels than TPGW-14.
The stations that are freshest and located farthest from the coast (TPGW-8 and TPGW-9) exhibit fewer water level differences among the shallow, intermediate, and deep wells.
The differences in water levels among the shallow, intermediate, and deep wells at other locations are influenced by the density differences in the formation water.
Wells located between the westernmost wells and the CCS, such as TPGW-4 and TPGW-5, have brackish water in the intermediate and deep zones overlain by much fresher water in the shallow zone. The shallow zone water elevations in these wells are always higher than the deep zone.
To provide insight into the differences in groundwater elevations over the landscape, time-series plots from selected stations are illustrated on Figures 3.3-33 and 3.3-34. Each figure represents a transect or group of well clusters. The water levels for the stations in Biscayne Bay (TPGW-10 and TPGW-11) are shown as daily averages since their hourly tidal fluctuations obscure comparisons with other non-tidal stations. It is important to note that all time-series data reflect actual measured water levels and have not been converted to freshwater head equivalents. Water elevations are typically higher in stations to the west and are lower in stations near the coast.
3-21
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Groundwater levels in the Biscayne Bay wells fluctuate notably with tides. During high tide, the Bay groundwater levels are higher than groundwater levels in land-based nearshore wells; at low tide, the opposite is true.
Figure 3.3-35 shows a time-series plot stage at TPSWCCS-2B and TPGW-13S, which are located near the center of the CCS. For the reporting period, the results indicate that the CCS water levels at TPSWCCS-2B were higher than the groundwater elevation at TPGW-13S, suggesting that a downward gradient generally occurs at this location.
3.3.3.2 Surface Water The CCS and the L-31E canal exhibit limited tidal response to conditions in Biscayne Bay, indicating a less direct hydrologic connectivity.
Findings regarding surface water levels presented in the Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2016a) remain valid. These findings include the following:
Diurnal water level variations were observed at all tidally influenced stations, including those located in Biscayne Bay (north to south: TPBBSW-10, TPBBSW-3, and TPBBSW-
- 14) and tidal canal station TPSWC-5. The tidal range declines across the landscape from north to south. At TPBBSW-10, tide ranges during spring tide and neap tide can be more than 2.0 ft and less than 1.0 ft, respectively.
The effect of rainfall on water levels is masked in most tidal stations. Rainfall effects are evident on all onshore surface water stations where water level increases have been observed following significant rainfall events in the L-31E canal, CCS, and ID.
Water levels in the CCS vary spatially, depending on whether the station is located on the plant discharge side or intake side of the CCS. Water levels on the plant discharge side have lower ranges in variability (typically less than 1 ft at TPSWCCS-1) than stations on the intake side (up to approximately 2 ft at TPSWCCS-6). Water levels on the discharge side of the CCS are also typically at least 0.5 ft higher than those on the CCS intake side.
Following heavy rain events, during the rainy season, and during outages, the difference in water levels between TPSWCCS-1 and TPSWCCS-6 is less than at other times of the year.
Water levels in the CCS and L-31E canal exhibit little response to tidal influences in Biscayne Bay surface water.
3-22
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 3.4 Extent of CCS Water Data collected during this reporting period show no significant changes to the orientation and extent of CCS water, with the exception of several groundwater wells near the western boundary of the CCS which are becoming less saline. Based on tritium data for the reporting period, the outer limit for potential CCS groundwater (20 pCi/L isopleth) at depth continues to be approximately 4.5 miles west of the CCS.
As discussed in the 2018 Annual Monitoring report (FPL 2018a), saltwater from Biscayne Bay was reported well inland prior to construction and operation of the CCS (Prinos et al. 2014; Golder 2011a; Parker et al.1955; Klein 1957). The CCS is a source of saline water; that water has intermixed with historical Bay marine groundwater and has migrated inland. There are multiple factors influencing saltwater movement, including groundwater hydraulic gradients, drainage, evaporation, precipitation, groundwater withdrawals, hurricanes, regional development, and changes in sea levels. Based on tritium data for the reporting period, the outer limit for potential CCS groundwater (20 pCi/L isopleth) at depth is approximately 4.5 miles west of the CCS, which has not changed since the previous reporting year. This water consists of ambient saline groundwater and may contain very small (not discernible) amounts of CCS water.
Closer to the CCS, the amount of CCS water mixed with ambient saline groundwater is much higher and is reflected by higher tritium and chloride concentrations. Groundwater near the base of the Biscayne Aquifer, 1.5 to 2.5 miles west of the CCS, is hypersaline, and chloride concentrations have not changed appreciably at depth over the entire period of monitoring.
Further discussion is provided below, along with figures that show the approximate western extent of CCS groundwater influences (outer limits of CCS influenced groundwater).
Figures 3.4-1, 3.4-2, and 3.4-3 show transect locations and cross-sectional tritium isopleths based on the average concentrations for the reporting period. Tritium concentrations from June 2012 through March 2013 are also included on Figures 3.4-2 and 3.4-3 for comparative purposes. All isopleths represent estimated locations of tritium contours and were developed based on linear interpolation methods and best professional judgment using tritium data collected for this reporting period. Data from other wells, such as TPGW-15 through TPGW-18, have been reviewed to determine the appropriateness of the contours. With a few exceptions, some of which were discussed in Section 3.1.4, the majority of the groundwater tritium values are very similar when comparing values for the same wells for the two reporting periods. While the values at a specific station will vary and may be higher or lower in any given year, the majority of values tend to fluctuate within a fairly consistent range reflective of each well. Thus far, there have been no large-scale changes in the tritium isopleths from one reporting period to another.
Other than the influences from atmospheric exchange, there are was no evidence during the reporting period of CCS sourced groundwater adversely impacting Biscayne Bay/Card Sound, other surface water bodies, or surrounding wetlands.
3-23
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 With regard to the extent of saline and hypersaline groundwater west of the CCS, similar cross-sectional maps have been prepared for chloride (Figures 3.4-4 and 3.4-5) and are of interest, as the progress of some remediation efforts will be based on chloride. MDC and FPL have agreed that hypersaline groundwater is represented by chloride concentrations above 19,000 mg/L (MDC 2015). Figures 3.4-4 and 3.4-5 also include chloride concentrations for the period from June 2012 through March 2013. Similar to the tritium maps, the chloride values at each well are similar over time, with a few exceptions, as noted in Section 3.1.4.
It is anticipated that, as a result of RWS withdrawals of hypersaline groundwater, chloride concentrations will gradually lower west of the CCS as the hypersaline plume is gradually retracted back toward the CCS. This change will be first observed in wells closest to the CCS in the shallow zone, such as TPGW-1S and TPGW-2S, which are near the hypersaline groundwater interface. Reductions of chloride in intermediate and deep wells, such as at TPGW-1M, TPGW-1D, TPGW-2M, and TPGW-2D, will take longer, given the mass of hypersaline groundwater to be retracted at depth. Further information related to RWS operation and effectiveness will be included in annual Remedial Action Reports submitted to MDC.
3-24
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 TABLES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.0-1. Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring at Each Station.
Monitoring Stations Media TPGW - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 GW TPBBSW - 3, 4, 5, 10, 14, Automated Water Quality TPSWC - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 SW TPSWID - 1, 2, 3 CCS - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 TPGW-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 GW TPBBSW - 3, 10, 14 Automated Water Level TPSWC - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 SW TPSWID - 1, 2, 3 CCS - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 TPGW-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, L-3, L-5, GW G-21, G-28, G-35 TPBBSW - 3, 4, 5 Quarterly1 TPSWC - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 SW TPSWID - 1, 2, 3 TPSWCCS - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 TPGW-3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, L-3, L-5, G-21, G-28, GW (excludes G-35 nutrients)
GW (includes TPGW - 1, 2, 10, 13, 14 nutrients)
Semi-annual1 TPBBSW - 3, 4, 5 TPSWC - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 SW TPSWID - 1, 2, 3 TPSWCCS - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Notes:
1 = Analytes from Table 3.0-2 plus field parameters (temperature, specific conductivity, DO, percent oxygen saturation, pH, oxidation reduction potential, and salinity) at all stations.
Key:
CCS = Cooling Canal System.
GW = Groundwater.
SW = Surface Water.
3-25
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.0-2. Analytes Measured in Groundwater, Surface Water, and the Cooling Canal System.
Monitoring Plan Analyte Analyte Category GW SW CCS Chloride (Cl-) Ions Q Q Q Sodium (Na+) Ions Q Q Q Other Anions (SO42-, F-, Br-) Ions SA SA SA Other Cations (Ca2+, Mg2+, K+, Sr2+, B+) Ions SA SA SA Alkalinity Ions SA SA SA Total Ammonia Nutrients SA SA SA Ammonium + unionized ammonia Nutrients SA SA SA Nitrate/Nitrite Nutrients SA SA SA Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Nutrients SA SA SA Total Phosphorus Nutrients SA SA SA Ortho-Phosphate Nutrients SA SA SA Silica Nutrients - - SA Sulfides Ions SA SA SA TDS Other Q - -
Chlorophyll Other - - -
Tritium Tracer Q Q Q Key:
- = Not applicable.
BB = Biscayne Bay.
B+ = Boron.
Br- = Bromide.
Ca2+ = Calcium.
CCS = Cooling Canal System.
F- = Fluoride.
GW = Groundwater.
K+ = Potassium.
Mg2+ = Magnesium.
Q = Quarterly event.
SA = Semi-annual event.
SO42- = Sulfate.
Sr2+ = Strontium.
SW = Surface water.
3-26
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-1. Statistical Summary of Automated Groundwater Specific Conductance (µS/cm).
2018 2019 Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Well 2018-06 2018-07 2018-08 2018-09 2018-10 2018-11 2018-12 2019-01 2019-02 2019-03 2019-04 2019-05 MIN MAX AVG STDDEV MIN MAX AVG STDDEV TPGW-1S_AT 49988 47983 45560 43850 40986 37819 35817 39217 39407 40294 38698 39770 35191 50815 41622 4214 34379 66059 53895 6790 TPGW-1M_AT 69457 69510 69515 69644 69615 69631 69609 69511 69492 69442 69330 69150 68835 70301 69492 172 66640 75369 71429 1060 TPGW-1D_AT 71672 71834 71884 71872 71534 71477 71648 71718 71603 71538 71330 70887 68326 72048 71593 303 69525 73258 71206 614 TPGW-2S_AT 61917 61273 60681 60522 60174 60537 60571 60547 60419 61126 61164 60487 59802 63654 60784 553 59193 77321 70835 3331 TPGW-2M_AT 74428 73841 73705 73748 73947 74176 74348 74521 74453 74784 75628 75718 73352 77930 74424 685 72648 78584 75208 853 TPGW-2D_AT 77036 77000 76942 76898 76686 76503 76780 76853 76720 76708 76659 76600 76341 77348 76783 181 72128 78233 75795 705 TPGW-3S_AT 60656 60625 60561 60491 60400 60367 60546 60412 60321 60199 59964 59760 59570 60786 60362 262 54694 65637 62656 1560 TPGW-3M_AT 68008 68081 67997 67904 67957 67944 67903 67860 67893 67846 67869 67801 67622 68483 67923 101 65756 70236 68233 818 TPGW-3D_AT 67953 67939 67925 67822 67738 67695 67714 67684 67575 67498 68493 69518 67323 70102 67832 418 65468 72418 68908 771 TPGW-4S_AT 5645 4541 4199 3606 3824 4849 4633 5365 5327 6009 7761 8559 3326 10116 5358 1530 1105 16267 2503 1286 TPGW-4M_AT 41459 41446 41524 41253 41491 41728 41595 41811 41507 41653 41767 41900 40813 42281 41595 226 35988 42023 38363 1181 TPGW-4D_AT 42808 42824 42852 42792 42875 42807 42636 42542 42489 42025 42130 42879 40968 43283 42639 331 41045 44803 42825 553 TPGW-5S_AT 920 907 897 881 870 861 862 894 899 871 855 851 835 952 881 26 496 1947 1107 257 TPGW-5M_AT 33937 33854 33783 33653 33604 33728 33966 34008 33918 33797 33657 33412 33211 34084 33776 176 29494 35694 31853 1087 TPGW-5D_AT 36159 36131 36137 35910 35991 36175 36238 36282 36274 36306 36276 36045 35789 36491 36160 136 31234 37376 34102 1083 TPGW-6S_AT 1317 1383 1442 1433 1482 1502 1485 1507 1475 1520 1506 1602 1268 1637 1471 73 496 1552 1166 113 TPGW-6M_AT 23112 23044 23093 23363 23377 23377 23424 23416 23405 23392 23429 23480 22914 23564 23325 155 20731 23434 22512 420 TPGW-6D_AT 24205 24210 24202 24204 24236 24266 24381 24371 24392 24387 24382 24382 23486 24483 24301 92 22444 24729 23606 278 TPGW-7S_AT 498 490 488 491 493 488 483 483 481 486 497 508 443 582 490 8 421 906 551 33 TPGW-7M_AT 552 535 549 529 509 515 509 516 587 599 599 624 468 750 547 42 445 814 608 49 TPGW-7D_AT 10505 10618 10601 10568 10771 10745 10834 10839 10879 11056 11193 11156 10413 11328 10805 226 418 10573 2699 3471 TPGW-8S_AT 654 657 657 650 658 657 649 656 627 616 652 666 525 669 650 17 343 3681 2169 868 TPGW-8M_AT 652 653 653 654 655 654 655 655 655 * *
- 631 658 654 1 606 671 638 11 TPGW-8D_AT 665 670 662 662 667 677 671 661 661 663 662 670 594 685 666 9 183 714 670 24 TPGW-9S_AT 593 594 591 602 601 605 598 595 598 596 593 596 585 618 597 5 60 659 590 42 TPGW-9M_AT 603 599 601 615 614 608 609 609 617 608 601 602 582 627 607 7 490 752 628 28 TPGW-9D_AT 606 604 611 614 611 610 610 608
- 607 604 596 625 608 5 592 791 632 15 TPGW-10S_AT 55012 55123 55090 55092 55142 55156 55145 55003 54965 55072 55096 54984 54778 55339 55077 92 50000 55605 52517 1263 TPGW-10M_AT 56305 56479 57260 58171 59372 58865 57467 57752 57109 56768 56505 56491 56075 60920 57407 1132 53629 68230 55606 2050 TPGW-10D_AT 70873 70910 70874 70918 70977 71222 71434 71215 71113 71033 71041 71175 70627 71641 71063 196 53918 72720 61013 6694 3-27
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-1. Statistical Summary of Automated Groundwater Specific Conductance (µS/cm) (continued).
2018 2019 Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Well 2018-06 2018-07 2018-08 2018-09 2018-10 2018-11 2018-12 2019-01 2019-02 2019-03 2019-04 2019-05 MIN MAX AVG STDDEV MIN MAX AVG STDDEV TPGW-11S_AT 55800 55764 55808 55752 55663 55763 55784 55892 56027 55795 55757 55960 54234 56984 55810 145 53242 56838 54864 705 TPGW-11M_AT 56599 * * * *
- 53428 54504 54933 51772 51130 48938 48617 56725 52805 2500 54895 59680 56548 787 TPGW-11D_AT 68387 68619 68686 68822 68900 68816 68746 69025 69153 69211 69329 69370 68079 69623 68913 301 55275 69143 60540 3235 TPGW-12S_AT 41336 42760 44395 41827 40304 40320 41484 43525 44124 46931 48948 51472 22023 58860 43889 6304 19579 56674 42223 3465 TPGW-12M_AT 64265 64120 64387 64610 64753 63943 62413 62806 62386 61189 59340 59139 58858 65084 62780 1920 56264 66924 63453 1755 TPGW-12D_AT 66014 65988 66340 66460 66484 66511 66462 66481 66563 66576 66200 65579 64542 68655 66307 331 61509 67675 64377 996 TPGW-13S_AT 83130 83075 83001 82979 82939 82895 82871 82869 82777 82785 82742 82648 82419 83395 82890 157 80937 92012 84215 1810 TPGW-13M_AT 81437 81158 81822 82028 81910 81780 81947 81691 81479 80306 80970 81567 79134 84630 81534 697 72747 85519 80322 1453 TPGW-13D_AT 82684 82577 82396 82497 82474 82137 82150 81707 81388 81284 81307 81364 80920 83443 82002 552 77542 89551 82412 2017 TPGW-14S_AT 57910 58101 58242 58261 58301 58166 58103 58127 58070 57771 57469 57401 57200 58768 57995 306 54695 61461 57755 831 TPGW-14M_AT 60764 60546 60632 60805 60603 60575 60637 60496 60455 60503 60586 60556 60296 61558 60597 185 58050 67002 62536 1369 TPGW-14D_AT 72635 72665 72639 72637 72625 72554 72597 72383 72266 72503 72536 72960 72014 73888 72563 185 70754 75918 73722 789 Key:
Avg = Average. Historical Period of Record = Start-up of monitoring through May 2018. * = Less than 21 days of data are available, so no monthly average is Min = Minimum. Reporting Period = June 2018 through May 2019. included. However all available hourly data included in annual min, max, ave, and STDDEV Max = Maximum. Std Dev = Standard Deviation.
3-28
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-2. Statistical Summary of Automated Groundwater Salinity (in PSS-78 scale).
2018 2019 Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Well 2018-06 2018-07 2018-08 2018-09 2018-10 2018-11 2018-12 2019-01 2019-02 2019-03 2019-04 2019-05 MIN MAX AVG STDDEV MIN MAX AVG STDDEV TPGW-1S_AT 33.3 31.8 30.0 28.7 26.6 24.4 22.9 25.4 25.5 26.2 25.0 25.8 22.5 33.9 27.1 3.1 21.9 45.6 36.3 5.1 TPGW-1M_AT 48.3 48.4 48.4 48.5 48.4 48.5 48.4 48.4 48.3 48.3 48.2 48.1 47.8 49.0 48.3 0.1 46.1 53.1 49.9 0.8 TPGW-1D_AT 50.1 50.2 50.3 50.3 50.0 49.9 50.1 50.1 50.0 50.0 49.8 49.5 47.4 50.4 50.0 0.2 48.4 51.4 49.7 0.5 TPGW-2S_AT 42.4 41.9 41.4 41.3 41.0 41.3 41.3 41.3 41.2 41.8 41.8 41.3 40.8 43.8 41.5 0.4 40.3 54.7 49.5 2.7 TPGW-2M_AT 52.4 51.9 51.8 51.8 52.0 52.2 52.3 52.4 52.4 52.7 53.4 53.4 51.5 55.2 52.4 0.6 50.9 55.8 53.0 0.7 TPGW-2D_AT 54.5 54.5 54.4 54.4 54.2 54.1 54.3 54.4 54.2 54.2 54.2 54.1 53.9 54.8 54.3 0.1 50.5 55.5 53.5 0.6 TPGW-3S_AT 41.4 41.4 41.3 41.3 41.2 41.2 41.3 41.2 41.2 41.1 40.9 40.7 40.6 41.5 41.2 0.2 36.8 45.3 43.0 1.2 TPGW-3M_AT 47.2 47.2 47.2 47.1 47.1 47.1 47.1 47.1 47.1 47.0 47.1 47.0 46.9 47.5 47.1 0.1 45.4 49.0 47.3 0.7 TPGW-3D_AT 47.1 47.1 47.1 47.0 46.9 46.9 46.9 46.9 46.8 46.8 47.5 48.4 46.6 48.8 47.0 0.3 45.2 50.7 47.9 0.6 TPGW-4S_AT 3.1 2.5 2.3 1.9 2.0 2.6 2.5 2.9 2.9 3.3 4.4 4.8 1.8 5.8 2.9 0.9 0.6 9.7 1.3 0.7 TPGW-4M_AT 27.0 27.0 27.0 26.8 27.0 27.2 27.1 27.2 27.0 27.1 27.2 27.3 26.5 27.6 27.1 0.2 23.1 27.4 24.7 0.8 TPGW-4D_AT 28.0 28.0 28.0 27.9 28.0 28.0 27.8 27.8 27.7 27.4 27.5 28.0 26.6 28.3 27.8 0.2 26.7 29.4 28.0 0.4 TPGW-5S_AT 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.2 1.0 0.6 0.1 TPGW-5M_AT 21.6 21.5 21.5 21.4 21.4 21.4 21.6 21.6 21.6 21.5 21.4 21.2 21.1 21.7 21.5 0.1 18.5 22.8 20.1 0.8 TPGW-5D_AT 23.2 23.1 23.1 23.0 23.0 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.3 23.2 23.1 22.9 23.4 23.2 0.1 19.7 24.0 21.7 0.8 TPGW-6S_AT 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.6 0.1 TPGW-6M_AT 14.2 14.1 14.1 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.4 14.4 14.4 14.3 14.4 14.4 14.0 14.5 14.3 0.1 12.6 14.4 13.8 0.3 TPGW-6D_AT 14.9 14.9 14.9 14.9 14.9 14.9 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 14.4 15.1 15.0 0.1 13.7 15.2 14.5 0.2 TPGW-7S_AT 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.0 TPGW-7M_AT 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.0 TPGW-7D_AT 6.0 6.1 6.1 6.1 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.0 6.5 6.2 0.1 0.2 6.1 1.5 2.0 TPGW-8S_AT 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.2 2.0 1.1 0.5 TPGW-8M_AT 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 * *
- 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 TPGW-8D_AT 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.0 TPGW-9S_AT 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 TPGW-9M_AT 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.0 TPGW-9D_AT 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
- 0.3
- 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.0 TPGW-10S_AT 37.1 37.2 37.1 37.1 37.2 37.2 37.2 37.1 37.1 37.1 37.1 37.1 36.9 37.3 37.1 0.1 33.3 37.5 35.2 1.0 TPGW-10M_AT 38.1 38.2 38.8 39.5 40.4 40.0 38.9 39.2 38.7 38.4 38.2 38.2 37.9 41.6 38.9 0.9 36.0 47.4 37.5 1.6 TPGW-10D_AT 49.4 49.5 49.4 49.5 49.5 49.7 49.9 49.7 49.6 49.6 49.6 49.7 49.2 50.1 49.6 0.2 36.2 50.9 41.7 5.2 3-29
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-2. Statistical Summary of Automated Groundwater Salinity (in PSS-78 scale) (continued).
2018 2019 Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Well 2018-06 2018-07 2018-08 2018-09 2018-10 2018-11 2018-12 2019-01 2019-02 2019-03 2019-04 2019-05 MIN MAX AVG STDDEV MIN MAX AVG STDDEV TPGW-11S_AT 37.7 37.6 37.7 37.6 37.6 37.6 37.7 37.7 37.8 37.7 37.6 37.8 36.5 38.6 37.7 0.1 35.7 38.5 36.9 0.5 TPGW-11M_AT 38.3 * * * *
- 35.9 36.7 37.0 34.6 34.1 32.5 32.2 38.4 35.4 1.9 37.0 40.6 38.2 0.6 TPGW-11D_AT 47.4 47.6 47.7 47.8 47.8 47.8 47.7 47.9 48.1 48.1 48.2 48.2 47.2 48.4 47.9 0.2 37.2 48.0 41.3 2.5 TPGW-12S_AT 27.1 28.0 29.2 27.3 26.3 26.2 27.0 28.5 29.0 31.0 32.5 34.4 13.5 40.0 28.8 4.6 11.8 38.4 27.6 2.5 TPGW-12M_AT 44.2 44.1 44.3 44.5 44.6 44.0 42.8 43.1 42.7 41.8 40.4 40.2 40.0 44.9 43.1 1.5 38.0 46.3 43.6 1.4 TPGW-12D_AT 45.6 45.6 45.8 45.9 46.0 46.0 45.9 46.0 46.0 46.0 45.7 45.2 44.4 47.7 45.8 0.3 42.1 46.9 44.3 0.8 TPGW-13S_AT 59.7 59.6 59.6 59.5 59.5 59.5 59.5 59.5 59.4 59.4 59.4 59.3 59.1 59.9 59.5 0.1 57.9 67.3 60.6 1.5 TPGW-13M_AT 58.3 58.0 58.6 58.8 58.7 58.5 58.7 58.5 58.3 57.3 57.9 58.4 56.3 60.9 58.3 0.6 51.1 61.7 57.3 1.2 TPGW-13D_AT 59.3 59.2 59.0 59.1 59.1 58.8 58.8 58.5 58.2 58.1 58.1 58.2 57.8 59.9 58.7 0.5 55.0 65.1 59.1 1.7 TPGW-14S_AT 39.3 39.4 39.5 39.6 39.6 39.5 39.5 39.5 39.4 39.2 38.9 38.9 38.7 40.0 39.4 0.2 36.8 42.0 39.2 0.6 TPGW-14M_AT 41.5 41.3 41.4 41.5 41.4 41.4 41.4 41.3 41.3 41.3 41.4 41.3 41.1 42.1 41.4 0.1 39.4 46.2 42.9 1.1 TPGW-14D_AT 50.9 50.9 50.9 50.9 50.9 50.8 50.9 50.7 50.6 50.8 50.8 51.2 50.4 51.9 50.8 0.1 49.4 53.6 51.8 0.6 Key:
Avg = Average. Historical Period of Record = Start-up of monitoring through May 2018. * = Less than 21 days of data are available, so no monthly average is Min = Minimum. Reporting Period = June 2018 through May 2019. included. However all available hourly data included in annual min, max, ave, and STDDEV Max = Maximum. Std Dev = Standard Deviation.
3-30
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-3. Statistical Summary of Automated Groundwater Temperature (°C).
2018 2019 Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Well 2018-06 2018-07 2018-08 2018-09 2018-10 2018-11 2018-12 2019-01 2019-02 2019-03 2019-04 2019-05 MIN MAX AVG STDDEV MIN MAX AVG STDDEV TPGW-1S_AT 25.7 25.6 25.5 25.5 25.4 25.5 25.5 25.6 25.6 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.4 25.8 25.6 0.1 25.4 26.3 25.7 0.2 TPGW-1M_AT 25.8 25.8 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.8 25.7 25.9 25.7 0.0 25.8 26.2 25.9 0.1 TPGW-1D_AT 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.7 25.8 25.8 0.0 25.7 26.2 26.0 0.1 TPGW-2S_AT 26.2 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.2 26.3 26.3 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.1 26.6 26.2 0.1 25.6 27.5 26.4 0.4 TPGW-2M_AT 27.0 26.9 26.8 26.8 26.8 26.8 26.8 26.8 26.7 26.8 26.9 26.9 26.7 27.1 26.8 0.1 26.6 27.4 27.0 0.2 TPGW-2D_AT 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 0.0 26.8 27.6 27.2 0.2 TPGW-3S_AT 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.2 26.2 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.2 26.1 0.0 25.6 26.7 26.0 0.2 TPGW-3M_AT 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 0.0 25.8 26.0 25.9 0.0 TPGW-3D_AT 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 0.0 25.6 25.8 25.7 0.0 TPGW-4S_AT 25.3 25.2 25.1 25.1 25.2 25.3 25.3 25.4 25.4 25.3 25.2 25.1 25.1 25.4 25.3 0.1 24.2 26.1 25.0 0.4 TPGW-4M_AT 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.1 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.1 25.1 0.0 24.4 25.1 24.6 0.1 TPGW-4D_AT 24.6 24.7 24.7 24.7 24.7 24.7 24.7 24.7 24.7 24.7 24.7 24.7 24.6 24.8 24.7 0.0 24.3 24.6 24.4 0.1 TPGW-5S_AT 24.0 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.2 24.3 24.4 24.4 24.4 24.3 24.3 24.0 24.4 24.2 0.1 23.3 24.1 23.6 0.2 TPGW-5M_AT 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 23.9 24.1 23.9 0.0 23.5 23.9 23.6 0.1 TPGW-5D_AT 23.7 23.7 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.7 23.8 23.8 0.0 23.6 23.7 23.7 0.0 TPGW-6S_AT 23.4 23.4 23.4 23.4 23.5 23.6 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.6 23.6 23.3 23.7 23.6 0.1 23.0 23.8 23.5 0.2 TPGW-6M_AT 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3 0.0 23.3 23.7 23.5 0.1 TPGW-6D_AT 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 0.0 23.3 23.6 23.5 0.1 TPGW-7S_AT 24.4 24.4 24.4 24.5 24.6 24.6 24.7 24.8 24.8 24.7 24.6 24.5 24.3 24.8 24.6 0.1 23.6 24.6 23.8 0.2 TPGW-7M_AT 24.1 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.3 24.3 24.3 24.3 24.2 24.1 24.4 24.2 0.0 23.7 24.6 23.8 0.1 TPGW-7D_AT 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 24.0 23.9 24.0 23.9 0.0 23.8 23.9 23.8 0.0 TPGW-8S_AT 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.8 23.9 24.0 24.1 24.1 23.9 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.7 24.2 23.9 0.1 23.3 24.3 23.8 0.2 TPGW-8M_AT 23.7 23.6 23.6 23.6 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 * *
- 23.6 23.8 23.7 0.0 23.6 23.8 23.7 0.1 TPGW-8D_AT 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.7 23.8 23.7 0.0 23.5 24.6 23.7 0.0 TPGW-9S_AT 24.3 24.4 24.5 24.5 24.7 24.8 24.9 24.8 24.7 24.4 24.4 24.3 24.3 24.9 24.6 0.2 24.1 25.3 24.7 0.3 TPGW-9M_AT 23.8 23.7 23.7 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.8 23.7 23.9 23.8 0.1 23.6 24.2 23.9 0.1 TPGW-9D_AT 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.8 23.9 23.9 23.8 23.9 23.8 0.0 23.8 24.1 24.0 0.1 TPGW-10S_AT 26.3 26.3 26.4 26.4 26.6 26.7 26.8 26.8 26.7 26.6 26.5 26.4 26.3 26.9 26.5 0.2 25.5 27.3 26.2 0.4 TPGW-10M_AT 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.3 26.3 26.2 26.3 26.2 0.0 25.8 26.3 25.9 0.1 TPGW-10D_AT 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.7 25.6 0.0 25.6 25.7 25.6 0.0 3-31
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-3. Statistical Summary of Automated Groundwater Temperature (°C) (continued).
2018 2019 Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Well 2018-06 2018-07 2018-08 2018-09 2018-10 2018-11 2018-12 2019-01 2019-02 2019-03 2019-04 2019-05 MIN MAX AVG STDDEV MIN MAX AVG STDDEV TPGW-11S_AT 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.8 25.9 26.0 25.9 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.7 26.0 25.8 0.1 25.0 26.1 25.4 0.2 TPGW-11M_AT 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 0.0 25.2 25.4 25.3 0.0 TPGW-11D_AT 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 25.2 0.0 25.2 25.3 25.3 0.0 TPGW-12S_AT 26.1 26.2 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.2 26.3 26.3 26.2 26.2 26.1 26.1 25.9 27.1 26.2 0.1 22.4 30.8 26.1 0.5 TPGW-12M_AT 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 26.0 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 26.0 26.0 0.0 25.9 26.2 26.0 0.1 TPGW-12D_AT 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.8 25.7 25.7 25.9 25.8 0.0 25.8 26.2 26.0 0.1 TPGW-13S_AT 29.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 29.5 29.6 29.6 29.6 29.6 29.6 29.5 29.6 29.5 0.0 29.3 30.8 29.9 0.4 TPGW-13M_AT 29.6 29.5 29.5 29.5 29.4 29.4 29.4 29.4 29.4 29.3 29.4 29.4 29.3 29.6 29.4 0.1 29.2 29.8 29.5 0.1 TPGW-13D_AT 29.1 29.1 29.1 29.1 29.1 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 28.9 29.1 29.0 0.0 29.0 29.9 29.4 0.2 TPGW-14S_AT 26.0 26.0 26.2 26.3 26.5 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.6 26.2 26.0 26.0 25.9 26.8 26.3 0.3 25.5 26.9 26.2 0.3 TPGW-14M_AT 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 0.0 26.0 26.4 26.2 0.1 TPGW-14D_AT 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.4 26.4 26.3 26.3 26.3 26.2 26.4 26.3 0.0 26.3 26.4 26.3 0.0 Key:
Avg = Average. Historical Period of Record = Start-up of monitoring through May 2018. * = Less than 21 days of data are available, so no monthly average is included. However all available hourly data included in annual min, max, Min = Minimum. Reporting Period = June 2017 through May 2018.
ave, and STDDEV Max = Maximum. Std Dev = Standard Deviation.
3-32
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-4. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the June 2018 Sampling Event.
TPGW-1S TPGW-1M TPGW-1D TPGW-2S TPGW-2M TPGW-2D TPGW-3S TPGW-3M TPGW-3D DUP1 TPGW-4S TPGW-4M Parameter Units 06/14/2018 06/14/2018 06/14/2018 06/06/2018 06/06/2018 06/06/2018 06/11/2018 06/11/2018 06/11/2018 06/11/2018 06/07/2018 06/07/2018 Temperature °C 26.8 26.9 26.6 27.5 27.6 27.6 27 26.8 26.6 25.8 25.7 pH SU 7.05 7.11 7.06 7.34 6.96 6.94 6.62 6.85 6.83 6.98 6.98 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.19 0.18 0.25 0.12 0.12 0.38 0.29 0.15 0.14 0.17 0.15 Specific Conductance S/cm 45343 70256 70898 61984 74183 74624 59375 66328 67512 6017 40206 Turbidity NTU 0.18 0.34 0.22 0.24 0.15 0.27 0.19 0.49 0.39 0.37 0.41 Sodium mg/L 8810 14600 14700 12700 15400 16100 12400 13900 15000 14500 880 7760 Chloride mg/L 17300 28300 28400 24300 30400 31500 23300 26500 27600 27100 1810 14700 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 28200 47000 52200 44200 55000 60800 41200 44600 48000 45600 4020 26600 Salinity
- 29.3 48.07 48.58 41.64 51.15 51.5 39.67 45.01 45.94 3.27 25.65 Tritium pCi/L (1) 775 (26.6) 1961 (62.6) 2227 (62.0) 4605 (165) 2986 (109) 3071 (113) 69.5 (4.4) J 900 (29.9) 997 (31.9) 1228 (42.4) 25.9 (3.9) J 308 (12.3)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
060518-DUP1 was collected at 060518-TPGW-7M 061118-DUP1 was collected at 061118-TPGW-3D 061318-DUP1 was collected at 061318-TPGW-12S Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per Liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per Centimeter. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
= Sigma (Standard Deviation). pCi/L = PicoCuries per Liter.
DUP = Duplicate. SU = Standard Unit(s).
EB = Equipment Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
FB = Field Blank.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias).
3-33
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-4. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the June 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-4D TPGW-5S TPGW-5M TPGW-5D TPGW-6S TPGW-6M TPGW-6D TPGW-7S TPGW-7M DUP1 TPGW-7D TPGW-8S-NEW Parameter Units 06/07/2018 06/14/2018 06/14/2018 06/14/2018 06/05/2018 06/05/2018 06/05/2018 06/05/2018 06/05/2018 06/05/2018 06/05/2018 06/12/2018 Temperature °C 25.6 25.1 25 24.8 24.8 25.1 25.0 25.1 24.8 24.6 24.9 pH SU 7.02 7.41 6.9 6.92 7.06 6.97 6.97 7.46 7.42 6.83 7.09 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.21 0.21 0.26 0.41 0.33 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.14 0.21 0.26 Specific Conductance S/cm 42387 947 33829 36381 1303 23521 24307 515 548 10425 668 Turbidity NTU 0.16 0.24 0.3 0.36 0.38 0.26 0.93 0.42 0.29 0.39 0.25 Sodium mg/L 8390 74.6 6400 6920 117 4250 4460 21.1 23.4 22.8 1640 15.7 Chloride mg/L 15800 146 12500 13600 224 8210 8530 35.7 40.7 40.8 3400 28.8 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 29600 502 20800 22000 720 13600 13800 310 302 312 6180 402 Salinity
- 27.21 0.46 J 21.2 22.99 0.65 J 14.22 14.74 0.25 J 0.26 J 5.89 0.32 J Tritium pCi/L (1) 381 (14.6) 11.8 (4.0) 241 (10.2) 287 (11.0) 6.3 (6.1) 11.0 (6.0) 8.8 (6.2) 7.4 (6.1) -2.3 (5.9) UJ 6.5 (6.1) 24.6 (6.5) 4.8 (3.8) J Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
060518-DUP1 was collected at 060518-TPGW-7M 061118-DUP1 was collected at 061118-TPGW-3D 061318-DUP1 was collected at 061318-TPGW-12S Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per Liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per Centimeter. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
= Sigma (Standard Deviation). pCi/L = PicoCuries per Liter.
DUP = Duplicate. SU = Standard Unit(s).
EB = Equipment Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
FB = Field Blank.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias).
3-34
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-4. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the June 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-8M TPGW-8D TPGW-9S TPGW-9M TPGW-9D TPGW-10S TPGW-10M TPGW-10D TPGW-11S TPGW-11M TPGW-11D TPGW-12S Parameter Units 06/12/2018 06/12/2018 06/12/2018 06/12/2018 06/12/2018 06/19/2018 06/19/2018 06/19/2018 06/19/2018 06/19/2018 06/19/2018 06/13/2018 Temperature °C 24.4 24.4 25.6 25.4 25.1 27.6 27.5 27.5 27.0 26.7 26.8 27.7 pH SU 7.04 7.03 6.85 6.81 6.7 7.33 7.24 7.06 7.00 6.85 6.94 6.8 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.17 0.26 0.17 0.19 0.23 0.22 0.32 0.27 0.43 0.61 0.35 0.28 Specific Conductance S/cm 667 687 614 609 625 54249 54577 69917 54244 57545 66478 36772 Turbidity NTU 0.34 0.31 0.09 0.8 0.1 0.25 0.21 0.24 0.35 0.45 0.20 0.19 Sodium mg/L 15.0 22.8 14.4 14.5 14.9 10400 10600 13800 10500 11200 13200 7150 Chloride mg/L 28.0 39.4 23.9 23.6 24.4 21100 21300 28600 21300 22900 26800 13200 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 396 408 346 342 346 39800 40000 48400 37400 38200 44400 22600 Salinity
- 0.32 J 0.33 J 0.30 J 0.29 J 0.30 J 35.81 36.05 47.79 35.82 38.29 45.1 23.19 Tritium pCi/L (1) 8.2 (3.0) J 6.4 (3.0) J 2.5 (3.7) UJ 7.8 (3.9) J 3.5 (3.9) UJ 70.5 (4.3) J 194 (7.4) 1723 (48.8) 4.6 (3.0) J 281 (9.7) 1133 (33.1) 33.2 (4.4)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
060518-DUP1 was collected at 060518-TPGW-7M 061118-DUP1 was collected at 061118-TPGW-3D 061318-DUP1 was collected at 061318-TPGW-12S Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per Liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per Centimeter. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
= Sigma (Standard Deviation). pCi/L = PicoCuries per Liter.
DUP = Duplicate. SU = Standard Unit(s).
EB = Equipment Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
FB = Field Blank.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias).
3-35
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-4. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the June 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
DUP1 TPGW-12M TPGW-12D TPGW-13S TPGW-13M TPGW-13D TPGW-14S TPGW-14M TPGW-14D TPGW-L3-18 TPGW-L3-58 TPGW-L5-18 Parameter Units 06/13/2018 06/13/2018 06/13/2018 06/13/2018 06/13/2018 06/13/2018 06/19/2018 06/19/2018 06/19/2018 06/06/2018 06/06/2018 06/06/2018 Temperature °C 27 27 29.1 29.0 29.1 27.3 27.5 27.3 27.5 27.8 28.7 pH SU 6.91 7.11 6.71 6.82 6.83 6.93 6.80 6.85 7.39 6.94 7.36 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.18 0.22 0.22 0.96 0.16 0.28 0.62 0.26 0.24 0.25 0.43 Specific Conductance S/cm 62736 65647 80936 81146 82099 56996 58993 71429 1743 76608 1472 Turbidity NTU 0.15 0.23 0.21 0.65 0.13 0.26 0.22 0.26 0.74 0.26 0.38 Sodium mg/L 7190 12500 13300 18700 16800 19400 11100 12100 14100 211 16500 174 Chloride mg/L 13500 24600 25900 33100 33100 33900 22200 23300 29300 400 31900 311 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 23600 43000 42600 55800 55200 58800 41200 43000 47400 990 54000 880 Salinity
- 42.24 44.48 56.52 56.70 57.47 37.87 39.36 48.98 0.88 J 53.08 0.73 J Tritium pCi/L (1) 39.7 (4.5) 1136 (40.3) 1282 (44.5) 6057 (189) 2615 (84.0) 3102 (105) 109 (6.8) 178 (7.0) 1928 (54.8) 41.9 (4.3) 2743 (92.1) 25.4 (4.0)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
060518-DUP1 was collected at 060518-TPGW-7M 061118-DUP1 was collected at 061118-TPGW-3D 061318-DUP1 was collected at 061318-TPGW-12S Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per Liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per Centimeter. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
= Sigma (Standard Deviation). pCi/L = PicoCuries per Liter.
DUP = Duplicate. SU = Standard Unit(s).
EB = Equipment Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
FB = Field Blank.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias).
3-36
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-4. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the June 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-L5-58 TPGW-G21-18 TPGW-G21-58 TPGW-G28-18 TPGW-G28-58 TPGW-G35-18 TPGW-G35-58 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB2 Parameter Units 06/06/2018 06/05/2018 06/05/2018 06/07/2018 06/07/2018 06/12/2018 06/12/2018 06/05/2018 06/06/2018 06/07/2018 6/11/2018 06/12/2018 06/13/2018 06/14/2018 6/19/2018 6/19/2018 Temperature °C 28 25.8 25.6 26.1 25.2 25.5 25.7 pH SU 6.93 7.15 6.72 7.76 6.96 7.35 7.17 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.24 0.27 0.36 0.27 0.27 0.24 0.25 Specific Conductance S/cm 73783 644 20844 J 2395 J 39734 J 706 18495 Turbidity NTU 0.38 0.69 0.23 4.84 1.57 0.01 0.08 Sodium mg/L 15600 39.4 3670 339 7760 50.2 3290 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U Chloride mg/L 30200 77.7 7400 625 14600 94.0 6170 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 56200 364 7600 J 1440 26400 406 10400 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U 9.47 U 9.47 U 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U Salinity
- 50.82 0.31 J 12.46 J 1.23 J 25.3 J 0.340 J 10.93 Tritium pCi/L (1) 2481 (83.9) 14.1 (6.3) 55.5 (7.3) 19.4 (3.9) J 338 (13.3) 8.9 (3.9) J -5.7 (3.7) UJ 4.0 (6.0) UJ -1.5 (6.0) UJ 4.3 (3.5) 15.8 (3.7) 8.4 (3.0) -1.5 (3.7) UJ 2.8 (3.8) UJ 8.1 (3.9) 8.5 (3.9)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
060518-DUP1 was collected at 060518-TPGW-7M 061118-DUP1 was collected at 061118-TPGW-3D 061318-DUP1 was collected at 061318-TPGW-12S Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per Liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per Centimeter. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
= Sigma (Standard Deviation). pCi/L = PicoCuries per Liter.
DUP = Duplicate. SU = Standard Unit(s).
EB = Equipment Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
FB = Field Blank.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias).
3-37
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-5. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the September 2018 Sampling Event.
TPGW-1S TPGW-1M TPGW-1D TPGW-2S TPGW-2M TPGW-2D TPGW-3S TPGW-3M TPGW-3D TPGW-4S TPGW-4M TPGW-4D TPGW-5S TPGW-5M Parameter Units 09/11/2018 09/11/2018 09/11/2018 09/17/2018 09/17/2018 09/17/2018 09/13/2018 09/13/2018 09/13/2018 09/18/2018 09/18/2018 09/18/2018 09/11/2018 09/11/2018 Temperature °C 26.8 26.6 26.7 26.9 27.2 27.3 27.7 27.5 27.4 27 26.6 27.1 25.6 25.5 pH SU 7.08 7.13 7.06 7.23 6.96 6.91 6.7 6.96 6.95 7.04 7.05 7.08 7.37 6.99 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.24 0.4 0.91 0.26 0.67 0.7 0.19 0.17 0.19 0.33 0.19 0.25 0.71 1.04 Specific Conductance S/cm 37102 70268 70881 60081 74078 76107 59188 65999 67307 3535 40246 42586 906 33569 Turbidity NTU 0.36 0.08 0.04 0.09 0.05 0.12 0.33 0.28 0.28 0.18 0.11 0.16 0.08 0.22 Calcium mg/L 449 638 630 948 681 690 618 635 621 193 550 541 99.3 592 Magnesium mg/L 930 1920 1900 1310 1930 1970 1470 1700 1680 36.4 921 1010 7.55 771 Potassium mg/L 268 567 564 466 590 613 447 515 511 10.5 195 237 6.20 154 Sodium mg/L 7380 15700 15600 12600 16000 16400 12000 14000 13900 456 7660 8280 73.9 6420 Boron mg/L 2.62 5.7 5.65 4.56 6.00 6.21 4.73 5.22 5.34 0.0777 1.53 1.88 0.0490 I 1.08 Strontium mg/L 7.34 11.7 11.5 11.4 13.8 13.6 9.86 11.5 11.9 1.79 7.82 7.80 0.935 7.22 Bromide mg/L 43.6 90.8 92.5 73.6 94.6 97.4 72.8 82.6 84.8 2.99 47.6 52.4 0.507 39.9 Chloride mg/L 13900 28500 28900 22800 29200 30500 22300 25900 26700 953 15200 16700 146 12700 Fluoride mg/L 0.230 0.270 J- 0.280 J 0.190 0.260 0.240 0.210 0.190 0.200 0.100 0.130 0.150 0.130 0.130 Sulfate mg/L 1680 3540 3610 2920 3510 3660 2760 3130 3240 45.1 1750 1960 20.1 1330 Ammonia mg/L as N 1.11 1.71 1.76 1.84 2.52 J+ 2.54 J
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 1.43 2.20 2.26 2.37 3.25 J 3.28 J Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00881 0.0125 0.0110 0.0183 0.0128 J 0.0114 J Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 1.65 1.85 J- 1.79 J 3.47 3.35 3.52 TN mg/L 1.65 1.85 J 1.79 J 3.47 3.35 3.52 ortho-Phosphate mg/L as P 0.0473 0.0511 0.0146 I 0.0179 I 0.0567 0.0762 Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0283 0.0365 0.0429 0.00900 U 0.0645 0.0553 Alkalinityas CaCO3 mg/L 325 207 208 126 224 233 522 284 265 322 219 228 217 254 Bicarbonate as HCO3 mg/L 397 252 253 154 273 284 636 347 324 393 267 278 264 309 Sulfide mg/L 0.0760 I 0.715 1.55 0.285 U 0.285 U 0.285 U 0.868 0.570 U 0.0760 I 0.722 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.285 U Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 25400 47400 47000 39800 47000 56800 37800 45400 40800 2020 25400 26800 492 24800 Salinity
- 23.44 48.09 48.57 40.21 51.08 52.7 39.51 44.74 45.75 1.85 J 25.66 27.31 0.440 J 21.01 Tritium pCi/L (1) 519 (14.1) 2141 (23.2) 2100 (27.9) 3648 (37.5) 2977 (30.8) 3049 (29.0) 111 (7.9) 1086 (19.6) 1256 (22.3) 9.6 (7.2) 305 (11.0) 371 (14.2) 21 (7.2) 245 (10.6)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
091218-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 091218-TPGW-12M 091318-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 091318-TPGW-9D 092018-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 092018-TPGW-11S Text in blue are revised from the February 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
EB = Equipment Blank NH4+ = Ammonium ion.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-38
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-5. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the September 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-5D TPGW-6S TPGW-6M TPGW-6D TPGW-7S TPGW-7M TPGW-7D TPGW-8S-NEW TPGW-8M TPGW-8D TPGW-9S TPGW-9M TPGW-9D Parameter Units 09/11/2018 09/12/2018 09/12/2018 09/12/2018 09/12/2018 09/12/2018 09/12/2018 09/11/2018 09/11/2018 09/11/2018 09/13/2018 09/13/2018 09/13/2018 Temperature °C 25.5 25.1 24.9 24.8 25.4 26.4 24.9 25.7 25 25.1 25.7 25.5 25.5 pH SU 7.02 7.17 7.03 7.01 7.48 7.09 6.89 7.14 7.11 7.11 6.96 6.96 6.97 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 1.15 0.26 0.21 0.41 0.26 0.37 0.25 0.37 0.66 0.46 0.21 0.26 0.56 Specific Conductance S/cm 36312 1439 23525 24355 499 455.2 10532 659 664 678 625 616 616 Turbidity NTU 0.23 0.42 0.25 0.29 0.08 0.5 0.06 0.21 0.23 0.33 0.31 0.33 0.28 Calcium mg/L 588 137 512 513 74.4 80.6 499 114 117 110 110 113 111 Magnesium mg/L 864 14.5 504 507 3.77 3.53 97.9 4.59 4.75 6.44 2.62 2.83 3.23 Potassium mg/L 190 4.84 106 107 7.60 3.84 11.1 14.5 16.1 12.4 4.37 5.23 4.15 Sodium mg/L 7070 137 4290 4390 20.7 14.2 1600 15.5 15.7 22.0 13.7 14.1 15.1 Boron mg/L 1.5 0.0541 0.756 0.794 0.0487 I 0.0303 I 0.0738 0.0662 0.0672 0.067 0.0404 I 0.0429 I 0.0477 I Strontium mg/L 8.1 1.27 7.77 8.30 0.734 0.700 5.48 1.13 1.14 1.03 0.899 0.889 1.08 Bromide mg/L 42.4 0.966 26.6 27.5 0.154 0.179 11.8 0.190 0.196 0.222 0.186 0.180 0.246 Chloride mg/L 13600 279 8120 8500 34.6 18.8 3580 28.4 28.6 37.3 26.4 23.3 23.5 Fluoride mg/L 0.140 0.130 0.140 0.150 0.150 0.170 0.0900 I 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.0900 I Sulfate mg/L 1500 7.78 803 844 44.1 1.40 79.0 67.2 70.6 67.9 2.28 5.48 19.7 Ammonia mg/L as N
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L Unionized NH3 mg/L Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N TKN mg/L TN mg/L ortho-Phosphate mg/L as P Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L Alkalinityas CaCO3 mg/L 227 301 225 225 164 206 188 233 233 225 285 293 274 Bicarbonate as HCO3 mg/L 277 368 275 274 200 251 230 285 285 275 347 357 334 Sulfide mg/L 0.285 U 0.110 0.0570 U 0.285 U 0.0570 U 0.315 I 0.285 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.362 0.149 0.0570 U Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 21600 812 14600 15300 292 296 6400 416 428 416 366 356 364 Salinity
- 22.92 0.72 J 14.23 14.78 0.24 J 0.22 J 5.95 0.32 J 0.32 J 0.33 J 0.30 J 0.30 J 0.30 J Tritium pCi/L (1) 342 (11.4) 16.8 (4.9) 13.6 (6.1) 12.3 (4.1) 7.9 (7.0) 18.4 (7.5) 19.0 (6.3) 13.4 (8.1) 4.5 (5.3) UJ 6.1 (4.1) 28.3 (5.6) 1.1 (5.4) UJ 5.3 (5.2)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
091218-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 091218-TPGW-12M 091318-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 091318-TPGW-9D 092018-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 092018-TPGW-11S Text in blue are revised from the February 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-39
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-5. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the September 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
DUP1 TPGW-10S TPGW-10M TPGW-10D TPGW-11S DUP1 TPGW-11M TPGW-11D TPGW-12S TPGW-12M DUP1 TPGW-12D TPGW-13S Parameter Units 09/13/2018 09/20/2018 09/20/2018 09/20/2018 09/20/2018 09/20/2018 09/20/2018 09/20/2018 09/12/2018 09/12/2018 09/12/2018 09/12/2018 09/10/2018 Temperature °C 28.2 28.0 27.8 28.0 27.8 27.9 28 27.8 27.8 30.2 pH SU 7.34 7.13 7.05 7.03 6.90 7.00 6.69 6.95 7.15 6.81 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.18 0.18 0.22 0.22 0.25 0.22 0.25 Specific Conductance S/cm 55039 58205 71500 55643 59390 67981 48806 62858 66081 81241 Turbidity NTU 0.15 0.17 0.33 0.36 0.09 0.54 0.19 0.11 0.48 0.17 Calcium mg/L 111 458 510 619 495 485 593 616 530 646 713 654 738 Magnesium mg/L 3.25 1400 1500 1900 1380 1350 1580 1740 1240 1760 1960 1860 2180 Potassium mg/L 4.17 416 451 566 417 409 462 505 367 506 568 537 658 Sodium mg/L 15.1 11100 11900 15200 11100 10800 12600 13800 9780 13900 15500 14500 17900 Boron mg/L 0.0495 I 4.53 4.84 5.74 4.9 4.76 4.77 5.30 3.47 4.62 4.44 4.88 7.94 Strontium mg/L 1.09 8.40 9.40 11.1 8.72 8.47 9.79 11.2 7.21 10.2 9.28 10.3 16.0 Bromide mg/L 0.251 68.4 73.2 92.9 69.4 69.2 74.7 87.4 57.8 78.0 78.2 82.7 107 Chloride mg/L 24.0 21000 22500 28700 21400 21500 23000 27300 18100 24400 24500 25800 33500 Fluoride mg/L 0.0900 I 0.740 0.590 0.250 0.830 0.850 0.570 0.670 0.450 0.290 0.290 0.280 0.440 J-Sulfate mg/L 20.0 2680 2850 3580 2740 2750 2840 3390 2190 3060 3070 3230 4230 Ammonia mg/L as N 0.401 0.713 1.49 6.55 J
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 0.516 0.918 1.93 8.44 J Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00578 0.00617 0.00982 0.0277 J Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 1.24 0.772 I 1.96 I J- 7.61 J TN mg/L 1.24 0.772 1.96 J 7.61 J ortho-Phosphate mg/L as P 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0500 U J- 0.0100 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0183 I 0.0324 0.0417 0.0886 Alkalinityas CaCO3 mg/L 283 156 200 202 353 323 337 257 549 288 285 208 362 Bicarbonate as HCO3 mg/L 345 191 244 246 431 394 412 314 670 351 348 254 442 Sulfide mg/L 0.0570 U 4.93 7.15 9.06 10.8 10.0 8.45 6.02 2.33 2.74 J 3.59 1.09 3.42 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 354 32800 38000 49000 34200 38000 39200 48600 29200 41400 43200 48400 52200 Salinity
- 36.38 38.76 49.02 36.83 39.66 46.26 31.78 42.3 44.79 56.72 Tritium pCi/L (1) 12.0 (5.3) 70.7 (6.9) 423 (15.1) 1745 (25.0) 7.8 (8.8) 284 (10.1) 1179 (21.8) 81.1 (6.6) 1111 (18.9) -4.4 (4.5) UJ 1355 (22.9) 6647 (57.6)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
091218-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 091218-TPGW-12M 091318-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 091318-TPGW-9D 092018-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 092018-TPGW-11S Text in blue are revised from the February 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-40
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-5. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the September 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-13M TPGW-13D TPGW-14S TPGW-14M TPGW-14D TPGW-L3-18 TPGW-L3-58 TPGW-L5-18 TPGW-L5-58 TPGW-G21-18 TPGW-G21-58 TPGW-G28-18 TPGW-G28-58 Parameter Units 09/10/2018 09/10/2018 09/20/2018 09/20/2018 09/20/2018 09/17/2018 09/17/2018 09/17/2018 09/17/2018 09/18/2018 09/18/2018 09/18/2018 09/18/2018 Temperature °C 29.9 30.0 28.3 28.5 28.6 29.3 29.1 29 28.9 27.1 26.8 26.6 26.6 pH SU 6.88 6.95 6.95 6.87 6.92 7.21 7.02 7.53 6.99 7.24 6.81 7.91 7.01 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.22 0.20 0.25 0.21 0.17 0.59 0.29 0.54 0.46 0.38 0.53 0.35 0.38 Specific Conductance S/cm 81325 82271 58489 60566 71947 3464 76829 543 73310 510 20573 2122 40017 Turbidity NTU 0.11 0.09 0.49 0.37 0.63 0.43 0.11 0.68 0.36 0.9 0.64 0.85 2.08 Calcium mg/L 731 725 544 553 633 123 675 42.9 695 72.6 638 115 582 Magnesium mg/L 2180 2210 1510 1520 1880 44.6 1970 9.28 1910 4.03 312 33.8 956 Potassium mg/L 641 647 446 448 560 17.9 617 3.32 584 4.26 30.4 10.5 211 Sodium mg/L 17800 17800 12100 12000 14800 473 16500 45.6 15900 27.7 3530 334 7970 Boron mg/L 7.32 7.44 4.91 5.08 6.08 0.178 6.41 0.0649 5.87 0.0424 0.161 0.121 1.56 Strontium mg/L 16.0 15.5 9.42 9.82 12.5 1.23 12.9 0.403 14.6 0.721 7.29 1.14 8.15 Bromide mg/L 105 111 73.2 76.9 95.0 2.84 99.0 0.328 95.6 0.192 23.3 1.88 47.3 Chloride mg/L 32600 34400 22600 23900 29500 976 31100 78.9 29800 47.7 7400 561 15000 Fluoride mg/L 0.200 J- 0.220 J 0.530 0.440 J- 0.400 0.130 0.300 0.100 0.220 0.130 0.100 0.0800 I 0.140 Sulfate mg/L 3990 4200 2880 3010 3690 82.1 3860 0.626 3620 4.14 334 79.9 1710 Ammonia mg/L as N 3.31 J+ 3.33 J 0.498 0.775 2.18
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 4.26 J 4.29 J 0.641 1.00 2.81 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.0161 J 0.0190 J 0.00291 0.00378 0.0112 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 4.48 J- 5.27 J 1.26 1.49 J 3.09 J TN mg/L 4.48 J 5.27 J 1.26 1.49 J 3.09 J ortho-Phosphate mg/L as P 0.0520 0.0151 I 0.0100 U 0.0100 U J 0.0100 UJ Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0575 0.0566 0.0550 0.219 0.0527 Alkalinityas CaCO3 mg/L 265 269 335 368 274 219 198 150 212 177 220 184 220 Bicarbonate as HCO3 mg/L 323 328 409 449 334 268 242 183 259 216 269 225 269 Sulfide mg/L 1.50 4.17 8.71 9.97 5.32 1.16 0.285 U 0.0570 U 0.285 U 0.471 0.0570 U 0.480 0.0570 U Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 55000 54200 41400 39800 50800 2070 50600 298 52200 288 13200 1300 26000 Salinity
- 56.80 57.57 38.96 40.53 49.35 1.8 J 53.21 0.26 J 50.41 0.24 J 12.26 1.08 J 25.5 Tritium pCi/L (1) 3049 (34.3) 3222 (29.8) 128 (8.9) 208 (11.4) 2044 (28.9) 59.7 (7.3) J 2897 (31.0) 57.2 (9.1) J 2573 (31.3) 19.6 (7.8) 67.4 (7.3) 1.3 (7.8) UJ 349 (11.8)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
091218-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 091218-TPGW-12M 091318-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 091318-TPGW-9D 092018-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 092018-TPGW-11S Text in blue are revised from the February 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-41
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-5. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the September 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-G35-18 TPGW-G35-58 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB2 Parameter Units 09/13/2018 09/13/2018 9/10/2018 09/11/2018 09/12/2018 09/13/2018 09/17/2018 09/18/2018 09/20/2018 09/20/2018 Temperature °C 27.2 26 pH SU 7.39 7.27 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.45 0.33 Specific Conductance S/cm 619 17919 Turbidity NTU 0.64 0.3 Calcium mg/L 73.9 295 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U Magnesium mg/L 6.43 339 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U Potassium mg/L 12.6 103 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U Sodium mg/L 36.1 3030 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.110 I Boron mg/L 0.0785 1.50 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Strontium mg/L 0.957 4.83 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U Bromide mg/L 0.366 18.9 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U Chloride mg/L 66.2 5800 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U Fluoride mg/L 0.150 0.170 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U Sulfate mg/L 59.9 901 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U Ammonia mg/L as N 0.0398 U 0.0749 I 0.0398 U 0.0398 U 0.0398 U 0.0398 U Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 0.128 U 0.129 U Unionized NH3 mg/L Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.014 U 0.018 I 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 0.126 U 0.126 U 0.126 U 0.126 U 0.126 U 0.126 U TN mg/L 0.140 U 0.140 U 0.0140 U 0.0180 I 0.140 U 0.140 U ortho-Phosphate mg/L as P 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.00900 U Alkalinityas CaCO3 mg/L 167 176 1.78 1.78 1.39 1.19 1.78 1.78 2.18 2.18 Bicarbonate as HCO3 mg/L 204 215 2.17 2.17 1.69 1.45 2.17 2.17 2.66 2.66 Sulfide mg/L 0.124 0.0570 U 0.570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 360 10500 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U Salinity
- 0.300 J 10.56 Tritium pCi/L (1) 8.0 (4.5) 6.4 (5.0) 10.8 (7) 0.4 (5.3) UJ -2.5 (7.2) UJ -2.5 (7.2) UJ 11.0 (5.5) 6.8 (7.3) UJ 38.3 (6.8) 1133 (17.0)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
091218-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 091218-TPGW-12M 091318-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 091318-TPGW-9D 092018-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 092018-TPGW-11S Text in blue are revised from the February 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-42
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-6. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the December 2018 Sampling Event.
