ML20069H832: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| number = ML20069H832 | | number = ML20069H832 | ||
| issue date = 03/07/1983 | | issue date = 03/07/1983 | ||
| title = Annual Environ Operating Rept,1982 | | title = Annual Environ Operating Rept,1982 | ||
| author name = | | author name = | ||
| author affiliation = TOLEDO EDISON CO. | | author affiliation = TOLEDO EDISON CO. | ||
Latest revision as of 03:22, 24 May 2020
| ML20069H832 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 03/07/1983 |
| From: | TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20069H825 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8304120272 | |
| Download: ML20069H832 (493) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:, Dock;t No. 50-346 License No. NPF-3 ['T
- s_s' Serial No. 1-333 TOLEDO EDISON AcsAAc P CACUSE March 7, 1983 7lj ,*.'". "
I4191259-5221 E 2.20.1 RR P-7-82-01 Mr. James G. Keppler - A83-165B Regional Director, Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60136
Dear Mr. Keppler:
Under se:parate cover, we are transmitting two (2) copies of the 1982 Annual Environmeneci Operating Report for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1. This report in submitted in accordance with Section 5.4.1 of Appendix B, Davis-Besse Technical Specifications. Sincerely, A t. I { RPC:JSW:yml i Enclosure cc: Victor Stello, Jr., Director Office' of Inspection and Enforcement USNRC Washington, D.C. 20555 (20 copies) Norman Haller, Director Office of Management and Program Analysis USNRC Washington, D.C. 20555 (2 copies) Harold Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation USNRC Washington, D.C. 20555 (1 copy) Tom Peebles, Resident NRC Inspector Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station (1 copy) 9 8304120272 830307 PDR ADOCK 05000346 R PDR THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY EDISON PLAZA 300 MADISON AVENUE TOLEDO, OHIO 43652
O =s
- Cm-S LIMITING CMDITIONS FOR OPERATION
- MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL 2.1.1
! BIOCIDES 2.3.1 PH MONITORING 2.3.2-SULFATES MONITORING 2.3.3 ENVIRONfENTAL SURVEILLANCE , CHEMICAL USAGE 3.1.1.A.2 . CHLORINE MONITORING 3.1.1.A.3 ENVIR0ffENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING 3.2 LAND USE AND MILK ANIMAL CENSUS RESULTS UPDATE OF 50-MILE DEMOGRAPHIC DATA O BIOLOGICAL MONITORING t 1982 STUDIES OF 1}iE ASIATIC CLAM (CORBICULA)' FJNIRONMENTAL IffACT APPRAISAL OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 1 ON THE AQUATIC ECOLOGY CF LAKE ERIE 1973-1979 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING ANALYSIS OF THERMAL INTERNAL BOUNDARY LAYER CONDITIONS FOR A COASTAL NUCLEAR POWER PLANT i 1982 ItTEOR0 LOGICAL DATA FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION - MONTHLY AVERAGES AND 4 WINDROSES PRECIPITATION STUDY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE-NUCLEAR POWER STATION !O E l l
. - - . - , _ . - - _ . - - - , . . . ~ , . . . - . _ - _ - - _ . . . - - - - _ . . . _ . _ , _ _ . _ . , - - -
I O d J 4 SECTION 2.1.1 MAxlMuM TEMPERATURE DIFFERB4TIAL i I l l i O
I-1 1 4 !~ i I j I i-a t ! ~ 2.1.1 TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL, *F 1982 1982 Minimum Maximum Average i January 6 18' 12 February 5 15 10 ; i : March 1 16 _7 l i n April O '6 2 : May. 0 5- 2 , i j- June 0 5 2 i l' ! July 0 3 1 i I l August 0 6 2 September 1 11 .7 , October 8- 14 11 i i November 7 19 13 i December 8 19 13-i i 4 4 i I-4
i f k 4 I i i i i I i l i SECTION 2.3.1 BIOCIDES g I i 1 e i I i t l
, _ . ~ . _ . _ _ , . _ _ _ . _ . _ . - . , _ _ . _ . . . , . . . , . . . _ . , . . . . , . . - . . . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . _ _ . _ . _ . . . _ _ . . _ . , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _ . - - - .
i 2.3.1 BIOCIDES 4 1' [ . Chlorine was the only biocide used in the circulating water.at i Davis-Besse during the 1982 period. Monitoring of chlorine residuals i is covered by the Station's National Pollutant. Discharge Elimination , i4 f System (NPDES) Permit. The limits of the permit were not exceeded in 1982. .3 ,~ i i 'l i i 1 I i J e s 4 I i 4, l l i i
. ii I
e I I i I . . I ! i i
- i e
i I i I i I
\
1 e i I 1 l ww 4 4 --gn rnew--+-e---m+.-*r-=----se,----,+<s--w -w -*-w-s+m ~ ~A eee -+ 's ,v~v~~~= >*~* - -*~~ - - ~ ~* - * * *'- '~ -
I d i e t i t I
- i. -
i 1 i l I i l i i i l 1 l 1 1 t I 1 SECTICN 2.3.2 1 ! PH MONITORING I i I 1 f i I 1 l J r i 1 1 i i 1 j i i l i ! I J l l l 1
' j i
I I i 4
. - , - , . - .- .__. ,. -.- ,, . - , , - - , - - - . - . = , - . - . - , , , - . , _ . -_ . _ _ . _ _ . - _ _ _ _ - -
4 i t .i i 2.3.2 pH MONITORING 1982 1 1982 Minimum Maximum - ;
! January 7.2 8.1 -
February 7.1 8.5 i; - 1 March 7.2 8.6 I- April 6.4 8.2
- May 6.5 8.5-
)- June 7.7 8.5 i
; July 7.1 8.1 i
August 7.6 8.2 4 i- September 7.8 8.6~ s
, October 7.7 8.5 i
November 7.5- 8.5 December 8.0 8.4' i I t I , 4 l- The pH limit of 6-9 was not exceeded in 1982. f 4 i
- j. .
- l
,t
,, ..mk..-,,-..~~....,,,,.,_,...,,,_ ,,,,L,y,--.,,,,,,, ..,c.m,..,w,_.,,_..,vb_,,,,_..,_,_ .,..-~,,,......mm,,,-....,,.
i i } 4 i l i e i 1 e i 1 i 4 14 1 i t. 4 1 1 4 i i i . s 4 j 4 i 1 i t i ! SECTION 2.3.3 } SULFATES MONITORING i i i 1 1 I i d i 1 k i f f, I t i i I l i i i b i i i I t L d
- - - - - . _ . - _ . _ _ - - _ - , _ - _ . . _ _ . _ - . _ . - - . _ _ , _ , _...,,.., .. ,,.----. ._.----...-_.-.__._._.,-.__.--..--____.-_____.__.___._____..._..I - -
,~ .. .
4 4 I 1 l' + i i i i l' i. i, - , f a 2.3.3 SULFATE 1982 l !. mg/l l 1982 Minimum Maximum Average . 3 i January 55 120- 74 }- + 4 February 50 85 68 March! 57 100 72 i i April 65' 100 89 May 57 75 62 i i -June 55 70 63- } July 50 77 61 i l August 60 70 65 i j- ' September 60 75 67 { October 60 78 66 a 1 November 55 100 70 December 73~ 125 84 l i a . The sulfate limit of 1500 mg/l was not exceeded during 1982. i' t l 1 !- i i k 1 - - 4 4 4 4 w -N-- r- sww-e e vr- r --=,r----r u v r e- r-w -v---*y-- c we r e -w= w ww - y e- w= e = e-=-- -e++eezvvw- 4-y--y w ---m r -w e v y*w -w v r- ww vs av v-*v eee ww+=--w*+ey-5
i I i 1 e i i i e I 1 I i 1 i e 1 ! I i t ! 4 i t i 1 i SECTION 3.1.1.A.2 CHEMICAL USAGE 4 t 4 k i l l
- _ , _ . _ .,-._____._....,.,__.,-_____.--._______,..-.-.,,________________,____._____.,____......4-,,,
O O O Table 3.1-1 DAVIS-EESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT NO. I
- CHEMICAL USAGE FOR 1982 DISCHARGE CHEMICAL SYSTEM USE QUANTITY INTERMEDIATE FINAL Chlorine Circulating Water Biocide 36,833# N/A Unit discharge
- via cooling tower blowdown Chlorine Service Water Biocide 27,892# Cooling Tower Unit discharge Fbkeup via cooling tower blowdown Chlorine ' Cooling Tower Makeup Biocide NONE Cooling Tower Unit discharge tiakeup via cooling. water blowdown y, Chlorine Water Treatment Disinfection 3,563# N/A Water Dist. sys.
I Sulfuric Acid Circulating Water Alkalinity keacts with cir- Unit discharge via . Control NONE culating water cooling tower blowdown. Sulfuric Acid Demineralizers Regeneration 3.128 gal Neutralizing tank Unit discharge for neutralization 1 Sulfuric Acid Water Treatmenc Stabilization NONE N/A Water dist. sys. Sulfuric Acid Neutralizing Tank Neutralization NONE N/A Unit discharge "Only used when'the unit is operating and service water is being returned to the forebay. _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _m _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Table 3.1-1 (Cont'd.) DISCHARGE CHDiICAL SYSTEM USE QUANTITY INTER}EDIATE FINAL Sodium Demineralizers Regeneration 19093 gal Neutralizing tank Unit discharge flydroxide for neutralization Sodium Neutralizing tank Neutralization 4948 gal N/A Unit discharge liydroxide Calcium Water treatment Clarification 51150# Sludge to the Supernatant from Ilydroxide and Softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge 4 Sodium Water treatment Clarification 8 Aluminate and softening 3900# Sludge to the Supernatant from Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge Nalco 607 Water Treatment Clarification NONE Sludge to the Supernatant from and softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge Nalco 8184 Water treatment Clarification 12 gal Sludge to the Supernatant from and softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge
O O O Table 3.1-1 (Cont'd) DISCHARGE CHEMICAL SYSTEM USE QUANTITY INTERMEDIATE FINAL Morpholine Component Cooling pil Control NONE N/A N/A Nalco 39L Turbine Plant Corrosion Cooling Inhibitor 55 gal N/A N/A , 4 Chilled Water Corrosion Inhibitor 4 gal N/A N/A Nalco 7320 Turbine Plant Microbiological NONE N/A N/A Cooling Control Chilled Water Microbiological NONE N/A N/A , .- Control y Nalco'7326 Turbine Plant Microbiological 80 gal N/A N/A Cooling. Control 1 i . Sodium Turbine Plant pil Control 50# N/A N/A liydroxide Cooling 2 Nalco 810 Water Treatment Clarification 32 gal Studge to the Supernatant from l and softening settling basin the settling i- basin to the unit discharge Nalco 7330 Turbine plant Microbiological 130 gal N/A 1 N/A cooling Control s e O
% D %
= ,t
Table 3.1-1 (Cont'd) DISCHARGE CHEMICAL SYSTEM USE QUANTITY INTERMEDIATE FINAL Sodium Water Treatment Clarification 515# Sludge to the Supernatant from and softening Settling Basin the settling basin Ilydroxide to the unit dis-charge Disinfection NONE N/A Water distribution Sodium Water Treatment IIypochlorite system Sewage Treatment Disinfection 1575# N/A linit discharge Sodium Ilypochlorite 11ydrazine Secondary Coolant Oxygen Scavenging 419 gal N/A N/A Reactor Coolant Oxygen Scavenging NONE N/A N/A Component Cooling Oxygen Scavenging 1 gal N/A N/A Auxiliary Boiler Oxygen Scavenging 7 gal N/A N/A 7 Oxygen Scavenging 1 gal N/A N/A lleating System Ammonia Secondary Coolant pil Control 60 gal N/A N/A Auxiliary Boiler pil Control 11 gal N/A N/A Boric Acid Reactor Coolant Neutron Moderator 19775 gal N/A N/A Lithium Reactor Coolant pil Control 7034 grams N/A N/A Ilydroxide g e
i 1 } SECTION 3.1.1.A.3 CHLORINE MONITORING
. l f
i
t 4 i l 1 -; , 1 ! 3.1.1.a.3 CHLORINE MONITORING - 1 Chlorine monitoring is covered by the Davis-Besse Station's National-i ! . Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. .The limits i i of the permit were not exceeded'during 1982. i . i ;
'{
- j. .
I i t L i r i > i 4 4
- b I,
I i i, f f f I i i l f 1 a I l l , I t 1 l' I
-Aae e e e.-M_ _- a_.am--s.- E ._a,a.-.i-- me- - - --- m--- *-. --- 4.-- m n+ ----4 oc I
i .I l 1 i
+ >
1 - I .I SECTION 3.2 ENVIRCRENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING r b Y } t i J f i i
,- ,, ..-. , .-..-_... - - - . _ ,...-.,__-- - - . - - - - - - . . - , _ -----__..._o,.
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES A OlVISION OF HAZLETON LABOAATORIES AMEAICA, INC. 1500 F AONTAGE ACAD. NCATHBAOCK. ILUNOJS 60062. U S A. REPORT TO TOLED0 EDIS0N COMPANY TOLEDO, OHIO l l OPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT NO. 1 OAK HARBOR, OHIO ANNUAL REPORT - PART I f-'
SUMMARY
AND INTERPRETATION JANUARY - DECEMBER 1982 FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES CORPORATION PROJECT N0. 8003-100 Approved by: . L. 4. f(udbner' M.S. Director, Nuclear Sciences I 1 February 1983 pHCNE (3121564-07C0 o TELE x 28-9403 (HAZES NBAM)
l-i HAZl ETON ENVIRONMENTAL. SCIENCES 4 PREFACE J The staff of the Nuclear Sciences Department of Hazleton Environmental Sciences ' (Hazleton) was responsible for the acquisition of the. data presented in this report. Samples were collected by members of the staff of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station and by local sample collectors. t The report was prepared by C. R. Marucut, Section Supervisor, under the direc- ' tion of L. G. Huebner, Director, Nuclear Sciences. She was assisted in the report preparation by L. Nicia, Group Leader, and other staff members of the . Nuclear Sciences Department. , e P O b l 1 O ! 3.2-11 1 ! i i t l
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL. SCIENCES l O TABLE OF CONTENTS No. Page . PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv List of Tables ...................... v
1.0 INTRODUCTION
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM . . . . . . . 3 . 3.1 Methodology ..................... 3 3.1.1 The Air Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1.2 The Terrestrial Program . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1.3 The Aquatic Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1.4 Program Execution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.1.5 Census of Milch Animals . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
/ 3.2 Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2.1 Effect of Chinese Atmospheric Nuclear Detonation .................. 9 3.2.2 The Air Environment . ............. 9 .
3.2.3 The Terrestrial Environment . ......... 11 3.2.4 The Aquatic Environment . . . . . ... . . . . . 13 3.2.5 Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4.0 FIGURES AND TABLES .................... 16
5.0 REFERENCES
........................ 31 APPENDIX A. Crosscheck Program Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A ,
3.2-111
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O LIST OF FIGURES No. Caption Page 4-1 Sampling locations on the site boundary of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4-2 Sanpling locations (except those oi 'he site periphery), Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station . . . . . . . . . . . 18 e l I O 3.2-iv
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL. SCIENCES O LIST OF TABLES No. Title Page 4.1 Sampling Locations, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 4.2 Type and Frequency of Collections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4.3 Sample Codes Used in Table 4.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 4.4 Sampling Summary . . ................... 24 4.5 Environmental Radiological Monitoring Program Summary . . . -25' O O 3.2-v
'i HAZLETON ENVIRONMSNTAL. SCIENCES 3 b W f
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Because of the many potential pathways of radiation exposure to man from both natural and man-made sources, it is necessary to document levels of radio-activity and the variability of these levels which exist in an area prior to i the anticipated release of any additional radioactive nuclides. l i To meet this objective, an extensive preoperational environmental radiological T monitoring program was initiated for the Toledo Edison Company in the vicinity i of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station site. This program included collec-j tion (both onsite and offsite) and radiometric analyses of airborne particu-l lates, airborne iodine, ambient gamma radiation, milk, groundwater, meat and I wildlife, fruits and vegetables, animal and wildlife feed, soil, surface water, fish, and bottom sediments. Approximately S years of preoperational monitoring i were completed in April 1977 by the same laboratory that currently operates under the name Hazleton Environmental Sciences (HES). Fuel elements were loaded in Unit 1 on 23 through 27 April 1977 and the initial criticality was achieved on 12 August 1977. Unit 1 achieved one hundred percent of its operational capacity on 4 April 1978. Approximately 5-1/2 years of operational monitoring was completed by the end of December 1982. This report presents the fifth full year of operational data for the Environ-mental Radiological Monitoring at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. l l The program was conducted in accordance with the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1 Technical Specifications: Appendix B to License No. NPF-3, Section 3.2. O 3.2-1 !
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O 4 a 2.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
i Operational Nuclear Stations are required by Federal Regulations to submit Annual Operational Reports to the U.S. NRC. The reports must also include the
; results of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.
This report summarizes the results of such a program. The program was conduc-ted in accordance with the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1 Tech-
- nical Specifications: Appendix B to License No. NPF-3 Section 3.2. This program included collection (both onsite and offsite) and radiometric analyses V of airborne particulates, airborne iodine, -ambient gamma radiation, milk, ground water, meat and wildlife, fruits and vegetables, animal and wildlife feed, soil, surface water, fish, and bottom sediments.
Results of sample analyses during the period January - December 1982 are summarized in Table 4.5. Tabulations of data for all samples collected during this period, additional statistical analyses .of the data, and graphs of data trends are presented in a separate report to the Toledo Edison Company (HES 1983). Radionuclide concentrations measured at indicator locations were compared with levels measured at control locations and in preoperational studies. The comparisons indicate background-level radioactivities in all samples collected. No station effect on the environment was indicated in any of the sampling media collected and analyzed. l O 3.2-2 l I _ 9.
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 1 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM 3.1 Methodology . The sampling locations for the Preoperational Environmental Radiological . Monitoring Program at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station are shown in Figures 4-1 and 4-2. Table 4.1 describes the locations, lists for each its direction and distance from the station, and indicates which are indicator and which are control locations. The sampling program monitors the air, terrestrial, and aquatic environ-ments. The types of samples collected at each location and the frequen-
/~'S cy of collections are presented in Table 4.2 using codes defined in V
Table 4.3. The collections and analyses that comprise the program are
- described in the following pages. Finally, the execution of the program in the current reporting annual period (January - December 1982) is discussed.
3.1.1 The Air Program Airborne Particulates The airborne particulate samples are collected on 47mm diameter mentrane filters of 0.8 micron porosity at a volumetric rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. The filters are col-lected weekly from eleven locations (T-1, T-2 T-3, T-4,
. T-7, T-8, T-9, T-11, T-12, T-23, and T-27), pl aced in individual glassine protective envelopes, and dispatched by mail to HES for radiometric analyses. The filters are analyzed for gross beta activity approximately five days after collection to allow for decay of naturally-occurring short-lived radionuclides. The quarterly composites of all air particulate samples from indica-tor locations (T-1, T-2, T-3, T-4, T-7, and T-8) and of all air particulate samples from control locations (T-9, T-11, T*12,
- T-23, and T-27) are gamma-scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 and -90.
3.2-3
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O Airborne Iodine Each air sampler is equipped with a charcoal trap in-line af ter the filter holder. The charcoal trap at each location is changed at the same time as the particulate filter and analyzed for iodine-131 immediately after arrival at the laboratory. Ambient Gamma Radiation The integrated gamma-ray background from natural radiation s measured with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD). Monthly and quarterly TLDs are placed at thirteen locations (the eleven air sampling locations and locations T-5 and T-24). On 1 January 1980 eighteen (18) new TLD sampling locations were added to the program. Twelve locations (T T-49) were established at the site boundary ranging in distance from 0.5 mi to 1.2 mi from the stack. Six locations were established at a distance of 3.7 mi to 5.0 mi from the stack. Since about 50% of the outer 5 mi ring is over Lake Erie, only six additional locations were required to cover all sectors on the land. Each shipment of TLDs includes controls which are stored in a shield at the station and returned with the field TLDs af ter their removal. In-transit exposures are measured by the control TLDs and subtracted from the field TLD measurements to obtain their net exposure. 3.1.2 The Terrestrial Program Milk Two-gallon milk samples are collected twice a month during the grazing period of the year from(May two through indicatorOctober) locationsand monthly (T-8 during)the and T-20 and onerest control location (T-24). The milk samples are analyzed for iodine-131, strontium-89 and -90, calcium, stable potassium, and are gamma scanned. Groundwater One-gallon well water samples are collected quarterly from two indicator locations (T-7 and T-17) and from one control location (T-27). The gross beta activity is determined on the suspended and dissolved solids of each sample. The samples are also gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 and -90, and tritium. l 3.2-4 1
HAZLETON ENVIRONS 1 ENTAL. SCIENCES O Edible Meat Semi-annually, domestic meat samples (chickens) are collected from one indicator location (T-32) and one control location (T-34) and one representative species of wildlife (muskrat or raccoon) is collected onsite (T-31). In addition, one water-fowl species and one snapping turtle are collected annually onsite (T-31) or in the site vicinity (T-33). Gamma-spectroscopic analysis is performed on the edible portions of each sample.
~
Fruits and Vegetables Semi-annually, two varieties of fruits and vegetables are collec-ted from each of the two indicator locations (T-8 and T-25) and from one control location (T-34). The edible portions are gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 and -90. Green Leafy Vegetables Monthly, during the harvest season, green leafy vegetables are O,1 collected from one indicator location (T-36) and one control location (T-37). The samples are analyzed for iodine-131. Should green leafy vegetables from private gardens be unavail-able, nonedible plants with similar leaf characteristics from the same vicinity may be substituted. Animal-Wildlife Feed Animal feed is collected semi-annually from one indicator loca-tion (T-8) and one control location (T-34). Cattlefeed is collected during the first quarter and grass is collected during the third quarter. Also, once a year, a sample of smartweed is collected from location T-31 (onsite). Gamma-spectroscopic analysis is performed on all samples. Soil Once a year, soil samples are collected from all eleven air y sampling locations; six indicator locations (T-1, T-2, T-3, T-4, T-7, and T-8) and five contrc,1 locations (T-9, T-11, T-12, T-23, and T-27). Gamma-spectroscopic analysis is performed on all samples. O 3.2-5
F HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O , 3.1.3 The Aquatic Program Treated Surface Water Weekly grab samples of treated water are collected at one indicator location (T-28, Unit 1 treated water supply, onsite) and two control locations (T-11 and T-12, Port Clinton and Toledo filtration plants). The samples from each location are composited monthly and analyzed for gross beta activity in dissolved and suspended solids. Quarterly composites from each . location are gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 and
-90, and tritium. .
Untreated Surface Water Weekly grab samples of untreated water from Lake Erie are collec-ted from one indicator location (T-3) and from two control locations (T-ll and T-12, Port Clinton and Toledo filtration plants, untreated water tap). In addition, hourly grab samples are collected from one in-plant water supply (T-28, Unit I untreated water supply, onsite). The samples from each location tre composited monthly and analyzed for gross beta activity in dissolved and suspended solids. Quarterly composites from each location are gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 and -90, and tritium. Fish Two species of fish are collected semi-annually from each of two locations in Lake Erie; from one indicator location in the vicinity of the discharge (T-33) and one control location approximately 15 miles from the plant (T-34; Put-In-Bay area). The flesh is separated from the bones and analyzed for gross beta and gamma-emitting isotopes. Bottom Sediments Semi-annually, bottom sediments are collected from three loca-tions in Lake Erie; at two indicator locations, intake (T-29) and discharge (T-30), and at one control location about 5.3 miles WNW from the plant (T-27). The samples are gamma scanned and anal-yzed for gross beta and strontium-89 and -90. O 3.2-6
I l l HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL. SCIENCES 3.1.4 Program Execution Program execution is summarized in Table 4.4. The program was executed as described in the preceding sections with the following exceptions:
- 1. There were no gross beta in air particulate and airborne iodine-131 data from locations T-1, T-2, and T-3 for the collection periods ending 6-28-82, 7-6-82, 7-12-82, 7-19-82, and 7-26-82 because a power line to the samplers was down.
- 2. There were no gross beta in sir particulate and airborne iodine-131 data from Location T-7 for the collection period .
ending 3-15-82 because of pump malfunction.
- 3. There were no gross beta in air particulate and airborne iodine-131 data from location T-9 for the collection period ending 8-9-82 because the fuse was blown.
- 4. There were no gross beta in air particulate and airborne iodine-131 data from location T-23 for the collection period ending 1-11-82 because the location was inaccessable due to bad weather.
- 5. There were no gross beta in air particulate and airborne iodine-131 data from location T-23 for the collection periods ending 12-20-82 and 12-27-82 because the sample collector was on vacation and could not find a substitute.
- 6. Weekly samples of untreated surf ace water were not collected from Lake Erie (T-3) for three weeks in February,1982 because the lake was frozen.
- 7. There was no TLD data from Location T-49 for the third quarter of 1982 because they were lost in the field.
3.1.5 Census of Milch Animals In compliance with Appendix B, Section 3.2 of the Technical Specifications for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, the annual census of milch animals was conducted on May 25 and 27, 1982 and June 1,1982 by the Environmental Monitoring Group personnel, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. The census results were as follows: Goats Allen Avery Farm, 4 miles S of the Station; 3 goats, 2 are milking. , 3.2-7
l l l HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES I O Dan Biggert Farm, 3 miles SSW of the Station; 3 non-milking goats. Clark Brown Farm, 4.5 miles SSE of the Station; 7 goats, 2 will be milking late August or early September. Ralph A. Miller Farm, 4.5 miles SSE of the Station; 1 milk goat and 3 kids. Milk will be used for personal consumption af ter kids are weaned. Mary Waugh Farm, 7.5 miles SE of the Station; 2 goats, could not be confirmed if milking or non-milking. Lyle Wooley Farm, 2.5 miles SSW of the Station; 1 goat and 2 sheep, could not be confirmed if goat is milking or non-milking. Arthur Bruns Farm, 4 miles SSE of the Station; 1 non-milking goat. Milking Cows Carl Gaeth Farm, 5.5 miles WSW of the Station; 35 milking cows. Earl Moore Farm, 2.5 miles WSW of the Station; 35 milking cows. Gordon Sandwisch Farm, 1 mile SSW of the Station; 1 milking cow steer, and a calf. The milk is used only to nurse the calf. Non-Milking Cows and ,attle David Appling Farm, 0.5 miles W of the Station; 5 beef cows. Gerald Daup Farm, dairy cattle for breeding and marketing only. Ed DeWitz Farm,15 beef cattle. Alvin Gates Farm, 4 miles SW of the Station; 4 beef steer. 3.2 Results and Discussion The results for the reporting period January to December 1982 are presented in summary form in Table 4.5. For each type of analysis of each sampled medium, this table shows the annual mean and range for all indicator locations and for all control locations. The loca-tion with the highest annual mean and the results for this location are also given. The discussion of the results has been divided into three broad cate-gories; the air, terrestrial, and aquatic environments. Within each category, samples are discussed in the order listed in Table 4.4. 3.2-8
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL. SCIENCES O Any references to previous environmental data for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station refer to data collected by HES (or its predeces-sor companies, NALC0 Environmental Sciences and Industrial BIO-TEST Laboratories,Inc.). The tabulated results of all me surements made during 1982 are not included in this section, although references to these results are made in the discussion. The complete tabulation of the results is submitted . to the Toledo Edison Company in a separate report. 3.2.1 The Effect of Chinese Atmospheric Nuclear Detonation There were no reported atmospheric nuclear tests in 1982. The - last reported test was conducted by the People's Republic of China on 16 October 1980. The reported yield was in the 200 - kiloton to 1 megaton range. There was a moderate residual effect from this test on the gross 4 beta levels in airborne particulates. The annual mean gross beta activity was three times lower than in 1981. The highest activity was reached in the first quarter and then declined steadily to the level observed in 1980. 3.2.2 The Air Environment Airborne Particulates Gross beta measurements yielded annual means that were nearly identical at the five control locations and at the six indicator locations (0.022 pCi/m3 and 0.024 pCi/m3, respectively). The annual mean activity in 1982 was approximately four times lower than in 1981 (0.090 pCi/m3). The decrease in the activity is attributable to the cleansing of the atmosphere of the radioac-tive debris which was introduced into the atmosphere by the nuclear test conducted October 16, 1980. The highest annual mean (0.026 pCi/m3) was measured at control location T-23,14.3 miles ENE of the station. Gross beta activities at all locations were also statistically analyzed by months and quarters. The highest averages were for the months of January and February ' and the first quarter. The elevated activity was due to an early spring peak, which has been observed almost annually (1976 and 1979 were exceptions) for many years (Wilson et al . ,1969) . The spring peak has been attributed to f allout of nuclides from the stratosphere (Gold et al.,1964). It was more pronounced in 1981 and, to a le:ser degree, in 1982 because of the addition of the radioactive debris i
-O from the latest nuclear test.
3.2-9 Y
i HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Strontium-89 and strontium-90 activities were below their respec-O tive LLLs of 0.0005 and 0.0002 pCi/m3 in all samples. Gamma spectroscopic analysis of quarterly composites of air particulate filters yielded nearly identical results for indica-tor and control locations. The predominant gamma-emitting isotope was beryllium-7 which is produced continuously in the upper atmospnere by cosmic radiation (Arnold and Al-Salih,1955). A trace amount of cerium-144 was detected in one sample. Presence of cerium-144 in the atmosphere is attributable to the f allout from the most recent nuclear test conducted 16 October. 1980. There was no indication of a station effect on the data. Airborne Iodine Weekly levels of airborne iodine-131 were below the lower limit of detection (LLD) of 0.02 pCi/m3 in all samples. Ambient Gamma Radiation At thirteen (13) regular locations the monthly TLDs measured a mean equivalent dose of 13.5 mrem /91 days et the indicator locations and a mean of 14.4 mrem /91 days at control locations. These results were in agreement with the values obtained by quarterly TLDs and were nearly identical to the levels observed in 1980 (13.6 mrem /91 days and 14.5 mrem /91 days, respectively), and in 1981 (13.8 mrem /91 days and 14.9 mrem /91 days, respec-tively). The highest annual means for monthly TLDs (17.8 mrem /91 days) and for quarterly TLDs (19.3 mrem /91 days) occured at indicator location T-8. At the twelve special locations established at the site bound-ary, the mean equivalents were essentially identical to those measured at the regular indicator locations (14.1 mrem /91 days and 13.9 mrem /91 days, monthly and quarterly, respectively). At the six special locations established within 3.7 mi to 5.0 mi radius the mean dose equivalent was higher (17.3 mrem /91 days and 17.6 mrem /91 days, monthly and quarterly, respec-tively). Higher gamma radiation levels measured at locations away from the lake were also observed in previous years and are attributed to the higher potassium-40 content in the soil. The annual mean dose equivalent for all locations measured by
- monthly and quarterly TL0s was 14.5 mrem /91 days and was iden-l tical to that measured in 1980 and similar to mean dose measured in 1981 (14.8 mrem /91 days). This is lower than the average l 3.2-10
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES f} V natura{; quarter background radiation and is primarily due tofor theMiddle America,19.5content lower potassium-40 mrad / in the soil in the area. 3.2.3 The Terrestrial Environment Milk A total of 54 analyses for iodine-131 in milk were performed Juring the reporting period. All samples contained less than 1.0 pCi/l of iodine-131. Strontium-89 was below the LLD level of 1.7 pCi/l in all samples. Strontium-90 activity was detected in all but four samples and ranged from 0.6 to 2.8 pCi/1. The annual mean value for stron-tium-90 was slightly higher at the indicator location (1.7 pCi/l) than at the control location (1.5 pCi/1). The loca-tion with the highest mean (1.8 pCi/1) was control location T-20. The mean values were similar to those measured in 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, and 1981. The activities of barium-140 and cesium-137 were below their respective LLDs in all samples collected. Results for potassium-40 were nearly identical at control and indicator locations (1310 and 1300 pCi/1, respectively). Indic-ator location T-20 had the highest mean (1330 pCi/1). Since the chemistries of calcium and strontium, and potassium and cesium are similar. organisms tend to deposit cesium-137 in muscle and soft tissue and strontium-89 and -90 in bones. In order to detect potential environmental accumulation of these radionuclides, the ratios of the strontium-90 activity to the weight of calcium and of the cesium-137 activity to weight of stable potassium were monitored in milk. The measured l concentrations of calcium and stable potassium were in agree-ment with previously determined values of 1.16i0.08 g/l and 1.5010.21 g/1, respectively (National Center for Radiological Health, 1968). No statistically significant ariations in the ratios were observed. l 1 This estimate is based op data on pp. 71 and 108 of the report . Natural Background Radiation in the United States (National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements,1975). The terrestrial absorbed dose (uncor-rected for structural and body shielding) ranges from 35 to 75 mrad /y and [s') averages 46 mrad /y for Middle America. Cosmic radiation and cosmogenic V radionuclides contribute 32 mrad /y for an average of 78 mrad /y or 19.5 mrad / quarter. 3.2-11
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES l Groundwater (Well Water) Gross beta activities in suspended solids were below the LLD of 0.7 pCi/1 in all samples. Gross beta activities in dissolved solids averaged 3.3 pCi/l at the indicator locations and 6.8 ; pCi/l at the control location. The location with the highest annual mean was the control location T-27 and averaged 6.8 pCi/1. The range of gross beta activities were similar to those observed in 1978, 1979, 1980, and 1981. Tritium activity was below the LLD of 330 pCi/l in all samples. Strontium-89 and strontium-90 activities were below the LLD's of 2.0 pCi/l and 1.2 pCi/l in all samples. - All samples were below the LLD of 10.0 pCi/l for cesium-137 activity. The activities detected in well water were not significant when compared with the LLDs and were not attributable to the station operation. Edible Meat In the edible meat samples (chickens, muskrats, goose, and snapping turtle) the mean potassium-40 activity was 2.77 pCi/g wet weight for the indicator locations and 2.66 pCi/g wet weight for the control location. Cesium-137 activity was below the LLD of 0.078 pCi/g wet weight in all but one sample. Fruits and Vegetables Strontium-89 and strontium-90 activity was below the LLD of 0.011 pCi/g wet weight and 0.007 pCi/g wet weight respectively in all samples. The only gamma-emitting isotope detected was naturally-occurring potassium-40. The mean activities were 1.45 pCi/g wet weight for the indicator locations and 1.38 pCi/g wet weight for the control locations. The activities detected were identical or similar to those detected in 1977, 1978,1979,1980, and 1981. All other gamma-emitting isotopes were below their respective LLDs. Green Leafy Vegetables Green leafy vegetables (cabbage) collected during harvest season were analyzed for iodine-131. All results were below the LLD of 9 3.2-12
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O 0.023 pCi/g wet weight. All gamma-emitting isotopes, except potassium-40 and cerium-141, were below their respective LLDs. Potassium-40 activity averaged 1.49 pCi/g wet weight and 1.60 pCi/g wet weight for indicator and control locations, respec-tively. Cerium-141 was detected in one control sample and was 0.078 pCi/g wet weight. No plant effect was indicated. Animal-Wildlife Feed In grass, smartweed, and corn the only gamma-emitting isotope detected was potassium-40. The annual mean for control location T-34 was (2.04 pCi/g wet weight) nearly identical to the mean value for indicator locations (2.10 pCi/g wet weight). All other . gamma-emitting isotopes were below their respective LLDs. Soil Soil samples were collected in June 1982 and analyzed for gamma-emitting isotopes. The predominant activity was potassium-40 which had a mean value of 17.2 pCi/g dry weight at the indicator locations and 21.0 pCi/g dry weight at the control locations. Cesium-137 activiy was above the LLD of 0.048 pCi/g in eight of the eleven samples. The mean activity at the indicator locations . . .- was 0.246 pCi/g dry weight and 0.705 pCi/g dry weight at the control locations. The highest cesium-137 activity, 0.986 pCi/g, was detected at the control location T-23, 14.3 miles ENE of station. The level of activities and distribution pattern was very similar to those observed in 1978, 1979, 1980, and 1981. Beryllium-7 was detected in one control sample and the activity was 1.54 pCi/g dry weight. 3.2.4 The Aquatic Environment Water Samples - Treated In treated water samples the gross beta activity in suspended solids was below the LLD of 0.9 pC1/1 in all samples. Gross beta activity in dissolved solids averaged 2.3 pCi/l at indicator locations and 2.6 pCi/1 at control locations. The values are similar to those measured in 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, and 1981. Annual mean tritium activities were similar at indica-tor and control locations (<330 and 370 pCi/1, respectively). Strontium-89 and strontium-90 activities were below the LLD levels of 3.2 and 1.7 pC1/1, respectively in all samples. Cesium-137 level was below the LLD of 10 pCi/l in all samples. Essentially identical results were obtained in 1979, 1980, and O 1981. 3.2-13
l HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O Water Samples - Untreated In untreated water samples the mean gross beta activity in suspended solids was 1.8 pCi/l at indicator locations and below the LLD of 1.0 pCi/l at control locations. In dissolved solids the mean activity was 3.1 pCi/l at indicator and 2.9 pCi/1 at control locations. For total residue, the mean activities were 3.4 pCi/l at indicator locations and 3.0 pCi/1 at control loca-tions. None of these results show statistically significant differences between indicator and control locations. The mean tritium activities for indicator and control locations were essentially identical (<330 and 420 pCi/1, respectively). These results were slightly higher than those obtained for . treated water, (<330 and 370 pCi/1, respectively) but differ-ences are not statistically significant since the countin uncertainty is larger than the difference (140-160 pCi/1)g . Strontium-89 level was below the LLD of 2.1 pCi/l in all sam-ples. Strontium-90 activity was nearly identical at indicator and control locations, 0.8 pCi/l and 0.9 pCi/1, respectively. Cesium-137 activity was below the LLD of 10.0 pCi/l for all locations. No plant effect was indicated. Fish The mean gross beta activity in fish muscle was similar for indicator and control locations (2.84 and 3.13 pCi/g wet weight, respectively). Potassium-40 was the only gamma-emitting isotope detected. The mean potassium-40 activity was 2.81 pCi/g wet weight for the
- indicator location and 2.77 pCi/g wet weight for the control
) location. Cesium-117 activity was below the LLD level of 0.040 l pCi/g wet weight in all samples. , The levels of activities were i similar to those observed in 1978, 1979, 1980, and 1981. No l plant effect was indicated. l Bottom Sediments The mean gross beta activity in bottom sediments was 19.3 pCi/g dry weight for indicator locations and 20.5 pCi/g dry weight for the control location. The location with the highest 3.2-14
I HAZl.ETON ENVIRONMENTAL. SCIENCES n U mean was control Location T-27 (20.5 pCi/g dry weight). Control Location T-27 also had the highest mean potassium-40 activity (15.3 pCi/g dry weight) which was the major contributor to the gross beta activity at all locations. Strontium-89 activity was below the LLD level of 0.041 pCi/g dry weight in all but two samples, one indicator and one control. The activities were 0.081 and 0.063 pCi/g dry weight, respectively.
' The mean strontium-90 activity was 0.028 pCi/g dry weight for indicator locations and 0.016 pCi/g dry weight for control ,
location. The location with the highest mean was indicator Location T-29 (0.031 pC1/g). The difference between these . values is insignificant. Cesium-137 activity was detected in one of six samples and was 0.124 pCi/g dry weight at control location T-27. Similar levels, distribution, and composition of detected radionuclides were detected in 1978, 1979, 1980, and 1981. 3.2.5 Summary and Conclusions Results of sample analyses during the period January - December 1982 are summarized in Table 4.5. Tabulations of data for all samples collected during this period, additional statistical analyses of the data, and graphs of data trends are presented in a separate report to the Toledo Edison Company (HES 1983). Radionuclide concentrations measured at indicator locations were compared with levels measured at control locations and in pre-operational studies. The comparisons indicate background-level radioactivities in all samples collected. No station effect on the environment was indicated in any of the sampling media collected and analyzed. l O 3.2-15 l
E I HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O 4.0 FIGURES AND TABLES O O ! 3.2-16 l_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ - . -. __ _ . .
O o
- O
@ Sampilog location
- # . " " '.~..,, . . . .
----Site boundary
-l.:,'.
sp gff _ . . _ _:=
.. o l.. , h ,' '
.,,, 6 ,,e,-
S. i SO R ftOW PIT
- s. g:- *'.
~
l C00L1N G towin s'.,.. " ~DISC ~ ** "ht
/ RGE
, 45 G
,6 0 Q!. .;. _
LAXE 1
~t . .
.y ,ggg ,as'g\ .=-
,,.I
, '5 o.g ml :
g E R/ E Du r F.was te t. ROAO , QL _ __f #
." - DAVIS - BESSE " .-
sonow rus NUCLE AR POWER STATION 7 t-+-t-*-s--+--+-+-4 44 q l.O m.i-N , . I 03l - 1 f4AVARHE v . -,.,- LJ MARSil . 1.5 mi 43 . QUAHk/ . -
. N
.g @ @
~: ~@ @ ~@ , . ,
a -_ __ j.. j
. ;g;
.- gq,. ...
.- y tq
..- .- l . . . .. .r. .
g .' ,,<';; ' . N
~.~
.f,.,.,Y'. .k $-l.hb5N . . ,
-wL.;2.sau.>
'f
" b RIVER ._,,,,.p-~ ~.