TPGW-1S TPGW-1M TPGW-1D TPGW-2S DUP1 TPGW-2M TPGW-2D TPGW-3S TPGW-3M TPGW-3D TPGW-4S TPGW-4M Parameter Units 12/13/2018 12/13/2018 12/13/2018 12/05/2018 12/05/2018 12/05/2018 12/05/2018 12/05/2018 12/04/2018 12/04/2018 12/06/2018 12/06/2018 Temperature °C 25.2 25.7 25.8 26 26.1 26.2 25.6 26.5 26.8 25.6 25.3 pH SU 7.08 7.03 7.03 7.25 6.97 7.00 6.66 7.01 7.01 6.92 6.98 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.2 0.53 0.39 0.19 0.16 0.89 0.29 0.6 0.26 0.19 0.18 Specific Conductance S/cm 26011 71737 70609 60336 74090 75839 59423 66054 67301 5006 40435 Turbidity NTU 0.18 0.34 0.16 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.29 0.08 0.28 0.08 0.16 Sodium mg/L 4730 14100 14100 11800 11900 14800 15200 11800 12800 13200 697 7680 Chloride mg/L 9040 27000 27400 22800 22600 29200 29900 22500 25300 25800 1410 14600 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 17600 50800 51800 39800 38200 50200 51000 40200 42800 45400 2860 27200 Salinity
- 15.87 49.27 48.38 40.43 51.12 52.52 39.75 44.81 45.77 2.68 25.82 Tritium pCi/L (1) 300 (11.4) 2051 (26.3) 2214 (24.9) 3372 (30.2) 3708 (37.3) 2922 (26.3) 2955 (33.8) 87.6 (7.8) 1199 (18.4) 1275 (16.8) 30.7 (7.3) 289 (12.1)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
120518-DUP1 was collected at TPGW-2S 120518 DUP2 was collected at TPGW-12M 121318 DUP1 was collected at TPGW-8D Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable; field parameters and calculated values not collected/reported for duplicate and blank samples.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
DUP = Duplicate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
EB = Equipment Blank. SU = Standard Unit(s).
FB = Field Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL.
J = Estimated.
3-43
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-6. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the December 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-4D TPGW-5S TPGW-5M TPGW-5D TPGW-6S TPGW-6M TPGW-6D TPGW-7S TPGW-7M TPGW-7D TPGW-8S-NEW TPGW-8M Parameter Units 12/06/2018 12/13/2018 12/13/2018 12/13/2018 12/10/2018 12/10/2018 12/10/2018 12/10/2018 12/10/2018 12/10/2018 12/13/2018 12/13/2018 Temperature °C 25.3 24.5 24.3 24.3 24.3 24.3 24.0 25.0 24.8 24.5 24.8 24.6 pH SU 7 7.27 6.77 6.96 7.07 6.97 6.95 7.51 7.38 6.85 7.29 7.33 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.21 0.47 0.45 0.39 0.19 0.22 0.23 0.17 0.18 0.25 0.4 0.45 Specific Conductance S/cm 42304 888 34085 36617 1497 23415 24385 496 527 10866 678 685 Turbidity NTU 0.11 0.42 0.46 0.36 0.37 0.43 0.16 0.18 0.83 0.79 0.56 0.24 Sodium mg/L 8130 70.0 6280 6900 146 4230 4380 21.4 21.7 1600 15.3 15.2 Chloride mg/L 15400 133 11900 13000 286 7900 8240 33.0 35.6 3580 28.0 27.9 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 29800 480 22600 24800 772 14500 14200 284 318 6280 390 380 Salinity
- 27.15 0.440 J 21.39 23.15 0.75 J 14.16 14.81 0.24 J 0.25 J 6.16 0.33 J 0.33 J Tritium pCi/L (1) 401 (12.6) 7.5 (8.2) UJ 268 (12.6) 345 (12.3) 12.9 (5.9) J 1.4 (6.9) UJ 2.2 (4.9) UJ 16.5 (6.1) J 12.7 (7.6) J 22.7 (8.3) J 7.0 (4.6) 7.2 (5.8)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
120518-DUP1 was collected at TPGW-2S 120518 DUP2 was collected at TPGW-12M 121318 DUP1 was collected at TPGW-8D Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable; field parameters and calculated values not collected/reported for duplicate and blank samples.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
DUP = Duplicate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
EB = Equipment Blank. SU = Standard Unit(s).
FB = Field Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL.
J = Estimated.
3-44
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-6. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the December 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-8D DUP1 TPGW-9S TPGW-9M TPGW-9D TPGW-10S TPGW-10M TPGW-10D TPGW-11S TPGW-11M TPGW-11D TPGW-12S Parameter Units 12/13/2018 12/13/2018 12/11/2018 12/11/2018 12/11/2018 12/12/2018 12/12/2018 12/12/2018 12/12/2018 12/12/2018 12/12/2018 12/05/2018 Temperature °C 24.7 24.7 23.5 23.8 24.9 24.9 24.4 23.6 23.6 23.6 26.2 pH SU 7.22 7.01 6.55 7.05 7.25 7.17 7.04 7.00 6.84 6.94 6.91 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.36 0.52 0.77 0.29 0.34 0.37 0.20 0.21 0.42 0.22 0.22 Specific Conductance S/cm 721 617 623 618 55231 57311 70434 55045 58732 67134 42988 Turbidity NTU 0.44 1.65 0.77 0.228 0.10 0.37 0.03 0.14 0.67 0.34 0.22 Sodium mg/L 24.2 24.2 14.7 15.8 15.8 11000 11300 14400 11000 11700 13700 8140 Chloride mg/L 42.4 42.4 25.2 25.8 24.5 19900 20600 27000 20100 21700 25600 15200 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 370 430 350 346 354 38000 35800 51200 38200 37000 48000 26800 Salinity
- 0.35 J 0.30 J 0.30 J 0.30 J 36.61 38.17 48.28 36.50 39.27 45.71 27.62 Tritium pCi/L (1) 42.8 (8.7) 0.0 (8.0) UJ 3.9 (8.4) UJ 14.0 (7.7) 3.2 (5.4) UJ 68.2 (7.3) 289 (13.2) 1754 (25.8) 10.7 (5.7) 309 (12.1) 1152 (19.7) 43.6 (7.3)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
120518-DUP1 was collected at TPGW-2S 120518 DUP2 was collected at TPGW-12M 121318 DUP1 was collected at TPGW-8D Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable; field parameters and calculated values not collected/reported for duplicate and blank samples.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
DUP = Duplicate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
EB = Equipment Blank. SU = Standard Unit(s).
FB = Field Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL.
J = Estimated.
3-45
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-6. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the December 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-12M DUP2 TPGW-12D TPGW-13S TPGW-13M TPGW-13D TPGW-14S TPGW-14M TPGW-14D TPGW-L3-18 TPGW-L3-58 TPGW-L5-18 Parameter Units 12/05/2018 12/05/2018 12/05/2018 12/04/2018 12/04/2018 12/04/2018 12/12/2018 12/12/2018 12/12/2018 12/10/2018 12/10/2018 12/05/2018 Temperature °C 26.4 26.3 29.4 29.4 29.2 23.6 23.8 24.3 24.4 25.4 26.3 pH SU 6.86 7.16 6.86 6.91 6.99 6.90 6.81 6.89 7.37 6.99 7.61 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.16 0.83 0.36 0.31 0.23 0.14 0.34 1.97 Specific Conductance S/cm 59927 65848 81025 81263 82375 57517 59579 71094 2278 76531 972 Turbidity NTU 0.04 0.45 0.20 0.16 0.19 0.79 0.47 0.42 0.79 0.3 6.72 Sodium mg/L 11500 11800 13000 16400 16400 16700 11900 12100 14700 318 16200 99.6 Chloride mg/L 22600 22500 25800 32600 32500 32500 21200 22400 27500 603 29900 186 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 38200 38200 45000 54400 59800 61600 38200 40200 50200 1210 52000 600 Salinity
- 40.11 44.63 56.59 56.78 57.69 38.35 38.91 48.80 1.17 J 53.1 0.48 J Tritium pCi/L (1) 913 (15.2) 899 (14.5) 1329 (17.0) 6448 (47.4) 3004 (33.2) 3197 (36.2) 105 (8.2) 174 (9.2) 1921 (24.9) 138 (9.3) J 2774 (36) 125 (7.7)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
120518-DUP1 was collected at TPGW-2S 120518 DUP2 was collected at TPGW-12M 121318 DUP1 was collected at TPGW-8D Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable; field parameters and calculated values not collected/reported for duplicate and blank samples.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
DUP = Duplicate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
EB = Equipment Blank. SU = Standard Unit(s).
FB = Field Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL.
J = Estimated.
3-46
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-6. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the December 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-L5-58 TPGW-G21-18 TPGW-G21-58 TPGW-G28-18 TPGW-G28-58 TPGW-G35-18 TPGW-G35-58 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB2 Parameter Units 12/05/2018 12/06/2018 12/06/2018 12/06/2018 12/06/2018 12/11/2018 12/11/2018 12/04/2018 12/05/2018 12/06/2018 12/10/2018 12/11/2018 12/12/2018 12/13/2018 12/13/2018 Temperature °C 26 24.7 24.3 25.3 25 25.6 25.4 pH SU 7.01 7.26 6.79 7.63 6.98 7.54 7.21 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.32 0.44 0.48 0.36 0.35 0.64 0.335 Specific Conductance S/cm 73099 615 20554 2314 39994 756 18548 Turbidity NTU 1.64 0.51 0.83 1.02 1.53 1.83 0.3 Sodium mg/L 14900 28.8 3530 329 7660 62.7 3290 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U Chloride mg/L 28600 52.0 7010 588 14500 116 6000 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 47000 328 13800 1350 24000 418 11600 15.0 U 18.0 I 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U Salinity
- 50.34 0.30 J 12.28 1.18 J 25.5 0.37 J 10.97 Tritium pCi/L (1) 2523 (31.5) 14.7 (7.8) 51.8 (6.4) 4.8 (5.6) UJ 370 (10.7) 45.8 (6.5) 2.1 (4.4) UJ 15.3 (5.2) -5.5 (7.4) UJ -11.3 (6.5) UJ 15.5 (5.4) -1.6 (4.5) UJ -8.3 (6.1) UJ 0.2 (4.5) UJ 11.5 (5.9)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
120518-DUP1 was collected at TPGW-2S 120518 DUP2 was collected at TPGW-12M 121318 DUP1 was collected at TPGW-8D Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable; field parameters and calculated values not collected/reported for duplicate and blank samples.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
DUP = Duplicate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
EB = Equipment Blank. SU = Standard Unit(s).
FB = Field Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL.
J = Estimated.
3-47
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-7. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the March 2019 Sampling Event.
TPGW-1S TPGW-1M TPGW-1D DUP1 TPGW-2S TPGW-2M TPGW-2D TPGW-3S TPGW-3M TPGW-3D TPGW-4S TPGW-4M Parameter Units 03/04/2019 03/04/2019 03/04/2019 03/04/2019 03/05/2019 03/05/2019 03/05/2019 03/06/2019 03/06/2019 03/06/2019 03/13/2019 03/13/2019 Temperature °C 26.4 26.4 26.5 26.6 26.8 26.9 25.4 25.5 25.1 25.7 25.3 pH SU 7.04 7.09 7.01 7.16 6.93 6.90 6.66 6.9 6.92 6.85 6.96 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.34 0.17 0.24 0.19 0.23 0.13 0.37 0.13 0.28 0.32 0.19 Specific Conductance S/cm 30353 70980 71402 60080 74326 76347 59722 66739 68110 5517 J 41139 Turbidity NTU 0.35 1.45 0.34 0.23 0.34 0.27 0.39 0.91 0.21 0.12 14.03 Calcium mg/L 361 571 579 613 812 661 636 617 621 627 257 554 Magnesium mg/L 669 1780 1800 1830 1370 2050 2000 1570 1760 1800 68.5 970 Potassium mg/L 195 532 526 543 437 577 571 468 514 524 16.2 219 Sodium mg/L 5350 14400 14400 13700 11800 J 15400 J 15700 J- 12000 13500 13700 741 7900 Boron mg/L 2.17 6.10 6.31 5.85 4.95 I 5.97 6.44 4.96 I 5.36 5.72 0.115 1.69 Strontium mg/L 5.89 11.2 11.3 11.5 11.4 13.6 14.3 10.4 12.3 12.7 2.38 7.78 Bromide mg/L 34.1 J 91.9 90.9 91.7 75.6 98.7 102 77.3 88.6 90.3 5.23 50.0 Chloride mg/L 11000 J 28300 29100 29000 23800 30600 31800 24000 27300 28100 1640 15200 Fluoride mg/L 0.220 J 0.250 0.260 0.260 0.190 0.260 J 0.230 J- 0.200 J 0.170 0.190 0.0900 IJ 0.120 J-Sulfate mg/L 1320 J 3380 3460 3450 2950 3580 3730 2930 3280 3380 101 1760 Ammonia mg/L as N 1.05 1.67 1.90 1.88 1.91 J 2.89 J 2.70 J-Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 1.35 2.15 2.45 2.42 2.47 J 3.73 J 3.48 J Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00764 0.0110 0.0104 0.0159 J 0.0133 J 0.0115 J Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.204 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 1.52 1.82 2.23 2.18 2.20 2.67 2.51 TN mg/L 1.52 1.82 2.23 2.18 2.41 2.67 2.51 ortho-Phosphate mg/L as P 0.0259 IJ 0.0265 I 0.0222 I 0.0235 I 0.0191 I 0.0412 0.0613 Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0209 IJ 0.0349 I 0.0404 I 0.0405 I 0.0426 JV 0.0442 JV 0.0541 JV Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L 328 J 197 195 197 138 242 236 517 272 262 319 211 Bicarbonate as HCO3 mg/L 400 J 241 238 241 168 295 288 631 332 320 389 257 Sulfide mg/L 0.321 1.18 2.13 2.05 1.55 1.17 J 0.232 J- 16.5 0.0570 U 0.111 0.117 0.0570 U Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 20300 49800 50800 47800 42600 52800 52200 41000 47400 46400 3040 I 23400 Salinity
- 18.79 48.66 48.99 40.22 51.29 52.9 39.98 45.37 46.44 2.97 26.32 Tritium pCi/L (1) 374 (13.0) 2033 (26.9) 2111 (27.8) 2177 (26.5) 3237 (52.4) 2959 (28.4) 2987 (35.6) 81.0 (9.4) 1145 (18.2) 1320 (23.0) 0.3 (7.7) 304 (12.6)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
030419-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 030419-TPGW-1D 031419-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 031419-TPGW-9S 032119-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 032119-TPGW-13D Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion. V = Detected in method blank.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-48
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-7. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the March 2019 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-4D TPGW-5S TPGW-5M TPGW-5D TPGW-6S TPGW-6M TPGW-6D TPGW-7S TPGW-7M TPGW-7D TPGW-8S-NEW TPGW-8M Parameter Units 03/13/2019 03/04/2019 03/04/2019 03/04/2019 03/06/2019 03/06/2019 03/06/2019 03/05/2019 03/05/2019 03/05/2019 03/14/2019 03/14/2019 Temperature °C 25.2 25.7 25.2 25.2 23.8 23.8 23.9 24.7 24.5 24.3 24.2 24.1 pH SU 6.97 7.21 6.91 6.93 7.07 6.98 6.96 7.40 7.3 6.83 7.06 7.03 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.19 0.16 0.21 0.2 0.19 0.15 0.33 0.28 0.15 0.19 0.47 0.2 Specific Conductance S/cm 42289 900 33332 36851 1538 23459 24586 505 533 10983 677 677 Turbidity NTU 0.19 0.29 0.51 0.23 1.17 0.20 0.19 0.08 0.24 0.32 13.02 0.12 Calcium mg/L 529 92.7 542 537 139 470 472 72.6 77.1 493 122 113 Magnesium mg/L 1000 6.97 673 784 14.8 437 455 3.94 3.95 103 4.65 4.59 Potassium mg/L 242 5.73 137 178 4.98 95.7 100 8.07 7.29 11.4 15.0 15.7 Sodium mg/L 8100 65.0 5880 6530 141 3920 4210 21.8 22.6 1580 16.9 15.7 Boron mg/L 2.03 0.0497 I 1.12 1.56 0.0573 0.807 0.834 0.0521 0.0516 0.0868 0.0715 0.0730 Strontium mg/L 8.24 0.920 7.33 7.41 1.39 8.53 8.73 0.740 0.784 6.20 1.21 1.20 Bromide mg/L 51.7 0.460 37.7 J 42.6 J 1.09 26.9 27.7 J 0.144 0.155 12.4 0.192 0.209 Chloride mg/L 16000 142 12300 J 13600 J 331 8260 8970 J 36.8 40.4 3780 31.2 29.9 Fluoride mg/L 0.140 J 0.130 0.120 J 0.140 J 0.120 0.130 0.140 J 0.140 0.130 0.0900 I 0.100 0.0900 I Sulfate mg/L 1910 18.6 1220 J 1470 J 9.87 792 869 J 47.3 36.50 80.4 68.3 72.4 Ammonia mg/L as N Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L Unionized NH3 mg/L Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N TKN mg/L TN mg/L ortho-Phosphate mg/L as P Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L 208 224 236 J 225 J 290 218 228 J 149 170 190 244 236 Bicarbonate as HCO3 mg/L 254 273 288 J 275 J 353 266 278 J 181 207 232 297 287 Sulfide mg/L 0.0570 U 0.119 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0934 I 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.114 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 27000 496 20800 21600 890 16200 15800 284 306 6520 392 390 Salinity
- 27.14 0.440 J 20.85 23.3 0.77 J 14.2 14.94 0.24 J 0.26 J 6.23 0.33 J 0.33 J Tritium pCi/L (1) 417 (14.1) 25.4 (5.6) 240 (13.1) 381 (12.2) 19.0 (7.4) 10.7 (8.0) 25.3 (9.5) 23.9 (7.7) 8.6 (4.5) 10.5 (6.8) 8.1 (6.1) 1.1 (8.0)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
030419-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 030419-TPGW-1D 031419-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 031419-TPGW-9S 032119-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 032119-TPGW-13D Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion. V = Detected in method blank.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-49
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-7. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the March 2019 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-8D TPGW-9S DUP1 TPGW-9M TPGW-9D TPGW-10S TPGW-10M TPGW-10D TPGW-11S TPGW-11M TPGW-11D TPGW-12S Parameter Units 03/14/2019 03/14/2019 03/14/2019 03/14/2019 03/14/2019 03/07/2019 03/07/2019 03/07/2019 03/07/2019 03/07/2019 03/07/2019 03/05/2019 Temperature °C 24.1 24.5 24.1 24 25.3 25.1 25.2 24.6 24.4 24.4 27.2 pH SU 7.04 6.94 6.93 6.93 7.31 7.29 7.03 7.00 6.83 6.93 6.65 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.58 0.31 0.22 0.28 0.17 0.07 0.29 0.16 0.37 0.15 0.27 Specific Conductance S/cm 683 627 622 628 55160 56288 70636 56034 58805 68809 48305 Turbidity NTU 1.01 0.31 0.37 0.3 0.50 0.38 0.64 0.82 0.52 0.40 0.03 Calcium mg/L 109 113 112 111 114 448 454 604 493 554 623 494 Magnesium mg/L 6.06 3.00 2.95 3.09 3.47 1370 1380 1860 1390 1490 1790 1210 Potassium mg/L 13.0 4.94 4.89 4.84 3.96 407 410 544 414 433 515 350 Sodium mg/L 21.2 15.6 15.5 15.8 15.5 10600 10700 14900 11300 11400 13500 9370 Boron mg/L 0.0754 0.0443 I 0.0457 I 0.0468 I 0.0507 4.60 I 4.73 I 5.90 4.64 I 4.67 I 5.30 3.73 Strontium mg/L 1.12 0.916 0.903 0.942 1.12 8.38 9.00 11.7 8.50 9.51 11.3 7.79 Bromide mg/L 0.220 0.193 0.195 0.195 0.241 69.6 71.3 95.0 70.0 76.0 90.4 58.0 Chloride mg/L 37.1 26.1 26.2 26.5 25.2 20800 21500 29000 22100 22800 27000 18900 Fluoride mg/L 0.0900 I 0.0900 I 0.0900 I 0.0900 I 0.0900 I 0.660 J 0.580 J- 0.220 0.750 0.520 J 0.610 0.480 Sulfate mg/L 71.8 3.94 4.07 5.29 20.6 26.0 2680 3580 2700 2770 3260 2320 Ammonia mg/L as N 0.338 0.677 1.49 J Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 0.435 0.872 1.92 J Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00371 0.00696 0.00786 J Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 1.09 J+ 0.898 J- 1.83 TN mg/L 1.09 J 0.898 J 1.83 ortho-Phosphate mg/L as P 0.0216 IJ 0.0216 IJ 0.0123 I Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0146 IJ 0.0159 IJ 0.0434 Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L 230 287 289 281 266 149 157 202 310 344 245 503 Bicarbonate as HCO3 mg/L 281 350 353 342 325 182 192 246 378 420 299 614 Sulfide mg/L 0.0980 I 0.389 J 0.124 0.187 0.0570 U 3.87 I 4.72 I 12.6 11.0 8.50 6.14 9.81 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 392 356 352 354 346 36400 37400 52200 37400 39600 47800 31600 Salinity
- 0.33 J 0.30 J 0.30 J 0.30 J 36.55 37.40 48.42 37.22 39.10 47.09 31.44 Tritium pCi/L (1) 4.7 (7.3) 8.3 (4.6) -7.6 (5.9) 11.4 (6.0) 1.3 (4.6) 61.4 (6.7) 197 (8.9) 1776 (25.3) 26.6 (5.6) 290 (11.5) 1249 (20.4) 54.8 (6.9)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
030419-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 030419-TPGW-1D 031419-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 031419-TPGW-9S 032119-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 032119-TPGW-13D Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion. V = Detected in method blank.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-50
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-7. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the March 2019 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-12M TPGW-12D TPGW-13S TPGW-13M TPGW-13D DUP1 TPGW-14S TPGW-14M TPGW-14D TPGW-L3-18 TPGW-L3-58 TPGW-L5-18 TPGW-L5-58 Parameter Units 03/05/2019 03/05/2019 03/21/2019 03/21/2019 03/21/2019 03/21/2019 03/07/2019 03/07/2019 03/07/2019 03/12/2019 03/12/2019 03/12/2019 03/12/2019 Temperature °C 27 26.9 29.2 28.9 28.5 24.6 25.2 25.1 26.4 27.1 26.4 26.8 pH SU 6.8 7.07 6.76 6.82 6.91 6.93 6.79 6.87 7.18 6.98 7.17 6.95 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.12 0.12 0.19 0.14 0.37 0.22 0.30 0.19 0.56 0.38 0.4 0.39 Specific Conductance S/cm 59787 66007 81185 81062 81890 58457 60350 72372 3133 78801 2560 73976 Turbidity NTU 0.08 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.12 0.45 0.39 0.21 0.77 0.08 0.31 0.45 Calcium mg/L 580 594 644 643 659 644 515 556 624 117 634 115 655 Magnesium mg/L 1610 1780 1900 1920 1980 1960 1460 1530 1890 39.4 1970 31.7 1860 Potassium mg/L 458 502 591 591 602 599 430 448 554 13.4 595 11.1 546 Sodium mg/L 11900 13400 21900 18800 18000 18600 11200 12400 15400 442 16800 328 14600 Boron mg/L 4.87 I 5.19 7.71 7.21 7.27 7.20 4.93 I 5.25 6.27 0.138 7.07 0.111 5.76 Strontium mg/L 9.97 10.8 16.1 16.1 16.6 16.4 9.17 9.90 12.6 1.16 14.0 1.22 14.3 Bromide mg/L 75.3 84.2 111 112 113 113 74.7 77.6 96.0 2.54 106 2.09 98.6 Chloride mg/L 24200 26600 34000 33700 34800 34500 22700 23700 29500 874 32000 677 29300 Fluoride mg/L 0.260 0.250 J 0.400 J 0.200 J- 0.210 0.200 0.480 J 0.410 J 0.360 0.0900 I 0.250 0.0900 I 0.200 Sulfate mg/L 2910 3200 4320 4150 4280 4220 2820 2920 3560 54.5 3890 23.7 3480 Ammonia mg/L as N 7.03 3.56 3.67 3.68 0.587 0.651 2.49 J Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 9.05 4.58 4.72 4.74 0.756 0.839 3.21 J Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.0248 0.0141 0.0173 0.00253 0.00210 0.00894 J Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 7.01 3.88 3.85 3.98 1.32 J+ 1.24 J 2.55 TN mg/L 7.01 3.88 3.85 3.98 1.32 J 1.24 J 2.55 ortho-Phosphate mg/L as P 0.0100 UJ 0.0313 I V J 0.0250 I V J- 0.0219 I V 0.0358 I 0.0206 I 0.0269 I Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0523 0.0743 0.0679 0.0661 0.0624 0.0574 0.0564 Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L 351 200 350 264 266 266 301 399 277 212 200 250 212 Bicarbonate as HCO3 mg/L 428 244 427 322 324 325 367 486 338 258 244 305 258 Sulfide mg/L 6.37 1.16 J 18.9 Q 1.92 Q 1.95 Q 1.98 Q 8.99 13.0 6.84 2.65 J 0.0890 I 5.73 J- 0.520 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 40800 47800 60000 59800 59800 60200 40400 42000 51800 1660 54400 1330 52000 Salinity
- 39.99 44.76 56.73 56.64 57.34 39.04 40.46 49.79 1.63 J 54.87 1.37 J 51.01 Tritium pCi/L (1) 793 (17.5) 1281 (19.0) 6071 (47.3) 3042 (31.4) 3084 (35.8) 3040 (29.3) 109 (8.3) 150 (10.4) 1972 (22.8) 146 (9.0) 2931 (30.0) 91.0 (10.3) 2446 (28.5)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
030419-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 030419-TPGW-1D 031419-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 031419-TPGW-9S 032119-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 032119-TPGW-13D Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion. V = Detected in method blank.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-51
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-7. Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results from the March 2019 Sampling Event (continued).
TPGW-G21-18 TPGW-G21-58 TPGW-G28-18 TPGW-G28-58 TPGW-G35-18 TPGW-G35-58 EB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB2 Parameter Units 03/21/2019 03/21/2019 03/13/2019 03/13/2019 03/14/2019 03/14/2019 03/04/2019 03/05/2019 3/6/2019 03/07/2019 03/12/2019 3/13/2019 03/14/2019 03/21/2019 03/21/2019 Temperature °C 25.5 25.1 25.9 25.3 26.5 26.1 pH SU 7.3 6.78 7.34 7 7.47 7.19 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.89 0.33 0.52 0.4 0.28 0.4 Specific Conductance S/cm 640 21034 2456 40525 806 18844 Turbidity NTU 0.5 0.32 0.39 1.66 4.06 0.73 Calcium mg/L 78.1 568 130 571 70.0 316 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U Magnesium mg/L 3.77 283 42.2 960 9.08 396 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U Potassium mg/L 5.51 27.5 10.7 216 13.0 112 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U Sodium mg/L 30.0 3850 336 7700 71.7 3260 0.119 I 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.147 I 0.0742 I 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U Boron mg/L 0.0453 I 0.176 I 0.143 I 1.53 0.0878 1.59 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Strontium mg/L 0.919 7.64 1.35 7.51 1.05 4.88 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00579 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U Bromide mg/L 0.216 24.0 2.22 49.6 0.581 22.2 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U Chloride mg/L 57.0 7630 631 15500 137 6260 0.273 I 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U Fluoride mg/L 0.130 0.100 0.0800 IJ 0.140 J 0.140 0.170 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.330 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U Sulfate mg/L 23.5 398 79.8 1790 63.3 1010 0.0924 I 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.101 I Ammonia mg/L as N 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U Unionized NH3 mg/L Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 0.124 U 0.124 U 0.124 U 0.124 U 0.124 U 0.124 U 0.124 U 0.124 U TN mg/L 0.138 U 0.138 U 0.138 U 0.138 U 0.0140 U 0.138 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U ortho-Phosphate mg/L as P 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.00500 U 0.00660 I 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00500 U Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L 203 221 252 216 129 175 1.24 V 0.830 IV 1.24 1.04 V 1.66 V 2.06 1.44 2.88 V 2.05 V Bicarbonate as HCO3 mg/L 247 270 308 264 157 214 1.51 V 1.01 IV 1.52 1.27 V 2.02 V 2.52 1.76 3.51 V 2.51 V Sulfide mg/L 0.0570 U 0.0570 U Q 0.108 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 UQ 0.0570 UQ Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 334 12800 1350 26000 400 11200 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U Salinity
- 0.31 J 12.59 1.26 J 25.9 0.39 J 11.15 Tritium pCi/L (1) 2.8 (5.1) 56.6 (6.4) 7.2 (5.1) 339 (10.5) 13.5 (5.4) 6.1 (7.1) 0.6 (5.7) -6.6 (7.2) 3.7 (4.9) -11.4 (6.6) 6.7 (4.2) -1.0 (4.7) -19.7 (7.4) -17.7 (6.2) 12.0 (8.5)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
030419-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 030419-TPGW-1D 031419-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 031419-TPGW-9S 032119-DUP1 is a field duplicate of 032119-TPGW-13D Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion. V = Detected in method blank.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-52
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.1-8. Range of Ion and Nutrient Concentrations in Groundwater.
Marine Fresh/Brackish TPGW-13 Historical Period of Record Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Reporting Period Paramter Units Min Max Average Std Dev Min Max Average Std Dev Min Max Average Std Dev Min Max Average Std Dev Min Max Average Std Dev Min Max Average Std Dev Temperature °C 18.32 31.35 26.08 1.44 23.60 28.60 26.14 1.31 22.05 32.10 25.12 1.22 23.50 29.30 25.40 1.11 27.00 31.20 29.57 0.71 28.50 30.20 28.92 0.80 pH SU 6.45 7.64 6.93 0.19 6.62 7.34 6.98 0.14 6.52 12.10 7.29 0.90 6.55 7.91 7.15 0.26 6.52 7.25 6.87 0.16 6.71 6.99 6.78 0.10 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L -0.07 1.93 0.29 0.22 0.07 1.15 0.29 0.18 0.03 4.58 0.38 0.36 0.13 1.97 0.36 0.24 0.02 1.10 0.27 0.22 0.14 0.96 0.41 0.23 Specific Conductance µS/cm 20594 79893 56329 15370 23415 76347 55769 15175 305 41949 4985 9422 455 40525 5497 9837 72393 93579 82462 2955 80936 83311 81826 1022 Turbidity NTU 0.00 8.50 0.46 0.81 0.03 14.03 0.43 1.33 0.00 105.40 2.35 8.01 0.01 13.02 0.85 1.70 0.00 5.62 0.36 0.65 0.09 0.65 0.30 0.17 Calcium mg/L 259 1700 588 107 361 948 578 91.4 15.0 980 176 160 42.9 638 187 166 633 878 741 51.0 643 738 690 41.8 Magnesium mg/L 300 2200 1350 450 437 2050 1417 453 0.0200 910 76.1 188 2.62 960 97.1 220 1670 2500 2144 189 1900 2210 2062 131 Potassium mg/L 91.0 780 436 170 95.7 613 407 152 2.30 440 24.00 51.1 3.32 216 25.35 48.44 600 932 723 65.2 591 658 622 27.7 Sodium mg/L 3340 18900 11338 3554 3920 16400 11200 3409 6.00 8300 763 1716 13.7 7970 911 1883 14700 20100 17381 1092 16400 21900 18567 1498 Boron mg/L 0.580 7.78 4.30 1.85 0.807 6.96 4.47 1.88 0.0250 1.70 0.213 0.435 0.0316 1.75 0.234 0.460 6.50 9.20 7.51 0.598 7.14 7.95 7.44 0.291 Strontium mg/L 3.96 15.0 10.0 2.16 5.89 15.3 10.3 2.10 0.521 8.80 1.93 2.04 0.429 8.23 2.24 2.32 13.4 18.9 14.9 1.03 15.4 16.6 15.9 0.438 Bromide mg/L 23.0 180 77.5 27.4 26.6 102 70.8 21.4 0.0100 62.0 5.29 11.9 0.144 49.6 5.93 11.9 49.0 174 114 16.7 105 113 110 2.85 Chloride mg/L 6400 36900 21998 6902 7900 31800 21665 6566 10.0 16300 1561 3451 18.8 15500 1790 3642 26000 39800 34371 2168 32500 34800 33217 739 Fluoride mg/L 0.0100 3.30 0.444 0.459 0.120 0.830 0.320 0.190 0.0200 2.00 0.135 0.147 0.0800 0.170 0.114 0.0260 0.0200 3.60 0.629 0.775 0.200 0.440 0.278 0.101 Sulfate mg/L 650 5760 2854 1030 792 3730 2662 858 0.472 2230 172 406 0.626 1790 190 415 3700 6330 4450 496 3990 4320 4195 107 Total Ammonia mg/L as N 0.220 3.14 1.31 0.666 0.338 2.89 1.50 0.786 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.0610 5.58 2.42 1.05 3.31 7.03 4.58 1.58 Ammonium ion mg/L 0.280 4.01 1.67 0.859 0.435 3.73 1.93 1.01 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.0780 7.15 3.08 1.35 4.26 9.05 5.89 2.03 Unionized ammonia mg/L 0.00152 0.0423 0.00964 0.00534 0.00210 0.0183 0.00901 0.00415 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.000718 0.184 0.0190 0.0248 0.0141 0.0277 0.0198 0.00484 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.00470 1.20 0.0340 0.112 0.0140 0.204 0.0219 0.0380 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.00470 0.34 0.05175 0.0600 0.0140 0.0140 0.0140 0.00 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L 0.260 3.50 1.78 0.841 0.772 3.52 1.97 0.791 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.50 5.40 3.34 1.00 3.85 7.61 5.35 1.47 Total Nitrogen mg/L 0.260 3.51 1.80 0.848 0.772 3.52 1.98 0.795 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.50 5.43 3.41 1.01 3.85 7.61 5.35 1.47 Orthophosphate mg/L 0.00140 0.100 0.0375 0.0192 0.0100 0.0762 0.0291 0.0185 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.00140 0.0854 0.0417 0.0258 0.0100 0.0520 0.0239 0.0148 Total Phosphorus mg/L 0.00220 0.0845 0.0366 0.0185 0.00900 0.219 0.0476 0.0390 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.00220 0.152 0.0509 0.0259 0.0523 0.0886 0.0662 0.0125 Alkalinity mg/L 70.0 590 234 84.7 126 549 268 93.5 30.0 580 223 66.0 129 322 225 48.2 116 381 207 54.0 264 362 296 42.6 Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L as HCO3 70.0 720 254 100 154 670 326 114 30.0 417 236 61.72 157 393 274 58.8 116 465 228 79.5 322 442 361 52.2 Sulfide mg/L 0.0140 22.0 3.36 4.17 0.0570 16.5 3.68 4.34 0.0140 19.0 0.891 1.22 0.0570 5.73 0.373 0.966 0.100 39.1 7.53 9.13 1.50 18.9 5.31 6.15 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 7700 71900 36354 11939 13600 60800 37844 11545 160 27300 2829 5630 284 26400 3255 6185 41100 75000 57290 6008 52200 62800 58267 3796 Salinity (PSS-78)
- 12.30 57.88 37.68 11.32 14.16 52.90 37.26 11.13 0.14 26.93 2.94 5.92 0.22 25.89 3.25 6.18 49.41 66.97 57.80 2.43 56.52 58.48 57.26 0.84 Tritium pCi/L -11.8 3770 1065 1077 1.4 4605 973 1053 -21.6 440 34.5 83.1 -5.7 370 39.3 78.2 2133 6390 3825 665 2615 6647 4067 1295 Notes:
- 1. Marine wells include: TPGW-1S, -1M, -1D, -2S, -2M, -2D, -3S, -3M, -3D, -4M, -4D, -5M, -5D, -6M, -6D, -10S, -10M, -10D, -11S, -11M, -11D, -12S, -12M, -12D, -14S, -14M, -14D.
- 2. Fresh/Brackish wells include: TPGW-4S, -5S, -6S, -7S, -7M, -7D, -8S, -8M, -8D, -9S, -9M, -9D, -L3-18, -L5-18, -G21-18, -G21-58, -G28-18, -G28-58, -G35-18, -G35-58 Please see Appendix I for a list of values that were removed from this analysis and the rationale for their removal.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
°C = Degrees Celsius. N = Nitrogen. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
µS/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable, analyte not collected/required Std Dev = Standard deviation.
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. for location/event. SU = Standard Unit(s).
Max = Maximum. NH3 = Ammonia. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. NH4+ = Ammonium ion. TN = Total nitrogen.
Min = Minimum. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Unit(s).
3-53
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2018 Section 3 Table 3.2.1. Probe Types/Automated Measurements at Surface Water Stations for the Reporting Period.
Surface Water Site Probe Parameters Measured TPSWC-1T AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWC-1B AT100 Water Quality TPSWC-2T AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWC-2B AT100 Water Quality TPSWC-3T AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWC-3B AT100 Water Quality TPSWC-4T AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWC-4B AT100 Water Quality TPSWC-5T AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWC-5B AT100 Water Quality TPSWID-1T AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWID-1B AT100 Water Quality TPSWID-2T AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWID-2B AT100 Water Quality TPSWID-3T AT100 Water Quality TPSWID-3B AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWCCS-1B AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWCCS-2B AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWCCS-3B AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWCCS-4T AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWCCS-5T AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWCCS-6T AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPSWCCS-7B AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPBBSW-3B AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPBBSW-4B AT100 Water Quality TPBBSW-5B AT100 Water Quality TPBBSW-10B AT200 Water Quality, Stage TPBBSW-14B AT200 Water Quality, Stage Key:
AT = Aqua TROLL.
B = Bottom.
T = Top.
3-54
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-2. Statistical Summary of Automated Surface Water Specific Conductance (µS/cm).
2018 2019 Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Station 2018-06 2018-07 2018-08 2018-09 2018-10 2018-11 2018-12 2019-01 2019-02 2019-03 2019-04 2019-05 MIN MAX AVG STDDEV MIN MAX AVG STDDEV TPBBSW-3B_AT 53799 52711 52984 48986 49392 49218 50787 53187 51332 54113 53812 61098 37337 62814 52624 3676 18655 63371 49351 6981 TPBBSW-4B_AT 52934 52718 51264 48708 48028 51900 54293 54978 54972 57723 57867 58813 44461 60085 53682 3564 33490 61897 50612 5440 TPBBSW-5B_AT 47767 49644 46249 44282 48916 51843 53022 53691 54981 57454 58651 60522 38477 62650 52251 5115 29312 69581 48485 7022 TPBBSW-10B_AT 46928 44942 49027 38318 38721 42810 45235 48308 44749 48389 52660 55972 13542 60132 46364 6911 9593 64623 45985 9163 TPBBSW-14B_AT 53136 52544 51904 49265 50954 52807 53201 53632 52499 55491 54353 57268 45059 60168 53080 2460 31935 60805 45434 6679 TPSWC-1T_AT 2512 3420 1612 726 682 867 1660 1721 2138 3232 6589 6303 442 7146 2625 1966 315 10428 1139 1416 TPSWC-1B_AT 4651 4277 2168 1130 706 917 1813 1757 2529 4104 7416 6528 563 8166 3166 2224 387 25089 1545 2650 TPSWC-2T_AT 3426 3837 2145 627 843 2232 2289 2981 4528 7177 10434 12453 403 14279 4416 3714 256 21805 1695 2830 TPSWC-2B_AT 8227 5040 3671 695 924 2381 2771 3223 4786 10093 11469 13101 397 15832 5534 4308 267 26383 2154 3240 TPSWC-3T_AT 3119 4864 2774 719 1171 2613 2818 3811 4703 7291 10564 12832 408 13799 4705 3651 265 21717 1875 2764 TPSWC-3B_AT 14561 6434 4955 853 2085 4932 12365 5170 5736 23769 26749 16166 406 33662 10335 9044 265 46008 5410 6863 TPSWC-4T_AT 34057 32457 24035 12532 32420 42602 42446 36926 40124 52121 57124 54715 1005 60808 39048 12994 378 65333 31905 16945 TPSWC-4B_AT 36512 36119 29456 19578 38729 45887 45443 40854 44358 51903 58200 57931 1001 64061 42081 12116 388 66755 35853 17115 TPSWC-5T_AT 51810 51061 48076 45940 50360 52509 53218 54334 53727 55822 55927 58499 35437 59674 52609 3756 27741 62477 49341 6415 TPSWC-5B_AT 58362 53981 52877 50627 51989 53845 54028 54627 54409 56775 56983 59979 48425 62896 54875 2823 39376 71282 55094 5117 TPSWCCS-1B_AT 75201 79472 76548 66889 69532 69322 69105 72128 72243 76351 77837 82132 61443 86993 73997 5004 44133 128358 79684 14571 TPSWCCS-2B_AT 75995 78629 75436 65307 68961 70344 69253 72431 72206 73479 71931 88935 57964 91428 72603 4761 47717 129541 83689 13269 TPSWCCS-3B_AT 68671 71279 68847 60712 60812 64586 64877 67011 68188 69084 74284 76763 55806 81625 68028 5117 49131 128283 78557 13911 TPSWCCS-4T_AT 75023 78777 74148 64323 65529 65949 70144 74195 75817 77705 79711 83180 58414 86301 73718 6036 49572 126549 81391 13655 TPSWCCS-5T_AT 76000 79482 76653 66251 69696 70147 69585 71381 74974 77257 78804 83707 60202 89598 74495 5203 49973 125101 79570 13834 TPSWCCS-6T_AT 74040 78171 75296 65719 68296 68660 68191 71798 73807 79131 80212 86666 60938 90389 74011 6231 42852 126500 79384 12627 TPSWCCS-7B_AT 73453 76737 73581 64475 66291 66966 66831 68944 71758 71929 73693 77675 59845 81858 71037 4634 41390 129230 77260 14605 TPSWID-1T_AT 10670 8667 7038 5639 5076 5152 5192 5793 5758 6173 6124 9655 4614 17332 6746 1962 1605 45621 8474 7579 TPSWID-1B_AT 11042 8640 7099 5733 5121 5154 5199 6964 5897 9038 9149 15800 4713 24079 7926 3301 1594 48037 12932 10158 TPSWID-2T_AT 7487 6695 5435 4477 4381 4543 4393 4472 4153 4260 4696 5226 2896 8445 5023 1042 1308 55392 6536 7673 TPSWID-2B_AT 12541
- 7320 6212 5648 4578 4415 4507 4203 4239 4782 6243 3849 13587 5440 1720 2146 68416 18466 18929 TPSWID-3T_AT 7213 6892 5462 3468 3886 4833 4940 4851 4757 6056 7733 7048 2710 8713 5599 1406 1177 62140 6318 8454 TPSWID-3B_AT 7251 6613 5242 3949 5790 8381 6514 5063 5546 20961 25259 9488 3199 38994 9177 7603 1211 66206 11086 15175 Key:
Avg = Average. Historical Period of Record = Start-up of monitoring through May 2018. * = Less than 21 days of data are available, so no monthly average is included.
However all available hourly data included in annual min, max, ave, and Min = Minimum. Reporting Period = June 2018 through May 2019.
STDDEV Max = Maximum. Std Dev = Standard Deviation.
3-55
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 3.2-3. Statistical Summary of Automated Surface Water Salinity (in PSS-78 Scale).