. . v TOUSSAINT
~
~.... .. ..
h }..
'.}i.?:;f .' T .. . ~ .. .,. _,, .c_'(* ? l;j?. . .' :
(-).*.* Figure 1. Sampling locations on the site periphery of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. e S %
I..E
,, \\ . \
/
North Boss Ld\.
# Middle Boss I e i
(/ .. i f, 12 ' '.*
- I I* - -
Toledo -
@ E 0regon '*:.','
5 $
/ smL l _
< // \ I f . , 27 ' . South Boss I. e l I
. . - 1 . Kelleys L
}
Y k ' - 38 . a E '
\ 3 ;
- r. .
l
, I,ggs 54 t' 32.:. ,',,
2 '8 T \Ook Harbor h 5 .'.s .
~.
. . . I. '
fori Clintonj; 'i no s s8
\ @B ,,
> u. : . e ~ ~ ' O N lomt I -::-
y w
*/v -
'f.7.;, .
s g ,gs' @ -
.8 sondusky ' ',' . ,
Bowling Green 15ml .',
\ F si J 9 08 ' 20ml. Fremont i N}
k l 25 ml. i Mk N g R< 30ml Fosforia NI Figure 2. Sampling locations (excepting those on the site periphery), Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, ' Uni t flo. 1.
HA2LETON ENVIRONMENTAL. SCIENCES (O3 Table 4.1. Sampling locations, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1. l Type of a ]- Code Location T-1 I Site boundary, 0.6 miles NE of station, near intake canal . T-2 I Site boundary, 0.9 miles E of station.
- T-3 I Site boundary, l.4 miles SE of station, near Toussaint River and storm drain. .
T-4 I Site boundary, 0.8 miles S of station, near Locust Point and Toussaint River. T-5 I Main entrance to site, 0.5 mi,les W of station. T-7 I Sand Beach, 0.9 miles NNW of station. T-8 I Earl Moore Farm, 2.7 miles WSW of station. T-9 C Dak Harbor, 6.8 miles SW of station. T-ll C Port Clinton, 9.5 miles SE of station. T-12 C Toledo Water Treatment Station. Airborne particulate and iodine collected 23.5 miles WNW of site and water l samples taken from intake crib 11.25 miles NW of site. T-17 I Irv Fick's well onsite, 0.7 miles SW of station. T-20 I Gaeth Farm, 5.5 miles WSW of station. j T-23 C Put-In-Bay Lighthouse.14.3 miles ENE of station. i T-24 C Sandusky, 24.9 miles SE of station. T-25 I Miller Farm, 3.7 miles S of station. T-27 C Magee Marsh, 5.3 miles WNW of station. T-28 I Unit 1 treated and untreated water supply, onsite. T-29 I Lake Erie, intake area,1.5 miles NE of station. T-30 I Lake Erie, discharge area, 0.9 miles ENE of station. O v 3.2-19
HAZLETON ENVIFIONMENTAL SCIENCES O Table 4.1. (continut.d) Type of Code Locationa T-31 I Onsite. T-32 I Land, within 5 miles radius of station. T-33 I Lake Erie, within 5 miles radius of site. T-34 C Land, greater than 10 miles radius of site. T-35 C Lake Erie, greater than 10 miles radius of site. T-36 I The private garden or farm having the highest X/Q. T-37 C The farm 10 to 20 miles from the site in the least prevalent wind direction. T-38 I Site boundary, 0.6 ENE of station near lake. T-39 I Site boundary,1.2 miles ESE of station near ditch to Toussaint. T-40 I Site boundary, 0.7 miles SE of station near ditch to Toussaint. T-41 I Site boundary, 0.6 miles SSE of station near ditch to Toussaint. T-42 I Site boundary, 0.8 miles SSW of station by ECC. T-43 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles SW of station along Route 2 fence. T-44 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles W of station by railroad tracks. T-45 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles WNW of station on access road behind cooling tower. T-46 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles NW of station along access road. T-47 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles N of station along access road by gate. l l 9 l 3.2-20 l
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
- Table 4.1. (continued)
Type of Code 'Locationa T-48 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles NNE of station by lake. T-49 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles NE of station along access road by lake. T-50 I Erie Industrial Park, 4.5 miles ESE of station by Water Tower. T-51 I Daup Farm, 600 Tettau Road. Port Clinton, Ohio 4.5 miles SSE of the station. . T-52 I Miller Farm,'3.7 miles S of site on West Camp Perry Western Road. T-53 I Nixon Farm, 4.5 miles SSE of site on West Camp Perry Western Road. T-54 I M. Beier Farm, 4.8 miles WSW of site on Genzman Road T-55 I Lenke Farm, 5 miles west of site on Route 2. al-Indicator locations: C = Control locations. O
'3.2-21
Table 4.2. Type and frequency of collection.
~
Sampfing Location Type Weekly Monthly Quarterly _ Semi-Annually Annually, 1 I AP Al TLD TLD 50 2 I AP Al TLD TLD S0 3 I AP AI SWU TLD TLD S0 4 I AP AI TLD TLD S0 5 I TLD TLD I 7 I AP AI TLD TLD WW S0 N a b c F 8 I AP AI TLD M TLD VE AF S0 9 C AP AI TLD TLD SO O AP AI SWU SWT TLD TLD SO O 11 C AP Al SWU SWT TLD TLD SO 2 12 C m 17 I a WW 2 20 I M 23 C AP Al TLD a TLD SO 5 F 24 C TLD M TLD D o N 25 I VE Z U 27 C AP AI TLD TLD WW BS S0 5 28 I SWU SWT 29 I BS 30 I BS 31 I WL SMW h 32 I ME d n 33 I F WF ST iii b c 7 34 C ME VE AF d g 35 C F 36 I GLV W 37 C GLV 38-55 I TLD TLD bSemi-monthly during the grazing season. May through October. Two varieties from each location. hCattlefeedcollectedduringthe1stquarter grass collected during 3rd quarter. Two species from each location. G 9 . . G
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O
, Table 4.3. Sample codes used in Table 4.2.
- Code Description AP Airborne Particulate f
AI Airborne Iodine TLD (M) Thermoluminescent Dosimeter - Monthly TLD(Q) Thermoluminescent Dosimeter - Quarterly . M Milk , i WW Well Water (Ground Water)
- ME Domestic Meat VE Fruits and Vegetables i
GLV Green Leafy Vegetables AF Animal Feed (silage, grain, grass) SMW Smartweed SWT Surface Water - Treated SWU Surface Water - Untreated F Fish BS Bottom Sediments SO Soil . WL Wildlife (muskrat or raccoon) ST Snapping Turtle b WF Water fowl (goose) ,O s 3.2-23
- - .-. . - , - . - - - . . - . - , . .--. ~ . - - - .
Table 4.4. Sampling sumary. Number--of- ddieT of
- - - ~
~ 6flecti~on Number Nu Sample Type and of Samples Samples Type Frequency, Locations Collected Missed Remarks Air Environment
~ATrborne particulates C/W 11 563b 20 See text p. 3.2-7 Airborne iodine C/W 11 563b 20 See text p. 3.2-7 TLDs C/M 31 372 0 C/Q 31 123 1 See text p. 3.2-7 Terrestrial Environment Milk (May-Oct) G/SM 3 36 0 y (Nov-Apr) G/M 3 18 0 N Groundwater G/Q 3 12 0 E Edible Meat -4
- a. Domestic meat G/SA 2 4 0 2 0
- b. Wildlife G/SA 1 (one species) $
- c. Waterfowl G/A 1 1 0 <
w d. Snapping Turtle G/A 1 1 0 5 Fruits and Vegetables 3 12 0 0 6 G/SA 2 L (two varieties from each location) h Green leafy vegetables G/M 2 6 0 Z (during harvest season) g Animal-wildlife feed r-
- a. Cattlefeed G/A 2 2 0 Collected 1st Q m
- b. Grass or corn G/A 2 2 0 Collected 3rd Q 9
- c. Smartweed G/A 1 1 0 m Soil G/A 11 11 0 lm Ajuatic Environment #
Treated surface water G/WM 3 156b 0 Untreated surface water G/WM 3 153b 3 See text p. 3.2-7 G/HM 1 52b 0 Fish (two species) G/SA 2 8 0 Bottom sediments G/SA 3 6 0 8 Type of collection is coded as follows: C/ = continuous; G/ = grab. Frequency is coded as follows: /HM = hourly grab composited monthly; /WM = weekly grab com-posited monthly; /W = weekly; /SM = semi-monthly; /M = monthly; /Q = quarterly,
/SA = semi-annually; /A = annually.
b Samples are sent to laboratory weekly. O O . . O
. . - - - _ . - - _, - - ~ _ . . ..-. .- .. - , -- -
OL q , -(~) y Table 4.5 Environmental Radiological Monitoring Program Sumary. Name of facility Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Docket No. 50-346
' Location of facility Ottawa, Ohio Reporting period January - December 1982 (County, state)
~ -
Indicator Location with Highest Control Sample Type and Loca*long Annual Mean locations Nisaber of. Type Nunter of N~eaii(r) Mean(F) Non-routine (Units) Analysesa LLDb Mean(F) Range Locationd Range Range Resultse 1 Airborne 'G8 563f U.0029 0.024(298/302] T-23, Put-in-Bay 0.026(48/53) 0.022(255/261) O Particglates- (0.006-0.073) Lighthouse (0.010-0.066) (0.008-0.066) (pCi/m ) 14.3 mi ENE I Sr-89 8 0.0005 (LLD - - <LLD 0
<tLD 0 Sr-90 8 0.0002 <LLD - -
GS 8 O Be-7 0.0054 .0.058 (4/4) NAh 0.075 (4/4) 0 (0.057-0.065) -(0.065-0.089) E Z K-40 0.0068 <tLD - - <LLD 0 $ a. y. ro It-95 0.0006 <tLD - - <tLD 0 0' Zr-95 0.0013 <LLD - - (LLO O - (LLD 0 E Ru-103 0.0012 (LLD - - Ru-106 0.0031 <tLD - - <LLD 0 ; _ F Cs-134 0.0004 <LLD - - <LLD 0 g Cs-137 0.0005 <tLD - - <tLD- 0 Ce-141 -0.0020 <tLD - - <LLD 0 2 O e-144- 0.0028 0.005 (1/4)_ NA -
.<LLD ' O l
Airborne I-131 563 0.02I <LLD - - (LLD 0 Iodine (pC1/m3 ) TLD(Monthly) Ganna 156 1.0 - 13.5 (84/84) T-8, Earl Moore Fars 17.8 (12/12) 14.4 (72/72) 0 . (mren/91 days) (9.3-18.9) 2.7 at WSW (16.5-18.9) (10.5-17.4) TLD (Quarterly) Gaama 52 1.0 14.0 (28/28) T-8, Earl Moore Fars 19.3 (4/4) 15.5 (24/24) 0 (arem/91 days) -(9.2-21.3). 2.7 mi WSW (18.4-21.3) (10.0-20.5)
, , -- , - . , - - r --, w, - , , , ...
Table 4.5 (continued) Mxne of Facility Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Indicator Location with Highest Control Sample Type and Locationg Annual Mean locations hunber of Type hunber of Mean(F) M Te{f) Mean(F) kn-routine Analysesa (Lpb Rangec Locationd Range Range Results' (Unitsl Gatissa 143 1.0 14.1 (143/143) T-45, Site boundary 19.2 (12/12) kne 0 TLD (Month 13 1 (mrem /91dyas) (8.4-19.9) 0.5 mi WNW (17.9-19.9) (Inner Ring Site Boundary) TLD (Quarterly) Gamma 47 1.0 3 .9 (47/47) T-45, Site boundary 18.9 (4/4) kne 0 (mren/91 days) (8.5-21.3) 0.5 mi WNW (14.1-21.3) I p' (Inner Ring Site Boundary) N F 1.0 T-50, Erie Industrial 16.3(12/12) kne 0 m 17.3 (72/72) TLD (Monthly) (mrem /91 days) (Outer Ring, app. Gamma 72 (12.4-18.9) Park, 4.5 mi ESE of Station by Water (14.3-18.9) [2 5 al distant) Tower m TLD (Quarterly) Gamrna 24 1.0 17.6 (24/24) T-50 Erie Industrial 18.8 (4/4) kne 0 2 (arem/91 days) (12.4-22.3) Park, 4.5 mi ESE of (16.3-20.3) < W , (Outer Ring, app. Station by Water g to 5 mi distant) Tower O g cn Milk (pC1/1) 1-131 54 1.0 (LLD - - (LLD 0 5 m Sr-89 54 1.7 <LLD - - <LLD 0 2 Sr-90 54 0.53 1.7 (32/36) T-20, Gaeth Farm 1.8 (18/18) 1.5(18/18) 0 (0.6-2.0) 5.5 mi WSW (1.4-2.6) (1.0-2.8) (A 0 GS 54 m K-40 100 1300 ( 36/36) T-20, Gaeth Fars 1330 (18/18) 1310(18/18) 0 2 (1080-1590) 5.5 mi WSW (1240-1590) (1030-1820) O m Cs-137 10 <tLD - - <tL D 0 (A 8a-140 10 <t LD - - <t L D 0 (g/1) Ca 54 0.5 1.2 (36/36) No highest location, 1.2 (54/54) 1.2 (18/18) 0 (0.9-1.4) all are identical (0.7-1.4) (0.7-1.4) K 54 0.04 1.52 (36/36) T-20 Gaeth Fars 1.51 (18/18) 1.49 (18/18) 0 (stable) (1.33-1.81) 5.5 mi WSW (1.38-1.81) (1.17-2.07) (pCl/g) Sr-90/Ca 54 0.8 1.4 (36/36) T-20, Gaeth Fars 1.5 (18/18) 1.3 (18/18) 0 (0.9-2.2) 5.5 mi WSW (0.9-2.2) (0.9-2.4) (pci/g) 9.1 <tLO - - <LLD 0 Cs-137/K 54
_- . ._ . , _ .. __ , _ _ . _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ ___ _. . . _ . _ . ~ _ . . - _ . .. . _ _ .
~ Table 4.5 (continued)
Naue of Facility Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station liidicator Location witFiffgTest Contrsl
' Sampl e Type and Locationg Annual Mean Locations Number of Type Number of Mean(F) MeinTF1 Mean(F) Non-routine
'(Units) Analysesa LLDb RangeC Locationd Range Range Results' Well Water G8 (SS) 12 0.7 <LLD - - <LLD 0 (pC1/1) '
G8 (DS) 12 1.Ok 3.3(8/8) T-27, Magee Marsh 6.8 (1/4) 6.8 (1/4) 0 (2.4-4.7) 5.3 mi WNW - - CB (TR) 12 3.4 (8/8) T-27, Magee Marsh 6.8 (1/4) 6.8 (1/4) 0 (2.7-4.7) 5.3 mi WWW - - I H-3 12 330 (LLD - - <LLD 0 N F (LLD 0 Sr-89 8 2.0 . <LLD - - Sr-90 8 1.2 (LLD - - <LLD 0 GS 8 M Z Cs-137 10.0 (LLD - - (LLD 0 C
'." h to . Edible Meat GS 8 0
/o (pC1/g wet) g
'N' K-40 0.1 2.77 (6/6) T-32, Lieste Fam 2.94 (2/2) 2.66 (2/2) 0 (2.24-3.48) 3.0 mi W (2.58-3.30) (2.62-2.70) E E
Cs-137 0.078 <tLD - - <LLD 'O Fruits and Sr-89 12 0.011 (LLD - - <LLD 0 p Ve9etables (pCf/g wet) Sr-90 12 0.007 (LLD - -
<LLD 0' GS 12 5 Z
K-40 .0.50 1.45 (8/8) T-8, Earl Moore Fars 1.65 (4/4) 1.38 (4/4) 0 O (1.02-2.93) 2.7 mi WSW (1.05-2.93) (0.84-1.89) M W Nb-95 0.036 (LLD - -
<LLD 0 Zr-95 0.064 (LLD - - <tLD 0
. Ru-106 0.33 <tLD - - (LLD 0 Cs-137 .0.033 (LLD - .- .<LLD- 0 Ce-141 0.093 <LLD .- - <LLD 0 Ce-144 0.20 <tLD - - (LLD 0
I)N"f g2MZ$307 m2 >g iZ0mA i i l e f n' oi s tt rul 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 eou 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 brs me unR No N m
) )
) 3 )
s ) l n) )8 / 1
)0 28 5 )4.
5 o oF e 37 / / /5 ri( g / ( D D D D D D D 1 52 D D tt nn D 31 D D D D - 22 ( - L L L L L L ( ( - L L 8 L
~naaa L (
1
- L t
L L L L 7 L L - t 7 t L L t t t 1 t t oceR L
< < < ( < 42 < < ( < < < 4 -
- 0. 2 CoH ( 04 0 - 5 L
6.1 . 0.1 2( 1 11 2( 1( O
) ) ) )
)8 3 ) 1 1 37 / 1
/ / /
) / 1 1 1 1 Fe g 31 ( - - ( - - -
* ( - - - - - - - ( - - - - - - (
t s (nn aa 04 1 8 7 6 4 5 4 e 0 8 hg eR H 6.1 1( 0 2 1 5 2 I n 7e hH a - t fl wau d n d n r r nn a a o o on t S t S b b TA t d n t e r a r a o tW tW iE HW HW i iS iS S S u sN Wa t c a o u ri Fm ri Fm n Oi
,m -
k ai Om Om k ai
- ,0 - - - ,0 - - - - - - - ,8 L 7 16 ,8 n 7 32 3 9 9 o 32 1 - 1 0 6 1 i
T T T T T t a t S r . e _ w _ o rg ) ) _ ) P )6 _ r on)C )9 35 38 )6. 6 toFeg ii( / /4 a / 32 62 e ctnn 31
- D D D D D ( - D D D D D D D ( - D D l iaaa D ( D L L L 5 L L c dceR L 3 L L L L L L 0 L L L L u nom L 93 L L t L t L
01 L L ( L L L t L ( 2.1 L L ( N IL ( 4.1 1.1 2( 71 1( e 1( s s e B - s i b 3 6 6 '8 2 1 3 4 3 5 5 8 1 7 2 3 0 v D 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 1 1 2 6 5 0 1 1 a L 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 D L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 _ ~ 5 1 y 6 6 - 1 t - i dfa _ l nos - 3 7 1 4 i a e 7 1 4 5 5 0 3 4 4 5 5 ) c rs 5 5 9 3 4 4
- 7 0 9 9 1 1 1 1 7 0 9 9 da 1 0 9 1 1 1 eF e,b l,ey 3 4 - - - - - - 4 - -
r u s e e e
- 4 r b u 3ma 1 - b r s c e e - b S B K Z H nf - S K N Z C C C S B K N Z R C C C Tun G G io NA 1 G t
ne om ca (N f e - i .
) ) _
) l y
) yst d t e r e s f ee l i w d 5 l et al w W p pi eb - g g 4 m yn L ag l / /
aTU t/ ad1 1 e S ( ne1 e gC meC lC l i ep ip b eep o( a rV( nF( S T G A l w 7N
- - - . - ._ - - - - _ .. - . -. _~ .- . - - _ . _ -. - ._
vm l Y/ 1
- Table 4.5 (continued)
Name of Facility Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Indicator Location witT' highest Control Sample Type and Annual Mean Locations Ntaber of Locationg - Non-routine Typa Number of Mean(F) Niaii(F) Mean(F) Analysesa LLDb RangeC Locationd Range Range Resultse (Units) 0.16 (LLD - <LLD 0 Soll . Ru-103 - (pC1/gdry) 0 Ru-l% 0.67 <tLD - <LLD (cont'd) - T-23, Put-in-Bay 0.986 (1/1) 0.705 (5/5) 0 Cs-137' O.048 0.246(3/6) (0.163-0.292) 14.3 mi ENE - (0.385-0.986) I-Ce-141 0.14 <LLD - - <LLD 0 ) N
<tLD 0 i Ce-144 ,0.34 <LLD - -
d.9 <LLD - <t L D 0 O' Treated Surface GB (SS) 36 - Water g' 1.0 T-11, Port Clinton 2.7(12/12) 2.6(24/24) 0 (pC1/1) GB (DS). 36 2.3(12/12) M (1.1-3.2) 9.5 mi SE (2.1-3.8) (1.7-3.8) Z w G8 (TR) 36 1.0 2.3(12/12) T-11, Port Clinton . 2.8(12/12) 2.6(24/24) O aC a (1.1-3.2) 9.5 mi SE (2.1-3.8) (1.7-3.8) j g T-12, Toledo Tap 370(2/4) 370(4/8) 0
. *b H-3 12 330 <tLD 23.5 mi WNW (340-400) (340-400) g
<LLD 'O E Sr-89 8 3.2 (LLD' .- -
Sr-90 8 1.7 <LLD - - <tLD 0 F* GS 8 g Cs-137' :10.0 <LLD -- .- <LLD 0 0 M Untreated Surface 1.0 1.8(2/23) T-3, Lake Erie Site 1.8 (2/11) <LLD 0 Z G8 (SS) 47 O Water (1.2-2.3) boundary, 1.4 al SE (1.2-2.3) of Station near 'E (pCl/1) II Toussaint R. and storm drain GB (DS) 47 1.0 . 3.1(23/23) T-3,(seeabove) 11/11 '2.9(24/f4)' 0 (1.8-3.8) 3.1 (2.2- (3.7) ) (2.1-3.8) 1.0 3.4(23/23) T-3 (see above) 3.6 (11/11) 3.0 (24/24) 0 GB (TR) 47 (1.8-5.5) (2.2-5.5) (2.2-4.2) H-3 16 330 <tLD T-12. Toledo Tap 430(1/4) 420 (3/8 0 23.5 at WNW - (410-430 Sr-89 8 2.1 <LLD - - <LLD 0
Tabla 4.5 (continued) Mane of f acility D vis-Besst Nuclerr Power Station Indicator Location with'lffglies~t Cohtrol Sample Type and Locationg Annual Mean locations Nanber of Type Number of Mean(F Hean(F) Mean(f) Non-routine Analyses a LLDb Range Locationd Range Range Resultse (Units) Untreated Surf ace Sr-90 8 0.3 0.8 (4/4) NA NA 0.9 (4/4) 0 Water (0.6-1.0) (0.4-1.4) (pC1/1) GS 8 Cs-137 7.8 <tLD - - (LLD 0 Fish G8 8 0.1 2.84 (4/4) T-35, Lake Erie 3.13 (4/4) 3.13(4/4) 0 (pC1/g wet) (2.10-3.20) 15 mi NE (2.76-3.38) (2.76-3.38) GS 8 I K-40 0.1 2.81 (4/4) T-33, Lake Erie 2.81 (4/4) 2.77 (4/4) 0 N (2.59-3.02) 1.5 mi NE (2.59-3.02) (2.48-3.36) h Cs-137 0.040' <tL D - - <LLD 0 h T-27 Magee Marsh 20.5 (2/2) 20.5 (2/2) 0 2 Bottora Sediments GB 6 1.0 19.3 (4/4) (pC1/g dry) (17.2-22.6) 5.3 mi WNW (20.0-21.1) (20.0-21.1) m Z F Sr-89 6 0.041 0.081 (1/4) T-30, Lake Erie 0.081 (1/1) 0.063(1/1) 0 $ .ru - Discharge Area - - 3) L 0.9 mi ENE g Sr-90 6 0.005 0.028 (4/4) T-29, Lake Erie 0.031 (2/2) 0.016(2/2) 0 Intake Area (0.015-0.048) (0.010-0.021) E (0.015-0.048) m 1.5 mi NE Z GS 6 g 0 I K-40 0.1 14.0 (4/4) T-27. Magee Marsh 15.3 (2/2) 15.3 (2/2) 10 (13.1-15.5) 5.3 mi WNW (14.1-16.5) (14.1-16.5) 0 ~ Cs-137 0.056 <LLD T-27, Magee Marsh 0.124 (1/2) 0.124(1/2) 0 iII 5.3 mi WNW - - Z o a GB = gross beta, SS = suspended solids, DS = dissolved solids, TR = total residue, m b LLO = nominal lower limit of detection based on 3 sigma counting error for background sample. (A c Mean based upon detectable measurements only. Traction of detectable measurenents at specified locations is indicated in parentheses. (F). d Locations are specified by station code (Table 4.1) and distance (miles) and direction relative to reactor site. e Non-routine results are those which exceed ten times the control station value. f five results have been excluded in the determination of the means and ranges of gross beta in air particulates. 1he results were unreliable due to pump malfunction. 9 Three results have been excluded in the determination of the LLD for gross beta, liigher than norman LLil's resulted from pump malfunction or low volume. h Quarterly composites of all samples from indicator locations and control locations were gamma scanned separately. Thus, the location with the highest annual mean cannot be identified. I Thirty-eight results have been excluded in the detennination of the LLD of airborne lodine-131. These results have been excluded due to apparent pump malfunction or low volume. J Two .high LLD values of 1.2 and two LLD values of 1.1 and 1.0 resulting from low chenical recovery have been excluded from determination of LLD. k Three high LLD values (4.9, 7.2, and 7.3 pct /1) have been excluded from the determination of LLD. High values resulted from high dissolved solids content necessitating the use of small volume for analysis.
c HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O 4 V 5_ ._0 REFERENCES Arnold, J. R. and H. A. Al-Salih. 1955. Beryllium-7 Produced by Cosmic Rays. Science 121: 451-453. Gold, S., H. W. Barkhau, B. Shlein, and B. Kahn. 1964. Measurement of Naturally Occurring Radionuclides in Air, in the Natural Radiation En/ironment, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 369-382. 4 Hazleton Environmental Sciences, 1979. Operational Environmental Radio- ~ logical Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Oak Harbor, Ohio, Annual Report, January-December 1978.
. 1980. Operational Environmental Radiological Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Oak Harbor, Ohio, Annual Report, January-December 1979.
. 1981. Operational Environmental Radiological Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1, Oak Harbor Ohio, Final Ov Report - Part II, Data Tabulations and Analyses. January-December 1980.
. 1982. Operational Environmental Radiological Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1, Oak Harbor, Ohio, Final Report - Part II, Data Tabulations and Analyses. January-December 1981.
- . 1983. Operational Environmental Radiological Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1, Oak Harbor, Ohio, Final Report - Part II, Data Tabulations and Analyses. January-December 1982.
NALC0 Environmental Sciences. 1978. Preoperational and Operational Radio- , logical Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Oak l Harbor, Ohio, Annual Report. January-December 1977. National Center for Radiological Health. 1968. Section 1. Milk and Food. I 4 Radiological Health Data and Reports. Vol. 9, November 12, 730-746. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Environmental Radiation Data, . l Report 12 (April 1978) and Report 14 (October 1978). Eastern Environ-mental Radiation Facility, Montgomery, Alabama. 4 Wilson, D. W., G. M. Ward, and J. E. Johnson. 1969. In: Environmental Contamination by Radioactive Materials, International Atomic Energy ' h. J Agency, p. 125. 3.2-31
HAZLETON ENVf ACNMENTAL SCIENCES i i Appendix A Crosscheck Program Results O O A-1
HA2LETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES , O Aopendix A Crosscheck-Program Results The Nuclear Sciences Department of, Hazleton Environmental Sciences has parti-cipated in interlaboratory comparison (crosscheck) programs since the formula-l tion of its quality control program in December 1971. These programs are operated b agencies which supply environmental-type samples (e.g. , milk ~ or water) ycontaining concentrations of radionuclides known to the issuing agency but not to participant laboratories. The purpose of such a program is to provide an independent check on the laboratory's analytical procedures and to alert it to any possible problems. . Participant laboratories measure the concentrations of specified radionuclides and report them to the issuing agency. Several months later, the agency reports the known values to the participant-laboratories and specifies control limits. Results consistently higher or lower than the known values or outside the control limits indicate a need to check the instruments or procedures used. The results in Table A-1 were obtained through participation in the environ-O mental sample crosscheck program for milk and water samples during the period 1975 through 1982. This program has been conducted by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Intercomparison and Calibration Section,- Quality Assurance Branch, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada. The results in Table A-2 were obtained for thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's) during the period 1976, 1977, 1979, 1980, and 1981 through participation in the. Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth International Intercomparison of Environmental Dosimeters under the sponsorships listed in Table A-2. t O A-2
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES : Table A-1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's crosscheck program, i comparison of EPA and Hazleton ES results for milk and water samples,1975 through 1982a, ' Concentration in aci/lb Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA lesult Code Type Coll. Analysis 20 c 33 , ~ n =1 d i STM-40 Milk Jan. 1975 Sr-89 <2 0 15 Sr-90 73 2.5 75 11.4 I-131 99 4.2 101t15.3 , Cs-137 76i0.0 75 15 Ba-140 <3.7 0 15.0 . K(mg/1) 1470t5.6 1510 228 STW-45 Water Apr. 1975 Cr-51 <14 0 2 Co-60 421 6 425 63.9
- Zn-65 487 6 497 74.7 Ru-106 505 16 497 74.7 Cs-134 385 3 400 60.0 Cs-137 468t3 450 67.5 l STW-47 Water Jun. 1975 H-3 1459i144 1499i1002 STW-48 Water Jun. 1975 H-3 2404134 2204i1044 STW-49 Water Jun. 1975 Cr-51 <14 0 Co-60 344t1 350153 Zn-65 33015 327 49 Ru-106 315t7 325 49 Cs-134 291t1 304 46 Cs-137 387 2 378 57 STW-53 Water Aug. 1975 H-3 3317t64 3200 1083 4
STW-54 Water Aug. 1975 Cr-51 223t11 225 38 Co-60 305t1 307 46 4 Zn-65 28913 281142 Ru-106 346 5 279i57 i Cs-134 238t1 256 38 , Cs-137 292t2 307 46 i STW-58 Water Oct. 1975 H-3 1283i80 1203 988 s O A-3
.m HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Table A-1. (continued)
Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Result Code Type Coll. Analysis 20 c i30 , n=1d STM-61 Milk Nov. 1975 Sr-90 68.9i2.1 74.6111.2 I-131 64.6 3.8 75 15 Cs-137 75.6 20 75 15 Ba-140 <3.7 0 K(Mg/l) 1435157 1549 233 . STW-63 Water Dec. 1975 H-3 1034 39 1002i972 . SiW-64 Water Dec. 1975 Cr-51 <14 0 Co-60 221 1 203 30.5 Zn-65 215 6 201 30.2 Ru-106 171i9 181 27.2 Cs-134 198 2 202130.3 Cs-137 15214 151i22.7 STW-68 Water Feb. 1976 H-3 1124 31 10801978 STW-78 Water Jun. 1976 H-3 2500 44 2502i1056 STW-84 Water Aug. 1976 H-3 3097 21 3100t1080 STM 91 Milk Nov. 1976 I-131 8310.6 85 15 Ba-140 <4 0 Cs-137 12 1.7 11 15 K(mg/l) 1443 31 1510 228 STW-93 Water Dec. 1976 Cr-51 105115 104 15 Co-60 <4 0 Zn-65 97t4 102 15 Ru-106 87 3 99 15 Cs-134 85 4 93t15 Cs-137 10314 101 15 STW-94 Water Dec. 1976 H-3 2537 15 2300 1049 STM-97 Milk Mar. 1977 I-131 5512.5 51t15 Ba-140 <6 0 Cs-137 34 1 29 15 K(mg/l) 1520 35 1550i233 STW-101 Water Apr. 1977 H-3 1690 62 1760i1023 0 A-4
3-HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES v l Table A-1. (continued) Concen'. ration in pCi/lb l Lab Sample Date HES Resalt EPA Result Code Type Coll. Analysis 2a c *30 , n=1d ! STM-130 Milk May 1977 Sr-89 38 2.6 44 15 Sr-90 12 2.1 10 4.5 I-131 59 2.1 50 15 Ba-140 5314.4 72il5 Cs-137 1411.2 10 15 , i
- K(mg/1) 1533 21 1560 234 <
STW-105 Water Jun. 1977 Cr-51 <14 0 Co-60 29 1 29 15 Zn -65 74 7 74t15 . Ru-106 64 8 62 15 Cs-134 41t1 44 15 - ! Cs-137 35 3 35 15 i STW-107 Water Jun. 1977 Ra-226 4.7i0.3 5.1*2.42 STW-113 Water Aug. 1977 Sr-89 13 Oe 14t15 Sr-90 10t28 10i4.5 STW-116 Water Sep.1977 Gross Alpha 12i6 10il5
!- Gross Beta 32i6 30 15 i STW-118 Water Oct. 1977 H-3 1475i29 1650i1017 STW-119 Water Oct. 1977 Cr-51 132 14 153i24 Co-60 39 2 38 15 Zn-65 51 5 53t15 Ru-106 63t6 74 15 Cs-134 30i3 30 15 Cs-137 26t1 25115
~ STW-136 Water Feb. 1978 H-3 1690t270 1680t1020 STW-137 Water Feb. 1978 Cr-51 <27 0 Co-60 36 2 34 15 Zn-65 32 4 29t15 Ru-106 41i2 36i15 Cs-134 47 2 52il5 Cs-137 <2 0 . ~0 A-E
HA2LETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O Table A-1. (continued) Concentration in pCi/l b Lab Sample Date HE5 Result EPA Res Code Type Coll. Analysis 2a c 13o,n=1glt STW-138g Water Mar. 1978 Ra-226 5.4tp.1 5.5 0.6 Ra-228 NA 16.7t2.5 STW-150 Water Apr. 1978 H-3 21501220 2220i1047 STW-151 Water Apr. 1978 Gross Alpha 20 1 20 15 Gross Beta 5614 59i15 i Sr-89 19 2 21 15 l Sr-90 811 10 4.5 Co-50 19 3 20 15 Cs-134 16 1 15 15 Cs-137 <2 0 STM-152 Milk Apr.1978 Sr-89 85 4 101t15 Sr-90 8t1 914.5 I-131 7811 82115 Cs-137 2913 23t15 l Ba-140 <11 0 K(mg/1) 1503 90 1500t225 STW-154g Water May 1978 Gross Alpha 1211 13t15 Gross Beta 21 4 18 15 STW-1579 Water Jun. 1978 Ra-226 4.0g.0 3.7 0.6 Ra-228 NA 5.610.8 l STW-1599 Water Jul. 1978 Gross Alpha 19i3 2216 Gross Beta 2813 3015 STW-162 Water Aug. 1978 H-3 1167t38 12301990 STW-165g Water Sep. 1978 Gross Alpha 411 Si5 Gross Beta 1311 1015 I O: A-6
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O Table A-1. (continued) i Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample Date HE5 Result EPA Result - Code Type Coll. Analysis 2a c 3 o , n=1d a ! STW-167 Water Oct. 1978 Gross Alpha ~ 19i2' 19t15
. Gross Beta 36 2 34*15 Sr-89 911 10115 Sr-90 410 Si2.4 Ra-226 5.5 0.3 5.0 2.4 "
Ra-228 NAf 5.412.4 Cs-134 10*1 10 15 i Cs-137 15 1 13*15 STW-170 Water Dec. 1978 Ra-226 11.5i0.6 9.2il.4 i Ra-228 NAf 8.9to.5 l STW-172 Water Jan. 1979 Sr-89 11i2 14i15 Sr-90 Si2 6i4.5
- STW-175 Water Feb. 1979 H-3 13441115 12801993 STW-176 Water Feb. 1979 Cr-51 <22 0 Co-60 10 2 9t15
. In-65 26 5 21 15 Rn-106 <16 0 Cs-134 82 6115 Cs-137 15f2 12 15 STW-178 Water Mar. 1979 Gross Alpha 6.313 10il5 . Gross Beta 15i4 16i15
, STW-195g Water Aug. 1979 Gross Alpha 6.3tl.2 55 i Gross Beta 42.7 7.0 4014 STW-193 Water Sep. 1979 Sr-89 5.011.2 3.0 1.5 Sr-90 25.012.7 28.0 4.5-STW-196 Water Oct. 1979 Cr-51 135 5.0 113t18 Co-60 7.0 1.0 65 i Cs-134 7.310.6 7t15-Cs-137 12.7 1.2. 11*15 STW-198 Water Oct. 1979 H-3 1710i140 1560t1111 A-7
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O Table A-1. (continued) Concentration in pC1/lb Lab Sample Date lies Result EPA Result Code Type Coll. Analysis 2a c 30 , n=1d STW-199 Water Oct. 1979 Gross Alpha 16.0 3.6 21115 Gross Beta 36.3 1.2 49115 Sr-89 10.7 0.6 12il5 Sr-90 5.7 0.6 7115 . Ra-226 11.1 0.3 1115 Ra-228 1.6 0.7 0 Co-60 35.0 1.0 33 15 Cs-134 50.7 2.3 56115 Cs-137 <3 0 STW-206 Water Jan. 1980 Gross Alpha 19.0 2.0 30.018.0 Gross Beta 48.0 2.9 45.0 5.0 STW-208 Water Jan. 1980 Sr-89 6.111.2 10.0 0.5 Sr-90 23.9 1.1 25.5t1.5 STW-209 Water Feb. 1980 Cr-51 112t14 101 5.0 Co-60 12.7 2.3 11 5.0 Zn-65 29.7 2.3 25 5.0 Ru-106 71.7 1.5 51 5 Cs-134 12'.0 2.0 1015.0 Cs-137 30.0 2.7 30 5.0 STW-210 Water Feb. 1980 H-3 1800 120 1750t340 STW-211 Water March 1980 Ra-226 15.7 0.2 16.0 2.4 Ra-228 3.5 0.3 2.6 0.4 STM-217 Milk May 1980 Sr-89 4.4 2.69 55 Sr-90 10.0 1.0 12il.5 STW-221 Water June 1980 Ra-226 2.0t0.0 1.7t0.8 Ra-228 1.6 0.1 1.7 0.8 O A-8
HA2LETON ENVIRONMENTAI. SCIENCES a .q
-(J Table A-1. (continued)
Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Result Code Type Coll. ' Analysis i2o c t3o , n=1d STW-223 Water July 1980 Gross Alpha 31 3.0 38i5.0. Gross Beta 44 4 35 5.0 STW-224 Water July 1980 Cs-137 33.9 0.4 35i5.0 Ba-140 <12 0 . K-40 1350i60 1550 78 I-131 <5.0 0 STW-225 Water Aug. 1980 H-3 1280 50 1210 329 STW-226 Water Sept. 1980 Sr-89 22il.2 24 8.6 Sr-90 12 0.6 15i2.6 STW-228 Water Sept. 1980 Gross Alpha NAf 32.0 8.0
- (}
\-- Gross Beta 22.5 0.0 21.015.0 STW-235 Water Dec. 1980 H-3 2420i30 2240 604 l STW-237 Water Jan. 1981 Sr-89 13.0 1.0 16 8.7
- Sr-90 24.0i0.6 34t2.9 STM-239 Milk Jan. 1981 Sr-89 <210 0 Sr-90 15.7 2.6 20 3.0 t
I-131 30.9i4.8 26t10.0 Cs-137 46.9 2.9 43 9.0 - Ba-140 <21 0
- K-40 1330 53 1550 134 l STW-240 Water Jan. 1981 Gross alpha 7.3 2.0 9 5.0 i -Gross beta 41.0i3.1- 44 5.0 4
STW-243 Water Mar. 1981 Ra-226 3.5 0.06 3.413.5 .' Ra-228 6.5*2.3 7.3 1.1 1 O A-9
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 9 Table A-1. (continued) Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Result Type Coll. Analysis 20 c 3 a , n=1d Code STW-245 Water Apr. 1981 H-3 3210i115 2710 355 STW-249 Water May 1981 Sr-89 51 3.6 36 8.7 Sr-90 22.7 0.6 22i2.6 STW-251 Water May 1981 Gross alpha 24.0 5.29 21 5.25 Gross beta 16.1 1.9 1415.0
~
STW-252 Water Jun. 1981 H-3 2140 95 1950 596 STW-255 Water Jul. 1981 Gross alpha 20 1.5 22i9.5 Gross beta 13.0 2.0 ,15 8.7 STW-259 Water Sep. 1981 Sr-89 16.lil.0 23 5 Sr-90 10.3 0.9 11 1.5 STW-265 W5ter Oct. 1981 Gross alpha 71.2 19.1 80 20 Gross beta 123.3 16.6 111 5.6 Sr-89 14.9 2.0 21 5 Sr-90 13.lil.7 14.411.5 Ra-226 13.0 2.0 12.7 1.9 STW-269 Water Dec. 1981 H-3 2516 181 2700 355 STW-270 Water Jan. 1982 Sr-89 24.3 2.0 21.0 5.0 Sr-90 9.4 0.5 12.0 1.5 STW-273 Water Jan. 1982 1-131 8.6 0.6 8.4tl.5 STW-275 Water Feb. 1982 H-3 1580i147 1820 342 STW-276 Water Feb. 1982 Cr-51 <61 0 Co-60 26.0 3.7 20 5 Zn-65 <13 15 5 Ru-106 <46 20 5 C;-134 26.8 0.7 22 5 Cs-137 29.7 1.4 23 5 STW-277 Water Mar. 1982 Ra-226 11.9 1.9 11.6 1.7 STW-278 Water Mar. 1982 Gross alpha 15.6 1.9 1915 Gross beta 19.2 0.4 19 5 O A-10
l HAZL.ETON ENVIRONMENTAL. SCIENCES v Table A-1. (continued) Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample Date HES Result EPAResglt Code Type Coll. Analysis 20 c i30 , n=1 STW-280 Water Apr. 1982 H-3 2690 80 2860 360 STW-281 Water Apr. 1982 Gross alpha 75 7.9 85i21 Gross beta 114.1 5.9 106 5.3 Sr-89 17.4 1.8 24 5 Sr-90 10.5 0.6 12 1.5 ~ Ra-226 11.4 2.0 10.9tl.5 Co-60 <4.6 0 , STW-284 Water May 1982 Gross alpha 31.5i6.5 27.5 7 1 Gross beta 25.9 3.4 2915 STW-285 Water June 1982 H-3 1970 1408 1830i340 STW-286 Water June 1982 Ra-226 12.6tl.5 13.4i3.5 Ra-228 11.1 2.5 8.7 2.3 STW-287 Water June 1982 1-131 6.5 0.3 4.410.7 STW-290 Water Aug. 1982 H-3 3210i140 2890i619 STW-291 Water Aug. 1982 I-131 94.6i2.5 87i15 STW-292 Water Sept 1982 Sr-89 22.7t3.8 24.5i8.7 Sr-90 10.9 0.3 14.5 2.6 STW-296 Water Oct. 1982 Co-60 20.0il.0 20i8.7 Zn-65 32.3i5.1 24i8.7 Cs-134 15.3 1.5 19.0 S.7 Cs-137 21.0 1.7 20.0 8.7 STW-297 Water Oct . 1982 H-3 2470i20 2560i612 STW-298 Water Oct. 1982 Gross alpha 32 30 55 24 Gross beta 81.7i6.1- 81 8.7 Sr-89 <2 0 Sr-90 14.1 0.9 17.2i2.6' Cs-134 <2 1.8i8.7 Cs-137 22.7i0.6 20 8.7 Ra-226 13.6 0.3 12.5 3.2 Ra-228 3.9 1.0 3.6 0.9 O A-11 i
l l HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O Table A-1. (continued) Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Result Code Type Coll. Analysis 20 c t3a , n=1 d STW-301 Water Nov. 1982 Gross alpha 12.0 1.0 19.0 8.7 Gross beta 34.0 2.7 24.0 8.7 STW-302 Water Dec. 1982 I-131 40.0 0.0 37.0i10 aResults obtained by the Nuclear Sciences Department of Hazleton Environ-mental Sciences as a participant in the environmental sample crosscheck program operated by the Intercomparison and Calibration Section, Quality Assurance Branch, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), Las Vegas, Nevada, ball results are in pCi/1, except for f.lemental potessium (K) data which are in mg/1. cunless otherwise indicated, the' HES results given as the mean 20 standard deviations for three determinations. dVSEPA results are presented as the known values t control limits of 30 for n=1. eMean i 2a standard deviations of two determinations, fNA = Not analyzed. 9 Analyzed but not reported to the EPA.