2018 2019 Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Station 2018-06 2018-07 2018-08 2018-09 2018-10 2018-11 2018-12 2019-01 2019-02 2019-03 2019-04 2019-05 MIN MAX AVG STDDEV MIN MAX AVG STDDEV TPBBSW-3B_AT 36.2 35.4 35.6 32.6 32.9 32.7 33.7 35.5 34.2 36.3 36.2 41.8 24.1 43.2 35.3 2.8 11.2 43.7 32.8 5.2 TPBBSW-4B_AT 35.6 35.4 34.3 32.4 31.9 34.7 36.4 36.9 37.0 39.1 39.3 40.0 29.2 41.0 36.1 2.7 21.3 42.5 33.8 4.1 TPBBSW-5B_AT 31.7 33.1 30.6 29.1 32.5 34.7 35.4 35.9 37.0 38.9 39.9 41.4 24.9 43.1 35.0 3.8 18.4 48.5 32.2 5.2 TPBBSW-10B_AT 31.1 29.6 32.7 24.9 25.2 28.0 29.7 31.9 29.4 32.1 35.3 37.9 7.9 41.1 30.7 5.1 5.5 44.5 30.4 6.7 TPBBSW-14B_AT 35.7 35.3 34.8 32.8 34.1 35.4 35.6 35.9 35.1 37.4 36.6 38.9 29.7 41.1 35.6 1.8 20.2 41.6 30.0 5.0 TPSWC-1T_AT 1.3 1.8 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.7 3.7 3.5 0.2 4.0 1.4 1.1 0.2 6.0 0.6 0.8 TPSWC-1B_AT 2.5 2.3 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.9 0.9 1.3 2.2 4.1 3.6 0.3 4.6 1.7 1.3 0.2 15.5 0.8 1.6 TPSWC-2T_AT 1.8 2.1 1.1 0.3 0.4 1.2 1.2 1.6 2.4 4.0 6.0 7.2 0.2 8.4 2.4 2.2 0.1 13.3 0.9 1.7 TPSWC-2B_AT 4.7 2.7 2.0 0.3 0.5 1.2 1.5 1.7 2.6 5.8 6.6 7.7 0.2 9.4 3.1 2.6 0.1 16.4 1.2 1.9 TPSWC-3T_AT 1.7 2.6 1.5 0.4 0.6 1.4 1.5 2.0 2.6 4.1 6.1 7.5 0.2 8.1 2.6 2.2 0.1 13.2 1.0 1.6 TPSWC-3B_AT 8.6 3.6 2.7 0.4 1.1 2.7 7.2 2.8 3.1 14.8 16.7 9.6 0.2 21.4 6.1 5.8 0.1 30.3 3.1 4.3 TPSWC-4T_AT 21.8 20.6 14.9 7.6 20.7 27.9 27.7 23.7 26.0 34.9 38.7 36.9 0.5 41.5 25.5 9.2 0.2 45.1 20.7 11.5 TPSWC-4B_AT 23.5 23.2 18.6 12.2 25.1 30.3 29.9 26.5 29.1 34.7 39.6 39.4 0.5 44.2 27.7 8.6 0.2 46.2 23.4 11.7 TPSWC-5T_AT 34.7 34.2 31.9 30.3 33.6 35.2 35.6 36.4 36.1 37.7 37.8 39.8 22.7 40.8 35.3 2.8 17.5 42.9 32.8 4.8 TPSWC-5B_AT 39.7 36.4 35.5 33.8 34.8 36.2 36.2 36.6 36.5 38.4 38.6 40.9 32.2 43.2 37.0 2.2 25.5 49.1 37.2 3.9 TPSWCCS-1B_AT 53.3 56.8 54.4 46.5 48.6 48.5 48.3 50.7 50.8 54.2 55.4 59.1 42.2 63.2 52.3 4.1 29.0 101.4 57.3 12.5 TPSWCCS-2B_AT 53.9 56.1 53.4 45.2 48.1 49.2 48.2 50.7 50.7 51.6 50.4 64.7 39.5 66.9 51.0 3.9 31.7 101.9 60.4 11.5 TPSWCCS-3B_AT 47.9 50.0 48.0 41.6 41.6 44.6 44.7 46.3 47.4 48.1 52.3 54.4 37.7 58.5 47.3 4.1 32.6 100.9 56.1 12.0 TPSWCCS-4T_AT 53.1 56.2 52.3 44.4 45.3 45.6 48.8 52.0 53.5 55.0 56.8 59.8 39.8 62.5 51.9 4.9 32.9 99.3 58.4 11.7 TPSWCCS-5T_AT 53.9 56.8 54.4 46.0 48.6 48.9 48.4 49.7 52.8 54.6 56.0 60.2 41.2 65.3 52.5 4.3 33.2 97.8 56.9 11.8 TPSWCCS-6T_AT 52.2 55.7 53.3 45.5 47.5 47.7 47.2 50.1 51.8 56.2 57.2 62.7 41.7 66.0 52.1 5.1 28.0 99.3 56.7 10.8 TPSWCCS-7B_AT 51.8 54.5 51.9 44.6 46.0 46.5 46.4 48.0 50.4 50.4 51.9 55.3 40.9 58.8 49.8 3.8 27.0 102.2 55.2 12.5 TPSWID-1T_AT 6.1 4.9 3.9 3.1 2.8 2.8 2.8 3.2 3.2 3.4 3.4 5.5 2.5 10.4 3.8 1.2 0.8 30.1 4.9 4.9 TPSWID-1B_AT 6.4 4.9 4.0 3.1 2.8 2.8 2.8 3.9 3.2 5.1 5.2 9.4 2.6 14.8 4.5 2.0 0.8 31.9 7.8 6.6 TPSWID-2T_AT 4.2 3.7 3.0 2.4 2.4 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.3 2.5 2.9 1.5 4.8 2.7 0.6 0.7 37.4 3.8 5.0 TPSWID-2B_AT 7.3
- 4.1 3.4 3.1 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.6 3.4 2.1 8.0 3.0 1.0 1.1 47.6 11.7 13.1 TPSWID-3T_AT 4.0 3.8 3.0 1.8 2.1 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.6 3.3 4.3 3.9 1.4 4.9 3.1 0.8 0.6 42.7 3.7 5.6 TPSWID-3B_AT 4.0 3.7 2.9 2.1 3.2 4.8 3.7 2.8 3.0 12.9 15.8 5.4 1.7 25.2 5.4 4.9 0.6 45.9 7.0 10.4 Key:
Avg = Average. Historical Period of Record = Start-up of monitoring through May 2018. * = Less than 21 days of data are available, so no monthly average is included.
Min = Minimum. Reporting Period = June 2018 through May 2019. However all available hourly data included in annual min, max, ave, and STDDEV Max = Maximum. Std Dev = Standard Deviation.
3-56
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-4. Statistical Summary of Automated Surface Water Temperature (oC).
2018 2019 Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Station 2018-06 2018-07 2018-08 2018-09 2018-10 2018-11 2018-12 2019-01 2019-02 2019-03 2019-04 2019-05 MIN MAX AVG STDDEV MIN MAX AVG STDDEV TPBBSW-3B_AT 30.6 31.7 30.8 30.2 28.0 25.6 21.9 21.1 24.3 24.5 26.6 28.6 15.2 34.0 27.0 3.8 9.5 35.4 25.7 4.1 TPBBSW-4B_AT 30.4 31.7 30.8 30.2 28.2 25.9 22.1 21.7 23.8 24.5 26.6 28.6 19.0 33.3 27.0 3.5 15.9 35.1 26.4 3.7 TPBBSW-5B_AT 30.9 31.8 30.8 30.6 28.1 25.9 22.5 21.7 24.4 24.9 27.0 28.9 18.2 33.7 27.3 3.6 15.1 35.9 26.7 3.7 TPBBSW-10B_AT 30.7 31.8 30.9 30.4 28.0 25.7 21.9 21.3 24.4 24.6 26.7 28.7 17.1 34.6 27.1 3.8 13.9 35.4 26.6 3.7 TPBBSW-14B_AT 30.5 31.7 30.8 30.3 28.2 25.9 22.3 21.8 24.3 24.9 26.7 28.6 18.9 33.1 27.2 3.5 15.6 34.4 26.5 3.6 TPSWC-1T_AT 30.4 31.8 30.8 30.3 28.6 26.3 22.7 22.2 24.6 25.6 27.7 29.6 19.5 34.1 27.6 3.3 14.5 34.4 26.4 3.6 TPSWC-1B_AT 29.5 31.2 30.3 29.2 28.0 25.8 21.9 21.5 23.5 25.4 27.2 28.9 19.4 32.2 26.9 3.3 14.7 32.2 25.4 3.4 TPSWC-2T_AT 31.0 31.7 31.0 30.6 28.6 26.2 22.7 22.1 24.5 25.5 27.9 30.1 19.4 34.2 27.7 3.5 14.1 34.8 26.3 3.8 TPSWC-2B_AT 30.2 31.2 30.9 29.7 28.2 25.9 22.0 21.5 23.7 26.0 27.5 29.8 19.4 32.6 27.2 3.5 14.0 32.7 25.6 3.7 TPSWC-3T_AT 30.7 31.9 31.1 30.8 28.8 26.3 22.7 22.4 24.5 25.2 27.9 29.9 19.9 34.4 27.8 3.5 15.1 34.3 26.6 3.7 TPSWC-3B_AT 29.2 30.7 31.1 30.2 28.4 26.0 22.9 21.7 23.2 26.0 27.3 29.5 19.9 32.9 27.2 3.2 15.0 33.1 26.2 3.7 TPSWC-4T_AT 30.8 33.2 32.3 30.1 29.1 27.3 24.4 22.5 25.2 26.0 28.4 30.2 18.6 36.0 28.3 3.5 15.2 37.4 27.3 3.2 TPSWC-4B_AT 30.7 33.4 32.5 29.4 29.0 27.0 24.1 23.0 25.8 25.8 28.3 30.5 16.6 36.1 28.3 3.5 15.4 36.5 27.4 3.1 TPSWC-5T_AT 31.0 32.4 31.4 30.8 28.6 26.4 22.8 22.1 25.1 25.4 27.8 29.7 19.3 35.1 27.8 3.6 13.8 36.2 26.8 3.8 TPSWC-5B_AT 29.1 31.8 30.8 29.8 27.8 25.5 21.9 21.5 23.4 24.3 26.4 28.3 19.2 33.0 26.8 3.5 16.2 34.9 27.1 3.5 TPSWCCS-1B_AT 41.8 42.5 41.6 41.0 37.4 35.9 33.5 32.8 36.0 34.9 36.4 39.4 28.3 44.4 37.9 3.6 18.0 46.3 35.6 4.2 TPSWCCS-2B_AT 35.1 35.6 34.7 34.2 29.5 29.5 27.3 26.4 29.4 27.6 30.0 32.6 20.0 39.9 31.0 3.9 14.4 45.0 30.5 4.2 TPSWCCS-3B_AT 33.0 33.7 33.0 32.1 29.0 28.6 25.2 24.7 27.6 26.7 29.0 31.2 18.5 37.4 29.5 3.6 14.8 42.2 29.9 4.2 TPSWCCS-4T_AT 32.8 33.4 32.8 32.1 28.7 27.6 25.0 24.1 27.2 26.2 28.5 30.8 18.1 36.8 29.1 3.7 12.4 40.8 28.7 4.2 TPSWCCS-5T_AT 32.8 33.4 32.8 32.1 28.7 27.5 24.9 24.0 27.1 26.3 28.5 30.7 19.0 35.9 29.1 3.6 12.8 40.1 28.4 4.1 TPSWCCS-6T_AT 32.2 33.0 32.3 31.6 28.6 27.1 24.2 23.4 26.5 26.0 28.0 30.3 19.2 35.3 28.6 3.6 12.5 38.8 28.1 4.0 TPSWCCS-7B_AT 37.4 38.1 36.7 36.3 31.4 31.7 29.8 29.0 31.5 29.7 32.1 34.5 21.6 42.1 33.2 3.8 11.5 45.7 32.3 4.3 TPSWID-1T_AT 31.2 32.2 31.5 30.4 28.7 26.7 23.7 23.1 25.2 26.0 27.8 29.4 20.9 34.2 28.0 3.2 16.8 36.3 27.2 3.4 TPSWID-1B_AT 30.5 31.8 31.0 29.9 28.3 26.3 23.2 23.5 24.5 26.8 28.1 28.2 20.7 33.4 27.7 2.9 16.8 36.4 27.5 3.1 TPSWID-2T_AT 29.3 30.4 29.9 28.9 28.2 26.5 24.0 23.5 25.3 25.7 27.2 28.6 21.7 32.9 27.3 2.4 17.9 33.9 27.0 2.9 TPSWID-2B_AT 26.9 26.9 26.7 26.7 27.1 25.5 23.8 23.2 24.9 25.2 26.5 27.4 21.6 29.5 25.8 1.5 18.8 32.5 27.0 2.2 TPSWID-3T_AT 30.5 31.2 30.7 30.4 28.8 26.5 23.6 23.1 25.2 25.7 27.6 29.6 20.8 32.8 27.8 2.9 17.9 34.4 27.0 3.1 TPSWID-3B_AT 29.2 29.7 29.3 29.1 28.1 26.9 23.6 22.8 24.3 26.7 27.3 28.7 20.7 30.6 27.1 2.4 17.7 33.8 26.7 2.7 Key:
Avg = Average. Historical Period of Record = Start-up of monitoring through May 2018. * = Less than 21 days of data are available, so no monthly average is included.
Min = Minimum. Reporting Period = June 2018 through May 2019. However all available hourly data included in annual min, max, ave, and STDDEV Max = Maximum. Std Dev = Standard Deviation.
3-57
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-5. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the June 2018 Sampling Event.
TPBBSW-3B TPBBSW-4B TPBBSW-5B DUP1 TPSWC-1T TPSWC-1B TPSWC-2T DUP1 TPSWC-2B TPSWC-3T TPSWC-3B TPSWC-4T Parameter Units 06/19/2018 06/19/2018 06/19/2018 06/19/2018 06/11/2018 06/11/2018 06/12/2018 06/12/2018 06/12/2018 06/11/2018 06/11/2018 06/04/2018 Temperature °C 30.2 30.1 30.6 29.6 29.4 29.9 30.2 29.7 29.1 33.0 pH SU 8.40 8.16 7.95 7.8 7.40 7.68 7.45 8.06 7.7 7.34 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 5.53 5.34 4.7 4.47 0.15 4.18 2.13 4.72 0.14 3.93 Specific Conductance S/cm 54912 54121 50710 1943 3890 3480 6950 1928 18457 39741 Turbidity NTU 0.75 0.00 0.98 7.8 6.19 1.59 2.63 1.15 19.05 12.69 Sodium mg/L 10300 9860 9620 8920 256 572 515 518 1130 254 3290 7700 Chloride mg/L 21100 20900 19300 19300 478 1090 1020 1030 2390 464 6190 14500 Salinity
- 36.21 35.63 33.11 0.98 J 2.04 1.81 J 3.78 0.97 J 10.86 25.12 Tritium pCi/L (1) 5.8 (4.0) J 8.1 (3.0) J 8.5 (3.0) J 27.1 (3.4) 31.3 (3.5) J 39.7 (3.7) J 28.7 (4.3) J 8.5 (3.9) 18.0 (4.1) J 20.0 (3.2) J 49.5 (3.9) 83.7 (7.2) J Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
061218-DUP1 was collected at 061218-TPSWC-2T 061918-DUP1 was collected at 061918-TPBBSW-5B Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable; field parameters and calculated values not collected/reported for duplicate and blank samples
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
DUP = Duplicate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
EB = Equipment Blank. SU = Standard Unit(s).
FB = Field Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL.
J = Estimated.
3-58
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-5. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the June 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPSWC-4B TPSWC-5T TPSWC-5B TPSWC-6T TPSWC-6B TPSWID-1T TPSWID-1B TPSWID-2T TPSWID-2B TPSWID-3T TPSWID-3B TPSWCCS-1B Parameter Units 06/04/2018 06/11/2018 06/11/2018 06/07/2018 06/07/2018 06/04/2018 06/04/2018 06/04/2018 06/04/2018 06/04/2018 06/04/2018 06/04/2018 Temperature °C 30.0 30.7 29.6 27.1 27.5 31.2 29.9 30.6 28.1 31.4 29.6 41.7 pH SU 7.20 7.99 7.52 7.28 7.31 8.06 7.42 7.87 7.02 7.78 7.74 8.18 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.25 5.15 0.26 1.28 1.35 5.67 5.14 5.11 0.11 4.61 4.14 2.29 Specific Conductance S/cm 40903 52585 61903 1088 1058 11995 J 13006 6080 11519 6779 J 8058 73060 Turbidity NTU 37.8 1.73 10.72 0.71 0.87 0.75 3.65 1.33 6.02 0.68 1.05 72.47 Sodium mg/L 8040 10900 13600 88.3 96.4 2000 2220 935 1910 1070 1280 15100 Chloride mg/L 15000 20100 24400 159 173 4840 J 4900 2200 4230 2500 J 2750 29400 Salinity
- 26.04 34.47 41.51 0.54 J 0.52 J 6.79 J 7.42 3.27 6.53 3.67 J 4.43 49.53 Tritium pCi/L (1) 99.5 (7.7) J 10.8 (3.0) J 108 (5.5) 14.3 (3.7) 12.6 (3.7) 242 (11.9) 285 (13.1) 118 (8.4) 148 (9.1) 102 (7.4) 126 (8.4) 1388 (47.6)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
061218-DUP1 was collected at 061218-TPSWC-2T 061918-DUP1 was collected at 061918-TPBBSW-5B Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable; field parameters and calculated values not collected/reported for duplicate and blank samples
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
DUP = Duplicate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
EB = Equipment Blank. SU = Standard Unit(s).
FB = Field Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL.
J = Estimated.
3-59
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-5. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the June 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPSWCCS-2B TPSWCCS-3B TPSWCCS-4T TPSWCCS-5T TPSWCCS-6T TPSWCCS-7B EB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB2 Parameter Units 06/13/2018 06/04/2018 06/11/2018 06/04/2018 06/04/2018 06/04/2018 06/04/2018 06/11/2018 06/12/2018 6/13/2018 06/19/2018 06/19/2018 Temperature °C 32.2 32.5 31.6 33.3 32.8 38.4 pH SU 8.08 8.31 8.23 8.34 8.29 8.28 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 2.07 4.39 2.71 3.86 2.86 4.08 Specific Conductance S/cm 75609 68236 75071 73321 72878 72446 Turbidity NTU 75.57 69.96 77.27 78.07 77.77 72.88 Sodium mg/L 15700 13800 15800 15300 15300 15200 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U Chloride mg/L 30600 27200 30200 29100 29700 29300 0.288 I 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U Salinity
- 52.09 46.27 51.69 50.22 49.89 49.25 Tritium pCi/L (1) 1266 (41.6) 1388 (47.7) 1265 (41.2) 1376 (48.0) 1388 (47.7) 1423 (48.4) 10.5 (5.3) 4.3 (3.5) 15.8 (3.7) 8.4 (3.0) -1.5 (3.7) UJ 8.1 (3.9)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
061218-DUP1 was collected at 061218-TPSWC-2T 061918-DUP1 was collected at 061918-TPBBSW-5B Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable; field parameters and calculated values not collected/reported for duplicate and blank samples
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
DUP = Duplicate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
EB = Equipment Blank. SU = Standard Unit(s).
FB = Field Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL.
J = Estimated.
3-60
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-6. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the September 2018 Sampling Event.
TPBBSW-3B TPBBSW-4B TPBBSW-5B TPSWC-1T TPSWC-1B TPSWC-2T TPSWC-2B TPSWC-3T TPSWC-3B TPSWC-4T TPSWC-4B DUP1 TPSWC-5T Parameter Units 09/19/2018 09/19/2018 09/19/2018 09/06/2018 09/06/2018 09/06/2018 09/06/2018 09/06/2018 09/06/2018 09/05/2018 09/05/2018 09/05/2018 09/05/2018 Temperature °C 30.7 30.9 31.2 29.6 28.4 30.3 29.2 31.1 30.5 31.1 29.9 28.3 pH SU 8.21 8.08 7.99 7.4 7.57 7.87 7.66 7.89 7.88 7.93 7.58 7.96 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 4.30 4.58 3.84 4.11 3.21 6.16 4.06 6.48 4.71 4.67 2.8 4.19 Specific Conductance S/cm 50969 48010 42840 702 1572 480 625 525 521 2703 25069 46864 Turbidity NTU 0.95 0.54 0.87 0.88 2.89 0.63 2.26 0.83 0.84 1.19 7.09 2.3 Copper mg/L 0.00188 I 0.0435 U 0.0435 U Silica, dissolved mg/L 2.10 I Calcium mg/L 410 407 342 32.0 49.9 26.0 29.7 29.0 30.3 43.9 J 213 219 366 Magnesium mg/L 1290 1260 1040 9.82 21.9 7.12 9.29 7.33 7.36 43.7 J 545 568 1140 Potassium mg/L 388 376 317 3.41 8.61 2.79 3.77 3.18 3.22 15.0 J 169 176 359 Sodium mg/L 10300 10300 8460 79.9 215 49.9 74.8 57.1 58.6 383 J 4550 4670 9540 Boron mg/L 4.41 3.93 3.54 0.0703 0.111 0.0567 0.0650 0.0518 0.0518 0.235 I 2.09 2.10 4.30 Strontium mg/L 7.78 7.07 6.28 0.323 0.508 0.297 0.314 0.319 0.321 0.647 4.09 4.02 7.35 Bromide mg/L 61.7 57.8 51.2 0.270 1.12 0.133 0.261 0.156 0.156 2.22 J 28.0 29.8 56.5 Chloride mg/L 19300 18100 16300 141 415 80.2 128 97.1 98.5 775 J 8100 8700 17000 Fluoride mg/L 0.910 J 0.860 J- 0.810 J 0.0700 I 0.0900 I 0.0800 I 0.0800 I 0.0700 I 0.0700 I 0.120 0.520 0.520 0.830 Sulfate mg/L 2530 2370 2110 4.52 23.2 1.94 3.90 2.37 2.36 80.6 J 1140 I 1180 2210 Ammonia mg/L as N 0.0503 I 0.0794 I 0.197 0.158 0.258 J+ 0.127 0.146 0.139 0.156 0.173 0.180 0.181 0.0893 I
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 0.128 I 0.128 I 0.252 0.202 0.331 J 0.163 0.187 0.178 0.199 0.222 0.231 0.231 0.128 I Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00597 0.00737 0.0158 0.00368 0.00811 J 0.00882 0.00594 0.0106 0.0112 0.0143 0.00582 0.00543 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0290 I J- 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 0.910 J 0.704 J+ 0.776 J 0.972 1.23 0.879 0.970 0.936 0.863 0.836 1.07 1.01 0.894 TN mg/L 0.910 J 0.704 J 0.776 J 0.972 1.26 J 0.879 0.970 0.936 0.863 0.836 1.07 1.01 0.894 Orthophosphate as P mg/L 0.0112 IJ 0.0111 IJ 0.0105 I 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0124 IJ 0.0135 I 0.0100 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.00900 UJ 0.00900 UJ 0.00900 U 0.0114 I 0.0228 I 0.00900 U 0.00900 I 0.0116 I 0.0101 I 0.0117 I 0.00900 UJ 0.00900 U 0.00900 U Alkalinity mg/L 148 139 154 85.9 105 84.7 92.1 92.1 85.3 85.3 J 148 138 134 Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L 180 170 188 105 128 103 112 112 104 104 J 181 168 164 Sulfide mg/L 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.570 U 0.0570 U 0.570 U 0.570 U Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 31800 Dissolved Inorganic Carbon mg/L Salinity
- 33.28 31.11 27.38 0.34 J 0.79 J 0.23 J 0.30 J 0.25 J 0.25 J 1.38 J 15.17 30.33 Tritium pCi/L (1) 21.3 (5.8) 3.8 (9.5) UJ 14.8 (4.7) 109 (7.1) 62.0 (6.4) 127 (8.4) 124 (8.1) 103 (6.7) 112 (10.0) 107 (9.8) 67.2 (7.1) 87.8 (6.0) 21.2 (6.4)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
090518-DUP1 is a duplicate of -TPSWC-4B 090618-DUP1 is a duplicate of TPSWID-3T Text in blue are revised from the February 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-61
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-6. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the September 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPSWC-5B TPSWC-6T TPSWC-6B TPSWID-1T TPSWID-1B TPSWID-2T TPSWID-2B TPSWID-3T DUP1 TPSWID-3B TPSWCCS-1B TPSWCCS-2B TPSWCCS-3B Parameter Units 09/05/2018 09/13/2018 09/13/2018 09/06/2018 09/06/2018 09/06/2018 09/06/2018 09/06/2018 09/06/2018 09/06/2018 09/05/2018 09/10/2018 09/06/2018 Temperature °C 29.2 28.2 28.2 30.7 29.5 30.6 28.6 30.8 28.4 37.6 33.4 31.7 pH SU 7.84 7.28 7.25 7.99 7.91 7.81 7.08 7.93 7.56 8.18 8.26 8.31 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 1.7 1.20 0.95 5.43 5.32 5.26 0.34 5.94 4.55 4.67 2.16 5.67 Specific Conductance S/cm 53413 770 777 6187 6259 4478 6312 3583 4651 65668 66595 61204 Turbidity NTU 3.12 0.97 1.00 1.53 1.81 1.61 119.20 1.11 2.27 69.94 72.99 69.36 Copper mg/L 0.0435 U 0.0843 0.0174 U 0.0174 U 0.0174 U 0.0723 I Silica, dissolved mg/L 2.94 15.7 16.2 15.4 Calcium mg/L 411 89.0 88.3 155 J 155 J 138 199 115 114 152 576 612 593 Magnesium mg/L 1300 9.35 9.43 102 J 105 J 65.2 96.9 50.6 49.8 66.2 1620 1670 1590 Potassium mg/L 410 8.71 8.58 32.1 J 32.7 J 22.9 32.9 17.4 17.4 22.1 512 515 493 Sodium mg/L 10800 53.4 55.3 913 J 932 J 645 949 518 512 676 13500 13800 13100 Boron mg/L 5.16 0.0664 0.0650 0.335 I 0.310 I 0.222 I 0.299 I 0.184 I 0.185 I 0.209 I 7.18 6.34 5.62 Strontium mg/L 8.79 0.951 0.942 1.92 1.70 1.47 2.32 1.25 1.22 1.80 16.3 14.7 13.0 Bromide mg/L 64.1 0.436 0.450 5.64 J 5.74 J 3.83 5.86 2.92 2.92 4.13 81.4 86.0 74.5 Chloride mg/L 19300 99.4 103 1920 J 1930 J 1320 1930 1040 1030 1400 25200 26800 23800 Fluoride mg/L 0.880 0.110 0.110 0.150 0.150 0.140 0.160 0.120 0.140 0.130 1.32 1.35 1.28 J-Sulfate mg/L 2500 19.7 19.8 190 J 192 J 121 187 85.8 85.1 116 3460 3690 3230 Ammonia mg/L as N 0.134 0.0899 I 0.0778 I 0.185 0.140 0.317 0.875 0.161 0.161 0.255 0.141 0.151 0.160
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 0.172 0.128 I 0.128 I 0.237 0.180 0.406 1.12 0.206 0.206 0.327 0.180 0.193 0.205 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00643 0.00145 I 0.00117 I 0.0167 0.00987 0.0194 0.00903 0.0130 0.00775 0.0222 0.0217 0.0236 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.143 0.122 0.211 0.0140 U 0.248 0.243 0.152 0.0500 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 1.00 0.622 0.518 0.750 0.795 0.908 1.59 0.814 0.707 0.839 3.56 2.84 3.89 TN mg/L 1.00 0.622 0.518 0.893 0.917 1.12 1.59 1.06 0.950 0.991 3.61 2.84 3.89 Orthophosphate as P mg/L 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0130 I 0.0176 I 0.0100 U J-Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.0256 0.00970 I 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.0250 0.0319 0.0274 Alkalinity mg/L 146 210 216 256 J 261 J 230 292 183 183 226 173 185 198 Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L 178 257 263 312 J 319 J 281 356 223 224 275 211 226 221 Sulfide mg/L 0.570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 4.92 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.570 U 0.570 U 0.570 U Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Dissolved Inorganic Carbon mg/L Salinity
- 35.13 0.37 J 0.38 J 3.34 3.38 2.36 3.42 1.87 J 2.47 44.02 44.95 40.89 Tritium pCi/L (1) 25.4 (5.4) 14.2 (4.2) 12.3 (7.9) 200 (10.2) 202 (9.5) 145 (8.5) 73.4 (6.3) 148 (9.2) 136 (7.9) 99.0 (7.2) 6023 (44.5) 6151 (46.8) 5539 (45.6)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
090518-DUP1 is a duplicate of -TPSWC-4B 090618-DUP1 is a duplicate of TPSWID-3T Text in blue are revised from the February 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate SU bias).
= Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-62
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-6. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the September 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPSWCCS-4T TPSWCCS-5T TPSWCCS-6T TPSWCCS-7B EB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 Parameter Units 09/05/2018 09/10/2018 09/05/2018 09/06/2018 09/05/2018 09/06/2018 09/10/2018 9/13/2018 09/19/2018 Temperature °C 30.1 31.2 30.3 34.8 pH SU 8.34 8.39 8.27 8.40 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 4.60 3.86 4.57 6.60 Specific Conductance S/cm 68536 64192 67129 66245 Turbidity NTU 81.59 76.96 78.11 77.14 Copper mg/L 0.0664 I 0.00174 U 0.00174 U 0.00174 U Silica, dissolved mg/L 16.3 15.7 15.8 16.5 0.0936 I 0.0430 U 0.0430 U Calcium mg/L 619 586 605 656 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U Magnesium mg/L 1750 1590 1710 1800 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U Potassium mg/L 558 491 536 558 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U Sodium mg/L 14500 13100 14000 14900 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U Boron mg/L 7.17 6.35 7.13 6.31 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Strontium mg/L 16.8 14.5 16.8 14.3 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U Bromide mg/L 87.3 79.6 84.2 82.1 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U Chloride mg/L 26700 24700 25900 26300 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U Fluoride mg/L 1.35 1.32 1.30 1.35 J 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U Sulfate mg/L 3740 3400 3570 3590 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U Ammonia mg/L as N 0.144 0.155 0.156 0.146 0.0398 U 0.0398 U 0.0398 U 0.0398 U 0.0398 U
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 0.185 0.198 0.199 0.187 0.128 U 0.128 U Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.0197 0.0257 0.0189 0.0300 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 4.49 3.15 3.45 3.62 0.126 U 0.126 U 0.126 U 0.126 U 0.126 U TN mg/L 4.49 3.15 3.45 3.62 0.140 U 0.140 U 0.140 U 0.140 U 0.140 U Orthophosphate as P mg/L 0.0150 I 0.0100 U 0.0140 I 0.0100 UJ 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0240 I 0.0313 0.0267 0.0350 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.00900 U Alkalinity mg/L 181 190 177 188 1.40 1.59 1.78 1.19 2.58 Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L 209 232 216 189 1.71 1.94 2.17 1.45 3.14 Sulfide mg/L 0.570 U 0.570 U 0.570 U 0.930 I 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U 15.0 U Dissolved Inorganic Carbon mg/L Salinity
- 46.61 43.20 45.51 44.61 Tritium pCi/L (1) 7275 (42.8) 5533 (42.2) 6480 (53.9) 6378 (48.5) 4.0 (5.5) UJ -0.30 (5.8) UJ 6.8 (5.9) 4.0 (6.6) UJ Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
090518-DUP1 is a duplicate of -TPSWC-4B 090618-DUP1 is a duplicate of TPSWID-3T Text in blue are revised from the February 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate SU bias).
= Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-63
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-7. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the December 2018 Sampling Event.
TPBBSW-3B TPBBSW-4B TPBBSW-5B TPSWC-1T TPSWC-1B TPSWC-2T TPSWC-2B TPSWC-3T TPSWC-3B TPSWC-4T TPSWC-4B TPSWC-5T Parameter Units 12/12/2018 12/12/2018 12/12/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/04/2018 12/04/2018 12/04/2018 Temperature °C 17.9 20.1 19.1 26.1 24.3 26.4 24.1 25.9 24.7 25.7 25.3 26.8 pH SU 8.12 7.84 7.68 8.1 7.76 8.11 7.85 7.90 7.52 7.86 7.86 7.99 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 7.23 6.29 6.98 6.62 4.81 6.21 4.8 4.94 0.55 3.84 3.41 5.28 Specific Conductance S/cm 51470 55171 53712 1341 1173 3151 2870 4119 17648 53721 56040 55870 Turbidity NTU 0.94 0.69 0.33 1.05 5.56 1.03 2.49 0.94 1.63 0.54 2.61 0.77 Sodium mg/L 10100 11200 11000 176 152 457 423 596 3070 10400 11000 11000 Chloride mg/L 18500 20200 19400 325 274 907 806 1220 5630 19600 20900 20600 Salinity
- 33.88 36.66 35.54 0.67 J 0.58 J 1.64 J 1.49 J 2.18 10.4 35.47 37.21 37.04 Tritium pCi/L (1) 33.7 (6.6) 28.9 (5.7) 27.0 (5.9) 189 (8.7) 221 (9.9) 166 (9.0) 154 (8.2) 118 (9.1) J 94.9 (6.4) J 269 (11.0) 161 (9.2) J 50.4 (6.5) J Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
120318-DUP1 was collected at 120318-TPSWID-2B 120418-DUP1 was collected at 120418-TPSWCCS-5T Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable; field parameters and calculated values not collected/reported for duplicate and blank samples
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
DUP = Duplicate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
EB = Equipment Blank. SU = Standard Unit(s).
FB = Field Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
J = Estimated.
3-64
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-7. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the December 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPSWC-5B TPSWC-6T TPSWC-6B TPSWID-1T TPSWID-1B TPSWID-2T TPSWID-2B DUP1 TPSWID-3T TPSWID-3B TPSWCCS-1B TPSWCCS-2B Parameter Units 12/04/2018 12/11/2018 12/11/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/04/2018 Temperature °C 24.6 21.7 21.7 25.8 25.3 25.7 25.0 26.2 27.2 35.5 30.8 pH SU 7.91 7.35 7.35 7.92 7.71 7.56 7.49 7.94 7.04 8.11 8.11 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 4.23 2.65 2.86 6.19 5.30 4.16 2.68 6.60 0.29 2.64 1.33 Specific Conductance S/cm 55899 962 1033 5248 5366 4691 4785 5875 21270 72133 72838 Turbidity NTU 0.8 0.68 0.99 0.39 1.04 0.42 0.68 0.36 24.18 79.91 78.75 Sodium mg/L 10900 82.9 93.1 753 759 640 672 676 837 3610 14700 14300 Chloride mg/L 20700 159 180 1510 1540 1330 1350 1390 1790 6870 27900 28400 Salinity
- 37.12 0.47 J 0.51 J 2.82 2.89 2.50 2.56 3.18 12.71 49.17 49.95 Tritium pCi/L (1) 55.2 (9) J 8.4 (6.4) 12.4 (5.2) 322 (13.4) 315 (9.4) 165 (6.7) 119 (6.5) 145.6 (10.5) 174 (7.5) 178 (8.6) 16496 (145) 17945 (84.0)
Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
120318-DUP1 was collected at 120318-TPSWID-2B 120418-DUP1 was collected at 120418-TPSWCCS-5T Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable; field parameters and calculated values not collected/reported for duplicate and blank samples
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
DUP = Duplicate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
EB = Equipment Blank. SU = Standard Unit(s).
FB = Field Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
J = Estimated.
3-65
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-7. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the December 2018 Sampling Event (continued).
TPSWCCS-3B TPSWCCS-4T TPSWCCS-5T DUP1 TPSWCCS-6T TPSWCCS-7B EB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 Parameter Units 12/03/2018 12/04/2018 12/04/2018 12/04/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/03/2018 12/4/2018 12/11/2018 12/12/2018 Temperature °C 29.5 28.9 29.1 26.7 32.2 pH SU 8.22 8.26 8.22 8.13 8.22 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 4.99 3.98 3.47 2.38 5.33 Specific Conductance S/cm 68107 72625 72628 72873 71755 Turbidity NTU 76.84 82.40 83.30 84.37 77.61 Sodium mg/L 13500 14600 14000 14400 15100 14200 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U Chloride mg/L 25900 28200 28300 28300 28600 28100 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.221 U 0.189 U Salinity
- 46.30 49.87 49.86 50.14 49.03 Tritium pCi/L (1) 15703 (77.0) 18176 (78.0) 17379 (77.0) 17277 (80) 18529 (86.0) 18054 (77.0) 12.8 (6.1) 15.3 (5.2) -1.6 (4.5) UJ -8.1 (6.3) UJ Notes:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
120318-DUP1 was collected at 120318-TPSWID-2B 120418-DUP1 was collected at 120418-TPSWCCS-5T Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable; field parameters and calculated values not collected/reported for duplicate and blank samples
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
DUP = Duplicate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
EB = Equipment Blank. SU = Standard Unit(s).
FB = Field Blank. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
J = Estimated.
3-66
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-8. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the March 2019 Sampling Event.
TPBBSW-3B TPBBSW-4B TPBBSW-5B TPSWC-1T TPSWC-1B TPSWC-2T TPSWC-2B TPSWC-3T TPSWC-3B TPSWC-4T TPSWC-4B TPSWC-5T Parameter Units 03/07/2019 03/07/2019 03/07/2019 03/12/2019 03/12/2019 03/12/2019 03/12/2019 03/12/2019 03/12/2019 03/06/2019 03/06/2019 03/06/2019 Temperature °C 22.1 23.2 22.1 28.4 26.3 26.5 26.2 27.3 26.4 24.9 24.9 24.5 pH SU 7.16 8.24 8.21 8.08 7.88 8.18 7.49 8.10 7.23 7.77 7.75 7.85 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 6.97 7.18 7.21 5.93 4.87 6.4 2.99 6.57 0.28 3.62 3.59 2.74 Specific Conductance S/cm 56201 55660 56694 2819 2976 5377 9005 6131 25646 46192 46170 56968 Turbidity NTU 1.52 0.98 0.79 1.6 3.46 0.79 1.81 0.74 6.62 2.96 5.6 1.91 Silica, dissolved mg/L Calcium mg/L 449 449 465 78.7 80.4 119 189 136 304 J- 410 414 470 Magnesium mg/L 1420 1430 1460 36.9 39.6 74.6 140 87.0 527 1140 1140 1470 Potassium mg/L 429 430 440 13.1 14.0 25.0 40.9 28.4 156 349 346 446 Sodium mg/L 11000 11000 11200 399 J- 424 J 820 1460 948 4650 9160 8980 11500 Boron mg/L 4.81 I 4.86 I 4.68 I 0.143 0.148 0.214 0.354 0.244 1.70 3.22 I 3.82 I 4.87 I Strontium mg/L 8.17 8.15 7.94 0.905 0.949 1.35 2.33 1.64 4.75 5.81 6.95 8.10 Bromide mg/L 73.0 J 73.8 J 73.5 J 2.21 2.47 4.62 9.00 5.460 28.8 57.7 57.1 73.9 Chloride mg/L 22600 J 23100 J 22900 J 795 845 1680 2940 1940 9100 18400 18000 22800 Fluoride mg/L 0.840 J 0.860 J 0.860 J- 0.100 0.100 0.110 0.120 0.110 0.380 0.710 0.710 0.840 Sulfate mg/L 2820 J 2880 J 2820 J 35.6 38.4 69.4 191 81.5 1000 2350 2280 2830 Ammonia mg/L as N 0.0349 I 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0890 I 0.161 0.144 0.452 0.210 0.628 0.130 0.129 0.0972 I Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 0.0450 I 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.115 I 0.208 0.185 0.583 0.271 0.810 0.167 0.166 0.125 I Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.000400 U 0.000547 I 0.00152 I 0.00852 0.00871 0.0150 0.00993 0.0193 0.00721 0.00413 0.00392 0.00340 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0160 I 0.0140 I 0.0490 I 0.0520 0.0690 0.0770 0.0810 0.0140 U 0.0330 I 0.0310 I 0.0150 I TKN mg/L 0.531 0.585 0.809 1.06 1.07 0.124 U 1.44 1.26 1.54 0.944 0.967 0.776 TN mg/L 0.531 J 0.601 J 0.825 1.11 1.12 0.0193 1.51 1.34 1.54 0.977 1.00 0.791 J Orthophosphate as P mg/L 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.0211 0.0223 0.0132 I 0.0119 I 0.0106 I 0.0107 I 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00500 U Alkalinity mg/L 139 J 142 J 157 J 164 164 187 239 202 239 199 198 162 Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L 170 J 174 J 192 J 191 200 215 292 236 291 242 241 198 Sulfide mg/L 0.0570 U J 0.0570 U J 0.0570 U J- 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U Salinity
- 37.38 36.94 37.75 1.45 J 1.54 J 2.89 5.02 3.32 15.61 29.96 29.94 37.92 Tritium pCi/L (1) 3.0 (7.1) 35.4 (7.0) 20.0 (5.4) 161 (9.5) 169 (9.6) 90.2 (9.1) 50.0 (9.5) 79.6 (6.0) 36.9 (5.5) 98.2 (7.1) 89.9 (9.6) 34.0 (6.1)
NOTES:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
031819-DUP1 is a duplicate of -TPSWCCS-1B 031819-DUP2 is a duplicate of -TPSWID-1T KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-67
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-8. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the March 2019 Sampling Event (continued).
TPSWC-5B TPSWC-6T TPSWC-6B TPSWID-1T DUP2 TPSWID-1B TPSWID-2T TPSWID-2B TPSWID-3T TPSWID-3B TPSWCCS-1B DUP1 Parameter Units 03/06/2019 03/13/2019 03/13/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 Temperature °C 24.6 24.7 24.7 26.1 27.3 26.5 26.1 26.8 26.7 34.0 pH SU 7.84 7.18 7.25 7.98 7.04 7.66 7.41 7.76 7.18 8.09 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 2.39 2.34 2.22 6.31 0.47 5.07 2.45 5.15 0.20 2.61 Specific Conductance S/cm 57080 829 829 6013 12415 4262 4228 5792 39160 82028 Turbidity NTU 2.47 0.76 1.04 0.82 19.93 0.61 1.00 1.08 19.41 87.00 Silica, dissolved mg/L 15.2 16.3 Calcium mg/L 461 84.2 82.6 148 152 180 149 148 170 358 723 735 Magnesium mg/L 1450 10.2 10.0 97.0 98.7 230 54.5 53.6 78.0 878 2110 2130 Potassium mg/L 441 12.5 12.3 34.1 34.5 83.5 19.2 18.8 25.6 268 672 673 Sodium mg/L 11500 66.0 65.9 984 877 1870 653 655 935 8120 15800 15900 Boron mg/L 4.85 I 0.0752 0.0800 0.396 I 0.392 I 0.963 0.191 I 0.187 I 0.222 I 2.83 I 8.75 8.67 Strontium mg/L 8.14 1.09 1.14 2.03 2.06 2.81 1.80 1.78 2.06 6.58 20.5 20.6 Bromide mg/L 73.7 0.538 0.537 5.40 5.38 13.4 J 3.99 3.99 5.38 47.7 113 J 114 Chloride mg/L 23200 134 127 1820 1810 3960 J 1210 1210 1770 14700 33600 J 34100 Fluoride mg/L 0.840 0.110 J 0.110 J 0.160 0.160 0.230 J 0.130 0.120 0.130 0.310 1.52 J 1.52 Sulfate mg/L 2880 56.1 53.2 191 189 476 J 103 99.3 140 1810 4760 J 4800 Ammonia mg/L as N 0.0845 I 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.173 0.188 0.989 0.349 0.419 0.257 0.539 0.0339 U 0.0339 U
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 0.109 I 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.223 0.242 1.26 0.449 0.539 0.331 0.694 0.0437 U 0.0437 U Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00290 0.000400 U 0.000401 I 0.0114 0.00159 0.0117 0.00777 0.0109 0.00528 0.00326 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0350 I 0.0400 I 0.0910 0.0880 0.0140 U 0.127 0.0920 0.120 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 0.900 0.287 I 0.223 I 0.867 0.791 1.92 0.812 0.944 0.828 1.18 2.87 3.00 TN mg/L 0.900 J 0.322 0.263 0.958 0.879 1.92 0.940 1.04 0.948 1.18 2.87 3.00 Orthophosphate as P mg/L 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U J 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.00500 U 0.0128 I 0.0143 I 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.0106 I 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00630 I J 0.0470 I 0.0470 I Alkalinity mg/L 162 172 170 301 298 401 J 273 275 254 227 275 J 277 Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L 197 210 208 367 364 490 J 333 335 310 276 336 J 338 Sulfide mg/L 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.853 J 0.294 J 0.297 J 0.297 J 0.0570 U 0.292 J 0.0570 U Salinity
- 38 0.40 0.40 J 3.26 7.08 2.26 2.24 3.13 24.89 57.17 Tritium pCi/L (1) 46.2 (7.4) 20.7 (5.5) 26.0 (7.4) 202 (9.2) 220 (12.5) 173 (9.6) 92.5 (10.2) 74.6 (9.1) 80.1 (8.1) 230 (10.1) 8808 (54.1) 8875 (54.5)
NOTES:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
031819-DUP1 is a duplicate of -TPSWCCS-1B 031819-DUP2 is a duplicate of -TPSWID-1T KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-68
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-8. Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results from the March 2019 Sampling Event (continued).
TPSWCCS-2B TPSWCCS-3B TPSWCCS-4T TPSWCCS-5T TPSWCCS-6T TPSWCCS-7B FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB1 FB2 Parameter Units 03/21/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 03/18/2019 03/06/2019 3/7/2019 3/12/2019 03/13/2019 03/18/2019 3/21/2019 3/21/2019 Temperature °C 24.2 27.1 26.6 27.3 26.2 30.5 pH SU 8.15 8.14 8.20 8.17 8.07 8.12 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 5.25 4.53 5.48 4.06 1.5 4.65 Specific Conductance S/cm 79077 71505 79709 80580 82089 80599 Turbidity NTU 79.06 83.75 87.09 83.19 85.38 86.00 Silica, dissolved mg/L 14.0 14.7 14.1 16.3 13.6 14.9 0.0500 U Calcium mg/L 708 638 703 705 736 691 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U 0.0760 U Magnesium mg/L 1900 1790 2040 2050 2150 2010 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U Potassium mg/L 603 574 645 649 683 645 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U 0.0490 U Sodium mg/L 16300 13700 15200 15500 16600 15300 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.147 I 0.0742 I 0.0650 U 0.0650 U 0.0650 U Boron mg/L 8.31 7.38 8.40 8.51 8.50 8.38 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Strontium mg/L 20.2 18.0 20.1 20.3 20.4 20.1 0.00100 U 0.00579 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U 0.00100 U Bromide mg/L 108 J 96.4 J 112 J 113 J 114 J 112 J 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U Chloride mg/L 33400 J 28700 J 33100 J 33600 J 34400 J 33000 J 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U 0.189 U Fluoride mg/L 1.52 J 1.41 J 1.50 J 1.52 J 1.50 J 1.50 J 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.330 0.0320 U 0.0320 U 0.0320 U Sulfate mg/L 4620 J 3990 J 4660 J 4730 J 4870 J 4630 J 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.0920 U 0.101 I Ammonia mg/L as N 0.0339 U 0.0752 I 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U 0.0339 U Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 0.0437 U 0.0969 I 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U 0.0437 U Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00199 0.00548 0.00260 0.00253 0.00188 0.00281 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 3.28 2.78 2.01 1.86 3.01 1.71 0.124 U 0.124 U 0.124 U 0.124 U 0.124 U 0.124 U TN mg/L 3.28 2.78 2.01 1.86 3.01 1.71 0.138 U 0.138 U 0.138 U 0.138 U 0.138 U 0.138 U Orthophosphate as P mg/L 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0102 I 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.0535 0.0382 I 0.0419 I 0.0499 I 0.0443 I 0.0467 I 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00500 U Alkalinity mg/L 267 J 272 J 271 J 277 J 282 J 281 J 1.24 V 1.04 V 1.66 V 2.06 1.45 V 2.88 V 2.05 V Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L 326 J 332 J 330 J 338 J 344 J 343 J 1.52 V 1.27 V 2.02 V 2.52 1.77 V 3.51 V 2.51 V Sulfide mg/L 0.0606 I Q 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.860 J 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.0570 U 0.282 0.0570 U Q 0.0570 U Q Salinity
- 55.18 49.05 55.62 56.56 57.57 56.19 Tritium pCi/L (1) 10282 (55.3) 7314 (53.0) 8802 (57.7) 8643 (45.2) 9580 (52.3) 7995 (48.2) 3.7 (4.9) -11.4 (6.6) 6.7 (4.2) -1.0 (4.7) 3.0 (4.7) 12.0 (8.5) -17.7 (6.2)
NOTES:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
031819-DUP1 is a duplicate of -TPSWCCS-1B 031819-DUP2 is a duplicate of -TPSWID-1T KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). SU = Standard Unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). N = Nitrogen TN = Total nitrogen.
DUP = Duplicate. NH3 = Ammonia. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
+
EB = Equipment Blank NH4 = Ammonium ion.
FB = Field Blank. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Units(s).
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. Q = Holding time exceeded.
3-69
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-9. Range of Ion and Nutrient Concentrations in Surface Water.
Biscayne Bay Interceptor Ditch Historical Period of Record Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Reporting Period Parameter Units Min Max Average Std Dev Min Max Average Std Dev Min Max Average Std Dev Min Max Average Std Dev Temperature °C 17.02 31.98 26.08 4.01 17.90 31.20 25.68 5.11 18.85 32.48 27.66 2.98 25.00 31.40 28.09 2.07 pH SU 7.68 8.57 8.14 0.20 7.16 8.40 8.00 0.31 5.39 8.52 7.48 0.39 7.02 8.06 7.62 0.33 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 2.34 8.99 6.17 1.26 3.84 7.23 5.85 1.22 0.04 9.14 4.04 2.36 0.11 6.60 4.02 2.14 Specific Conductance S/cm 37725 64512 50676 6371 42840 56694 52539 3856 1759 66251 9064 10336 3583 39160 8667 7483 Turbidity NTU 0.17 8.62 1.24 1.12 0.00 1.52 0.78 0.36 0.07 136.12 4.20 12.68 0.36 119.20 8.79 23.97 Silica, dissolved mg/L NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Calcium mg/L 330 500 429 44.9 330 464 391 53.4 68.0 610 174 102 84.2 230 133 45.6 Magnesium mg/L 870 1700 1235 181 916 1300 1095 158 27.0 1700 188 318 51.1 205 92.2 49.6 Potassium mg/L 280 590 423 68.4 312 520 406 87.8 11.0 560 64.7 103 19.8 78.8 36.2 20.1 Sodium mg/L 7200 14000 10149 1346 11100 12800 11933 657 230 14000 1506 2579 541 3870 1364 993 Boron mg/L 3.10 5.40 4.46 0.573 3.22 5.49 4.29 0.953 0.0535 5.30 0.630 1.00 0.194 0.763 0.348 0.186 Strontium mg/L 5.40 9.50 7.43 0.905 5.93 9.12 7.33 1.30 0.80 11.00 2.25 1.88 0.98 3.21 1.70 0.69 Bromide mg/L 44.0 95.0 68.3 11.0 47.6 77.9 62.4 12.2 0.258 85.0 9.62 15.2 3.08 15.8 6.09 3.90 Chloride mg/L 14000 26000 19094 2646 21200 22500 21850 475 110 27000 2825 4915 1130 8180 2738 2030 Fluoride mg/L 0.100 1.20 0.716 0.284 0.571 1.03 0.799 0.212 0.0270 3.20 0.241 0.332 0.0730 0.184 0.137 0.0257 Sulfate mg/L 2000 3700 2644 366 2040 3110 2530 449 30.0 2900 324 512 90.9 431 187 116 Ammonia mg/L as N 0.0260 0.915 0.131 0.142 0.0339 0.197 0.0716 0.0584 0.0272 1.90 0.423 0.326 0.140 0.989 0.388 0.268 Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 0.0343 1.08 0.154 0.180 0.0437 0.197 0.0765 0.0553 0.0500 2.40 0.524 0.408 0.140 3.31 0.623 0.839 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.0000170 0.116 0.0148 0.0220 0.000400 0.0158 0.00527 0.00541 0.0000170 0.0654 0.0117 0.0122 0.00528 0.0216 0.0120 0.00471 Nitrate Nitrite mg/L as N 0.00470 0.164 0.0213 0.0248 0.0140 0.0160 0.0144 0.000731 0.00470 0.210 0.0547 0.0488 0.0140 0.248 0.112 0.0712 TKN mg/L 0.110 1.30 0.529 0.270 0.531 0.910 0.719 0.130 0.200 2.40 1.00 0.402 0.750 1.92 1.02 0.351 TN mg/L 0.205 1.30 0.560 0.267 0.531 1.11 0.772 0.194 0.200 2.40 1.07 0.384 0.893 1.92 1.13 0.299 Orthophosphate as P mg/L 0.00140 0.0609 0.00466 0.00921 0.0100 0.0112 0.0105 0.000515 0.00140 0.0410 0.00656 0.00861 0.0100 0.0100 0.0100 0.00 Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.00220 0.112 0.0121 0.0177 0.00500 0.00900 0.00700 0.00200 0.00220 0.0400 0.00711 0.00622 0.00500 0.0256 0.00902 0.00540 Alkalinity mg/L 58.0 170 130 20.7 131 145 140 6.05 120 448 251 60.9 176 310 220 39.6 Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L 57.0 184 132 25.3 128 177 163 18.4 120 511 258 68.9 208 378 263 48.9 Sulfide mg/L 0.100 1.00 0.909 0.250 0.0360 0.360 0.198 0.162 0.0517 13.0 1.45 1.95 0.0360 4.56 0.668 1.27 Salinity
- 23.96 43.43 33.24 4.66 27.38 37.75 34.57 2.90 0.20 44.82 5.27 6.80 1.87 24.89 4.94 4.80 Tritium pCi/L (1) -20.0 34.5 11.2 9.5 3.0 35.4 17.5 11.3 48.8 5677 302 599 73.4 322 167 70.8 Notes:
- 1. TPSWC-4T, TPSWC-4B, TPSWC-5T, TPSWC-5B, TPSWC-6T, and TPSWC-6B sites are located either in a marine system or not along the L-31E canal and are therefore not included in these calculations.