~
G A-12
O O O ' Table A-2. Crosscheck program results, thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's). mR Hazleton Average 12 o d Lab TLD Result Known (al1 , Code Type Measurement i20 a Value participants) 2nd International Intercomparison b 115-2b CaF2:Mn Gamma-Field 17.011.9 17.lc 16.417.7 p Bulb m Gamma-Lab 20.814.1 21.3c 18.817.6 y Z 3rd International Intercomparisone 11'5-30 CaF2:Mn Bulb Gamma-Field 30.713.2 34.914.8f 31.513.0 f 3 y Gamma-Lab 89.616.4 91.7114.6f 86.2124.0 0 4th International Intercomparison9 h z 115-49 CaF2:Mn Gamma-Field 14.lil.1 14.lil.4f 16.09.0 g Bulb ~ r-Ganna-Lab (Low) 9.311.3 12.212.4f 12.0i7.6 m O Gamma-Lab (High) 40.411.4 45.819.2f 43.9113.2 5th International Intercomparison h Q m 115-5Ah CaF2:Mn Gamma-Field 31.411.8 30.016.01 30.2114.6 Bulb . Gamma-Lab. 77.415.8 75.217.6i 75.8140.4 at beginning Gamma-Lab 96.615.8 88.418.8i 90.7131.2 at the end m - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - . _ _ . - _ - - _ _ _ _ . - - . _ _ .
Table A-2. (Continued) mR Average i 20 d Hazleton Lab TLD Result Known (all Code Type Measurement 12aa Value participants) 115-5Bh LiF-100 Gamma-Field 30.314.8 30.016i 30.2114.6 Chips Gamma-Lab 81.117.4 75.217.6i 75.8140.4 f N at beginning E
-4 88.418.8i 90.71131.2 0 Gamma-Lab 85.4111.7 2 at the end ,
Z alab result given is the mean 120 standard deviations of three determinations. 5 > bSecond International Intercomparison of Environmental Dosimeters conducted in April of 1976 by the Health 0 2 L and Safety Laboratory (GASL), New York, New York, and the School of Public Health of the University of Texas, Houston, Texas. h cValue determined by sponsor of the intercomparison using continuously operated pressurized ion chamber. z dMean 120 standard deviations of results obtained by all laboratories participating in the program. g CThird International Intercomparison of Environmental Dosimeters conducted in summer of 1977 by Oak Ridge r-National Laboratory and the School of Public Health of the University of Texas, Houston, Texas. m fValue 120 standard deviations as determined by sponsor of the intercomparison using continuously operated 9 m pressurized ion chamber. 9 Fourth International Intercomparison of Environmental Dosimeters conducted in summer of 1979 by the School of Public Health of the University of Texas, Houston, Texas. m l hFifth International Intercomparison of Environmental Dosimeter conducted in fall of 1980 at Idaho Falls, m Idaho and sponsored by the School of Public Health of the University of Texas, Houston, Texas and Environmental Measurements Laboratory, New York, New York, U.S. Department of Energy. IValue determined by sponsor of the intercomparison using continuously operated pressurized ion chamber. 9 9 . 9
. . . . , . , _ . , _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . . _ . - _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ _ _ _ . . . . _ . _ - - . . . . . . . . - . . . - _ . _ . . . _ . . . _ . - . m i, i - p , . , p .... 1 - 1' s ['. 4-IO g t I l i. i e i i i 1982 LAND-USE AND MILK ANIMAL CENSUS- l , bY - I i
,. )
Gary Downing ; and- l Kelly Clayton -I L
.t i.
i F f- TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION [ r l DECEMBER 1982 t j .i 4 b f f f ' ,I - i a L 1: i 1 ?. e 1: ( i i r s .. 5; ?, {- . . .
.., -~. . - -
9 4 L , e
?
h PURPOSE t The Toledo Edison Company performs an annual land-use and milk 1
- animal census to satisfy the requirements of-Section 3.2 of Appendix B
', ~ Davis-Besse Technical Specifications and Section IV B.3 of Appendix I, 10CFR50. The location of all dairy cows, meat animals and vegetable \ t' gardens within 5 miles of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station were i l' determined. Locations of dairy goats within a 15-mile radius were also j determined. , i I 1 4 i 4 I 1 4 t ? k ; i l' h i l ?
~
l
- ( . ,
i y i- a 0 I
- ,9 - };
,e %r- c / i,
~ - .-.- - -- ~ - - . , . . . . _ . . . - , _ , . . _ . , , _ _ . . . . . , , _ _ _ , _ _ , , , _ _ .
s~ 33, .' 3. ,
i 4 4 BACKGROUND AND METHODS Appendix I to 10CFR50 states "The licensee shall. establish an appropriate surveillance and monitoring program for evaluating doses to individuals from principal pathways of exposure." Appendix B to Davis-Besse Technical Specifications states "An annual census of I animals producing milk for human consumption shall be conducted at the start of the grazing season to determine their location and number with respect to the site". Pathways are defined as any means by which radio-nuclides can get into the human food chain. Pathways recorded in the land-use and milk animal census are residences, vegetable gardens, I milk animals and beef animals. The dose is determined by: (1) release rate - the actual amount released to the environment; (2) meteorology - i the actual meteorological conditions during the time of release (includes
\
atmospheric stability class, wind velocity and wind direction). A preliminary land-use census was done in September, 1981. The I 1982 land-use census field work was done June 15 - June 18, 1982, while the milk animal census was done May 25 and 27, 1982. Local agencies such as the Goat Dairyman Association, and the Ottawa County and Sandusky County Cooperative Extension Agencies provided lists of dairy animal t owners in their areas. The Ottawa County agency confirmed the presence of all beef cattle, milk cows and milk goats reported within the 5-mile radius of the station. RESULTS The results of the 1982 land-use and milk animal census are presented in Table 1. O
REFERENCES Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1982 Code of Federal Regulations" 10CFR Part 50, Appendix 1 Section IV B.3 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1979
" Davis-Besse Unit No. 1 Technical Specifications". Appendix B to License No. NPF-3 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1979
" Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for PWP.'s".
NUREG 0472 NUS Corporation, June 4, 1976
" Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1" Evaluation of Compliance with Appendix I to 10CFR50
's O TABLE 1 PATHWAY IDENTIFICATION Sector Distance (meters) Receptor N' 870 residence NNE .870 residence . 1 NE 900 residence ENE * --- ----- E * --- ----- ESE * --- ----- I SE * --- ----- SSE 2030 residence . 2680 residence. vegetable garden l 7320 residence, vegetable garden, dairy goat S 1130 residence 1610 residence, vegetable garden , 4420 residence, vegetable garden, beef cattle SSW 1000 residence, vegetable garden 1610 residence, vegetable garden, beef cattle 5270 residence, vegetable garden, dairy goat SW 990 residence, vegetable garden 4970 residence, vegetable garden.. beef cattle WSW 2650 residence, vegetable garden 4250 residence, vegetable garden, dairy cow W 980 residence,-vegetable garden, beef _ cattle. WNW 1730 residence 2830 residence, vegetable garden NW 1160 residence 2210 residence, vegetable garden NNW 1250 residence, vegetable garden.
- Sectors over Lake Erie and marsh areas u - _ - . . _ .
,,.m._.__,_.-. _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ , - _ . _ .7_ l '- d h < l t
?
. 1
'l
- Ia
[ f Evaluation of Compliance With Appendix I to 10CFR50: ' Updated , Population. Agricultural, Meat-Animal, l and Milk Production Data Tables l < for 1982 i < i Prepared by ; , i l I i t l' Kelly L. Clayton i 1 ? 4
-l i '!.
7) g l _
~
t l-1!
- ' ~
I . ,
~
~
E..,...-.-*---.----.--..-.--.'.%--- . . . ,E ' ,.i-. w ' E . M -%,-- . --#w'n ww.- _...-%..=,~,.
4 PURPOSE Within the guidelines of Appendix I to 10CFR50 are recommenda- ) tions to perform a survey of the 50-mile. region surrounding any nuclear power reactor. This survey should determine the number of
~
4 people, meat-animals, milk-animals, and crop production for this j region. These factors were determined to be key receptors in an i environmental assessment of the effects of a nuclear power. station
- on the environment.
! Therefore, Toledo Edison personnel have updated data tables , containing the following information for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station: population, annual vegetation production, annual meat production, and annual milk production. The main purpose of f updating this information is to incorporate the results of the 1980 j United States Census statistics-now available. .
f a 4 O I I t M O r
METHODS Several methods were used to determine the distribution of popu-lation; annual crop production, meat production, and milk production for a 50-mile region surrounding the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. First, the 50-mile region was divided into 160 subregions (segments) formed by sectors centered on the 16 cardinal compass directions and annuli of 0-1, 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5, 5-10, 10-20, 20-30, and 40-50 miles. The 50-mile region centered at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station covers the State of Ohio, the State of Michigan, and the Province of Ontario, Canada. Sixteen counties are included within this region with 9 located in Ohio, 4 in Michigan, and 2 in Ontario. County agricultural statistics for 1981 were used in distributing crop, meat, and milk production throughout the 50-mile subregions. Subregions located over water (Lake Erie), State or National .i l parks, refuges, or wildlife preserves were removed from this study. In similar fashion, segments within highly urbanized areas were eliminated from agricultural distribution since cropa, meat-animals, and milk-animals would be in extremely low concencrations. Crop production throughout the entire 50-mile region was deter-mined from county statistics. The crop statistics used for this dis-tribution were: corn, soybeans, wheat, oats, hay, sugarbeets, tomatoes, and cucumbers. The annual meat production and milk pro-duction was determined from county statistics on beef-cattle and sheep marketed annually and the number of pounds of milk sold annually. However, county statistics were used for meat and milk production only within subregions located 5-50 miles from the station. Due to the 0-5 mile region from the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station being a more critical area, an accurate distribution was important. Meat, milk, and population distribution were determined from 1982 field work data and confirmed by the Ottawa County Coop-erative Agriculture Extension Agency. Meat-animal distribution was derived from the number of beef cattle located in each 0-5 mile sub-region. Similarly, milk production was determined by the number of milk-cows and milk goats in each subregion. Milk production was cal-culated from the average daily production rates for these animals. Population located in subregions of 0-5 miles was determined by the number of houses within each subregion. The number of houses per subregion was multiplied by the average number of individuals occupying such households (2.0). The number of individuals per household in these subregions had been previously determined by the Emergency Planning Group for their evacuation procedures. Again 1980 census statistics were used. Finally, population distribution in 5-50 mile subregions was per-formed by a computer program designed by the Control Data Corporation. This program used 1980 U.S. census statistics plus 1976 Canadian pop-ulation figures. O
.. -.. . . . . . . ~ . . - . . . . . .. - - . ..
a-l l 1 f h The final' data on population and agricultural distribution were j- put into tabular form where the vertical columns represent the 3 cardinal. compass directions and the horizontal columns represent the l number of miles each subregion is located from Davis-Besse Nuclear ; Power Station. The final results were converred into the following I units: Annual vegetable production.in kilograms, annual meat produc- I tion in kilograms, and annual milk production in liters. 1 4 O i f I i i i J h . I c l E I 1 1 ,I i i i l n -
REFERENCES Agricultural Ministry of Ontario, 1980.
" Agricultural Statistics and Livestock Marketing Account, 1980."
Agricultural Ministry of Ontario, 1980.
" Agricultural Statistics for Ontario - 1980." Publication 21, 1980.
Michigan Department of Agriculture, July, 1981.
" Michigan Agricultural Statistics, 1981.
NUS Corporation, 1976.
" Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1,. Evaluation of Compliance with Appendix I to 10CFR50, June 4, 1976.
Ohio Crop Reporting Service, 1981.
" Ohio Agricultural Statistics, 1981."
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1977.
" Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10CFR Part 50, Appendix I, October 1977." Revision 1 to Reg-ulatory Guide 1,109.
O
...... _ _._m -. . _ _..__ _ . . _ - . _ _ _ . _ _ _ , . - _ _ - -
.._- _.-_.~ _m. . . . . _ . .
~
t LPDFULai10ff D.'eiA ust.E 1. D 1 S T A il C E (PtILE S ) - ' 7ECTOR 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-10 40-50' TUTAL ' 1 11. 0. c. O. O. 0. O. 9884. 47104. 33580!. 392800
- 2 - 30. O. O. O. 0. O. O. 11508. 13871. 12516 37923 3 4. O. O. O. O. O. O. 133. 12514. 12707. 25358 4 0.- 0. O. O. O. '
O. 556. 131. O. O. 687
'S 0.- '0. O. O. O. O. 1905. 124. 0. 14282. 16311 ^
6 .- ,O. 9. O. 0.t 0. O. 7626. 44516. 20191. 83075. 155408 7 0. O. O. O. 101. 6420. 3712. 7785. 27402. 8745. 54225 e- 5. 42. 59. 75. 65. 1931. 4882. 18495. 5370. 15380. 46303
?- 34. 20. 60. 43. 105. 333. 26617. 12438. 29221. 4940. 73811
- 10. 49. 10. 35. 63. 95. 4576. 3390. 6069. 24257. 11215. 49759
'il 16. O. 36. 56. 62. 462. 8394. 9649. 6481. 46510. 71666 12 4. 26. 6. 45. 60.- -1181. 4541. 7737 39542. 10182. 63304 13 22. 58. 22. ~ 54. 104. 831. 15254. 231753. 63179. 17601. 328878 ,
185,934. 13815. 14 1.- 31. - 164. 2. 9. 200. 6929. 48282. 255360 15' 1. - 147. 42. O. O. O. 0. 44307. 14525. 18908. 779 N)
.16 64. 20. O. O. O. O. O. 15168. 47565. 191783. 254600
' TUTAL 241 334 423 338 592 15994 83806 605633 399504 797458 1904323 j
O a 6 4 I M---n
i so a N N N sm cC 00 ao O a0 80 00 so e N e Q. O.
+ O+ O+ (AuO
. + C.+ Q+ O.
++i.) O. O O O. O e 4 O.
WW4WWWWWWWWWWWWW f4 d 8Cg884~~e44me%3C c0000000C N 4 H Pete4 @ 4 C
> m. t.a %. me. e. N N M P N. 4 4 4 4 4N. P.+ f. A. F. 4 4 4. A. N. %.
00D0000000000000 O mmNOONmmmmmmmmN4 e 0000000000000000 O
***********+++ * +
O WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W e C000000000000000 fa M n O O w 4 b1 0 4 0 4 M w n O 3 e o O f fa O O T O N O
- M n M n + M =
v *
- a. M. n. C. O. 0.= a. a. f.' *. f.t f.4 f.a **. 0.* 4 O C000000000000000 NNNOONememmmNmmN e 0000000000000000 O
+++++++++****++
- O WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W
I 0000000000000000 fa N b O O
- O p m m w M O M o n m
O N M O O O O fav h1 N e 4 n O O O = M O
- m. m. w. C. O. 4. M. a. *. M. a. a. m. a. a. n.
0000000000000000 44444NNmmmmmNNNN e 0000000000000000 O
++++++++++++*+=*
- O WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW $
M 0000000000000000 4 1 04 0 N O 4 On =0 m M 03 91 == O 01 N M.e n O n to M f a f a M e M h1 c. DC.Os n .Oa fa M. W. 4. m. w. Me u. w. w. w. w. a. m. 4. W. r.e f 0000000000000000 Cot 14NNNNNNNNNNOO e 0000000000000000 O
+ +++++++ee++++++
- O WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW $
fa 0000000000000000 N I O O m o w m e faram a M N 4 C O O O C o e m e fa N M M h1 4 = b n O O 4 M 0 0 4 6. *. f.a n. >. >. m. N. e. w. m. O. O. O* 0000000000000000 400000eNN444N400 % C000000000000000 C
+++ * *.,**++=**+ +
0 WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW 0000000000000000 y e l OOOOOONENMHMOOOO m n COOOOOpmMNNNwNOO e* e O. O. O. O. O. O. m. a. m. a. m. *. *. T. o. o. O m 0000000000000000 W 4
= 000000n444444000 E
. C.000000000000000
+++++* ++=.++.+
$+
ki WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W C I 0000000000000000 W T O O O O O O m b1 tl n t10a T O O O 4 COOOOO49eewm*Ooo [ u e. O. O. O. O. O. O. m. *. w. w. w. w. =. O. C. O. O W = 0000000000000000 a m e 4 OOOOOOO44eennOOO 4 h > 0000000000000000 O
+***++++++++++++ +
n
- WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W
- M I C000000000000000 OOOOOOOMMMMOOOOO 3
OOOOOOOOmmwW6OOO + C 0 0 0 0 0 0. C. *. =. =. m. w. 6 0 0 0 O* C000000000000000 O O O O O O O n n n n t161 p O O @ C000000000000000 O
++++++++++****++ +
M WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW $ 8 000C000000000000 % fa C O O O O O O M M T w b1 T w C O e O O O O O O O O O w m O
- t10 0 4*
O. O. O. O. O. O. O. 4. m. m. N. 4. m. e. O. O. O
- 0000000000000000 e
S O O O O O O O n bi n n n n W O O 4 8 0000000000000000 C b ++++++++++++++++ + fa WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW $
-$ t 0900000000000000 4 m
- O O O O O O O M n m 4
- t1 h10 0 C m OOOOOOO4mammebOO e
- C. O. O. O. O. O. O. M. T. e. r.a T. *. *. O. O. O C 0000000000000000 4
Q OOOOOOOOOennnnOO e C00000000000o000 g r . + + ++++ ++.. W O = WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW m
= 0 I C000000000000000 C O O O O O O O O O bi n n k10 0 h
e U 0000000006444400 N D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. >. =. M. *. w. 0 0 O s O 0000000000000000 p W J e d
.: ts: 4 m M N 0 o u e f a M .* t7 -0 N *U 0- O -e f a M 9. n. -4 . N
%mh4@NNN'Emm%eN%m 0 9h O O O sp H th O O O O O $n o O O
O g +4++++4+ ++++++++ + p ~ _ .$ $ s $ g $-.$ Q N - 0 4 m
@ NNudewNM e@wNN NN mi p
.." S S S S i $ $ i $ $ i s . i i OI
,00000000 00000000 O O o
N440ONNNNNNNNNNn 0000000000000000
+++++++*********
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW O000000000000000 e 0 e
+-
a rawCOOmw4n>OOMnO4 N M O T r.*aNOO ore 4 M em omommM O
. r.e O.= 0. C. r.a.w M. r.8 r.a f.a f.a 4. M. r.4 CS.
C00000000000C000 NN400NNNNNNN4NN4 e 0000000000000000 0
++++++++******++ +
0 WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW T O 1 00000000*00000000
- O O O O Om n COMOOONemeNMefew w ra O 4 0 en es r4 M f ,
- w. w..w C. O. w. w. w. w. r.a m. m. n. w. r.a n.
0000000000000000 nnnnn4NNNNNNN444 e 0000000000000000 O
++++++++++++++++ y O WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWhi O M 0000000000000000 @
t M n w C O n > O,m e,n M o w M O 9 O- n w e,m s n o w re e . N. o.r.a 4. . 0000000000000000
..M. .w .4. ram n e n. O u. n. o. n. r.a OOwn444444444pOO m 0000000000000000 0
+++++**++******+
- O WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW $
A re O O O O O O O O O O O O Ce O O O I O O 4 O N N es n n CD 0* 0 0 p C O ers O C O M 4 N w 4 = w a ra 4 M ra O O m u O. C. T. 4. *. r.e 4. b. e. m. N. 4. M. N. C. O. O C000000000000000 OOOOOOnnennnnnOO 4 0000000000000000 O
+++++*+*++++++++
- C
- O WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW $
< w C000000000000000 %
G 0 OOOOOOMar4444TnOO N e n O O O O O O M ra O w w w w > O O U O w w O. O. O. O. O. O. 4. W. w. m. e. m. 4. *. O. O. O O M C000000000000000 A W 4 J .
- M w OOOOOOOw0900O000 4 Q K 000000000000000O O O w ++++++++++++++++
- E n WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW 0000000000000000 g
W . 8 %
& . W T OOOOOOOnor 000000 4 m OOOOOOONoeOOOOOO e=
W W O a W O. O. O. O. O. O. O. N. O. N. O. O. O. O. O. O. w g z 0000000000000000
< 4 H 0000000000 WOOOOO O 4 n > 0000000000000000 O
++++++++++++++++ +
8 W M T W W W ba ha W W ha W W W ha ha W W b5 M M w M t O000COCOCOOCOCOO 0000000000>O0000 kN W C000000000ra00000 4 Me M e C.000000000900000 0000000000000000 O w
> w
< 0000000CeO000000
& C000000000000000 ' O +
++++++++++++++++
M WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW e 46O000000000000O ti O000000000000000 N 00000000>O000000
- O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. N. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O 0000000000000000 e 0000000000000000 O 0000000000000000 0 P4 WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW 8 0000000000000000 -
= 0000000000000000
, 0000000000000000
- e C000000000000000
************** O O '0000000000000000, w
w M -
. 000000000e00eO00 0000000000000000 C ++++++++++++++++
W. 4 -t
- WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
'O000000000000000 G O- 000000000000r000 m 000000000900e000 M E
O O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. w. O. O. N. O. O. O.O w 0000000000000000 O'
. .O W
D a M g. ' A .M 4
-Q.. -
-* *o -
k
. Da 'W ** re M e n *O N 03 0 O .s e
- re
.e M
.4 T n.4 w e .
M v3
-@ S.e
N NN 44e MeeNN NCNm p 080000 000008000 0,
+++ +o ++ + + +
d WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW CO C000 W O 4 C0000000 es weem c N Nm emNN4 eme~ conn Om POOm O
- 4. N. m. N. M. m. m. m. m. M. 4 4. +. m. e. N. m.
C000000000000000 C N =4 A O O N N N N P. P. A N N N N 0000000000000000 $.
... **+++ ++++** W O WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW O n O000000000000000 e w r44 0 0 0 0 4 n a m e o) MNO WNOOONemO4MO44pv O c.
e O r.e w. m. O. O. 4. T. *. M. e. e. r.a v. N. n. e. C000000000000000 NN40CNNNNN44eNNN e 0 0000000000000000
**+++++++++e++++ +
W O W W W W h4 W W W uJ W us W ud W W uJ C T 0000000000000000 m 8 M e > O O M 4 0 08 v M e e m M O e O es
- N O O
- m > M M e re n M N w N M . . 04 w O r.a f.a f.4 O. O. r.e e. M. M. r.4 CD. 4. M.
- 0000000000000000 0444nNNNNNN44444 O00000000000000O e
O 1 i
+
++++++++++++ce*+
O WWWWWWWWWW64WWWWW h M 0000000000000000 + t CO 4 N N O 0= 0 e O N 04 D= n N O N a O eMMMOOONem
- C4 N
M.O .m.4WOF.4n c.* 9 .F4
. . .re f 4 f.4 m. 4. f.4 CD. O (D. M.
0000000000000000 COMn44N5NN44WOOO 0000000000000000 N O
*********+++++++ $
0 WwwwWWWWwwwWwWWW O F4 OCO + I C O 0. O 03 N O C. 0 0O0 OO.0 Ow O 0 P4 reO*OO CO O O 4 0 OO4*OmOMMoobMOOO e O O. f m O. O. N. a. w. r.e m. m. a. w. >. M. b. O. O000000000000000 OOOOOOnnnnnn*OOO + 0000000000000000 O 4 ++++++++++++++++ y
- O W W W W W W W W W W W W W ha W W O m
< H 0000000000000000 OOOOOOMeengeweOOO 4 G l n 000000*v999wnOOO W
w a O. O. O. O. o. o. m.f.an. a. m . m. N. O. 0 0 "f I m 0000000000000000 A W
? d @
a m O000000900040000 O O E 0000000000000000 + O w +++++++++++++++* E
= n WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW s w i 0000000o00o0000o N A W T 00000000000n0000 m 3 03000000000N0000
- W Q 000 C a g O. 20 0 0 0 0. a. C. 0 0. m. O.
= a Z 0000000000000000 C a 4 4 N O O O O O O O O *r 0 0 0 O O 0 0
- O O O w 0000000000000000
++++++++++++++++ $
W m e W W W W W W W W W W kt W W W W ua m e C000000000000000 m w M 0000000000000000 " W 0000000000000000 4 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. w. o. 0 0 0 0 0 0 O s W C000000000000000 m
> 0000000000040000 s 0000000000000000
**++++++++++++++
y M WWWWWWWWWWh4WWWWW C
+
1 0000000000000000 N fa C000000000000000
- 00000000000NO000 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. *. O. 0 0 0 f 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 g 0000000000000000 y
+++++++++++++e**
a f4 WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW w I C000000000000000 . W M 0000000000000000
" 0000000000000000 g"
C.000000000000000 0000000000000000 f 4 w 4 4 000000000eO00000 O Q 0000000000000000
+++++++++****+++ $
2 M WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW O I 0000000000000000 M O C000000000000000 +
> 0000000000000000
- U 3
a C.000000000000000 0000000000000000 O O M A A W H M E O )
> e-o re M v n 4 P. 03 tbwmeeMmm OefaMeO4 .s:
y
- 3 U Q W p G w
l I O I t
. ?
BIOLOGICALPUNITORING 1982 STUDIES OF THE ASIATIC CLAM (CORBICULA) ENVIRONrENTAL llPACT APPRAISAL OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 1 ON THE AouATIC ECOLOGY OF LAKE ERIE 1973-1979 0
l !O 1982 STUDIES OF THE ASIATIC CLAM (CORBICULA) by Jennifer Scott-Wasilk Jeffrey S. Lietzow Gary Downing Kelly L. Clayton January 1983 O l l l
SUMMARY
The purposes 'of this investigation were to determine growth rates and patterns for the Asiatic clam (Corbicula) in Lake Erie and to determine if Corbicula had spread to any. waters immediately adjacent to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. For the growth study, clam specimens were collected once per month from the discharge of the Bay Shore Generating Station. A Needham scraper with - 9mm mesh was used to collect the specimens, and a vernier caliper was used to measure the clams to the nearest tenth millimeter. Sample size ranged from 67 to 248 individuals. The 1982 results indicate that there is.only one peak spawning season for this population, and it has a growth rate of about 0.1mm per day from June through September and a growth rate of
- less than 0.05mm per day in the colder months beginning in.0ctober. .
To determine if the clam had migrated to the vicinity of Davis-Besse, the adjacent Lake Erie shoreline and the intake channel were sampled. No Corbicula specimens were found at either location. O O
- =
! O o n 4 ] INTRODUCTION . The Asiatic clam (Corbicula) was first noted-in North-America when speci-I mens were taken from the Columbia River in 1938. The clas gradually l i migrated eastward (Ingram et al., 1964;.Britton and Murphy,'1977), and by j 1957, specimens were being collected from the Ohio River Basin (Sinclair ' ! and Isom, 1963). By 1971, theLclam was found in the Atlantic drainage'in l Georgia and began to move northward (Fuller and Powell, 1973; Sickel, l 1973, Trama, 1982). As the Asiatic clam spx;ead, it occasionally caused ~
- blockage of industrial and municipal raw water systems (Ingram, 1959; i
! McMahon, 1977; Goss'et al., 1979; Harvey, 1981). . Concern that nuclear ! j power plants might be adversely affected caused the United States Nuclear 1 Regulatory Commis'sion (USNRC, 1981) to note that under certain conditions { the Asiatic clam might pose a significant threat to power plants due to 3- colonization and subsequent blockage of raw water systems. The USNRC requested that all nuclear power plants determine if the Asiatic' clam was * ' l
- found in the source water and if there was a potential problem with flow " ,
j-blockage at the plants due to the clams. Since there were.two recent reports of this clam being found in the western basin of Lake Erie (Detroit l Edison, 1981; Clarke, 1981) we decided to conduct a survey to better _.
- quantify the distribution of the clam in the areas around the three Toledo j Edison power plants. In 1981, our initial surveys-revealed that Corbicula
! were found in the thermal plumes of the Acme and Bay Shore Generating i Stations. Population densities ranged between 33 and 78 individuals per i sq'uare meter. No Corbicula were found in the. vicinity of the Davis-Besse .i { Nuclear Power Station (Scott-Wasilk et al. ,1982). $ The monitoring program continued into 1982, and this report describes the ! results of that monitoring. In 1982, we continued to closely _ monitor the t
- area around Davis-Besse for Corbicula. We also began a study of growth '
i rate and patterns of the Corbicula population in the Bay Shore discharge. j Bay Shore was chosen for the growth study because it has;a large,-apparently ! stable population and the discharge is readily accessible to sampling j equipment and people. i . j Sampling was also conducted at the Acme. Generating' Station and the Cleveland j Electric Illuminating Company's Eastlake Power Plant. l , MONITORING LOCATIONS i l Surveys were conducted in the vicinity.of four power plants. Three plants ; j- are operating by the Toledo Edison Company - Acme Generating Station, Bay.
- Shore Generating Station and Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. .One plant. '
j is operated by the Cleveland ElectricsIlluminating Company :Eastlake Power Plant. i The Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station is -a nuclear-fueled generating ~ _
- facility .with a net electrical capacity -of'890 megawatts. ' It .is.~ located ,
L - near Locust Point,at the mouth'of the Toussaint: River. The-condenser cooling water system lis closed cycle with a natural-' draft cooling tower-- used to dissipate heat.into the atmosphere. ;A_ submerged cooling water s intake crib is located about 900 meters from the shoreline.' Water from-i ,d h
- theicooling' tower blowdown and other plant systems. is discharged throughLa
_ submerged pipe 370-meters offshore in Lake Erie. The discharge.is about . 4-
-2 ;
e s I r i k 7 py-- e-- < + ., ,p; , ,-,-,--,,,,e' ' 4 r'- , . . . , ,,- v-g'_- , gg-,4. %h - , , , - , p.,_ - y )y,-t
1200 meters from the intake and has a typical flow rate of 0.6 cubic meters per second (20 cfs). Under conditions of maximum heat discharge, the plume of water warmer then 1.6 C (3 F) above ambient covers about 3600 m2 (0.9 acres). Approximately 30,000 m (73 2 acres) are contained within the 0.6 C (1*F) isotherm (USNRC, 1975). The circulating water is normally chlorinated four times per day for one half hour each time. At the Bay Shore Generating Station - a 623 megawatt coal-fired facility, the once-through condenser cooling water is discharged at a maximum flow rate of 33 cubic meters per second (1150 cfs) with a typical area of about 450,000 m2 (112 acres) within the 2.8 C (5 F) isotherm of the thermal plume (Wapora, 1977b). Chlorination at Bay Shore is conducted twice per day for two hours each time. Bay Shore has had a continuous discharge of heated water during all seasons for the past decade. Bay Shore is located on the Maumee Bay at the mouth of the Maumee River. The Acme Generating Station is coal-fired and has a once-through condenser cooling system. Acme is located on the Maumee River across from downtown Toledo. Since operation of Davis-Besse began, Acme has been increasingly used as a peaking station with a maximum load capacity of more than 300 megawatts. Because its load is variable, the circulating water flow rate also varies. In past years, the flow rate has been about 9 cubic meters per second (380 cfs), and a typical thermal plume contained 125,000 m2 (31 acres) within the 2.8*C (5 F) isotherm (Wapora, 1977a). Chlorination at Acme is done twice per day for 20 minutes each time. Chlorination is not performed on weekends or when the station is off-line. The Eastlake Power Plant is a 1300 megawatt coal-fired electric generating station with a once-through condenser cooling system. It is located on the southern shore of the central basin of Lake Erie. LAKE ERIE ENVIRONMENT Water temperatures in the western basin of Lake Erie remain below 4.5*C (40*F) from December through March with temperatures remaining at 0 C (32 F) for the entire months of January and February. Temperatures above 16-17*C, the temperature at which Corbicula spawning has been noted to begin (Gardner et al., 1976; Eng, 1979), occur from mid-May through September. The thermal plumes of the power plants cause a localized alteration in this temperature scheme. In general, the water temperature in the Bay Shore thermal plume remains above 4.5*C all year long. Water temperatures in the plume above 16*C occur from April through mid-October. The benthic substrate in the Maumee Bay and River tends to be muck and silt which reflects the great quantities of agricultural runoff from the Maumee River Basin (Fraleigh et al., 1979). The substrate near Locust Point is sandier although there is some silt mixed in with the sand. In the central basin, the substrate is sandy with very little silt. Water clarity is higher than in the western basin. The western basin is eutrophic. The central basin is somewhat oligotrophic. 9 METHODS AND MATERIALS Qualitative sampling and sampling for growth study specimens was done w na a Needham scraper-(after Needham and Needham, 1962) custom made by Wildlife Supply Company. Mesh size of the scraper was 9mm. Quantitative sampling was done with a 15.4cm x 15.4cm x 22.9cm Wildco Tall Ekman Bottom Dredge. The Ekman grab removes a known area (232cm2 ) .of sediment, and the number of clams per square meter could then be, determined. Specimens for the growth study were taken-at about one month intervals beginning in June, 1982. Shell size was measured with a vernier caliper to the nearest tenth millimeter across the widest part of the shell-parallel to the hinge. Growth rates were determined from the modal width from each monthly ' sample. The julian sampling date was then plotted against the modal shell width to obtain growth rates. RESULTS No Corbicula were found in the vicinity of Davis-Besse or Eastlake, and none were found in the intakes of either Acme or Bay Shore. A few speci-mens were collected from the Acme discharge which indicates that there is still an established population there. The majority of the specimens were collected from the Bay Shore discharge (see Table 1). The sample distribution for the specimens collected at Bay Shore for the growth studies can be seen in Figure 1. The modal shell widths for these samples can be seen in tabular (Table 1) and graphical (Figures 1 and 2) form. Growth rates were calculated for two separate time periods. The first, period was comprised of data from the warmer months : June, July,' August and September. The growth rate was 0.106mm per day (r2 > 0.9). For the second period when the water temperature was colder - October, November,. and December the growth rate was 0.034mm per day'(r2 > 0.9). DISCUSSION From this' study, we found that the' growth rate of Corbicula-slowed con-- siderably when the water temperature fell below 13*C. This finding ~ confirms that of Eng (1979), who found that growth rate. slowed below about. 14*C. The Corbicula colony in the discharge of the Bay Shore Generating ~ Station had only one peak spawning season in the spring.- No fall peak was observed. In fact,-beginning in August,'no specimens of-shell width less'than or. equal to 6mm were collected. These preliminary results' indicate that-spawning probably ends in July-in .this region. This interpretation means that spawning has ceased when temperatures are about.25'C. This contradicts. the statement'of Gardner and coworkers-(1976):in which they indicate that the Corbicula spawning season begins-when the water temperature reaches approximately 16-17'C and' continues until the temperature falls below that1
level. This finding may demonstrate a a. elective adaptation on the part of Corbicula for coping with the rigors of the cold temperatures of this region. McMahon (1982) believes that with its introduction into the Great Lakes (Clarke, 1981), Corbicula have probably reached the extent of their northern distribution in North America. From a survival standpoint, this mid-summer cut-off in spawning may reflect the inability of the clam larvae produced after that time to reach a size sufficient to allow for over-winter survival. Consistent with our 1981 findings, there is no indication that Corbicula have spread beyond the confines of the plumes of the Acme or Bay Shore Generating stations. With the temperatures outside the thermal plumes of these two power plants remaining at 0*C for the entire months of January and February, no Corbicula would be expected to survive over-winter in other Lake Erie locations. Past investigations (Mattice, 1976) have found that the ultimate lower lethal temperature is about 2 C. We found no indication that Corbicula are established in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors wish to thank Dr. Henry van der Schalie for his guidance in this study. 9 9 1
'l l
Q REFERENCES Britton, J. C. and C. E. Murphy. 1977. "New Records and Ecological notes for Corbicula manilensis in Texas." The Nautilis, 91:20-23. Clarke, A. H. 1981. "Corbicula fluminea in Lake Erie". The Nautilis. 95:83-84. Petroit Edison 1981. " Detroit Edison Response to IE Bulletin 81-03, Flow . Blockage of Cooling Water to Safety Systems Components by Corbicula, Enrico Fermi- Atomic Power Plant Unit 2, April 10, 1981." Docket No. 50-341. Eng, L. L. 1979. " Population Dynamics of the Asiatic Clam, Corbicula fluminea (MGiler), in the Concrete-lined Delta-Mendota - Canal of Central Californii." In Proceedings, First International Corbicula Symposium, J. C. Britton editor, ~ pp. 39-68. Fraleigh, P. C., J. C. Burnham, G. H. Gronau, and T. L. Kovacik. 1979.
"Maumee Bay Environmental Quality Study 1977 Final Report."
Fuller, S. L. H. and C. E. Powell, Jr. 1973. " Range extensions of Corbicula manilensis (Philippi) in the Atlantic Drainage of the United States." The Nautilis. 87:59. O g j Gardner, J. A.,Jr., W. R. Woodall, Jr., A. A. Staats, Jr., and J. F. Napoli. 1976. "The invasion of the Asiatic Clam (Corbicula manilensis Philippi) in the Altamaha River, Georgia." The Nautilis. 90:117-125. Goss, L. B., J. M. Jackson, H. B. Flora, B. G. Isom, C. Gooch, S. A. Murray C. G. Burton and W. S. Bain. 1979. " Control studies on Corbicula for steam-electric generating plants." In Proceedings, First International Corbicula Symposium, J. C. Britton editor. pp. 140-151. 4 Harvey, R. S. 1981. " Recolonization of reactor cooling water system by the Asiatic clam Corbicula fluminea." .The Nautilis. 95:131-136. Ingram, W. M., L. Keup and C. Henderson. 1964. " Asiatic Clams at Parker, Arizona." The Nautilis. 77:121-125. Ingram, W. M. 1959. " Asiatic Class as Potential Pests in California Water Supplies." Jour. American Water Works Association. 51:363-370. Mattice, J. S. 1979. " Interactions of Corbicula sg. with Power Plants." In Proceedings, First International Corbicula Symposium, J. C. Britton, _ editor, pp. 120-139. s 3
McMahon, R. F. 1982. "The Occurrence and Spread of the Introduced Asiatic Freshwater Clam Corbicula fluminea (Muller), in North lh America: 1924-1982." 96:134-141. McMahon, R. F. 1977. "Shell size - Frequency Distributions of Corbicula manilensis Philippi from a Clam Fouled Steam Condenser." The Nautilis 91:54-59. Needham, J. G. and P. R. Needham. 1962. A Guide to the Study of Fresh Water Biology. Holden-Day, San Francisco. Scott-Wasilk, J. L., G. G. Downing, and J. S. Lietzow. 1982. " Evaluation of the Asiatic Clam, Corbicula fluminea, in the Western Basin of Lake Erie." Davis-Besse Unit No. 1 Annual Environ-mental Operating Report, January 1,1981 - December 31, 1981. Sickel, J. B. 1973. "A New Record of Corbicula maailensis (Philippi) in the Southern Atlantic Slope Region of Georgia." The Nautilis. 87:11-12. Sinclair, R. M. and B. G. Isom. 1963. "Further Studies on the Introduced Asiatic Clam (Corbicula) in Tennessee." Tennessee Stream Pollutica Control Board, Tennessee Department of Public Health. Trama, F. B. 1982. " Occurrence of the Asiatic Clam Corbicula fluminea in the Raritan River, New Jersey." The Nautilis. 96:6-8. lh United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1975. " Final Environmental Statement related to operation, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 proposed by Toledo Edison Company." NUREG-75/C97. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1981. " Flow Blockage of Cooling Water to Safety System Components by Corbicula sp. (asiatic Clam) and Mytilus sp. (Mussel)." Inspection and Enforcement Bulletin 81-03. Wapora, Inc. 1977a. 316(a) Demonstration, Acme Power Station, Toledo Edison Company. Wapora, Inc. 1977b. "316(a) Demonstration, Bay Shore Generating Station, Toledo Edison Company."