Please see Appendix I for a list of values that were removed from this analysis and the rationale for their removal.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
°C = Degrees Celsius. N = Nitrogen. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
µS/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable, analyte not Std Dev = Standard deviation.
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. collected/required for location/event. SU = Standard Unit(s).
Max = Maximum. NH3 = Ammonia. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. NH4+ = Ammonium ion. TN = Total nitrogen.
Min = Minimum. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Unit(s).
3-70
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Table 3.2-9. Range of Ion and Nutrient Concentrations in Surface Water (continued).
L-31 Cooling Canals Historical Period of Record Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Reporting Period Parameter Units Min Max Average Std Dev Min Max Average Std Dev Min Max Average Std Dev Min Max Average Std Dev Temperature °C 19.64 33.68 26.80 3.32 21.70 33.00 27.43 2.55 18.60 40.56 30.91 4.96 24.20 41.70 31.44 3.87 pH SU 6.53 8.83 7.67 0.36 7.18 8.18 7.69 0.29 7.35 9.47 8.19 0.38 8.07 8.40 8.22 0.09 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.11 10.05 4.41 2.42 0.14 6.62 3.47 1.90 0.07 12.30 4.52 2.04 1.33 6.60 3.81 1.34 Specific Conductance S/cm 271 63421 16077 21612 480 61903 18371 22353 47883 128411 84823 17935 61204 82089 72455 5436 Turbidity NTU 0.00 107.80 3.40 7.47 0.54 37.80 3.66 6.11 1.26 1100.00 52.90 82.32 69.36 87.09 78.74 5.10 Silica, dissolved mg/L NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.140 14.4 6.06 4.13 13.6 16.5 15.3 0.901 Calcium mg/L 44.0 740 182 167 44.3 473 162 154 570 1170 808 148 539 962 698 155 Magnesium mg/L 5.40 1800 350 533 5.65 1330 304 477 1600 3200 2242 349 1360 2440 1765 400 Potassium mg/L 2.00 610 122 182 2.27 457 106 163 560 1420 780 193 440 964 670 235 Sodium mg/L 27.0 14000 2867 4359 31.9 12500 3841 4988 13000 24500 17505 2319 26000 28500 27342 862 Boron mg/L 0.0250 5.70 1.24 1.85 0.0191 5.03 1.17 1.81 6.00 14.3 8.32 2.05 5.54 10.9 7.79 2.12 Strontium mg/L 0.41 9.60 2.68 2.95 0.47 8.65 2.59 2.95 11.00 24.90 15.51 3.60 10.70 20.80 14.81 3.94 Bromide mg/L 0.0270 110 19.4 29.8 0.0250 92.1 17.6 28.7 0.270 252 122 35.7 14.3 177 102 43.2 Chloride mg/L 39.0 28000 5529 8413 59.2 22900 7105 9150 13000 48900 34335 5640 51700 54600 53617 860 Fluoride mg/L 0.0200 2.00 0.328 0.393 0.0500 0.992 0.276 0.314 0.0200 94.0 2.18 9.08 0.715 1.07 0.982 0.0839 Sulfate mg/L 0.713 4000 746 1125 0.916 3740 718 1153 1900 7740 4831 1244 2860 6090 4273 1319 Ammonia mg/L as N 0.0260 3.87 0.260 0.337 0.0339 0.628 0.163 0.127 0.0552 4.42 0.328 0.532 0.0339 0.160 0.0951 0.0564 Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 0.0300 4.95 0.338 0.429 0.0437 0.810 0.190 0.166 0.0500 5.36 0.380 0.661 0.0437 0.160 0.101 0.0515 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.0000170 0.0798 0.0106 0.0126 0.000400 0.0193 0.00695 0.00471 0.0000170 0.323 0.0349 0.0416 0.00188 0.0300 0.0130 0.0104 Nitrate Nitrite mg/L as N 0.00470 0.550 0.0398 0.0658 0.0140 0.0810 0.0289 0.0212 0.00470 1.00 0.0364 0.101 0.0140 0.0500 0.0166 0.00927 TKN mg/L 0.180 4.94 0.898 0.528 0.124 1.54 0.891 0.337 1.50 17.7 5.88 3.71 1.71 4.49 3.04 0.757 TN mg/L 0.200 4.90 0.933 0.535 0.193 1.54 0.912 0.338 0.870 17.7 5.78 3.60 1.71 4.49 3.04 0.760 Orthophosphate as P mg/L 0.00140 0.0736 0.00336 0.00586 0.0100 0.0124 0.0101 0.000480 0.00140 0.0870 0.0132 0.0211 0.0100 0.0176 0.0114 0.00239 Total Phosphorus (P) mg/L 0.00220 0.140 0.0119 0.0158 0.00500 0.0228 0.0111 0.00484 0.00440 0.106 0.0393 0.0239 0.0240 0.0535 0.0373 0.00958 Alkalinity mg/L 42.0 310 160 42.2 109 241 160 47.8 73.0 250 155.8 34.7 193 216 208 8.70 Bicarbonate Alkalinity mg/L 42.0 310 164 44.4 133 292 194 57.9 15.0 277 142 62.2 235 264 255 10.2 Sulfide mg/L 0.0360 3.90 0.901 0.380 0.0360 0.455 0.215 0.166 0.00 2.40 0.919 0.310 0.0360 2.52 0.795 0.930 Salinity
- 0.13 42.60 10.30 14.28 0.23 41.51 11.77 14.85 31.20 98.34 60.10 14.87 40.89 57.57 49.66 4.37 Tritium pCi/L (1) -4.4 1636 97.6 194 8.4 269 79.2 61.2 358 16538 6496 3724 1265 18529 8449 5892 Notes:
- 1. TPSWC-4T, TPSWC-4B, TPSWC-5T, TPSWC-5B, TPSWC-6T, and TPSWC-6B sites are located either in a marine system or not along the L-31E canal and are therefore not included in these calculations.
Please see Appendix I for a list of values that were removed from this analysis and the rationale for their removal.
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
°C = Degrees Celsius. N = Nitrogen. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
µS/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NA = Not applicable, analyte not Std Dev = Standard deviation.
HCO3 = Bicarbonate. collected/required for location/event. SU = Standard Unit(s).
Max = Maximum. NH3 = Ammonia. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. NH4+ = Ammonium ion. TN = Total nitrogen.
Min = Minimum. NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Unit(s).
3-71
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 FIGURES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-1. TPGW-1 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-71
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-2. TPGW-2 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-72
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-3. TPGW-3 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-73
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-4. TPGW-4 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-74
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-5. TPGW-5 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-75
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-6. TPGW-6 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-76
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-7. TPGW-7 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-77
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-8. TPGW-8 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-78
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-9. TPGW-9 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-79
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-10. TPGW-10 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-80
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-11. TPGW-11 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-81
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-12. TPGW-12 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-82
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-13. TPGW-13 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-83
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-14. TPGW-14 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-84
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-15. Average and Standard Deviation of Specific Conductance Values (µS/cm) for Groundwater Stations.
3-85
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-16. Average and Standard Deviation of Salinity (PSS-78) for Groundwater Stations.
3-86
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-17. Average and Standard Deviation of Temperature (°C) for Groundwater Stations.
3-87
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-18. Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Groundwater Chloride (mg/L) Results.
3-88
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-19. Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Groundwater Sodium (mg/L) Results.
3-89
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-20. Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Groundwater Tritium (pCi/L) Results.
3-90
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.1-21. Historical Range and Reporting Period Semi-Annual Groundwater Nutrient (mg/L) Results.
3-91
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 0
-5
-10
-15
-20 Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
-55
-60 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Chloride Concentration (ppt)
Jun-18 Sep-18 Dec-18 Mar-19 Historical Envelope Figure 3.1-22. L-3 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2018 through March 2019.
3-92
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 0
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25 Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
-55
-60 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 Chloride Concentration (ppt)
Jun-18 Sep-18 Dec-18 Mar-19 Historical Envelope Figure 3.1-23. L-5 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2018 through March 2019.
3-93
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 5
0
-5
-10
-15
-20 Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
-55
-60 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Chloride Concentration (ppt)
Jun-18 Sep-18 Dec-18 Mar-19 Historical Envelope Figure 3.1-24. G-21 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2018 through March 2019.
3-94
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 0
-5
-10
-15
-20 Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
-55
-60 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Chloride Concentration (ppt)
Jun-18 Sep-18 Dec-18 Mar-19 Historical Envelope Figure 3.1-25. G-28 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2018 through March 2019.
3-95
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 0
-5
-10
-15
-20 Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
-55
-60 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Chloride Concentration (ppt)
Jun-18 Sep-18 Dec-18 Mar-19 Figure 3.1-26. G-35 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2018 through March 2019.
3-96
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 0
-5
-10
-15
-20 Water Elevation (ft. NAVD88)
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
-55
-60 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Temperature (°C)
Jun-2018 Sep-2018 Dec-2018 Mar-2019 Historical Envelope Figure 3.1-27. L-3 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2018 through March 2019.
3-97
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 0
-5
-10
-15
-20 Elevation (ft. NAVD88)
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
-55
-60 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Temperature (°C)
Jun-2018 Sep-2018 Dec-2018 Mar-2019 Historical Envelope Figure 3.1-28. L-5 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2018 through March 2019.
3-98
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 0
-5
-10
-15
-20 Water Elevation (ft. NAVD88)
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
-55
-60 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Temperature (°C)
Jun-2018 Sep-2018 Dec-2018 Mar-2019 Historical Envelope Figure 3.1-29. G-21 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2018 through March 2019.
3-99
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 0
-5
-10
-15
-20 Water Elevation (ft. NAVD88)
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
-55
-60 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Temperature (°C)
Jun-2018 Sep-2018 Dec-2018 Mar-2019 Historical Envelope Figure 3.1-30. G-28 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2018 through March 2019.
3-100
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 0
-5
-10
-15
-20 Water Elevation (ft.NAVD88L)
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
-55
-60 20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 Temperature (°C)
Jun-2018 Sep-2018 Dec-2018 Mar-2019 Figure 3.1-31. G-35 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2018 through March 2019.
3-101
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-1. TPBBSW-3 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-102
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-2. TPBBSW-4 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-103
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-3. TPBBSW-5 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-104
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-4. TPBBSW-10 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-105
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-5. TPBBSW-14 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-106
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-6. TPSWC-1 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-107
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-7. TPSWC-2 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-108
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-8. TPSWC-3 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-109
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-9. TPSWC-4 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-110
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-10. TPSWC-5 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-111
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-11. TPSWCCS-1 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-112
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-12. TPSWCCS-2 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-113
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-13. TPSWCCS-3 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-114
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-14. TPSWCCS-4 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-115
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-15. TPSWCCS-5 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-116
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-16. TPSWCCS-6 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-117
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-17. TPSWCCS-7 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-118
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-18. TPSWID-1 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-119
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-19. TPSWID-2 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-120
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-20. TPSWID-3 Specific Conductance and Temperature.
3-121
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-21. Average and Standard Deviation of Specific Conductance (µS/cm) for Surface Water Stations.
3-122
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-22. Average and Standard Deviation of Salinity (PSS-78) for Surface Water Stations.
3-123
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-23. Average and Standard Deviation of Temperature (°C) for Surface Water Stations.
3-124
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-24. Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Surface Water Chloride (mg/L) Results.
3-125
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-25. Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Surface Water Sodium (mg/L) Results.
3-126
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-26. Historical Range and Reporting Period Quarterly Surface Water Tritium (pCi/L) Results.
3-127
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-27. Reporting Period Semi-Annual Surface Water TN (mg/L) and NH3 (mg/L as N) Results with Historical Period of Record Range.
3-128
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.2-28. Reporting Period Semi-Annual Surface Water TP (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Range.
3-129
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 9.5 9.0 8.5 Temperature Difference (°C) 8.0 7.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 2014/2015 2015/2016 2016/2017 2017/2018 2018/2019 Reporting Year Figure 3.2-29. Temperature Difference between TPSWCCS-6 and TPSWCCS-1/Cooling in the CCS.
3-130
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 50000 50000 45000 45000 Specific Conductance (µS/cm) Specific Conductance (µS/cm) 40000 40000 35000 35000 30000 30000 25000 25000 20000 20000 15000 15000 10000 10000 5000 5000 0 0 6/2010 7/2011 8/2012 10/2013 11/2014 1/2016 3/2017 4/2018 6/2019 6/2010 7/2011 8/2012 10/2013 11/2014 1/2016 3/2017 4/2018 6/2019 TPSWC-1T TPSWC-2T TPSWC-3T TPSWC-1B TPSWC-2B TPSWC-3B 36 36 32 32 Temperature (°C) Temperature (°C) 28 28 24 24 20 20 16 16 12 12 6/2010 7/2011 8/2012 10/2013 11/2014 1/2016 3/2017 4/2018 6/2019 6/2010 7/2011 8/2012 10/2013 11/2014 1/2016 3/2017 4/2018 6/2019 TPSWC-1T TPSWC-2T TPSWC-3T TPSWC-1B TPSWC-2B TPSWC-3B Figure 3.2-30. Comparison of Specific Conductance and Temperature in the L-31E Canal for Top and Bottom Locations.
3-131
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 35 30 4.5 Salinity (PSU) 25 20 3.5 15 2.5 10 5
1.5 0
-5 Water Elevation 0.5
-10
-15 -0.5 (ft, NAVD 88)
-20
-25 -1.5 8/2010 9/2011 10/2012 11/2013 12/2014 2/2016 3/2017 4/2018 6/2019 TPSWC-3B Salinity TPSWC-5 minus TPSWC-3 Elevation 0 Events Figure 3.2-31. TPSWC-3B Qualified Salinity and Difference in Level between TPSWC-3 and TPSWC-5.
3-132
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 70000 60000 Specific Conductance (µS/cm) 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0
6/2018 7/2018 8/2018 10/2018 11/2018 1/2019 3/2019 4/2019 6/2019 TPSWC-5B TPBBSW-4B Figure 3.2-32. Comparison of Specific Conductance at TPSWC-5 and TPBBSW-4.
3-133
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-1. TPGW-1 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-2. TPGW-2 Water Elevations.
3-134
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-3. TPGW-3 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-4. TPGW-4 Water Elevations.
3-135
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-5. TPGW-5 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-6. TPGW-6 Water Elevations.
3-136
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-7. TPGW-7 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-8. TPGW-8 Water Elevations.
3-137
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-9. TPGW-9 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-10. TPGW-10 Water Elevations.
3-138
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-11. TPGW-11 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-12. TPGW-12 Water Elevations.
3-139
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-13. TPGW-13 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-14. TPGW-14 Water Elevations.
3-140
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-15. TPBBSW-3 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-16. TPBBSW-10 Water Elevations.
3-141
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-17. TPBBSW-14 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-18. TPSWC-1 Water Elevations.
3-142
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-19. TPSWC-2 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-20. TPSWC-3 Water Elevations.
3-143
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-21. TPSWC-4 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-22. TPSWC-5 Water Elevations.
3-144
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-23. TPSWCCS-1 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-24. TPSWCCS-2 Water Elevations.
3-145
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-25. TPSWCCS-3 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-26. TPSWCCS-4 Water Elevations.
3-146
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-27. TPSWCCS-5 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-28. TPSWCCS-6 Water Elevations.
3-147
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-29. TPSWCCS-7 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-30. TPSWID-1 Water Elevations.
3-148
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.3-31. TPSWID-2 Water Elevations.
Figure 3.3-32. TPSWID-3 Water Elevations.
3-149
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 2
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88) 1 0
-1
-2 6/2010 7/2011 8/2012 10/2013 11/2014 1/2016 3/2017 4/2018 6/2019 TPGW-14S Daily Average TPGW-13S TPGW-4S TPGW-9S Figure 3.3-33. Comparison of Time-Series Groundwater Elevations across the Landscape at TPGW-14, TPGW-13, TPGW-4, and TPGW-9.
3-150
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 2
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88) 1 0
-1
-2 6/2010 7/2011 8/2012 10/2013 11/2014 1/2016 3/2017 4/2018 6/2019 TPGW-10S Daily Average TPGW-13S TPGW-1S TPGW-5S TPGW-7S Figure 3.3-34. Comparison of Time-Series Groundwater Elevations across the Landscape at TPGW-10, TPGW-13, TPGW-1, TPGW-5, and TPGW-7.
3-151
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 2
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88) 1 0
-1
-2 6/2017 8/2017 11/2017 3/2018 6/2018 8/2018 11/2018 3/2019 6/2019 TPGW-13S TPSWCCS-2B Figure 3.3-35. Comparison of Time-Series Groundwater Elevations at TPGW-13S and CCS Surface Water Elevations at TPSWCCS-2.
3-152
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.4-1. Locations of Tritium and Chloride Cross-Sections.
3-153
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.4-2. Tritium Cross-Section A-A, Current Concentration Isopleths.
3-154
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.4-3. Tritium Cross-Section B-B, Current Concentration Isopleths.
3-155
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.4-4. Chloride Cross Section A-A.
3-156
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 3 Figure 3.4-5. Chloride Cross Section B-B.
3-157
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4
- 4. CCS WATER AND SALT BUDGET A requirement of the Monitoring Plan is for FPL to provide a monthly water and salt balance budget for the CCS. The purpose of the budget model is to quantify the volume of water and mass of salt entering and exiting the CCS over a 12-month period. Details of this Excel-based model, the underlying conceptualization of the relationship between the CCS and the surrounding environmental systems, key calculations, and results were provided in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a). That version of the model simulated water and salt flow to and from the CCS for the period between September 2010 and June 2012. In the Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report, refinements to the model were made and water and salt flow to and from the CCS was simulated for the period between September 2010 and May 2015. Subsequent updates to the model simulated semi-annual and annual periods between June 2016 and May 2018. For this annual report, the modeled period encompasses the reporting period (June 2018 through May 2019).
The conceptual model and associated calculations are predominantly unchanged since last presented in the 2012 Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a). As such, only a brief summary of the model is provided below. Model results and corresponding conclusions regarding the operation of the CCS are based on the current calibrated water and salt balance model and are provided herein.
4.1 Model Summary As depicted on Figure 4.1-1 and the inserted schematic, the water balance for the proposed control volume for this reporting period is comprised of seepage (lateral through the sides and vertical through the bottom), blowdown (additional water pumped from other units to the CCS),
added water (pumped from the UFA and/or shallow groundwater and the ID), precipitation (including runoff from earth berms between canals), and evaporation.
Aside from evaporation and precipitation, these are the same mechanisms by which salt flows into and out of the CCS. The means by which water and/or salt is transferred (e.g., seepage, evaporation) are calculated using various equations provided in the 2012 Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a). Calculations were performed during the 12-month reporting period, Conceptual diagram showing and average flows of water and salt into and out of the inflows (top) and outflows control volume were calculated for each day of this period (bottom). See Figure 4.1-1 for using hydrologic, water quality, and meteorological data details.
measured within, beneath, and adjacent to the CCS. The 4-1
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 average daily flows were summed to estimate the amount of water and salt that enters or exits the control volume (i.e., the CCS) during each month and the entire 12-month reporting period.
These calculations demonstrate and validate the conceptual model of the CCS and, in so doing, illustrate the hydrologic mechanisms by which the CCS functions.
Calculated water flows are reported in mgd. The mass flux into or out of the control volume is calculated by multiplying the volumetric flow by the salinity of the body of water from which the water is flowing. Salinity was monitored at all groundwater and surface water stations employed in the ensuing calculations and was reported in the practical salinity scale (PSS-78), which is equivalent to grams per liter. Calculated mass fluxes are reported in thousands of pounds per day (lb x 1,000/day).
The gain/loss of water and salt mass within the control volume during some period of time results in a change in the control volumes water and salt mass storage. Increased water storage, for instance, occurs when more water enters the control volume (i.e., the CCS) than exits.
Storage then can be estimated by summing all of the components of the water (and salt) balance.
When the net flow is positive (into the control volume) during a specified period of time, the storage of the control volume increases. Conversely, a net negative (out of the control volume) flow implies a decrease in storage during a specified time period. Whereas an increase or decrease in water storage results in a rise or drop, respectively, of CCS water elevation, the same is not universally true for salt storage. An increase in salt storage can be coincident with a decrease in salinity as long as the volume of water in which the salt is dissolved increases sufficiently over the same time period.
Water elevations and salinity are monitored at seven locations throughout the CCS. Thus, another manner in which a change in storage can be estimated relies on these direct measurements of water elevations and salinities within the control volume. A change in water elevation within the control volume can be calculated as a difference between water elevations at the beginning and end of a specified time period. The product of this change in water elevations and the surface area of the control volume provide an estimate of the change in the volume of water contained in the control volume during that period of time. Estimates of daily storage changes derived from this method are used to further calibrate the water and salt balance model to ensure an accurate simulation of temporal trends for CCS water elevation and salinity.
For the most part, inflows and outflows of water and salt to/from the CCS are natural and can be predicted based on differences in water levels and meteorological conditions. However, some inflows to the CCS are anthropogenic. During the 12-month simulated period, UFA water was continuously added to the CCS at rates between approximately 10 mgd and 14 mgd as a salinity abatement measure. Additionally, water from the ID, located immediately west of the CCS, was intermittently pumped into the CCS as a part of normal ID operations meant to prevent westward migration of CCS groundwater. Plant operations contribute other sources of water to the CCS (i.e., added water from Units 3, 4, and 5). Water pumped from and back into the CCS from the plant intake and discharge pumps are assumed to be equivalent in magnitude and cancel each other out; as such, these flows are not simulated as a part of the CCS water and salt balance model.
4-2
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 4.2 Model Calibration, Results, and Discussion The individual components of the water and salt balance were simulated daily and summed for each month individually from June 2018 through May 2019, for the semi-annual period between June 2018 and November 2018, and for the 12-month reporting period in its entirety. The individual components of flow are summed in order to calculate a simulated change in volume for each month and for the 12-month reporting period. These simulated changes in storage were compared to observed changes in CCS water and salt storage on a monthly, semi-annual, and annual basis. Errors between the simulated and observed storage changes were minimized by adjusting key variables associated with the flow balance model; this process is called calibration.
The calibration process ensures that the model can accurately reflect the average changes in CCS storage over a 12-month period while also effectively capturing day-to-day changes in CCS water and mass storage. Calibration of the water and salt balance model was achieved by adjusting hydraulic conductivities of the aquifer materials adjacent to and beneath the CCS that factor into the calculation of seepage to/from groundwater and Biscayne Bay. Additional adjustable parameters include the coefficients in the wind function (FPL 2012a), the amount of runoff that enters the control volume as percentage of precipitation, the amount of Unit 5 cooling tower water that is lost to evaporation before entering the CCS, and the salinity of the Unit 5 blowdown as a percentage of seawater. Adjustments were also made to the amount of influence that different observed groundwater levels beneath and adjacent to the CCS contributed to the appropriate representation of the exchange of flow between the CCS and the Biscayne Aquifer.
The calibrated model parameter values are provided in Table 4.2-1.
4.2.1 Parameter Adjustments The horizontal hydraulic conductivities of the side (north, south, east, west) walls of the CCS were calibrated to range between 100 ft/day (west and north CCS walls) and 450 ft/day (south CCS wall). The calibrated vertical conductivities of the bottom of the CCS ranged from 0.1 ft/day (middle portion of discharge canals, southern portion of discharge and return canals) to 5.4 ft/day (northern discharge canals); the vertical hydraulic conductivity of the middle of the discharge canals were 0.12 ft/day, and that of the middle and northern portions of the return canals were calibrated to 2.0 ft/day. The variability in these vertical hydraulic conductivities is attributable to the non-uniform depth of a shallow high flow zone that is variably intersected by deeper CCS canals. A separate factor of 1.2 was multiplied by the vertical hydraulic conductivities of the discharge canals that were a part of sediment removal activities in early 2015 to reflect a greater connectivity with the Biscayne Aquifer. The magnitude of and variability in vertical hydraulic conductivities are approximately on the same order of magnitude as those in the prior model (which simulated the period from June 2018 through November 2018 for the Semi-Annual Data Delivery), when vertical hydraulic conductivity ranged from 0.1 to 6.0 ft/day. Horizontal hydraulic conductivities calibrated in this model are, for the most part, on the same order of magnitude and range of values as those calibrated in the prior model, which was simulated through November 2018. The minor exception to this is the hydraulic conductivity of the eastern wall of the CCS, which was previously set to 1,000 ft/day. The reduction in this hydraulic conductivity value was effective at matching the rise in salinity observed between March and May 2019. Overall, the adjustments to hydraulic conductivity were relatively minor 4-3
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 but were necessary to maintain a reasonably accurate match to observed CCS water levels and salinities throughout the 12-month reporting period.
In addition to changes in hydraulic conductivities, revisions were also made to evaporation. The equation for evaporation (FPL 2012a) includes an empirical factor. This factor was increased from 0.63 to 0.635 (a minor adjustment) to calibrate the model to the 12-month reporting period.
By increasing this factor, the simulated evaporative losses from the CCS were consequently increased. As in the case of the east CCS walls hydraulic conductivity, this was necessary to match the moderate rate of salinity increase observed throughout the modeled timeframe.
The percentage of additional precipitation-based inflow due to runoff from canal berms is an adjustable model parameter. This parameter is time-invariant and increases precipitation-based inflow for all precipitation events; as the precipitation increases, additional runoff inflow also increases. Since precipitation is a key inflow to the CCS for moderating salinity, the balance model is sensitive to this parameter. This parameter is defined to be 27% of direct precipitation inflow. This is an increase relative to the prior 6-month model (16%). There is considerable uncertainty in this parameter, and it is more impactful to the simulation of water level and salinity changes during greater rainfalls. However, the significant rain events during the simulated 12-month timeframe were few, and the average of non-zero daily rainfalls was approximately 0.2 inch.
The impact of the parameter changes, particularly the adjustments made to the evaporation parameters, is a relatively accurate simulation of the monthly flow balance and simulated daily CCS conditions during the reporting period. The effect of these parameter adjustments on the historical period of record (September 2010 through May 2018), which were previously simulated by earlier versions of the water and salt balance model, were not evaluated as a part of this modeling effort.
4.2.2 Flow Balance Comparisons Results of the calibrated 12-month water and salt balance model are provided in Tables 4.2-2 and 4.2-3, respectively. The modeled net flow of water, as calculated by summing the components of the water balance for the 12-month calibration period, is denoted as the Modeled Change in CCS Storage and was calculated to be an average outflow of 2.18 mgd over the 12-month calibration period (i.e., on average, over the 12-month period, the volume of water in the CCS decreased at a rate of 2.18 mgd). The observed change in storage, which is the difference in the volume of water in the CCS between the final and first days of the calibration period, divided by the number of days in the period, was observed to be a decrease in storage at a rate of 2.14 mgd.
Though the model over-estimated the decrease in storage, the residual error between the simulated and observed flow was only 0.04 mgd. This error is small (0.11%) relative to the variability in monthly net observed flows, which range from a net inflow of 15.1 mgd (March 2019) and a net outflow of 20.2 mgd (April 2019). These monthly net flows are provided in the calibrated water and salt balance model included as Appendix M.
4-4
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 The model simulated a net gain of salt over the 12-month reporting period that equates to 348,000 pounds per day.
The model simulated a net gain (net inflow) of salt over the 12-month reporting period at a rate of 348 (lb x 1,000)/day. The corresponding observed rate of salt outflow was calculated by multiplying the average observed salinity in the CCS (based on salinities measured at monitoring stations TPSWCCS-1, -2, -4, -5, and -6) on the final and first day of the calibration period by the corresponding CCS volumes on those days. The difference between these two products divided by the number of days in the calibration period provides the observed net inflow of salt, 539 (lb x 1,000)/day. Thus, the model under-estimates the salt inflow by approximately 191 (lb x 1,000)/day. As in the case of water balance simulation, the magnitude of this over-estimation is small (1.5%) relative to the range in monthly average salt inflows; the observed monthly net mass fluxes range from an outflow of 5,426 (lb x 1,000)/day (April 2019) to an inflow of 7,478 (lb x 1,000)/day (March 2019).
Figures 4.2-1 and 4.2-2 show the monthly change in water and salt mass flows and illustrate the models ability to match the magnitude and direction of net monthly flows of water and salt, respectively, over the 12-month period. With a few exceptions, the model accurately simulated the direction of monthly averaged water and salt flows into and out of the CCS. In Figure 4.2-1, it is evident that the wet season (June to October) is marked by a mix of inflow (July, August, and September) and outflow (June and October). In the latter two months, rainfall was relatively low and precipitation inflows were dwarfed by evaporative losses. The dry season (December to April and including the transitional months of May and November) is marked by a fairly consistent outflow of water from the CCS, with isolated months of net inflow (March and May).
Consistent with these general trends in net water flow, water elevations during the wet season were relatively steady, with isolated peaks; water elevations generally decreased during the dry season, except for a short-term increase in March 2019.
Modeled and measured water (left diagram) and salt (right diagram) inflows and outflows. See Figures 4.2-1 and 4.2-2 for details.
4-5
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 Figure 4.2-2 compares observed and modeled net monthly flows of salt into and out of the CCS.
Unlike the flows of water in Figure 4.2-1, net salt storage was muted during the wet seasons, except in September 2018, when the loss of salt was more pronounced. Net salt storage changes during the dry season alternated between losses and gains, though the latter are more notable.
Like the modeled water flows, modeled salt mass fluxes generally match observed fluxes, albeit with less accuracy than the match to water flows. One month in particular (July 2018) illustrated a marked deviation between the modeled and observed changes in magnitude and direction of net storage; the model simulates a nearly 4,000 (lb x 1,000)/day increase in salt mass compared to the approximately 400 (lb x 1,000)/day decrease in salt storage. The cause of this is likely one or both of the following: (1) too high a ratio of inflowing salt mass through the bottom and/or east faces of the CCS to outflowing salt mass; and/or (2) a short-term deviation from the hydrology.
Nevertheless, this is an isolated condition and changes to CCS water and salt storage are adequately simulated the remainder of the year. As such, this model error does not signify a deficiency in the monitoring network in and around the CCS.
4.2.3 Simulated CCS Water Levels and Salt The model generally predicts water level and salt changes fairly well; however, there are some months when the water levels tend to be underestimated and this can cause salinity to be overestimated.
Implicit in the models ability to simulate monthly net water and salt mass flows is the accurate simulation of daily flows to and from the CCS. Because the model is able to characterize the daily flows of water and salt, the model estimates the daily changes in CCS water and salt storage. As previously mentioned, these changes in storage are associated with daily changes in CCS water levels and salinity. Figure 4.2-3 shows the model-calculated water level in the CCS, which varies over the reporting period. These modeled water levels range between approximately -1.0 ft North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) and 0.2 ft NAVD 88 and are an average of water levels throughout the entire CCS. Also shown in this figure are the observed CCS water levels over time; the observed values reflect the mean of daily-averaged water elevations across the five sensors in the CCS (TPSWCCS-1, -2, -4, -5, -6). The model generally matches the seasonal trends in CCS water level changes (reductions during the dry season and increases during the wet season). However, from July to October 2018, the model under-simulates the CCS stage. Changes to the model intended to mitigate these residuals resulted in a degradation in the quality of the match to CCS salinity and CCS water levels during other periods of the simulated timeframe.
Changes in salt mass storage within the CCS can be used to calculate average CCS salinity changes over time. The simulated daily net flow of salt is divided by the simulated volume of water in the CCS, which results in a change in salinity. This change in salinity is added to the simulated salinity calculated for the previous day to produce a simulated salinity for the current day. Like the simulated CCS water level, the modeled salinity reflects a representative daily salinity throughout the CCS. Figure 4.2-4 compares the simulated salinities to those observed in the CCS over the period of record. Observed salinities are the mean of daily averaged salinities 4-6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 measured in the CCS monitoring stations (TPSWCCS-1, -2, -4, -5, and -6). The model generally matches the observed temporal trends in salinity. Periods of salinity over-simulation are generally consistent with periods of under-simulation of water elevations. This is not coincidental, since an underestimation of the volume of water in the CCS can lead to an over-simulation of salt concentrations. However, it is important to note that the most notable period of salinity over-simulation begins in July 2018, which is the same month that modeled and observed changes in salt storage had markedly deviated.
4.3 Conclusions The accurate simulation of changing CCS inflows, outflows, water elevations, and salinities is complex due to the different components of the balance model and their varying impacts on CCS water and salt storage. For instance, vertical flows into and out of the control volume are generally larger than horizontal flows and have a comparatively greater impact. However, the salinity of inflowing water can vary depending on the source of the water. For example, water pumped from the UFA into the CCS is relatively low in salinity and, as such, serves to reduce and/or moderate CCS salinity; vertical flow from groundwater beneath portions of the discharge canals to the CCS is saline to hyper-saline and generally increases the salinity of the CCS. The correct balance of both water and salt mass flow is difficult to estimate in the model. In addition, observed CCS water temperatures varied by approximately 23.9°C (from approximately 19.6°C at TPSWCCS-5 in November 2018 to 43.5°C at TPSWCCS-1 in July 2018) during the simulated timeframe. The model addresses associated impacts to the CCS by explicitly simulating the effects of water/air temperature gradients on evaporation. Whereas numerous sources and sinks of water, varying salinities, and changes in water temperature do increase model complexity, the need to accurately simulate these different components of CCS operation constrains the number of possible solutions.
Though the model is able to simulate the complex dynamics associated with the CCS over a 12-month timeframe with reasonable accuracy, there are periods when the simulated flows of water and salt do not accurately reflect observed conditions. Consequently, the simulated water levels and salinities in the CCS deviate from those that have been observed at various times in the simulation period. However, the overall performance of the model reinforces its utility as a tool for understanding how the CCS has and will operate under varying meteorological, hydrological, and operational conditions. This is best demonstrated by the fact that the same conceptual model employed to characterize changes in CCS storage of water and salt during the reporting period was used to explain changes in storage during the prior approximately 8-year historical period of record. This is notable since the same conceptual model is able to effectively characterize CCS water level and salinity responses to average conditions as well as numerous hydrologic, meteorological, and anthropogenic conditions, including hurricanes, droughts, added water, and sediment removal.
The robustness and accuracy in the model underpins FPLs informed understanding of processes that control the CCS and the manner in which the CCS interacts with the surrounding environment. This accuracy in simulating the historical changes within the CCS bolsters confidence in the models utility as a tool to evaluate the sensitivity of CCS operations to certain factors, such as changes in operation, drought conditions, storm events, salinity abatement 4-7
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 activities, and other potential environmental stresses. Additionally, the model quality validates the fact that the most appropriate data are being collected to effectively capture CCS operations, identify interactions between the CCS and the surrounding environment, and support FPLs comprehension of historical and future operations of the CCS. Continued application and updating of this model is recommended to improve the quality with which it simulates historical conditions and, thereby, bolster user confidence when making future decisions regarding CCS operations.
4-8
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 TABLES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 Table 4.2-1. Calibration Parameters.
Parameter Name Calibrated Value Units Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity (Zone A) 4.5 ft/day Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity (Zone B) 0.1 ft/day Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity (Zone C) 0.1 ft/day Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity (Zone D) 2.0 ft/day West Face Hydraulic Conductivity 200.0 ft/day East Face Hydraulic Conductivity 400.0 ft/day North Face Hydraulic Conductivity 100.0 ft/day South Face Hydraulic Conductivity 450.0 ft/day Evaporation Modifier (Factor Multiplier) 0.64 Runoff Modifier (as % of Precipitation) 27%
Blowdown Evaporation Factor 25%
Blowdown Concentration (as % of Seawater) 0.85 4-9
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 Table 4.2-2. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components for the Period of Record (June 2018 through May 2019).
June 2018 to May 2019 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10^6)
W. Seepage 0.17 63.16 E. Seepage 2.52 918.09 N. Seepage 0.01 2.81 S. Seepage 2.09 761.98 Bot Seepage 5.45 1988.03 Precipitation and Runoff 16.35 5967.59 Into CCS Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.58 211.22 Unit 5 Blowdown 1.73 630.93 ID Pumping 1.21 440.46 Added Water 11.36 4146.75 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 41.45 15131.02 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1.97 -717.24 N. Seepage 0.00 -1.81 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bot Seepage -5.97 -2178.61 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -35.71 -13034.29 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -43.65 -15931.95 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2.19 -800.93 Observed Change -2.14 -780.15 Key:
CCS = Cooling Canal System.
gal = Gallon.
ID = Interceptor Ditch.
MGD = Million gallons per day.
4-10
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 Table 4.2-3. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components for the Period of Record (June 2018 through May 2019).
June 2018 to May 2019 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)
W. Seepage 3.82 1392.51 E. Seepage 695.00 254037.03 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 469.58 171394.90 Bot Seepage 1927.76 703633.02 Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Into CCS Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 429.16 156643.67 ID Pumped Water 51.74 18883.70 Added Water 230.39 84093.29 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3808.43 1390078.12 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -823.86 -300708.99 N. Seepage -2.56 -934.50 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bot Seepage -2558.71 -933928.94 Out of CCS Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -3385.13 -1235572.43 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 423.30 154505.69 Observed Change 539.43 196892.09 Key:
CCS = Cooling Canal System.
ID = Interceptor Ditch.
lb = Pound(s).
4-11
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 FIGURES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 (A)
(B)
Key: Red line = L-31E canal; green line = Interceptor Ditch; purple lines = CCS southbound canals; thick blue line = CCS Grand Canal; short blue line = CCS northbound canals; thin blue line = CCS return canal; light blue bar = Biscayne Bay Figure 4.1-1. Flow into (A) and out of (B) the CCS, Shown in Cross-Section.
4-12
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 20 15 10 Net Water Flow (MGD) 5 0
-5
-10
-15 Modeled
-20 Measured
-25 Figure 4.2-1. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flows of Water for the CCS during the Period from June 2018 - May 2019.
10000 8000 Net Salt Flux (lb x 1000/day) 6000 4000 2000 0
-2000
-4000 Modeled Measured
-6000 Figure 4.2-2. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flux of Salt Mass for the CCS during the Period from June 2018 - May 2019.
4-13
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 4 2
Measured Water Elevations CCS Water Elevation (ft NAVD 88) 1.5 Simulated Water Elevations 1
0.5 0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2 Figure 4.2-3. Modeled versus Measured Water Elevations (NAVD 88) in the CCS during the Reporting Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Water Elevation.
80 Measured Concentration 70 Simulated Concentration CCS Salinity (PSU) 60 50 40 30 20 Figure 4.2-4. Modeled versus Measured Salinity in the CCS during the Reporting Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Salinity.
4-14
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5
- 5. ECOLOGICAL MONITORING The ecological monitoring plan was designed to characterize the plant communities in the marsh, mangrove, and bay ecosystems adjacent to Turkey Point and to determine the influence, if any, of the CCS on these communities via a groundwater pathway. The ecological significance of each type of ecological data collected under this monitoring program and their significance in identifying potential CCS influences are summarized in Table 5.0-1.
This section encompasses data collected from marsh and mangrove wetlands adjacent to the CCS and submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) in Biscayne Bay and Card Sound proximal to Turkey Point for the reporting period. An overview of the ecological conditions for the historical period of record (October 2010 through May 2018) is also provided in this section as a comparison with the reporting period data. Background of the sites monitored, plot setup, sampling frequency, and parameters measured are detailed in Appendix B. Appendix K provides a detailed explanation of all terrestrial ecological calculations.
The most impactful event over the last 9 years of monitoring has been Hurricane Irma (September 10, 2017). Immediately after the hurricane, the effects of storm surge and high winds could be seen in many of the marsh and mangrove plots. The impacts continue to be evident in a handful of marsh and mangrove plots and will be discussed in the sections below.
5.1 Marsh, Mangroves, and Tree Islands Details of the plot establishment, monitoring setup, and parameters measured are provided in detail in Appendix B, while Table 5.0-1 outlines all of the types of data collected and their significance to the monitoring program.
5.1.1 Results and Discussion 5.1.1.1 Community Description Vegetation patterns have not changed significantly over the past 9 years; the biggest impact to the system has been due to climatic events (e.g., Hurricane Irma) and regional meteorological conditions.
As described in detail below, in general, the overall trends in species diversity and evenness have remained consistent throughout the entire period of record. The key vegetation communities in each of the general habitats are provided in Table 5.1-1, and a complete list of species is provided in Appendix L. The vegetation community remains consistent, as described in previous years (FPL 2018; Table 5.1-2).
5-1
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Eleven total species of woody and herbaceous plants were documented in the northeast corners of the plots during the November 2018 sampling event (Table 5.1-3). In the freshwater F-plots (F2, F3, F4, and F6), sawgrass and spikerush (Eleocharis cellulosa) were the two species encountered most often. In the mangrove plots, red mangrove was the most common species.
Diversity ranged from one to five species within a plot and from one to six species along a transect, which is consistent with observations from the historical period of record (Table 5.1-3).
The Shannon-Weiner Index (SWI) of diversity is a measure of the probability that a randomly sampled individual will be a particular species. For instance, an SWI value of 0 indicates that only one species is present, with no uncertainty as to what species a randomly sampled individual will be. Values can range from 0 to 4.5, with the smallest values representing low diversity and the larger values representing high diversity. Shifts in these values over time can indicate a change in the vegetative community (fewer species or more species present). During the November 2018 monitoring event, the SWI was low at all plots, and each transect had SWI values of less than 1 (Table 5.1-4). In the marsh plots, diversity was lowest in the F2 plots (SWI = 0.425), as plots along the transect were dominated by a single species (sawgrass), with spikerush only sparsely present. In comparison, diversity was highest in the freshwater marsh at transect F3 during the November 2018 sampling event (SWI = 0.647). All values in November 2018, including those from the F6 reference plots, were similar to those observed during the historical period of record. Overall, the relatively low SWI values indicate low species diversity and low abundance of non-dominant species (i.e., most plots are dominated by sawgrass, with spikerush sparsely present), which is typical of Everglades sawgrass marshes (Gunderson 1997).
Low species diversity and low abundance of non-dominant species (i.e., most plots are dominated by sawgrass, with spikerush sparsely present), as seen in the monitoring plots, are typical of Everglades sawgrass marsh and mangrove habitats.
The SWI diversity was also low in the mangrove plots, which were dominated by red mangrove, with white and black mangrove (Avicennia germinans) sparsely present. Low diversity is expected in scrub mangrove ecosystems, as few plants can tolerate the harsh conditions that naturally occur in these areas (Lugo and Snedaker 1974). M5-1 was the most diverse mangrove plot, with four species present (Table 5.1-3). The community with the highest diversity was the marsh-mangrove mix, which had three (F1) and six (F5) species along each transect. F5 was the most diverse transect, as it was composed of a mix of woody and non-woody species within the different plots. Although the SWI values have fluctuated over the years, the overall trends have remained consistent throughout the entire period of record. These data from both the M and F plots indicate a stable system, with species diversity consistent with similar ecosystems (Lugo and Snedaker 1974; Gunderson 1997).
Species evenness is a measure of how evenly distributed (numerically) each species is at a site.
A species evenness of 1 means an equal number of individuals of each species is present. The low evenness values of the mangrove plots indicate one highly dominant species (e.g., red mangrove) with other species sparsely intermixed (Table 5.1-4). Higher evenness values indicate that at plots such as F3-1, F4-2, and F6-2 most species present are well represented. Many of the 5-2
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 plots along the F6 and M6 reference transects are represented by only one species and, therefore, could not be evaluated for species evenness (plot F6-2 excluded). The mangrove plots had the lowest species evenness, while the marsh sites had the highest (Table 5.1-4). These trends have remained consistent throughout the entire monitoring period, indicating a stable system.
5.1.1.2 Freshwater Marsh Sampling The marsh community is reflective of the sparse sawgrass community type (i.e., low cover and productivity). Productivity is a function of soil nutrient conditions and hydrology that is influenced by regional meteorological conditions and climatic events. Porewater tritium concentrations have been low at all of the marsh sites throughout the entire period of record and are consistent with atmospheric deposition concentrations. Plot differences are likely due to inherent hydrologic and biogeochemical interactions within each plot and not because of CCS groundwater influence.
To focus on landscape trends, the following discussion is limited to sawgrass, which is the primary herbaceous species measured in the marsh plots. Prior to Hurricane Irma, the sawgrass at plot F1-1 consistently had the third or fourth highest biomass of all marsh plots. However, this plot experienced a complete die-off of sawgrass after the hurricane, likely caused by increased salinity from the storm surge associated with the hurricane and not because of a groundwater pathway from the CCS (based on porewater chloride and tritium values). While some regrowth has occurred, there are only three sawgrass individuals present in the plot. Therefore, plot F1-1 will be largely omitted from the vegetation discussion below.
Sawgrass percent cover at sites other than F1-1 have remained consistent during the entire period of record. During the reporting period, percent cover categories remained consistent in most plots, with only small seasonal changes observed (Table 5.1-5). Throughout the entire period of record, sawgrass cover was consistently 25%, and average vegetation height for each sampling event never exceeded 1.35 meters (m) (Tables 5.1-5 and 5.1-6, respectively). These vegetation patterns are consistent with the sparse sawgrass community commonly observed in Florida (Olmsted and Armentano 1997). Ross et al. (2003) determined that the sparse sawgrass habitat was the most common marsh cover type in Shark Slough within Everglades National Park, consisting of >50% of the transects studied.
Sawgrass is tallest at plots F4-1 and F1-2, while plants in F3-1 and F3-2 are the shortest (Table 5.1-6). Comparisons among transects show that sawgrass in F3, F2, and F6 (reference transect) have always been shorter relative to F1 and F4. These patterns have remained consistent throughout the entire period of record and there have been no differences in the rank order of vegetation heights over the last 6 years. In the reporting period, height in each plot was generally lowest during the early wet season (August 2018) or late dry season (May 2019) monitoring events and was highest during the November 2018 monitoring event. Because porewater tritium concentrations have been low and consistent with atmospheric deposition concentrations at all of the marsh sites throughout the entire period of record, these differences are likely due to inherent hydrologic and biogeochemical interactions within each plot and not because of CCS influence.
5-3
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Both live and total sawgrass biomass were calculated using the equations presented in Table 5.1-
- 7. These equations were derived from semi-annual plant harvests conducted in accordance with the Monitoring Plan (SFWMD 2009b) using the methodology established by Daoust and Childers (1998). Both live and total biomass follow the same general patterns across the landscape, with F4-1 and F1-2 having the highest values and F3-1 and F6-2 having the lowest values (Tables 5.1-8 and 5.1-9). Most plots experienced a decline in both live and total biomass during the wet season sampling events (August and November), followed by a noticeable increase during the dry season events (February and May). This is consistent with the Childers et al. (2006) findings that sawgrass becomes less productive with increased water depth and hydroperiod. This overall trend has remained consistent during the entire period of record.
The Model Lands Marsh adjacent to Turkey Point has similar hydrology and community composition as the C-111 Basin and Taylor Slough (Childers et al. 2006). Although the Model Lands Marsh is smaller in size than both the C-111 Basin and Taylor Slough, these landscapes are similarly characterized by sawgrass marshes, tree islands, and hydrology driven by rain, canal overflow, and surface water runoff (Childers et al. 2006). Historical live biomass data at study sites in the C-111 Basin and Taylor Slough (located west of the study area) generally range from 100 to 300 grams per square meter (g/m2) annually (Childers et al. 2006). Average live biomass during the reporting period was within the range observed by Childers et al. (2006) for seven of the 14 sawgrass plots; the other half of the sawgrass plots had biomass <100 g/m2, including plot F1-1 (die-off from Hurricane Irma) and one of the three plots along reference transect F6. This is consistent with the average live biomass observed for most of the plots for the entire period of record. The values observed in the reporting period are within or above the range of values historically observed.
Annual net primary productivity (ANPP) is collected for sawgrass in order to represent how much aboveground biomass is produced and lost during a given year. It is often used as an annual indicator of vegetative community health. Within the reporting period, ANPP values ranged from 77.0 to 347.0 g/m2, excluding plot F1-1. Productivity at plots F1-2 and F4-1 were the highest this reporting period, while F6-2, a reference plot, was the lowest. Average transect ANPP rank order this reporting period was F4>F2>F6>F3, consistent with the historical period of record (Table 5.1-10). Slight variability is observed among years, attributable to localized hydrologic variations and meteorological conditions. Annual mean productivity from the C-111 Basin typically ranges from about 200 to 500 g/m2, while mean productivity at Taylor Slough in Everglades National Park is typically less than 300 g/m2 (Childers et al. 2006); the values from this reporting period are consistent with the values observed at Taylor Slough.
Sclerophylly is a measure of leaf hardness or toughness that reflects growing conditions and external stressors, such as climate, meteorological conditions, and nutrient availability. Low sclerophylly values (i.e., thinner, less dense/tough leaves) represent better growing conditions compared to high sclerophylly values. During the reporting period, sclerophylly values were lower in November 2018 than in May 2019 at all 10 of the marsh plots that had data for both events (Table 5.1-11). This indicates better growing conditions at the end of the wet season compared to the dry season. All reporting period values were within historical ranges.
5-4
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Summaries of sawgrass leaf nutrients and stable isotopes are presented in Tables 5.1-12 through 5.1-18. Leaf carbon concentrations in November 2018 and May 2019 were within the historical period of record range for all 13 sawgrass plots. Leaf nitrogen concentrations followed a similar trend at 10 of the 13 plots, but were lower than historical values at F2-2 and F4-3 in November 2018 and at F6-1 in May 2019. Leaf phosphorous values were within the historical range at 12 of the 13 plots, but were below the historical range at F2-1 in May 2019.
Leaf isotopic and nutrient composition are indicators of plant and community health; values observed in the study area were consistent with values found in similar ecosystems throughout southern Florida. C3 photosynthetic plants (e.g., sawgrass) can have carbon isotope values between -34 parts per mille () and -22 (Smith and Epstein 1971), where -22 is representative of plants from desert conditions and -34 is indicative of tropical rainforest vegetation (Kohn 2010). Chang et al. (2009) found that carbon isotopes from sawgrass in the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge (LNWR) ranged from -30.1 to -24.5. Carbon isotopes from sawgrass collected during the reporting period ranged from -27.8 (F1-1 in November 2018) to -25.1 (F6-2 in November 2018), which is within range of the plant community in the LNWR and historical period of record data (Table 5.1-15). The nitrogen isotopes (15N) found in sawgrass from the LNWR ranged from -5.3 to 7.7, while sawgrass adjacent to Turkey Point had an average range of -5.0 (F4-1 in November 2018) to 0.21 (F1-2 in May 2019) during the reporting period (Table 5.1-16). The molar ratio of carbon to nitrogen (C:N) never fell below 47:1, which is representative of mature plants with high lignin content (Table 5.1-17). Terrestrial environments are considered nitrogen-limited when the nitrogen to phosphorus (N:P) ratio is below 14 (31 molar ratio) and phosphorous-limited when the N:P ratio is above 16 (36 molar ratio) (Verhoeven et al. 1996). Interestingly, the N:P ratio at plot F1-1 in November 2018 indicated that the sawgrass plants re-growing at the site post-hurricane were nitrogen-limited instead of phosphorous-limited; this may be a consequence of greater short-term phosphorus availability post-hurricane with increased detrital/organic matter decomposition.
The plants shifted back to being phosphorous-limited in May 2019. Besides F1-1 in November 2018, the N:P ratios in this reporting period ranged from 49:1 to 124:1, indicating a P-limited system (Table 5.1-18). This pattern is consistent with previous data from the historical period.
The specific conductance and temperature of porewater collected from the 30-centimeter (cm) depth within the sediment are presented in Tables 5.1-19 and 5.1-20, respectively. Porewater analytical data for August 2018 through May 2019 are presented in Tables 5.1-21 through 5.1-24 and Figures 5.1-1 through 5.1-6. The historical period of record and reporting period averages for each analyte at each F site habitat type (marsh, tree island, marsh/mangrove mix) are presented in Table 5.1-25 for comparison.
Porewater specific conductance values at transects F3, F4, and F6 (reference transect) all noticeably increased following Hurricane Irma, although not as much as observed at F1-1. None of the vegetation in the F3, F4, or F6 plots experienced any notable die-off. While the specific conductance values along the F4 transect have since returned to pre-hurricane levels, porewater specific conductance along the F3 and F6 (reference) transects were still elevated during this reporting period. Sodium and chloride values mirrored specific conductance, with the highest marsh values observed along transects F3 and F6. The F6 plots are located along the reference transect, which is located outside of any potential influence from the CCS, indicating that the 5-5
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 high specific conductance values are not the result of plant operations. Additionally, the high specific conductance values do not coincide with high porewater tritium concentrations. The combination of these two factors indicate that the high specific conductance values were likely caused by storm surge associated with Hurricane Irma and are not the result of groundwater migration of CCS water.