TAB SAMPLING RESULTS - 1982 Power No. of No. of Date Plant- Location Samples Equipment clams Temp. Substrate Dec. 28, 82 Bay Shore Discharge ~15 Needham 73 10*C muck / ash Nov. 30,.82 Bay Shore Discharge 10-15 Needham 114 9'c muck / ash Nov. 3, 82 Bay Shore Discharge 15 Needham 209 13*C muck / ash Oct. 1, 82 Bay Shore Discharge 18 Needham 130 18*C -- Sept. 9, 82 Eastlake Discharge 8-10 Needham 0 25*-27*C sand
' Sept. 9, 82 Eastlake Discharge 6 Ekman 0 25*-27*C sand Sept. 9, 82 Eastlake Y-between 20-30 Needham 0 23*-24*C sand intake & discharge
' Sept. 1, 82 ; Bay Shore Discharge 17 Needham 248 23*-25*C sand / silt Sept. 1, 82 Acme Discharge 7 Needham ~15 30*C rocky Aug. 16, 82 Davis-Besse Intake 11 Ekman 0 25*C muck / silt / clay Aug. 16, 82 Davis-Besse- Lake Erie shore 7 Needham 0 25*C sandy.
~Aug. 2, 82 . Bay Shore Discharge 6 Ekman 6 25*C muddy sand / silt Aug. 2, 82 Bay Shore Intake Channel 6 Ekman 0 23*C very clayey muck Aug. 2, 82 Acme Discharge 4 Ekman 0 26*C rocky Aug. 2, 82 Bay Shore Discharge --
Needham 118 25'C mud / silt / clay July 7, 82 Bay Shore Discharge 9 Ekman 16 24*C sandy / clay July 7, 82 . Bay Shore ' Discharge 30-50 Needham 144 24*C clay / sandy / ash
TABLE 1. SAMPLING RESULTS 1982 Power No. of No. of Date Plant Location Samples Equipment clams Temp. Substrate June 11, 82 Bay Shore Discharge 20 Ekman 6 19*-20 C rocky June 5, 82 Acme Discharge 20 Ekman 6 19*-20 C rocky June 5, 82 Acme Intake 8 Ekman 0 17*C loose sand / clay / muck Jit 5, 82 Bay Shore Intake 8 Ekman 0 18*C sand and clay O O O
l TABLE 2. MODAL'SKELL' WIDTHS (1982) (f l Julian Mode- Water Date Date (mm) Temperature
*C l
j June 11, 82 162 5 19 l l July 7, 82 188 9 24' Aug. 2, 82 214 11 25 Sept. 1, 82 244 14 23-25 Oct. 1, 82 274 14 18 - Nov. 3, 82 307 15 13 Nov. 30, 82 334 16 9 Dec. 28,_82 362 17 10 O DBP 4306B O
~
~ <
- = ,
Figure 1 l O l 7 11 JUNE 82 N = 67 T = 19 C 60 50 O 40 cc to 30 5 m z l 20 l 10 l
=O = LL L m- . .
- n. .
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 LENGTH [mm)
I Figure 1 (continued) O' 1 7 7 JULY 82 l N:144 l T = 24 C
- 60 50 0
40 l cc m 30 g l$zo 20 10
. ME__amt . .. . _ E .m .. m ~'
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 l LENGTH [mm)
Figure 1 (continued) O l l 70 2 AUGUST 82 ! N = 118 l l T: 25 C ; 60 I l 6 40 CC W 3o m 4 a 1 20 1 10 E O .. Em a EL _ _ 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 LENGTH [mm) l
l Figure 1 (continued)
.O 7
1 SEPTEMBER 82 ~ N = 248 T= 23-25 C 60 50 I ,. cc
$30 '
- s . .
z , 20 s
\ , v 10 t'
> i s
. 120 . .
5 10 15 ,/ 25- 30 , <35 , -j LENGTH [mm] . 4 p
Figure 1 (continued) O 5 1 7 1 OCTOBER 82 N:130 - T:18 C 60 50 0 40 W u.I g 30 k 4 m ; Z l 20 l l l 10 10 5
. Il 10 15 20 25 30 35 LENGTH [mm]
Figure 1 (continued) l i 1 L O l l. l l l 7 l 3 NOVEMBER 82 l' N=209 - j' T= 13 C ! 60 ? i
'~
l l l ! 50 ! 40-1 1 !Z l W
; g 30'
!I a Z 20 1 l 10 i
^
i ,
, u _-__ .. . .
i 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 , L ENGTH [mm) Figure 1 (continued) O 7c 30 NOVNs 82 N =114 ~ T=9 C - 60 l 50 0 40 cc 30 o z 20 10 o 5 sdl 10 15 I 20 25 30 35 LENGTH [mmt Figure 1 (continued) e
-- 7 28 DECEMBER 82
- ~ ~
N=73 T =10 C - 60 50 9 40 Z 30 - w k o Z 20 10i
" !! EE
~
. . e 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 LENGTH [mm]
I I 1 II
~
A-O s o a OF 2 i e r u g W
- 6 0
3 o 2 2 8 9 1 E T A D N A I L i 0 0 U a 2 J d i s# 6 oA-o ' o 1 5 0 5 O 1 1 QOE UdOETo L t y -
. ;* 4 -
CLEAR TECHNICAL REPORT NO.172 O ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL i 0F THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER
. STATION, UNIT 1 -
ON THE AQUATIC ECOLOGY OF LAKE ERIE 1973 - 1979 Prepared by Jeffrey M. Reutter and Charles E. Herdendorf Prepared for Toledo Edison C~cmpany Toledo, Chlo THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR LAKE ERIE AREA RESEARCH COLUMSUS, CHIO June 1960
.O PREFACE The Ohio State University's Center for Lake Erie Area Research has conducted an aquatic ecology monitoring program in Lake Erie in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station for the Toledo Edison-Company since April 1973. This effort has been supervised by Drs. Charles E. Herdendorf and Jeffrey M. Reutter. Dr. Herdendorf took responsibility for water quality analyses, and Dr. Reutter was responsible for biological analyses. ,
The following report provides an appraisal of the impacts of- the operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, on the aquatic environment of Lake Eric in the vicinity of the Station. The primary responsibility for the preparation of the various components of the report are designated below: Charles E. Herdendorf
- 1. Introduction
^
- 2. Station Description '
- 3. Aquatic Environment
- 4. Impact Appraisal
-- Water Quality Jeffrey M. Reutter
- 1. Executive Summary
- 2. Station Description
- 3. Impact Appraisal
-- Plankton Studies
-- Benthic Studies
-- Fisheries Population Studies
-- Ichthyoplankton
-- Fish Egg and Larvae Entrainment
-- Fish Impingement 0
i I
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF TABLES ........................ v LIST OF FIGURES ......................,. ix EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
. ..................... 1 INTRODUCTION .......................... 4 STATION DESCRIPTION ...................... 4 .
Station Location ................... 4 General Station Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Cooling Water Intake Design ............. 5 Intake Crib ................... 5 Intake Canal .................. 6 Intake Structure ................ 6 Water Use ...................... 7 Discharge System ................... 7 Chemical Discharge ............... 7-Thermal Discharge ................ 7 AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Habitat Description ................. 8 Locust Point and Western Lake Erie ....... 8 Intake Canal .................. 9 Hydrology ... ................... 10 Circulation Patterns .............. 10 Littoral Drift ................. 11 Thermal Conditions ............... 11 Water Quality .................. 11 IMPACT APPRAISAL ........................ 12 Water Quality ....................... 12 Procedures and Results ................ 12. Dissolved Oxygen .................12 Hydrogen-ions (pH) ................ 12 Transparency ................... 12 Turbidity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Suspended Solids ................. 13 Conductivity ................... 13 Dissolved Solids ................. 13 Calcium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Chloride ..................... 13 llll 11
1
-l d
L i i TABLE OF CONTENTS (CON'T) s PAGE Sulfate .................... 13 4 Sodium .................... 13 Magnesium ................... 13' Total Alkalinity ............... 14 L Nitrate .................... 14 Phosphorus ..........._....... 14 l Silica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 , 4 Biochemical Oxygen Demand ........... 14
- Temperature .................. 14 Appraisal ..................... 14 Plankton Studies .................... 15 -
P rocedu re s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 - Phytoplankton Results ............... 16 Diatoms .................... 16 Green Algae .................. 16 > Blue-Green Algae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Total Phytoplankton .............. 17 Zooplankton Resu!ts ................ 17 Total Zooplankton ............... 17 Rotifers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Copepods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Cladocerans .................. . 18 Appraisal ..................... 18 . Phytoplankton ................. 19 Zooplankton .................. 19 Benthic Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Results ...................... 20 Total Benthic Macroinvertebrates . . . . . . . . 20 Coelenterata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Annelida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Art hrop od a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 i Mollusca . . . . .-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Appraisal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Fisheries Population Studies .............. 22 Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-Alewife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 24 , Channel Catfish ................ 24
' Freshwater Drum ................ 24 Gizzard Shad . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . .
24 Spottail Shiner ................ 24 Walleye _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 White Bass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- 24 Yellow Perch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Appraisal . . . . . . . ..... . ... . . . . . . . . 25~ iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CON'T) PAGE Ichthyoplankton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Results ...................... 26 Appraisal ..................... 27 Fish Egg and Larvae Entrainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Res>11ts ...................... 28 Appraisal ..................... 29 Fish Impingement .................... 31 - Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Results ...................... 32 Appraisal ..................... 32 i LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 FIGURES ........................... 108 9 O' iv
LIST OF TABLES PAGE
- 1. Milestones for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 38
- 2. Calculated Intake Crib Velocities for Unit 1 for Various Pumping Rates ........................ 39
- 3. Monthly Pumping Rates and Calculated Velocites at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Water Intake Crib for 1978 ... 40
- 4. Fish Species Found in the Locust Point Area 1963 - 1979 ... 41
- 5. Procedures for Water Quality Determination . . . . . . . . . . 43
- 6. Dissolved Oxygen Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of ,
Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 -
- 7. Hydrogen-Ions (pH) Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
- 8. Transparency Data for Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
- 9. Turbidity Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures ........... .... 47
- 10. Suspended Solids Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
- 11. Conductivity Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lak.e Intake and Discharge Structures ....... ........ 49
- 12. Dissolved Solids Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
- 13. Calcium Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
- 14. Chloride Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake
, and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
- 15. Sulfate Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 -i
- 16. Sodium Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
- 17. Magnesium Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures .......... ..... 55 0 V
[ LIST OF TABLES (cont'd)
- 18. Total Alkalinity Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
- 19. Nitrate Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures ................... 57
- 20. Phosphorus Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
- 21. Silica Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures ..................... 59
- 22. Biochemical Oxygen Demand Data for Bottom Water in the '
Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . 60
- 23. Temperature Data for Bottom Water in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
- 24. Operational Water Quality Parameters Falling Outside of the Range of Pre-Operational Values at Station 13. . . . . . . . . 62
- 25. Mean Water Quality Values For Pre-Operational and Operational Periods in the Vicinity of Lake Intake and Discharge Structures .......................... 63 *
- 26. Plankton and Water Quality Sampling Dates . . . . . . . . . . . 64
- 27. Phytoplankton and Zooplankton Sampling Structure, 1973-1979 65
- 28. Pre-Operational and Operational Phytoplankton Data From Lake >
Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station 66
- 29. Pre-Operational and Operational Phytoplankton Data From the Vicinity of the Intake and Discharge Structures and a Control Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
- 30. Pre-Operational and Operational Zooplanktoa Data from the Locust Point Area i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
- 31. Pre-Operational and Operational Zooplankton Data in the Vicinity of the Intake and Discharge Structures and a Control Station ........................... 71
- 32. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Dates ........... 72
- 33. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Structure, 1973-1979 . .-. 73
- 34. Pre-Operational and Operational Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities From Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 vi
J LIST OF TABLES (cont'd) ; !- PAGE
- 35. Pre-Operational and Operational Benthic Macroinvertebrate
- Data From the Vicinity of the Intake and Discharge Structures
- and a Control Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
$ 36. Gill Net Sampling Dates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- 77 ! 37. Pre-Operational and Operational Gill Net Catches of Selected Species From Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Pcwer Station Discharge (Sta.13) . . . . . . . . . . . 78
- 38. Pre-Operational and Operational Gill Net Data From the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Intake, Discharge, and Two Control Stations ............. 81 ,
- 39. Ichthyoplankton Sampling Dates ................ 83- -
- 40. Ichthyoplankton Densities in the Vicinity of the Intake of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station - 1978 ........... 84
- 41. Ichthyoplankton Densities in the Vicinity of the Intake of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station - 1979 . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
- 42. Ichthyoplankton Entrainment at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station -1978 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
. 43. Ichthyoplankton Entrainment at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station - 1979 ................t....... 87 4
- 44. Traveling Screen Operation at the Davis-Besse Nuclear' Power 4
Station from 1 January to 31 December 1978 .......... 88
- 45. Traveling Screen Operation at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station from 1 January to December 1979 .. . . . . . . . . . . . 93
- 46. Fish Species Impinged at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station: 1 January through 31 December 1978 ......... 100
- 47. Fish Species Ir. pinged at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station: 1 January through 31 December 1979 ......... 101
~48. A Sumary of Monthly Fish Impingement at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Stations: 1 January through 31 December 1978 . . 102
, 49. A Summary of Monthly Fish Impingement at the Davis-Besse l Nuclear Power Stations: 1 January through 31 December 1979 . . 103
! 50. Estimated 1978 Sport and Comercial Fish Harvest from the Ohio i Waters of Lake Erie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 t
vii-
LIST OF TABLES (cont'd) PAGE
- 51. Comercial Fish Landings from the Ohio Waters of Lake Erie 1974-1979 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
- 52. Comercial Fish Landings from Lake Erie: 1975 - 1979 .... 106 M
9 viit 9
LIST OF FIGURES PAGE
- 1. Reactor Power Record for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1978)...................................... 109
- 2. Reactor Power Record for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1979)...................................._.. 110
- 3. Gross Electric Power Generation Record for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1978)........................ 111
- 4. Gross Electric Power Generation Record for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 (1979)......................... 112
- 5. Water Temperature Record for Intake and Discharge for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1978)............ 113
- 6. Water Temperature Record for Intake and Discharge for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1979)............ 114
- 7. Water Intake Conduit Flow Record for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1978)................................ 115
- 8. Water Intake Conduit Flow Record for the Davi3-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1979)................................ 116
~
- 9. Discharge Conduit Flow Record for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1978)................................ 117
- 10. Discharge Conduit Flow Record for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1979)................................ 118
- 11. Station Location Map........................................ 119
- 12. Water Intake and Discharge Structures....................... 120
- 13. Details of Water Intake Crib................................ 121
- 14. Water Intake Pumps and Screens Arrangement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
- 15. Reefs Near Locust Point..................................... 123
- 16. Sediment Distribution Map of Western' Lake Erie in the Vicinity of Locust Point.................................... 124
- 17. Biological Sampling Stations at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station..................................................... 125
- 18. Trends in Nean Montnly Temperature, Dissolved .0xygen, and Hydrogen Ion. Measurements for Lake Erie at' Locust Point for -
O the Period 1972-197.9........................................ 126 ix
LIST OF FIGURES (cont'd) PAGE
- 19. Trends in Mean Monthly Conductivity, Alkalinity and Turbidity Measurements for Lake Erie at Locust Point for the Period 19 7 2 - 19 7 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
- 20. Trends in Mean Monthly Transparency and Phosphorus Measurements for Laka Erie at Locust Point for the Period 19 7 2 - 1 9 7 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
- 21. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Dissolved Oxygen in Bottem Water at. Station Discharge (Sta. -
No. 13).................................................... 129
- 22. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data of ~
Hydrogen Ion Concentration (pH) in Bottom Water at Station ' Discharge (Sta. No. 13) .................................... 130
- 23. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Transparency (Secchi Disk) of Water at Station Dischar (Sta. 13).................................................ge .. 131
- 24. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Turbidity of Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13) 132
- 25. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Suspended Solids in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Sta.
Data for g No. 13).................................................... 133
- 26. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Conductivity of Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Sta. No.
13)......................................................... 134
- 27. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Dissolved Solids in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Sta.
No. 13).................................................... 135
- 28. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Calcium in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13).. 136
- 29. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Chloride in Bottom Water at. Station Discharge (Sta. No.13) . 137
- 30. Cnmparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data of Sulfate in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13).......... 138
- 31. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Sodium in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13).......... 139
- 32. Comparison of o re-Operational and Operational Data for Magnesium in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13) 140 X
O LIST CF FIGURES (cont'd) PAGE
- 33. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Total Alkalinity of . Bottom-Water at Station Discharge (Sta. No.
13)......................................................... 141
- 34. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational
- Data for Nitrate in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13).. 142
- 35. Comparison of Pre-Operational . and Operational Data for Phosphorus in Bottom Water at Station Discharge - (Sta. No.
13)......................................................... 143
- 36. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Silica in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13).......... 144 .
- 37. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data .of Biochemical Oxygen Demand of Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13)..................................... 145
- 38. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Temperature of Bottom Water at Station Dischar (Sta. No.
13).............................................ge ............ 146
- 39. Mean Monthly Power Generation for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1977-1978)........................... 147
- 40. Monthly Mean Bacillariophyceae, Chlorophyceae, and Myxophyceae Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point -1974. 146
- 41. Monthly Mean Bacillariophyceae, Chlorophyceae, and Myxophyceae Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point -1975. 149
- 42. Monthly Mean Bac111ariophyceae, Chlorophyceae, and Myxophyceae Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1976. 150
- 43. Monthly Mean Bacillariophyceae, Chlorophyceae, and
.Myxophyceae Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1977. 151
- 44. Monthly Mean Bacillariophyceae, Chlorophyceae, and Myxophyceae Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1978. 152.
- 45. Monthly Mean Bacillariophyceae, Chlorophyceae, and Myxophyceae Populations for Lake' Erie at Locust Point, 1979 153
- 46. Monthly Mean Phytoplankton Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1974-1979..................................... 154'
- 47. Comparison af Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Diatom Densities in Lake Erie .in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station....................................... 155
- 48. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Green-Algae Densities in Ldke Er.ie in the Vicinity of the Davis -
Besse Nuclear Power Station.................. . .............. 156-xi- i
LIST OF FIGURES (cont'd) PAGE
- 49. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Blue-green Algae Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station .......................... 157
- 50. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Phytoplankton Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station .......................... 158
- 51. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Phytoplankton Densities at the Station Intake (Sta. No. 8).. 159
- 52. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Phytoplankton Densities at the Station Discharge (Sta. No.
13)......................................................... 160 ,
- 53. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Phytoplankton Densities at a Control Station (Sta. No. 3)... 161
- 54. Monthly Mean Zooplankton Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1972 -1979........................................... 162
- 55. Monthly Mean Rotifer Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1972 -1979........................................... 163
- 56. Monthly Mean Copepod Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1972 -1979........................................... 164
- 57. Monthly Mean Cladoceran Populations for take Erie at Locust Point, 1972 -1979........................................... 165
- 58. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Zooplankton Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station........................... 166
- 59. Comparison of Pre-0perational and Operational Data for Zooplankton Rotifer Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station....................... 167
- 60. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Zooplankton Copepod Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station....................... 168
- 61. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Zooplankton Cladoceran Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.................... 169
- 62. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Zaoplankton Densities at the Station Intake (Sta. No. 8).... 170
- 63. Comparison of Pre-Operational Zooplankton Densities at the Station Discharge (Sta. No. 131 and Operational Data for 171 h
xii w
m LIST OF FIGURES'(cont'd) PAGE i
, 64.. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for l Zooplankton Densities at a Control Station (Sta. No. 3)..... 172
- 65. Monthly Mean Benthic Macroinvertebrate Populations for Lake
! Erie at Locust Point, 1972 - 1979'.......................... 173
- 66. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station .......... 174 J
- 67. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Benthic Coelenterate Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.................... 175 .
1 68. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for - Benthic Annelid Densities in Lake. Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station .......................... 176
- 69. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Benthic Arthropod Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station ...................... 177
- 70. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Benthic Mollusc Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station .......................... 178
- 71. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for 4
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities at the Station Intake (Sta. No. 8)............................................... 179
- 72. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities at the Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13) .............................................. 180
- 73. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Data for Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities at a Control Station (Sta. No. 3)............................................... 181
, J4. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Alewife Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power 5'tation Discharge (Station 13) ....................... 182
- 75. Comparison of. Pre-Operational and Operational Channel Catfish
! Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13)................ 183-
- 76. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Freshwater Drum Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse
;O "#cie r ae r st t4e o4 c" r9e (st t4ee 12). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 184
- 77. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational! Gizzard Shad Catches in Gill Nets-Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13)................ 185 i
xiii
i I LIST OF FIGURES (cont'd) h PAGE
- 78. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Spottail Shiner Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13)................ 186
- 79. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Walleye Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13)........................ 187
- 80. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational White Bass Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13)................ 188 .
- 81. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Yellow Perch '
Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13)................ 189
- 82. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Gill Net Results at the Station Intake (Sta. No. 8).................. 190 i
l 83. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Gill Net Results at the Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13).............. 191
- 84. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Gill Net Results at an In-Shore Control Station (Sta. No. 3)......... 192 8S. Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Gill Net Results at an Off-Shore Control Station (Sta. No. 26)....... 193 s
O xiv
O EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
The Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station is located in Ottawa County, Ohio, at Locust Point on the southwest shore of Lake Erie, about 21 miles east of Toledo. Unit 1 has a net electrical capacity of 906 MWe and a closed cycle coolin means of a natural g cooling' draft systemtower, which493 dissipates feet high heat and 415to the feet atmosphere in by diameter at its base. Make-up water for cooling purposes is drawn from Lake Erie from a submerged intake crib 3000 feet offshore through a buried eight-foot diameter conduit to a closed, but uncovered, intake canal. The canal is approximately 2950 feet long and terminates at the trash racks of the intake structure. Water is drawn through the intake crib and conduit by gravity. Design capacity for Unit 1 is 42,000 gpm with a resultant Cooling tower approach velocity through the crib ports of 0.25 ft/sec. blowdown is dfscharged at a point approximately 1200 feet offshore through a six-foot diameter buried conduit which terminates in a higg velocity nozzle to promote rapid mixing. The maximum allowable AT is 20 F. Studies of the aquatic environment in Lake Erie in the vicinity of the intake and discharge of this station were initiated in 1973. From 1973 to 1979, with few exceptions, the following parameters were sampled, during ice-free times, at approximately monthly intervals: water quality, phytoplankton, zooplankton, benthic macroinvertebrates (60-day intervals in 1977, 1978, and 1979), fish, and ichthyoplankton (approximately 10-day intervals during the spring spawning season). Ichthyoplankton entrainment studies and fish impingement studies were initiated after the plant began operating in August 1977. As is to be expected when a new unit first goes "on line", Unit 1 was operated sporadically from August 1977 through December 1979. It is the purpose of this report to appraise the impact of unit operation on the aquatic environment by comparing results obtained prior to unit operation with those obtained from September 1977 through December 1979. Water Quality. Eighteen water quality parameters were monitored at approximately monthly intervals beginning in April 1974. In general the quality of Lake Erie water in the vicinity of the Station's discharge The structure has remained relatively constant over the past seven years. concentrations of dissolved and suspended substances were slightly higher during the operational period, particularly: chloride, magnesium, silica, sulf ate, nitrate, turbidity, and suspended solids. Dissolved oxygen and phosphorus were slightly lower after operation. The magnitude of these differences was not great and appeared to be caused by the general condition of the nearshore ' waters of western Lake Erie rather than Unit operation. Phytoplankton. Quantitative estimates of phytoplankton densities at 6 Locust Point were obtained at apprwimately monthly intervals from 1974 through 1979. Operational phytoplankton densities were larger during the
I l spring and f all 'than pre-operational densities. This was a natural phenomenon occurring throughout the nearshore waters of western Lake Erie h and not caused by unit operation. Zooplankton. Quantitative estimates of zooplankton densities in Lake Erie at Locust Point were obtained at approximately monthly intervals frem 1973 through 1979. With the exception of cladoceran densities, which were very similar during the pre-operational and operational studies, zooplankton operational densities, though generally similar to pre-operational densities, were somewhat lower than the corresponding pre-operational monthly density. However, these differences appeared to. be due to natural phenomena occurring along the south shore of the Western Basin and not related to unit operation. Benthic Macroinvertebrates. Benthic macroinvertebrate densities in Lake Erie at Locust Point were observed at approximately 30-day intervals from 1973-1976 and 60-day intervals from 1977-1979. Operational densities were within the ranges established during the pre-operational study for every month except September. Differences were attributable to natural variation. Fish. Monthly gill net catches from Lake Erie near Locust Point from 1973-1TTwere used to evaluate the impact of unit operation. Fish populations for each of the eight major species at Locust Point, alewife, channel catfish, fre:ihwater drum, gizzard shad, spottail shiner, walleye, wnite oass, and yellow perch, and the density of all species combined showed little or no variation between pre-operational and operational results. Ichthycolankton. Ichthyoplankton densities from Lake Erie in the vicinity of the intake and discharge were monitored at approximately 10-day intervals from 1974 through 1979. Tremendous variability was observed from year to year. However, due to the similarity in densities observed at the intake and discharge and control stations, there is indication that the activities of the Power Station have not significantly altered these populations. Entrainment. Ichthyoplankton entrainment estimates were not developed until the spring of 1978 as entrainment is an operational phenomenon, and there were few, if any, ichthyoplankters in Lake Erie to be entrained during the first fall and winter of the operational period l (September 1977 - March 1978). During 1978 and 1979, the number of l ichthyoplankters entrained was insignificant compared to lake populations. Furthermore, the off-shore intake, where larvae densities are lower, and the low intake water volume due to the cooling . tower and closed cycle cooling system, result in a very low-level . impact on western Lake Erie fish populations. Impingement. Fish impingement at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station was estimated from measurements of approximately 24 hours taken l approximately 3 times per week from January 1,1978 to December 31, 1979. Goldfish was the species most commonly impinged, representing 49.9 percent (1978) and 78.6 percent (1979) of the total number of fish impinged. By number, the 6,607 fish impinged during 1978 were 0.04 percent of the Ohio 1978 sport fishing harvest, while the 4,385 fish impinged during 1979 were
0.03 percent of the Ohio 1978 sport fishing harvest. By weight, impingement was less than 0.001 percent (both years) of the Ohio 1978 sport O' fishing harvest. These figures become even less significant when one realizes .that the Ohio sport catch was only. 83.4 percent of the Ohio 1978 ccmmercial catch and only 15.9 percent of the 1978 ccmmercial catch from all of Lake Erie. Conclusion. Based upon the results obtained to date, there are indications that operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, has had no short-term deleterious effects on the Lake Erie ecosystem. l Therefore, it is the conclusion of this appraisal that the Station has not significantly altered the aquatic environment at Locust Point and that long-term deleterious impacts are unlikely. O l
O INTRODUCTION The Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, initiated commercial - operation on August 29, 1977 (Table 1). The purpose of this report is to provide an appraisal of the impacts of station operation on the aquatic environment of Lake Erie. A pre-operational aquatic ecology monitoring program at the Station was begun in 1973-1974 and continued through the construction period. The program consisted of monitoring 18 water quality parameters and biological populations, including plankton, benthos and fish. Normally samples were taken monthly during the ice-free seasons on Lake Erie. Once commercial operation was started, the monitoring program continued essentially unchanged, except for the addition of fish ' impingement /entrainment studies. This report will attempt to compare natural water quality / biological variability,-as measured during the pre-operational period, with values obtained during the operational period. The details of the monitoring program are found in Apoendix B_ to License NPF-3 " Environmental Technical Specifications". For the purposes of this report, the pre-operaticnal period is considered to be from 1973 or 1974 (depending on when monitoring for a particular parameter began) to August 31, 1977. The operational period considered is from September 1, 1977 to December 31, 1979. The Station's & operating history, including: 1) reactor power ' record, 2) electrical , W power record, 3) intake and discharge temperature records, 4) water pumping record, and 5) water discharge record are presented in Figures 1 to
- 10. It can be seen from these figures that during the period of operation being considered, average generation was approximately 33% of its potential capacity. This circumstance was largely due to several months of maintenance outage during the summer of 1978 and the Three-Mile Island Incident in 1979. Of the 28 operational months being considered in 1977, 1978, and 1979 water quality / biological sampling and mean unit output of greater than 453 MWe (50% capacity) coincided during six months.
STATI0'N DESCRIPTION Station Location The Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 is located in Ottawa County, Ohio, on the southwest shore of Lake Erie, about 21 miles east of Toledo. The954-acresiteislocatedinCarrollgownshipadjacenttothe mouth of the Toussaint River (ccordinates: 4135'57" N and 83o05'28" W).The site has 7,250 feet of Lake Erie frontage (Figure 11). This section of shoreline is flat and marshy with a maximum elevation only a few feet above the lake level (U.S. Atomic Energy Comission,1973).
1 i i s General Station Description ! Unit 1 is a nuclear-powered electric generating facility with a net i electrical capacity of 906 MWe. The facility utilizes a pressurized water ~ i; reactor (PWR) manufactured by Babcock and Wilcox Company. Most of the heat i from the turbine steam condenser is dissipated to the atmosphere by means 4 of natural-draft cooling tower, 493 feet high and 415 feet in diameter at its base. j Cooling Water Intake Design o . i The cooling water intake shown in Figure 12 is made up of three ! principle elements; the intake crib and conduit, intake canal, and intake ! structure. The Unit obtains its cooling water from Lake Erie through the 1 intake crib. Water entering the intake crib flows by gravity through the eight-foot diameter intake conduit buried beneath the lake bottom to the - l intake canal. The water then flows through the intake canal to the intake structure located at the west end of the intake canal forebay. From the j intake structure cooling water will be pumped to the various systems within j the unit. These three principle components are described in detail in the following sections. l Intake Crib. The intake crib for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power i Station is located in the Western Basin' of Lake Erie 'approximately 3000 ! feet offshore from the land area comonly known as Locust Point -in l j O approximately 11 feet of water at low water datum (568.6 ft. I.G.L.D.). The lake area off of Locust Point has been identified as an area of constant sand movement. The intake crib is a wooden cross shaped structure f rising 3'-10" above the lake bottom with intake screens (ports) located in I the ends of each of the four arms so that water enters the crib dcwnward ! through the ports. At the design maximum flow of 42,000 gpm, the intake f velocity has been calculated at 0.25 ft/sec (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory ! Comission,1975). Table 2 shows calculated intake velocities for various pumping rates. At the 42,000 gpm design flow rate, the velocity through 1 the eight-foot diameter conduit would be approximately 1.8 ft/sec. This design is similar to the one used at the Oregon, Ohio, and Port Clinton, 2 Ohio, municipal water intakes. Figure 13 shows the similarities of these
- intakes.
i Normal practice in intake design has been to locate intake cribs in-l 20 to.50 feet of water to avoid ice formation and the possibility of i blockage from ice jams. Inlet ports should be located four-to eight feet i off the bottom to minimize the uptake of sand, silt, .and other sediment. i However, adherance to,these practices has not always'been possible in the Western Basin of Lake -Erie because-of its shallowness. This-is the case with the design chosen for the Davis-Besse intake crib. The Davis-Besse ! intake crib is located in relatively shallow water,11 feet below. low water - datum,' and five feet below the lowest water level experienced at the site, ! 562.9 IGLD computed from the Toledo gauging station records corrected to the site. Therefore, the intake design must be such that the crib will not [ be exposed by low water and the intake ports have to be high enough off the bottom that sand and sediment are not -drawn into the crib. Locating the j (
- crib in deeper water was investigated but found not- to be a-I
,y . . , - . i.,--,,y,ny - 4 7 ,,, ., e ,-. , %, _ , , . . - - -,e m . - . ., . - -- =
viable alternative. Water depths of- 20 feet are not reached in the vicinity of the site until approximately four to.five miles from shore. The design finally chosen utilized a downward flow of water into the crib so that the intake ports could be located as far off the lake bottom as possible and still be under water during low lake level conditions. During the design of the intake crib, consideration was given to using velocity caps to change the direction of the intake flow from vertical to horizontal. However, this did not turn out to be feasible, since under low lake level conditions the upper portion of the velocity caps would have been above water. Also, since the velocity caps would protrude above the top of the intake crib, they would be subjected to winter ice conditions. These ice conditions, floating ice, and wind blown ' ice masses, would most likely damage the velocity caps annually and in doing so could cause structural damage to the intake crib itself.
~
Intake Canal. The intake canal is an open channel with earthen ' embankments to convey water from the intake conduit (bringing water from the intake crib) to the intake structure located immediately east of Unit No. 1. The intake canal is approximately 2950 feet long including the forebay and is separated from the lake by a sand beach and beachfront dike constructed of large limestone rip-rap. The canal is approximately 40 to
- 45 feet wide at the bottom, with 3
- 1 side slopes and a water depth of 13 to
- 14 feet at normal lake levels except in the vicinity of the intake l structure where it widens to form the forebay. At a flow rate of 42,000 gpm, the calculated velocity in the intake canal is approximately 0.11 ft/sec. The intake canal forebay is approximtely 800 feet long, 200 feet wide, at the bottom, with 3:1 side slopes and a water depth of 16 to 17 feet g at normal lake levels.
Intake Structure. The intake structure is shown in Figure 14 and is located at the western end of the intake canal forebay. All of the water which is used by the unit is pumped via the pumps located in the intake structure. The following pumps are located in the intake structure. Service Water Pumps - 2 operating, 1 standby l Cooling Tower Makeup Pump - 2 used as required
- Dilution Pump - 1 used as required I
Water Treatment Feedpumps - 1 operating, 1 standby Screen Backwash Pumps - 2 used as required These pumps are preceded by the trash racks and traveling screens. The trash racks are fixed screens, have 4-inch by 26-inch openings, and will be manually cleaned. The traveling screens have -inch square openings and will be automatically cleaned either on a pre-set time interval or ~ differential pressure across the screens. The . impinged material washed from these screens is sluiced through a trough to a holding basin with an overflow weir discharge to allow monitoring of this material. Collections of impinged fish were made by placing a basket within the trough itself. O
l l Water Use l ! The quantity of water used for cooling' at the D' avis-Besse Nuclear i Power Station, Unit No.1, has been minimized by using a closed cycle cooling water system and a natural draft cooling tower. The unit's water
- usage is also minimized by recycling the heated discharge from the service l
water system and using it as makeup to the closed cycle cooling water j system. This exceeds the requirement of 40 CFR 423.13, " Effluent limitation guidelines representing the degree of effluent reduction ,4 attainable by the application of- the best available technology i economically achievable" as well as 40 CFR 423.15, "New Source Performance , Standards" which would permit the heated discharge from the service water l system to be discharged, provided it meets chlorine limitations. Table 3 shows the unit's maximum, minimum, and average water usage for each month l during 1978 at the intake crib. . Discharge System All station effluents (except storm water drainage and certain L building drains which go to the Toussaint River) are mixed in the ! collection box prior to discharge into Lake Erie. Most of this mixture is
- cooling tower blowdown water and its associated dilution water which- is added so that the concentration of dissolved solids in the discharge will
! be less than twice the concentration in the lake. The collection ~ box has a j small' volume compared with the flow rates into it, and, therefore, the box
- merely serves to mix the various effluents. From the collection box, the i station discharge flows through a six-foot diameter buried pipe .to the j slot-type jet discharge structure (4.5 feet wide x 1.5 feet high) 1200 feet
!- offshore in Lake Erie (Figure 12). The elevation of the collection box 4 provides the necessary head for discharge through the pipe to the . lake under all predicted water level conditions. The slot-type discharge has an exit water velocity of about 6.5 ft/sec at the design maximum discharge , flow of 20,000 gpm. The nominal calculated water velocity of 3.6 ft/sec, " at the typical discharge rate of 11,000 gpm, promotes rapid entrainment and mixing with lake water. The lake bottom has been rip-rapped with rock for.- l about 200 feet in front of the slot discharge to minimize scouring of the t lake bottom and associated turbidity. 1 i Chemical Discharge. All of the me.keup water to the recirculating i system (cooling tower) is partially neutralized 'with sulfuric acid, ! releasing carbon dioxide, and thereby reducing the amount of scale formed 1 in the condenser. The -only other chemical added to the . circuits is elemental chlorine for defouling. The recirculating cooling water blowdown contains the major fraction of all chemicals discharged to Lake Erie. Due to the evaporation of water in the cooling tower, the i concentration of dissolved solids in the recirculating water is
- approximately double that in the lake. Because of the addition of. sulfuric acid and the loss of carbon dioxide, the sulfate ratio is slightly higher
~
and the carbonate ratio is slightly lower in discharge water while' ratios for various other chemicals are the same as in lake' water. Thermal Discharge.: .The discharge of cooling tower blowdown from the - station's submerged discharge structure generates a thermal plume in Lake
ij a b Erie. The plume is calculated to have a maximum surface area of; 0.7 acres (U.S.AtomicEnergyCommission,1973). The temp'erature difference between cooling tower blcwdown ' water and ambient lake water ranges as high as 30 F. Lake water is ustd to dilute the blowdown so that the effluent to the lake-never exceeds 200 F above ambient lake water temperature. { AQUATIC ENVIROMEin Habitat Description . . Locust Point and Western Lake Erie. Locust Point is a gently curving' headlano on the south shore of western _ Lake Erie, approximately ten miles Y ' west of Port Clinton, Ohio (Figure 15). The Davis-Besse Nuclear Power - Station is located on a 954-acre tract of land on this point. The terrain of the point is relatively flat and contains about 600 acres of marshland. 2 The Station hcs a 7,250-foot frontage on Lake Erie 'along the point. The 3 point has a relatively stable barrier beach which separates Navarre marsh .
-s from the lake. The shore is not tending to straighten itself or advance , f over the wetland which is usual for barrier ceaches with such a -
configuration. This may be in part due to the extensive rip-rap dike ni , placed on the berm of the beach during the record-high water levels of the I 1972 and 1973. The dike now protects the Station site, as wellJs the L wetland, fromtthe lake encroachment. 4 g
" ~
Hydrographic surveys show a very gentle slope of the lake bottom from - i the shore out for a distance of at least 4000 feet (!"gure 15). Two. sand bars typically li_e ir the nearshore zone, one at 120' feet offthore and the-
- other at 280 feet froi the' beach. The deeper area between,the beach and the first sand bar 'as a thin bottom layer of fluffy silt and shell
^
5 fragments over the sand. The inshore slope of the'firstytar contains an abundant population of naiad clams. The' sand bottom, generally medium- to fine-grained, extends to 800 feet offs'hore (5.0 feet water depth, IGLD, s
?
1955). At this point the bottom deepens by 0.5 feet and is composed of hard, glaciolacustrine clay which forms a 500 to 700-footaide strip around 3 the point. Lakeward the bottom again becomes san'dy arai the sand increases q in thickness in a lakeward direction. The lake reaches a depth of ten feet ; at a distance of 200 feet offshore and 12, feet at 4000 fe'et offshore. The 1 sand and gravel bottom, underlain by' hard' clay persists lakeward to the -j rocky reefs about three mi_les offshore (Figure 16). ] The offshore reefs consist of bedrock,and associated rock rubble and gravel. The tcpography of the reef tops rangesifrc:n rugged surfaces caused b i , by bedrock pinnacles and large angular bouldert, to smoothi slabs . of 1 horizontally bcdded rock. In places ths, exposed' bedrock has the appearance r of low stairs with steps dipping slightly to the east from the crest to the. b - fringe of the submerged reef. All'of the bedrock formations that form the 4 i reefs and shoals are c carbonate rocks which icontainwabundant solution' . cavities, in many cases up - to one or two :cm in diameter. tThe bedrock l
=
itself is comonly masked by rubble composed ofLboth? autochthonousAnd - glacial origin and ranging frcm small, pebbles to bosiders up to' five-feet [ in diameter. _ On the reefs, ist. lated patches -cf ' sand and gravel fil1~ ~ 3 vertical joint cracks and smal) depressions in the bedrock; at the fringes. ;;; of reefs, sand. and gravel beds or glacial till lap.over the rock. -During. r , quiet periods the rocks ' are : often covered by a inin t layer of fluff,. i
- organic-rich silt, which can be several millimeters' L th$ck (Herdendorf,' y ,; q ' - _
1970). , o , p , y - w
$ (' ,
(3 '
$4 [? ,
T
- 1 1
ll
. Lakeward of the reefs the depths increase rapidly to 24 feet. Here~
the bottom is composed of mud (semi-fluid silt and clay-sized particles) . and less than ten percent sand (Figure 16). j i The_ lack of permanent siltation on the bedrock and gravel reefs make i them the only suitable sites for " clean water" benthic organisms such as certain mayflies, caddisflies, isopeds, and amphipods. These organisms are important in the food web of many of the consnercial and' game fish
- species of western Lake Erie. The absence of these invertebrate animals on
- or in the adjacent mud bottoms limits fish feeding to the reefs and inshore areas.
i The reefs project above the bottom and they are generally areas of higher energy due to the force of waves and currents. These factors allow simulation of the environment found in the riffles of streams. Several i species of fish, particularly walleye and white bass, appear to have enjoyed success in Lake Erie because of the availability of this type of - j habitat. 1 j Because of the lack of shelter in the nearshore zone at Locust Point, j except the intake and discharge structures, the area does not appear to support a large resident fish population. Monthly fish collections in this area (gill net, shore seine, and trawl) show great variability in species composition and relative abundance which strongly suggest a transient fish i population. Results from 17 years of sampling at Locust Point ' indicate j that 51 different species of fish have been captured (Table 4),-but only
- ten species are of any real numerical or commecial significance. Alewife, i carp, gizzard shad, white bass, emerald shiner, spottail shiner, yellow.
} perch, channel catfish, freshwater drum, and walleye constitute over 97% } of the total number that were captured (Reutter and Herdendorf, 1976). ( i The general flat or gently sloping lake bottom in the nearshore zone
- (within one mile of the shore) of Locust Point is broken only_by the intake i and discharge structures and uneven clay _ fill along the route of the buried l pipelines. An ice barrier of rip-rap rock has been constructed on the lake side of the intake crib, and a scour prevention apron of'similar material
- 4
, has been placed on the bottom lakewaro of the discharge slot. In 1976, t -
it.thyoplankton sampling stations were established in the vicinity of the , , water intake discharge structure as .well as control stations at similar- - l ' distances offshore in an attempt to determine if. these structures were t inducing higher than normal fish ~ spawning rates for their position E
' offshore. The populations at these structures were within the normal-range observed at the control station, indicating -that the populations at the intake and discharge structures were not unusual for their position in the -
nearshore zone (Reutter and Herdendorf, 1976). l Intake Canal. In September 1974, the intake canal was poisoned to !
- ' eliminate resident fish prior to the operation of the Station. During
- periods of 1972 and 1973 the intake canal was open to Lake Erie, and fish were free to enter the canal through an opening at the beachfront. In 1974
- the canal was closed at the beach and the only water communication with the-
? X lake was via the 3000-foot-long, buried, intake pipe. Immediately prior to-the poisoning, 22 trawls yielded 411 fish of 18 species. Trawls taken in i the canal in October 1974, one month. after poisoning, yielded only one - 9 e
-,-- y _ . - -,2. , , . , . _,.m, s ._. + ~ . . _ , - . _ .
I I 1 l fish, an adult carp, indicating that the kill was essentially complete. l The benthic population was also destroyed in the process (Reutter and Herdendorf,1975). Later trawls, in summer 1975, yielded 420 individuals of 13 species indicating some fish were entering the crib and travelir.g via the pipeline to the intake canal. The most common species found in the canal were white crappie, bullhead, black crappie, carp, yellow perch, and sunfish. Trawls in the intake canal were not continued after 1975. However, there is evidence that white crappie, goldfish, and other species have l developed resident populations in the intake canal, and these populations represent a sizeable percentage of the fish impinged on the traveling screens. The size, age classes and relativs abundance of species impinged at the Station are markedly different than individuals captured with trawls and gill nets in the vicinity of the intake crib.
~
The intake canal is constructed of earthen walls and has a mud bottom I over hard clay. The steep-sided walls of the canal preclude the development of extensive aquatic vegetation. The entire surface of the canal is unshaded. Velocities in the canal during 1978, are calculated to have had a maximum, minimum, and mean velocity of 0.16, 0.02, and 0.06 feet /sec, respectively. Hydrolooy Circulation Patterns. Western Lake Erie is dominated by the large in-flow of the Detroit River with a mean flow of approximately 210,000 cfs. The mid-channel flow of this river penetrates deep into the Western Basin, g at times reaching the vicinity of Locust Point. The Maumee River, with an average ficw of 4,700 cfs, is the second largest stream flowing into the lake and carries 37 percent of the sediment loading to the basin, but accounts for less than three percent of the total water drainage to Lake Erie. Maumee River water enters the lake through Maumee Bay where it divides into a northern flow along the Michigan shore and an eastern flow along the Ohio shore toward Locust Point. The Toussaint River, with an average flow of only 76 cfs, is a minor contributor to circulation patterns in the vicinity of Locust Point. l East of the dominating effect of the Detroit River, the prevailing southwest winds produce a clockwise surface flow around the Bass Islands to the northeast of Locust Point. However, this surface flow is often altered by changes in the direction, intensity, and duration of the wind. Strong winds from any direction can drive the surface currents over most of the basin toward the windward shore (Herdendorf, 1975). Current maps of l ucstern Lake Erie in the vicinity of Locust Point for various wind conditions are presented by Herdendorf (1970). Bottom currents have essentially the same pattern as surface flows in that part of the basin influenced by the Detroit River. However, in other parts of the basin bottom currents are commonly the reverse of and compensate for strong, wind-driven, surface currents. Herdendorf and Braidech (1972) measured currents at 68 stations in the vici'11ty of Locust Point and the offshore reefs during a three-year study. The average recorded velocity for surface currents was 0.28 knots
I (0.48 feet /sec) and 0.15 knots (0.26 feet /sec) for bottom currents. These velocities are not capable of eroding bottom material, but are able to have transport been placedfine in sand, silt, clay,Velocities suspension. and fish eggs or larvae in excess once of 0.5 they(0.84 knots feet /sec) were reccrded on the reefs but not in the nearshore zone at Locust Point. The mean intake velocity for the Station is approximately half of the average bottom current velocity measured by Herdendorf and l Braidech(1972). I Littoral Drift. Locust Point is at a position of diverging littoral (alongshore) drifts of sand which ordinarily would result in the beach being starved of sand because of movement east and west away from the headlands which form the point. However, the shore is apparently maintained at near equilibrium by replenishment from an extensive sand and gravel deposit which lies north of a narrow strip of compact glaciolacustrine clay that fronts the point beyond the sandy nearshore zone. Transportation of this material from offshore to the beach can be - accomplished by at least three forces: 1) currents induced by wind action . of Detroit River flow; 2) wave action; and 3) ice shove. Most of the sand probably migrates shoreward by wave action and currents generated by northeast and northwest storms. Evidence for the shoreward movement of sand can be found in the position of bars before and after major storms. For example, fathometer profiles of the lake bottom at Locust Point before (13 June 1972) and after (28 June 1972) tro~pical storm Agnes revealed that two offshore bars migrated 20 to 25 feet shoreward as a result of wave attack from the northwest storm (Herdendorf and Hair, 1972). Thermal Conditions. Water teg eratures in western Lake Erie range from 32" F in the winter to about 75 in late summer. The Western Basin frequently freezes from shore to shore in December and the ice cover breaks up in March and April. A shallow epilimnion develops early during the spring, but because the basin is so shallow, wind action causes efficient vertical mixing and by June the water becomes vertically isothermal. Diurnal microthermoclines are common in the summer, but. prolonged periods of hot, calm weather can cause temporary thermal stratification, due to the heating of the surface water without the benefit of mixing. In 1953, such ; a situation resulted in severe oxygen depletion in the bottom water (Britt, ' 1955). Water Quality. Nutrient overenrichment is the most significant water quality problem in western Lake Erie. Locust Point, being within the nearshore zone, is also characterized by low transparency, high concentrations of dissolved solids and warmer water temperai:are when compared with offshore water quality studies at Locust Point in July 1972 (Figure 17). Over the past 8 years most parameters have shown typical seasonal trends with only small variations from year to year. Trends for 8 water quality parameters from July 1972 through November 1979 are shown on Figures 18,19, and 20. Temperature and dissolved oxygen shcw normal seasonal trends for each year with only minor variations from one year to the next or over the entire period. 00 appears to have undergone more depletion in 1976 and 1977 than in previous years or in 1978. Hydrogen-ion concentration (pH) and alkalinity remained fairly stable over the period. Transparency, turbidity, phosphorus, and conductivity have shown radical variations which are probably due to storms and dredging activities that
have disturbed the bottom sediments. Phosphorus levels were low in 1977,. 1978, and 1979 compared to earlier years. In general however, no significant deviations from the normal quality of the water in this part of western Lake Erie have been observed during the past seven years. IMPACT APPRAISAL Water Quality Procedures and Results Water quality measurements during the period April 1974 to November 1979 were used for the purposes of this appraisal. The results of the water quality monitoring program are contained in semi-annual reports (1974-1976) and annual reports (1977 - 1979) of the Toledo Edison Company ' to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The data used included Station No. 13 (500 feet east of the discharge structure) and Station No. 8 (adjacent to the water intake crib). Station No. 13 serves as the station most likely to be impacted, while Station No. 8 serves as a control station (Figure 17). Each station was visited once a month during the ice-free period of the year (normally April-November). Surface and bottom water samples were taken at each station and were analyzed in accordance with thc procedures listed in Table 5. Because the intake and discharge structures are located at or near the bottom, bottom samples were used for comparing pre-operational and operational conditions. Tables 6 to 23 summarize pre-operational and operational dgta for the 18 water quality parameters at the intake and discharge stations. These data are displayed graphically for the discharge station on Figures 21 to 38. The following discussion summarizes the comparison for each of the parameters. Dissolved Oxygen. During both the pre-operational and operational period 00 showed a typical trend of high values in the spring and' fall with low concentrations ' i the summer. Operational concentrations were considerably lower than the pre-operational range in April and November, but not during the critical summer months (Figure 21). Hydrocen-ions (pH). Throughout the pre-operational and operational period pH values remained relatively stable, never exceeding 9.0 or falling below 7.5. The operational values showed more variability than the nearly straight-line mean concentration for the pre-operational period (Figure 22). However, both periods had a mean pH of 8.3. Transparency. Both the pre-operational and operational measurements showed the lowest water clarity in the spring, the best transparency in the sumer, and intermediate clarity in the fall. In general, operational values were within the range of pre-operational values throughout the year (Figure 23). Turbidity. Being somewhat the reciprocal of transparency, the lowest readings occurred in the sumer, the highest in spring and intermediate values in the fall for the pre-operational period. Operational values showed a general decreasing trend throughout the year, with only a slight rise in the fall. However, values for May, June, and h
1 1 September well exceeded the pre-operational ranges for those months O (Figure 24). Suspended Solids. This. parameter, like turbidity showed a "U" shaped trend during the pre-operational period with sumer concentrations being the lowest. Like transparency and turbidity, high particulate material in the water during the spring and fall months of the operational period yielded readings in excess of the pre-operational ranges for these months (Figure 25). 1 Conductivity. This parameter is a measure of the ionized material in the water and it also shows high concentrations in the spring for both the l pre-operational and operational periods. Only conductivity values in l April for the operational period exceed the range for this month during the pre-operationalperiod(Figure 26).
~
Dissolved Solids. The concentrations of dissolved substances in the i water during pre-operational and- operational periods were relatively - similar, with the operational data falling within or nearly within the pre-operational range for each month. Operational concentrations were somewhat lower than pre-operational conditions for April and October, while September was slightly higher (Figure 27).
~ Calcium. This element, one of the most comon found in Lake Erie water, showed relatively consistent values during both the pre-operational and operational period. High concentrations typified the spring with considerably lower values in the summer and fall. Only in November did operational concentrations exceed the range of pre-operational data (Figure 28).
Chloride. Operational chloride conc.entrations were within the range of pre-operational concentrations during six of the eight months for which comparative data are available. The greatest discrepancy occurred in April and November. Pre-operational data show a progressive decrease in concentration throughout the year, while operational data indicate a more "U" shaped trend (Figure 29). Sulfate. Both pre-operational and operational sulfate data show relatively consistent concentrations throughout the year with somewhat higher values in the spring. Operational data were more erratic, with four months above the pre-operational range and one month below the rar.ge (Figure 30). Sodium. A trend similar to that of sulfate was noted for sodium. Operational data again showed greater variability with two months above and one month below the range for pre-operational data. April and November yielded the highest concentrations for the operational period, both beyond the pre-operational range (Figure 31). Magnesium. This parameter showed the 11 east agreement between
- pre-operational and operational data of any of those tested. Operational concentrations exceeded the range of pre-operational . data for all ~ months O except May. In April, the operational mean value was nearly double the pre-operational mean concentration (Figure 32).
k
Total Alkalinity. This parameter showed considerable variability in I both the pre-operational and operational data, with the highest values ! occurring in the spring and fall during the pre-operational period and in I the spring and summer during operation. April, July, August, and November l were periods when operational values exceeded pre-operational ranges, while May and June were months of relatively low operational alkalinity (Figure 33). Nitrate. Serving as a biological nutrient, this parameter fluctuates widely in response to plankton productivity. Concentrations during both the pre-operational and operational periods were highest in the spring but decreased in the summer as this material was utilized by algae. Fall concentrations increased as algal productivity declined. Concentrations during both periods were relatively comistent, with operational values being somewhat higher, particularly in June, August, andNovember(Figure 34). - Phosphorus. This parameter is also an important biological nutrient and, like nitrate, shows seasonal variations such as high spring and low summer concentrations. Pre-operational and operational data were relatively consistent throughout the year, except for May which showed a considerably higher mean concentration during the pre-operational period (Figure 35). Silica. As a necessary mater.ial for diatom cells, silica also under-goes seasonal changes in concentration. As the growing season progresses this material greatly declines in the water. Both pre-operational and operational data show the same seasonal trend. Operational concentrations exceeded the pre-operational ranges for May and November (Figure 36). Biochemical Oxygen Demand. 800 levels were relatively consistent throughout the year for both the pre-operational and operational periods. Values were highest in the spring and lowest in the fall. All of the operational concentrations fall within the range of pre-operational data, except for June (Figure 37). Temoerature. Both pre-operational and operational data show typical seasonal temperature trends for Lake Erie; and both data sets are relatively consistent. Most of the operational values fall within the range of pre-operational data (Figure 38). Aopraisal In general the quality of Lake Erie water in the vicinity of the Station's discharge structure has remained relatively constant over the past seven years (Figures 18,19, and 20). In comparing the 18 water quality parameters during the ice-free months for the pre-operational versus the operational period (Figures 21 to 38), it can be seen that there is a 67% agreement (operational data within pre-operational range) between the two data sets. This is a relatively good agreement (Figure 39). Table 24 summarizes this comparison and provides an indication of the degree of difference between the two periods. In general the
E concentrations of dissolved and suspended substances were higher during the operational period, particularly: magnesium, silica, nitrate, turbidity, and suspended solids. Dissolved oxygen was lower after operation. The magnitude of these differences was not great and seemed to be caused by the general condition of the nearshore waters of western Lake Erie rather than Station operation. For example, Table 17 shows that magnesium was not only high at the discharge (Sta. No. 13) but also high at the water intake (Sta. No. 8) which serves as a control station. Table 25 indicates the percent change in water quality at the lake intake (Station 8) and discharge (Station 13) from the pre-operational period through the operational period. Dissolved oxygen and phosphorus showed the largest decreases in concentration (7 and 35 percent, respectively), while sulfate, magnesium, 800, silica, chloride, turbidity, and suspended solids all had increases greater than 5%. In all cases where an increase in excess of 5% occurred at the discharge station, a similar ' increase was also observed at the control station. These observations ' further substantiate the conclusion that most of the changes are due to general lake conditions, and not localized changes resulting from Station operation. The decrease in phosphorus concentration is consistent with other nearshore measurements in western Lake Erie which indicate a decline in this substance as a result of pollution abatement programs. Based on the results of this study, short-term degradation of Lake Erie water quality can not be demonstrated as a result of Station operation. The stability of water quality in the vicinity of Locust Point is well-documented; long-term deleterious impacts resulting from station 3 operation are unlikely. Plankton Studies Procedures Plankton monitoring at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station has been completed approximately monthly during ice-free periods since 1973 (Table 26). The stations at which samples were collected each year are listed in Table 27 and shown on Figure 17. In 1973 only quantitative zooplankton samples were collected, while both quantitative zooplankton and phytoplankton samples were collected in all other years. The preservation techniques have been modified occasionally as new techniques to make specimen identification easier appeared in the literature. However, no modifications which would have quantitatively affected the results were made, and formalin was always the final preservative. Two vertical tows, bottom to surface, were collected at each station for phyto-plankton and zooplankton with a Wisconsin plankton net (12 cm mouth; 0.064 m mesh in 1973 and 1974 and 0.080 mm mesh from 1975-1979). ~Each sample was concentrated to 50 ml and preserved. The volume of water sampled was computed by multiplying the depth of the tow by the area of the net mouth. Three 1-ml aliquots were withdrawn from each 50-m1 sample and placed in counting cells.
I~ l Whole organism counts of the phytoplankton were made from 25 random Whipple Disk fields in each of the three 1-ml aliquots from each of the 2 samples. When filamentous forms numbered 100 or more in 10 Whipple fields, they were not counted in the remaining 15 fields. Identification was carried as far as practicable, usually to the genus or species level. All zooplankters within each of the three 1-ml aliquots from each of the 2 samples were counted by scanning the entire counting cell with a microscope. Identification was carried as far as practicable, usually to the genus or species level. Phytoplankton Results . The results of the phytoplankton monitoring program were presented in the semi-annual reports (1974-1976) andannualreports(1977-1979)of the Toledo Edison Company to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This report summarizes the findings presented in these earlier reports through , graphic presentations of monthly densities of the major phytoplankton components, Bacillariophyceae, Chlorophyceae, and Myxophyceae, encountered yearly from 1974-1979 (Figures 40 -45). Figure 46 presents the monthly estimates of the total phytoplankton density from 1974 through 1979.
. Table 28 and Figures 47 - 50 sumarize the above data in a different manner by combining all monthly density estimates from all years and all stations and comparing pre-operational means, minima, maxima, and standard deviations with operational results. Table 29 and Figures 51 - 53 use this same technique to compare the total phytoplankton densities observed at Station 8 (intake structure), Station 13 (plume area), and Station 3 (control station). A discussion of these comparisons follows.
Diatoms. Both pre-operational and operational densities were high during the spririg and fall, and low during the summer (Figure 47). Spring densities were highest. This is typical for western t.ake Erie and as one would expect since diatoms are cold-water forms. Operational densities observed during the spring and fall were larger than the corresponding pre-operational values. However, operatin al standard deviations overlapped the pre-operational standard deviations. Green Algae. Chlorophycean densities, in general, were much lower than diatom densities or blue-green algae densities during the pre-operational and the operational studies. Furthermore, these green algae s population densities are much less predictable seasonally than diatoms. Reutter (1976) has demonstrated that green algae densities parallel transparency closely and are opposite to turbidity and, therefore, are often controlled by factors such as the wind, which affects transparency by suspending bottom sediments through wave action. However, most of the monthly samples collected during the operational period fell within the range established during the pre-operational period, and for those which were outside the range (July, September, and November), the standard deviation of the operational period overlapped the standard deviation of the pre-operational period (Figure 48).
i l L Blue-Green Algae. Myxophycean populations during both the pre-operational and operational periods showed tendencies toward sudden, j large, mid-summer pulses (Figure 49). Operational densities were i ' generally larger than pre-operctional densities. However, with the exception of October and November, the coerttional standard deviations always overlapped the pre-operational scandard deviations. Total Phytoplankton. The total phytoplankton density, i.e., the sum total of the 3 major component groups previously discussed and several other minor classes, was higher during most of the operational study than , during the pre-operational study (Figure 50). However, with the exception
- of April and October, the standard deviations of the means observed during ,
l the operational study overlapped the standard deviations from the pre-operational study. Zooplankton Results
' i The results of the zooplankton monitoring program were presented in ;
the semi-annual reports (1974-1976) and annual reports (1973, 1977, 1978 and 1979) of the Toledo Edison Company to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission. This report sumarizes the findings presented in these earlier reports through graphic presentations of the monthly densities of the total zooplankton population and its major components, rotifers, i copepods, and cladocerans encountered yearly from 1972 -1979 (Figures 54 - 57). Table 30 and Figures 58 - 61 summarize the data in a different ma,nner by combining all monthly density estimates from all years and all stations and comparing pre-operational means, minima, maxima, and standard deviations with operational results. Table 31 and Figures 62 - 64 use this same technique to compare total zooplankton densities observed at Station '. 8 (intake structure), Station 13 (plume area), and Station 3 (control ~ station). A discussion of these comparisons follows. Total Zooplankton. The total zooplankton population density, i.e., a sum total of the major zooplankton groups (rotifers, copepods, and cladocerans) and any minor classes or orders, has usually exhibited two pulses, one in the late spring or early summer and a smaller pul';e in the . fall. This is true of both pre-operational and operational results, although operational densities were generally lower than pre-operational densities (Figure 58). Rotifers. Rotifer densities at Locust Point during the operational period were lower for every month than the mean value from the pre-operational period -for the same month (Figure '59). However, the operational. monthly mean was below the pre-operational monthly range only i during June and November, and the operational monthly mean was always less than two standard deviations from the pre-operational mean. Copepods. Copepod densities at Locust Point durin the pre-operational study generally exhibited spring pulses (Figure 60)g This was . i also.the case during the operational ~ study, except the pulse was somewhat o
. .. . . . . . _ _. ..~..-,._.-..._...~.:.-_...
1
. . . , . , . ~ . . _ , . , _ . _ , _ , , , . . - . . . _ .
smaller than those observed duritig the pre-operational study. As observed with the ratifers, operational monthly densities were never more than two standard deviations from the pre-operational mean (Figure 60). Cladocerans. Cladoceran densities at Locust Point during both the pre-operational and operational studies have exhibited spring (or early summer) and fall pulses (Figure 61). However, during the operational period the two pulses were less distinct. With the exception of August, none of the monthly operational densities were more than two :tandard deviations from the pre-operational mean. Aporaisal Prior to the appraisal of the effects of unit operation on the zooplankton and phytoplankton communities, some assistance in interpreting - these results is warranted. First, one should bear in mind that when ' sampling the same population eight months each year for seven years, and plotting data with monthly minima and maxima, as in this report, eight minima and eight maxima will be generated. That is, there will be seven values for each of the eight months, or one value for each month from each of the seven years. Each of the eight months will have a minimum value and a maximum value, and, since there are eight months, there will be a total of eight minimum values and eight maximum values (one of each for each month). If there is nothing unusual about the environmental conditions which existed during any of the seven years, then each year would have an equal chance (probability) of producing several monthly minimum or maximum values. Assuming each year does have an equal probability of producing these minima and maxima, and since there are eight monthly minimum values and .eight monthly maximum values, each year of the sevca years would produce 1.14 of the monthly minimum values and 1.14 of the monthly maximum values. This is pointed out to demonstrate that it is natural for any year to produce a population extreme (monthly minimum or maximum value). Consequently, it should not be automatically viewed as a unit produced effect if any operational variable is above or below the pre-operational range. Another point useful in the interpretation of these results involves the distance of the operational monthly mean from the pre-operational mean. A general " rule-of-thumb" is that when dealing with a normal distribution, the area within one standard deviation on either side of the l mean will contain approximately 66 percent of the values, two standard l deviations would contain approximately 95 percent of the values, and three
- standard deviations would contain approximately 99 percent of the values.
As a final aid in interpreting these results, population densities are presented from a control station (unaffected) to allow comparison with the discharge where the impact should be greatest. This allows a distinction to be made between unusual values caused by unit operation and unusual results which are typical of the entire lake due to an unusual set of climatic or biological conditions -- natural variation. Between September 1977 and the end of 1979, the operational period, O plankton samples were collected on 18 occasions. On five of these dates,
the station was operating at 90 percent capacity, 8 percent capacity, 100 percent capacity, 99 percent capacity, .and. 48 percent capacity, respectively. On the remaining 13 sampling dates the station was not i operating. I Phytoplankton. Reutter and Fletcher (1980) summarized the rt ,ults of phytoplankton sampling at Locust Point and concluded that " populations , observed at Locust Point during 1979 are similar to those of previous years and appear typical for those occurring in the nearshore waters of the Western Basin of Lake Erie." This report has taken the results compiled by Reutter and Fletcher a step farther by computing means, ranges, and standard deviations for the pre-operational period and by adding the results from the last portion of 1977 to those of 1978 and 1979 to summarize the operational period. Operational phytoplankton densities were somewhat larger than pre- . operationaldensities(Figure 50). This appears to be a general trend, as the operational values of the three major phytoplankton groups were never ~ below the pre-operational range and often above it. Due to the unusually harsh winters of 1978 and 1979, it is likely that these differences were caused by natural weather conditions. Figures 51 - 53 present phytoplankton densities at the station I intake (Station 8), discharge (Station 13), and a control station (Station 3). It would probably be safe to use the station intake as a control station, however, as an extra measure of caution Station 3, 3000 feet Y northwest of the discharge, was selected as a control. Using- is comparative technique, any difference between pre-operational and operational data observed at the discharge which was also observed-at the intake or Station 3 would obviously have been due simply to natural variation in population densities.- The only large differences between operational and pre-operat1onal data at the discharge were unusually high
- spring and fall population densities, and, since these were also observed at the intake and Station 3, they were obviously a natural phenomenon and not caused by unit operation.
. In conclusion, to date, operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, has not had a significant effect on Lake Erie phytoplankton densities.. ~
Zooplankton. Reutter and Fletcher (1980) sumarized the results of zooplankton sampling at Locust Point through 1979 and ' concluded that
" populations observed in 1979 should be considered typical for the south shore of the Western Basin of Lake Erie." - This report has taken the results compiled by Reutter and Fletcher a step farther by computing means, ranges, and standard deviations for the pre-operational period- and. by '
adding the results from the last portion of 1977 to those of.1978 and 1979 to'sumarize the operational period. Zooplankton operational ~ densities, though generally similar to pre-operational densities, were often somewhat lower than the corresponding. pre-operational monthly density (Figures 58 - 61). However, as with the phytoplankton, these-differences should not be interpreted as due to unit
-operation, for it appears that zooplankton densities even in unaffected
areas (control stations) were lower during the operational period (Figures 62-64). Consequently, these differences were obviously attributable to natural variation and not unit operation. The obvious conclusion is that to date, operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, has not had a significant effect on Lake Erie zooplankton densities. Benthic Studies Procedures Benthic macroinvertebrate densities in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station were monitored at approximately monthly intervals during ice-free periods (normally April through November) from - 1973 through 1976, and at invervals of approximately 60 days during the ice-free periods of 1977,1978, and 1979 (Table 32). The stations at which samples were collected each year are listed in Table 33 and shown on Figgre
- 17. Population densities were sampled with a Ponar dredge (Area =0.052 m ).
Three replicate grabs were collected at each station on each date from 1974 through 1979, whereas one sample was collected at each station on each date during 1973. Samples were sieved on the boat through a U.S. #40. soil sieve, preserved in 10% formalin, and returned to the laboratory for identification and enumeration. Individuals were identified as far as practicable (usually to genus; to soecie when possible). Results were reported as the number of organisms per m Results The results of the benthos monitoring program were presented in the semi-annual reports (1974 - 1976) andannualreports(1973,1977,1978,and 1979) of the Toledo Edison Company to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This report summarizes the findings presented in these earlier reports through a graphic presentation of the monthly benthic macroinvertebrate densities encountered yearly from 1972 - 1979 (Figure 65). Table 34 and Figures 66 - 70 sumarize the data in a different manner by combining all monthly density estimates for the major benthic groups from all years and all stations during the pre-operational study, and comparing these pre-operational monthly means, minima, maxima, and standard deviations to operational results. Table 35 and Figures 71 - 73 i use this same technique to compare total benthic macroinvertebrate l densities observed at Station 8 (intake structure), Station 13 (discharge l area), and Station 3 (control station). A discussion of these comparisons l follows. l Total Benthic Macroinvertebrates. The population densities of all l benthic macroinvertebrates, i.e., the sum total of the major benthic groups (Coelenterata, Annelida, Arthropoda, and Mollusca), were generally the highest in the late summer and fall during the pre-operational study. During the operational study the highest densities occurred slightly earlier in the sumer and fall (Figure 66). Operational densities were
very close to the pre-operational mean during -every month except September, when they were slightly lower than the pre-operational minimum. Coelenterata. . Pre-operational coelenterate population densities generally produced peaks in the spring and fall . (Figure 67). During the operational study only -a fall peak was observed. However, operational density estimates were always within one standard deviation of the pre-operational mean. Annelida. Benthic annelid densities during both the pre-operational and operational studies showed peaks in late summer ~or.early fall (Figure 68). However, all monthly operational results were .w ithin the pre-operational range or within_ one standard deviation of the pre-operational mean, except May and Septemoer, when the operational densities were slightly lower. Arthropoda. Both pre-operational and operational benthic arthropod- - densities peaked during the summer and fall (Figure 69). Operational . densities were above the pre-operational maxima during May, June, and July, and below the minimum during October. Mollusca. Benthic mollusc densities were extremely low (five was maximum during the seven-year study period) and variable, and, consequently, pre-operational / operational differences are difficult to detect (Figure 70). However, nothing unusual was observed during the operational period. Appraisal Initially it should be pointed out, as discussed in the plankton appraisal (see page 18), that operational densities which fall outside the ' pre-operational range may be due to natural variation and not related to unit operation. To allow comparisons of ambient densities with densities at the unit discharge, population - densities have been presented - from Station 3, a control station located . 3000 ft northwest of the unit discharge structure, the same distance from shore as the discharge and at approximately the same water depth. These comparisons allow one to more: accurately assess the causes of. observed differences - natural' variation or unit operation. t During what is defined as the operational period, samples were collected on ten occasions. On these ten occasions,' the unit was operating at 98 percent on one occasion,100 ~ percent on another, 99 percent on another, and not operating on the remaining seven dates. While this is very critical to water quality and plankton results, it is somewhat less important when observing benthic communities. Benthic communities are much less mobile than plankton or fish, and, therefore, are generally considered to~ be good pollution indicators, even of~~intermittant-pollutants or environmental changes. The rationale is that even if t'1e - unit were not operating - on the sampling - date, a . large' portion of tne community sampled would have . been present when the unit was operat'ng.
This is not true of plankters, and fish are capable of leaving when unfavorable conditions exist and then returning quickly when the conditions are improved. Reutter (1980a) sumarized the results of benthic macroinvertebrate sampling at Locust Point through 1979 and concluded that " populations found at Locust Point during 1979 must be considered typical for those of the nearshore waters of the Western Basin of Lake Erie . . . no significant environmental changes due to unit operation were observed." This report has taken the results compiled by Reutter a step farther by computing means, ranges, and standard deviations for the pre-operational period and by adding the results from the last portion of 1977 to those from 1978 and 1979 to summarize the operational period. Benthic macroinvertebrate densities observed during the operational study were within the limits established during the pre-operational study . on all but one occasion. A review of Figures 71 - 73 shows that variability in population densities was widespread and not related to unit operation. Operational densities observed at the discharge (Figure 72) more closely resembled pre-operational densities than did those observed at the intake (Figure 71) or Station 3 (Figure 73), which were designed to be the control stations. Results at Station 3, which is well away from the intake and discharge and where no construction has ever occurred, are graphic examples of the discussion at the beginning of this appraisal section, showing that natural variability can produce values far from the pre-operational densities. Furthermore, this type of variability is to be , expected in the Locust Point vicinity, a shallow wave-swept zone with shifting substrate. In conclusion, to date, operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, has not had a significant effect on Lake Erie benthic macroinvertebrate densities. Fisheries Pooulation Studies Procedures Fish populations in Lake Erie at Locust Point in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station were monitored at approximately monthly intervals during ice-free periods (normally April - November) from 1973 through 1979. Fish were collected by three sampling techniques, experimental gill nets, shore seines, and trawls. Experimental gill nets (125 feet long, consisting of five 25-ft contiguous panels of h, 3/4,1, lh, and 2-inch bar mesh) were set parallel to the intake pipeline at Station 8 (intake) and parallel to the discharge pipeline at Station 13 (discharge or plume area) from 1973 through 1979 (Table 36). During 1977,1978, and 1979, nets were also placed at Stations 3 and 26 to serve as controls (Figure 17). Each net was fished at the lake bottom for approximately 24 hours. Results were reported as catch per unit . effort (CPE), where one unit of effort was equal to one 24-hour set with one net.
1 l l .
. Shore seining was conducted at Stations 23, 24, and 25 with a 100-ft t bag seine ( -inch bar mesh). The seine was stretched perpendicular to the shoreline until the shore brail was at the water's edge. The far brail was then dragged through a 900 arc back to shore. Two hauls were made at each station in opposite directions.
Four 5-minute bottom tows with a 16-ft trawl (1/8-inch mesh bag) were conducted on a transect between Stations 8 (intake) and 13 (plume area) at a speed of 3 - 4 knots. Starting in 1977, tows were also made on a transect between Stations 3 and 26 for comparative purposes. All fish captured by each technique were identified, enumerated, et al.,' 1970). All results weighed, and measured were keypunched and stored(Trautman,1957; on magnetic tape at Bailey,7he Ohio State University Computer Center. Results The results of the fisheries population monitoring program are contained in the semi-annual reports (1974 - 1976) and the annual reports (1973,1977,1978, and 1979) of the Toledo Edison Company to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. These reports have shown gill netting to be the superior sampling technique for measuring the impact of unit operation for several reasons: 1 1. gill nets can be set right at the point of impact, are relatively unbiased" sampling devices, and collect adequate sample sizes (quantities of fish);
- 2. shore seines- sample mainly young-of-the-year fish and, consequently, are subject to sudden pulses following~ spawning;
- 3. shore seines sample at locations over 1000 feet from the point of discharge;
- 4. trawls have been shown to collect too few fish.
Consequently, although the results of shore seining and trawling have greatly increased our ability to interpret yearly results, gill' nets have proven to be the most effective assessment tool. and, therefore, these results and discussions will pertain mainly to this gear type. Fifty-one fish species have been collected at Locust Point since 1963 (Table 4). However, the fish comunity at Locust. Point has. consistently been dominated by 'seven species: alewife, emerald shiner, freshwater drum, gizzard - shad, spottail shiner,- wnite' bass, and yellow . perch. These seven species generally constitute well over 90 percent of the annual catch by the sampling program.- The monthly mean, minimum, maximum, and standard deviation of the number of each of these species, except emerald shiner, collected in the gill net set at the discharge have been presented in Table 37 and Figures 74 - 81. Emerald shiners are seldom i collected in gill nets of these mesh sizes, so they were not included in
'Ox' the tabulations. However, due to ' their economic .importance, channel
catfish and walleye were added to the list. Table 38 and Figures 82 - 85 summarize the gill net results by presenting pre-operational means, minima, maxima, and standard deviations and comparing them to operational h results at Stations 8 (intake),13 (discharge or plume area), 3 and 26 (controls). Alewife. Alewife densities in the vicinity of the unit discharge during both the operational and pre-operational periods were generally highest during the late summer and early fall (Figure 74). The maximum pre-operational catch was 322, while 136 was the maximum catch during the operational period (Table 37). Although operational catches were generally lower than pre-operational catches, they were always within the pre-operational range. Channel Catfish. Channel catfish catches during both the pre- , operational and operational studies were greatest during the sumer (Figure 75). They were seldom a significant component of the catch, as 18 was the maximum pre-operational catch and 6 was the maximum operational catch (Table 37). The pre-operational and operational catches were quite similar, and all operational means were within the pre-operational range. Freshwater Drum. During both the pre-operational and operational l studies, freshwater drum were most abundant during the summer (Figure 76). The maximum catch during the pre-operational study was 50, while 75 was the maximum operational catch (Table 37). With the exception of June, which was higher, all operational catches were within the range established during the pre-operational study. Gizzard Shad. Gizzard shad densities during both the
- pre-operational and operational studies were always greatest during the late summer and fall (Figure 77). The maximum pre-operational catch was 184, while 291 was the maximum operational catch (Table 37). The monthly pre-operational and operational mean catches were generally quite similar, and all but one of the operational means were within the pre-operational range (Figure 77).
Spottail Shiner. Spottail shiners were always most abundant during the month of May (Figure 78). In fact, with the exception of April and June, the minimum catch in May was greater than the maximum catch of any of the other months during the pre-operational period. The operational catch was within the range established during the pre-operational period during all months but September. l Walleye. Walleye catches during both the pre-operational and operational studies were greatest during the summer (Figure 79). This species was never a significant portion of the catch, as 15 was the maximum l prior to plant operation and 8 was the maximum afterwards (Table 37). With the exception of August, when the operational catch was above the range of pre-operational catches, all catches after the unit began operation were within the range of catches prior to unit operation. White Bass. White bass were generally most abundant during the sumer (Figure 80 and Table 37). The magnitude of the pre-operational and h
operational catches were very similar, but the pre-operational peak 4 occurred in August whereas the operational peak occurred in June. With the i exception of June and. July, when the operational catch was above the pre-
- operational mean, all operational values were within the range established i during the pre-operational study.
Yellow Perch. Yellow perch generally occurred in similar numbers from month to month during the pre-operational period with a slight increase in the early fall, followed by a decrease to low densities in i , November (Figure 81). Operational densities were of similar magnitude during all months but August when they were higher than the pre-operational mean but very close to the pre-operational maximum for September. . Appraisal In the appraisals of the phytoplankton, zooplankton, and benthos sections, it was shown that extreme values, i.e., either maxima or minima, - in addition to being potentially due to unit operation, will occur by chance alone, due to natural variation. Furthermore, the magnitude of the standard deviation gives one a good indication of the magnitude of natural variation to be expected. i 5 The above statements are hardly necessary when evaluating the impact of unit operation on the fishery populations in the vicinity of the Davis-l Besse Nuclear Power Station, for there was little or no variation out of I the pre-operational range durin major species (Figures 74 - 81)g the operational On the period 17 sampling forduring dates the eightthe O operational period, the unit was operating at above 90 percent capacity on j four dates,15.0 percent capacity on another, and not operating on the
- remaining twelve dates.
j Another way to measure impact and an approach which allows us to
- include all species (not just the major eight) is to compare catches at the l discharge (Station 13) and those at the intake (Station 8) with two control stations (Figures 82 - 85 and Table 38). This method shows that the only i
operational catches at the intake and discharge which were outside the pre- ! operational range occurred during November (Figures 82 and 83). Both of j these catches were above pre-operational data which is an indication that l it was either a lake-wide occurrance, or a case of fish being attracted to the rip-rap material which was placed around these structures to prevent bottom scouring and ice damage. However, since an identical - November increase occurred at the control stations (Figures 84 and 85), natural variation, not unit operation, should be considered the cause. In conclusion, to date, operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, has not had a significant effect on Lake Erie fish populations at Locust Point. Ichthyoplankton Procedures Ichthyoplankton was sampled at Locust Point in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station from 1974 through 1979 with a 0.75-meter
. _ _ .. ~ _ . _ . -
diameter oceanographic plankton net (No.00, 0.75 mm mesh). Each sample consisted of a 5-minute circular tow at 3 to 4 knots. collected at the surface and bottom of each station. Samples were h Sampling was conducted at the following stations during the following years: 1974, Stations 8 ar.d 12; 1975, Stations 8, 12, and Toussaint Reef (Figure 15); 1976, Stations 3, 8, 13, 26, 28, 29, and Toussaint Reef; 1977, 1978 and 1979, Stations 3, 8, 13, 29, and Toussaint Reef. Toussaint Reef was used for comparisons since the Ohio Division of Wildlife considers it a spawning location. Each sample was preserved in 5 percent formalin and. returned to the laboratory for sorting and analysis. Samples were generally collected at approximately 10-day intervals from April through August. Sampling was terminated at the end of August to add a margin of safety to the USEPA (Grosse Ile Office) sampling program for the Western Basin of Lake Erie which terminated each year in July (Table 39). . From 1974 to 1976, a single sample was collected at each depth of - each station, and results were reported as the number of individuals per 5-minute tow. In 1977,1978 and 1979, duplicate samples were collected at the surface and bottom of each station, and the net was equipped with a calibrated General Oceanics flowme'or to pilow presentation of the results as the number of individuals per 100 m of water. All specimens were identified and enumerated using the works of Fish (1932), Norden (1961a and b), and Nelson and Cole (1975). Results The results of the ichthyoplankton analyses have been thoroughly described in the semi-annual reports (1974 - 1976) and annual reports (1977,1978, and 1979) of '.he Toledo Edison Company to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory unit effort Commission. vs. no./100 m Sincg)the reporting during of results the course changed of the study,(catch direct per comparisons of results from 1977, 1978, and 1979 with those of the early pre-operational years, 1974 - 1976, are not possible. However, comparisons of the relative portions of the total density constituted by each species are possible. Ichthyoplankton populations varied greatly from 1974 - 1979. Emerald shiners constituted 81 percent of the 1974 larvae,1 percent of the 1975 larvae, 60 percent of the 1976 larvae, 3 percent of the 1977 larvae, 14 percent of the 1978 larvae, and 3 percent of the 1979 larvae. Yellow perch constituted 5 percent of the 1974 larvae, 70 percent of the 1975 larvae, 4 percent of the 1976 larvae, 26 percent of the 1977 larvae, 2 percent of the 1978 larvae, and 11 percent of the 1979 larvae. Gizzard shad appear to have increased significantly, reaching 34 parcent of the 1976 larvae, 56 percent of the 1977 larvae, 69 percent of the 1978 larvae, and 82 percent of the 1979 larvae. It is felt that the above described variability is largely due to the fact that schooling populations are being sampled. Consequently, when the net is drawn tnrough a school the density appears quite high. This is also quite dependent on the seasonal frequency of sampling. For example, if the weather allows more frequent spring sampling but prohibits sumer sampling, then spring species such as perch and walleye appear relatively more abundant. i =
Nineteen seventy-eight was the second year that walleye constituted a significant portion of the catch. However, as noted in 1977, adult populations throughout the Western Basin are increasing greatly (Scholl, 1978). These walleye larvae contributed to the 53 percent 3increase 37.0/100 m ) to 1978 observed (mean densityin= larval 56.6/100densitief).from m 1977 (mean density =However, gizzard shad of this incre e as their mean densities increased from 20.7/100 m in 1977 to 38.9/100 m in 1978. Yellow pefeh densities decreased significantly from 9.5/100 m in 1977 to 1.2/100 m in 1978. This decrease is similar to that observed by the Ohio Division of Wildlife for the adult population (Scholl,1979). The 1979 ichthyoplankton density (q6.79/100 m3 ) was 18 percent Although greater than the 1978 density (56.6/100 walleye densities decreased from 6.1/100 m mj)to 0.15/100(Reutter,19f9).m , the loss wag more than offset by ye110w perch densities which increased from 1.2/100 m . 3 in1978to7.46fl00m in 1979 and gizzard 3 in shad densities 1979. It appears which that increased walleye from 38.9/100 m in 1978 to 54.64/100 m and yellow perch densities will fluctuate yearly, however, a definite increasing trend is emerging for gizzard shad densities. In 1976, control stations (3 and 29) were established on either side of the intake (Station 3)/ discharge complex (Station 13) to determine if unusually large fish larvae populations were occurring due to possible spawning in the rip-rap material around these structures. This does not appear to be occurring to any significant degree as Station 13 (plume area) exhibited densities similar to Station 3 (control), and Station 8 (intake) exhibited the lowest densities. These lower densities observed at Station 8 are probably due to the fact that this station is the farthest from shore and in the deepest water.