Transect F5 is located in an area south of Turkey Point that had been previously hydrologically isolated but was reconnected to the surrounding marsh to the west in 2015, as part of an FPL Everglades Mitigation Bank restoration effort, and reconnected to the mangroves to the south in 2017. This restoration of hydrologic connectivity in the area has resulted in plot F5-1, which had historically lower specific conductance values (2010-2015 range: 2,290 to 44,370 µS/cm),
having consistently higher porewater values in the last 2 years (2017-2019 range: 25,554 to 59,133 µS/cm).
Total ammonia was higher at the end of the wet season relative to the dry season for most of the plots. Naturally occurring ammonia at the reference plots was higher than in the monitoring plots around the CCS, possibly due to delayed impacts on vegetation from Hurricane Irma.
In the reporting period, marsh porewater nutrients (TN, total ammonia, and TP) showed no consistent trends with distance from the CCS (Figures 5.1-3, 5.1-4, and 5.1-5), demonstrating a wide range of natural variability across the landscape. Marsh TN and TP showed no consistent seasonal patterns in porewater nutrient concentrations during the reporting period. Marsh TN values ranged from 1.96 mg/L (F4-1 in November 2018) to 15.7 mg/L (F2-1 in May 2019), with an average of 5.26 mg/L during the reporting period. Marsh porewater TP ranged from 0.0090 mg/L (F6-1 and F6-2 in November 2018) to 0.252 (F2-1 in May 2019), with an average of 0.0602 mg/L in the marsh sites during the reporting period. Total ammonia concentrations were higher in November 2018 than in May 2019 at all marsh plots, with the exception of F4-2. Total ammonia values observed in the reporting period ranged from 0.23 mg/L to 2.54 mg/L in the monitoring plots around the CCS, with an average of 1.54 mg/L. Naturally occurring values in the F6 reference plots (0.68 to 2.97 mg/L) were higher than those observed around the CCS.
Ammonia values (>0.5 mg/L) have been observed in Everglades National Park and are a natural occurrence in sawgrass marsh ecosystems (Ilami et al. 2003), likely due to organic matter decomposition.
Porewater tritium values around the CCS were highly variable across the landscape during the reporting period and appeared to be influenced by the atmospheric concentration of tritium (Figure 5.1-6). Reporting period tritium values in the marsh around the CCS were lowest in August 2018 relative to the other three quarters. However, despite the offset in marsh sampling periods (November, February, and May) relative to the CCS sampling periods (September, December, and March), the F sites closest to the CCS (i.e., F2-1, F3-1, F4-1, and F5-1) seemed to broadly reflect an atmospheric influence of CCS tritium concentrations when values in the CCS were higher (see Section 3.2). Most of the values at F sites closest to the CCS were
>100pCi/L when the tritium concentration within the CCS was between an average of 6,197 to 17,469 pCi/L. The observation of an atmospheric exchange with the CCS, however, seemed to 5-6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 dissipate rapidly with distance from the CCS, with much lower values observed in the plots farther from the CCS within each transect. Values in the reference transect, F6, did not exhibit any pattern and remained <15 pCi/L at all sites for all sampling events. Higher tritium values in the F sites nearest the CCS were not accompanied by high salinity values; the majority of sites (except F3-1 in August and F1-1 exhibiting residual Hurricane Irma impacts) had salinity values of <4 (in PSS-78 scale). Consequently, the data do not indicate any influence from the CCS via a groundwater pathway.
The structure and composition of the sawgrass marsh communities within the study area have remained stable throughout the entire monitoring effort. Plot F1-1 continues to show gradual recovery after Hurricane Irma. Many of the fluctuations observed are likely due to seasonal and meteorological conditions. Overall, the vegetation characteristics summarized above (i.e., live biomass, productivity, leaf nutrient concentration), porewater chemistry, and community composition are representative of the hydrologically modified marshes found throughout southern Florida, as described in Childers et al. 2006.
5.1.1.3 Mangrove Sampling The scrub mangrove forest study sites have remained fairly consistent structurally over the past 9 years, with the exception of the reference transect, which had some delayed mortality during this reporting period (not uncommon) from the impact of Hurricane Irma.
Reporting period annual vegetation sampling at the M sites occurred during the November 2018 sampling, while porewater was sampled in November 2018 and May 2019. Data collected in May and November throughout the historical period of record are presented as ranges in each table to aid in comparisons with the reporting period. As red mangrove is the primary woody species measured in the mangrove plots, to focus on landscape trends, discussion of the woody vegetation is limited to this species.
Percent cover values are reported as percentage categories per the QAPP (FPL 2013). Average red mangrove percent cover has remained consistent throughout the entire period of record, indicating that no rapid decline or growth has occurred at any of the mangrove plots at most of the M plots, with the exception of M6-2 (Table 5.1-26). Significant die-off was observed at the fringe reference plot M6-2 during the November 2018 sampling event, where four of the 12 tagged trees within the plot were either dead or lost. The M6 reference transect is located outside of the influence of Turkey Point in an area with no protective fringe mangrove forest, and plot M6-2 is in proximity to Barnes Sound (within approximately 500 m). It is likely that wind and storm surge from Hurricane Irma significantly impacted the mangroves in plot M6-2. The effects of the hurricane on plot M6-2 were more notable in November 2018 than they were immediately after the storm in November 2017. This is not uncommon; mangrove research in the Everglades (Smith et al. 1994; Barr et al. 2012) has shown that mangrove tree damage and mortality can continue to occur 2 to 3 years after a storm.
5-7
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Data on height is collected to help determine how the trees are growing and if there is any die-back. Lugo and Snedaker (1974) classified a scrub mangrove forest as having trees that are less than 1.5 m (150 cm) tall. Trees measured within the study area are consistent with this classification (Table 5.1-27). With the exception of reference transect M6, average height values from November 2018 are slightly higher than, or are within the upper range values of, the historical period of record, suggesting that the dwarf mangrove populations within the study area are slow-growing and that no considerable die-off has occurred. Slow growth is expected in dwarf mangrove ecosystems because of the concurrent stressors (phosphorous nutrient limitations and naturally higher salinities due to less tidal flushing) that create difficult growing conditions in these areas (McKee et al. 2002).
Red mangrove biomass was calculated using the allometric equation presented in Coronado-Molina et al. (2004). The average biomass values for this reporting period at all sites were lower than other studies from either Florida (Coronado-Molina et al. 2004) and Biscayne Bays (Lugo and Snedaker 1974, Ross et al. 2001). Biomass was highest at M3 and lowest at reference transect M6 (Table 5.1-28). Inter-annual variations have been observed, but for most M sites there are no consistent increasing or decreasing trends over time (Table 5.1-28). This suggests that, while red mangrove biomass can fluctuate between events, there has been no considerable change in the red mangrove community during the entire monitoring period. However, several plots in November 2018 had biomass values lower than the historical period of record. Biomass at plots M3-1 and M5-2 were only slightly below their historical ranges. Biomass at plot M1-2, however, has been steadily decreasing for the past 4 years although there has been no noticeable die-off at this site (as indicated by the percent cover and height values). A decrease in height and biomass was observed at the two reference transect plots M6-1 and M6-2 during the November 2018 event, likely as a delayed response to Hurricane Irma.
Biomass varies spatially from plot to plot, but these variations are not directly indicative of plot health. For instance, the highest biomass values in the reporting period were found at plots M1-1 and M2-2, not because of the height or robustness of the trees (Table 5.1-27), but because of the density at which the trees are growing (~1,000 individuals per 25 square meters [m2]) (Table 5.1-3). Conversely, plot M6-1, which has relatively tall trees compared to most plots, had the third lowest biomass of the M plots during the reporting period because of low tree density (29 individuals per 25 m2) (Table 5.1-3). These differences do not indicate that one plot is healthier than another but, instead, highlight the natural variability present in the scrub mangrove ecosystems being monitored.
Sclerophylly is a measure of leaf hardness or toughness that reflects growing conditions and external stressors, such as climate, meteorological conditions, and nutrient availability. Low sclerophylly values represent better growing conditions compared to high sclerophylly values.
Data from Belize show that typical scrub red mangroves have sclerophylly somewhere between 200 to 300 g/m2 (Feller 1995). All of the plots had average sclerophylly values within this typical range in November 2018, although M2-1 and M4-1 (Table 5.1-29) had values that were slightly higher than their historical period of record. Average sclerophylly at the monitoring sites were lower than the reference M6 plots, which may be a reflection of the hurricane response in the M6 plots.
5-8
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Mangrove leaf nutrients, stable isotopes, and molar ratios for the November 2018 event are presented in Tables 5.1-30 through 5.1-36. Carbon isotope data were within the normal range of C3 plants (-34 to -22, from Smith and Epstein 1971), ranging from -27.3 at F2-2 to -24.2 at M3-2. The overall carbon isotope average in November 2018 was -25.5, which is similar to data from scrub red mangroves in Belize (-25.3, from Smallwood et al. 2003; and -26.4, from McKee et al. 2002). Red mangrove 15N ranged from -11.3 to 1.00 and averaged -4.7 (Table 5.1-34). McKee et al. (2002) found average 15N values of -5.38 in similar scrub mangrove habitats. Low 15N values are a consequence of the slow growth patterns and the resulting low nitrogen demand associated with scrub mangrove forests (McKee et al. 2002). The November 2018 leaf nutrient and isotope values are consistent with the historical data and are within the ranges established in the literature for similar dwarf mangrove plant communities (Smallwood et al. 2003; McKee et al. 2002). The N:P molar ratios observed at plots M2-1, M3-1, M6-1, and M6-2 were all below 36:1, indicating a nitrogen limitation for the first time in the entire period of record at these plots. This shift to N-limitation may be a consequence of greater short-term phosphorus availability post-hurricane with increased detrital/organic matter decomposition within the mangroves, especially in the M6 plots where whole-tree mortality has been observed. The N:P molar ratios of the leaves at the remaining M sites ranged from 36:1 to 67:1, indicating that these mangrove sites are still P-limited (Table 5.1-36). Leaf chemistry of these sites will continue to be monitored closely to determine if this switch to N-limitation is a continued phenomenon or just a short-term observation.
Porewater monitoring during the reporting period occurred in November 2018 and May 2019.
For comparison purposes, the historical ranges presented in Tables 5.1-19 and 5.1-20 include data from past November and May events only so that the values represent similar seasons to the reporting period. Values from both sampling events were within the historical ranges of each site. The highest specific conductance value observed in either sampling period was measured at M5-1 in May 2019 (63,006 µS/cm) but was still within the range of the values historically encountered at this site. Several tidal creeks on the north side of the Card Sound canal were re-opened as part of an FPL mitigation effort in 2017. The creeks have provided tidal flushing to plots M4-1 and M4-2, which is helping to minimize the seasonal fluctuations in porewater specific conductance and temperature at these sites throughout the reporting period. This may be beneficial to plant growth patterns in the long-term.
Table 5.1-37 shows the range of porewater field parameters and ionic and nutrient concentrations at the M plots for both the historical period of record and the reporting period. The historical period of record includes data from past November and May events only, so the values represent similar seasons to the reporting period. Reporting period sodium and chloride values were within historical ranges at all M sites and were consistently higher in May 2019 than November 2018 (Figures 5.1-1 and 5.1-2). The highest sodium and chloride values observed during the reporting period occurred at M5-1 (13,100 mg/L and 24,100 mg/L, respectively) in May 2019, coincident with the highest specific conductance value (63,006 µS/cm). The values observed at M5-1 were within the historical range for this site.
Porewater total ammonia was generally higher in November 2018 than May 2019 and all the porewater values are consistently higher than in the overlying Biscayne Bay/Card Sound waters.
Ammonia values at reference plots M6-1 and M6-2 were generally higher than all other M 5-9
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 plots, with ammonia at M6-2 doubling after Hurricane Irma (from 1.48 mg/L in May 2017 to 3.07 mg/L in November 2017) and remaining high after that, potentially indicating tree damage and the resultant delayed mortality in one-third of the measured trees. Porewater TP and TN values varied both spatially and seasonally, demonstrating a wide range of natural variability across the landscape (Figures 5.1-3 and 5.1-5). When averaged across all M sites, nutrient values observed during the reporting period were generally higher than historical averages (Table 5.1-37).
Tritium values varied both spatially and temporally at all M sites, with sites closer to the CCS (i.e., M1-1, M2-1, M4-1, M5-1) generally having values higher than the sites farther away (Figure 5.1-6). The tritium values at all M sites during the reporting period were less than 90 pCi/L, which is consistent with atmospheric influence from the CCS. Wet season (November 2018) values were lower than the dry season (May 2019) values, but all the tritium concentrations were within the range of their historical ranges.
The structure and composition of the scrub mangrove communities within the study area have remained stable throughout the entire monitoring effort. The system is driven by multiple factors, including nutrient deficiency, high salinities, tropical storms, and saturated soil. The vegetation characteristics of the study area are consistent with scrub mangrove forests that Lugo and Snedaker (1972) documented along the coastal fringe of south Florida and the Florida Keys.
There are no indications of impacts from the CCS on coastal mangroves.
5.2 Biscayne Bay/Card Sound On-going ecological monitoring has been conducted on a semi-annual basis since September 2010, with the entire period of record extending through May 2019. This annual reporting period encompasses September 2018 (fall) and May 2019 (spring) events. Results of this reporting period are compared with corresponding results from the historical period of record (September 2010 through May 2018).
The purpose of monitoring is to document benthic biota (SAV, benthic and epibenthic fauna),
salinity, and tritium to determine the extent of CCS connectivity to the conditions of Biscayne Bay/Card Sound (SFWMD 2009b). Table 5.0-1 outlines the types of data collected and their significance to the monitoring program. Background of the sites monitored, sampling frequency, and parameters measured are detailed in Appendix B. The sampling point locations are provided in Table 5.2-1, and the Braun-Blanquet categories can be found in Table 5.2-2.
5.2.1 Results and Discussion 5.2.1.1 Water Depth and Sediment Conditions Physical conditions (water quality and clarity) in the study site are consistent with previously observed conditions in past years.
5-10
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Sampling was conducted over all tidal cycles, and the data presented herein are actual depths at the time of sampling, unadjusted for tides. BB1 had the shallowest mean depth, while BB3 was the deepest (Table 5.2-3). Water depths in all areas were within the range of historical mean minimums and maximums. The basins encompassing each study area are geologically and hydrologically stable, and significant changes to depth beyond the normal tidal range are not expected, short of the changes caused by Hurricane Irma.
Sediment types sampled during the reporting period were consistent with observations reported during the historical period of record and confirm prior observed variability within and among the four study areas (Table 5.2-4). During the fall 2018 and spring 2019 sampling periods, most of the sampling points within BB1, BB2, and BB3 had a substrate comprised of sand and shell hash. Similar to previous years, BB4 had a higher percentage of sampling points with a rubble component compared with the other three areas during both sampling periods. Only BB1 and BB4 had sampling points with a silty component. These findings are consistent with observations reported during the historical period of record and demonstrate that sediment conditions in BB4 (the reference area, which is located south of the study area within Barnes Sound) continue to be somewhat different from the other three areas.
5.2.1.2 Surface Water Quality Light attenuation, temperature, turbidity, DO, salinity, and other water quality variables in Biscayne Bay are highly dynamic and reflect prevailing conditions at the time of sampling, including time of day (air temperature and sunlight), tidal stage, currents, cloud cover, wind, waves, rainfall, and recent extent of freshwater runoff. All of these factors, both independently and collectively, create considerable natural spatial and temporal variability within the system.
Light attenuation varied over space and time during field sampling events, which is to be expected, given the variability in those factors (e.g., winds, waves, currents, rainfall, etc.) that collectively contribute to water clarity (Table 5.2-5). Water clarity was relatively high during this reporting period, as reflected by the very low (largely undetectable) surface and bottom turbidity values throughout the entire study area (Tables 5.2-6 and 5.2-7). Overall, the values of light attenuation indicated that the water was quite clear and that light is not a limiting factor in seagrass distribution in either the study area or the reference area.
Surface water temperature data, collected over a period of 4 to 5 days, primarily reflect the temporal variability in water temperatures based on prevailing weather conditions (sunny vs.
cloudy, clear vs. rainy, etc.). Values recorded during the fall 2018 and spring 2019 sampling events are within the range of values recorded over the historical period of record, with the exception of BB1 (higher mean surface and bottom temperatures than the historical period of record for both transects) and BB2 (transect a in fall 2018 and transect b for the surface water measurement only in spring 2019). Few differences were observed between the mean surface and bottom water temperatures along any transect during the reporting period; the greatest difference was a 3.2°C warmer surface water than bottom temperature in area BB2 transect b in the spring 2019 event. The shallow (1 to 3 m; Table 5.2-3) basins (especially BB-1 which is the shallowest area) containing the four study areas are well-mixed by wind action, in general; water temperatures are, therefore, reflective of prevailing air temperatures.
5-11
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Overall, the long-term automated data (see Section 3) indicate that reporting period average (27.1°C) was 0.9°C warmer than the previous reporting period (26.2°C) and 0.6°C warmer than the historical period of record. These higher Bay temperatures are a reflection of the higher overall air temperatures observed regionally. Additionally, as these sites are fairly shallow, especially BB-1, the surface water temperatures observed may even be higher than the automated Biscayne Bay/Card Sound surface water stations, at times. Due to the shallow conditions within the Bay and the drier reporting period, these observations may contribute to higher evaporative rates and result in continued hypersaline conditions that may become less conducive to the growth of seagrass over time. These changes are driven by broader-scale events and are not a result of CCS operations.
Specific conductance, salinity, DO, and pH over the historical period of record have generally been lower in the wet season compared to the dry season (Tables 5.2-6 and 5.2-7). Additionally, specific conductance, DO, pH, and temperature between the top and bottom of the water columns further indicate that the Biscayne Bay/Card Sound transect sites are fairly well mixed vertically. Mean bottom specific conductance and salinity data for all transects and study areas were similar to surface water values during both the reporting period and over the historical period of record, which is suggestive of a well-mixed water column. Consequently, trends reported above for surface waters were also evident near the bottom. Mean bottom values in all four study areas were higher during the spring 2019 sampling event than during the fall 2018 event (Table 5.2-7); this is consistent with observations in the Bay surface waters (see Section 3).
Both the mean surface and bottom water specific conductance for control area BB4 for the spring 2019 event were above the historical period of records maximum mean for the area.
Spring hypersaline conditions were not unexpected, as the study area has become hypersaline at the end of the dry season in previous years (see Section 3). Hypersaline conditions have been previously reported not only in Biscayne Bay but also in nearby Florida Bay (FIU-WQMN; http://serc.fiu.edu/wqmnetwork/SFWMD-CD/index.htm). For this reporting period, hypersaline (salinity >35.0 PSS-78; Lohmann et al. 2012) conditions were observed in all four study areas during spring 2019 sampling, with the highest mean value (42.2 PSS-78) recorded in reference area BB4 at both the surface and bottom. Although mean salinity values for BB2, BB3, and BB4 were hypersaline during the spring 2019 sampling event, most of the surface mean values fell below area maximums from the historical period of record. It should be noted that higher salinity values recorded during both the reporting period and over the historical period of record are lower than the maximum values reported for regions of Florida Bay and are within the healthy upper range for turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum) (Zieman et al. 1999). The primary driver of salinity in Biscayne Bay is freshwater flow from canals on the western shore (Caccia and Boyer 2005). The drier reporting period (see Section 2) and especially the dry wet season are likely the primary contributors to the hypersaline conditions observed during spring 2019 within Biscayne Bay (e.g., at BBCW-10 north of Turkey Point). Two MDC RER monitoring sites located in Barnes Sound (BB50 and BB51) have had salinity values greater than 42 PSS-78 dating back to 1990, even though this area is well outside the influence of Turkey Point Units 3 and 4. Barnes Sound is an enclosed system that experiences limited water circulation compared to Biscayne Bay (Lohmann et al. 2012). Consequently, pulses of freshwater that enter Barnes Sound during the wet season (summer) have a long residency time and result in extended periods 5-12
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 of low salinity. Conversely, when drought conditions limit input of freshwater into Barnes Sound, salinities can rise to hypersaline (>35 in PSS-78) conditions (Lohmann et al. 2012).
Due to the shallow conditions within Biscayne Bay and the drier reporting period, these observations may contribute to higher evaporative rates and result in continued hypersaline conditions that may become less conducive to the growth of seagrass over time. These changes are driven by broader-scale events and are not necessarily a result of CCS operations.
5.2.1.3 Porewater Quality Porewater conditions are generally comparable to the historical period of record values, reflective of the overlying surface water conditions, and are not influenced by the CCS via a groundwater pathway.
Porewater temperatures were relatively consistent between transects and among areas for fall 2018 and spring 2019, with a maximum difference of mean values between areas of 0.3°C and 0.5°C, respectively. Mean values within each study area ranged from 30.6°C in BB3 and BB4 to 30.9°C in BB1 and BB4 during the fall 2018 sampling event, and from 28.3°C in BB4 to 28.8°C in BB2 during the spring 2019 sampling event. During the reporting period, average porewater temperatures for each transect were within the range observed for the historical period of record (Table 5.2-8).
Porewater in Biscayne Bay transects do not appear to have any linkage to CCS temperatures, as porewater temperatures were cooler than the overlying Bay surface water by 0.1 to 0.8°C; the only exception was in reference area BB4 where the porewater was slightly (0.2°C) warmer (Table 5.2-8). The shallow automated wells in Biscayne Bay were also cooler than the overlying surface water and porewater. Both the bedrock and sediments have an insulating effect and, thus, changes in porewater temperatures sometimes lag behind changes in overlying water column temperatures. For example, as water column temperatures increase, porewater temperatures tend to remain slightly cooler; the opposite effect is observed when water column temperatures decrease.
Porewater specific conductance and associated salinity values were substantially higher during the spring 2019 sampling event than during the preceding fall event and are reflective of sampling at the end of the dry and wet seasons, respectively (Table 5.2-8). The greatest seasonal differences occurred in BB4, where the mean specific conductance value during the spring was 11,950 µS/cm higher than the corresponding fall value. When sampling areas are compared, BB4 had the lowest mean porewater specific conductance during the fall 2018 sampling event (45,394 µS/cm), while BB1 had the lowest value during the spring 2019 sampling event (56,831
µS/cm). BB3 had the highest mean specific conductance values in fall 2018 event (50,206
µS/cm) and spring 2019 event (58,156 µS/cm). Over the historical period of record, there has been considerable variability in the data, with values ranging from 40,700 µS/cm at BB4 to 59,775 µS/cm at BB1. All mean transect values for porewater specific conductance during the 5-13
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 reporting period were within their respective historical ranges, except for BB3 during the spring 2019 sampling event, which was within the range of historical maximum.
Porewater specific conductance is largely a reflection of the conductance in the overlying water column. However, unlike temperature, specific conductance for porewater and the water column differed considerably among study areas and between seasons (Table 5.2-8). For example, during the fall 2018 sampling event, mean porewater conductance was 1,983 to 7,194 µS/cm higher than bottom water column values in all areas, while mean porewater values during the spring 2019 event ranged from 1,890 to 5,107 µS/cm lower than bottom water column values.
These differences are likely from lag-time sediment-surface water seepage and exchange.
During the reporting period, mean sodium concentrations in porewater within each study area ranged from 9,145 (BB4) to 10,600 mg/L (BB2) during the fall and from 12,200 (BB1) to 12,400 mg/L (BB3 and BB4) during the spring (Table 5.2-9; Figure 5.2-1). Sodium concentrations were lower in the fall than in the spring. All transect values and area means were within the range of comparable values documented over the historical period of record for the fall event. During the spring, area means were slightly above the historical period of record in BB1, BB2, and BB3. In the spring, transect values ranged from 200 mg/L (BB1-b) to 500 mg/L (BB3-a) higher than the historical period of record.
Mean chloride concentrations in porewater ranged from 17,400 mg/L (BB4) to 19,050 mg/L (BB2) during the fall 2018 sampling event, and from 23,100 mg/L (BB2) to 24,100 mg/L (BB1) during the spring 2019 sampling event (Table 5.2-9; Figure 5.2-2). Mean chloride concentrations were lower in the fall than in the spring. The greatest variance in seasonal means was found in BB1 and BB4; both sites had average chloride concentrations of 6,200 mg/L greater in the spring than in the fall. The area mean for BB1 during the spring 2019 sampling event was 300 mg/L higher than the historical period of record, while the other area means were within the range of comparable values over the historical period of record. Transect values were higher than the historical period of record at BB1-a and BB4-a during the spring, while fall values were all within the historical range.
Porewater nutrient concentrations for TN, total ammonia, and TP are provided in Figures 5.2-3 through 5.2-5. Mean total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) concentrations in porewater ranged from 0.732 mg/L (BB2) to 1.72 mg/L (BB4) during the fall 2018 sampling event and from 0.931 mg/L (BB2) to 1.09 mg/L (BB4) during the spring 2019 event (Table 5.2-9). The greatest variance in seasonal means was found in BB4, which had a TKN concentration 0.635 mg/L greater in the fall than in the spring. All area means were within the range of comparable values over the historical period of record.
Unionized ammonia concentrations in porewater were low during both the fall 2018 and spring 2019 sampling events, with a maximum mean area value of 0.006 mg/L found in BB1 during fall 2018 (Table 5.2-9). All ammonia values during the reporting period were within the range of comparable values reported over the historical period of record; average porewater values over the 9 years have been higher than the average surface water ammonia values for the monitoring sites over the historical period.
5-14
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 TP, orthophosphate (OP), and nitrate/nitrite porewater concentrations during the reporting period were mostly non-detect, with the exception of an OP value at BB2-a (0.0115 mg/L) and a TP reported value of 0.0298 mg/L in the reference site at BB4-a in fall 2018. These low phosphorus values indicate that the monitoring transects are phosphorus-limited, consistent with other studies from South Florida (Brand 1988). The porewater does not appear to be a source of phosphorus into the Bay.
Mean tritium values for the reporting period were 7.5 pCi/L in fall 2018 and 8.5 pCi/L in spring 2019 in the monitoring transects BB-1 to BB-3, while the reference transect means were 4.6 pCi/L and 7.5 pCi/L for the same periods. These slight differences are not significant, as these comparative values are within the 1-sigma () of approximately 6.5 for these values. Plot values ranged from effectively zero (-6.4 pCi/L reported) at BB2-b to 28.2 pCi/L at BB1-a (Table 5.2-9; Figure 5.2-6). All values were <15 pCi/L, with the exception of BB1-a in May 2019. This 28.2 pCi/L value from BB1-a is not unexpected, as this is the shallowest transect and this value is within the 1-sigma error of dry season values from previous years (e.g., September 2013 [25.1 pCi/L], May 2017 [24.3 pCi/L]).
5.2.1.4 Submerged Aquatic Vegetation The seagrass community continues to be healthy and dominated by turtle grass, reflective of stable growing conditions. Percent coverage of macrophytes has been consistent over the 9-year monitoring effort, and the turtle grass TN/TP ratios continue to indicate a phosphorus-limited system with ratios similar to, and often more limiting than, the reference area in Barnes Sound.
Study Area Characterization All four study areas have different physical and hydrologic attributes that contribute to the vegetation patterns observed. For example, study area BB1 can generally be described as a sheltered embayment compared to the other study areas because portions are located west of the Arsenicker Islands and south of the Turkey Point peninsula (Figure 1.5-1). BB1 is also the shallowest of the study areas, with a mean depth of 1.6 m (Table 5.2-3). This site also had the most consistent layer of sediment. Turtle grass was present in >90% of the quadrats. Shoal grass (Halodule wrightii) was also present in BB1, but was less widespread than turtle grass. This species was present in about one-third of the quadrats. The percentage of quadrats containing either turtle grass or shoal grass during both seasonal sampling events was within the range of comparable values previously reported for BB1.
Study area BB2 contained turtle grass in approximately one-third of the quadrats (Table 5.2-10).
Shoal grass was present in approximately 20% of the quadrats in BB2. The percentage of quadrats in BB2 containing the two species during both seasonal sampling events was within the range of comparable values previously reported. Study area BB3 is the deepest of the four study areas, with a mean water depth of 2.8 m (Table 5.2-3). During this reporting period, turtle grass was present in approximately 70% of the quadrats (Table 5.2-10) while shoal grass occurred in 9% of the fall 2018 and spring 2019 quadrats, although it was completely absent in BB3-b during 5-15
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 this reporting period. Shoal grass is sparsely and patchily distributed in the study areas where it occurs; it may still be in the study area, but was not captured in the randomized quadrat placement.
Turtle grass was present in >70% in the BB4 reference transects during this reporting period (Table 5.2-10). Shoal grass was scarce and present in <10% of the quadrats, and completely absent from BB4-b in spring 2019. The percentage of quadrats containing turtle grass or shoal grass this reporting period were within historical range, with the exception of turtle grass in spring 2019, which was lower (81%) than the historical period of record minimum (84%).
There have been no changes in the dominant seagrass species in the transects over the years, although the cover may vary from year to year. Seagrass coverage within the study area primarily consists of turtle grass, which is the dominant species in oligotrophic tropical and sub-tropical coastal waters. This is because turtle grass is able to tightly recycle phosphate in carbonate sediments with low phosphate availability (Fourqurean et al. 1992) and promote phosphorus releases from sediments (Long et al. 2008). Robblee and Browder (2007) generally found turtle grass to be the most abundant seagrass present at their monitoring locations in both Biscayne Bay and Florida Bay (frequency of occurrence ranged from 80 to 98%). High cover and a low-standing crop of seagrass is typical in Biscayne Bay and has been attributed to the shallow depth of sediments. As the turtle grass rhizosphere typically extends 25 to 40 cm into the substrate (Enriquez et al. 2001; Robblee and Browder 2007), this grass cannot effectively colonize and grow in areas where only a thin veneer of substrate exists over the hardbottom.
Overall, higher levels of salinity favor growth of turtle grass and shoal grass (Lirman et al.
2014).
During the reporting period, mean sediment depths at SAV sampling points ranged from 5.1 cm (BB4-b in spring 2019) to 26.8 cm (BB1-a in fall 2018), with BB1 having the greatest mean depth of any study area during both seasonal events (Table 5.2-11). Thus, it is not surprising that BB1 typically has the greatest coverage of turtle grass of any study area. However, sediment depths are not uniform. Mean sediments only exceeded 20.0 cm in depth on the nearshore transect in BB1 in spring 2019. The maximum mean sediment depth on the offshore transect in BB1 was only 9.4 cm (BB1-b in spring 2019). Variability in sediment depths between seasonal sampling events reflects the random nature of quadrat placement. This variability is the reason depth to hardbottom was recorded at five points within each quadrat. The five-point measurement with each depth recorded was first conducted in the spring 2017 event. Previously (spring 2013 through fall 2016), a diver would probe the four corners and record an approximate average on the datasheet. Actual depths for each probe were not recorded. The historical period of record minimum and maximum depths to hardbottom reflect the data collected from spring 2013 through spring 2018. All mean depths to hardbottom in all areas for the current reporting period are within the range of minimum and maximum depths recorded for the historical period of record.
Calcareous algae, such as Penicillus, Halimeda, and Acetabularia, were ubiquitous throughout the study area during this reporting period (Table 5.2-12); this has remained consistent for the historical period of record. During the spring 2019 event, 100% of all sampling points scored the presence of calcareous algae as many, while the percentage of sampling points with many 5-16
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 calcareous algae during the fall 2018 event ranged from 94% (BB1) to 100% (BB2, BB3, and BB4). The Braun-Blanquet scores for macroalgae over the historical period of record ranged from 1.0 to 3.3, and the range for fall 2018 and spring 2019 (1.5 to 2.3 for both sampling periods) fell squarely in the middle of this range.
Drift algae was present at all sampling points during both the fall 2018 and spring 2019 sampling events, although most of the sampling points were scored as having only sparse or sparse to moderate coverage (Table 5.2-12). Coverage was generally greater during the fall event than during the spring event.
Batophora, a tropical green macroalgae loosely affixed to the substrate, was widespread in all study areas throughout this reporting period, with coverage ranging from sparse to moderate/dense. However, it was generally more abundant during the fall 2018 event than during the spring 2019 event (Table 5.2-12). The presence and seasonal prevalence of this species is comparable to previous years. Batophora coverage varies across the historical period of record, although it is ubiquitous in the monitoring areas; it is a common species in Biscayne Bay and its presence is seasonal, being more prevalent during the warmer summer months relative to the fall and spring (Collado-Vides et al. 2011).
Sponges and stony corals were found in all the study areas during this reporting period, although they were encountered less frequently in BB1 than at the other transects (Table 5.2-12).
Gorgonians (i.e., soft corals) were relatively abundant in BB2 and BB3 during this reporting period, but were completely absent from BB1 and BB4. In a reversal of the relationship between seagrasses and sediments, the relative abundance of both stony and soft corals within the study area is positively related to the amount of exposed hardbottom present. Those areas with relatively large amounts of unconsolidated sediments, such as BB1, have fewer corals than areas where exposed hardbottom is more expansive.
Macrophyte Coverage Braun-Blanquet Cover Abundance (BBCA) scores for SAV (i.e., total macrophytes, total seagrass, and total algae) are semi-quantitative, as each score represents a range of values (1 =
<5% coverage, 2 = 5% to 25% coverage, 3 = 25% to 50%, 4 = 50% to 75%, and 5 = >75%), and the numerical ranges vary among scores (5%, 20%, and 25%, respectively). This can skew results when scores are averaged. Nevertheless, the means do provide a reasonable gauge for assessing relative coverage.
During this reporting period, mean total macrophyte (seagrass and attached macroalgae after drift red algae has been removed) BBCA scores ranged from an average of 1.5 (BB2 in spring 2019) to 2.4 (BB1 in fall 2018, and BB3 in spring 2019; Table 5.2-13). Some of the variation in total macrophyte BBCA values can be attributed to the very patchy nature of many of the SAV species within the study area and the randomness of quadrat placement around sampling points.
Mean total seagrass BBCA scores during this reporting period ranged from 0.4 (BB2 in fall and spring) to 1.1 (BB1 in fall and spring; Table 5.2-13). The fall sampling event occurs at the end of the seagrass growing season. Soon thereafter, the grasses enter a period of senescence when 5-17
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 leaves are shed and aboveground coverage declines. Thus, seagrass coverage at a particular location would be expected to be greater in the fall than in the spring, which is at the end of this quiescent period. However, it should be noted that BBCA scores encompass a broad range of SAV coverage, and an increase in coverage might not always be reflected by a higher score. For example, a doubling of coverage from 10% to 20% would not change the BBCA score, which is 2 (5% to 25%). Overall, all mean seagrass BBCA scores within each study area were within the range of values reported over the historical period of record.
A better assessment of SAV conditions is a comparison of the attached seagrass and macroalgae community. Mean total attached macroalgae (i.e., all species exclusive of drift algae) BBCA scores during this reporting period ranged from 1.5 (BB2 in spring 2019) to 2.3 (BB1 in fall 2018 and BB3 in spring 2019), all of which were within the range for the historical period of record (Table 5.2-13). Average total attached macroalgae for the historical period of record ranged from 1.0 in BB1 to 3.0 in BB2. In short, the BBCA scores for the 2018 and 2019 sampling events were no higher or lower than the historic range for macrophyte coverage. The SAV patterns and composition of the seagrass at the monitoring sites have remained consistent over the period of record and do not appear to be transitioning to a different community type.
5.2.1.5 Seagrass Leaf Nutrients Mean TP values ranged from 566.5 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) in BB3 to 717.5 mg/kg in BB1 for the reporting period. Area means were within historical ranges for all areas (Table 5.2-14). For the 2010-2018 reporting period, TP in seagrass leaves appears to be trending higher (Mann-Kendall Test, phosphorus and N:P ratios). However, the trend was apparent at all sites (including reference sites), which suggests that phosphorous enrichment may be a regional phenomenon. Regionally, the monitoring sites in Biscayne Bay and Card Sound have turtle grass leaves that are more phosphorous-limited than the average of Florida Bay T. testudinum leaves (Fourqurean and Zieman 1992). In a long-term study of seagrass nutrients, Fourqurean and Zieman (2002) found that leaf phosphorus accounted for between 0.048% to 0.243% (mean
= 0.113%) of the dry weight of turtle grass leaves collected over a broad geographic area of the Florida Keys. In Florida Bay, the dry weight of turtle grass leaf TP ranged from a high of 0.161% close to a bird rookery with substantial phosphate inputs, to a low of 0.078% at 120 m from the rookery that the authors considered to be oligotrophic (Fourqurean et al. 1992). Mean TP values obtained for each study area during the fall 2018 sampling event ranged from 0.059%
in BB3 to 0.066% in BB1 (Table 5.2-14). Thus, leaf nutrient values for TP obtained during this reporting period are within the range of values reported for turtle grass in similar areas of South Florida.
Seagrass leaf nutrient ratios for Fall 2018 are within or below values reported for the historical period of record. The molar N:P ratios for turtle grass indicate phosphorus limitation in their growth. The N:P ratios for the monitoring sites (e.g., BB1, BB2, and BB3) were slightly lower than the reference BB4 transect, and indicate that these sites are less phosphorus-limited than the control site. Furthermore, molar N:P ratios reported from 2010 to 2018 ranged from 57.58 to 206.78, which testify to the phosphorus-limited sediments found in the study areas. In 2010, Dewsbury (2013) sampled turtle grass at three sites in southern Biscayne Bay, including a site near Turkey Point, and reported average N:P ratios of 31.4 to 71.2. The N:P ratios found near 5-18
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Turkey Point ranged higher than the Dewsbury (2013) data set, and indicate lower TP levels in T.
testudinum blades. The N:P ratios at all sampling sites are within the range of values reported for the shoreline sampling sites (<50 m from shore) for western Biscayne Bay in 2008, but lower (i.e., less phosphorus-limited) than nearshore or offshore sampling sites sampled in 2011 (Lirman et al. 2014).
Nutrients within the water column can be highly variable, both spatially and temporally, making it difficult to accurately characterize prevailing conditions. However, over time, nutrients present in the water column become sequestered in sediment porewater where they are used by seagrasses for growth. Therefore, nutrient concentrations in leaf tissue provide a reliable indicator of limiting nutrients within the ecosystem. Seagrass leaf nutrients were measured during fall sampling events as an integration of the growing season. The data over the past 9 years have remained consistent, and the porewater patterns at the monitoring sites, coupled with the leaf data, indicate that the system continues to be a phosphorus-limited system that is stable and dominated by turtle grass.
5-19
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 TABLES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.0-1. Summary of all Ecological Data Collected and Significance to the Project.
Type of Ecological Biscayne Data Collected Marsh Mangrove Bay Significance Indicates if the vegetative community in a given area has changed over time. Shifts in the vegetative community could be an indication of outside influence such as mitigation efforts, major storm events, or regional Community X X X meteorological conditions. It could also be an indication of potential CCS Description influence via a groundwater pathway if a sudden change in the vegetative community coincides with higher-than normal porewater specific conductance, chloride, sodium, and tritium values.
An indicator of species diversity. Shifts in the Shannon-Weiner Index value of a plot over time can indicate a change in the vegetative community (fewer species or more species), the cause of which can be a Shannon-Weiner naturally occurring influence such as droughts/floods or storm events. It X X Index could also be caused by potential CCS influence via a groundwater pathway if a sudden change in the vegetative community coincides with higher-than normal porewater specific conductance, chloride, sodium, and tritium values.
Measures how evenly distributed (numerically) each species is at a site.
Species Evenness X X Sudden changes in species evenness can indicate shifts in the vegetative community caused by outside influences.
Changes in vegetation height over time indicates growth and/or die-off.
Changes in height are most commonly caused by seasonal effects, meteorological conditions, or storm events, but could potentially be Vegetation Height X X caused by CCS influence via a groundwater pathway if a sudden change in height coincides with higher-than-normal porewater specific conductance, chloride, sodium, and tritium values.
5-20
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.0-1. Summary of all Ecological Data Collected and Significance to the Project.
Type of Ecological Biscayne Data Collected Marsh Mangrove Bay Significance Changes in vegetation percent cover over time indicates growth and/or die-off. Changes in percent cover are most commonly caused by seasonal Vegetation effects, meteorological conditions, or storm events, but could potentially X X X Percent Cover be caused by CCS influence via a groundwater pathway if a dramatic change in percent cover coincides with higher-than-normal porewater specific conductance, chloride, sodium, and tritium values.
Biomass values can be compared to published values in similar habitats as an indicator of vegetative community health. Biomass values can also be monitored for changes over time, which can indicate the effects of outside Vegetation influences. Changes in biomass are most commonly caused by seasonal X X Biomass effects, meteorological conditions, or storm events, but could potentially be caused by CCS influence via a groundwater pathway if a sudden change in biomass coincides with higher-than-normal porewater specific conductance, chloride, sodium, and tritium values.
Productivity values can be compared to published values in similar habitats as an indicator of vegetative community health. Productivity values can also be monitored for changes over time, which can indicate Vegetation outside influences. Changes in productivity are most commonly caused by X X Productivity seasonal effects, meteorological conditions, or storm events, but could potentially be caused by CCS influence via a groundwater pathway if a sudden change in productivity coincides with higher-than-normal porewater specific conductance, chloride, sodium, and tritium values.
Sclerophylly is a measure of leaf hardness or toughness that reflects a plant's response to climate and nutrient availability. Better growing Leaf Sclerophylly X X conditions will result in lower sclerophylly values. These values can be monitored for changes over time or compared to published values to indicate potential stressors on the vegetative community.
5-21
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.0-1. Summary of all Ecological Data Collected and Significance to the Project.
Type of Ecological Biscayne Data Collected Marsh Mangrove Bay Significance Describes the carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorous content of the vegetation.
Leaf Nutrient These values can be used to determine nutrient limitations and can be X X X Concentrations compared over time to identify shifts in nutrient availability caused by outside influences.
These values can be compared to published values from similar habitats as an indicator of vegetative community health. Values that fall well outside Leaf Isotopic X X X the range of published values for a particular habitat can reflect abnormal Values environmental conditions. Large changes in leaf isotopic values can indicate a significant environmental change.
Collected from the sediment at 0, 30, and 60 cm depths (terrestrial only).
Porewater CCS water is characterized by specific conductance and temperature Specific values that are higher than those found in the ecosystems adjacent to TPP.
X X X Conductance and High porewater specific conductance and temperature values can indicate Temperature a potential CCS groundwater pathway if they coincide with high sodium, chloride, and tritium values.
Porewater chloride and sodium samples are collected from the root zone Porewater (30 cm depth) on a quarterly basis. These values reflect salt concentrations Chloride and X X X in the porewater. High values of sodium and chloride can indicate Sodium potential CCS influence if they coincide with high specific conductance Concentrations and tritium values.
Porewater nutrient samples are collected from the root zone (30 cm depth) on a semi-annual basis. These values can help explain vegetation biomass Porewater and productivity patterns on a landscape scale. They can also indicate Nutrient nutrient cycling patterns and phosphorous availability in the marsh and Concentrations X X X mangrove ecosystems. CCS water can contain high concentrations of (TN, TP, Total nutrients at certain times of the year. If high nutrient values are present at Ammonia) an ecological monitoring site and those values coincide with high specific conductance, sodium, chloride, and tritium values, this may indicate CCS influence via a groundwater pathway.
5-22
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.0-1. Summary of all Ecological Data Collected and Significance to the Project.
Type of Ecological Biscayne Data Collected Marsh Mangrove Bay Significance Porewater tritium samples are collected from the root zone (30 cm depth) on a quarterly basis. CCS water is characterized by high tritium concentrations (ranging from 1,000 to 19,000 pCi/L). Groundwater migration of CCS water would be characterized by tritium concentrations similar to those observed in the CCS, and would coincide with higher Porewater Tritium X X X specific conductance, temperature, sodium, chloride, and possibly nutrient Concentrations values. It should be noted that atmospheric deposition of tritium does occur in the areas adjacent to TPP. Tritium concentrations from atmospheric deposition are generally above background levels (>20 pCi/L) but are still considered low level and would not coincide with higher specific conductance, chloride, and sodium values.
5-23
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-1. Data and Samples Collected from August 2018 through May 2019.
Measurements August 2018 November 2018 February 2019 May 2019 Measure herbaceous plants in 1x1m subplots X X X X Measure woody plants in 5x5m subplots X Collect herbaceous leaf samples for mass and nutrient X X analysis Collect woody leaf samples for mass and nutrient X
analysis Estimate herbaceous plant cover in 1x1m subplots X X X X Estimate woody plant cover in 5x5m subplots X Collect porewater samples for nutrient analysis X X Collect porewater samples for tracer suite analysis X X X X Key:
m = meter(s).
5-24
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-2. Plot Location, Community Description, Dominant Vegetation in Subplots.
Northeast Subplot Set Up Location (decimal degrees) Herbaceous Woody (meters)
Dominant Dominant Transect Plot Latitude Longitude Community Species Species 1x1 5x5 Cladium Rhizophora F1 1 25.43503 -80.34692 Marsh/Mangrove Y Y jamaicense mangle F1 2 25.44027 -80.34042 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense R. mangle Y Y F2 1 25.43310 -80.35403 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense None Y N F2 2 25.43286 -80.35864 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense R. mangle Y Y F2 3 25.43328 -80.36346 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense None Y N F3 1 25.40840 -80.36248 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense None Y N F3 2 25.40815 -80.36722 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense None Y N F3 3 25.40806 -80.37231 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense None Y N R. mangle Conocarpus F4 1 25.38657 -80.37074 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense erectus Y N Myrica cerifera F4 2 25.38669 -80.37492 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense None Y N F4 3 25.38655 -80.37908 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense None Y N Laguncularia F5 1 25.3557 -80.36692 Scrub mangrove None racemosa Y Y R. mangle D. spicata F5 2 25.35304 -80.35600 Scrub mangrove Juncus R. mangle Y Y roemerianus F6 1 25.35469 -80.43848 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense None Y N F6 2 25.34966 -80.43619 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense None Y N F6 3 25.34413 -80.43097 Freshwater marsh C. jamaicense None Y N M1 1 25.44296 -80.33598 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M1 2 25.44716 -80.33269 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y 5-25
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-2. Plot Location, Community Description, Dominant Vegetation in Subplots.
Northeast Subplot Set Up Location (decimal degrees) Herbaceous Woody (meters)
Dominant Dominant Transect Plot Latitude Longitude Community Species Species 1x1 5x5 M2 1 25.40535 -80.33070 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M2 2 25.40521 -80.32990 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M3 1 25.38628 -80.33083 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M3 2 25.38450 -80.32794 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M4 1 25.35630 -80.33138 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M4 2 25.35468 -80.32911 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y R. mangle M5 1 25.35186 -80.35543 Scrub mangrove D. spicata Avicennia Y Y germinans M5 2 25.34507 -80.33381 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle Y Y M6 1 25.29448 -80.39633 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y M6 2 25.29305 -80.39538 Scrub mangrove None R. mangle N Y 5-26
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-3. Species and Individuals Counted in Subplots for Shannon-Wiener Index of Diversity Calculations in November 2018.
November 2018 Community Type
- Plot Species Present # of Individuals C. jamaicense 47 F2-1 E. cellulosa 4 C. jamaicense 45 F2-2 E. cellulosa 6 R. mangle 2 C. jamaicense 50 F2-3 E. cellulosa 9 C. jamaicense 34 F3-1 E. cellulosa 30 C. jamaicense 36 F3-2 Aster sp. 3 C. jamaicense 44 F3-3 E. cellulosa 8 Marsh Aster sp. 1 C. jamaicense 64 R. mangle 1 F4-1 Myrica cerifera 1 Chrysobalanus icaco 1 Unknown sp. 1 C. jamaicense 42 F4-2 E. cellulosa 35 F4-3 C. jamaicense 32 F6-1 C. jamaicense 61 C. jamaicense 18 F6-2 E. cellulosa 81 F6-3 C. jamaicense 73 C. jamaicense 3 F1-1 R. mangle 60 C. jamaicense 86 F1-2 R. mangle 11 Marsh/Mangrove Conocarpus erectus 1 R. mangle 427 F5-1 L. racemosa 51 C. erectus 4 F5-2 D. spicata 3 5-27
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-3. Species and Individuals Counted in Subplots for Shannon-Wiener Index of Diversity Calculations in November 2018.
November 2018 Community Type
- Plot Species Present # of Individuals J. romerianus 7 R. mangle 401 L. racemosa 17 A. germinans 1 R. mangle 1024 M1-1 A. germinans 7 R. mangle 233 M1-2 A. germinans 2 R. mangle 26 M2-1 A. germinans 2 R. mangle 984 M2-2 A. germinans 4 M3-1 R. mangle 82 M3-2 R. mangle 61 Mangrove R. mangle 372 M4-1 A. germinans 2 M4-2 R. mangle 87 D. spicata 1 R. mangle 714 M5-1 A. germinans 12 L. racemosa 8 R. mangle 77 M5-2 A. germinans 1 M6-1 R. mangle 29 M6-2 R. mangle 24 Note:
- Calculations are conducted once per year in November. For herbaceous vegetation, all plants were counted in the northeast 1x1 (1 m2) subplot; similarly woody species were counted in the northeast 5x5 (25 m2).
5-28
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-4. Shannon-Wiener Index Calculated Values for Plots and Transects in November 2018 with Historical Period of Record Range.
- Historical Period of Record Range November 2018 Location Shannon Wiener Index Species Evenness Shannon Wiener Index Species Evenness Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect 1 0.0 - 0.693 N/A - 0.999 0.191 0.276 F1 2 0.393 - 0.510 0.532 - 0.728 0.358 - 0.464 0.484 - 0.843 0.407 0.720 0.370 0.656 1 0.113 - 0.473 0.162 - 0.682 0.275 0.397 F2 2 0.195 - 0.850 0.281 - 0.774 0.509 0.464 3 0.0 - 0.580 0.192 - 0.670 N/A - 0.837 0.175 - 0.609 0.427 0.425 0.616 0.387 1 0.130 - 0.693 0.187 - 1.00 0.691 0.997 F3 2 0.0 - 0.292 N/A - 0.391 0.271 0.391 3 0.325 - 0.684 0.243 - 0.762 0.469 - 0.986 0.221 - 0.982 0.429 0.647 0.619 0.589 1 0.0 - 0.0 N/A 0.305 0.190 F4 2 0.0 - 0.693 N/A - 1.00 0.689 0.994 3 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - 0.512 N/A 0.496 - 0.739 0.0 0.632 N/A 0.303 1 0.469 - 0.841 0.427 - 0.765 0.385 0.350 F5 2 0.243 - 0.943 0.494 - 1.17 0.221 - 0.680 0.276 - 0.715 0.307 0.368 0.191 0.205 1 0.0 - 0.0 N/A 0.0 N/A F6 2 0.555 - 0.687 N/A - 0.991 0.474 0.684 3 0.0 - 0.0 0.458 - 0.656 N/A 0.661 - 0.946 0.0 0.646 N/A 0.932 1 0.0 - 0.0280 N/A - 0.0410 0.041 0.059 M1 2 0.0 - 0.255 0.0 - 0.0760 0.0570 - 0.369 0.00200 - 0.109 0.049 0.042 0.071 0.061 1 0.0 - 0.168 N/A - 0.242 0.257 0.371 M2 2 0.0130 - 0.122 0.0120 - 0.116 0.0180 - 0.176 0.0180 - 0.168 0.026 0.036 0.038 0.052 1 0.0 - 0.0 N/A 0.0 N/A M3 2 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 N/A N/A 0.0 0.0 N/A N/A 1 0.0 - 0.0920 N/A - 0.133 0.005 0.008 M4 2 0.0 - 0.0790 0.0 - 0.0840 N/A - 0.563 0.0130 - 0.121 0.0 0.028 N/A 0.040 1 0.156 - 0.649 0.113 - 0.468 0.154 0.111 M5 2 0.0 - 0.212 0.141 - 0.584 N/A - 0.306 0.0490 - 0.421 0.069 0.147 0.099 0.106 1 0.0 - 0.0 N/A 0.0 N/A M6 2 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 N/A N/A 0.0 0.0 N/A N/A Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Key:
N/A = Not applicable. Species evenness cannot be calculated when only one species is present.
5-29
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-5. Average Sawgrass Coverage per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Average.
Percent Cover Historical Period of Record Average* August 2018 November 2018 February 2019 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect Plot Transect 1 6-25% 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% 0-1%
F1 2 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
1 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
2 2-5% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
F2 3 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 2-5% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
1 2-5% 2-5% 2-5% 6-25% 6-25%
2 2-5% 2-5% 2-5% 6-25% 2-5%
F3 3 6-25% 2-5% 6-25% 2-5% 6-25% 2-5% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
1 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
2 2-5% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
F4 3 2-5% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
1 2-5% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
2 2-5% 2-5% 2-5% 2-5% 2-5%
F6 3 2-5% 2-5% 2-5% 2-5% 2-5% 2-5% 6-25% 2-5% 2-5% 2-5%
Notes:
Percent cover based on cover classes (e.g. 0-1; 2-5; 6-25; 26-50; 51-75;76-100).