- Aporaisal Ichthyoplankton at Locust Point in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, was sampled for two major reasons: 1) to determine if unit operation had a significant effect on densities in the area; and 2)to provide the ichthyoplankton densities to be used for the entrainment estimates. The first goal of the program is reasonable, and Reutter (1980b) stated, "due to the similarity between test and control stations, there is no indication that the activities of the plant have significantly altered these populations." To date, this assessment is true. However, on the 20 sampling dates during the operational study, the unit was operating at over 90 percent capacity on 3 dates, 40 percent capacity on another, 39 percent capacity on another one, 29 percent capacity on another, and not operating on the remaining 14.
The second reason for sampling ichthyoplankton is no longer valid as these results will not be used for entrainment estimates. Reutter and Cooper (1978) demonstrated that night samples at Locust Point produced density estimates 13.1 times greater than day estimates. Consequently, a
)
i i night ichthyoplankton sampling program was initiated, the results of which were to be used to estimate entrainment losses at the unit. Fish Egg and Larvae Entrainment Procedures Fish egg and larvae (ichthyoplankton) entrainment at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station was computed by multiplying the ichthyoplankton concentration observed at Station 8 (intake) by the intake volume. Ichthyoplankton densities were determined at approximately 10-day intervals from April - August of 1978 and 1979 from four 3-minute, oblique (bottom to surface) tows at 3 - 4 knots made at night on each date (Tables 10 and 41) with a 0.75 meter diameter heavy-duty oceanographic plankton net (No. 00, 0.75 mm mesh) equipped with a calibrated General Oceanics flowmeter. Oblique tows were selected as this is the technique required at ' intakes on Lake Erie by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Night sampling is also required by these agencies to minimize net avoidance by larvae and to more accurately assess populations of species which may cling to the bottom during daylight. Samples were preserved in 57. formalin and returned to the laboratory for sorting and analysis. All specimens were identified and enumerated using the works of Fish (1932), Norden (1961a and b), and Nelson and Cole (1975). Densities 3 were presented as number of ichthyoplankters per 100 m of water. From the above estimates it was possible to determine an approximate period of occyrrence for each species and a mean density during that period. For example, during 1978 walleye were not found on April 30 or on June 7 or later (Table 40). They were present in samples from May 11 and May 21. Therefore, the period of occurrence was estimated to have been from May 6 (the midpoint between April 30 and May 11) to May 30 (the midpoint between May 21 and June 7) (Table 42). The mean pensity of walleye during this period was estimated go have been 41.6/100 m , computed from the concentration gf 79.2/100 m observed on May 11 and the concentratjonof4.0/100m observed on May 21. It was this concentration, 41.6/100 m , which was multiplied by the volume of water drawn through the plant from May 6 to May 30. The same procedure was used in 1979 (Table 43). The daily intake volume was computed by multiplying the daily discharge volume by 1.3. The daily intake volumes were then added for all days , within the period of occurrence of the species in question to determine the l total intake volume during the period. All specimens were vouchered and i all data were keypunched and stored at The Ohio State University's Center l for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio. I Results l No pre-operational comparisons can be made since entrainment is l associated with unit operation. Furthermore, since the operational period began in September 1977 (after the spawning season), no entrainment of fish and eggs occurred until 1978.
4 29 - i Ichthyoplankton densities observed at Station 8 (intake) during 1978 indicated that ichthyoplankters were entrained at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Pcwer Station from May 6 to August 17 (Table 40). May 6 was selected as the 4 first day since it is midway between April 30 and May 11. August 17 was selected as the last day because larvae were present in night samples on August 11 (Table 40) but were absent from day samples at Station 8 on August 23 and later. During g978 the mean larvae density from all night samples at Station f 8 (47.5/100 m ) was 49 percent greater th the mean density from all day i samples collected at Station 8 (31.9/100 m ). Gizzard shad constituted 69 ' percent of the night ichthyoplankton population, followed by walleye at 22 - percent, and emerald shiners at 5 percent (Table 40). Based on the above results (Table 40), it is estimated that 6,311,371 larvae and 44,278 eggs were entrained at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1978 (Table 42). Of this total, gizzard shad constituted 76
- percent, walleye 15 percent, and emerald shiners 5 percent. 5 Ichthyoplankton densities observed at Station 8 (intake) during 1979 indicated that iethyoplankters were entrained at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station from 26 April to 9 August (Table 41). April 26 was selected as the first day because several walleye were . collected on the first sampling date (1 May) and 26 April is half of one sampling interval (10 days)aheadofthisfirstcollection. It should also be noted that in 1978 no ichthyoplankters were collected prior to 11 May. August 9 was selected O as the last day since it is midway between 3 August, the last sampling date on which larvae were present, and 15 August, a sampling date on which no ichthyoplankters were collected.
During 1939 the mean larvae density from all night samples at Station . 8 (142.97/100 samples collectedmat) Station was 2.9 times greater 8 (36.7/100 m thy).theshad Gizzard mean density50 constituted from all day percent of the night ichthyoplankton population, followed by emerald shiners at 32 percent, yellow perch at 8 percent, freshwater drum at 5
; percent, and smelt at 4 percent (Table 41).
Based on the results in Table 41, it is estimated that 20,620,799 larvae and 101,405 eggs were entrained at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1979 (Table 43). Of this total, gizzard shad constituted 49 percent, emerald shiners 33 percent, yellow perch 8 percent, freshwater drum 5 percent, and rainbow smelt 4 percent. Appraisal Ichthyoplankton entrainment at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1978 and 1979 was typical for.an intake on the south shore of the-o Western Basin of Lake Erie -- it was strongly dominated by gizzard shad. t As explained in the ichthypplankton section of this report, gizzard shad are on the increase and, consequently, it would'not be surprising if.they p represented an even greater portion of the entrainment in future years. Q Walleye and perch ~pepulations appear to be . fluctuating.
.obviously be entrained at this station. However, the number could vary They will greatly from year to year.
l
+- -- v - - , . , . ew =e,,--,w.-,E--,
One way to put entrainment losses into perspective is to look at fecundity. Based on an average of 300,000 eggs / female gizzard shad (Hartley and Herdendorf,1977), the 4,796,964 larvae entrained during 1978 could have been produced by 16 females; based on an average of 331,000 eggs / female walleye (Hartley and Herdendorf,1977), the 916,738 larvae entrained during 1978 could have been produced by 3 females; a~1 based on 44,000 eggs / female yellow perch (Hartley and Herdendorf,1977) the 35,259 larvae entrained during 1978 could have been produced by 1 female. In actuality, the above estimates of the number of females required to produce the entrained larvae are quite low since they do not take mortality from eggs to larvae into account. If we assume 99 percent mortality from eggs to larvae to be safe (90 percent is probably more reasonable) then the entrained larvae could have been produced by 1,600 gizzard shad, 300 walleyes, and 100 perch. These values are less than 0.1 percent of the number of perch and walleye captured by Ohio sport fishermen in 1978 (Scholl,1979). Furthermore, if one looks at the worst case, the value for the uppar 95 percent confidence limit and assumes 99 percent mortality from eggs to larvae, the losses of perch and walleye larvae are still less than ' O.25 percent of the number lost due to harvesting by Ohio sport fishermen. Another way to determine the impact of entrainment losses is to estimate the number of adults the entrained larvae might have produced had they lived. This technique requires some knowledge of the mort'ality between larval stages and between year classes. Patterson (1976) has developed such estimates for yellow perch, and, since it is in the same family, the estimates will also be used here for walleye. Several assumptions,are involved. I. All entrained larvae are killed. . II. All larvae lost by entrainment are in their late larval stage. This provides a conservative or high estimate because it does not account for early larval mortality which may range from 83-96 percent (Patterson, 1976). III. Yellow perch become vulnerable to comercial capture, and reach sexual maturity at age class III. IV. A one percent survival rate from late larvae to age III adults is assumed. Again, this is conservative since survival rates l from: late larvae to YOY = 4 to 17 percent; YOY to age class I = 12 to 33 percent; age class I to age class II = 38 percent; age class II to age class III = 38 percent (Patterson,1976, and Brazo, et al., 1975). This trend translates to a survivorship ranging from 0.1 percent to one percent over the period from the late larval stage to age class III. Based on the above assumptions, in 1978 the 916, 738 entrained walleye larvae might have produced 917-9,167 age class III adults and the
------------__--_--_--------__a
4 35,259 entrained yellow perch larvae might have produced 35-353 age class i O III adults. In 1979, - the 41,648 entrained walleye larvae might have produced 42 - 416 age class III adults and the 1,595,066 entrained yellow . perch larvae might have produced 1,595 -15,951 age class III adults. l l The author feels little weight should be placed on the above impact assessments since they are based on the. number of entrained larvae which can vary greatly from year to year depending on the success of the hatch which in turn is dependent- upon the size of the brood stock and weather conditions during spawning and incubation. In the case of Davis-Besse, the off-shore intake where larvae densities are lower and the low volume intake
- (1978 mean = 21,389 gpm) due to the cooling tower and closed cycle cooling system will always result in a very low-level impact on Western Basin fish populations.
Fish Impingement Procedures As was the case with entrainment, impingement is an operational phenomenon and, consequently, pre-operational comparisons are impossible. - Furthermore, since estimates are available for only a small portion of 1977 (Reutter,1978), and since impingement should be viewed for an entire year to allow for seasonal interpretations, only the 1978 and 1979 results will O De discussed. 2 Between January 1 and December 31, 1978 the traveling screens at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station were operated 221 times, while between January 1 and December 31, 1979 the screens were operated 272 times. The date, time, and duration of each screen operation were recorded and keypunched, even when the impinged fish were not collected (Tables 44 and 45). Collections of impinged fish were made by Toledo Edison personnel during 144 of the 221 screen operations during 1978 and on 134 of the 272 screen operations in 1979 by placing a screen having the same mesh size as the traveling screens (k-inch bar mesh) in the sluiceway through which the backwashed material passed. Fish collected in this manner were placed in plastic bags', labeled with the date and time of screen operation, and frozen. The samples were picked up by personnel of The Ohio. State University's Center for Lake Erie ~ Area Research (CLEAR)' weekly. _ All specimens, or a representative number thereof, were also weighed and measured. In addition to the: information pertinent to traveling screen . operation, the total number and total weight of each species and the length and weight of each individual fish were also keypunched. All.these data were stored on magnetic tape at The Ohio State University for use with the Statistical Analysis System: SAS (Barr et al., ,1976) on an AMDAHL 370 computer. Since-the time and duration of every screen operation was known, it-
~
was possible to determine' the number of ~ hours represented by. each' collection. From this a rate, fish impinged / hour, was developed and used , to. estimate impingement on days when samples were not collected. _ _ - = , - ,
. ~ _ _ _ . , , . _ . ,,
O Results A total of 6,607 fish representing 20 species was impinged on the traveling screens at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station from January 1 through December 31, 1978 (Table 46). Goldfish was the dominant species impinged representing 49.9 percent of the total. Only 6 other species represented more than 1 percent of the total: yellow perch, 23.9 percent; emerald shiner,15.0 percent; gizzard shad, 5.9 percent; black crappie, 1.2 percent; freshwater drum, 1.2 percent; and rainbow smelt, 1.0 percent. A total of 4,385 fish representing 19 species was impinged on the traveling screens at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station from January 1 through December 31, 1979 (Table 47). Goldfish was the dominant species , impinged representing 78.6 percent of the tatal. Only 4 other species , represented more than 1 percent of the total: yellow perch, 6.5 percent; - emerald shiner, 4.9 percent; gizzard shad, 3.7 percent; and freshwater drum, 2.6 percent. Impingement was also computed on a monthly basis (Tables 48 and 49). Most of the impingement during 1978 occurred during April (43.5 percent) and December (35.3 percent). Of the 2,875 fish estimated to have been impinged during April, 834 (29.0 percent) were emerald shiners, 799 (27.8 percent) were goldfish, and 1,098(38.2 percent)wereyellowperch. Of the 2,330 fish estimated to have been impinged during December, 1,870 (80.3 percent) were goldfish and 360 (15.5 percent) were gizzard shad. Most of the im percent) and April (pingement during Of 17.2 percent). 1979 theoccurred during 2,429 fish January estimated to(55.4 have been impinged during January, 2,218 (91.3 percent) were goldfish,103. (4.2 percent) were freshwater drum, and 80 (1.8 percent) were gizzard shad. Of the 753 fish estimated to have been impinged in April, 333 (44.2 percent) were goldfish, 200(26.6 percent) were yellow perch, and 184(24.4 percent) were emerald shiners. Aopraisal With the exception of the blackside darter and the bluntnose minnow, all species impinged at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station have been captured within the past 17 years at Locust Point (Table 4). However, both the blackside darter and bluntnose minnow have been reported from the island area of Lake Erie and most of the tributaries, including the Toussaint River and Turtle Creek near Locust Point (Trautman, 1957). With the exception of goldfisn, black and brown bullheads, and black and white crappies, the impinged fish occurred in relative numbers which were not unusual for populations in Lake Erie at Locust Point. These five species occurred in relative proportions well above that of the open lake. This indicates probable use of the intake canal as a permanent residence for these species. Furthermore, due to the small sizes of these fish (they g were young-of-the-year) and results from previous trawling efforts
(Reutter and Herdendorf,1975), it appears that these species are also O- spawning within the intake canal and, consequently, these losses should not be considered as a negative impact on the lake populations of these species. I Impingement losses at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1978 and 1979 were extremely low even when compared to other plants on the Western Basin with lower generating capacities (Reutter et al.,1978). Tables 50 - 52 present sport and commercial fish landings from the Ohio waters of Lake Erie and commercial landings from all of Lake Erie. Table 50 presents only 1978 results because 1979 sport fishing harvest estimates , are not available for all species. However, they would probably have been higher than 1978 because commercial fishing harvests increased by 13 percent from 1978 to 1979, and because the sport harvest of walleye increased from 1,652,000 in 1978 to 3,351,000 in 1979 (Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 1980). Although the fish impinged at Davis-Besse were , primarily YOY (mean length, 74 nun and 71 mm in -1978 and 1979)- and, consequently, much more abundant than the adults taken by commercial and sport fishermen, the total number impinged (including gizzard shad and goldfish which are not taken by sport fishermen) was only 0.04 percent . (1978) and 0.03 percent (1979) of the number harvested by Ohio sport l fishermen in 1978. This figure becomes even less significant when one realizes that the Ohio sport catch was only 83.4 percent cf the Ohio 1978 commercial catch and only 15.9 percent of the 1978 commercial catch from all of Lake Erie (Tables 50 - 52). The above comparisons make it obvious that impingement losses at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station have an insignificant effect on Lake Erie fish stocks and further justification of this is unnecessary.' However, it shoul'dbe noted that although by number impingement losses were 0.04 percent (1978) and 0.03 percent (1979) of the Ohio 1978 sport fishing . harvest, by weight impingement was less than 0.001 (1978 and 1979) percent of the Ohio sport harvest.- Furthermore, based on the estimates of Patterson (1976) (see Entrainment Section) the impingement of 1,582 young-
- of-the-year yellow perch (1978), a species which is very important to sport and consercial fishermen, might result in the loss of only 28 - 75 adults which is from 0.0002 to 0.0007 percent of the number captured by Ohio sport fishermen in 1978, while the impingement of 285 young-of-the-year perch in 1979 might result in the loss of 5-16 adults, which is from 0.00004 to 0.0001 percent of the total number of perch captured by Ohio sport fishermen in 1978. It should also be noted that no walleye were impinged.
! The obvious conclusion is that impingement losses at the Davis-Besse ' Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, have an insignificant effect on Western ! Basin fish stocks. Furthermore, although the plant did not operate at full capacity during much of these years, the circulating pumps were operated, ' and consequently, impingement estimates are based on the entire 2-year period and not just dates of generator operation. l l0 l
,i m ,.,~_._,
,, ,.m, . . , , , , . _ . . ,. __ , ., ..,.__._..-,.s~..
O LITERATURE CITED American Public Health Association. 1975. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 13th ed. APHA, New York. 847 p. American Society for Testing and Materials. 1973. Annual book of ASTM standards, part 23, water; atmospheric analysis. ASTM, Philadelphia. 1108 p. Bailey, R.M., J.E. Fitch, E.S. Herald, E.A. Lachner, C.C. Lindsey, R.C. Robins, and W.B. Scott. 1970. A list of common and scientific names - of fishes from the United States and Canada. Third ed. Amer. Fish. - Soc. Spec. Pub. No. 6. 150 p. Barr, J., J.H. Goodnight, J.P. Sall, and J.T. Helwig. 1976._ A user's guide to SAS 76. SAS Institute, Inc., Raleigh, N.C. 329 pp. Brazo, D.C., P.I. Tack, and C.R. Liston. 1975. Age, growth, and fecundity of yellow perch, Perca flavescens, in Lake Michigan near Ludington, Michigan. Proc. Am. Fisn. Soc. 104:727. Britt, N.W. 1955. New methods of collecting bottom fauna from shoals or rubble bottoms of lakes and streams. Ecology 36(3):524-525. - Fish, M.P. 1932. Contributions to the early life histories of 62 species of fishes from Lake Erie and its tributary waters. Bur. Fish. Bull. Wash. D.C. 47:293-398. Hartley, S.M. and C.E. Herdendorf. 1977. Spawning ecology of Lake Erie fishes. The Ohio State Univ., Columbus, Ohio. CLEAR Tech. Rept. No. 62. 10 pp. Herdendorf, C.E. 1970. Limnological investigations of the spawning reefs and adjacent areas of western Lake Erie with special attention to their physical characteristics. Dissertation. The Ohio State University. 203 pp. Herdendorf, C.E. 1975. Shoreline changes of Lakes Erie and Ontario. Bull. Buffalo Soc. Nat. Sci. 25(3):43-76. Herdendorf, C.E. and L.L. Braidech. 1972. Physical characteristics of the reef area of western Lake Erie. Ohio Dept. Nat. Res., Div. Geological Survey Rept. Invest. 82. 90 pp. Herdendorf, C.E. and E.M. Hair. 1972. Aquatic biology of Lake Erie in the vicinity of Locust Point, Ohio. The Ohio State Univ., Columbus, Ohio. CLEAR Tech. Rept. No. 23. 30 pp. g l ____ _____ ____________________-___ - _ _ _ D
4 LITERATURE CITED (cont'd)- Muth, K.M. 1980. Commercial fish production from Lake Erie, 1979. USFWS Special Report for Annual Meeting Lake Erie. Comittee Great Lakes Fishing Commission Ann Arbor, Michigan. March 18-19, 1980. 22 p. Nelson, D.D. and R.A. Cole. 1975. The distribution and abundance of larval fishes along the western shore of Lake Erie at Monroe, 4 Michigan. Michigan State Univ., Inst. Water Res., Tech. Rept. - No. 32.4. 66 p. . Norden, C.R. 1961a. A key to larval fishes from Lake Erie. Univ. of - ! Southwestern Louisiana Lafayette. 4 p . -- i Norden, C.R. 1961b. The identification of larval perch, Perca flavescens, and walleye, Stizostedion y2 vitreum. Copeia 1961:282-288. Ohio Department of Natural Resources. 1980. Status of Ohio's Lake Erie . Fisheries. Ohio Division of Wildlife Publication. 18 p. Patterson, R.L. 1976. Analysis of losses in standing crop and fishery yields of yellow perch in the western basin of Lake Erie due to
' entrainment and impingement mortality at the Detroit Edison Monroe Power Plant, large Lakes Research Station. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Grosse Ile, Mich.
Reutter, J.M. 1976. Environmental evaluation of a nuclear power plant on O Lake Erie: Predicted aquatic impacts. Ph.D. Dissertation. The Ohio State University. Columbus, Ohio. 242 pp. 4 l Reutter, J.M. 1978. Fish impingement at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1977. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. CLEAR Tech. Rept. No. 83. 10 pp. Reutter, J.M. 1979. Ichthyoplankton studies from Lake Erie near the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1978. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio CLEAR Tech. Rept. No. 108. 9 pp. Reutter, J.M. 1980a. Benthic macroinvertebrate populations in Lake Erie near the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1979. -The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. CLEAR Tech. Rept. No.' 161. 8 pp. l Reutter, J.M. 1980b. Ichthyoplankton studies from Lake Erie near the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power - Station during' 1979.. The Ohio oState University, Columbus, Ohio. CLEAR Tech. Rept. No. 163. 14 p. Reutter, J.M. and C.L. Cooper. 1978. Comparison of ichthyoplankton densities in day and night samples from Locust Point, Lake Erie. Ohio J. Sci. 78 (Supplement):6(Abstract).
- Reutter, J.M. and J.W. Fletcher. 1980. Phytoplankton and . zooplankton densities from Lake Erie near the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station O during 1979. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. CLEAR Tech.
Rept. No. 160. 27 pp.
~
y LITERATURE CITED (cont'd) Reutter, J.M. and C.E. Herdendorf. 1975. Pre-Operational aquatic ecology monitoring program for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit I. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Progress Rept. July 1 - Dec. 31, 1974. Toledo Edison Co. 123 pp. , Reutter, J.M. and C.E. Herdendorf. 1976. Pre-Operational aquatic ecology monitoring program for the Davis-8 esse Nuclear Power Station, Unit I. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Progress Rept. July 1 - Dec. 31, 1975. Toledo Edison Cc. 156 pp. Reutter, J.M., C.E. Herdendorf, and G.W. Sturm. 1978. Impingement and entrainment studies at the Acme Power Station, Toledo Edison Company 316(b) program, Task II. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. CLEAR Tech. Rept. No. 78a. 161 pp. . Scholl, R.R. 1978. Status of Ohio's Lake Erie. fisheries: January 1978. Ohio Dept. Nat. Res. Div. of Wildlife. 20 pp. Scholl, R.L. 1979. Status of Ohio's Lake Erie fisheries: January 1979. Ohio Dept. Nat. Res. Div. of Wildlife. 18 pp. Trautman, M.B. 1957. The Fishes of Ohio. The'0hio State Univ. Press, Columbus, Ohio. 683 pp. U.S. Atomic Energy Comission. 1973. Final e:Eironmental statement . related to contruction of Davis-Besse nuclear power station. U.S.N.R.C. Directorate of Licensing, Wash., D.C. Docket No. 50-346. 270 pp. U.S. Environmental Protection Ager.cy. 1974. Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes. EPA Analytical Control Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio 125 pp. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission. 1975. Final environmental statement related to operation of Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1. U.S.N.R.C., Wash., D.C. Docket No. 50-346. 134 pp. Welch, P.W. 1948. Limnological Methods. McGraw-Hill, New York. 381 p. O b--
..p a
37 - j ,
. 4 t
l
\
l r i TABLES - 1 t l I f I I i, i 1
- l 1
1 w ,- - - - . + g- - - - -n,. y-- r-r , w---,-w., .w-+-.,,ee-w--e. - =,~e-
TABLE 1 h MILESTONES FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 1 Date Event February 1968 Public announcement of project August 1, 1969 File PSAR with AEC May 1, 1970 Site preparation begun March 24, 1971 Construction permit issued . December 7, 1972 Reactor vessel arrived on site by barge - December 8, 1972 Operating license application (FSAR) filed with AEC March 9, 1973 FSAR docketed (.No. 50-346) June 15, 1973 Initiated aquatic ecology monitoring program December 8, 1975 Begin fuel receipt at station August 29, 1977 Commence operation
. O 9
s - O TABLE 2 6 CALCULATED It4TAKE CRIB VELOCITIES FOR UflIT 1 FOR VARIOUS PUMPIl1G RATES s Pumping Rate Intake Velocity (gpm) (mgd) (ft/sec) 0 0 0.00 5,000 7.2 0.03 - 10,000 14.4 0.06 15,000 21.6 0.09 20,000 28.8 0.12 h 25,000 36.0 0.15 [ 30,000 43.2 0.18 35,000 50.4 0.21 40,000 57.6 24 5 45,000 64.8 0.27 50,000 72.0 0.30 55,000 79.2 0.33 60,000 86.4 0.36 g 65,000 93.6 0.39 ( 70,000 100.8 0.42 { 75,000 108.0 0.45 { 80,000 80,000 115.2 0.48 122.4 0.51
- 00,000 95,000 129.6 0.54 136.8 0.57 7- 100,000 144.0 0.60 F
I-E I e m.
TABLE 3 MONTl!LY PUMPING RATES AND CALCULATED VELOCITIES AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATI0ft WATER INTAKE CRIB FOR 1978 Maximum Minimum ! !!can Total Pumping Velocity Pumping Velocity Pumping Velocity Millions Month Rate Rate Rate of (mgd) (ft/sec) (mgri) (ft/sec) (mgd) (ft/sec) gallons January 34.6 0.14 23.4 0.10 29.6 0.12 918.8 February 40.0 0.17 21.5 0.09 , 32.0 0.13 895.4 March 52.4 0.22 22.1 0.09 34.2 0.14 1059.9 l April 56.2 0.23 23.0 0.10 38.1 0.16 1142.7 [ i May 44.3 0.18 21.5 0.09 25.4 0.11 785.9 7 June 23.0 0.10 14.7 0.06 21.3 0.09 639.6
)
July 43J 0.18 21.5 0.09 33.4 0.14 1035.7 August 53.8 0.22 10.4 0.05 38.9 0.16 1205.0 September 107.5 0.45 49.8 0.21 73.5 0.31 2203.5 October 64.6 0.27 36.1 0.15 55.6 0.23 1724.8 November 69.3 0.29 41.7 0.17 55.3 0.23 1657.5 0.35 25.7 0.11 43.3 0.18 1341.6 December }83.5
- Annual 107.5 0.45 10.4 0.05 40.0 0.17 13268.8 O 9 e
TABLE . 4_ . 1 SPECIES FOUND IN THE LOCUST POINT AREA 1963 - 1979 b h - h h h b h SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME Amiidae
* *
- Amia calva bowfin Atherinidae
* * * *
- Labidesthes sicculus brook silverside Catostomidae
* * * *
- Carpiodes cyprinus_ quillback
* * * * * * *
- Catostomus commersoni white sucker
- Minytrema melanops spotted sucker
- Moxostoma erythrurum golden redhorse
*
- Moxostoma macrolepidotun shorthead redhorse
- Ictiebus cyprinellus bigmouth buffalo
- Hypentelium nigricans northern hogsucker Centrarchidae I
i I Ambloplites rupestris Lepomis cyanellus rockbass green sunfish
*
- L. gibbosus pumpkinseed
*
- C humilis orangespotted sunfish
*
- C macrochirus bluegill
- C microloonus redear sunfish
* * *
- HTc'rooterus dolomieui smallmouth bass
*
- M. salmoides largemouth bass
* * * * * *
- Tomoxis annularis white crappie
* * * * * * *
- P. nigron.iculatus black crappie Clupeidae
* * * * * * *
- Alosa pseudoharengus . alewife
* * * * * * *
- Dorosoma cepedianum gizzard shad Cyprinidae
* * * * * * *
- Carassius auratus goldfish
* *
- C. auratus x Cyprinus carpio carp x goldfish hybrid
* * * * * * *
- Worinus carpio carp
* * * * * * *~ Ifyiopsis storeriana silver chub-
- Notemigonus crysoleucas goldenshiner .
* * * * * * *
- Notropis atherinoides emerald shiner
* * * * * * *
- N. hudsonius spottail shirier
* * * *
- II soilopterus spotfin shiner
*
- TC volucellus mimic shiner
{
- PTmephales notatus bluntnose minnow
- P. promelas fathead minnow
~ ~
TABLE 4 (CON'T) 1 SPECIES FOUND IN THE LOCUST POINT AREA 1963 - 1979 h C0f410N NAME-h- h h h h h SCIENTIFIC NAME Esocidae
- Esox lucius northern pike
- Esox masquinoney muskellunge Ictaluridae
* * *
- Ictalurus melas black bullhead -
- * * *
- 1. natalis yellow bullhead
- * * * * * *
- T nebulosus brown bullhead
- * * * * * * * 'I punctatus channel catfish IToturus flavus stonecat Lepisosteidae
* *
- Lepisosteus osseus longnose gar Osmeridae
* * * * * * *
- Osmerus mordax rainbow smelt Percidae
*
- Etheostoma nigrum johnny darter
* * * * * * *
- Perca flavescens yellow perch
* * * * *
- Percina caprodes logperch
* * *
- Stizostedion canadense sauger
* * * * * * *
- S. v. vitreum walleye Percichthyidae
- Morone americana white perch
* * * * * * *
- L chrysops white bass Percopsidae Percopsis omiscomaycus trout-perch Petromyzantidae
- Petromyzon marinus sea lamprey Salmonidae
*
- Oncorhynchus _ kisutch_ coho salmon Sciaenidaa
* * * * * * *
- Aplodinotus grunniens_ freshwater drum 22MM$E$N
'l Includes species collected in Federal Aid Project F-41-R at Locust Point
. O O O TABLE 5
. PROCEDURES FOR WATER QUALITY DETERMINATION Parameter Units References for Analytical Methods
- 1. Dissolved Oxygen *C APHA (1975): Sec. 422B
- 2. Hydrogen-lons (pH) pH units ASTM (1973): D1293-65
- 3. Transparency meters Welch (1948): Secchi disk
- 4. Turbidity F.T.U. APHA (1975): Sec. 214A
- 5. Suspended Solids ag/l APHA (1975): Sec. 208D
- 6. Conductivity umhos/cm(2G"C) ASTM (9175): D1125-64
- 7. Dissolved Solids ag/l USEPA (1974) 8.' Calcium (Ca) mg/l APHA (1975): Sec. 306C
- 9. Chloride (Cl) mg/l APHA (1975): Sec. 408B 7
^
- 10. Sulfate (504) mg/l ASTM (1973): D516-68C
- 11. Sodium (Na) mg/l . ASTM (1973): 'D1428-64
- 12. Magnesium'(Mg) mg/l APHA (1975): Sec. 313C
- 13. Alkalinity (Total as CACO3) mg/l APHA (1975): Sec. 403'
- 14. Nitrate (NO3) mg/l ASTM (1973): D992-71
- 15. Phosphorus (Total as P) mg/l APHA (1975): Sec. 425F
- 16. Silica (SiO2) mg/l ASTM (1973): D859-68B
- 17. Biochemical Oxygen Demand mg/l APHA (1975): Sec. 507
- 18. Temperature "C ' APHA (1975): Sec. 212 I
TABLE 6 DISSOLVED OXYGEN DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES h INTAKE.(STA. NO. 8) . Pre-Operational Dai ta (ppm) - Operational Data (ppm) - Month i Min Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March 11.8- ^11.8 11.8 0.0 - - - - April 11.0 13.2 11.9 9.5 9.5 9.5 0.0
,0.9 May 7.2 10.4 9.1 1.4 9.2 12.4 10,8- 213 June 7.0 10.2 8.1 1.5 7.2 8.8 8.0 1.1 July 4.8 8.9 6.6 1.7 6.1 7.6 6. 9- 1.1 August 6.0 9.1 7.4 1.3 8.3 8.4 8.4 0.1 September 8.6 9.3 8.9 0.4 8.2 9.2 9.1 0.1 October 10.0 11.2 10.5 0.6 9.5 11.4 10.7 1.0 November 11.0 12.1 11.5 0.6 10.2 12.2 11.5 1.1 0:cember 11.4 14.1 12.8 1.9 - - - . -
Mean 9.9 2.1 9.4 1.6 DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) March 11.8 11.8 11.8 0.0 - - - April 11.8 12.8 12.3 0.5 9.5 9.5 9 5. . O May 8.6 10.0 9.4 0.6 9.0 12.0 10.5 2.1 June 6.8 10.1 8.5 1.4 5.7 8.5 7.1 2.0 July 4.5 8.4 6.6 1.6 8.3 8.8 8.6 0.4 August 6.6 9.3 7.7 1.2 8.1 8.2 8.2 0.1 , Ssptember 8.2 9.3 8.6 0.6 8.' 7 9. 2' 8.6 0.4 October 10.4 11.3 11.3 0.8 10.4 11.5 11.0 0.6 N2vember 11.3 12.2 11.7 0.5 4.8 12.1 9.6 . 4.2 D; camber 14.1 10.2 12.2 -2.76 - - - Mean I i 10.0 2.1 c.1 1.3 9
TABLE 7 HYDROGEN-IONS (pH)' OATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES INTAKE (STA. NO. 8). Pre-Operational Data (pH units) Operational Data (pH units) Min Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March 8.1- 8.1 8.1 0.0 - - - - April 7.7 8.3 8'.1 0.3 8.1 8.1 8.1 0.0 May 7.8 8.4 8.2 0.3 7.7 8.0 '7.9 01 2 - June 8.0 8.6 8.3 0.3 8.3 8.6 8.5 0.2 July 8.1 9.0 8.5 0.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 0.0 August 8.5 8.9 8.8 0.2 8.7 8.7 8.7 0.0 September 7.8 8.6 8.2 0.4 8.6 8.8 8.7 'O.1 October 8.2 8.9 8.6 0.4 8.0 8.8 8.4 0.4 November 7.6 8.4 8.0 0.4 7.5 8.0 7.8 0.3
\ j ecember 8.1 8.3 8.2 0.1 - - -
Mean RM n1 8.3 0.3 DISCHARGE (STd. NO. 13) March 7.8 7.8 7.8 0.0 - - - - April 7.7 8.5 8.1 0.4 8.1 8.1 8.1 0.0 May 7.8 8.6 8.3 0.3 7.5 8.3 7.9 0.6 June 7.8 8.6 8.3 0.4 8.5 8.6 8.6 0.1 July 8.0 8.7 8.4 0.4 8.1 8.5 8.3 0.3 August 8.0 8.7 8.4 0.3 8.7 8.7 8.7 0.0 September 8.3 8.5 8.4 0.1 8.5 8.9 8.7' O.2 l October 8.4 8.8 8.6 0.2 8.0 8.6 8.2 'O.3 Ncrember 7.7 8.4 8,0 0.7 6.9 8.1 7.6 0.6 D2cember 7.9 8.4 8.2 0.4 - - - - Mean 8.3 0.2 8.3 0.4
< TABLE 8 TRANSPARENCY DATA FOR WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES 4
' INTAKE (STA. NO. 8)
Pre-Operational Data (m) Operational Data (m) Month . Min Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.00 - - - April 0.10 0.50 0.34 0.20 0.40 0.40 0.40 .0.00 May 0.35 1.00 0.'70 0.30 0.20 0.40 0.30 0,.10 June 0.50 0.60 0.60 0.05 0.35 0.45 0.40 0.10 July 0.40 1.10' O.70 0.30 0.75 0.85 0'80
. 0.10 August 0.45 1.30 0.90 0.40 0.50 0.95 0.70 0.30 September 0.60 0.80 0.70 0.10 0.40 1.15 0.72 0.40 October 0.50 0.80- 0.60 0.17 0.45 0.60 0.53 0.10 November 0.30 0.50 0.43 0.12- 0.35' O.80 0.62 0.2 December 0.40 0.40- 0.40 0.00' - - - -
Maan 0.55 0.22 . 0.56 0.18 DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) March 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.00 - - - - April 0.10 0.40 ._0.25 0.13 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.00 May 0.30 0.70 0.60 0.20 0.20 0.40 0.30 0.10 June 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.35 0.10 July 0.30 0.95 0.61 0.33 0.55 0.85 0.70 0.20 August 0.50 - 1.00 0.77 0.25.. 0.45 0.70 0.58 0.20 September 0.50 0.65 0.58 0.08 0.40 1.15 0.68 0.40 October 0.40 0.65 0.53 0.13 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.00 November 0.30 0.6Q 0.45 0.15 0.35 0.80 0.55 0.20 December 0.40 0.45 0.43 0.04 - - - - Mean n.4R 'O.19 0.49 0.14 9 e
TA8LE 9 O TUR8IDITY DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES INTAKE (STA. NO. 8) Pre-Operational Data (F.T.U.) Operational Data (F.T.U.) Month Min Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March 145.0 145.0 145.0 0.0 - - - - April 12.0 105.0 46.3 42.8 67.0 67.0 67.0 0.0 May 5.5 21.0 14.9 6.7- 46.0 55.0 50.5 6.4 June 10.0 53.0 26.3 18.6 40.0 57.0 48.5 12.0' July 3.0 53.0 ~ 16.9 24.2 14.0 53.0 33.0 26.9 August 2.0 23.0 10.5 9.0 13.0 18 0 15.5 3.5 September 5.0 10.0 9.3 4.0 10.0 27.0 18.3 8.5 October 7.0 18.0 11.7 5.7 13.0 32.0 20.7 10.0 svember 13.0 36.0 12.5 8.0 58.0 26.0 27.8 2,1.7 2cember- 16.0 47.0 31.5 21.9' - - - Maan 33.4 40.8 34.9 18.5 DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) l March 148.0 148.0 148.0 0.0 - - - - April 18.0 110.0 54.5 42.7 75.0 75.0 75.0 0.0 May 8.5 28.0 17.9 8.0 52.0 75.0 63.5 16.3 June 7.0 25.0 17.5 8.2 49.0 54.0 51.5 3.5 July 4.5 45.0 19.4 18.6 15.0 34.0 24.5 13.4 August 2.0 . 24.0 12.3 9.5 16.0 17.0 16.5 0.7 September 4.0 16.0 10.0 6.0 11.0 47.0 28.7 18.0 October 9.0 22.0 13.7 7.2 7.0 42.0 23.3 17.6 N:vember 13.0 33.0 19.7 11.6 8.0 64 0 28.0 31.2 December 21.0 54.0 37.5 23.3 - - - - Mean 35.1 41.9 38.9 21.5 O ;
TABLE 10 SUSPENDED SOLIDS DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES INTAKE (STA. NO. 8) Pre-Operational Data (mg/1) Operational Data (mg/1) Min Max' -Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev i March 148.0 148.0 148.0 0.0 - - - - April 13.0 80.0 46.8 36.7 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 May 10.0 26.0 16.3 7.1 50.0 86.0 68.0 25.5 June 9.0 60.0 30.3 25.1 43.0 63.0 53.0 14.1 July 1.0 33.0 21.3 14.0 10.0 14.0 12.0 2.8 August 8.0 19.0 12.5 5.5 11.0 18.0 ~14.5 5.0 September 6.0 15.0 10.0 4.6 11.0 37.0 26.0 13.5 October 9.0 14.0 12.0 2.7 18.0 27.0 23.3 4.7 November 11.0 28.0 20.7 8.7 32.0 87.0 68.7 31.8 4 December 17.0 21.0 19.0 2.8' - - - - i Mean 33.7 '41.6 39.4 23.3 ! DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) March 170.0 170.0 170.0 0.0 - - - - April 15.0 101.0 58.5 41.9 59.0 59.0 59.0 0.0 May 17.0 34.0 22.8 7.6 49.0 89.0 69.0 28.3 June 7.0 67.0 35.0 29.5 44.0 S6.0 50.0 8.5 July 3.0 52.0 28.5 21.0 16.0 18.0 17.0 1.4 August 8.0 24.0 16.3 7.9 12.0 22.0 17.0 7.1 September 10.0 27.0 17.0 8.9 12.0 104.0 47.3 49.6 October 10.0 26.0 18.0 8.0 13.0 79.0 40.7 34.3 November 19.0 34.0 25.3 7.8 - 27.0 156.0 74.3 71.0 December 23.0 23.0 23.0 0.0 - - - - Mean 40.4 -47.5 l 46.8 21.5 O
~
TABLE 11 CONDUCTIVITY DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES INTAKE (STA. NO. 8) Pre-Operational Data (pmhos/cm) Operational Data (umhos/cm) Month Min Max' 'Mean Std Day Min Max Mean Std Dev March 410.0 410.0 410.0 0.0 - - - - April 287.0 340.0 314.5 27.9 410.0 410.0 410.0 0.0 [ , May 280.0 365.0 310.8 39.0 290.0 320.0 305.0 21.2 June 285.0 310.0 292.8 11.7 295.0 300.0 297.5 3'. 5 July 260.0 305.0 280.0 22.9 275.0 300.0 287.5 17.7 7 August 233.0 285.0 253.8 22.1 250.0 295.0 272.5 31.8 September 217.0 267.0 246.3 26.1 222.0 284.0 262.0 34.7 October 233.0 298.0 272.0 34.4 265.0 350.0 316.7 45.4 38.2
~
tovember 230.0 300.0 262.7 35.2 245.0 320.0 278.3 ecember 283.0 297.0 290.0 9.9 - - - - Mean 293.3 d6.8 303.7 46.5 a (( DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) . E March 392.0 392.0 392.0 0.0 - - - - April 272.0 360.0 '312.8 43.9 435.0 435.0 435.0 0.0 1 May 270.0 365.0 312.5 42.3 285.0 320.0 302.5 24.8 June 286.0 340.0 309.8 24,9 300.0 303.0 301.5 2.1-July 220.0 300.0 268.5 34.2 275.0 300.0 287.5 17.7 _j August 245.0 280.0 262.8 17.3 260.0 295.0 277.5 24.8 September 215.0 264.0 244.7 26.1 230.0 315.0 276.3 43.0 October 238.0 324.0 280.7 43.0 265.0- 335.0 310.7 39.6 November 130.0 306.0 268.0 38.0 25D.0 330.0 283.3 41.6 December 285.0 300.0 292.5 10.6 - - - - Mean 296.2 39.4 309.3 52.3 m 4 ?