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
5-30
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-6. Average Sawgrass Height per Plot and Transect in the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
Average Height +/- Standard Error (cm)
Historical Period of Record Range* August 2018 November 2018 February 2019 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 68.2 - 117.5 128.0 12.3 128.5 26.2 113.0 43.3 131.8 21.4 F1 2 89.7 - 114.5 82.0 - 106.0 91.6 2.0 93.3 2.1 97.8 2.0 98.8 2.2 94.0 2.2 94.6 2.5 90.1 2.1 91.4 2.2 1 67.1 - 96.3 66.1 1.5 71.5 1.5 70.2 1.9 68.3 1.5 2 62.7 - 89.6 68.5 2.0 72.7 2.1 71.5 2.2 64.6 2.2 F2 3 59.3 - 80.4 65.4 - 88.7 67.7 1.8 67.4 1.0 67.9 2.1 70.7 1.1 70.0 2.0 70.5 1.2 64.9 1.8 66.0 1.1 1 50.3 - 68.1 56.8 1.5 63.1 1.9 58.9 2.0 54.4 1.7 2 53.2 - 73.0 61.4 2.0 66.0 2.3 61.8 2.2 54.9 2.0 F3 3 65.8 - 101.6 57.7 - 79.4 65.2 2.3 61.2 1.1 69.2 2.3 63.7 1.3 70.3 2.7 63.5 1.4 65.1 1.9 58.9 1.1 1 86.6 - 123.9 89.0 2.4 96.3 2.1 91.1 3.0 90.8 2.3 2 57.9 - 79.9 59.8 1.7 66.4 1.8 62.9 1.9 62.4 1.7 F4 3 59.6 - 89.1 71.0 - 96.2 70.0 1.8 74.8 1.5 74.3 1.8 79.9 1.5 74.8 2.2 77.1 1.7 69.7 2.1 75.2 1.5 1 75.2 - 99.3 88.5 2.6 82.2 2.7 78.6 2.5 82.0 1.9 2 61.7 - 87.0 75.8 1.7 81.3 2.4 77.4 2.4 72.0 1.7 F6 3 59.6 - 81.5 66.9 - 89.3 69.3 2.0 77.7 1.4 75.2 1.9 79.5 1.4 76.2 1.9 77.4 1.3 71.3 1.8 75.3 1.1 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
cm = Centimeters.
5-31
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-7. Corrected Live and Total Sawgrass Biomass Equations for Previous and Current Reporting Period Events.
Season Model R2 p-Value N Total Biomass Equations Total Biomass = -2.92276 + 0.000186 (LLL)2 Wet Season 2018 + 0.04193 (NoLL)2 + 0.36254 (NoDL) + 0.8474 <0.0001 143 3.76860 (Cdb1)
Total Biomass = -1.14201 + 0.0002934 Dry Season 2019 (LLL)2 + 0.01542 (NoLL)2 + 0.15366 (NoDL) 0.8645 <0.0001 120
+ 2.61598 (Cdb1)
Live Biomass Equations Live Biomass = -0.97047 + 0.0001596 (LLL)2 Wet Season 2018 + 0.05041 (NoLL)2 + 1.53759 (Cdb1)2 - 0.8315 <0.0001 143 0.01453 (NoDL)2 Live Biomass = -1.53489 + 0.0001919 Dry Season 2019 (LLL)2 + 0.03257 (NoLL)2 + 2.49648 0.8153 <0.0001 120 (Cdb1)2 - 0.02271 (NoDL)2 Key:
Cdb1 = Culm diameter at base 1.
Cdb2 = Culm diameter at base 2.
LLL = Longest live leaf.
NoDead = Number of dead leaves.
NoLL = Number of live leaves.
N = Sample size.
5-32
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-8. Average Sawgrass Live Biomass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
Live Biomass (g/m2)
Historical Period of Record Range* August 2018 November 2018 February 2019 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 0.0 - 193.0 7.8 7.8 5.2 5.2 5.9 5.9 5.7 5.7 F1 2 122 - 313.0 102.8 - 205.8 276.1 63.2 142.0 58.7 215.7 45.4 110.5 45.1 246.1 48.7 126.0 50.8 272.4 57.6 139.1 57.1 1 59.6 - 208.8 92.7 11.9 88.0 12.1 120.8 10.5 124.3 8.8 F2 2 36.4 - 91.8 64.9 8.7 68.6 7.9 79.3 16.0 82.1 5.6 3 38.9 - 112.6 56.0 - 122.2 106.4 28.8 88.0 11.1 84.5 16.7 80.4 7.1 95.1 17.9 98.4 9.5 98.7 18.3 101.7 8.2 1 29.1 - 91.2 53.4 7.4 57.8 11.7 66.6 14.7 53.2 12.3 F3 2 25.5 - 71.8 68.4 14.9 61.3 11.4 64.3 13.2 56.6 17.7 3 67.2 - 141.9 40.8 - 84.8 105.8 16.9 75.9 9.8 90.9 16.7 70.0 8.3 105.5 18.4 70.4 10.7 101.5 17.6 70.4 10.7 1 124.9 - 327 275.3 55.0 157.7 29.7 275.5 48.3 376.3 49.8 F4 2 36.4 - 89.9 68.0 9.7 56.1 6.0 80.9 14.3 94.5 10.8 3 37.8 - 100.0 68.7 - 172.3 95.8 20.0 146.3 33.0 91.5 20.6 101.8 16.8 105.1 22.0 153.8 30.9 119.2 24.5 196.7 42.0 1 48.7 - 156.0 79.6 35.3 90.9 36.6 109.2 48.5 131.2 58.9 F6 2 18.6 - 84.8 37.5 18.1 38.4 14.8 55.2 22.6 74.0 30.7 3 39.5 - 100.8 47.7 - 92.1 70.5 42.0 62.6 18.2 87.3 50.3 72.2 20.6 104.0 58.6 89.5 25.0 144.0 86.9 116.4 34.2 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
g/m2 = Grams per square meter.
5-33
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-9. Average Sawgrass Total Biomass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
Total Biomass (g/m2)
Historical Period of Record Range* August 2018 November 2018 February 2019 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 0.0 - 354.1 7.9 7.9 6.7 6.7 11.6 11.6 8.4 8.4 F1 2 167.7 - 507.6 129.4 - 329.7 309.0 66.0 158.5 64.7 277.2 56.7 141.9 57.5 341.6 64.2 176.6 69.3 384.0 70.1 196.2 78.2 1 78.9 - 366.3 116.8 17.9 106.0 5.4 155.0 13.7 150.7 11.7 F2 2 58.3 - 163.8 94.8 9.8 91.4 8.1 109.8 25.5 102.1 9.6 3 66.7 - 157.9 74.4 - 216.9 132.2 31.5 114.6 12.2 129.3 25.6 108.9 9.5 124.5 25.8 129.8 13.0 118.9 25.6 123.9 10.8 1 28.5 - 112.7 66.3 8.7 71.6 12.3 81.2 19.5 70.3 16.1 F3 2 33.1 - 138.2 86.4 19.0 92.0 19.0 86.0 18.6 64.5 18.3 3 90.0 - 285.2 54.0 - 169.0 125.2 21.7 92.7 11.7 120.3 20.1 94.6 10.9 126.0 33.8 95.2 13.3 132.2 22.1 89.0 13.6 1 172.6 - 661.8 332.0 58.1 217.6 30.2 391.9 77.7 498.3 80.2 F4 2 52.0 - 161.7 89.5 10.8 77.3 9.0 104.8 24.0 113.6 16.8 3 51.0 - 206.0 92.7 - 325.9 124.0 25.0 181.8 37.6 114.4 25.4 136.4 21.7 155.2 30.4 217.3 45.9 164.6 36.1 258.8 58.1 1 67.3 - 219.2 101.2 44.2 128.2 51.0 159.5 70.1 172.5 78.9 F6 2 24.6 - 205.8 44.9 19.4 59.0 23.6 72.8 26.8 87.0 37.4 3 47.7 - 253.7 63.5 - 226.9 85.6 53.3 77.2 22.8 101.7 55.3 96.3 25.3 150.4 91.9 127.6 37.6 208.0 129.7 155.8 49.6 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
g/m2 = grams per square meter.
5-34
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-10. Annual Net Primary Productivity for the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
ANPP (g/m2/yr)
Historical Period of November 2017 to Transect Plot Record Range* November 2018 1 -17.6 - 253.8 8.5 F1 2 220.2 - 326.3 347.0 1 105.5 - 229.7 167.9 2 68.5 - 125.8 160.9 F2 3 86.2 - 134.4 163.9 1 40.1 - 101.7 84.1 2 51.7 - 102.5 115.4 F3 3 110.0 - 158.3 171.8 1 208.7 - 440.1 256.9 2 67.3 - 129.7 126.2 F4 3 67.8 - 107.9 179.3 1 82.9 - 190.1 190.3 2 41.1 - 104.8 77.0 F6 3 76.4 - 161.8 154.1 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through November 2017 ecological sampling events.
Mean productivity at Taylor Slough in Everglades National Park is typically less than 300 g/m2/yr (Childers et al. 2006)
Key:
ANPP = Annual net primary productivity.
g/m2/yr = grams per square meter per year.
5-35
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-11. Sawgrass Leaf Sclerophylly per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
Sclerophylly (g/m2)
Historical Period of Record Range* November 2018 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 101.2 - 241.5 155.2 10.1 229.8 16.6 F1 2 89.7 - 296.9 126.1 - 249.7 176.7 7.6 172.4 6.7 211.2 11.3 215.0 9.6 1 111.6 - 279.9 ** ** 196.9 9.3 2 130.6 - 276.9 205.5 8.2 224.4 13.4 F2 3 125.9 - 263.4 125.3 - 269.6 176.9 9.3 191.2 6.8 194.6 15.7 205.3 7.7 1 128.6 - 304.2 185.6 11.3 *** ***
2 134.0 - 254.0 168.0 6.9 *** ***
F3 3 121.7 - 269.9 130.0 - 272.3 164.3 10.2 172.6 5.6 *** *** *** ***
1 102.6 - 228.2 173.8 7.8 227.8 15.4 2 138.5 - 279.4 176.7 13.4 209.7 12.1 F4 3 149.3 - 320.0 133.0 - 272.6 176.5 12.6 175.7 6.5 244.9 15.6 227.5 8.5 1 112.9 - 281.0 180.2 5.7 217.7 11.7 2 129.2 - 263.2 202.1 8.4 209.5 11.7 F6 3 118.9 - 312.9 125.1 - 273.1 193.8 9.0 192.0 4.7 251.7 10.0 226.3 7.0 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
- Data from F2-1 was lost.
- Data from the F3 transect was lost due to transcription error.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
g/m2 = Grams per square meter.
5-36
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-12. Average Leaf Carbon for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Historical Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
C. jamaicense Total Carbon (mg/g)
Historical Period of Record Range* November 2018 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 419 - 519 451 NA 452 NA F1 2 449 - 510 434 - 512 463 3.46 461 3.65 463 1.41 461 2.47 1 445 - 549 468 3.89 463 1.56 2 429 - 499 470 1.84 463 3.18 F2 3 446 - 522 445 - 523 470 1.24 469 1.40 458 3.47 461 1.65 1 438 - 513 462 2.92 468 3.32 2 436 - 505 466 1.79 452 7.69 F3 3 432 - 525 440 - 507 464 1.45 464 1.20 459 2.18 460 3.27 1 439 - 495 466 1.19 459 1.49 2 428 - 491 474 7.51 464 0.86 F4 3 436 - 549 436 - 510 465 1.80 468 2.62 463 2.27 462 1.08 1 425 - 512 464 2.73 465 1.93 2 421 - 508 472 2.50 465 2.68 F6 3 432 - 511 427 - 511 459 3.91 465 2.25 465 1.88 465 1.15 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
mg/g = milligrams per gram.
NA = Not applicable.
5-37
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-13. Average Leaf Total Nitrogen for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
C. jamaicense Total Nitrogen (mg/g)
Historical Period of Record Range* November 2018 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 5.20 - 10.7 5.80 NA 6.60 NA F1 2 4.40 - 10.8 4.80 - 10.4 6.68 0.76 6.50 0.61 7.35 0.62 7.20 0.51 1 4.60 - 11.0 6.58 0.25 8.70 0.44 2 6.00 - 11.0 5.13 0.50 8.90 0.50 F2 3 4.70 - 11.8 5.40 - 11.1 6.30 0.37 6.00 0.28 7.93 0.53 8.51 0.29 1 5.00 - 10.0 6.80 0.51 8.25 0.15 2 6.00 - 10.4 6.55 0.83 6.83 0.28 F3 3 5.30 - 10.0 5.90 - 9.90 7.10 0.95 6.82 0.42 7.25 0.47 7.44 0.25 1 5.70 - 10.0 6.28 0.19 7.63 0.84 2 5.00 - 9.50 5.90 0.49 6.98 0.38 F4 3 5.70 - 11.0 5.50 - 10.2 5.50 0.42 5.89 0.23 5.85 0.83 6.82 0.44 1 5.60 - 10.5 6.53 0.69 5.45 0.26 2 5.20 - 12.0 6.48 0.14 6.40 0.19 F6 3 4.60 - 10.3 5.30 - 10.9 5.93 0.15 6.31 0.23 5.85 0.23 5.90 0.17 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
mg/g = milligrams per gram.
NA = Not applicable.
5-38
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-14. Average Leaf Total Phosphorous for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect During the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
C. jamaicense Total Phosphorous (mg/kg)
Historical Period of Record Range* November 2018 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 144 - 296 465 NA 195 NA F1 2 127 - 313 136 - 304 203 11.4 255 53.2 208 10.2 206 8.3 1 163 - 255 174 8.80 155 23.1 2 160 - 285 161 13.4 188 15.2 F2 3 92.8 - 313 143 - 284 199 9.87 178 7.45 170 48.8 171 17.38 1 120 - 327 154 26.2 203 36.2 2 120 - 258 156 32.5 170 8.60 F3 3 123 - 282 134 - 261 197 5.40 169 14.0 170 8.77 181 12.4 1 117 - 324 227 26.2 232 10.4 2 92.7 - 292 172 9.60 183 10.9 F4 3 169 - 318 147 - 312 181 14.1 193 11.9 195 17.4 203 9.3 1 159 - 336 298 21.5 227 22.0 2 155 - 358 231 9.16 190 22.0 F6 3 130 - 288 159 - 328 200 14.2 243 14.8 184 7.49 200 11.2 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
mg/g = milligrams per gram.
NA = Not applicable.
5-39
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-15. Average Leaf Carbon Isotopes for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
C. jamaicense Carbon Isotopes ()
Historical Period of Record Range* November 2018 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 -28.3 to -25.5 -27.8 NA -27.6 NA F1 2 -27.5 to -24.3 -27.8 to -25.6 -25.8 0.42 -26.2 0.51 -26.8 0.42 -26.9 0.37 1 -27.0 to -25.4 -25.9 0.22 -26.3 0.12 2 -27.0 to -25.2 -26.3 0.20 -26.7 0.34 F2 3 -27.1 to -25.6 -27.0 to -25.4 -26.1 0.21 -26.1 0.12 -26.4 0.24 -26.5 0.14 1 -26.7 to -25.2 -25.9 0.23 -26.1 0.10 2 -27.0 to -25.1 -25.8 0.20 -26.6 0.31 F3 3 -26.7 to -25.1 -26.7 to -25.1 -25.5 0.28 -25.7 0.13 -26.1 0.27 -26.3 0.15 1 -27.5 to -24.9 -26.1 0.10 -26.6 0.35 2 -27.8 to -25.2 -26.0 0.18 -26.3 0.31 F4 3 -26.9 to -25.4 -27.4 to -25.0 -25.5 0.31 -25.9 0.14 -26.1 0.13 -26.3 0.16 1 -27.6 to -24.8 -25.2 0.07 -26.8 0.26 2 -27.0 to -18.1 -25.1 0.11 -26.1 0.18 F6 3 -27.6 to -20.2 -27.4 to -21.5 -25.6 0.18 -25.3 0.10 -27.1 0.10 -26.7 0.17 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
mg/g = milligrams per gram.
NA = Not applicable.
5-40
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-16. Average Leaf Nitrogen Isotopes for Sawgrass per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
C. jamaicense Nitrogen Isotopes ()
Historical Period of Record Range* November 2018 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 -3.4 to 2.8 -0.04 NA -0.37 NA F1 2 -3.8 to 2.8 -3.6 to 2.8 -2.0 0.31 -1.6 0.46 0.21 0.46 0.10 0.37 1 -3.2 to 0.70 -2.6 0.47 -3.6 0.65 2 -4.6 to 0.80 -1.7 0.63 -2.0 0.23 F2 3 -3.6 to 1.3 -3.7 to 0.70 -2.9 0.18 -2.4 0.29 -1.9 0.32 -2.5 0.33 1 -5.8 to 0.30 -3.6 0.92 -3.5 0.72 2 -5.2 to -0.30 -4.4 0.60 -3.5 0.89 F3 3 -5.0 to -0.50 -5.3 to -0.50 -4.6 0.75 -4.2 0.42 -3.8 0.93 -3.6 0.45 1 -5.2 to 2.7 -5.0 0.42 -3.5 0.65 2 -7.8 to -1.8 -4.8 0.95 -2.7 0.73 F4 3 -5.9 to -0.60 -5.8 to 0.10 -5.0 0.38 -4.9 0.33 -4.6 0.54 -3.6 0.41 1 -4.6 to -0.90 -2.2 0.76 -4.3 0.38 2 -3.7 to -0.60 -3.3 0.27 -3.8 1.3 F6 3 -5.1 to -0.50 -4.3 to -1.0 -3.7 1.1 -3.1 0.44 -3.3 1.3 -3.8 0.58 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
mg/g = milligrams per gram.
NA = Not applicable.
5-41
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-17. Sawgrass Leaf C:N Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect in the Reporting Period.
C. jamaicense C:N Molar Ratio November 2018 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect 1 91:1 80:1 F1 2 81:1 83:1 73:1 75:1 1 83:1 62:1 2 107:1 61:1 F2 3 87:1 91:1 67:1 63:1 1 79:1 66:1 2 83:1 77:1 F3 3 76:1 79:1 74:1 72:1 1 87:1 70:1 2 94:1 78:1 F4 3 99:1 93:1 92:1 79:1 1 83:1 99:1 2 85:1 85:1 F6 3 90:1 86:1 93:1 92:1 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
Key:
C = Carbon.
N = Nitrogen.
5-42
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-18. Sawgrass Leaf N:P Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect in the Reporting Period.
C. jamaicense N:P Ratio November 2018 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect 1 28:1 75:1 F1 2 73:1 56:1 78:1 78:1 1 84:1 124:1 2 71:1 105:1 F2 3 70:1 75:1 103:1 110:1 1 98:1 90:1 2 93:1 89:1 F3 3 80:1 89:1 95:1 91:1 1 61:1 73:1 2 76:1 84:1 F4 3 67:1 68:1 67:1 74:1 1 49:1 53:1 2 62:1 75:1 F6 3 66:1 57:1 70:1 65:1 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Hurricane Irma (9/10/17) resulted in the mortality of all sawgrass plants in F1-1. Some regrowth was observed at the northeast corner subplot during the reporting period.
Key:
N = Nitrogen.
P = Phosphorous.
5-43
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-19. Average Specific Conductance (µS/cm) of Porewater at 30 cm Depth for the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
Porewater Specific Conductance at 30 cm Depth (µS/cm)
Historical Period of Record Range* August 2018 November 2018 February 2019 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 1045 - 16146 12153 1517 5623 1271 4561 601 7555 1303 F1 2 1076 - 4112 1360 - 9597 3428 95 7790 2594 3241 45 4432 862 2900 145 3730 542 3329 98 5442 1332 1 847 - 6751 3812 504 1982 584 2296 75 3056 303 2 1153 - 2718 1988 334 1604 74 1259 31 2184 76 3 1827 - 2745 2027 50 2093 62 2055 110 2419 40 F2 4 670 - 2274 1194 - 3489 NA NA 2609 412 802 172 1621 224 NA NA 1870 201 1425 307 2271 236 1 1191 - 10141 7664 382 5875 212 4995 204 5254 37 2 1314 - 7509 6670 573 5828 137 5243 21 5317 65 3 1984 - 7764 5874 11 5615 297 4602 76 4465 3 F3 4 381 - 3440 1351 - 7810 NA NA 6736 373 1374 13 4673 725 NA NA 4946 131 2225 161 4315 475 1 651 - 9089 994 47 999 10 1273 2 1357 5 2 512 - 2318 1017 301 1017 13 1064 4 1143 24 3 790 - 5865 1569 484 1454 304 1478 49 1499 58 F4 4 874 - 5051 667 - 5268 NA NA 1193 189 2958 199 1877 311 NA NA 1272 77 3299 464 2119 365 1 6660 - 59133 26819 6953 34808 364 39535 146 56925 3409 F5 2 19904 - 76679 20114 - 60246 51097 2376 38958 7623 47951 464 41380 3802 51828 711 45681 3561 61377 654 59151 1913 1 889 - 9412 7262 212 6503 617 5252 35 5118 117 2 1070 - 4336 4177 673 3353 631 3433 619 3178 258 3 2438 - 11017 7935 1178 8285 406 6406 1153 6881 735 F6 4 645 - 3517 1124 - 7055 NA NA 6458 813 1620 111 4940 1002 NA NA 5030 643 1581 28 4190 769 1 40039 - 64315 NA NA 44388 284 NA NA 46988 271 M1 2 41105 - 63885 41584 - 59212 NA NA NA NA 44796 1041 44592 456 NA NA NA NA 48400 1101 47694 617 1 42239 - 62516 NA NA 50187 78 NA NA 54101 1666 M2 2 45387 - 64093 43813 - 62374 NA NA NA NA 55258 260 52722 1468 NA NA NA NA 56259 1003 55180 1009 1 42949 - 67368 NA NA 52644 284 NA NA 54061 634 M3 2 40886 - 64914 41918 - 63560 NA NA NA NA 50885 88 51764 522 NA NA NA NA 56553 451 55307 786 1 38237 - 79856 NA NA 51981 421 NA NA 59724 918 M4 2 40031 - 85880 38465 - 78953 NA NA NA NA 53515 852 52748 589 NA NA NA NA 56055 959 57890 1190 1 39633 - 81751 NA NA 50938 734 NA NA 63006 734 M5 2 41322 - 58486 43648 - 66605 NA NA NA NA 53422 676 52180 825 NA NA NA NA 54826 761 58916 2400 1 40409 - 51057 NA NA 44695 512 NA NA 46204 251 M6 2 32397 - 51909 37620 - 50682 NA NA NA NA 46271 339 45483 519 NA NA NA NA 46112 1069 46158 449 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Key:
µS/cm = Microsiemens per centimeter.
NA = Not applicable.
SE = Standard Error.
5-44
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-20. Average Temperature (°C) of Porewater at 30 cm Depth for the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
Porewater Temperature at 30 cm Depth (°C)
Historical Period of Record Range* August 2018 November 2018 February 2019 May 2019 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE Plot SE Transect SE 1 21.2 - 36.9 31.6 0.1 27.7 0.1 26.2 0.2 26.9 0.0 F1 2 20.0 - 30.8 21.7 - 33.9 28.1 0.1 29.9 1.0 26.4 0.0 27.1 0.4 25.6 0.8 25.9 0.4 26.5 0.2 26.7 0.1 1 22.3 - 31.0 28.8 0.1 29.3 1.1 23.3 0.9 28.1 0.1 2 21.0 - 31.5 30.7 1.0 27.9 1.0 23.1 0.4 29.3 0.7 3 20.7 - 31.4 31.5 1.5 23.2 0.7 25.8 0.6 28.3 0.4 F2 4 22.3 - 30.0 21.6 - 30.7 NA NA 30.4 0.7 27.5 0.3 27.0 0.9 NA NA 24.1 0.6 29.8 0.0 28.9 0.3 1 19.0 - 31.0 33.0 2.5 28.9 0.8 25.6 1.0 28.3 0.6 2 17.5 - 31.5 31.3 1.3 28.8 0.9 26.2 1.0 28.5 0.5 3 17.3 - 32.6 29.5 0.4 27.3 0.5 25.7 0.9 29.0 1.1 F3 4 23.1 - 28.7 18.0 - 30.5 NA NA 31.3 1.0 28.7 1.1 28.4 0.4 NA NA 25.8 0.5 27.2 0.3 28.2 0.4 1 18.9 - 30.2 30.6 0.5 28.2 0.5 25.9 0.7 28.5 0.9 2 19.9 - 32.0 29.5 0.1 28.1 0.5 25.7 0.4 29.3 0.8 3 21.4 - 32.1 30.6 0.6 27.9 0.4 25.2 0.2 28.6 0.9 F4 4 23.5 - 29.0 20.1 - 31.0 NA NA 30.2 0.3 29.0 1.0 28.4 0.4 NA NA 25.6 0.2 26.7 0.3 27.9 0.4 1 21.7 - 34.5 31.5 0.2 23.4 0.7 25.6 0.1 28.3 0.1 F5 2 22.4 - 34.1 22.1 - 33.0 30.8 0.3 31.2 0.2 25.3 0.3 24.4 0.6 24.7 0.7 25.2 0.4 30.6 0.5 29.4 0.7 1 18.8 - 31.6 30.6 0.3 27.3 0.5 21.5 0.1 28.8 0.5 2 19.3 - 30.6 29.7 0.1 27.8 0.8 23.1 0.0 29.8 1.3 3 20.8 - 30.2 29.0 0.1 26.9 0.0 23.2 1.0 27.8 0.4 F6 4 21.4 - 27.5 19.6 - 30.5 NA NA 29.8 0.3 27.1 0.7 27.3 0.3 NA NA 22.6 0.4 29.9 1.0 29.1 0.5 1 22.1 - 31.9 NA NA 28.3 0.6 NA NA 30.2 0.7 M1 2 23.4 - 31.1 22.8 - 31.2 NA NA NA NA 29.0 0.2 28.7 0.3 NA NA NA NA 26.2 0.3 28.2 1.2 1 22.4 - 32.6 NA NA 27.5 0.4 NA NA 26.6 0.0 M2 2 23.2 - 32.5 22.7 - 32.5 NA NA NA NA 27.4 0.1 27.5 0.2 NA NA NA NA 23.6 3.5 25.1 1.7 1 22.1 - 31.3 NA NA 28.3 0.6 NA NA 28.0 0.3 M3 2 20.9 - 31.0 21.7 - 30.9 NA NA NA NA 27.6 0.2 27.9 0.3 NA NA NA NA 28.4 0.4 28.2 0.2 1 23.0 - 33.5 NA NA 27.7 0.1 NA NA 26.2 0.1 M4 2 20.5 - 32.7 22.3 - 33.7 NA NA NA NA 29.2 0.1 28.4 0.4 NA NA NA NA 29.3 0.3 27.8 0.9 1 23.8 - 32.8 NA NA 25.3 0.0 NA NA 30.3 0.3 M5 2 18.4 - 31.2 21.4 - 32.5 NA NA NA NA 28.1 0.3 26.7 0.8 NA NA NA NA 28.9 0.3 29.6 0.5 1 22.5 - 31.5 NA NA 28.1 0.0 NA NA 28.4 0.4 M6 2 23.3 - 32.5 22.9 - 32.1 NA NA NA NA 28.1 0.4 28.1 0.1 NA NA NA NA 28.0 0.3 28.2 0.3 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Key:
C = Celcius.
cm = Centimeter.
NA = Not Applicable.
SE = Standard Error.
5-45
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-21. Marsh Analytical Porewater Results August 2018.
PW-F1-1 PW-F1-2 PW-F2-1 PW-F2-2 PW-F2-3 PW-F3-1 PW-F3-2 PW-F3-3 PW-F4-1 Parameter Units 08/01/2018 08/01/2018 08/07/2018 08/07/2018 08/07/2018 08/13/2018 08/13/2018 08/13/2018 08/14/2018 Temperature °C 31.64 28.09 28.85 30.75 31.49 31.81 31.32 29.54 30.64 pH SU 6.93 7.01 6.88 6.96 7.03 6.91 6.87 6.93 6.98 Specific Conductance S/cm 12153 3427 3812 1988 2027 7664 6670 5874 994 Sodium mg/L 1980 476 584 224 236 1220 1000 867 118 Chloride mg/L 3500 939 1130 459 476 2520 2050 1780 175 Salinity
- 7.07 1.82 J 2.02 1.02 J 1.04 J 4.29 3.70 3.23 0.50 J Tritium pCi/L (1) 147 (7.7) 33.9 (7.1) 20.0 (6.7) 39.8 (5.0) 29.9 (6.8) 71.2 (7.7) 56.4 (7.0) 34.7 (5.6) 29.3 (6.0)
NOTES:
Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. PW = Porewater.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
5-46
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-21. Marsh Analytical Porewater Results August 2018 (continued).
PW-F4-2 PW-F4-3 PW-F5-1 PW-F5-2 PW-F6-1 PW-F6-2 PW-F6-3 PW-EB1 PW-FB1 Parameter Units 08/14/2018 08/14/2018 08/06/2018 08/06/2018 08/15/2018 08/15/2018 08/15/2018 08/01/2018 08/15/2018 Temperature °C 29.52 30.56 31.54 30.84 30.56 29.71 29.00 pH SU 6.97 6.84 6.82 6.88 6.86 6.76 6.80 Specific Conductance S/cm 1017 1569 26819 51097 7262 4177 7935 Sodium mg/L 113 202 5400 10800 1050 581 1280 0.155 I 0.0650 U Chloride mg/L 190 339 10300 20600 2630 1280 2670 0.221 U 0.221 U Salinity
- 0.51 J 0.80 J 16.77 31.20 4.05 2.25 4.46 Tritium pCi/L (1) 23.9 (7.5) 25.8 (7.3) 45.0 (8.1) 23.6 (6.9) 12.4 (5.8) 2.5 (6.0) UJ 4.9 (8.5) UJ 21.8 (7.1) -4.0 (10.1) UJ NOTES:
Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. PW = Porewater.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
5-47
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-22. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater Results November 2018.
PW-F1-1 PW-F1-2 PW-F2-1 PW-F2-2 PW-F2-3 PW-F2-4 PW-F3-1 PW-F3-2 PW-F3-3 Parameter Units 11/26/2018 11/26/2018 11/05/2018 11/05/2018 11/29/2018 11/13/2018 11/07/2018 11/07/2018 11/07/2018 Temperature °C 27.74 26.43 28.86 27.87 23.41 27.53 28.89 28.84 27.27 pH SU 7.07 6.80 6.88 6.94 6.91 6.36 6.90 6.86 6.98 Specific Conductance S/cm 5623 3241 1982 1604 2093 802 5875 5828 5615 Sodium mg/L 889 407 260 177 219 113 930 859 825 Chloride mg/L 1540 757 393 318 422 129 1770 1730 1700 Ammonia mg/L as N 1.27 0.889 1.91 1.90 2.11 0.711 2.54 2.35 2.28 Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 1.63 1.15 2.45 2.45 2.72 0.915 3.27 3.03 2.94 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.0121 0.00420 0.0129 0.0138 0.0104 0.00133 I 0.0177 0.0149 0.0171 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 4.00 6.06 3.77 4.72 5.30 3.07 5.20 4.87 4.24 TN mg/L 4.00 6.06 3.77 4.72 5.30 3.07 5.20 4.87 4.24 ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0111 I 0.0100 U 0.0107 I 0.0100 U 0.0104 I 0.0119 I 0.0168 IJ 0.0153 I J- 0.0162 IJ Total Phosphorous (P) mg/L 0.0297 0.106 0.225 0.180 0.0449 0.0209 I 0.0169 I 0.0175 I 0.0172 I Salinity
- 3.09 1.72 J 1.02 J 0.81 J 1.07 J 0.39 J 3.23 3.20 3.08 Tritium pCi/L (1) 190 (9.3) 49.1 (6.8) 129 (10.1) 48.5 (9.0) 53.7 (7.6) 46.2 (8.2) 105 (7.9) 49.0 (5.7) 50.8 (5.9)
NOTES:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
Text in blue are revised from the 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. N = Nitrogen. PW = Porewater.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. SU = Standard unit(s).
+
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonum ion. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. TN = Total nitrogen.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
5-48
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-22. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater Results November 2018 (continued).
PW-F3-4 PW-F4-1 PW-F4-2 PW-F4-3 PW-F4-4 PW-F5-1 PW-F5-2 PW-F6-1 PW-F6-2 Parameter Units 11/13/2018 11/06/2018 11/06/2018 11/06/2018 11/06/2018 11/27/2018 11/27/2018 11/12/2018 11/12/2018 Temperature °C 28.70 28.19 28.10 27.91 28.98 23.42 25.33 27.28 27.84 pH SU 6.44 7.05 7.10 7.02 6.67 6.85 7.21 6.74 6.78 Specific Conductance S/cm 1374 999 1017 1454 3208 34808 47952 6503 3353 Sodium mg/L 252 83.4 94.0 146 357 6520 9570 920 436 Chloride mg/L 286 151 176 255 734 12300 17700 1950 930 Ammonia mg/L as N 0.410 0.912 J 1.47 J+ 2.10 0.434 0.378 0.233 2.97 2.02 Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 0.529 1.17 J 1.90 J 2.71 0.559 0.487 0.300 3.82 2.61 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00100 I 0.00871 J 0.0156 J 0.0183 0.00182 0.00141 I 0.00212 0.0128 0.0101 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0700 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0700 U 0.0700 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 2.97 1.96 J 2.76 J- 3.55 2.88 2.21 3.51 5.38 2.67 TN mg/L 2.97 1.96 J 2.76 J 3.55 2.88 2.21 3.51 5.38 2.67 ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0130 I 0.0168 I 0.0144 I 0.0138 I 0.0183 I 0.0136 I 0.0100 U J 0.0110 IJ 0.0127 IJ Total Phosphorous (P) mg/L 0.0248 I 0.0235 I 0.0282 0.111 0.111 0.0131 I 0.0993 0.00900 U J 0.00900 U J Salinity
- 0.69 J 0.50 J 0.51 J 0.74 J 1.55 J 22.20 31.74 3.60 1.78 J Tritium pCi/L (1) 45.8 (7.5) 139 (10.6) 132 (9.4) 59.7 (7.7) 49.4 (6.2) 149 (9.8) 111 (9.6) 5.8 (6.6) 14.7 (8.1)
NOTES:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
Text in blue are revised from the 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. N = Nitrogen. PW = Porewater.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. SU = Standard unit(s).
+
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonum ion. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. TN = Total nitrogen.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
5-49
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-22. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater Results November 2018 (continued).
PW-F6-3 PW-F6-4 PW-M1-1 PW-M1-2 PW-M2-1 PW-M2-2 PW-M3-1 PW-M3-2 Parameter Units 11/12/2018 11/12/2018 11/15/2018 11/14/2018 11/19/2018 11/19/2018 11/20/2018 11/19/2018 Temperature °C 26.90 27.14 28.28 29.04 27.51 27.44 27.15 27.57 pH SU 6.78 6.67 6.83 6.84 7.10 6.64 6.86 7.10 Specific Conductance S/cm 8285 1620 44388 44796 50187 55258 52644 50885 Sodium mg/L 1250 222 8460 8840 10100 10900 10300 9950 Chloride mg/L 2550 217 15900 16500 18200 20000 19400 18900 Ammonia mg/L as N 1.30 J- 0.533 0.186 0.0671 I 0.820 0.135 0.869 0.671
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 1.68 J 0.687 0.239 0.0864 I 1.06 0.173 1.12 0.864 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00595 J 0.00198 0.000886 I 0.000400 U 0.00667 0.000400 U 0.00392 0.00546 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 4.53 4.32 1.68 J 1.52 1.61 J 1.13 J 1.86 J 1.65 J TN mg/L 4.53 4.32 1.68 J 1.52 1.61 J 1.13 J 1.86 J 1.65 J ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0179 IJ 0.0275 I 0.0122 I 0.0100 U J 0.0160 I 0.0161 I 0.0136 IJ 0.0128 I Total Phosphorous (P) mg/L 0.0147 IJ 0.0423 0.0320 0.0169 I 0.0205 I 0.0780 0.00900 U J 0.0283 Salinity
- 4.66 0.82 J 29.17 29.48 33.46 37.29 35.32 33.98 Tritium pCi/L (1) -6.6 (6.3) 20.4 (6.4) 17.9 (6.5) 3.9 (7.8) 11.6 (7.4) 28.7 (7.4) 24.6 (7.0) 58.1 (7.8)
NOTES:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
Text in blue are revised from the 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. N = Nitrogen. PW = Porewater.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. SU = Standard unit(s).
+
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonum ion. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. TN = Total nitrogen.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
5-50
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-22. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater Results November 2018 (continued).
PW-M4-1 PW-M4-2 PW-M5-1 PW-M5-2 PW-M6-1 PW-M6-2 PW-EB1 PW-FB1 Parameter Units 11/20/2018 11/14/2018 11/27/2018 11/14/2018 11/15/2018 11/15/2018 11/05/2018 11/29/2018 Temperature °C 27.72 29.17 25.33 28.14 28.10 28.06 pH SU 6.94 6.88 6.82 6.98 6.85 6.86 Specific Conductance S/cm 51981 53515 50938 53422 44695 46271 Sodium mg/L 10300 11100 10400 11100 8390 8720 0.0968 I 0.0650 U Chloride mg/L 19000 19800 18900 19600 16100 16600 0.221 U 0.221 U Ammonia mg/L as N 1.13 1.50 0.126 1.65 2.67 3.66 0.0775 I 0.0339 U Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 1.46 1.94 0.162 2.13 3.43 4.72 0.100 I 0.0437 U Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00639 0.00810 0.000462 I 0.0104 0.0131 0.0182 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0700 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 1.97 J- 2.41 2.60 2.75 3.33 J 3.79 J 0.126 U 0.124 U TN mg/L 1.97 J 2.41 2.60 2.75 3.33 J 3.79 J 0.140 U 0.140 U ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0500 U J- 0.0100 U J 0.0131 IJ 0.0500 U J- 0.0154 IJ 0.0119 I 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Total Phosphorous (P) mg/L 0.00900 U 0.00900 U 0.0293 0.0168 IJ 0.00920 IJ 0.0293 0.00900 U 0.00900 U Salinity
- 34.81 36.00 33.67 35.91 29.39 30.55 Tritium pCi/L (1) 38.9 (7.2) 17.8 (7.0) 74.4 (6.4) -5.1 (7.3) 14.9 (4.8) 9.6 (5.1) 3.0 (6.7) -1.5 (7.2)
NOTES:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
Text in blue are revised from the 2019 Semi-Annual Data Delivery.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. N = Nitrogen. PW = Porewater.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. SU = Standard unit(s).
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4+ = Ammonum ion. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. TN = Total nitrogen.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
5-51
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-23. Marsh Analytical Porewater Results February 2019.
PW-F1-1 PW-F1-2 PW-F2-1 PW-F2-2 PW-F2-3 PW-F3-1 PW-F3-2 PW-F3-3 PW-F4-1 Parameter Units 2/6/2019 2/6/2019 2/7/2019 2/7/2019 2/25/2019 2/20/2019 2/20/2019 2/20/2019 2/25/2019 Temperature °C 26.18 25.55 23.30 23.10 25.79 25.62 26.23 25.70 25.94 pH SU 7.06 6.87 6.95 6.98 7.00 7.04 6.98 7.02 6.94 Specific Conductance S/cm 4561 2900 2296 1259 2055 4995 5243 4602 1273 Sodium mg/L 686 360 339 131 231 778 804 682 124 Chloride mg/L 1240 700 551 229 454 1490 1570 1390 249 J-Salinity
- 2.47 1.53 J 1.19 J 0.65 J 1.06 J 2.72 2.86 2.49 0.64 J Tritium pCi/L (1) 225 (19.5) 71.7 (16.0) 164 (16.6) 89.6 (16.3) 48.0 (1.9) 170 (17.0) 81.9 (15.7) 73.9 (15.7) 165 (16.6)
NOTES:
Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. PW = Porewater.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
5-52
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-23. Marsh Analytical Porewater Results February 2019 (continued).
PW-F4-2 PW-F4-3 PW-F5-1 PW-F5-2 PW-F6-1 PW-F6-2 PW-F6-3 PW-EB-1 Parameter Units 2/25/2019 2/25/2019 2/4/2019 2/6/2019 2/14/2019 2/14/2019 2/14/2019 2/4/2019 Temperature °C 25.20 25.30 25.59 24.72 21.49 23.03 23.17 pH SU 7.18 7.08 6.70 7.04 6.79 6.72 6.78 Specific Conductance S/cm 1064 1478 39535 51828 5252 3433 6406 Sodium mg/L 110 170 7670 10300 776 457 1040 0.173 I Chloride mg/L 202 J 271 J 15500 19600 1570 960 2150 0.210 I Salinity
- 0.53 J 0.75 J 25.60 34.63 2.86 1.83 J 3.55 Tritium pCi/L (1) 156 (16.3) 76.2 (17.0) 152 (18.2) 73.9 (13.8) 11.4 (2.2) 3.4 (2.3) 13.3 (2.3) -17.8 (9.3) UJ NOTES:
Laboratory anion and cation results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter.
= sigma (Standard Deviation). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. PW = Porewater.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
5-53
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-24. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater Results May 2019.
PW-F1-1 PW-F1-2 PW-F2-1 PW-F2-2 PW-F2-3 PW-F2-4 PW-F3-1 PW-F3-2 Parameter Units 05/07/2019 05/16/2019 05/09/2019 05/09/2019 05/09/2019 05/13/2019 05/13/2019 05/13/2019 Temperature °C 26.93 26.52 28.06 29.30 28.29 29.83 28.30 28.46 pH SU 6.90 6.86 7.36 7.01 6.94 6.87 6.96 6.94 Specific Conductance S/cm 7555 3329 4736 2184 2419 1425 5254 5317 Sodium mg/L 1130 244 413 243 277 163 840 808 Chloride mg/L 2230 850 689 462 508 330 1610 1620 Ammonia mg/L as N 0.508 0.507 0.876 1.41 1.22 0.527 1.97 2.08
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 0.655 0.653 1.13 1.82 1.57 0.679 2.54 2.69 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00308 0.00277 0.0167 0.0132 0.00907 0.00372 0.0152 0.0155 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0850 0.141 0.0140 U 0.0220 I 0.0200 I 0.0150 IJ 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 2.79 3.88 15.7 6.57 8.27 5.31 5.59 6.46 TN mg/L 2.87 4.02 15.7 6.59 8.29 5.32 J 5.59 6.46 ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Total Phosphorous (P) mg/L 0.0875 0.0505 0.252 0.0800 0.0663 0.0366 0.0471 0.0419 Salinity
- 4.23 1.77 J 1.61 J 1.13 J 1.26 J 0.72 J 2.86 2.94 Tritium pCi/L (1) 186 (17.0) 32.3 (4.5) 114 (11.2) 55.4 (15.4) 34.2 (4.5) 32.3 (15.0) 117 (16.0) 49.0 (15.0)
NOTES:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. N = Nitrogen. SU = Standard unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
+
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonum ion. TN = Total nitrogen.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978. V = Analyte detected in the sample and the associated mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. PW = Porewater. preparation blank.
5-54
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-24. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater Results May 2019 (continued).
PW-F3-3 PW-F3-4 PW-F4-1 PW-F4-2 PW-F4-3 PW-F4-4 PW-F5-1 PW-F5-2 Parameter Units 05/13/2019 05/13/2019 05/15/2019 05/15/2019 05/15/2019 05/15/2019 05/07/2019 05/08/2019 Temperature °C 29.03 27.22 28.68 29.28 28.60 26.68 28.25 30.64 pH SU 6.92 6.52 6.79 6.92 6.78 6.54 6.76 7.20 Specific Conductance S/cm 4465 2225 1357 1727 1499 3299 56925 61372 Sodium mg/L 694 363 124 111 158 385 11600 13800 Chloride mg/L 1350 612 273 215 299 911 21400 25100 Ammonia mg/L as N 1.21 0.141 0.496 2.08 1.69 0.490 0.529 0.428
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 1.56 0.181 0.639 2.68 2.18 0.630 0.681 0.551 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00897 0.000400 U 0.00270 0.0159 0.00893 0.00130 I 0.00200 0.00509 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0170 I 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 2.84 2.88 2.71 4.57 5.37 3.98 2.04 6.45 J-TN mg/L 2.84 2.90 2.71 4.57 5.37 3.98 2.04 6.45 J ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0100 U 0.0106 I 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U J 0.0100 U Total Phosphorous (P) mg/L 0.0212 0.0245 0.0191 I 0.0296 0.0617 0.0688 0.00750 I J 0.0537 Salinity
- 2.41 1.15 J 0.68 J 0.57 J 0.76 J 1.74 J 38.60 42.08 Tritium pCi/L (1) 92.8 (15.7) 31.5 (3.3) 182 (17.0) 107 (15.7) 87.7 (15.7) 50.2 (15.4) 71.7 (10.9) 66.6 (3.2)
NOTES:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. N = Nitrogen. SU = Standard unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
+
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonum ion. TN = Total nitrogen.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978. V = Analyte detected in the sample and the associated mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. PW = Porewater. preparation blank.
5-55
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-24. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater Results May 2019 (continued).
PW-F6-1 PW-F6-2 PW-F6-3 PW-F6-4 PW-M1-1 PW-M1-2 PW-M2-1 PW-M2-2 PW-M3-1 Parameter Units 05/14/2019 05/14/2019 05/14/2019 05/14/2019 05/08/2019 05/02/2019 05/01/2019 05/01/2019 05/01/2019 Temperature °C 28.83 29.85 27.77 29.93 30.23 26.16 26.56 26.57 28.03 pH SU 6.76 6.72 6.74 6.67 6.80 6.48 7.18 6.53 6.94 Specific Conductance S/cm 5118 3178 6881 1581 46988 48400 54101 56259 54061 Sodium mg/L 741 424 1080 205 9930 10000 11400 12000 11300 Chloride mg/L 1630 922 2270 332 18000 17400 20600 21900 20100 Ammonia mg/L as N 2.33 1.77 0.679 0.350 0.0558 I 0.0466 I 0.582 0.0349 I 0.625
+
Ammonium ion (NH4 ) mg/L 3.00 2.28 0.874 0.451 0.0719 I 0.0600 I 0.750 0.0450 I 0.805 Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.0118 0.00882 0.00303 0.00157 I 0.000400 U 0.000400 U 0.00520 0.000400 U 0.00357 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0170 I 0.0150 I 0.0290 I 0.0160 I J- 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 6.50 J+ 3.66 8.84 6.99 1.18 V 1.90 J 2.07 J- 1.56 J 1.92 J TN mg/L 6.52 J 3.68 8.87 7.01 J 1.18 J 1.90 J 2.07 J 1.56 J 1.92 J ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U J- 0.0100 U 0.0124 I J- 0.0100 U 0.0100 U J 0.0100 U J 0.0100 U J Total Phosphorous (P) mg/L 0.0217 0.0299 0.0773 0.114 0.00500 U J 0.0290 0.0172 I 0.0109 I 0.00600 I J Salinity
- 2.79 1.68 J 3.83 0.80 J 32.61 34.60 36.39 38.03 36.36 Tritium pCi/L (1) 12.8 (2.5) 9.8 (2.8) 9.6 (4.0) 19.0 (2.5) 18.1 (3.8) 7.3 (3.6) 62.1 (15.0) 24.0 (2.4) 61.4 (4.8)
NOTES:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. N = Nitrogen. SU = Standard unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
+
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonum ion. TN = Total nitrogen.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978. V = Analyte detected in the sample and the associated mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. PW = Porewater. preparation blank.
5-56
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-24. Marsh and Mangrove Analytical Porewater Results May 2019 (continued).
PW-M3-2 PW-M4-1 PW-M4-2 PW-M5-1 PW-M5-2 PW-M6-1 PW-M6-2 PW-EB1 PW-FB1 Parameter Units 05/01/2019 05/01/2019 05/02/2019 05/07/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/02/2019 05/01/2019 05/16/2019 Temperature °C 28.45 26.18 29.34 30.33 28.88 28.36 27.95 pH SU 7.02 6.68 6.71 6.94 6.96 6.70 6.67 Specific Conductance S/cm 56553 59724 56055 63006 54826 46204 46076 Sodium mg/L 11500 12600 11900 13100 11700 9480 9250 0.183 I 0.0650 U Chloride mg/L 21100 23600 22600 24100 21400 17400 17400 0.248 I 0.108 U Ammonia mg/L as N 0.555 0.282 1.03 0.0339 U 0.346 3.70 3.04 0.0339 U 0.0339 U Ammonium ion (NH4+) mg/L 0.715 0.363 1.33 0.0437 U 0.446 4.76 3.92 0.0437 U 0.0437 U Unionized NH3 mg/L 0.00387 0.000755 I 0.00376 0.000400 U 0.00219 0.0132 0.00971 Nitrate/Nitrite mg/L as N 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U 0.0140 U TKN mg/L 3.71 J 1.34 J 1.83 6.48 1.17 4.48 J 4.33 J- 0.141 I 0.124 U TN mg/L 3.71 J 1.34 J 1.83 6.48 1.17 4.48 J 4.33 J 0.141 0.138 U ortho-Phosphate mg/L 0.0100 U J 0.0500 U J- 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 UJ 0.0100 U 0.0100 U Total Phosphorous (P) mg/L 0.0627 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.108 0.00500 U 0.00500 U 0.00650 IJ 0.00500 U 0.00500 U Salinity
- 38.31 40.69 37.94 43.35 36.99 30.50 30.44 Tritium pCi/L (1) 81.6 (15.4) 66.9 (15.0) 51.2 (15.4) 57.0 (4.2) 14.8 (4.0) 8.6 (3.4) 8.6 (3.6) 2.2 (14.4) UJ 9.9 (14.7) UJ NOTES:
Laboratory results are reported with 3 digits although only the first 2 are significant figures.
- PSS-78 salinity is untiless KEY:
°C = Degrees Celsius. N = Nitrogen. SU = Standard unit(s).
S/cm = MicroSiemen(s) per centimeter. NH3 = Ammonia. TKN = Total Kjeldahl nitrogen.
+
= sigma (Standard Deviation). NH4 = Ammonum ion. TN = Total nitrogen.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL. pCi/L = PicoCuries per liter. U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias). PSS-78 = Practical Salinity Scale of 1978. V = Analyte detected in the sample and the associated mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. PW = Porewater. preparation blank.
5-57
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-25. Range of Porewater Field Parameters and Ionic and Nutrient Concentrations at the Marsh, Brackish, and Tree Island Plots during the Historical Period of Record and Reporting Period.
1 2 3 Marsh Fresh/Brackish Tree Islands 4 4 4 Historical Period of Record Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Reporting Period Historical Period of Record Reporting Period Standard Standard Standard Standard Standard Standard Parameter Units Min Max Average Deviation Min Max Average Deviation Min Max Average Deviation Min Max Average Deviation Min Max Average Deviation Min Max Average Deviation Temperature °C 17.34 32.55 26.43 2.79 21.49 31.81 27.78 2.45 20.03 34.45 27.55 2.94 23.42 31.64 27.46 2.53 21.40 30.01 25.26 1.75 26.68 29.93 28.25 1.27 pH SU 6.41 7.78 6.86 0.261 6.36 7.36 6.89 0.18 6.43 7.80 6.84 0.28 6.76 7.21 6.96 0.18 5.71 6.83 6.41 0.26 6.36 6.87 6.59 0.16 Specific Conductance S/cm 541 11017 2041 1666 994 8285 3731 2244 1045 76679 21366 21533 2900 62600 25897 22830 381 5051 1371 880 802 3299 1942 898 Sodium mg/n 35 1800 216 267 83 1280 526 374 72.1 16000 4023 4366 244 13800 5115 4888 21 568 128 119 113 385 258 101 Chloride mg/n 54 3860 451 606 151 2670 1062 801 101 31000 7763 8523 700 25100 9641 9107 35 1480 250 271 129 911 444 276 Total Ammonia mg/L as N 0.0260 2.90 1.21 0.730 0.496 2.97 1.74 0.621 0.0260 2.150 0.602 0.445 0.233 1.27 0.593 0.331 0.0260 2.00 0.636 0.458 0.141 0.711 0.450 0.165 TKN mg/L 1.40 21.0 4.03 2.50 1.96 15.70 5.25 1.97 0.7740 6.60 2.74 1.21 2.04 6.45 3.87 1.64 1.40 15.00 3.85 2.63 2.88 7.0 4.05 1.47 TN mg/L 1.41 17.5 4.10 2.31 1.96 15.70 5.26 2.82 0.8240 6.60 2.91 1.25 2.04 6.45 3.90 1.64 1.42 15.00 4.03 2.72 2.88 7.0 4.06 1.48 TP mg/L 0.00220 0.260 0.0336 0.0385 0.0090 0.252 0.0602 0.0673 0.00220 0.170 0.0291 0.0353 0.00750 0.106 0.0559 0.0383 0.00220 0.260 0.0476 0.0513 0.0209 0.114 0.0554 0.0384 Salinity
- 0.25 6.74 1.08 0.98 0.50 4.66 2.00 1.28 0.50 54.40 14.00 14.70 1.53 42.08 16.66 15.33 0.30 2.75 0.72 0.49 0.39 1.74 0.98 0.46 Tritium pCi/L -17.6 143 42.0 30.0 -6.6 181.76 63.6 52.4 0.20 240 76.0 46.8 23.6 225 102 64.40 -8.8 102 27.3 19.4 19.0 50.2 36.9 12.8 Notes:
1 Marsh = F2-1, F2-2, F2-3, F3-1, F3-2, F3-3, F4-1, F4-2, F4-3, F6-1, F6-2, and F6-3.
2 /
Fresh Brackish = F1-1, F1-2, F5-1, and F5-2.