TABLE 12 DISSOLVED SOLIDS DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER g IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES INTAKE (STA. NO. 8) Pre-Operational Data (mg/1) Operational Data (mg/1) Min Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March 318.0 318.0 318.0 0.0 - - - - Apri.1 158.0 284.0 206.0 55.3 140.0 140.0 140.0 ., 0.0 May 124.0 230.0 178.0 -47.2 186.0 236.0 211.0 35.4, June 89.0 178.0 131.3 45.3 164.0 180.0 172.0 11.3 July 136.0 180.0 164.5 20.8 174.0 174.0 174.0 0.0 August 152.0 226.0' 171.5 36.4 174.0 184.0 179.0 7.1 September 128.0 214.0' 166.0 43.9 146.0 . 180.0 168.0 19.1 October 158.0 186.0 170.7 14.2 146.0 190.0 164.0 23.1 November 140.0 174.0 156.0 17.1- 158.0 184.0 172.7 13.} December 140.0 160.0 150.0 14.1 - - - - Mean 181.2 MA 172.6 19.5 DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) . March 310.0 310.0 310.0 0.0 - - - . April 182.0 396.0 244.0 102.4 150.0 150.0 150.0 0.0 May 192.0 224.0 208.0 22.6 116.0 232.0 176.0 51.3 June 90.0 194.0 137.0 51.1 174.0 .194.0 196.0 20.7' July 136.0 190.0 164.0 27.0 160.0 182.0 171.0 15.6 August 150.0 228.0 170.0 38.7 178.0 194.0 186.0 11.3 September 140.0 170.0 153.3 15.3 158.0 196.0 176.7 19.0 October . 176.0 194.0 182.0 10.4 152.0 178.0 163.3 13.3 November 142.0 184.0 158.0 22.7 162.0 192.0 178.0 15.1 December 148.81 164.0 156.0 11.3 - - Mean 185.0 52.4 178.5 18.3 9
TABLE 13 CALCIUM DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES INTAKE (STA. NO. 8) . Pre-Operational Data (mg/1) Operational Data (mg/1) Month ' Min' Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max l Mean Std Dev March 50.8 50.8 50.8 0.0 - - - - April 32.8 46.4 40.6 6.1 46.4 .46.4 46.4 . 0.0 May 34.0 40.0 37.0 2.6 36.0 38.4 37.2 1I.7' June 34.0 38.Q 34.9 1.8 36.8 37.2 37.0 0.'3 July 32.0 34.4 33.6 - 1.1 36.0 36.0 36.0 0.0 August 29.2 39.2 32.8 4.3 32.0 35.6- 33.8 2.5 September 32.0 36.0 33.9 2.0 30.4 34.8 32.8 2.2 October 31.6 37.2 33.9 3.0 32.4 36.8 34.0 2.4 November 31.2 37.6 O December Mean 31.2 34.0 34.9 32.6 36.5 3.3 2.0 32.8 37.6 35.7 2.6 5.6 16.6 4.3 DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) March 50.4 50.4 50.4 0.0 - - - - April '33.6 50.4 41.7 7.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 . May 34.0 41.6 37.4 .3.5 36.0 36.0 36.0 0.0 June 34.0 38.4 35.9 1.a 36.8 37.6 37.2 0.6 July 32.0 36.4 34.1 1.9 33.6- 38.8 36.2 3.7 August 29.6 40.4 33.6 4.7 33.2 35.6 34.4 1.7 September 32.Q 36.0 33.3 2.3 31.2 33.2 32.1 1.0 October 32.0 41.2 34.2 3.9 32.8 36.0 34.1 1.7~ November 31.2 34.8 33.2 1.8 32.8 38.3 36.1 3.1 December 31.2 35.2 33.2 2.8 - Mean 36.7 5.5 37.0 5.5-O i' :- -
,._..m _ _.__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ -
TABLE 14 CHLORIDE DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES INTAKE (STA. NO. 8) Pre-Operational Data (mg/1) Operational Data (mg/1) Month Min Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March 22.0 22.0 22.0 0.0 - - - - April 18.0 26.8 20.6 4.2 26.0 26.0 26.0 0.0 May 18.0 20.0 18.7 1.0 20.0 21.0 20.5 0.7 June 15.5 20.3 17.9 2.3 15.2 20.5 17.9 3.7 July 16.0 19.5 18.0 1.8 12.5 23.0 17.8 7.4 August 13.5 18.3 16.1 ?. 0 10.8 19.5 15.2 ~ 6.2 September 16.0 17.2 16.7 0.6 13.5 17.5 15.8 2.1 October 15.8 18.8 17.4 1.5 14.3 22.0 19.4 4.4 November 13.0 16.5 14.7 1.8 15.0 20.0 17.5 2.5 December 15.0 15.8 15.4 0.6 - - - 17.8 2.3 18.8 3.4 Mean DISCHARGE (STA. NO.13) - March 22.0 22.0 22.0 0.0 - - - - April 18.0 26.5 20.8 3.9 27.3 27.3 27.3 0.0 May 17.6 20.0 18.9 1.3 17.8 21.0 19.4 2.3 June 16.3 22.5 18.8 2.9 15.5 20.5 18.0 3.5 July 16.8 20.0 18.2 1.7 12.5 22.0 17.3 6.7 August 13.5 18.3 16.1 2.0 12.3 19.0 15.7 4.7 September 14.5 17.2 15.9 1.4 14.0 19.5 16.7 2.8 October 16.8 21.0 18.4 2.3 15.8 21.0 19.3 3.0 November 13.0 16.0 14.7 1.5 17.3 21.5 19.0 2.2 December 15.0 16.3 15.7 0.9 - - - - 18.0 2.4 19.1 3.6 Mean 9
53 - TABLE 15 O SULFATE DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE. VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES
. INTAKE.'(STA. NO. 8)
Pre-Operational Data (.mg/1) Operational Data (mg/1) Min Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March 10.5 10.5 10.5 0.0 . . . . Apri.1 24.0 37.0 30.8 6.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 0.0
~
May 25.0 30.0 28.3 2 .~ 2 22.5 26.0 -24.3 2.5 June 21.0 30.5 26.4 4.3 ?.9.0 33.5 31.3 3 .'2 July 20.5 26.5 24.0 2.6 23.5 28.0 25.8 3.2 August 18.5 23.0 20.6 1.9 28.0 28.0 28.0 0.0 September 20.0 22.5 21.0 1.3 20.5 28.0 23.5 4.0 October 22.0 28.0 25.7 3.2 18.0 35.5 25.2 9.2 November 19.0 24.0 21.2 2.6 21.5 29.0 25.5 3.8 December 21.0 28.5 24.8 5.3^ - Mean 23.3 5.6 28.5' 6.7 DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) March 10.0 10.0 10.0 0.0 - _ _ _ April 27.3 , 41.5 32.5 6.7 46.0 45.0 46.0 0.0 May 28.0 31.0 29.5 1.3 22.5 26.0 24.3 2.5 June 21.0 30.5 26.5 4.1 29.0 32.5 30.8 2.5 July 19.0 26.0 23.5 3.1 23.0 28.0 25.5 3.5 August 19.5 23.5 21.5 1.7 27.5 28.5 28.0 0.7' September 17.0 22.0 19.7 2.5 20.0 28.0 23.3 4.2 October 22.5 30.5 26.7 4.0 15.8 35.3. 23.7 '10.3
, November 19.0 . 25.5 21.7 3.4 23.0 29.0 26.0 3.0 December 21.5 27.0 24.3 3.9 - - - -
Mean 23.6 - 6 . ?. l 28.5 7.5
~
O
TABLE 16 SODIUM DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES INTAKE (STA. NO. 8) Pre-Operational Data (mg/1) Operational Data (mg/1) Min Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean StdDev March 10.5 10.5 10.5 0.0 - - Apri1 9.2 12.7 10.8 1.5 13.2 13.2 13.2 0.0 May 10.1 12.6 11.2 1.1 8.5 8.6 8.6 '4.1 June 8.4 10.7 9.9 1.0 9.2 9.2 9.2 0.0 July 7.0 11.9 9.6 2.0 8.0 10.7 9.4 1.9 August 6.4 10.3 8.6 1.6 7.5 10.1 8.8 1.8 September 9.2 10.2 9.7 0.5 8.0 10.5 9.0 1.3 October 9.0 15.3 12.2 3.2 7.6 13.5 9.7 3.3 November 7.1 10.4 8.3 1.8 8.0 14.8 11.3 3. , December 8.5 9.3 8.9 0.6 - - - - Mean 10.0 1.7 9.8' 1.2 DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) . March 10.0 10.0 10.0 0.0 - - - - April 8.9 12.4 10.7 1.7 14.4 14.4 14.4 0.0 May 10.1 13.5 11.7 1.7 8.0 8.9 8.5 0.6 June 8.0 11.0 9.9 1.3 7.6 9.2 8.4 1.i July 7.0 12.1 9.6 2.2 8.0 10.1 9.1 1.5 August 7.1 10.3 8.7 1.3 8.3 10.1 9.2 1.3 September 8.4 10.2 9.4 0.9 8.0 10.5 9.0 1.3 October 9.Q 15.3 12.4 3.2 8.4 13.5 10.3 2.8 November 7.1 10.4 8.4 1.8 8.0 14.8 11.3 3.4 December 10.0 10.7 10.4 0.5 _ _ _ _ Mean 10.1 1.2 1 10.0 2.0 9
+
TABLE 17 MAGNESIUM DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES INTAKEf(STA. NO. 8) Pre-Operational Data (mg/11
~
Operational Data (mg/1)
. Month Min Max' -Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March 11.3- 11.3 11.3 0.0 - - - -
April 5.8 8.4 7.2 1.1 13.4 13.4 13.4. 0.0 , May 7.1 10.6 9.1 1.2 8.2 8.6 8.4 - 0.3 June 7.9 10.3 8.9 1.2 9.6 9.6 9.6 0.0 July 8.2 9.4 9.0 0.5 9.6 11.0 10.3 1.0 August 5.5 7.7 6.8 0.9 7.7 9.8 8.8 1.5 Septemb'er 6.5 7.7 7.1- 0.6 7.0 10.1 8.4 1.6 October 7.20 8.90 7.83 93 7.2 10.3 8.5 1.6 November 5.0 7.7 6.7 . 1.5 8.2 9.8 9.1 0.8 December 5.3 ,8.4 6.9 2.2' . . _ . Mean 8.1 1.5 9.6 1.7 DISCHARGE (ST . NO. 13) . March 11.5 11.5 11.5 0.0 - - - - April 5.8 , 9.1 7.1 1.5 13.4 13.4 13.4 0.0 May 7.7 10.3 9.0 1.1 8.6 8.6 - 8.6 0.0 June 7.7 9.6 8.5 0.8 9.8 10.1 10.0 0.2 July 8.9 9.4 9.2 0.2 11.5 12.2 11.9 0.5 . August 5.3 7.2 6.7 1.0 8.4 9.6 9.0 0.8 September 6.7 7.7 7.4 0.6 7.7 9.8 8.9 1.1 October 7.1 8.2 8.0 0.2 .8.2 10.1 8.9 1.0
,Nsvember 7.2 . ,8.6 7.8 0.7 8.2 10.8 9.5 1.3 D:cember 7.4 7.9 7.7 0.4 - - - -
Mean 8.3 1.4 l 10.0 1.7 O' .
l 1 1 TABLE 18 TOTAL ALKALINITY DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER h IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES , INTAKE'(STA. NO. 8) . Pre-Operational Data (mg/1) Operational Data (mg/1)
- Month Min Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March 110.0- ' 110.0 110.0 0.0 - - - -
April 88.0 101.0 94.5 5.3 104.0 104.0 104.0 0.0 l May 92.0 101.0 95.0 4.1 89.0 89.0 89.0 0.0, June 91.0 97.0 94.3 3.2 89.0 100.0 94.5 7.8 July 86.0 92.0 88.8 2.5 95.0 100.0 97.5 3.5 l August 84.0 92.0 87.5 3.7 96.0 96.0 96.0 0.0 I September 89.0 104.0 95.7 7.6 86.0 95.0 90.3 4.5 October 90.0 97.0 93.7 3.5 92.0 102.0 96.7 5.0 November 87.0 94.0 90.3 . 3.5 90.0 100.0 95.3 5.0 e December 87.0 93.0 90.0 4.2' - - - - Mean 94.0 6.3 96.0' 4.8 ? DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) . l l March 110.0 110.0 110.0 0.0 - - - - April
. 87.0 98.0 94.8 5.3 107.0 107.0 107.0 0.0 May 91.0 91.0 92.0 0.7 104.0 96.5 5.8 91.5 June 95.0 96.0 95.5 0.6 90.0 100.0 95.0 7.1 July 89.0 96.0 92.0 2.9 95.0 100.0 '97.5 3.5 August 85.0 94.0 88.3 4.0 93.0 98.0 95.5 3.5 September 88.0 96.0 92.7 4.2 88.0 96.0 91.7 4.0 October 92.0 111.0 98.3 11.0 92.0 100.0 95.7 4.0 , November 90.0 95.0 91.7 2.9 92.0 99.0 95.8 3.5 December 90.0 95.0 92.5 3.5 - - - -
Mean 95.2 5.9 l 96.2 4.8 O
~
TABLE 19 NITRATE DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRULlURES
. INTAKE."(STA..NO. 8)
Pre-Operational Data (mg/1) .. Operational Data (mg/1) - Min Max * . Mean Std Day Min', ' Max Mean Std Dev March 17.00 17.00 17.0a 0.00 - - - - Apri,1 1.99- 14.90 7.46 6.19 5.40 5.40 5.40 0.00 May 0.15 13.50 6.30 5.50 1.70 14.20 8.00 8.80 , June 0.00 8.00 4.2a 4.00 7:30 8.70 8.00. 1.00 July 0.00 7.70- 3.80 ,3.30 5.10' 7.70 6.40 1.80 . August 0.00 1.20 0.40 0.60 1.40 2.70- 2.10 1.00 September. 0.00 2.70: 1.00 1.50 0.60 2.40 1.60 1.00 October 0.50 8.00' 3.40 4.10 0.30 1.20 0.80 0.50 November 1.50 2.60 1.97 .0.57 5.10-. 7.90 6.60 1.4Q December 2.4a 3.60 3.00 0.85 * . _ _ . . Mean 4.90 4.79 4.86 2.93 DISCHARGE- (STA. NO.13) March 17.00 17.00 17.00 0.00 , April 1.20 , 17.00 7.81 7.41 6.40 6.45 6.40 0.00 May 0.15 13.50 6.80 5.50 1.70 - 12.00
- 6.90 7.30 June 0.00 7.70 4.30 3.80 7.70 11.50 9.60 2.70 July 0.00 8.40 3.70 3.70 4.50 9.30 6.90 3.40 ,
August 0.00 1.'20 0.50 0.50 2.30 3.10 2.70 0.60, September 0.00 . 2.70 1.20 1.40 0.30 1.70 _1.20 0.80 October 0.50 7.70 3.13 3.97 0.30 2.00 1.20 0.90 November 0.90' . 5.10 3.00 2.10 6.50 7.30 7.00 0.50 December 2.00 3.70 2.90 1.20- - - - - Mean 5.03 4.76 ., 5.24 3.12
.O .
. i
TABLE 20 PHOSPHORUS DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE IHTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES INTAKE.'(STA. NO. 8) Pre-Operational Data (.mg/1) Operational Data (.mg/1) . Month Min Max' *ilean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.00 - - - _ Apri.1 0.06 0.12 0.09 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 -0.00 May 0.02 0.27 0.09 0.12 0.01 0.07 0.04 0.04 June 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.01 July 0.02 0.07 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.12 0.07 0.07 August 0.01 0.06 0.04. 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00
~
September _0.00 0.05 0.02- 0.03 0.01- 0.04 0.03 0.02 October 0.00 0.05 0.02- 0.02 0.01 0.11 0.06 0.05 November 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.05 0.0 December 0.01 0.07 0.04 0.04' - - - - Mean 0.07 0.08 0.01 0.02 DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) - . March 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.00 - - - April 0.02 0.10 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 May 0.02 0.44 0.13 0.21 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.05 June 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.01 July 0.03 0.09 0.06 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.07 0.07 August 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01' September 0.00 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.0 0.03 October 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.08 0.0 0.04
, November 0.02 .
0.03 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.0 0.05 December 0.02 0.06 0.04 0.03 - - - - Mean 0.07 0.07 1 0.05 0.02 O
TABLE 21 I SILICA DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER i IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES I i
~
INTAKE (STA. NO. 8) , t Pre-Operational Data (mg/1)
~
Operational Data (mg/1)-
' l
. Month j j Min Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev i
March .- _ _ _ _ _ _ . April 0.10 3.09 0.96 1.43 0.83 0.83 0.83 0. 00., 4 , i May 0.00 0.23 0.10 0.10 0.07 1.36 0.72 0.91. . June 0.17 0.74 0.47 0.28 0.28 0.55 0.42 0.19 i
- July 0.40 1.20 0.77 0.36 0.44 0.45 0.45 0.01 August 0.11 0.38 0.27 0.17 0.04 0.23~ 0.14 0.13 l September 0.06 0.71 0.32 0.34 0.09 0.28 0.16 0.11 October 0.06 0.19 0.12 0.07 0.04 0.13 0.07 0.05 November 0.03 0.12 0.09 .0.05 0.07 0.59 0.34 0.26 December 0.19 0.24 0.22 0.04 - - - -
Mean 0.37 0.31 0.39 -0.27 l DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) . l March - - .- - - . . _ April 0.06 3.50 0.98 1.68 1.29 1.29 1.29 0.00 May 0.0 0.29 0.13 -0.12 0.07 1.41 0.74 0.95 l June 0.16 0.78 0.46 0.26 0.22 0.62 0.42 0.28 l July 0.33 0.91 0.57 0.25 0.47 0.65 0.56 0.13 I August 0.10' O.44 0.27 0.18 .0.02 0.19 0.11 0.12 September 0.06 0.59 0.28 0.28 0.07 0.36 0.22 0.15 October 0.09 0.19 0.13 0.06 0.07 0.10 0.09 0.02-l , November 0.03 . 0.16 0.10 0.07 0.11, 0.64 0.35 0.27 December 0.16 0.26 0.21 0.07 - - -- -. Mean 0.35 0.28 l 0.47 'O.40 O~ p . l
. , - - . . . .- .~ -.- . . . _ _ _ . ...-, . . - - - . -
f TABLE 22 BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER g IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES
. INTAKE.'(STA. NO. 8)
Pre-Operational Data (mg/l) . Operational Data (mg/1)
. Month '
Min Max- Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev-March 3.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 _ _ _ _ Apri.1 0.92 4.00 2.70 1.30 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 - May 0.50 3.0 1.40 1.10 4.0 2.0 3.0 1.4 . June 1.00 3.10 2.00 1.20 4.0 3.0 . 3.5 0.7 July 2.00 _4.00 3.00 1.00 ~2.0 3.0 2.5 0.7 August 3.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 September. 2.00 3.00 2.33 0.58 1.0 3.0 2.3 1.2 October 2.00 3.00 2.33 0.58 2.0 4.0 2.7 1.2 November 1.00 2.00 1.70 .0.60 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 December 1.00 2.00 1.50 0.71 - - - - Mean 2.30 0.63 2.8 ' O.7 DISCHARGE (ShA. NO.13) . March 3.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 _ _ _ _ April 2.00 4.50 3.40 1.10 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 May 0.60 4.00 2.40 1.50 2.0 3.0 - 2.5 0.7 June 1.00 3.00 2.10 0.90 3.0 5.0 4.0 1.4 July 1.00 3.00 2.30 1.20 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 August 2.00 4.00 3.00 0.80 2.0 3.0 2.5 0.7 September 2.00 3.00 2.67 0.58 2.0 4.0 3.0 1.0 October 2.00 4.00 3.00 1.00 3.C 4.0 3.7 0.6
, November 2.00 .
3.00 2.30 0.60 1.0 4.0 2.3 1.5 December 1.00 2.00 1.50 0.71 - - - Mean 2.57 0.56 , 3.13 0.7 O
l TABLE 23 TEMPERATURE DATA FOR BOTTOM WATER IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES INTAKE.'(STA. NO. 8) Pre-Operational Data (CC )
. Operational Data (PC)
Month Min Max' Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev- . March - - _ - - - - - Apri.1 6.0 10.0 7.7 1.7 10.0 10.0 10.0 0.0 May 14.0 20.0 15.8 2.8 10.4 17.8 14.1 5.2$ June 18.0 21.5 20.0 1.5 21.0 24.2. 22.6 2.3 July 22.0 24.0 22.6 10 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0 August 22.0 24.2 23.1 1.2 21.5 23.0 22.3 1.1 September 18.0 20.5 19.3 1.3 18.0 21.7 19.8 1.9 October 9.0' 13.0 11.2 2.0 8.0 11.2 9.5 1.6 November 5.0 10.0 8.2 2.8 -4.0 10.2 6.9 3.1 December - - - Mean 16.0 6.3 16.2 6.8 DISCHARGE (STA. NO. 13) . March _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ April 7.5 10.0 8.6 1.1 10.5 10.5 10.5 0.0 May 14.0 20.0 15.8 ,2.8 10.4 18.0 14.2 5.4 June 19.0 21.0 20.2 21.5 24.7 1.1 23.1 2.3 July 22.0 24.1 22.9 0.9 23.5 25.0 24.3 1.1 August 21.5 24.5 23.0 1.5 21.5' 23.0 22.3 1.1 , September 18.0 20.5 19.2 1.3 18.5 22.1 19.9 1.9 October 8.5 13.0 11.0 2.3 8.5 11.5 9.9- 1.5 November 5.0 - 10.5 7.9 2.8 4.0 - 10.1 6.9 3.1 December - - - Mean 16 .1 -. -6.2 l 16.4 6.8 O y ,- , - N .m ,, ,,J-, , , , , - ..e. ,.--,n- -
.-e,- - - - , , , , . - , , - , - + , - - - . ,,e.-~ - _.Lv+-,---. m,-
i E' e c n e 9 r e e g f f n i a D 7 1 0 9 4 2 1 1 2 2 1 6 3 5 3 7 1 2 R 1 2 f o - + + + + - + + + + + + + + + + + l a n m o u i S t a ' r e _ p o e E r H P T c e e F h D O t E 3 e D 1 d v 0 0 1 1 0 1 3+ 3+ + _ I S N T O U I i t s u N o 3 0 0 0 5 0+ 0 1
- + +
2 0
+ +
O T O A t 0 0 G T s c 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 O 0 0 0 4 0+ 0 'O 0 N S t H O - + - , I i T L T n N L A U O A M t 0 0 F S n p 0 2 0 2 2+ 0+ 0 O 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 E o e + + + S U i S R L t E A a 4 T V i 2 E v g E L B A M L A A R N A O P I D d e r A u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 3 0 2 + 0 3 0+ 0 + 0 0 9
. T T a y Y A d l T R n u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 I E a J 1 +
L P t . + A 0 S U - Q E f e 1 0 0 1 2 R o n 0 0 0 3 0+ 0 0 O 0 0 0 1 0 + + + R P u + E r J T F e A O b I W m E u y L G N a 1 0 0 4 5 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 A N M + + + - - + N A t O R s 1 I e T r r 0 0 A a p 5 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 3 2 0 0 0 R e A - + + + + + E N P O r a M n e
)
n H s s y g e p d d t y g ( i i i x y s l l n O x n y o y o i O o c S t S l l e l n i a s a r R d - e yd v d mk u c u E e n r t e i e e u l r i t T v e g ap din d t v md el i A e o m a E l c u i t m s t h a ed r a p c hn e M o o s i e u o i r a u e s r n b p d s c o f i n a r s i ca l p A R A P s d a r s n s i y r u u o i a h u o a o i h i ie e D H T T S C D C C S S M T N P S BD T l l l d g t t o l om m O
O O O TABLE 25 MEAN WATER QUALITY VALUES FOR PRE-0PERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL i PERIODS IN THE VICINITY OF LAKE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES PRE. OPERATIONAL OPERATIONAL PERCENT CHANGE PARAMETER UNITS , Sta. 8 Sta. 13 Sta. 8 Sta. 13 Sta. 8 Sta. 13 Dissolved Oxygen ppm 9.9 10.0 9.4 9.1 -5.1 -9.0 Hydrogen-ions pH 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 0.0' O.0 Transparency m 0.55 0.48 0.56 0.49 +1.8 +2.1 Turbidity F.T.U. 33.4 35.1 34.9 38.9 +4.5 +10.8 Suspended Solids mg/l 33.7 40.4 39.4 46.8 +17.0 +15.8 , Conductivity _. pmhos/cm 293.3 296.2 303.7 309.3 +3.5 +4.4 m , 1. Dissolved Solids mg/l 181.2 185.0 172.6 178.5 -4.7 -3.5 w Calcium mg/l 36.5 36.7 36.6 37.0 _+ 0.3 +0.8 i Chloride. mg/l 17.8 18.0 18.8 19.1 +5.6 +6.1 Sulfate
- mg/l 23.3 23.6 28.5 28.5 +22.3 +20.8
_ Sodium mg/l 10.0 10.1 9.8 10.0 -2.0 -1.0 Magnesium mg/1 8.1 8.3 9.6 10.0 +18.5 +20.5 Total Alkalinity mg/l 94.0 95.2 96.0 %.2 +2.1 +1.1 Nitrate mg/l 4.90 5.03 4.86 5.24 -0.8 +4.2 i Phosphorus _ mg/l 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.05 -42.9 -28.6 0.37 0.39 Silica . mg/l 0.35 0.47. - +5.4 +34.3 j Biochemical Oxygen Demand (B00) mg/l 2.30 2.57 2.80 3.13 +21.7 +21.8 . Temperature C* 16.0 16.1 16.2 16.4 +1.3 +1.9 L g. 1 ______ __ ___. ___ _ _ _ _ _ . - 1 - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
TABLE 26 PLANKTON AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLING DATES Month 1973 I 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 March 18 April 18 22 14 26 May 25 22 29 17 24 11 1 and 23 June 27 19 16 16 22 29 21 : July 25 17 14 20 13 25 28 % August 23 22 ' 11 18 30 17 29 September 26 10 8 14 12 15 27 October 9 6 19 26 17 30 November 6 7 3 2 22 1 28 December 4 16 I No phytoplankton collections. G G G
~
l-TABLE 27 . PHYTOPLANKTON AND'ZOOP ANKTON SAMPLING STRUCTURE, 1973-1979 1 i 2 Station 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 i I 1 X X X X X X X 2 3 X X X X X X X 4 5 X 6 X X X X X X 7 X - t 8 X X X X X X X - 9 X X X 10 X X X 11 : 12 X X X X ! 13 X X X X X X X : 14 X X X X X X 15 i 16 X X X X X X X 19 X X X , 20 X . l 21 22 i 23 i-24 25 26 X 27 X 28 X - 29 X First Month May April April March April May May ,. Last Month December November December November November November November 1 All samples were collected by a vertical tow with a Wisconsin plankton net; 12cm mouth 0.064 m mesh in 1973 and 1974 and 0.080 m mesh from 1975-1979. No phytoplankton sampling; Zooplankton only. t 6
- - - - - p , a , -m,-r -< , - - - - -
TABLE 28 . h PRE-0PERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL PHYTOPLANKTON DATA FROM LAKE ERIE IN THE VICINITY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION 8ACILLARIOPHYCEAE ._ Pre-Operational Data l Operational Data 2 (no/1) (no/1) Month Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March --- --- 22404 --- --- --- --- --- 3 April 7531 216609 105938 85684 --- --- 733663 ___ May 2080 167574 69785 78218 35855 408898 222377 263781 June 90 6573 2131 2991 1628 11078 6353 6682 July 235 2556 1206 1073 1830 10882 6356 6401 August 772 20481 7513 8870 3372 5712 4542 1655 September 907 17383 7577 8674 4996 18138 11688 6574 October 5958 34799 24927 16432 12505 89804 53004 38782 November 7993 13002 10584 2509 16471 105250 46563 50830 December --- --- 79879 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 3202 59872 33194 37727 10951 92823 135568 252388 h CHLOR 0PHYGEAE March --- --- 32 --- --- --- --- April 102 2888 916 1323 --- ---
-3 261 ---
May 432 2110 1167 716 700 2416 1558 1213 June 904 8347 4604 3951 1574 5556 3565 2816 July 1024 3384 1955 1012 4092 26052 15072 15528 August 793 5910 2362 2194 3791 4192 3992 284 September 2921 9511 5780 3381 2843 10034 27956 37443 October 7366 21872 13686 7431 16665 27160 21208 5388 November 1691 21198 11544 9755 27141 117566 48414 61348 December --- --- 1522 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 1904 9528 4357 4706 8115 27568 15253 16785 1 Results from samples collected from 1974 through August 1977. 2 Results from samples collected from September 1977 through 1979. 3 April sample actually collected May 1. 4 O
l
-TABLE 28 (cont'd) .
PRE-OPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL PHYTOPLANKTON DATA FROM LAKE ERIE IN THE VICINITY OF THE DA'/IS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION i ! MYX0PHYCEAE i l l l 2 [ Pre-Operational Data Operational Data - Month Min Max Mean' Std Dev Min Max' Mean Std Dev ! March --- --- 82 --- --- --- --- --- j April 81 954 358 402 --- --- 8423 ___ May 0 688 221 315 1221 1886 1554 470 June 13 12854 3471 6269 1243 45570 23407 31344 July 313 84901 37539 35129 28878 216958 122918 132993
! August 35 315263 101877 146415 69043 96697 82870 19554 September 1881 17977 7902 8780 19954 75577 171276 215727
! October 5109 14203 8394 . 5045 19629 60168 40973 20355 { November 1504 2578 2179 588 28219 31652 20275 16820 l December --- --- 1563 --- --- --- --- --- ! Mean 1117 56177 16359 32084 24027 75501 58027 62124 !O-i TOTAL PHYTOPLANKTON
- March --- ---
22517 --- -- - --- --- --- ! April 7860 224076 108178 88757 --- --- 734777 --- ! May 4883 168899 71305 77644 39497 411501 225499 263047 l June 1604 17817 10357 12247 4595 62414 33505 40884 . July 3460 87260 41833 34760 59120 266502 162811 146641-l August 1603 327915 112143 147757 76687 106244 91466 20900 l September 5751 31352 21378 13705 48372 83480 211073 252015 4 October 19232 70129 47052 25778 99846 126796 115422 13958 ! November 17148 33499 24324 8357 161456 165699 115537 83236 ! December --- --- 82 % 3 --- --- --- --- ---- i Mean 7693 121368 54205 37254 . 69939 174662- 211261 220686-l 1 l Results from samples collected from 1974 through August 1977. 2 Results from samples collected from September 1977 through 1979
- f. April sample actually collected May 1.
lO 4 t 4
, , , . , , . , . . , , - , , , . , , . . , , . , , - , - .,-....w,
TABLE 29 I PRE-0PERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL PHYTOPLANKTON DATA FROM THE VICINITY OF THE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES AND A CONTROL STATION STATION 3 Pre-Operational Data 2 Operational Data 3 Month Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max . Mean Std Dev March --- --- --- --- --- ---
-- 4 April 5929 188717 91274 76544 --- --- 737866 ---
May 3553 201735 74227 91342 45212 267882 156547 157451 June 1607 18380 6303 8079 8252 30840 19546 15972 July 2737 113803 48155 47231 57331 327506 192419 191043 August 1329 358252 125142 162782 48336 94904 71620 32929 September 3891 27850 16441 12020 40281 64617 207482 268801 October 12016 66619 46585 30064 152681 226943 175074 45060 November 12786 33484 20171 11552 149954 244023 138399 111850 , December --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Mean 5481 102539 53537 41018 71721 179531 212369 221533 STATION 8 March 22747 --- --- --- ---
-- 4 April 8250 142686 72523 57337 --- --- 872472 ---
May 1634 124782 58863 62864 28665 384544 206605 251644 June . 1348 22427 7242 10174 1945 6778 4362 3417 July 2313 80734 39508 32224 31659 94904 63282 44721 August 1562 389417 133684 182880 116805 181824 149315 45975 j September 5528 28524 19847 12473 36743 82952 200363 244475 October 14883 52375 35282 18963 71015 116363 96087 23051 November 15181 43947 26842 14813 93383 199435 103448 91371 Decenter --- --- 79075 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 6337 111737 49561 37676 54316 152400 211992 275361 STATION 13 . March --- --- 21247 --- --- --- --- --- 4
- April 6657 193221 113796 78639 --- ---
889947 --- May 4224 191170 78251 87463 36594 429182 232888 277602 June 1597 23356 9191 10200 3961 85402 44682 57587 July 2139 53265 35461 23674 47743 260850 154297 150689 August 1679 405706 132161 186211 96672 119697 108185 16281 September 6444 40540 23373 17068 46421 89766 276358 361375 October 17977 98873 52447 41752 77695 136376 115918 33129 November 13995 26408 20205 6207 75855 111081 66422 50057 Decenter --- --- 83306 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 6839 129067 57004 42833 54992 176051 236087 275701 1 Data presented as number of whole organisms per liter. 2 Data collected from 1974 through August 1977. 3 Data collected from September 1977 through 1979. 4 April sample actually collected May 1, 1979.
- 69'- ,a 's s') TABLE 30 PRE-OPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL ZOOPLANKTON DATA FROM THE LOCUST P0 INT AREA l ROTIFERS Pre-Operational Data l Operational Data 2 (no/1) ,
(no/l) Month Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March --- --- 27 --- --- --- --- --- April 39 362 169 138 --- --- 2003 ___ May 94 479 304 166 170 264 217 66 June 87 234 149 71 33 70 52 26 July 35 573 259 234 39 102 71 45 August 23 592 292 213 36 41 39 4 September 119 369 241 128 82 213 214 132 October 73 681 280 347 70 120 100 26 November 143 513 282 164 15 49 25 21 December 219 236 228 12 --- --- --- --- Mean 92 449 223 86 64 123 115 82 COPEPODS March --- --- 5 --- --- --- ~~~ April 24 46 35 9 --- ---
--443 ---
May 233 851 400 255 31 195 113 116 June 132 591 340 165 91 262 177 121 July 62 423 186 148 126 176 151 35 August 33 163 77 51 87 141 114 38 September 66 177 103 51 47 109 86 34 October 67 105 82 20 59 67 55 14 November 24 119 68 42 25 48 28 19 December 32 52 42 14 --- --- --- --- Mean 80 281 134 134 67 143 96 53 1 Results from samples collected from 1973 through August 1977. 2 Results from samples collected from September 1977 through 1979. 3 April sample actually collected May 1. !n U
i TABLE 30 (cont'd) PRE-OPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL ZOOPLANKTO:i DATA FROM THE LOCUST POINT AREA CLA00CERAN Pre-Operational Data 2
- Operational Data 2 (no/1) (no/l)
Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev Month
~~~
March --- --- 0.2 --- --- ---
-- 23 ---
April 0 11 3 5 --- --- 130 45 49 1 162 82 114 May 8 335 198 90 64 360 212 209 June 103 61 73 122 98 35 July 39 188 134 14 August 2 39 25 15 72. 92 82 205 104 74 30 192 90 89 September 29 211 101 97 27 56 37 16 October 26 17 58 34 18 16 26 14 13 November --- --- December 12 24 18 8 --- 26 133 66 65 40 144 77 66 Mean I I TOTAL ZOOPLANKTON
--- ~~
March --- --- 32 --- ---
-- 3 245 ---
April 77 439 217 157 --- --- May 555 1086 819 191 295 536 416 170 707 1365 902 266 483 518 501 25 June July 306 1168 911 345 252 370 811 624 825 454 249 250 334 292 59 August 144 September 391 627 500 110 251 557 461 182 831 489 302 159 246 253 97 October 259 256 650 391 178 55 135 71 58 November --- --- December 275 303 289 20 --- --- Mean 330 810 500 296 249 385 381 222 1Results from samples collected from 1973 through August 1977. 2Results from samples collected from September 1977 through 1979. 3 April sample actually collected May 1. O
/"; TABLE 31 .
PRE-0PERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL ZOOPLANKTON DATA IN THE VICINITY OF THE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES AND A CONTROL STATION STATION 3 (Control) Pre-Operational Data l Operational Data 2 (no/1) (no/1) Month Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev. March --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
- April 54 323 177 118 --- --- 207 3 _'__
May 415 1007 682 261 327 568 448 170 June 640 1210 862 218 489 535 512 33 July 265 1211 642 360 550 802 676 17a August 223 731 371 244 257 271 264 10 September 386 742 507 163 230 541 378 156 October 214 S55 492 329 112 265 254 137 November 248 520 367 138 42 151 72 69 December --- --- 280 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 306 825 487 215 287 448 351 192 _ STATION 8 (Intake) 1 l _ iarch --- --- 30 --- --- --- --- --- l April 56 318 151 115 --- --- 218' --- 265 846 656 268 657 391 May 124 377 June 504 1673 897 526 337 386 362 35 l July 216 918 487 328 319 1285 802 683 l August 100 435 303 148 228 291 260 45 l September 242 564 394 133 263 412 329 76 l October 256 513 354 139 154 252 247 91 ! November 225 489 323 144 34 137 64 63 l December --- --- 234 --- --- --- --- --- l Mean 233 720 383 250 208 489 334 215 STATION 13 (Discharge) March --- --- 33 --- --- --- --- --- April 63 482 223 184 --- --- 287 --- May 454 1421 894 350 243 354 299 78 June 621 1230 872 222 498 563 531 46 July 387 1243 808 413 337 1433 885 775 August 136 793 446 262 197 403 300 146 S:ptember 363 533 459 83 249 513 505 253 October 282 984 565 370 176 179 265 152 November 237 569 375 140 80 127 72 59 December 170 346 258 124 --- --- --- --- Mean 301 845 493 292 254 510 393 245 Data collected from 1973 through August 1977. 2 0ata collected from September 1977 through 1979. 3 April sample actually collected May 1.
TABLE 32 BENTilIC MACR 0IliVERTEBRATE SAMPLING DATES Year Month 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 March 18 April 17-18 23 9 27 May 25 22-23 21 4 11 30 June 19-20 19 7 22 , July 2, 26-1 17 17 5 26 29 g Au9ust 23 14 19 .5 16 September 19-26 6 11 3 26 30 October 10 9 5 3 flovember 2-7 7 6 1 1 4 Decenter 4 16 O O O
d
- 73'-
TABLE 33 BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE SAMPLING STRUCTURE, 1973-1979 1 ! ' S ta tion 1973 1974 1975 '1976 1977 1978 1979 } 1 X X X X X X X 1 2 X X X 3 X X X X X X X i 4 X X X 5 X X X 6 X X X X 7 X X X X .' 8 X X X X X X X . i 9 X X X X X X X i 10 X X X 1 11 X X X X j 12 X X X X 1 13 X X X X~ . -X X X 14 X X X X X X X i 15 X X X X X X X
! 16 X X X X i 17 X X X X X X X l '
. 18 X X X X- X X Xe 19 X X X 2
20 X X 21 22 . 23 24 25
! , 26 X X X X.