3 Tree Islands = F2-4, F3-4, F4-4, and F6-4.
4 Historical Period of Record includes the October 2010 through May 2018 ecological sampling events.
Please see Appendix I for a list of values that were removed from this analysis and the rationale for their removal.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. Min = Minimum. SU = Standard Units.
- = Unitless. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter. TKN = Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen.
mS/cm = MicroSiemens per centimeter. N = Nitrogen. TN = Total Nitrogen.
Max = Maximum. pCi/L = Picocuries per Liter. TP = Total Phosphorous.
5-58
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-26. Percent Cover of Red Mangroves per Plot and Transect for the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Average.
Percent (%) Cover Historical Period of Record Average* November 2018 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot Transect 1 6-25% 6-25%
F1 2 2-5% 6-25% 2-5% 6-25%
1 0-1% 0-1%
F2 2 0-1% 0-1%
3 0-1% 0-1% 0-1% 0-1%
1 6-25% 6-25%
F5 2 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
1 26-50% 26-50%
M1 2 26-50% 26-50% 26-50% 26-50%
1 6-25% 6-25%
M2 2 26-50% 6-25% 26-50% 6-25%
1 6-25% 6-25%
M3 2 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
1 6-25% 6-25%
M4 2 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
1 6-25% 6-25%
M5 2 6-25% 6-25% 6-25% 6-25%
1 6-25% 6-25%
M6 2 6-25% 6-25% 2-5% 6-25%
Notes:
Percent cover based on cover classes (e.g. 0-1; 2-5; 6-25; 26-50; 51-75;76-100).
- Historical Period of Record includes the November ecological sampling events from October 2010 through November 2017.
5-59
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-27. Average Red Mangrove Height per Plot and Transect for the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
Height +/- Standard Error (cm)
Historical Period of Record Range* November 2018 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 112.8 - 119.2 108.6 7.6 F1 2 83.7 - 99.6 100.2 - 107.5 100.1 3.8 104.7 4.5 F2 2 42.3 - 55.0 . 49.8 6.4 49.8 6.4 1 77.1 - 96.4 97.4 17.4 F5 2 59.3 - 69.0 64.7 - 76.6 69.2 5.6 77.5 6.9 1 71.7 - 77.8 77.8 2.2 M1 2 84.6 - 95.3 78.1 - 86.5 90.4 6.1 84.1 3.4 1 87.4 - 94.8 95.2 4.1 M2 2 68.9 - 75.2 78.2 - 85 69.1 5.9 82.1 4.5 1 81.8 - 89.7 90.3 4.0 M3 2 96.4 - 101.8 89.1 - 95.8 101.3 5.5 95.8 3.5 1 78.6 - 95.6 96.8 5.2 M4 2 82.3 - 94.2 80.5 - 94.9 95.2 6.2 96.0 4.0 1 58.7 - 67.7 62.5 6.7 M5 2 109.1 - 118.6 86.1 - 94.3 121.8 5.5 93.4 7.6 1 99.8 - 109.2 98.7 7.7 M6 2 90.2 - 98.3 95.2 - 103.5 86.8 8.4 92.7 5.7 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the November ecological sampling events from October 2010 through November 2017.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
cm = Centimeters.
5-60
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-28. Average Red Mangrove Biomass per Plot and Transect for the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
Biomass +/- Standard Error (g/m2)
Historical Period of Record Range* November 2018 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 220.2 - 262.8 210.8 65.8 F1 2 36.5 - 55.6 128.5 - 158.3 57.6 17.1 134.2 42.8 1 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 F2 2 7.2 - 13.7 15.2 2.3 3 0.0 - 0.0 2.4 - 4.6 0.0 0.0 5.1 2.3 1 112.8 - 185.3 215.4 87.1 F5 2 239.7 - 317.8 176.3 - 251.5 268.7 41.1 242.0 45.7 1 702.3 - 849.7 731.7 70.9 M1 2 611.7 - 691.2 663.2 - 766.9 600.7 27.6 666.2 43.1 1 89.1 - 263.5 107.7 24.4 M2 2 569.6 - 708.1 329.4 - 481.0 660.6 87.5 384.1 112.6 1 383.2 - 400.8 379.2 31.5 M3 2 155.9 - 252.8 269.6 - 322.4 163.7 15.0 271.5 43.8 1 196.2 - 226.2 231.8 30.2 M4 2 323.1 - 387.9 259.6 - 307.0 357.3 59.2 294.6 38.9 1 251.6 - 322.7 262.8 53.9 M5 2 271.6 - 418.6 262.3 - 370.6 267.9 25.1 265.4 27.5 1 145.8 - 168.4 121.3 14.9 M6 2 141.0 - 176.4 147.8 - 169.9 84.4 16.8 102.8 12.5 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the November ecological sampling events from October 2010 through November 2017.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
g/m2 = grams per square meter.
5-61
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-29. Red Mangrove Sclerophylly per Plot and Transect for the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
Sclerophylly (g/m2)
Historical Period of Record Average* November 2018 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 214.5 - 269.8 262.5 5.3 F1 2 223.9 - 241.2 220.7 - 255.5 247.4 6.4 255.0 4.3 F2 2 191.8 - 273.5 . 260.9 7.7 . .
1 155.5 - 342.0 238.2 6.2 F5 2 200.9 - 283.5 181.2 - 308.6 255.1 6.3 244.4 4.7 1 210.2 - 306.6 238.0 7.7 M1 2 198.5 - 269.6 211.2 - 261.7 249.6 6.5 243.8 5.0 1 239.5 - 281.1 281.8 5.9 M2 2 210.4 - 265.5 225.0 - 273.3 237.4 9.7 259.6 7.2 1 204.5 - 263.3 255.9 9.1 M3 2 223.1 - 274.5 214.4 - 258.5 267.1 7.6 261.5 5.9 1 212.7 - 237.7 256.7 7.3 M4 2 212.2 - 273.1 215.6 - 255.4 229.2 7.3 243.0 5.8 1 192.8 - 267.9 244.1 5.9 M5 2 210.8 - 267.1 201.8 - 259.4 240.4 7.2 242.5 4.5 1 230.9 - 340.0 270.8 7.8 M6 2 231.0 - 314.0 230.9 - 327.0 264.0 8.8 267.4 5.8 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the November ecological sampling events from October 2010 through November 2017.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
g/m2 = Grams per square meter.
5-62
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-30. Average Leaf Carbon for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
R. mangle Total Carbon (mg/g)
Historical Period of Record Average* November 2018 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 414 - 490 438 2.72 F1 2 424 - 491 419 - 490 440 6.47 439 3.26 F2 2 435 - 471 NA 445 2.06 NA NA 1 412 - 465 445 4.71 F5 2 410 - 477 411 - 471 442 5.28 443 3.37 1 394 - 493 436 3.27 M1 2 404 - 501 399 - 497 421 13.2 428 6.91 1 397 - 471 410 22.1 M2 2 392 - 467 412 - 463 433 3.41 422 11.2 1 395 - 545 440 1.38 M3 2 395 - 452 396 - 486 435 3.57 437 1.96 1 429 - 587 447 2.91 M4 2 395 - 461 416 - 512 441 6.54 444 3.50 1 398 - 457 434 18.4 M5 2 404 - 466 407 - 461 435 2.46 434 8.58 1 380 - 444 418 6.92 M6 2 373 - 444 377 - 443 411 6.59 415 4.61 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the November ecological sampling events from October 2010 through November 2017.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
mg/g = milligrams per gram.
5-63
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-31. Average Leaf Total Nitrogen for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
R. mangle Total Nitrogen (mg/g)
Historical Period of Record Average* November 2018 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 8.31 - 16.0 11.5 0.18 F1 2 10.5 - 16.9 9.38 - 16.5 11.9 0.55 11.7 0.28 F2 2 8.11 - 14.5 - 9.20 0.70 NA NA 1 9.97 - 19.3 11.5 0.59 F5 2 9.62 - 15.0 10.0 - 16.4 10.1 0.29 10.7 0.39 1 10.2 - 15.5 10.0 0.29 M1 2 10.5 - 16.3 10.4 - 15.9 8.98 0.73 9.50 0.41 1 8.84 - 14.2 6.58 0.20 M2 2 9.78 - 13.3 9.67 - 13.7 9.33 0.77 7.95 0.64 1 8.70 - 13.9 8.43 0.53 M3 2 8.62 - 12.8 9.01 - 13.4 8.05 0.48 8.24 0.34 1 11.2 - 20.5 9.73 0.42 M4 2 10.6 - 15.0 10.9 - 17.7 10.9 0.18 10.3 0.31 1 10.6 - 18.5 15.1 4.31 M5 2 9.92 - 15.3 10.2 - 16.9 9.43 0.31 12.3 2.27 1 8.49 - 11.8 6.73 0.30 M6 2 8.79 - 11.8 8.62 - 11.8 7.90 0.41 7.31 0.33 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the November ecological sampling events from October 2010 through November 2017.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
mg/g = milligrams per gram.
5-64
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-32. Average Leaf Total Phosphorus for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
R. mangle Total Phosphorous (mg/kg)
Historical Period of Record Average* November 2018 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 305 - 583 335 91.1 F1 2 425 - 623 365 - 603 331 111 333 66.6 F2 2 305 - 740 NA 467 15.1 NA NA 1 316 - 885 538 38.3 F5 2 383 - 641 360 - 755 492 16.9 578 19.5 1 470 - 640 563 21.1 M1 2 480 - 638 475 - 639 507 21.0 535 17.4 1 430 - 713 526 23.3 M2 2 448 - 740 439 - 726 569 47.5 547 25.8 1 233 - 760 555 26.4 M3 2 455 - 678 344 - 719 495 20.6 525 19.2 1 365 - 707 522 28.2 M4 2 378 - 680 371 - 674 540 29.7 531 19.2 1 345 - 601 502 14.4 M5 2 323 - 598 401 - 599 557 24.3 529 16.7 1 446 - 645 470 36.7 M6 2 457 - 628 469 - 636 552 33.1 511 27.7 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the November ecological sampling events from October 2010 through November 2017.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram.
5-65
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-33. Average Leaf Carbon Isotopes for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
R. mangle Carbon Isotopes ()
Historical Period of Record Average* November 2018 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 -27.9 to -25.8 -26.6 0.12 F1 2 -27.5 to -25.7 -27.6 to -25.7 -26.5 0.15 -26.6 0.1 F2 2 -28.3 to -26.1 NA -27.3 0.30 NA NA 1 -28.0 to -25.9 -27.0 0.41 F5 2 -26.1 to -24.8 -26.9 to -25.7 -25.6 0.14 -26.2 0.3 1 -26.1 to -24.4 -25.6 0.29 M1 2 -26.2 to -11.8 -26.1 to -18.4 -25.6 0.13 -25.6 0.1 1 -25.4 to -22.6 -24.7 0.18 M2 2 -25.6 to -11.9 -25.4 to -17.2 -24.9 0.58 -24.8 0.3 1 -25.4 to -24.1 -24.6 0.16 M3 2 -25.3 to -23.9 -25.4 to -24.1 -24.2 0.14 -24.4 0.1 1 -25.8 to -23.4 -24.8 0.18 M4 2 -26.5 to -24.3 -26.1 to -24.3 -25.2 0.17 -25.0 0.1 1 -26.1 to -22.8 -25.8 0.46 M5 2 -26.1 to -22.9 -26.1 to -22.9 -25.4 0.12 -25.6 0.2 1 -25.7 to -24.7 -24.8 0.11 M6 2 -26.1 to -24.4 -25.9 to -24.6 -24.8 0.20 -24.8 0.1 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the November ecological sampling events from October 2010 through November 2017.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
= parts per mille.
5-66
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-34. Average Leaf Nitrogen Isotopes for Red Mangrove per Plot and Transect during the Reporting Period with Historical Period of Record Range.
R. mangle Nitrogen Isotopes ()
Historical Period of Record Average* November 2018 Transect Plot Plot Transect Plot SE Transect SE 1 -2.44 to -0.10 -3.90 0.30 F1 2 -6.51 to -2.96 -4.47 to -1.62 -5.86 0.76 -4.88 0.53 F2 2 -2.05 to 0.50 NA -2.11 0.80 NA NA 1 -2.74 to 0.58 1.00 0.52 F5 2 -4.41 to -1.64 -2.58 to -1.40 -4.39 0.81 -2.08 1.19 1 -2.40 to 1.23 -0.12 1.54 M1 2 1.38 to 4.17 0.35 to 2.19 -1.13 2.61 -0.63 1.42 1 -11.4 to -8.58 -10.5 0.70 M2 2 -2.64 to 0.47 -6.76 to -5.00 -1.69 1.33 -6.10 1.80 1 -9.03 to -4.07 -6.02 1.49 M3 2 -10.3 to -5.55 -7.79 to -5.81 -9.22 0.73 -7.62 0.98 1 -6.80 to -3.92 -6.66 0.57 M4 2 -7.55 to -3.70 -5.99 to -4.17 -5.24 0.33 -5.95 0.41 1 -1.57 to 3.58 0.54 1.31 M5 2 -9.05 to -2.33 -3.94 to -1.13 -4.88 2.70 -2.17 1.73 1 -7.24 to -6.13 -8.36 0.43 M6 2 -11.2 to -7.13 -9.08 to -6.63 -11.3 0.10 -9.83 0.59 Notes:
- Historical Period of Record includes the November ecological sampling events from October 2010 through November 2017.
Key:
SE = Standard error.
= parts per mille.
5-67
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-35. Red Mangrove Leaf C:N Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect in the Reporting Period.
R. mangle C:N Molar Ratio November 2018 Transect Plot Plot Transect 1 45:1 F1 2 43:1 44:1 F2 2 56:1 -
1 45:1 F5 2 51:1 48:1 1 51:1 M1 2 55:1 53:1 1 73:1 M2 2 54:1 62:1 1 61:1 M3 2 63:1 62:1 1 54:1 M4 2 47:1 50:1 1 33:1 M5 2 54:1 41:1 1 73:1 M6 2 61:1 66:1 Key:
C = Carbon.
N = Nitrogen.
5-68
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-36. Red Mangrove Leaf N:P Molar Ratio per Plot and Transect in the Reporting Period.
R. mangle N:P Ratio November 2018 Transect Plot Plot Transect 1 76:1 F1 2 80:1 78:1 F2 2 44:1 -
1 47:1 F5 2 45:1 41:1 1 39:1 M1 2 39:1 39:1 1 28:1 M2 2 36:1 32:1 1 34:1 M3 2 36:1 35:1 1 41:1 M4 2 45:1 43:1 1 67:1 M5 2 37:1 51:1 1 32:1 M6 2 32:1 32:1 Key:
N = Nitrogen.
P = Phosphorous.
5-69
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.1-37. Range of Porewater Field Parameters, and Ionic and Nutrient Concentrations at Mangrove Plots in the Historic Period of Record and Reporting Period.
1 Mangrove 2
Historical Period of Record Reporting Period Standard Standard Parameter Units Min Max Average Deviation Min Max Average Deviation Temperature °C 22.50 32.35 27.29 1.67 25.33 30.33 27.94 1.24 pH SU 6.18 7.68 6.82 0.24 6.48 7.18 6.85 0.18 Specific Conductance S/cm 38237 78743 52422 7486 44388 63006 51718 4998 Sodium mg/L 7300 17200 10280 1689 8390 13100 10530 1292 Chloride mg/L 14000 32000 19875 3286 15900 24100 19354 2294 Total Ammonia mg/L as N 0.0260 3.64 0.787 0.742 0.0339 3.70 0.992 1.148 TKN mg/L 0.150 5.56 1.77 0.984 1.130 6.48 2.43 1.313 TN mg/L 0.222 5.59 1.88 1.03 1.130 6.48 2.43 1.313 TP mg/L 0.00220 0.124 0.0186 0.0201 0.00500 0.1080 0.0230 0.02577 Salinity
- 24.27 54.74 34.93 5.67 29.17 43.35 34.80 3.69 Tritium pCi/L -1.1 99.9 30.2 22.1 -5.1 81.6 31.5 25.6 Notes:
1Mangrove sites include M1-1, M1-2, M2-1, M2-2, M3-1, M3-2, M4-1, M4-2, M5-1, M5-2, M6-1, and M6-2.
2Historical Period of Record includes the semi-annual sampling events (November and May only) between October/November 2010 through May 2018.
Please see Appendix I for a list of values that were removed from this analysis and the rationale for their removal.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celsius. Min = Minimum.
- = Unitless. mg/L = Milligram(s) per liter.
µS/cm = MicroSiemens per centimeter. N = Nitrogen.
Max = Maximum. SU = Standard Units 5-70
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-1. Latitude and Longitude of Biscayne Bay, Card Sound, and Barnes Sound Ecological Sampling Points.
Point Latitude Longitude Point Latitude Longitude BB1-a-1 25.42632 80.32344 BB3-a-1 25.35211 80.32451 BB1-a-2 25.42355 80.32348 BB3-a-2 25.35034 80.32586 BB1-a-3 25.42296 80.32346 BB3-a-3 25.34834 80.32731 BB1-a-4 25.41888 80.32347 BB3-a-4 25.34671 80.32854 BB1-a-5 25.41664 80.32343 BB3-a-5 25.34400 80.33055 BB1-a-6 25.41644 80.32344 BB3-a-6 25.34172 80.33224 BB1-a-7 25.41217 80.32345 BB3-a-7 25.34089 80.33284 BB1-a-8 25.41074 80.32344 BB3-a-8 25.33927 80.33405 BB1-b-1 25.42769 80.32095 BB3-b-1 25.35051 80.32288 BB1-b-2 25.42335 80.32097 BB3-b-2 25.34832 80.32450 BB1-b-3 25.42116 80.32096 BB3-b-3 25.34663 80.32575 BB1-b-4 25.42049 80.32096 BB3-b-4 25.34426 80.32749 BB1-b-5 25.41750 80.32094 BB3-b-5 25.34346 80.32808 BB1-b-6 25.41514 80.32094 BB3-b-6 25.34202 80.32914 BB1-b-7 25.41306 80.32094 BB3-b-7 25.33996 80.33068 BB1-b-8 25.41130 80.32095 BB3-b-8 25.33817 80.33199 BB2-a-1 25.37277 80.30706 BB4-a-1 25.28361 80.38995 BB2-a-2 25.37171 80.30782 BB4-a-2 25.28203 80.39109 BB2-a-3 25.37021 80.30888 BB4-a-3 25.28096 80.39186 BB2-a-4 25.36822 80.31030 BB4-a-4 25.27843 80.39368 BB2-a-5 25.36692 80.31122 BB4-a-5 25.27762 80.39426 BB2-a-6 25.36490 80.31265 BB4-a-6 25.27576 80.39561 BB2-a-7 25.36334 80.31375 BB4-a-7 25.27357 80.39718 BB2-a-8 25.36009 80.31604 BB4-a-8 25.27135 80.39879 BB2-b-1 25.37296 80.30388 BB4-b-1 25.28255 80.38793 BB2-b-2 25.37088 80.30538 BB4-b-2 25.28035 80.38951 BB2-b-3 25.36808 80.30740 BB4-b-3 25.27996 80.38978 BB2-b-4 25.36702 80.30816 BB4-b-4 25.27821 80.39103 BB2-b-5 25.36481 80.30966 BB4-b-5 25.27587 80.39272 BB2-b-6 25.36344 80.31065 BB4-b-6 25.27476 80.39350 BB2-b-7 25.36159 80.31196 BB4-b-7 25.27293 80.39482 BB2-b-8 25.35886 80.31391 BB4-b-8 25.27068 80.39641 5-71
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-2. Categories of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Scored Using Braun-Blanquet Cover Abundance Index Method at Each Ecological Sampling Point for Reporting Period Fall 2018 to Spring 2019.
Fleshy Calcareous Corals/
Totals Algae Seagrasses Green Algae Sponges1 Algae Total Total Thalassia Batophora/
Penicillus Corals Macrophytes Macroalgae testudinum Dasycladus Total Drift Total Halodule Gorgonians/
Rhipocephalus Anadyomene Red Calcareous wrightii Soft Corals Total Total Green Macrophytes Syringodium Caulerpa Other Halimeda Sponges Minus Drift filiforme paspaloides (Fleshy)
Red Total Total Red Udotea Seagrass Other Total Brown Acetabularia Notes:
1 Presence/absence only 5-72
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-3. Mean Water Depth, +/- One Standard Error, by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented during the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2010 - Spring 2018]).
Historical Period Fall 2018 Spring 2019 Area Transect of Record Min Max Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE a 1.3 1.8 1.4 0.07 1.6 0.05 BB1 b 1.4 2.0 1.6 0.06 1.6 0.04 Total 1.4 1.9 1.5 0.04 1.6 0.04 a 2.0 2.5 2.1 0.08 2.1 0.06 BB2 b 2.3 2.7 2.6 0.12 2.4 0.13 Total 2.2 2.6 2.4 0.10 2.3 0.09 a 2.6 3.0 2.7 0.06 2.7 0.05 BB3 b 2.8 3.1 3.0 0.03 2.9 0.06 Total 2.7 3.0 2.8 0.03 2.8 0.03 a 1.8 2.3 2.0 0.02 2.0 0.04 BB4 b 1.9 2.4 2.1 0.02 2.0 0.03 Total 1.8 2.3 2.1 0.02 2.0 0.02 All Areas 2.0 2.4 2.2 0.09 2.2 0.08 Key:
m = meter(s)
SE = Standard Error 5-73
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-4. Substrate Type by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented during the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2010 -
Spring 2018]).
Historical Period of Record Substrate Type BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Sandy and Rubble 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6%
Sandy and Shell Hash 38% 100% 75% 100% 75% 100% 0% 50%
Sandy, Shell Hash, Rubble 0% 19% 0% 0% 0% 19% 0% 56%
Sandy, Silty, Shell Hash, Rubble 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 44%
Silty 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 19%
Silty and Rubble 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 38%
Silty and Sandy 0% 13% 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 6%
Silty and Shell Hash 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6%
Silty, Sandy, and Shell Hash 0% 44% 0% 6% 0% 13% 0% 44%
Silty, Sandy, Rubble 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 25%
Silty, Shell Hash, Rubble 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 31%
Not Recorded 0% 6% 0% 19% 0% 19% 0% 0%
Fall 2018 Substrate Type BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 Total Total Total Total Sandy and Rubble 0% 0% 0% 0%
Sandy and Shell Hash 88% 100% 100% 0%
Sandy, Shell Hash, Rubble 0% 0% 0% 81%
Sandy, Silty, Shell Hash, Rubble 0% 0% 0% 19%
Silty 0% 0% 0% 0%
Silty and Rubble 0% 0% 0% 0%
Silty and Sandy 0% 0% 0% 0%
Silty and Shell Hash 0% 0% 0% 0%
Silty, Sandy, and Shell Hash 13% 0% 0% 0%
Silty, Sandy, Rubble 0% 0% 0% 0%
Silty, Shell Hash, Rubble 0% 0% 0% 0%
Not Recorded 0% 0% 0% 0%
Spring 2019 Substrate Type BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 Total Total Total Total Sandy and Rubble 0% 0% 0% 0%
Sandy and Shell Hash 100% 100% 100% 19%
Sandy, Shell Hash, Rubble 0% 0% 0% 69%
Sandy, Silty, Shell Hash, Rubble 0% 0% 0% 13%
Silty 0% 0% 0% 0%
Silty and Rubble 0% 0% 0% 0%
Silty and Sandy 0% 0% 0% 0%
Silty and Shell Hash 0% 0% 0% 0%
Silty, Sandy, and Shell Hash 0% 0% 0% 0%
Silty, Sandy, Rubble 0% 0% 0% 0%
Silty, Shell Hash, Rubble 0% 0% 0% 0%
Not Recorded 0% 0% 0% 0%
5-74
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-5. Percent (%) Light Attenuation Based on Readings (µmols/m2/sec) Taken Simultaneously in Air and Water in Half Meter Increments at One Point Along Each Transect during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented for the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2010 -
Spring 2018]).
Historical Period of Record Rounded BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 Depth (m) a b Total a b Total a b Total a b Total Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max 0.3 (Surface) 2% 34% -2% 29% -2% 34% 0% 33% 2% 28% 0% 33% 2% 49% 3% 40% 2% 49% 1% 26% 1% 37% 1% 37%
0.5 15% 38% 9% 47% 9% 47% 3% 54% 11% 51% 3% 54% 38% 38% *
- 38% 38% 7% 53% 1% 43% 1% 53%
1.0 8% 55% 14% 46% 8% 55% 16% 55% 21% 59% 16% 59% 12% 52% 14% 79% 12% 79% 20% 62% 13% 54% 13% 62%
1.5 44% 54% 24% 51% 24% 54% 28% 64% 28% 64% 28% 64% 27% 62% 24% 66% 24% 66% 28% 67% 23% 64% 23% 67%
2.0 35% 66% -25% 74% -25% 74% 48% 73% 40% 74% 40% 74% 66% 66% 80% 80% 66% 80%
2.5 54% 73% 49% 90% 49% 90%
Fall 2018 Rounded BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 Depth (m) a b Total a b Total a b Total a b Total Surface (0.3 m) 10% 5% 7% 10% 12% 11% 10% 12% 11% 14% 12% 13%
0.5 m 23% 19% 21% 27% 30% 28% * *
- 37% 36% 37%
1.0 m 32% 34% 34% 45% 41% 43% 41% 26% 34% 40% 42% 41%
1.5 m 47% 50% 48% 52% 50% 51% 59% 52% 54%
2.0 m 58% 58% 66% 65% 65%
2.5 m 68% 68%
Spring 2019 Rounded BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 Depth (m) a b Total a b Total a b Total a b Total 0.3 (Surface) -4% -7% -6% -3% -1% -1% -1% -2% -1% -1% -11% -5%
0.5 10% 12% 11% 19% 20% 19% * *
- 18% 8% 13%
1.0 23% 21% 22% 33% 31% 32% 21% 20% 21% 31% 24% 29%
1.5 28% 26% 27% 45% 38% 40% 36% 31% 33% 38% 45% 40%
2.0 46% 46% 45% 38% 41%
2.5 49% 49% 49%
Key:
m = meter(s).
- Sample depths are based on water depth and taking five readings equally spaced out from 0.3 m below the surface and 0.3m above the bottom. No 0.5 m equivalent depth sampled.
Grayed out areas represent depths deeper than found at the sampling point 5-75
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-6. Mean Surface Water Quality Variables, +/- One Standard Error, by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented for the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2010 - Spring 2018]).
Historical Period of Record BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area a b Area a b Area a b Area Parameter Units Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Temperature °C 22.1 31.3 24.0 31.3 22.1 31.3 23.5 31.0 24.4 31.5 23.5 31.5 24.9 31.4 25.3 31.8 24.9 31.8 23.9 31.3 24.4 31.3 23.9 31.3 Specific Conductance µS/cm 23,987 60,337 23,712 60,638 23,712 60,638 36,063 59,863 39,825 59,613 36,063 59,863 34,800 61,238 37,225 60,825 34,800 61,238 33,950 60,287 34,688 60,287 33,950 60,287 Salinity PSU 14.6 40.6 14.4 40.8 14.4 40.8 22.8 40.3 25.4 40.1 22.8 40.3 22.7 41.3 23.5 41.0 22.7 41.3 21.5 40.0 21.9 40.0 21.5 40.0 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 4.5 7.0 4.6 6.9 4.5 7.0 4.3 7.1 4.8 7.0 4.3 7.1 4.7 6.6 4.8 8.0 4.7 8.0 4.3 6.4 4.5 6.4 4.3 6.4 pH - 7.4 8.6 6.8 8.5 6.8 8.6 7.3 8.5 7.2 8.6 7.2 8.6 7.2 8.4 7.3 8.3 7.2 8.4 7.6 8.2 7.4 8.2 7.4 8.2 Turbidity NTU 0.0 4.5 0.0 4.5 0.0 4.5 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 11.6 0.0 11.6 0.0 11.6 ORP mV 14.38 376.88 26.25 357.88 14.38 376.88 52.13 347.50 20.75 346.00 20.75 347.50 25.13 354.38 20.75 345.25 20.75 354.38 46.63 348.75 65.50 348.75 46.63 348.75 Fall 2018 BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area a b Area a b Area a b Area Parameter Units Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Temperature °C 31.6 0.26 31.4 0.23 31.5 0.17 31.5 0.16 30.2 0.06 30.9 0.19 31.1 0.29 30.5 0.06 30.8 0.16 30.5 0.13 30.9 0.04 30.7 0.08 Specific Conductance µS/cm 42,888 176 44,900 288 43,894 307 46,250 256 46,437 65 46,344 130 45,425 356 45,413 23 45,419 172 36,738 543 37,600 204 37,169 302 Salinity PSU 27.8 0.12 29.3 0.19 28.5 0.22 30.2 0.22 30.3 0.05 30.3 0.11 29.6 0.25 29.6 0.01 29.6 0.12 23.3 0.39 24.0 0.13 23.7 0.22 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 5.1 0.16 5.1 0.31 5.1 0.17 5.3 0.27 5.0 0.06 5.1 0.14 4.7 0.08 5.1 0.03 4.9 0.07 4.7 0.16 5.6 0.04 5.2 0.14 pH - 7.7 0.05 8.0 0.03 7.8 0.05 7.7 0.12 8.0 0.01 7.8 0.06 7.8 0.04 8.0 0.00 7.9 0.03 7.8 0.04 8.0 0.01 7.9 0.02 Turbidity NTU 0.5 0.29 0.0 0.00 0.2 0.15 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 ORP mV 332.13 13.26 256.50 12.24 294.31 13.09 261.38 18.13 281.38 15.22 271.38 11.72 274.13 27.72 264.25 8.02 269.19 14.00 242.00 19.44 245.00 10.06 243.50 10.58 Spring 2019 BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area a b Area a b Area a b Area Parameter Units Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Temperature °C 29.7 0.11 29.3 0.08 29.5 0.08 29.1 0.09 33.4 3.73 31.3 1.89 29.0 0.06 29.6 0.05 29.3 0.09 29.0 0.04 29.8 0.03 29.4 0.11 Specific Conductance µS/cm 59,375 133 60,000 46 59,687 106 59,775 49 58,937 78 59,356 117 59,687 77 60,987 35 60,337 173 61,950 265 62,612 199 62,281 181 Salinity PSU 40.0 0.10 40.5 0.03 40.2 0.08 40.3 0.03 39.7 0.06 40.0 0.08 40.2 0.06 41.2 0.03 40.7 0.13 41.9 0.20 42.5 0.15 42.2 0.14 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 6.0 0.16 4.9 0.04 5.4 0.16 4.8 0.23 5.6 0.07 5.2 0.16 5.5 0.02 5.9 0.05 5.7 0.06 5.2 0.12 5.9 0.07 5.5 0.11 pH - 8.0 0.05 8.2 0.01 8.1 0.04 8.2 0.02 8.2 0.01 8.2 0.01 8.2 0.00 8.1 0.01 8.1 0.00 7.9 0.11 8.1 0.02 8.0 0.06 Turbidity NTU 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 ORP mV 223.00 8.03 255.50 15.73 239.25 9.51 247.50 14.86 213.88 5.03 230.69 8.73 260.13 18.83 212.25 4.51 236.19 11.21 260.25 16.51 238.38 8.47 249.31 9.40 Notes:
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celcius.
mg/L = Milligram per liter.
µS/cm = Microsiemens per centimeter.
mV = Millivolts.
NTU = Nephelometric turbidity units.
ORP = Oxidation reduction potential.
SE = Standard error.
5-76
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-7. Mean Bottom Water Quality Variables, +/- One Standard Error, by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented for the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2010 - Spring 2018]).
Historical Period of Record BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area a b Area a b Area a b Area Parameter Units Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Temperature °C 22.1 31.3 24.0 31.3 22.1 31.3 23.5 31.0 24.4 31.6 23.5 31.6 24.8 31.3 25.3 31.8 24.8 31.8 23.9 31.5 24.4 31.8 23.9 31.8 Specific Conductance µS/cm 24,950 60,375 27,712 60,713 24,950 60,713 39,725 59,950 41,200 59,613 39,725 59,950 40,025 61,225 41,225 60,838 40,025 61,225 36,375 60,875 35,387 61,162 35,387 61,162 Salinity PSU 15.2 40.6 17.4 40.9 15.2 40.9 25.3 40.4 26.3 40.1 25.3 40.4 26.2 41.3 26.3 41.0 26.2 41.3 23.0 41.3 22.4 41.5 22.4 41.5 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 4.4 6.8 4.6 6.8 4.4 6.8 4.1 6.9 4.8 6.7 4.1 6.9 4.9 6.5 4.9 6.2 4.9 6.5 4.1 6.2 4.8 6.4 4.1 6.4 pH - 7.6 8.6 6.9 8.6 6.9 8.6 7.6 8.5 7.7 8.6 7.6 8.6 7.7 8.4 7.7 8.4 7.7 8.4 7.6 8.2 7.7 8.2 7.6 8.2 Turbidity NTU 0.0 3.9 0.0 4.9 0.0 4.9 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 10.1 0.0 5.1 0.0 10.1 ORP mV 12.13 368.00 23.75 346.50 12.13 368.00 41.75 339.88 13.13 334.38 13.13 339.88 26.38 345.75 30.38 333.0 26.38 345.75 51.38 338.25 59.38 354.13 51.38 354.13 Fall 2018 BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area a b Area a b Area a b Area Parameter Units Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Temperature °C 31.6 0.26 31.5 0.19 31.5 0.15 31.6 0.14 30.2 0.06 30.9 0.19 30.9 0.21 30.5 0.06 30.7 0.12 30.9 0.14 31.0 0.10 31.0 0.08 Specific Conductance µS/cm 42,862 194 45,450 392 44,156 395 46,787 169 46,487 74 46,637 97 46,075 219 45,213 261 45,644 199 38,200 132 38,200 60 38,200 70 Salinity PSU 27.8 0.12 29.7 0.27 28.7 0.28 30.6 0.11 30.4 0.06 30.5 0.07 30.1 0.17 29.6 0.02 29.9 0.10 24.4 0.06 24.5 0.04 24.4 0.04 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 4.9 0.16 5.1 0.34 5.0 0.18 5.5 0.29 4.8 0.08 5.1 0.17 4.6 0.06 5.1 0.06 4.9 0.08 4.1 0.12 5.6 0.18 4.8 0.22 pH - 7.9 0.01 8.1 0.03 8.0 0.02 7.9 0.04 8.0 0.01 8.0 0.02 7.9 0.02 8.0 0.00 8.0 0.02 7.9 0.01 8.0 0.02 7.9 0.02 Turbidity NTU 0.7 0.43 0.0 0.00 0.4 0.23 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 ORP mV 319.25 14.37 255.50 11.87 287.38 12.20 259.50 16.70 283.00 14.11 271.25 10.99 271.88 25.39 261.88 7.54 266.88 12.86 242.25 19.01 251.13 8.59 246.69 10.14 Spring 2019 BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area a b Area a b Area a b Area Parameter Units Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE Temperature °C 29.7 0.12 29.3 0.08 29.5 0.08 29.1 0.09 29.7 0.03 29.4 0.09 29.0 0.06 29.6 0.05 29.3 0.08 29.0 0.04 27.3 2.49 28.1 1.22 Specific Conductance µS/cm 59,375 122 59,987 44 59,681 101 59,775 49 58,912 81 59,344 120 59,675 75 60,700 259 60,188 186 61,912 261 62,590 184 62,251 177 Salinity PSU 40.0 0.10 40.6 0.11 40.3 0.10 40.3 0.02 39.7 0.06 40.0 0.09 40.2 0.06 41.2 0.03 40.7 0.14 41.9 0.20 42.5 0.15 42.2 0.14 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 6.1 0.11 4.8 0.04 5.5 0.18 4.8 0.23 5.7 0.07 5.3 0.16 5.5 0.04 5.9 0.05 5.7 0.06 5.1 0.14 5.9 0.09 5.5 0.13 pH - 8.1 0.02 8.2 0.01 8.2 0.02 8.2 0.01 8.2 0.01 8.2 0.01 8.2 0.00 8.2 0.00 8.2 0.00 8.0 0.04 8.1 0.01 8.1 0.02 Turbidity NTU 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 ORP mV 220.00 7.48 257.00 15.48 238.50 9.58 247.63 14.28 215.88 4.98 231.75 8.38 260.63 18.55 213.75 4.35 237.19 11.02 256.75 14.64 240.38 8.03 248.56 8.34 Notes:
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celcius.
mg/L = Milligram per liter.
µS/cm = Microsiemens per centimeter.
mV = Millivolts.
NTU = Nephelometric turbidity units.
ORP = Oxidation reduction potential.
SE = Standard error.
5-77
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-8. Comparison of Mean Porewater and Bottom Water Column Temperatures, Salinity, and Specific Conductance by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented for the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2010 - Spring 2018]).
Historical Period of Record BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area a b Area a b Area a b Area Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Parameter Units Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Temperature °C 24.7 30.9 22.1 31.3 24.4 30.8 24.0 31.3 24.4 30.9 22.1 31.3 24.3 31.0 23.5 31.0 24.7 31.0 24.4 31.6 24.3 31.0 23.5 31.6 24.8 30.9 24.8 31.3 24.8 30.8 25.3 31.8 24.8 30.9 24.8 31.8 24.9 31.3 23.9 31.5 24.9 32.3 24.4 31.8 24.9 32.3 23.9 31.8 Specific Conductance µS/cm 42,750 58,362 24,950 60,375 43,200 59,775 27,713 60,713 42,750 59,775 24,950 60,713 45,612 58,600 39,725 59,950 46,125 58,213 41,200 59,613 45,612 58,600 39,725 59,950 44,175 56,875 40,025 61,225 48,412 58,088 41,225 60,838 44,175 58,088 40,025 61,225 40,700 57,925 36,375 60,875 43,575 57,888 35,388 61,162 40,700 57,925 35,388 61,162 Salinity PSS 27.6 39.3 15.2 40.6 27.8 40.2 17.4 40.9 27.6 40.2 15.2 40.9 29.7 39.4 25.3 40.4 30.0 39.1 26.3 40.1 29.7 39.4 25.3 40.4 28.3 38.0 26.2 41.3 31.6 39.0 26.3 41.0 28.3 39.0 26.2 41.3 26.1 39.0 23.0 41.3 28.2 41.5 22.4 41.5 26.1 41.5 22.4 41.5 Fall 2018 BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area a b Area a b Area a b Area Parameter Units Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Temperature °C 30.9 31.6 30.9 31.4 30.9 31.5 30.9 31.6 30.4 30.2 30.7 30.9 30.7 30.9 30.6 30.5 30.6 30.7 31.0 30.9 30.8 31.0 30.9 31.0 Specific Conductance µS/cm 46,800 42,862 45,878 45,633 46,312 44,329 49,575 46,787 48,175 46,487 48,875 46,637 50,400 46,075 50,012 45,213 50,206 45,644 45,550 38,200 45,238 38,200 45,394 38,200 Salinity PSS 30.5 27.8 30.0 29.8 30.3 28.9 32.7 30.6 31.6 30.4 32.2 30.5 33.3 30.1 33.0 29.6 33.2 29.9 29.6 24.4 29.5 24.5 29.5 24.4 Spring 2019 BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area a b Area a b Area a b Area Parameter Units Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Porewater Bottom Temperature °C 28.5 29.7 28.8 29.3 28.7 29.5 28.8 29.1 28.7 29.7 28.8 29.4
- 29.0
- 29.6
- 29.3 28.3 29.0 28.2 27.3 28.3 28.1 Specific Conductance µS/cm 56,225 59,375 57,438 59,987 56,831 59,681 58,075 59,775 56,813 58,912 57,444 59,344 57,425 59,675 58,887 60,700 58,156 60,188 55,750 61,912 58,537 62,590 57,144 62,251 Salinity PSS 37.7 40.0 38.5 40.6 38.1 40.3 38.4 40.3 38.1 39.7 38.2 40.0 38.4 40.2 39.6 41.2 39.0 40.7 37.2 41.9 39.3 42.5 38.2 42.2 Notes:
- PSS-78 salinity is unitless.
Key:
°C = Degrees Celcius.
µS/cm = Microsiemens per centimeter.
5-78
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-9. Porewater Nutrient Concentrations by Transect, Season, and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented for the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2010 - Spring 2018]).
Historical Period of Record BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area a b Area a b Area a b Area Parameter Units Range Range Range Range Range Range Range Range Range Range Range Range Sodium (mg/L) 6,200 - 13,000 6,100 - 11,900 6,100 - 11,900 8,300 - 11,900 9,000 - 11,800 8,300 - 11,900 8,600 - 12,100 9,100 - 12,200 8,600 - 12,200 6,700 - 13,100 7,000 - 13,100 6,700 - 13,100 Chloride (mg/L) 12,200 - 23,300 11,800 - 23,800 11,800 - 23,800 16,600 - 39,300 17,300 - 22,900 16,600 - 39,300 17,000 - 25,000 17,800 - 26,500 17,000 - 26,500 13,000 - 23,200 14,300 - 25,000 13,000 - 25,000 Nitrate/ Nitrite (mg/L) as N 0.005 - 0.500 0.005 - 0.500 0.005 - 0.500 0.005 - 0.500 0.005 - 0.786 0.005 - 0.786 0.005 - 0.500 0.005 - 0.500 0.005 - 0.500 0.005 - 0.500 0.005 - 0.500 0.005 - 0.500 Unionized Ammonia mg/L 0.000017 - 0.0224 0.000017 - 0.0223 0.000017 - 0.0224 0.000017 - 0.0241 0.000017- 0.0116 0.000017 - 0.0241 0.000017 - 0.0216 0.000017 - 0.0388 0.000017 - 0.0388 0.0011 - 0.0191 0.000017 - 0.0185 0.000017 - 0.0191 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/L) 0.1500 - 1.1500 0.1500 - 8.8000 0.1500 - 8.8000 0.1500 - 1.1500 0.1500 - 2.600 0.1500 - 2.6000 0.2000 - 1.1500 0.1500 - 1.6600 0.1500 - 1.6600 0.4600 - 15.100 0.2000 - 8.1600 0.2000 - 15.1000 ortho-Phosphate (mg/L) 0.0014 - 0.0181 0.0014 - 0.0118 0.0014 - 0.0181 0.0014 - 0.1960 0.0014 - 0.0288 0.0014 - 0.1960 0.0014 - 0.0262 0.0014 - 0.0342 0.0014 - 0.0342 0.0014 - 0.0093 0.0014 - 0.0093 0.0014 - 0.0093 Phosphorus (mg/L) 0.0022 - 0.0150 0.0022 - 0.0941 0.0022 - 0.0941 0.0022 - 0.0220 0.0022 - 0.0420 0.0022 - 0.0420 0.0022 - 0.0233 0.0022 - 0.0416 0.0022 - 0.0416 0.0022 - 0.1400 0.0003 - 0.1790 0.0003 - 0.1790 Tritium pCi/L (1) 0.30 - 25.10 -2.50 - 25.80 -2.50 - 25.80 -6.50 - 19.30 -4.90 - 18.30 6.50 - 19.30 -0.90 - 21.60 -2.00 - 27.20 -2.00 - 27.20 -2.10 - 19.50 -0.40 - 19.50 -2.10 - 19.50 Fall 2018 BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area Mean a b Area Mean a b Area Mean a b Area Mean Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali-Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Parameter Units fier fier fier fier fier fier fier fier fier fier fier fier Sodium (mg/L) 9,610 10,300 9,955 10,900 10,300 10,600 10,400 9,640 10,020 8,930 9,360 9,145 Chloride (mg/L) 17,100 18,700 17,900 19,600 18,500 19,050 19,300 18,100 18,700 17,500 1,730 9,615 Nitrate/ Nitrite (mg/L) as N 0.014 UJ 0.014 UJ 0.014 UJ 0.014 UJ 0.014 UJ 0.014 UJ 0.014 UJ 0.014 UJ 0.014 UJ 0.014 UJ 0.014 UJ 0.014 UJ Unionized Ammonia mg/L 0.00596 J 0.00655 J 0.00626 J 0.00098 IJ 0.00085 IJ 0.00092 IJ 0.00076 IJ 0.00625 J 0.00350 JI 0.00573 J 0.00103 IJ 0.00338 IJ Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/L) 0.9230 1.0000 0.9615 0.6480 0.8160 0.7320 0.7460 1.1900 0.9680 2.2200 1.2200 1.7200 ortho-Phosphate (mg/L) 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 UJ 0.0115 IJ 0.0100 U 0.0108 IUJ 0.0100 UJ 0.0100 UJ 0.0100 UJ 0.0500 UJ 0.0100 UJ 0.0300 UJ Phosphorus (mg/L) 0.0090 U 0.0090 U 0.0090 UJ 0.0090 UJ 0.0090 U 0.0090 UJ 0.0090 U 0.0090 U 0.0090 U 0.0298 J 0.0090 U 0.0194 UJ Tritium pCi/L (1) 28.20 10.30 J 19.25 J 12.10 J -6.40 UJ 2.85 JU -1.30 UJ 2.10 UJ 0.40 UJ 2.20 UJ 7.00 J 4.60 UJ Spring 2019 BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 a b Area Mean a b Area Mean a b Area Mean a b Area Mean Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali- Quali-Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Value Parameter Units fier fier fier fier fier fier fier fier fier fier fier fier Sodium (mg/L) 12,300 12,100 12,200 127,000 11,800 69,400 12,600 12,200 12,400 12,800 12,000 12,400 Chloride (mg/L) 24,400 23,800 24,100 23,400 22,800 23,100 23,900 23,500 23,700 24,500 22,700 23,600 Nitrate/ Nitrite (mg/L) as N 0.014 U 0.014 U 0.014 U 0.014 U 0.014 U 0.014 U 0.014 U 0.014 U 0.014 U 0.014 U 0.014 U 0.014 U Unionized Ammonia mg/L 0.00425 0.00814 0.00620 0.00261 0.00040 U 0.00151 U 0.00327 0.00051 I 0.00189 I 0.00945 0.00186 0.00566 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/L) 0.9920 1.0100 1.0010 0.9180 0.9440 0.9310 1.1300 0.8800 1.0050 1.0900 1.0800 1.0850 ortho-Phosphate (mg/L) 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.0100 U 0.1000 U 0.0550 U Phosphorus (mg/L) 0.0050 U 0.0050 U 0.0050 U 0.0050 U 0.0050 U 0.0050 U 0.0072 U 0.0050 U 0.0061 U 0.0050 U 0.0050 U 0.0050 U Tritium pCi/L (1) 9.63 7.14 8.39 6.53 9.18 7.86 10.72 7.97 9.35 5.44 9.57 7.51 Key:
°C = Degrees Celcius.
I = Value between the MDL and PQL.
J = Estimated (+/- indicate bias).
mg/L = Milligrams per liter.
N = Nitrogen.
U = Analyzed for but not detected at the reported value.
5-79
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-10. Percentage (%) of Quadrats Along Each Transect (n=32) Containing Thalassia testudinum (TT) and/or Halodule wrightii (HW) by Study Area (n=64) and Season during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented for the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2010 -
Spring 2018]).
Historical Period of Record 1 2 Fall 2018 Spring 2019 Area Transect TT HW Min Max Min Max TT HW TT HW a 88% 100% 3% 47% 88% 25% 94% 34%
BB1 b 84% 100% 0% 72% 97% 38% 88% 30%
Total 84% 100% 0% 72% 92% 31% 91% 32%
a 9% 78% 25% 50% 25% 38% 34% 28%
BB2 b 31% 72% 3% 38% 34% 13% 38% 6%
Total 9% 78% 3% 50% 30% 25% 36% 17%
a 72% 94% 0% 22% 78% 19% 78% 19%
BB3 b 63% 84% 0% 16% 66% 0% 59% 0%
Total 63% 94% 0% 22% 72% 9% 69% 9%
a 84% 100% 0% 13% 84% 9% 81% 6%
BB4 b 59% 91% 0% 19% 63% 3% 75% 0%
Total 59% 100% 0% 19% 73% 6% 78% 3%
5-80
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-11. Mean Hardbottom Depth (cm), +/- One Standard Error (SE), by Transect, Season, and Study Area During Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented during the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2013 - Spring 2018]).
Historical Period of Fall 2018 Spring 2019 Area Transect Record*
Min Max Mean +/- SE Mean +/- SE a 16.8 28.4 26.8 4.73 25.2 4.48 BB1 b 8.5 17.9 9.6 1.61 9.4 1.65 Total 12.9 21.1 18.2 2.71 17.3 2.57 a 4.2 10.6 6.3 1.32 5.2 0.91 BB2 b 8.6 12.8 11.1 3.29 10.9 2.70 Total 6.7 11.2 8.7 1.79 8.1 1.46 a 7.9 16.6 12.3 2.76 13.8 2.57 BB3 b 4.8 12.8 7.7 0.82 5.3 0.65 Total 7.3 12.9 10.0 1.46 9.6 1.42 a 6.4 16.1 6.7 1.16 8.1 1.26 BB4 b 4.5 12.7 5.8 1.42 5.1 1.01 Total 6.2 14.4 6.2 1.29 6.6 0.82 All Areas 9.0 14.8 10.8 0.95 10.4 0.88 Key:
m = meter(s)
SE = Standard Error Notes:
- Depth to hardbottom data for the four corners and center of each quadrat was first collected in the Fall 2017 event.
Previously (spring 2013 through fall 2016) a diver probed the four corners and center and recorded the estimated average depth to hardbottom. The individual corner/center measurements for each quadrat were not recorded.
5-81
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-12. Percentage (%) of Sampling Points within Each Study Area (n=16) Having Specific Bottom Conditions during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented for the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2010 - Spring 2018]).
BB1 BB2 BB3 BB4 Historical Period Historical Period Historical Period Historical Period Category Coverage / Presence Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Min Max 2018 2019 Min Max 2018 2019 Min Max 2018 2019 Min Max 2018 2019 Open 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 31% 38% 0% 0% 13% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0%
Fairly Open 6% 75% 19% 56% 38% 81% 56% 88% 19% 69% 31% 13% 31% 94% 44% 13%
Overall Moderately Open 6% 69% 50% 19% 6% 44% 6% 0% 6% 69% 38% 44% 0% 56% 19% 25%
Mostly Covered 6% 38% 31% 25% 0% 25% 0% 13% 0% 63% 31% 44% 0% 25% 38% 63%
Uniform 0% 19% 0% 0% 0% 25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 25% 0% 0% 0%
Sparse 25% 81% 75% 69% 75% 94% 88% 75% 44% 94% 50% 63% 69% 100% 81% 75%
Sparse to Moderate 6% 63% 19% 25% 6% 25% 6% 19% 6% 56% 50% 38% 0% 31% 19% 25%
Seagrass Moderate 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Moderate to Dense 0% 19% 6% 6% 0% 6% 6% 6% 0% 19% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Sparse 44% 100% 94% 31% 0% 100% 69% 50% 13% 100% 81% 31% 0% 100% 13% 6%
Sparse to Moderate 0% 50% 6% 69% 0% 69% 25% 44% 0% 63% 19% 44% 0% 69% 63% 38%
Drift Algae Moderate 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 6% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Moderate to Dense 0% 13% 0% 0% 0% 25% 6% 6% 0% 38% 0% 25% 0% 50% 25% 56%
None 0% 31% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 88% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
Sparse 0% 81% 0% 50% 0% 94% 25% 44% 19% 100% 13% 88% 6% 100% 13% 75%
Sparse to Moderate 19% 88% 69% 44% 6% 81% 75% 56% 0% 69% 50% 13% 0% 75% 75% 25%
Batophora Moderate 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Moderate to Dense 0% 38% 31% 0% 0% 38% 0% 0% 0% 25% 38% 0% 0% 31% 13% 0%
None 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
None 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Calcareous Few 0% 81% 6% 0% 0% 38% 0% 0% 0% 19% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0%
Algae Many 19% 100% 94% 100% 63% 100% 100% 100% 81% 100% 100% 100% 94% 100% 100% 100%
None 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 13% 0% 0%
Sponges Few 19% 88% 44% 19% 0% 25% 0% 6% 0% 56% 0% 0% 6% 69% 6% 6%
Many 6% 81% 56% 81% 69% 100% 100% 94% 44% 100% 100% 100% 25% 94% 94% 94%
None 13% 69% 13% 38% 0% 19% 0% 0% 0% 25% 0% 0% 0% 19% 0% 0%
Corals Few 31% 69% 69% 44% 6% 50% 19% 31% 19% 56% 13% 38% 6% 63% 6% 19%
Many 0% 38% 19% 19% 38% 81% 81% 69% 38% 81% 88% 63% 31% 94% 94% 81%
None 100% 100% 100% 100% 19% 31% 25% 25% 13% 50% 19% 13% 69% 100% 100% 100%
Gorgonians Few 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 13% 6% 13% 6% 50% 19% 25% 0% 31% 0% 0%
Many 0% 0% 0% 0% 63% 81% 69% 63% 31% 75% 63% 63% 0% 0% 0% 0%
5-82
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-13. Mean Braun-Blanquet Coverage Abundance (BBCA) Scores, +/- One Standard Error, for Total Macrophyte Coverage (Excluding Drift Red Algae), Total Seagrass, and Total Macroalgae, by Transect and Study Area during Fall 2018 and Spring 2019. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented for the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2010 -
Spring 2018]).
Total Macrophytes1 Total Seagrass2 Total Macroalgae Historical Historical Historical Area Transect Period of Fall 2018 Spring 2019 Period of Fall 2018 Spring 2019 Period of Fall 2018 Spring 2019 Record Record Record Min Max Mean SE Mean SE Min Max Mean SE Mean SE Min Max Mean SE Mean SE a 0.0 2.7 2.6 0.32 1.8 0.17 1.1 1.8 1.3 0.18 1.3 0.23 1.0 2.2 2.3 0.33 1.5 0.15 BB1 b 0.1 2.6 2.3 0.12 1.8 0.14 0.8 1.6 1.0 0.04 1.0 0.16 1.0 2.5 2.3 0.12 1.6 0.15 Total 0.0 2.7 2.4 0.17 1.8 0.11 1.1 1.5 1.1 0.10 1.1 0.14 1.0 2.4 2.3 0.17 1.6 0.10 a 0.0 3.3 1.6 0.31 1.5 0.21 0.4 1.1 0.4 0.16 0.4 0.11 1.2 3.3 1.6 0.31 1.5 0.21 BB2 b 0.0 2.8 1.6 0.21 1.6 0.26 0.4 0.9 0.5 0.24 0.5 0.27 1.1 2.8 1.5 0.17 1.5 0.22 Total 0.0 3.0 1.6 0.18 1.5 0.16 0.4 1.0 0.4 0.14 0.4 0.14 1.2 3.0 1.6 0.17 1.5 0.15 a 0.0 2.5 2.6 0.37 2.6 0.31 0.8 1.8 0.9 0.22 1.1 0.26 1.1 2.3 2.6 0.40 2.4 0.34 BB3 b 0.0 2.4 1.9 0.18 2.1 0.23 0.6 1.1 0.6 0.17 0.5 0.15 1.1 2.4 1.9 0.19 2.1 0.23 Total 0.0 2.5 2.3 0.22 2.4 0.19 0.7 1.2 0.8 0.14 0.8 0.16 1.1 2.3 2.2 0.23 2.3 0.20 a 0.0 2.6 2.3 0.10 1.8 0.14 0.8 1.3 0.9 0.11 0.9 0.09 1.1 2.6 2.3 0.10 1.8 0.15 BB4 b 0.0 2.5 2.0 0.17 1.8 0.17 0.5 1.0 0.6 0.12 0.8 0.17 1.1 2.8 1.9 0.22 1.7 0.20 Total 0.0 2.5 2.2 0.11 1.8 0.11 0.8 1.1 0.8 0.09 0.9 0.09 1.2 2.7 2.1 0.13 1.8 0.12 1
Total macrophyte cover after drift red algae has been removed from the quadrat 2
Total seagrass cover for all seagrass species combined 3
Total macroalgae cover for all attached red, brown, calcareous, and fleshy green algaes combined Notes:
BBCA score <1 represents total coverage less than 5%
BBCA score >1 to 2 represents total coverage between 5% and 25%
BBCA score >2 to 3 represents total coverage between 25% and 50%
5-83
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-14. Seagrass Leaf Nutrient Concentrations during Reporting Period Fall 2018. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented for the Historical Period of Record
[Fall 2010 - Fall 2017¹]).
Method 353.2 & 351.2 365.4 U of M U of M U of M Parameter Total Nitrogen Total Phosphorus Total Carbon d13C d16N Historical Period of Historical Period of Historical Period of Historical Period of Historical Period of Sample Period Fall 2018 Fall 2018 Fall 2018 Fall 2018 Fall 2018 Record Record 1 Record Record Record Max wt Max wt Max wt Area Transect Min wt (%) wt (%) mg/kg Min wt (%) wt (%) mg/kg Min wt (%) wt (%) mg/kg Min () Max () Min () Max ()
(%) (%) (%)
a 1.85 2.82 1.99 19900 0.047 0.064 0.072 717.5 26.40 45.80 34.45 344450 -12.99 -8.60 -10.31 4.70 7.11 4.97 BB1 b 1.74 2.77 1.90 18950 0.026 0.059 0.061 612.0 26.25 43.52 34.86 348550 -12.19 -8.00 -9.37 3.40 5.71 3.79 Total 1.80 2.80 1.94 19425 0.036 0.062 0.066 664.8 26.33 44.66 34.65 346500 -12.59 -8.30 -9.84 4.05 6.41 4.38 a 1.80 2.54 1.82 18150 0.047 0.064 0.064 644.5 25.80 42.40 34.23 342250 -11.15 -7.50 -9.03 0.56 4.40 2.00 BB2 b 1.70 2.69 1.72 17200 0.054 0.062 0.065 651.0 27.60 43.47 33.04 330400 -11.00 -8.40 -10.47 2.34 3.80 3.03 Total 1.75 2.62 1.77 17675 0.051 0.063 0.065 647.8 26.70 42.94 33.63 336325 -11.07 -7.95 -9.75 1.45 4.10 2.51 a 1.77 5.14 1.77 17700 0.041 0.069 0.061 609.5 27.45 94.86 33.83 338300 -11.91 -8.90 -11.46 3.00 5.04 3.93 BB3 b 1.67 5.23 1.67 16650 0.036 0.064 0.057 566.5 27.10 91.24 33.48 334800 -11.47 -8.60 -11.57 3.00 5.14 4.17 Total 1.72 5.19 1.72 17175 0.039 0.067 0.059 588.0 27.28 93.05 33.66 336550 -11.69 -8.75 -11.52 3.00 5.09 4.05 a 1.72 2.46 1.84 18400 0.038 0.084 0.061 613.5 28.95 43.77 33.89 338850 -12.46 -10.10 -11.80 3.10 5.67 3.56 BB4 b 1.68 2.48 2.06 20550 0.040 0.073 0.063 628.5 26.95 44.69 36.02 360150 -12.15 -9.10 -10.84 3.00 5.60 3.98 Total 1.70 2.47 1.95 19475 0.039 0.078 0.062 621.0 27.95 44.23 34.95 349500 -12.30 -9.60 -11.32 3.05 5.63 3.77 Notes:
1Total Phosphorus in the Historical Period Record minimum and maximum values only include data from Fall 2010, Fall 2013, Fall 2015, Fall 2016 and Fall 2017 sampling.
Methods 353.2, 351.2 and 365.4 refer to the corresponding EPA methods.
Key:
= Parts per mille wt% = Percent weight mg/kg = Milligrams per kilogram U of M = University of Miami 5-84
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Table 5.2-15. Comparison of Seagrass Leaf Nutrient Molar Ratios during Reporting Period Fall 2018. (For Comparative Purposes, Minimum and Maximum Values are Also Presented for the Historical Period of Record [Fall 2010
- Spring 2017]).
C:N (molar) C:P (molar) N:P (molar)
Area Transect Historical Period Fall Historical Period Fall Historical Period Fall of Record 2018 of Record 2018 of Record 2018 Min Max Min Max Min Max a 16.2 20.5 20.2 1,246.8 1,983.2 1,238.1 73.8 96.4 61.3 BB1 b 15.8 21.5 21.5 1,238.5 3182.3 1,473.4 73.0 168.4 68.6 Total 16.0 21.0 20.8 1,242.7 2582.8 1,355.8 73.4 132.4 65.0 a 16.7 24.4 22.1 1,082.9 2,200.3 1,369.8 61.8 109.5 62.3 BB2 b 15.9 23.1 22.4 1,148.5 1,963.5 1,312.1 65.6 99.4 58.5 Total 16.3 23.7 22.3 1,115.7 2,081.9 1,341.0 63.7 104.5 60.4 a 17.0 24.0 22.3 1,053.6 3,695.7 1,477.4 57.8 174.6 66.0 BB3 b 16.9 24.0 23.6 1130.6 4,325.0 1,534.3 57.6 206.8 65.0 Total 16.9 24.0 23.0 1,092.1 4,010.4 1,505.9 57.7 190.7 65.5 a 15.4 24.6 21.5 989.8 2,819.1 1,425.4 60.2 132.1 66.3 BB4 b 15.8 23.7 20.5 1,080.6 2,690.8 1,476.7 64.7 128.1 72.2 Total 15.6 24.1 21.0 1,035.2 2,755.0 1,451.1 62.4 130.1 69.2 Notes:
1 Seagrass leaves for nutrient analysis are only collected during the fall sampling period.
Key:
C = Carbon N = Nitrogen P = Phosphorus 5-85
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 FIGURES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.1-1. Reporting Period Porewater Sodium (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-86
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.1-2. Reporting Period Porewater Chloride (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-87
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.1-3. Reporting Period Semi-Annual Porewater Total Nitrogen (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-88
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.1-4. Reporting Period Semi-Annual Porewater Total Ammonia (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-89
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.1-5. Reporting Period Semi-Annual Porewater Total Phosphorous (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-90
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.1-6. Reporting Period Porewater Tritium (pCi/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-91
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.2-1. Reporting Period Bay Porewater Sodium (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-92
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.2-2. Reporting Period Bay Porewater Chloride (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-93
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.2-3. Reporting Period Bay Porewater Total Nitrogen (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-94
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.2-4. Reporting Period Bay Porewater Total Ammonia (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-95
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.2-5. Reporting Period Bay Porewater Total Phosphorous (mg/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-96
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 5 Figure 5.2-6. Reporting Period Bay Porewater Tritium (pCi/L) Results with Historical Period of Record Ranges.
5-97
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6
- 6. INTERCEPTOR DITCH OPERATION 6.1 Introduction The ID system is operated pursuant to Section II (A)(1) of the Fifth Supplemental Agreement between the SFWMD and FPL, dated October 16, 2009, to restrict movement of saline water from the cooling water system westward of Levee 31E adjacent to the cooling canal system to those amounts which would occur without the existence of the cooling canal system (SFWMD 2009a). When a seaward gradient between the L-31E canal and the CCS, as defined in the Turkey Point Plant Interceptor Ditch Operation Procedure (FPL 2017b), temporarily ceases to exist, the water level in the ID is lowered by pumping water from the ID into the CCS, thereby creating a hydraulic divide in groundwater that acts to restrict the westward migration of groundwater. The information presented in this section pertains to the operation of the ID from June 1, 2018, through May 31, 2019 (the reporting period).
The ID system is part of the original CCS design and has been in operation since the early 1970s.
Original analog modeling used in the design of the system identified that the hydraulic divide established by operation of the ID pumps would be effective in restricting westward flow of groundwater throughout the thickness of the Biscayne Aquifer. However, naturally occurring variability of vertical permeabilities within the Biscayne Aquifer combined with the effects of increased specific gravity of saline and hypersaline waters limit the effectiveness of the ID to the upper zones of the aquifer. Surface water, groundwater, and porewater quality data combined with marsh ecological data demonstrate that the ID system effectively restricts inland movement of saline CCS water in the upper zones of the aquifer.
6.2 Operational or Structural Changes Operation of the ID system was conducted in accordance with the SFWMD-approved ID Operations Plan (FPL 2017b). There have been no changes in the operating procedures or structural changes in the ID during the reporting period. The current ID Operations Plan can be found in the Public Resources folder of the FPL EDMS (https://ptn-combined-monitoring.com).
On May 15, 2018, FPL began operating the 15-mgd groundwater RWS to extract hypersaline groundwater from 10 wells constructed at the base of the Biscayne Aquifer. These extraction wells are located on the CCS perimeter berm road immediately west of the ID canal over the entire length of the CCS and north to the daycare center. Modeling of the RWS system suggests that operation of the extraction wells may induce small drawdowns along the ID and western edge of the CCS that could reduce the frequency and duration of ID pump operation. While the amount of ID pumping was three times lower during this reporting period when compared to the previous year, it is not clear at this time the extent to which RWS operations had on this reduction, if any, as RWS induced drawdown in the CCS or ID is very small and difficult to discern given the daily and seasonal fluctuations in surface water.
6-1
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 6.3 Interceptor Ditch Operation and Transect Surface Water Levels Surface water levels are measured in the L-31E canal, the ID, and C-32 (CCS) on a routine basis along five transects (Figure 6.3-1) in order to assess whether a seaward gradient is maintained.
In the event the gradient criteria are not met and such conditions are confirmed in the field by manual readings, the ID pump operations are activated as prescribed in the ID operation procedures. Water levels recorded during the reporting period are presented on Figures 6.3-2 through 6.3-6. The data for these figures are based on the manual readings by FPL staff at all five transect locations.
Except for a few short periods (order of days), the L-31E canal water level was higher than the CCS at all five transects during the reporting period. With a few exceptions, the water levels in the L-31E canal were also higher than in the ID. The water level in the ID is usually higher than the CCS. In instances when the differences in water levels between the CCS and the L 31E canal triggered pumping, the ID water levels dropped below CCS water levels, such as in transects A, B, and C during the period from March through May 2019. Table 6.3-1 shows the range in head differences between the L-31E canal and C-32 and the range in head differences between the L-31E canal and ID at each transect based on weekly field measurements.
Operation of the ID pumps is shown on Figure 6.3-7, along with the NEXRAD rainfall data from the SFWMD. Much of the pumping occurred in March through May 2019 during periods with little rainfall, as is typical during the dry season. Table 6.3-2 shows the number of hours each pump operated every month, along with the volume of water pumped. During the reporting period, pumping was limited to the northern ID pump station, as seaward gradient criteria were met without the need to operate the southern ID pump station.
During the reporting period, the system operated 36 days, with a combined total of 492 hours0.00569 days <br />0.137 hours <br />8.134921e-4 weeks <br />1.87206e-4 months <br /> of pumping. The total volume pumped during the year was 460 million gallons. Data in Table 6.3-3 identify when pumping was required by the field measured water levels and when such pumping actually occurred. While the individual ID pumps have the ability to withdraw over 20 mgd each from the ID, the associated drawdown at nearby monitoring wells TPGW-1S and TPGW-2S is only on the order of 0.1 to 0.2 ft; this drawdown further diminishes with distance from the CCS. Accordingly, the area of influence of ID operations is mostly limited to the area between the L-31E canal and the CCS. During pumping, a large percentage of the water removed from the ID comes from the adjacent CCS as demonstrated by short-term increased salinity in the ID reach that accompanies the pumping events (refer to Section 3). The low amount of groundwater drawdown combined with the short duration of the withdrawals (typically on the order of 1 to 3 days) are insufficient to harm wetlands west of the CCS.
As part of the historic assessment of the effectiveness of ID operations on restricting westward migration of CCS groundwater, temperature and specific conductance are measured on a quarterly basis at 1-ft intervals throughout the water column in wells TPGW-L3, TPGW-L5, TPGW-G21, TPGW-G28, and TPGW-G35. The data consistently show a predominately fresh groundwater lens (approximately 20 ft thick) near the L-31E canal that increases in thickness 6-2
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 with distance to the west. The ID helps maintain this lens. During the reporting period, the predominantly fresh groundwater extended to elevations of -18 ft to -23 ft NAVD 88 (Figures 3.1-22 and 3.1-23). As the depth of the L-31E canal is approximately 9 to 10 ft below land surface (approximately elevation of -10 ft NAVD 88), it is apparent that the saline/freshwater interface occurs below the bottom of the L-31E canal.
6-3
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 TABLES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 Table 6.3-1. Range in Surface Water Head Differences.
Line A Line B Line C Line D Line E Date L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID 6/5/18 0.77 0.40 0.72 0.29 0.87 0.33 0.98 0.39 0.91 0.32 6/14/18 0.83 0.45 0.90 0.40 0.95 0.45 1.05 0.47 1.03 0.38 6/21/18 0.57 0.32 0.53 0.18 0.70 0.30 0.72 0.12 0.82 0.20 6/25/18 0.64 0.30 0.61 0.22 0.78 0.26 0.90 0.27 0.90 0.26 7/6/18 0.55 0.29 0.56 0.24 0.72 0.26 0.86 0.26 0.82 0.17 7/12/18 0.56 0.28 0.52 0.12 0.75 0.25 0.95 0.27 0.92 0.20 7/19/18 0.60 0.26 0.63 0.23 0.75 0.25 0.93 0.30 0.95 0.27 7/24/18 0.57 0.19 0.70 0.15 0.80 0.19 0.90 0.20 0.95 0.22 8/1/18 0.52 0.24 0.71 0.21 0.75 0.20 0.88 0.28 0.82 0.22 8/9/18 0.58 0.23 0.60 0.15 0.65 0.14 0.80 0.20 0.78 0.08 8/13/18 0.50 0.22 0.50 0.18 0.65 0.20 0.76 0.26 0.72 0.20 8/20/18 0.50 0.20 0.55 0.18 0.65 0.16 0.81 0.28 0.74 0.10 9/5/18 1.10 0.25 1.10 0.25 1.10 0.25 1.22 0.34 1.08 0.22 9/12/18 1.22 0.20 1.27 0.12 1.13 0.15 1.06 0.08 1.12 0.02 9/18/18 0.88 0.22 0.88 0.03 0.88 0.18 0.86 0.24 0.80 0.17 9/27/18 0.68 0.26 0.64 0.15 0.67 0.14 0.77 0.24 0.73 0.20 10/4/18 0.70 0.20 0.65 0.04 0.72 0.12 0.75 0.12 0.68 0.10 10/9/18 0.55 0.17 0.62 0.14 0.72 0.19 0.72 0.13 0.68 0.10 10/19/18 0.62 0.12 0.63 0.00 0.68 0.06 0.70 0.08 0.60 0.01 10/24/18 0.58 0.16 0.60 0.03 0.64 0.07 0.64 0.07 0.57 0.10 11/1/18 0.50 0.15 0.46 0.15 0.56 0.10 0.67 0.23 0.58 0.18 11/6/18 0.48 0.05 0.46 0.07 0.57 0.04 0.57 0.14 0.52 0.12 11/13/18 0.42 0.12 0.51 0.16 0.53 0.10 NA NA 0.57 0.22 11/21/18 0.47 -0.05 0.54 0.13 0.58 0.18 0.58 0.16 0.58 0.14 11/29/18 0.50 -0.03 0.47 -0.05 0.59 0.15 0.58 0.17 0.54 0.17 12/6/18 0.52 0.07 0.49 0.11 0.53 0.10 0.57 0.10 0.51 0.08 12/13/18 0.43 0.20 0.40 0.12 0.57 0.15 0.69 0.25 0.61 0.16 12/20/18 0.08 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.45 0.11 0.63 0.10 0.74 0.10 12/21/18 0.46 0.32 0.74 0.34 0.62 0.14 0.75 0.10 0.72 0.12 6-4
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 Table 6.3-1. Range in Surface Water Head Differences.
Line A Line B Line C Line D Line E Date L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID 12/26/18 0.50 0.18 0.46 0.12 0.57 0.15 0.60 0.12 0.56 0.14 1/4/19 0.32 0.12 0.32 0.10 0.48 0.12 0.66 0.10 0.68 0.10 1/8/19 0.38 0.06 0.38 0.08 0.51 0.11 0.63 0.12 0.60 0.10 1/15/19 0.38 0.13 0.36 0.13 0.49 0.16 0.62 0.08 0.54 0.14 1/23/19 0.23 0.12 0.21 0.13 0.44 0.15 NA NA 0.59 0.15 1/24/19 0.21 0.15 0.25 0.16 0.44 0.20 NA NA 0.62 0.17 1/30/19 0.52 0.20 0.49 0.14 0.60 0.17 0.72 0.14 0.66 0.16 2/7/19 0.43 0.21 0.45 0.18 0.57 0.19 0.69 0.13 0.64 0.20 2/12/19 0.28 0.21 0.30 0.14 0.59 0.19 0.70 0.14 0.67 0.20 2/21/19 0.33 0.19 0.38 0.14 0.55 0.21 0.70 0.14 0.68 0.14 2/25/19 0.41 0.21 0.34 0.12 0.47 0.15 0.62 0.13 0.45 0.02 3/4/19 0.25 0.17 0.28 0.10 0.47 0.09 0.67 0.11 0.58 0.06 3/5/19 0.23 0.21 0.24 0.13 0.44 0.17 0.63 0.12 0.60 0.14 3/6/19 0.25 0.43 0.22 0.38 0.33 0.21 0.50 0.18 0.39 0.17 3/7/19 0.23 0.13 0.19 0.10 0.34 0.11 0.52 0.08 0.44 0.05 3/8/19 0.09 0.37 0.11 0.33 0.35 0.20 0.44 0.04 0.42 -0.02 3/11/19 0.38 0.17 0.35 0.11 0.46 0.13 0.60 0.06 0.56 0.10 3/18/19 0.45 0.13 0.50 0.10 0.49 0.09 0.53 -0.01 0.46 0.08 3/25/19 0.52 0.15 0.49 0.11 0.54 0.10 0.64 0.08 0.59 0.14 4/1/19 0.50 0.20 0.47 0.13 0.51 0.16 0.58 0.10 0.52 0.14 4/8/19 0.25 0.22 0.26 0.19 0.40 0.19 0.53 0.19 0.50 0.20 4/9/19 0.09 0.21 0.08 0.18 0.33 0.22 0.49 0.21 0.54 0.19 4/10/19 0.31 0.37 0.31 0.33 0.44 0.35 0.54 0.22 0.50 0.17 4/11/19 0.24 0.15 0.27 0.09 0.38 0.12 0.49 0.15 0.44 0.10 4/12/19 0.22 0.56 0.24 0.51 0.40 0.21 0.50 0.23 0.45 0.14 4/15/19 0.27 0.17 0.25 0.13 0.40 0.14 0.57 0.22 0.43 0.10 4/16/19 0.25 0.13 0.23 0.11 0.30 0.10 0.39 0.11 0.38 0.08 4/17/19 0.16 0.42 0.16 0.36 0.27 0.19 0.34 0.11 0.30 0.14 4/18/19 0.03 0.09 0.08 0.06 0.18 0.06 0.34 0.00 0.35 0.04 6-5
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 Table 6.3-1. Range in Surface Water Head Differences.
Line A Line B Line C Line D Line E Date L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID L31-C32 L31-ID 4/19/19 -0.17 0.31 -0.04 0.26 0.09 0.19 0.29 0.11 0.30 0.12 4/19/19 0.22 0.10 0.20 0.07 NA NA NA NA NA NA 4/23/19 0.14 0.34 0.09 0.27 0.23 0.22 0.30 0.09 0.29 0.11 4/24/19 0.08 0.36 0.04 0.24 0.20 0.34 0.46 0.22 0.30 0.18 4/25/19 -0.04 0.34 -0.02 0.26 0.12 0.30 0.42 0.20 0.32 0.18 4/26/19 -0.16 0.22 -0.10 0.14 0.08 0.34 0.42 0.20 0.30 0.10 4/26/19 -0.11 0.69 -0.09 0.64 NA NA NA NA NA NA 4/29/19 0.08 0.14 0.03 0.08 0.17 0.07 0.30 -0.02 0.28 0.04 5/1/19 0.01 0.36 0.02 0.31 0.20 0.34 0.26 0.06 0.26 0.06 5/2/19 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.07 0.18 0.07 0.36 -0.03 0.38 0.00 5/3/19 -0.10 0.37 -0.08 0.33 0.10 0.31 0.30 0.06 0.37 0.10 5/6/19 0.00 0.12 -0.01 0.05 0.14 0.02 0.33 -0.03 0.39 0.03 5/8/19 0.21 0.35 0.20 0.30 0.35 0.30 0.51 0.07 0.52 0.13 5/9/19 0.20 0.15 0.26 0.08 0.41 0.11 0.56 0.02 0.56 0.09 5/10/19 0.15 0.36 0.14 0.30 0.36 0.33 0.54 0.02 0.52 0.08 5/13/19 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.10 0.38 0.12 0.61 0.06 0.64 0.12 5/15/19 0.21 0.40 0.22 0.33 0.36 0.26 0.49 0.02 0.52 0.10 5/16/19 0.37 0.18 0.36 0.13 0.39 0.04 0.58 0.03 0.58 0.08 5/17/19 0.42 0.16 0.42 0.09 0.56 0.12 0.70 0.06 0.63 0.10 5/23/19 0.38 0.18 0.40 0.11 0.44 0.12 0.53 0.07 0.51 0.12 5/28/19 0.22 0.18 0.20 0.12 0.32 0.09 0.48 0.03 0.48 0.09 5/29/19 0.12 0.72 0.10 0.68 0.28 0.08 0.42 -0.02 0.41 0.06 5/30/19 0.16 0.24 0.18 0.16 0.32 0.08 0.44 -0.02 0.44 0.05 5/31/19 0.13 0.50 0.24 0.22 0.22 0.50 0.38 0.08 0.38 0.12 5/31/19 0.08 0.66 0.09 0.61 NA NA NA NA NA NA Key:
NA = Not applicable 6-6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 Table 6.3-2. Hours and Volumes of ID Pump Operation per Month (June 2018 through May 2019).
ID 2018 2019 Pumped Hours Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May N1 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 51 134 120 N2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 92 S1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pumped Volume (MG)
N1 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 47 125 112 N2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 85 S1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Key:
MG = Million gallons N = North S = South 6-7
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 Table 6.3-3. Pumping Summary.
Performed Date N1 N2 S1 S2 Pumping 12/20/2018 Yes x 12/21/2018 Yes x 3/5/2019 Yes x 3/6/2019 Yes x 3/7/2019 Yes x 3/8/2019 Yes x 4/9/2019 Yes x 4/10/2019 Yes x 4/11/2019 Yes x 4/12/2019 Yes x 4/16/2019 Yes x 4/17/2019 Yes x 4/18/2019 Yes x 4/19/2019 Yes x 4/22/2019 Yes x 4/23/2019 Yes x 4/24/2019 Yes x 4/25/2019 Yes Yes x 4/26/2019 Yes Yes x 4/29/2019 Yes x 4/30/2019 Yes x 5/1/149 Yes x 5/2/2019 Yes x 5/3/2019 Yes x 5/6/2019 Yes x 5/7/2019 Yes x 5/8/2019 Yes x 5/9/2019 Yes x 5/10/2019 Yes x 5/13/2019 Yes x 5/14/2019 Yes x 5/15/2019 Yes x 5/28/2019 Yes x 5/29/2019 Yes x 5/30/2019 Yes x 5/31/2019 Yes Yes x Key:
N = North S = South 6-8
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 FIGURES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 Figure 6.3-1. Historical ID Monitoring Wells and Transects.
6-9
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 2.0 1.5 1.0 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88) 0.5 0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5 6/1/18 7/1/18 8/1/18 9/1/18 10/1/18 11/1/18 12/1/18 1/1/19 2/1/19 3/1/19 4/1/19 5/1/19 L-31E ID C-32 (CCS)
Figure 6.3-2. Transect A Field-Recorded Water Levels June 2018 through May 2019.
6-10
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 2.0 1.5 1.0 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88) 0.5 0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5 6/1/18 7/1/18 8/1/18 9/1/18 10/1/18 11/1/18 12/1/18 1/1/19 2/1/19 3/1/19 4/1/19 5/1/19 L-31E ID C-32 (CCS)
Figure 6.3-3. Transect B Field-Recorded Water Levels June 2018 through May 2019.
6-11
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 2.0 1.5 1.0 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88) 0.5 0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5 6/1/18 7/1/18 8/1/18 9/1/18 10/1/18 11/1/18 12/1/18 1/1/19 2/1/19 3/1/19 4/1/19 5/1/19 L-31E ID C-32 (CCS)
Figure 6.3-4. Transect C Field-Recorded Water Levels June 2018 through May 2019.
6-12
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 2.0 1.5 1.0 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88) 0.5 0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5 6/1/18 7/1/18 8/1/18 9/1/18 10/1/18 11/1/18 12/1/18 1/1/19 2/1/19 3/1/19 4/1/19 5/1/19 L-31E ID C-32 (CCS)
Figure 6.3-5. Transect D Field-Recorded Water Levels June 2018 through May 2019.
6-13
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 6 2.0 1.5 1.0 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88) 0.5 0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5 6/1/18 7/1/18 8/1/18 9/1/18 10/1/18 11/1/18 12/1/18 1/1/19 2/1/19 3/1/19 4/1/19 5/1/19 L-31E ID C-32 (CCS)
Figure 6.3-6. Transect E Field-Recorded Water Levels June 2018 through May 2019.
6-14
0.0 Pump 1.0N1 Pump2.0N2 Pump 3.0S1 Pump 4.0S2 5.0 6.0 7.0 06/01/18 06/11/18 06/21/18 07/01/18 07/11/18 FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report 07/21/18 07/31/18 08/10/18 08/20/18 08/30/18 09/09/18 09/19/18 August 2019 09/29/18 Rain (in) 10/09/18 10/19/18 10/29/18 N1 11/08/18 11/18/18 Figure 6.3-7. Interceptor Ditch Pump Operation and Rainfall.
11/28/18 Figure 6.3-17 6-15 N2 12/08/18 12/18/18 12/28/18 Pumping Operation S1 01/07/19 01/17/19 01/27/19 02/06/19 S2 02/16/19 02/26/19 03/08/19 03/18/19 03/28/19 04/07/19 04/17/19 04/27/19 05/07/19 05/17/19 05/27/19
-9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
-15 -14 -13 -12 -11 -10 Rainfall Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 7
- 7.
SUMMARY
AND INTERPRETATIONS In accordance with the Turkey Point Monitoring Plan (SFWMD 2009a) and the Fifth Supplemental Agreement (SFWMD 2009b), FPL is required to collect groundwater, surface water, meteorological, and ecological data in and around Turkey Point to establish conditions before and after the uprating of the nuclear units and to determine the horizontal and vertical effects and extent of CCS water on existing and projected surface water, groundwater, and ecological conditions. FPL has been conducting the above-required monitoring since 2010 and has submitted reports semi-annually and annually to the Agencies, pursuant to the requirements of the SFWMD Fifth Supplemental Agreement and referenced Monitoring Plan. This report summarizes the monitoring efforts from June 1, 2018, through May 31, 2019 (referred to as the reporting period) and compares the data from the reporting period to the historical period of record (June 2010 to May 2018) to determine whether there are any recent changes to the historical record. The results in this report are based on:
Automated water quality and water level data (over 4,500,000 data points) and analytical results for a wide array of parameters from 47 groundwater wells and 20 surface water stations (plus one additional non-automated surface water station) located in and around Turkey Point; Ecological field and analytical data, including plant productivity and community characteristics, leaf characteristics, nutrient content in leaves, and porewater quality from marshes, mangroves, and trees islands over a broad area around the CCS and control sites; Biscayne Bay field and analytical data for SAV, coral, and sponge community composition and cover, nutrient content in seagrass leaves, light attenuation, and porewater quality; Automated meteorological data, including rainfall, wind speed and direction, temperature, and other parameters; Rainfall and evaporation pan tritium data; Monthly water and salt budget results for the CCS; Borehole geophysical data from USGS annual induction logging in 14 deep wells; Applicable data collected from other sources referenced in the report; and Results from the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a),
Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2016a), and Annual Monitoring Reports (FPL 2017a and 2018a).
7-1
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 7 Many of the current findings are similar to those previously reported in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a) and Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2016a) and for the last several years Annual Monitoring Reports (FPL 2017a, 2018a).
During this reporting period, the operation of the UFA freshening wells has continued, adding an average of 11.17 mgd of low salinity UFA water to the CCS. Turkey Point groundwater RWS construction was completed and the system became fully operational on May 15, 2018 and operated 90% of the time during the reporting period. There are some early indications of reductions in salinity in shallow wells closest to the CCS, most likely due to RWS operation.
7.1 Meteorological Major Findings Total rainfall over the CCS estimated from NEXRAD during the reporting period was 36.97 inches, while the average historical value is 43.67 inches, with the deficiency occurring during the wet season. Wet season rainfall was only 23.07 inches, compared to the wet season historical average of 28.16 inches.
The drier 2018 wet season was preceded by a below average dry season in the previous reporting period, with the total rainfall for the months of January through March 2018 being the second driest, based on 51 years of records from the S-20F rainfall station.
There was only one large rainfall event greater than 3 inches and only two rainfall events greater than 2 inches during the reporting period. This lack of large rainfall events (i.e.,
greater than several inches/day or consecutive-rainfall events totaling 5 to 6 inches) was a notable meteorological finding for the reporting period. In most years there are two to four events in excess of 3 or 4 inches and one or two multi-day periods of much higher rainfall totals. These types of events cause appreciable declines in CCS salinity since the rainfall inputs greatly exceed evaporative losses; in this reporting period, these rainfall events did not occur as often as in previous years.
Temperature was overall warmer this reporting year, both regionally and over the CCS, contributing to higher evaporative losses.
Atmospheric tritium in the vicinity of the CCS elevates background tritium levels in the nearby waterbodies. Atmospheric exchange is highest around the plant (>500 pCi/L),
although the values attenuate with distance from the plant, with values approaching 40 pCi/L observed several miles west of the CCS.
7-2
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 7 7.2 Groundwater Major Findings There continues to be hypersaline groundwater (greater than 19,000 mg/L chloride) under and adjacent to the CCS, with diminishing concentrations at depth farther from the CCS.
The extent of this hypersaline water, based on chloride data, has not appreciably changed compared to the historical period of record.
Data for this reporting period show no significant changes to the orientation and extent of CCS groundwater. Based on tritium data for the reporting period, the outer limit for potential CCS groundwater (20 pCi/L isopleth) at depth continues to be approximately 4.5 miles west of the CCS.
The farthest wells, over 5.5 to 6 miles west of the CCS (TPGW-8 and TPGW-9, respectively), continue to be fresh at all depths, as are the shallow and intermediate depth wells at TPGW-7.
Based on water quality results, vertical profiling, and induction logging, a fresher groundwater lens was present within the upper 18 to 20 ft of the aquifer just west of the CCS. The lens thickens/increases in depth to over 50 ft at TPGW-7 (over 4.5 miles west of the CCS) and encompasses the full extent of the Biscayne Aquifer farther west. The thickness of this fresher groundwater lens varies slightly from year to year due to seasonal meteorological influences.
Groundwater specific conductance, chloride, sodium, and tritium values were generally consistent for the majority of wells throughout the entire monitoring effort. However, there are exceptions, as discussed below.
o Declines in saltwater constituents were recorded in several of the groundwater monitoring wells located west of and closest to the CCS. This notably includes TPGW-1S, TPGW-2S, and TPGW-15S, where historically low specific conductance, chloride, and/or sodium values were recorded and automated data show a clear downward trend that coincides with RWS hypersaline groundwater extraction pumping.
o Quarterly specific conductance, chloride, and sodium data in the shallow zone at TPGW-L3 (18 ft) and TPGW-L5 (18 ft) show declines in values compared to the previous reporting period when the shallow zone was influenced (made saltier) by Hurricane Irma.
o There have been increases in specific conductance, chloride, sodium, and/or bulk resistivity in the vicinity of Tallahassee Road in the deep zone of the Biscayne Aquifer (TPGW-4, TPGW-5, TPGW-7D, and TPGW-G21 [58-ft interval]). The rate of inland movement of saltwater has diminished during the reporting period relative to previous years.
7-3
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 7 o At TPGW-G21 (58 ft), quarterly specific conductance, chloride, and sodium values continued to increase slightly during this reporting period. The tritium concentrations have also been gradually increasing, but are still relatively low; the average for the reporting period was 57.8 pCi/L.
o Groundwater at the base of the Biscayne Aquifer, over 100 ft below the bottom of Biscayne Bay, has experienced gradual increases in saltwater constituents since 2012/2013 (TPGW-10D and TPGW-11D), but this has leveled off. Automated specific conductance values throughout the reporting period are nearly unchanged. The 2019 induction logs for these sites actually show a slight decrease in bulk resistivity compared to the previous year.
o The primary influence of the CCS on groundwater below Biscayne Bay is observed in the deep wells. There is little to no sourced CCS groundwater in the shallow wells, and porewater data collected from multiple locations in the Bay do not reveal CCS sourced groundwater seeping up into the Bay.
From May 15, 2018, through May 31, 2019, over 4.9 billion gallons of hypersaline groundwater and over 2 billion pounds of salt were removed from the Biscayne Aquifer in the vicinity of the CCS via the operation of the RWS.
7.3 Surface Water Major Findings The majority of conclusions regarding surface water quality and stage from this reporting period are similar to the values reported in the Pre- and Post-Uprate Comprehensive Monitoring Reports (FPL 2012a, 2016a) and previous Annual Monitoring Report (FPL 2017a, 2018a) findings.
The average specific conductance for the CCS using all seven stations combined during the reporting period (72,556 µS/cm) was almost exactly the same as the previous year (72,227 µS/cm). The average annual salinity for this year, calculated in accordance with Paragraph 29.J of the Consent Order, was 51.1 on the PSS-78 scale. The average CCS surface water temperature for the monitoring reporting period was 31.2°C, which is 0.7°C warmer than the previous reporting period due to commensurately warmer air temperatures, but still 2.3°C cooler than the 2014/2015 reporting period when CCS temperatures were the highest.
Tritium concentrations in surface waters surrounding the CCS are influenced by atmospheric deposition and vary based on tritium levels in the CCS, wind, rainfall, and distance. December 2018 canal and Biscayne Bay values were elevated commensurate with higher tritium levels in the CCS at that sampling period. The data do not support that the source of tritium was from a groundwater pathway.
7-4
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 7 The average temperature drop from near the plant discharge into the CCS at TPSWCCS-1 to the intake near TPSWCCS-6 was 9.3°C. This change in temperature reflects the amount of cooling that occurred across the CCS and reflects the best cooling performance since monitoring began.
The L-31E canal exhibited notable increases in specific conductance several times during the reporting period, indicating a saltwater influence. These elevated salinity events have been observed every reporting period when coastal tidal water elevations exceed water levels in the L-31E canal. Based on multiple lines of evidence (i.e., groundwater gradients, depth of hypersaline groundwater below the bottom of the L-31E canal, tritium concentrations, tritium-specific conductance relationships), the source of the saltwater entering the canal is Biscayne Bay marine groundwater and is not linked to the CCS.
Water quality and automated data from Biscayne Bay for this reporting period indicate no changes in trends or discernible influences from the CCS on adjacent surface waterbodies.
Total phosphorous samples at all of the Biscayne Bay/Card Sound stations were non-detect based on detection limits of 0.00582 mg/L and 0.009 mg/L, which are below or near historical values reported in the Bay.
UFA freshening water was added during the report period (approximately 4.15 billion gallons). This non-potable, low salinity water was instrumental in moderating CCS salinities and offset some of the evaporative losses of water from the CCS; however, it was not enough to offset the over 19 mgd deficit between precipitation and evaporation that occurred during the reporting period.
7.4 Water Budget Major Findings The water and salt budget model has been fairly robust in informing understanding of processes that control the CCS and the manner in which the CCS interacts with the adjacent aquifer and waterbodies.
The average monthly difference in rainfall versus evaporation was 589 million gallons, meaning that during the reporting period, on average, over 19.36 mgd of freshwater left the CCS by evaporation than was added by rainfall.
The modeled net flow of water was calculated to be an average inflow of 2.19 mgd over the 12-month calibration period, while the net gain (inflow) of salt over the same time period was 423 (lb x 1,000)/day.
7-5
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 7 7.5 Ecological Major Findings The marsh and mangrove areas are representative of communities found along the coastal fringe of South Florida, are hydrologically modified and/or nutrient limited systems, and have remained consistent over the historical period of record.
Marsh and mangrove productivity is a function of hydrological and biogeochemical interactions within each plot and is affected by regional meteorological conditions and climatic events (e.g., Hurricane Irma).
The data collected during the reporting period continue to support the conclusion that the CCS does not have an ecological impact on the surrounding areas and there is no clear evidence of CCS water in the surrounding marsh and mangrove areas from a groundwater pathway. Ecological changes observed during this reporting period are more seasonally and meteorologically driven.
Based on 9 years of twice yearly in-situ observations of seagrass in Biscayne Bay and Card Sound, there has been no indication of seagrass community transition that would indicate increases in TP or impacts from the CCS. While some changes in density or vegetation composition have been documented seasonally or annually, there is no trend to those changes. The location and growth of seagrasses in the area appear to be primarily a function of sediment depth.
TN/TP ratios in seagrass vary from year to year and still indicate a phosphorus-limited system with ratios similar to, and often more limiting than, the control/background station in Barnes Sound.
7.6 Interceptor Ditch Major Findings ID operational criteria triggered the use of the ID pumps for a total of 36 days during the reporting period, with a combined total of 492 hours0.00569 days <br />0.137 hours <br />8.134921e-4 weeks <br />1.87206e-4 months <br /> of pumping. The total volume pumped from June 1, 2018, through May 31, 2019, was 460 million gallons, which was approximately 3.5 times lower than the previous reporting period.
The ID was successful in restricting a net westward migration of CCS groundwater in the upper portion of the Biscayne Aquifer, as evidenced by the continued presence of a freshwater lens west of the ID.
7-6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 8
- 8. REFERENCES Barr, J. G., Engel, V., Smith, T.J., and J.D. Fuentes. 2012. Hurricane disturbance and recovery of energy balance, CO2 fluxes and canopy structure in a mangrove forest of the Florida Everglades. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology. 153:54-66.
Brand, L.E. 1988. Assessment of Plankton Resources and Their Environmental Interactions in Biscayne Bay, Florida. Miami-Dade Department of Environmental Resources, Miami, FL. DERM Technical Report 88-1. 207 pp.
Biscayne National Park (BNP). 2007. Salinity Sampling in Biscayne Bay (2005-2006). Annual Report to the United States Army Corps of Engineers for the Monitoring and Assessment Plan of the Comprehensive Everglades restoration Plan for RECOVER Assessment Team Southeast Estuary Subteam. 151 pp.
Caccia, V.G. and J.N. Boyer. 2005. Spatial patterning of water quality in Biscayne Bay, Florida as a function of land use and water management. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 50: 1416-1429.
Chang, C.Y., P.V. McCormick, S. Newman, and E. Elliott. 2009. Isotopic indicators of environmental change in a subtropical wetland. Ecological Indicators. 9:825-836.
Childers, D.L., D. Iwaniec, D. Rondeau, G. Rubio, E. Verdon, and C.J. Madden. 2006.
Responses of sawgrass and spikerush to variation in hydrologic drivers and salinity in Southern Everglades marshes. Hydrobiologia. 569 (1):273-292.
Collado-Vides, L., V. Mazzei, T. Thyberg, D. Lirman. 2011. Spatio-temporal patterns and nutrient status of macroalgae in a heavily managed region of Biscayne Bay, Florida, USA. Botanica Marina 54: 377-390.
Coronado-Molina, C., J.W. Day, E. Reyes, and B.C. Perez. 2004. Standing crop and aboveground biomass partitioning of a dwarf mangrove forest in Taylor River Slough, Florida. Wetlands Ecology and Management. 12:157-164.
Daoust, R.J. and D.L. Childers. 1998. Quantifying aboveground biomass and estimating net aboveground primary production for wetland macrophytes using a non-destructive phenometric technique. Aquatic Botany. 62:115-133.
Enriquez, S., N. Marba, C.M. Duarte, B.I. van Tussenbroek, and G. Reyes-Zavala. 2001.
Effects of seagrass Thalassia testudinum on sediment redox. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 219:149-158.
8-1
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 8 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). 2012. Drinking Water Standards, Monitoring, and Reporting. Chapter 62-550.
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/legal/Rules/drinkingwater/62-550.pdf
__________. 2016. Consent Order OGC No 16-0241. June 2016.
__________. 2008. Power Plant Site Certification # PA 03-45 for the FPL Turkey Point Plant Units 3 and 4 Nuclear Power Plant Uprate Project. October 2008.
Florida Power & Light Company (FPL). 2019a. Florida Power & Light Company Semi-Annual Data Delivery for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power &
Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc. February 2019.
__________. 2019b. Florida Power & Light Company Turkey Point Recovery Well System (RWS) Third Quarter Status Report. March 2019
__________. 2019c. Florida Power & Light Company Turkey Point Recovery Well System (RWS) Third Quarter Status Report. June 2019
__________. 2018a. Florida Power & Light Company Annual Monitoring Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc. August 2018.
__________. 2018b. Florida Power & Light Company Recovery Well System Startup Report.
Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc.
October 2018
__________. 2018c. Florida Power & Light Company Turkey Point Recovery Well System (RWS) Second Quarter Status Report. December 2018
__________. 2017a. Florida Power & Light Company Annual Monitoring Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc. September 2017.
__________. 2017b. Florida Power & Light Company Turkey Point Plant Interceptor Ditch Operation Procedure. May 2017.
__________. 2016a. Florida Power & Light Company Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc. March 2016.
__________. 2016b. Florida Power & Light Company Annual Monitoring Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc. August 2016.
8-2
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 8
__________. 2014. Florida Power & Light Company Annual Monitoring Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc. August 2014a
__________. 2013. Florida Power & Light Company Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc. June 2013.
__________. 2012a. Florida Power & Light Company Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc. October 31, 2012.
__________. 2012b. Florida Power & Light Company Turkey Point Plant Interceptor Ditch Operation Procedure. October 2012.
__________. 2012c. Turkey Point Plant Initial Ecological Characterization Report. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc. June 2012.
__________. 2011a. Florida Power & Light Company Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc. Effective Date: December 5, 2011.
__________. 2011b. Florida Power & Light Company Turkey Point Plant Interceptor Ditch Operation Procedure.
Feller, I.C. 1995. Effects of Nutrient Enrichment on Growth and Herbivory of Dwarf Red Mangrove (Rhizophora mangle). Ecological Monographs. 65:477-505 Fourqurean, J.W. and J.C. Zieman. 2002. Nutrient content of the seagrass Thalassia testudinum reveals regional patterns of relative availability of nitrogen and phosphorus in the Florida Keys USA. Biogeochemistry. 61:229-245.
Golder Associates, Inc. 2011a. 2011 Annual Report Groundwater Monitoring Program.
Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. August 2011.
Golder Associates, Inc. 2011b. Salt Water Orientation in the Biscayne Aquifer in the Turkey Point Plant Vicinity Prior to the Installation of the Cooling Canal System. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company and South Florida Water Management District. August 2011.
Gunderson, L.H. 1997. Vegetation of the Everglades: Determinants of Community Composition. Everglades: The Ecosystem and Its Restoration. Steven M. Davis and John C. Ogden. Boca Raton: St. Lucie Press. pp. 331-332.
8-3
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 8 Ilami, F., G.H. Anderson, and T.J. Smith. 2003. Spatial and temporal analysis of soil pore water nutrients in an estuarine fringe mangrove forest Harney River Estuary, Everglades National Park. Poster presented at ERF Conference. Seattle, Washington. September 2003.
JLA Geosciences, Inc. 2010. Geology and Hydrogeology Report for FPL Turkey Point Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan. FPL, Turkey Point Plant, Homestead, Florida. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. October 2010.
Klein, H. 1957. Interim Report on Salt-Water Encroachment in Dade County, Florida. Prepared by USGS in cooperation with Dade County, the Cities of Miami and Miami Beach, the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District, and the Florida Geological Survey.
Tallahassee, Florida.
Kohn, M.J. 2010. Carbon isotope compositions of terrestrial C3 plants as indicators of (paleo) ecology and (paleo) climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
107(46):207-226.
Lirman, D., T. Thyberg, R. Santos, S. Schopmeyer, C. Drury, L. Collado-Vides, S. Bellmund, and J. Serafy. 2014. SAV Communities of Western Biscayne Bay, Miami, Florida, USA:
Human and natural drivers of seagrass and macroalgae abundance and distribution along a continuous shoreline. Estuaries & Coasts. 37:1243-1255.
Lohmann, M.A., E.D. Swain, J.D. Wang, and J. Dixon. 2012. Evaluations of Effects of Changes in Canal Management and Precipitation Patterns on Salinity in Biscayne Bay, Florida, Using an Integrated Surface-Water/Groundwater Model. U.S. Department of the Interior and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). USGS Technical Report.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2012/5099/pdf/sir_2012_5099_v3.pdf Lugo, A.E. and S. Snedaker. 1974. The Ecology of Mangroves. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 5:39-64.
McKee, K.L., I.C. Feller, M. Popp, and W. Wanek. 2002. Mangrove Isotopic (15N and 13C)
Fractionation Across a Nitrogen vs. Phosphorous Limitation Gradient. Ecology.
83(4):1065-1075.
Miami-Dade County (MDC) Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources (RER),
Division of Environmental Resources Management. 2015. Consent Agreement between Miami-Dade County and Florida Power & Light Company.
Millero, F.J. 1996. Chemical Oceanography (3rd ed). Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. 536 pp.
Olmsted, I. and T.V. Armentano. 1997. Vegetation of Shark Slough, Everglades National Park.
SFNRC Technical Report 97-001. 39 pp.
8-4
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 8 Parker, G.G., G.E. Ferguson, and S.K. Love. 1955. Water resources of southeastern Florida, with special reference to the geology and ground water of the Miami area. U.S.
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1255. 965 pp.
Prinos, S.T. 2016. Saltwater Intrusion Monitoring in Florida. Florida Scientist. 79(4):269-278.
Prinos, S.T., M.A. Wacker, K.J. Cunningham, and D.V. Fitterman. 2014. Origins and delineation of saltwater intrusion in the Biscayne aquifer and changes in the distribution of saltwater in Miami-Dade County, Florida. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2014-5025. 101 pp. http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20145025.
Reich, C., R.B. Halley, T. Hickey, and P. Swarzenski. 2006. Groundwater Characterization and Assessment of Contaminants in Marine Areas of Biscayne National Park. Technical Report/NPS/NRWRD/NRTR-2006/356. 40 pp.
Robblee, M.B. and J.A. Browder. 2007. Year 2 Annual Report. USGS Work Order #19.
NOAA Work Order #3 for MAP activities 3.2.3.5 and 3.2.4.5. South Florida Fish and Invertebrate Assessment Network. 84 pp.
Smallwood, B.J., M.J. Wooller, M.E. Jacobson, and M.L. Fogel. 2003. Isotopic and molecular distributions of biochemicals from fresh and buried Rhizophora mangle leaves.
Geochemical Transactions. 4(7):38-46.
Smith, B.N. and S. Epstein. 1971. Two Categories of 13C/12C Ratios for Higher Plants. Plant Physiology. 47(3):380-384.
Smith, T.J., Robblee, M.B., Wanless, H.R., and T.W. Doyle. 2004. Mangroves, Hurricanes, and Lightning Strikes. Bioscience. 44(4) 256-262.
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). 2013a. Letter from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, to Barbara Linkiewicz, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida, regarding Units 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (reduction of groundwater/surface water monitoring). June 3, 2013.
__________. 2013b. Letter from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, to Barbara Linkiewicz, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida, regarding Unit 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (reduction of ecological monitoring). July 17, 2013.
__________. 2013c. Email from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, to Stacy Foster, Manager, Environmental Licensing, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida, regarding Unit 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (clarification of sampling frequency for ecological nutrients). July 23, 2013.
__________. 2009a. Fifth Supplemental Agreement between the South Florida Water Management District and Florida Power & Light Company. October 2009.
8-5
FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August 2019 Section 8
__________. 2009b. FPL Turkey Point Power Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan (Exhibit B). Prepared by SFWMD, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management. October 14, 2009.
__________. 1983. Agreement between the South Florida Water Management District and Florida Power & Light Company. July 1983.
Turekian, K. 1968. Oceans. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Valderrama, Robert, 2017, Time Series Electromagnetic Induction-Log Datasets, Including Logs Collected through the 2016 Water Year in South Florida: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/F7BG2MWD.
Verhoeven, J.T.A., W. Koerselman, and A.F.M. Meulman. 1996. Nitrogen- or phosphorous-limited growth in herbaceous wet vegetation: relations with atmospheric inputs and management regimes. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 11:494-497.
Wacker, M. 2010. Personal communication between Mike Wacker, U.S. Geological Survey, and Jim Bolleter, Ecology and Environment, Inc. February 2010.
Zieman, J.C., J.W. Fourqurean, and T.A. Frankovich. 1999. Seagrass die-off in Florida Bay:
long-term trends in abundance and growth of turtle grass, Thalassia testudinum.
Estuaries. 22:460-470.
8-6