27 X 28 X i 29 'X l First Month May April April March April May- May Last Month December November December November October November November Frequency Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Every- Every- Every-other- other- other-month month l month ] 1 Three replicate grab samples with a ponar dredge (A=0.052 m2 ) were collected at the stations indicated each year except 1973 when only one grat was collected at each station. 2 Samples were collected only in April as water at this station was removed
- - ' after this date to allow construction on the intake pumps.
. A r
, ,..,, __ ._,,,-,e , . . . .
1 1 l TABLE 34 9 1 PRE-0PERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE DENSITIES FROM LAKE ERIE IN THE VICINITY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION COELENTERATA Pre-Operational Data 2 Operational Data 3 Month Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March --- --- 0 --- --- --- --- --- April 0 3 1 2 --- --- --- --- May 9 51 21 20 1 21 11 14' ' June 0 210 89 89' --- --- --- --- July 0 5 2 2 0 4 2 3 August 0 7 2 3 --- --- --- --- September 1 36 10 17 1 40 21 20 October 2 72 30 37 --- --- 57 --- November 7 98 32 44 17 74 46 40 December 0 27 14 19 --- --- --- --- Mean 2 57 20 27 5 35 27 23 ANNELIDA March --- --- 113 --- --- --- --- --- April 506 1448 923 473 --- --- --- --- May 368 1153 637 358 302 306 304 3 Juna 547 822 705 101 --- --- --- --- July 481 1417 918 397 564 1947 1256 978 August 212 2212 1254 736 --- --- --- --- September 1012 2715 1561 783 443 813 628 262 October 767 2226 1305 801 --- --- 1371 --- November 654 1705 1157 509 496 1788 1142 914 Decenter 140 1543 842 992 --- --- --- --- Mean 521 1693 942 409 451.2 1214 940 455 ARTHROPODA March --- --- 11 --- --- --- --- --- April 29 149 89 68 --- --- --- --- May 71 107 120 60 257 330 294 52 June 105 700 449 218 --- --- --- --- July 243 1146 491 437 169 2346 1258 1539 August 109 - 1583 642 562 --- --- --- --- September 96 1035 602 407 275 601 438 231 October 270 729 440 252 --- --- 180 --- November 124 3016 896 1415 239 737 488 352 December 30 217 124 132 --- --- --- --- Mean 120 976 386 290 235 1004 532 424 1 0ata presented as number of organisms per square meter. 2 0ata collected from 1973 through August 1977. 3 0ata collected from September 1977 through 1979.
TABLE 34 (cont'd) 1 PRE-OPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE DENSITIES FROM l LAKE ERIE IN THE VICINITY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION MOLLUSCA - Pre-Operational Data 2 Operational Data 3 Month Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev March --- --- 4 --- --- --- --- - - - April 0 2 1 1 --- --- --- -- - May 0 4 2 2 0 1 1 1' June 0 5 2 2 --- --- July 1 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 August 0 4 1 2 --- --- --- --- September 0- 4 2 2 0 1 1 1 October 0 2 1 1 --- --- 1 --- November 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 . December 0 1 1 1 --- --- --- --- o ! Mean 0 3 2 1 0 1 1 1 l TOTAL BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE POPULATION March --- --- 127 --- --- --- --- --- , , April 540 1592 1018 535 --- --- --- --- ! May 537 1216 777 315 560 653 607 66' June 653 1557 1241 363 --- --- --- --- July 772 2559 1399 - 805 737 2346 1542 1138 August 321 2782 1893 1008 --- --- --- --- September 1254 3753 2179 1116 601 1090 846 346 October 1065 3027 1767 1094 --- --- 1609- ---
~ November 894 4492 2090 1675 737 2044 1391- 924 December 170 1788 979 1144- --- --- --- ---
Mean 690' 2530 1347 649 659 1533 1199 447 1 0ata presented as number of organisms per square meter. 2 0ata collected from 1973 through August 1977. 3 0ata collected from September 1977 through 1979. l O l h
TABLE 35 PRE-0PERATIONAL 'a3 OPERATIONAL BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE DATA FROM THE VICINITY OF THE INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES AND A CONTROL STATION l STATION 3 (CONTROL) Pre-Operational Data 2 Operational Data 3 Month Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max l'ean Std Dev March --- --- --- --- --- --- April 172 1910 1044 816 --- --- --- May 376 1662 824 604 923 955 939 23 June 1356 4181 2591 1451 --- --- --- July 1448 3565 2529 1008 -19 204 112 131. August 0 2776 1248 1151 --- --- --- --- September 1191 2540 1828 648 280 382 331 72 - October 1719 2903 2209 618 --- --- 83 --- November 1573 3247 2320 739 96 4081 2089 2818 December --- --- 2660 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 979 2848 1917 711 330 1406 711 844 STATION 8 (INTAKE) March --- --- 57 --- --- --- --- --- April 64 3361 1598 1642 --- --- --- --- May 255 1483 906 50% 89 592 341 356 June 573 1598 1387 455 --- --- --- --- July 458 1834 1127 700 554 3031 1793 1752 August 18 4164 1328 1639 .--- --- --- --- - September .1229 3095 2178 1003 618 1496 1057 621 October 414 2604 1488 1096 --- --- 6L1 --- November 172 1995 1125 819 649 1706 1178 747 December 51 325 188 194 --- --- --- --- Mean 359 2273 1138 636 478 1706 996 559 STATION 13 (DISCHARGE) March --- --- 191 --- --- --- --- --- April 83 1293 417 585 --- --- --- --- May 280 901 498 280 669 1178 924 360 June 337 1776 884 543 --- --- --- --- July 181 5068 2594 2374 649 1490 1070 595 August 89 3120 1319 1257 --- --- --- --- September 1827 3795 2701 851 140 1012 576 617 October 337 5100 2171 2563 --- --- 592 --- , November 337 1490 874 700 121 1834 978 1211 December 255 2497 1376 1585 --- --- --- --- Mean 414 2782 1303 907 395 1379 828 229 A 0ata presented as number of organisms per square meter. 2 0ata collected from 1973 through August 1977. Data collected from September 1977 through 1979. g
O O O l TABLE 36 GILL NET SAMPLING DATES l Year Month 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 i April 25-26 17-18 12-13 18-19 .30-1 (May)
- May 21-22 22-23 10-11 16-17 18-19 30-31 1
June 13-14 16-17
- 14-15 13-14 29-30 20-21 i July 2-3 10-11 14-15 14-15 12-13 24-25 28 D
- August 2-3, 30-31 19-20 11-12 11-12 9-10 17-18 28-29 September 28-29 12-13 .8-9 30-1 13-14 24-25 29-30 October 16-17 6-7 20-21 17-18 27-28 November 12-13 25-26 3-4, 17-18 4-5 1-2 3-4 December 16-17 4
TABLE 37 1 PRE-0PERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL GILL NET CATCHES 0F SELECTED SPECIES FROM LAKE ERIE IN THE VICINITY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DISCHARGE (STATION 13) ALEWIFE Pre-Operational Data 2 Operational Data 3 Month Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev April I 0 10 3 5 --- --- 0 --- May 0 44 30 20 0 0 0 0 June 0 43 19 19 0 1 1 1 July 0 159 49 68 0 0 0 0 August 0 72 14 32 0 6 3 4 September 0 200 87 102 1 136 48 76' October 4 322 117 178 36 88 41 44' November 0 47 16 22 41 52 47 8 December --- --- 0 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 1 112 37 40 11 40 18 23 CHANNEL CATFISH April 0 1 0 1 --- --- 1 --- May 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 June 0 7 2 3 3 6 5 2 July 1 18 6 7 3 4 4 1 August 0 5 2 2 0 0 0 0 September 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 October 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 November 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 December --- --- 0 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 0 4 1 2 1 1 1 2 FRESHWATER ORUM April 0 17 4 9 --- --- 4 --- May 0 4 1 2 1 1 1 0 June 3 9 5 3 20 75 48 39 July 1 50 18 20 0 14 7 10 August 0 12 5 5 0 6 3 4 September 0 11 4 5 0 3 1 2 October 0 7 4 4 0 0 0 0 November 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 December --- --- 0 --- --- --- -- - --- Mean 1 14 5 5 3 14 8 16 1 Results presented as the number of fish per unit effort, where one unit of effort equals a 24-hour bottom set with an experimental gill net 125 ft long consisting of five 25-ft l contiguous panels of , 3/4,1, lh, and 2-inch bow mesh. 2 l Results from samples collected from 1973 through August 1977. 3 Results from samples collected from September 1977 through 1979.
l l (3 V TABLE 37 (cont'd) PRE-0PERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL GILL NET CATCHESI 0F SELECTED SPECIES FROM LAKE ERIE IN l THE VICINITY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DISCHARGE'(STATION 13) l GIZZARD SHAD Pre-Operational Data 2 Operational Data3 Month l Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev i April 0 3 1 1 --- --- 1 --- May 0 9 4 4 1 5 3 3 June 4 9 8 3 9 22 16 9 July 7 50 30 15 3 13 8 7-August 40 184 103 63 7 109 58- 72
; September 3 168 76 68 1 114 55 57 October 24 155 106 71 0 291 103 .162 November 1 51 26 26 9 11 10 1 '
December --- --- 7 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 10 19 40 43 4 81 32 37 SPOTTAIL SHINER O~ April 58 142 97 43 --- --- 58 --- May 66 1331 482 574 12 224 118 150 June 0 85 29 39 0 4 2 3 July 0 29 8 12 0 14 7 10 August 2 58 15 24 4 21 13 12 September 0 25 10 11 18 75 44 29 October 31 35 33 2 4 27 15 12 November 0 64 21 29 24 26 25 1
~
December --- --- 5 --- --- --- --- ---
- Mean 20 221 78 154 9 56 35 38 WALLEYE April 0 3 1 1 --- ---
0 --- May 0 2 1 1 0 1 1 1
- June 0 4 2 2 0 1 1 1 July 0 15 3 7 0 4 2 3 August 0 2 1 1 0 8 4 6 September 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 l' October 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 November 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 December --- --- 0 --- --- --- --- ---
! Mean 0 4 1- 1 0 2 1 1 OIResults presented as the number of fish per unit effort, where one unit of effort' equals
- l. a 24-hour bottom set with an experimental gill net 125 ft long consisting of five 25-ft contiguous panels of , 3/4, 1, 1 , and 2-inch bow mesh.
2 Results from samples col.lected from 1973 through. August 1977. 3 Results from samples collected from September 1977 through 1979.
i TABLE 37 (cont'd) 1 PRE-0PERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL GILL NET CATCHES 0F SELECTED SPECIES FROM LAKE ERIE IN THE VICINITY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DISCHARGE (STATION 13) WHITE BASS Pre-Operational Data 2 Operational Data 3 Month Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev April 0 3 1 1 --- --- 0 --- May 0 3 1 1 0 2 1 1 June 0 6 3 3 8 43 26 25 July 0 6 3 3 4 25 15 15 ~- August 1 29 9 12 0 7 4 5-September 1 11 5 5 0 2 1 1 October 1 4 2 2 0 6 2 3 November 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 December --- --- 0 --- - - - --- --- --- Mean 0 8 3 3 2 12 6 9 YELLOW PERCH April 10 119 55 47 --- --- 24 --- May 9 109 48 44 9 40 25 22 June 3 95 47 39 2 28 15 18 July 5 125 37 50 35 76 56 29 August 33 100 65 28 43 313 178 191 September 32 160 73 60 43 71 53 15 October 13 158 67 79 7 18 12 6 November 0 28 8 14 6 7 7 1 December --- --- 0 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 14 112 44 26 21 79 46 56 1 Results presented as the number of fish per unit effort, where one unit of effort equals a 24-hour bottom set with an experimental gill net 125 ft long consisting of five 25-ft contiguous panels of h, 3/4,1, lh, and 2-inch bow mesh. 2 Results from sagles collected from 1973 through August 1977. 3 Results from samples collected fram September 1977 through 1979. 1 9
i
- 81 -
O b TABLE 38 1 PRE-OPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL GILL NET 0ATA FROM THE VICINITY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION INTAKE, DISCHARGE, AND TWO CONTROL STATIONS f STATION 3 -
~
3 Pre-Operational Data 2 Operational Data 3 I Month Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev April --- - - . 197 --- --- --- 72 --- May --- --- 49 --- 98 319 209 165 June --- --- 263 --- 102 239 171 97 July --- --- 110 --- 71 222 147 107 August --- --- 396 --- 241 267 254 18 September --- --- --- --- 178 481 331 151 i October --- --- --- --- 31 178 108 74 November --- --- --- --- 162 1371 577 688 i December --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Mean --- --- 203 135 126 440 234' 161 STATION 8 April J 52 26 19 --- --- 33 --- May 32 2077 676 959 20 134 77 81 June 62 260 154 98 69 196 133 90 July 85 179 122 45 86 262 174 124 August 89 166 135 38 122 208 165 61 September 61 343 203 124 174 221 191 26 October 55 652 257 342 25 93 57 34 November 4 112 49 52 12 816 288 458 December --- --- 19 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 50 480 182 202 73 276 140 83 I Results presented as number of fish per unit effort, where one unit of effort equals
- l. a 24-hour bottom set with an experimental gill net 125 ft long consisting of five 25-ft
- contiguous panels of h, 3/4,1,1,' and 2-inch bar mesh.
2 Results from samples collected from 1973 through August 1977. 3 Results from samples collected from September 1977 through 1979.
i l l TABLE 38 (cont'd.) 1 PRE-OPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL GILL NET DATA FROM THE VICINITY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION INTAKE, DISCHARGE, AND TWO CONTROL STATIONS STATION 13 Pre-Operational Data 2 Operational Data 3 Month Min Max Mean Std Dev Min Max Mean Std Dev - April 88 269 166 75 --- --- 88 --- May 120 1381 573 558 29 270 150 170 June 49 232 125 77 112 122 117 7 July 94 254 163 82 85 138 112 37-August 136 327 237 84 186 387 287 142' September 73 382 270 141 122 366 206 138 October 104 691 337 312 7 433 178 225 November 6 208 76 94 85 1455 544 789 Decenber --- --- 14 --- --- --- --- --- Mean 84 468 218 166 89 453 210 150 STATION 26 April --- --- 191 --- --- --- 47 --- May --- --- 44 --- 34 127 81 66 June --- --- 238 --- 101 175 138 52 July --- --- 41 --- 118 258 188 99 August --- --- 293 --- 345 348 347 . 2 September --- --- --- --- 41 637 336 298 October --- --- --- --- 54 71 61 9 November --- --- --- --- 28 907 328 502 December --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Mean --- --- 161 114 103 360 191 129 1 Results presented as number of fish per unit effort, where one unit of effort equals a 24-hour bottom set with an experimental gill net 125 ft long consisting of five 25-ft contiguous panels of h, 3/4,1, lh, and 2-inch bar mesh. 2 Results from samples collected from 1973 through August 1977. 3 Results from samples collected from September 1977 through 1979. l 4 L
o .o o TABLE 39 ICHTHYOPLANKTON SAMPLING DATES Year Month 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 March-Apri.1 22 6, 14, 30 20, 29 . 30 May 21 12, 25 10, 17, 27 21 . 22 1, 9, 31 , June 14 2, 15, 22 11, 17, 28 2, 13, 25 8, 20 5, 21 3-July 10 2, 13 8, 23, 29 5, 13, 20, 27 5, 19 5, 12, 20 ' August '19 4, 30 9, 20, 31 12, 22 1, 11, 23 3, 15 September 12 2 ' October 16 November 25 e
' TABLE 40 ICHTHYOPLANKTON DENSITIES IN THE VICINITY OF THE INTAKE ~
OF THE DAVIS - BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION - 1978* DATE April May May June July JJ1y Aug. Aug. 4 MEAN SPECIES STAGE 30 11 21 7 19 1 11 Ca rp.. Pro-larvae 0.3 0.04 Post-larvae Subtotal 0.3 C.04 Emerald Shiner Pro-larvae 14.7 1.84 Post-larvae 1.6 1.6 0.8 0.50 Subtotal 16.3 1.6 0.8 2.34 Freshwater Drum Pro-larvae 0.7 4.9 0.70 Post-larvae 0.4 0.05 Sub-total 0.7 5.3 0.75 Gizzard Shad Pro-larvae 16.4 0.4 2.10 Post-larvae 5.2 181.9 30.0 3.6 24.3 30.63 Subtotal 21.6 181.9 30.0 3.6 24.7 32.73 Rainbow Smelt Pro-larvae 0.7 . 0.09 i Post-larvae 4.2 0.6 0.60 Subtotal 0.7 4.2 0.6 0.69 Spottail Shiner Pro-larvae 0.3 0.04 Post-larvae 0.4 0.2 0.08 Subtotal 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.11 Halleye Pro-larvae 79.2 4.0 10.40 Post-larvae Subtotal 79.2 4.0 10.40 Yellow Perch Pro-larvae 1.4 1.8 0.40 Post-larvae Subtotal 1.4 1.8 0.40 TOTAL LARVAE Pro-larvae 80.6 7.2 16.7 '19.9 0.4 15.60 Post-larvae 5.2 183.9 34.6 5.2 25.9 31.85 Subtotal 80.6 7.2 21.9 203.8 34.6 5.2 26.3 47.45 EGGS 2.4 0.30 Data presented as number of individuals per 100m3and computed from 4 oblique tows (bottom to surface) collected at night. O
l
' - TABLE 41 ICHTHY 0 PLANKTON DENSITIES IN THE VICINITY OF THE INTAKE OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION - 1979*
l' OATE - Ma r May June June July July July August August I uant 1 31 5 - 21 5 11 19 2 15 MEan setelts s STAGE 5** Carg stage 1 0.2 2.9 0.2 0.37 Stage 2 0.1 0.01 Stage 3
$dtotal 0.3 2.9 0.2 0.30
- Emerald Stage 1 10.5 144.2 1.6 0.5 0.7 17.44 Shiner stage 2 23.8 84.4 38.3 10.5 17.67 l Stage 3 43.3 7.9 30.3 9. M t
5dtotal 34.3 273.9 47.8 4g.3 0.2 45.06 7 Freshueter Stage 1 3.1 7.7 38.3 0.2 5.48 4 Oria Stage 2 4.5 0.5 0.59 ( 5tage 3 1.0 4.8 0.64
. $dtstal 3.1 12.4 39.3 5.5 6.70 i
Gizzard stage 1 33.3 82.5 61.8 91.8 - 25.2 8.7 0.3 33.73 Shad Stage 2 8.7 15.5 82.6 69.5 64.4 15.1 2.8 28.73 Stage 3 7.8 39.4 22.1 9.5 5.5 9.37 Setetal 42.0 98.0 152.1 200.7 111.7 33.3 8.6 71.at Loggerch stage 1 3.6 0.40 5tage 2 0.1 0.01 i Stage 3 0.1 0.1 0.02 5dtotal 3.6 0.1 0.2 0.43 , s . Aainhos stage 1 0.2 33.5 0.6 3.81 2 Smelt stage 2 9.0 0.1 2.8 1.3 1.47 Stage 3 0.5 0.4 0.10 Suetotal 9.2 33.5 0.6 0.4 3.4 1.3 5.38 j 5eettall Stage 1 1.9 0.21 j Shtner Stage 2 0.5 0.06 Stage 3 % j Setotal 0.5 1.9 0.27
- i.nidentiftee stage 6 0.4 0.01 i Sun 2
. Sup 3 4 Setetal 0.1 0.01 unteentified stage 1
- Perste Stage 2 0.2 0.02 stage 3
$dtetal 0.2 0.02 j unteentified Stage 1 0.1 0.01 i Shiner Stage 2 0.1 0.C1 j> Sup 3 Suetetal 0.1 0.1 0.02 I
Unidentified Stage 1 . sucker stage 2 0.1 0.01 i sup 3 I $dtstal 0.1 0.01 4 j We11 eye Stage 1 0.7 0.2 0.10
- Stage 2 1.2 0.13 j Stage 0.3 0.03 a setetal 0.7 1.7 0.27 I White Sass stage 1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.00
! Stage 2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.17 1 Stage 3 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.12 j Sustetal 0.2 0.4 1.1 0.4 1.0 0.2 0.37 t l White Stage 1 0.2 0.02 1 Sucker Stage 2 i Sup 3 j sustetal 0.2 0.02 Tellem Stage 1 7.0 16.4 2.se ! . Pecca - Stage 2 55.5 3.6 4.57 4 Stage 3 14.7 5.0 0.2 2.21 Sumtetal 77.2 25.0 0.2 11.38 l I Fresammater 0.3 1.0 6.0 0.81 , Grim Eg8 ) Total - Stage 1 0.7 40.8 75.0 136.9 75.8 244.6 65.7 10.1 0.7 4.5 64.03 55.68
!catayeplankten stage 2 19.1 107.4 163.2 102.8 29.1 Stage 3 14.9 5.0 8.6 84.1 31.0 48.0 10.5 '22.47
! Egg 0.3 1.0 6.0 0.81
- $dtetal 0.7 130.7 160.0 192.0 494.9 205.5 87.1 15.8 142.97 i.
*Deta presented as nummer of tnetviduals per 100m3 and comeuted free 4 celleue tous (bettom and surface) collectee at night.
l l **This is the suttotal of the larvel stages. It is the seen of the surface i and bottom sensities. Stage 1
- prote-1arvae. no rays in fin /ftafold.
Stage 2
- seso larvae. first rey seen in moeten fins. Stage 3 a meta.
}- larvae. pelvic fin gud is visible. , e . __--._-- . - - , - - - , . . . - - - - . - - ., - , , , , -,, . - . - ~ . - - , --,n-,m--c - --,- -%. - - , . ~~- - , - - , . + - -
TABLE 42 ICllTilYOPLANKTON ENTRAINMENT AT Tile DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION - 1978 3c Number of Larvae Entrained Period During Volume of Larvae /100m d 95% Confidence Interval 95% Confidence Interval Species c r withdrawn d ring Mean Lower Limit Upper Limit Mean Lower Limit Upper Limit period h 21 June - 12 July 20,443 0.32 -0.69 1.32 6,542 0 26,985-Carp , 21 June - 17 August 73,704 4.68 -7.70 17.05 344,935 0 1,256,653 Emerald Shiner 16 May - 12 July 49,951 2.00 -5.15 9.15 99,902 0 457,052i Fr:shwater Drum 91,598 52.36 -38.38 143.00 4,796,071 0 13,098,514 E Gizzard Shad 30 May - 17 August 103,211 0.92 -0.80 2.64 94,954 0 272,477.' Rainbow Smelt 16 May - 17 August 91,598 0.18 -0.04 0.40 16,888 0 36,639 Spottall Shiner 30 May - 17 August 6 May - 30 May 22,037 41.60 -436.15 519.35 916,739 0 11,444,915 Walleye 22,037 1.60 -0.94 4.14 35,259 0 91,233 Yallow Perch 6 May - 30 May , 6,310,890 TOTAL LARVAE 30 May - 21 June 18,449 2.40 -5.24 10.04 44,278 0 185,228 EGGS , a Estimated from Table 1. See discussion on page 1. b Estimated by multiplying daily discharge rate by 1.3.and adding all daily estimates for the specified period. c Average concentration during their period of occurrence, d Values which would have been less than zero were rounded back to zero. 9 6 e
c F N ( _. l TABLE 43 , ! ICHTHYOPLANKTON ENTRAINMENT AT THE l DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION - 1979 i I Period Ouring volume of tarvae/100m3C hs6er of larvae Entralmed Species de ra 8
- I C*"IId*"M I"'"'* b I C*"IM15"I*E *b-
! Upper tim 6L Pert Mean 14narr Limit Upper Leelt feran Lauer llelt Carp 13 June-15 July 41.903 1.13 0.20 2.06 47.350 8,388 86.320 13 June-9 August 84,023 81.88 33.83 128.39 6,815.106 2.842.498 10,787.783 Emerald %Iner 13 June-9 August 84,023 12.07 6.84 17.30 1,014,158 ' 574,787 1,453.598 freshwater Drum 56 sesy-9 August 110,283 92.37 62.66 122.08 10.186.848 6.910,333 13,463,349 Glarard Shad 43,542 1.30 0.36 2.24 56,605 15,675 97,534 Logperch 2 June,8 July 16 piny-9 August 110.283 6.92 4.27 9.57 763.158 470.908 1,055.408 Sainbau Seelt Spottall Shiner 13 June-8 July 32.771 1.17 -1.01 3.35 38.342 0 109.783 20,474 0.05 -0.10 0.20 1,024 0 4,095 e thidentifled 13 June-28 June unidentitled Perctd 36 play-2 June 16,302 0.24 -0.52 1.00 3,912 0 16,302 $ Unidentified Shiner 53 June-8 July 32,778 0.08 .05- 0.21 2.622 0 6.882 s. . f 28 June-8 July 13,477 0.12 -0.26 0.50 1.617 - 0 6,739
- unidentified Sucker Wileye 26 April-2 June 34.138 0.64 1.80 41,648 28,848 68,448 1.2l 16 play-9 August 110,283 0.47 0.22 0.72 51.833 24,262 79,404 White Sass 8 July-85 July 0.15 -0.33 0.64 1,517 ' 0 6,472 148te Suctor 10.112 16 play-28 June 46,735 34.13 27.67 40.59 1,595,066 1.293,157 1,896.S74 Vellow Perch i
20,620,799 )~ TOTAL LASVAE F. Drum Eggs 13 Jrw-15 July 41,903 2.42 0.85 3.99 603,405 35,618 167,153 TOTAL ICHTMV0PLAalllTOII 20,722.204 i.
. *fstimated free Table 3. See discussion on page 1.
rate by 1.3 and adding all
*fstleated by multiplying daily estimates 4stly disci.arfed for the spectiled per 8
" Average concentratten during their period of occurrence.
Values uhtch would have been less than sero were rounded back to aero. i f e . 4' g e d
. . . . - - - _ . _ . . _ . - m,..... . _ . . ,. - . - , . - . - . . _ . __
i TA8LE 44 TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION
, FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1978 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OFF YES/NO OPERATION 2 January 1978 22.09 22.41 Y 46.41 4 " 21.30 22.00 Y 47.59 5
16.15 17.05 N 19.05 6 16.39 17.17 Y 24.12 8 16.01 16.37 Y 47.20 12 16.45 17.15 N 96.73 14 17.50 18.30 N 49.15 . 20 20.15 20.45 Y 146.15 22 17.30 18.00 Y 45.55 24 17.00 18.24 Y 48.24 28 18.00 19.30 Y 97.06 30 20.30 21.00 Y 49.70 1 February 1978 20.45 21.15 N 48.15 3 20.55 21.25 - Y 48,10 5 16.45 17.16 Y 43.91 7 17.30 18.00 Y 48.84 9 21.00 21.30 Y 51.30 11 17.40 18.15 Y 44.85 13 20.00 20.40 Y 50.25 17 17.00 17.30 Y 92.90
~
19
- 17. 12 17.45 Y 48.15-21 20.30 -
21.20 N 51.75* 22 18.40 17.20 N 20.00 23 19.55 20.50 N 27.30 25 20.57 21.40 N 48.90 27 18.10 19.40 Y 46.00 1 March 1978 23.00 23.40 N 52.00 2 16.30 17.10 N 17.70 3 18.00 18.35 Y 25.25 5 20.30 21.00 Y 50.65 6 21.30 22.00 N 25.00 7 20.15 20.50 Y 22.50 10 19.40 20.10 ( 71.60 11 19.10 -19.45 Y 23.35 12 17.20 17.50 N 22.05 13 17.30 18.00 N 24.50 l l 15 17.50 18.22 Y 48.22 l 17 18.50 19.20 Y 48.98 19 20.40 21.12 Y 49.92 21 19.58 20.28 N 47.16 23 20.50 21.26 Y 48.98 25 22.40 23.10 Y 49.84 26 18.00 18.30 N 19.20 27 20.00 21.05 N 26.75 29 21.19 21.56 Y 48.51 .
l i 4 TABL244.(Con't.)
- TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION i FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 GECEF.SER 1978 l
l TIME OF' SCREEN OFERATION FISH HOURS SINCE i DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OFF YES/NO OPERATION i i i 2 April 1978 19.06 19.40 Y 93.84 * . 3 20.15 20.50 N 25.10
- 4 20.00 20.30 N 23.80 l 7 19.40 20.40 N 72.10
- 8 20.30 21.00 y 24.60
! 9 20.10 20.40 N 23.40
. 10 21.00 22.00 y 25.60
- 12 20.50- 21.20 y 47.20 13 20.30 21.00 N 23.80 l 14 20.30 21.00 y 24.00 l 15 17.00 17.45 N 20.45 4.
16 16.58 17.36 y 23.91 17 16.30 17.45 N 24.09 18 17.25 17.55 y 24.10 ! 19 16.20 17.00 N 23.45 l 20 16.37 17.13 y 24.13 i 22 18.00 18.35 y 49.22 24 17.32 18.05 y 47.70 l 26 17.15 17.45 y 47.40 4 28 18.00 18.30 y 48.85
- 30 . 23.20 23.50 y 53.20 l 1 May 1978 18.30 -
19.00 N 19.50
~
j 2 18.45 19.15 y 24.15 1 5 10.30 11.00 N 63.85
- 6 21.15 21.45 y 34.45
! 8 20.25 20.55 Y 47.10 i 10 16.55- 17.25 y 44.70 1 12 22.00 22.30 y 53.05 l " 14 16.30 17.00 y 42.70 l 16 16.35 17.05 y 48.05 j " 18 16.10 16.40 y 47.35 ! 20 17.00 , 17.30 N 48,90 I 22 19.00 20.30 y 51.00 j 24 16.32, 17.04 y 44.74 4 26 - 14.40 15.10 y 46.06 1 28 18.03 18.33 y 51.23-
- 30 15.45 16.15 ,y 45.82 l 1 June 1978 16.25 17.00 y 48.85 i' 3 14.50 15.20 y 46.20 5 18.55 19.35 y 52.15 l- 6 18.30 19.15 N 23.80-7 21.05 21.35 y 26.20 l
- 9 21.36 22.06 y 48.71 l 4
10 16.15 16.36' N ~18.30 11 17.55 18.30 25.94 y_ T
i TABLE 4(Con't.) TRAVELINGSCREENOPERATIONATTHEDAVIS-BESSENUCLEARPOWdRSTATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1978 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH !iOURS SINCE DATE COLLECTION LA3T SCREEN ON OFF YES/NO GoERATION 12 June 1978 17.00 17.30 N 23.00 13 16.35 17.05 Y 23,75 15 12.52 13.24 Y 44.19 16 . 18.40 19.10 N 29.86 17 13.39 14.10 Y 19.00 19 18.45 19.25 H 53.15 20 16.25 16.55 N 21.30 , 21 16.07 ' 16.37 Y 23.82 l 23 13.25 14.55 Y 46.18 l 25 16.10 16.50 Y 49.95 l 27 20.30 21.15 N 52.65 28 17.25 17.50 N 20.35 ! 29 15.50 16.20 Y 22.70 l 30 16.00 16.30 N 24.10 2 July 1978 18.00 18.30 Y 50.00 4 17.15 17.45 Y 47.15 6 16.20 16.55 Y 47.10-8 14.20 14.50 Y 45.95 & 9 18.20 18.50 N 28.00 W 10 18.40 19.20 Y 24.70 11 20.45 21.16 Y 25.96 13 21.15 . 21.45 N 48.29 14 18.45 19.15 Y 21.70 15 16.25 16.55 N 21.40 16 16.30 17.00 Y 24.45 l 17 19.20 19.50 Y 26.50 20 20.15 20.50 Y 73.00 i 22 19.25 19.55 Y 47.05 l 24 17.00 17.30 Y 45.75 l 25 20.45 21.20 Y 27.90 a l 26 20.15 20.45 Y 23.25
- 27 16.55 17.25 N 20.80 28 18.25 19.00 Y 25,75 30 17.16, 17.46 Y 46.46 1 August 1978 17.00 17.30 Y 47.84 2 16.20 16.50 N 23.20 3 16.35 17.05 Y 24.55 4
19.00 19.30 N 26,25 5 19.02 19.37 Y 24.07 7 16.45- 17.15 Y- 45.78 9 19.30 20.00 Y 50.85 11 16.20 16.50 Y 44.50 13 16.43 17.18 N 48.68 14 22.00 22.30 N 29.12 -
'17 20.20 ,21.30 N 71.00
h _ 6 TABLE 44 (Con' t.) TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TC 31 DECEMBER 1978 i TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE DATE COLLECTION LAST' SCREEN ON OFF YES/NO OPERATION a 0 19 August 1978 18.55 19.29 Y 45.99 L " 21 19.20 20.15 Y 48.86 23 20.15 20.45 Y 48.30 25 18.35 19.10 Y 46.65 26 18.05 18.50 N 23.40 27 17.37 18.14 Y 23.64 29 16.45 17.15 Y 47.01 31 17.30 18.00 Y 48.85 1 September 1978 16.38 17.08 N 23.08 3 16.13 16.43 Y 47.35 4 . 16.35 17.25 Y 24.82 6 16.52 17.23 Y 47.98 8 18.07 18.37 Y 49.14 10 17.20 18.00 Y 47.63 12 20.13 20.45 Y 50.45 14
~"
19.15 19.50 Y 47.05 16 17.30 18.20 N 46.70 18 21.30 22.05 Y 51.85 0.. . . 19 20 22.15 20.00 22.50 N 24.45 20.30 Y 21.80 22 23.00 23.30 Y 51.00 24 17.20 - 18.05 N 42.75 25 20.35 21.05 N 27.00 28 19.00 19.35 Y 70.30 30 16.55 17.25 Y 45.90 2 October 1978 19.25 19.55 Y 50.30 3 18.20 18.40 N 22.85 4 17.45 18.15 Y 23,75 5 16.30 17.01 N 22.86 6 20.25 21.00 N 27.99 L 9 16.25 16.55 N 67.55 [ 10 17.05 17.35 Y 24.81 g 11 15.05 15.35 N 21.99 12 18.43 19.17 Y 27.82 13 16.40 17.10 N 21.93 14 21.34 22.04 Y 28.94 16 17.00 17.30 .Y 43.26 20 17.20 17.50 Y 96.20 _ 22 21.45 22.20 Y 52.70 25 18.20 18.50 N 68.30 26 16.30 17.00 Y 22.50 r 28 20.05 20.40 Y 51.40 30 21.10 21.45 Y 49.05 i O E I-F _ _ _ _ _ . _ .
TA8LE 44(Con't.) TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-8 ESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1978 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN DATE ON OFF YES/NO OPERATION 18.45 19.17 Y 45.72 1 November 1978 . 3 20.45 21.18 Y 50.01 5 20.08 20.40 Y 47.22 6 16.25 16.55 N 20.15 7 16.48 17.12 Y 24.57 8 16.40 17.10 N 23.98 16.50 17.20 Y 24.10 9 18.25 18.55 Y 49.35 . 11 17.05 17.35 N 22.80 , 12 18.15 18.35 Y 25.00 13 16.26 17.00 N 22.65 14 15 18.30 19.00 Y 26.00 20.05 20.57 N 49.57 17 20 19.45 20.30 N 71.73
" 20.50 21.20 N 24.90 21 23 16.15 16.45 Y 43.25 l
24 19.00 20.08 N 27.63 l 25 20.00 20.30 Y 24.22 20.30 21.00 Y 48.70 &
. 27 29
" - 20.15 20.45 Y 47.45 W 1 December 1978 19.15 19.45 Y 47.00 3
16.28 17.08 Y_ 45.63 ~ 48.26 17.34 N 5 16.00 6 17.55 18.25 Y 24.91 9 17.55 18.25 N 72.00 10 19.46 20.23 N 25.98 11 16.30 17.00 N 20.77 12 17.45 18.15 N 25.15 13 18.04 18.34 Y 24.19 15 17.20 17.50 Y 47.16 18.45 19.15 Y 49.65 17 17.34 18.10 N 22.95 18 22.20 22.50 Y 28.40 19 20
" 18.20 18.50 N 20.00 21 16.25 16.59 Y 22.09 23 -
19.45 20.15 Y 51.56 24 19.35 20.05 N 23.90 25 21.50 22.20 Y 26.15
" 17.30 18.00 N 43.80 27
" 19.37 20.07 N 26.07 28 Y 24.43 29
" 20.20 20.50
" 17.30 19,30 N 22.80 30 Y 23.78 31
" 18.35 19.08 O
O TABLE 45 TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1979 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OFF YES/NO OPERATION 1 January 0.01 0.31 N 0.31 2 January 19.20 21.45 N 45.14 4 January 17.55 18.26 Y 44.81 6 January 20.25 20.55 Y 50.29 8 January 16.00 17.54 N 44.99 10 January 17.20 17.52 Y 47.98 12 January 17.40 18.15 Y 48.63 13 January 16.05 16.35 N 22.20 14 January 19.20 19.50 Y 27.15 16 January 18.26 18.56 Y 47.06
- 17 January 16.12 16.42 N 21.86 20 January 17.20 18.45 N 74.03 24 January 11.50 17.30 N 94.85 26 January 18.55 19.25 N 49.95 O- 27 January 28 January 16.27 16.57 N 21.32 16.30 17.00 N- -24.43 1 February 19.39 20.09 N 99.09 2 February 20.15 21.00 N 24.91 3 February' 21.07 21.40 Y 24.40 5 February 17.30 18.00 Y 44.60 7 February 18.19 18.57 N 48.57 9 February 17.00 17.35 Y 46.78 11 February 19.32 20.05 Y 50.70 13 February 18.20 18.50 N 46.45 15 February 19.10 19.41 N 48.91 16 February 18.55 19.25 N 23.84 -
17 February 17.02 17.35 Y 22.10 19 February 17.50 18.25 Y 48.90 20 February 17.00 17.35 N 23.10 21 February 18.M 19.15 Y 25.80 23 February 19.10 19.40 Y 48.25 24 February 21.45 22.25 N 26.85 25 February 21.05 21.31 Y' 23.06 26 February 21.00 21.30 N 23.99-27 February. 17.50 18.25 Y 20.95' 28 February 22.00 22.30 N 28.05 1 March 21.22 21.52 Y 23.22 3 March 19.33 20.03 :Y 46.51: 5 March 16.10 16.40 Y 44.37-O
TABLE 45(con't) TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-8 ESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1979 e TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE DATE . COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OFF YES/M0 OPERATION 7 March 16.52 17.22 Y 48.82 9 March 16.10 16.40 Y 47.18 10 March 21.15 21.45 N 29.05 11 March 19.30 20.00 Y 22.55 - 13 March 17.17 17.50 Y 45.50 17 March 19.50 20.25 N 98.75 18 March 16.45 17.15 N 20.90 19 March 20.15 20.45 Y 27.30 21 March 16.13 16.43 Y 43.98 22 March 17.03 17.33 N 24.90 23 March 19.50 20.20 Y 26.87 24 March 16.58 17.30 N 21.10 25 March 16.40 17.10 Y 23.80 26 March 16.03 16.36 N 23.26 27 March 18.40 17.12 Y 24.76 28 March 17.30 18.00 N 24.88 31 March 16.20 16.50 Y 70.50 2 April 18.10 18.42 Y 49.92 3 April 21.00 21.30 Y 26.88 4 April 20.50 21.26 N 23.96 6 April 21.40 22.10 Y 48.84 8 April 17.27 18.00 Y 43.90 9 April 19.45 20.20 N 26.20 10 April 18.10 18.40 Y 22.20 t 12 April 18.15 18.45 Y 48.05 13 April 19.44 20.20 N 25.75 14 April 16.30 17.00 N 20.80 l 16 April 18.55 19.27 N 50.27 l 18 April 20.45 21.15 N 49.88 19 April 22.30 23.00 N 25.85 20 April 22.00 22.38 Y 23.38 21 April 16.50 17.25 Y 18.87 22 April 18.40 19.10 N 25.85 23 April 17.20 18.00 Y 22.90 24 April 18.00 18.30 N 24.30 25 April 18.43 19.09 Y 24.79 26 April 16.35 17.06 N 21.97 27 April 16.50 17.25 N 24.19 28 April 16.55 17.30 N 24.05 29 April 19.30 20.00 Y 26.70 30 April 19.50 20.20 Y 24.20
l f l
~
l TABLE 45 (con't) TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1979 - TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH- HOURS SINCE DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OFF YES/NO OPERATION 1 May 19.45 20.21 N 24.01 3 May 19.30 20.02 Y 47.81 4 May 16.50 17.20 N 21.18~ - 5 May 16.05 16.35 N 23.15 7 May 18.25 18.55 Y 50.20 8 May 16.45 17.15 N 22.60 9 May 18.20 18.50 Y 25.35 11 May 17.35 18.05 Y 47.55 12 May 20.10 20.40 N 26.35 13 May 18.36 19.06 Y 22.66 13 May 17.17 17.49 Y 46.43' 16 May 19.55 20.30 N 26.81 17 May 19.16 19.46 Y 23.16 19 May - 20.05 20.35 Y 48.89
) 20 May 21 May 17.18 17.17 17.48 17.48 N
Y 21.13 24.00 22 May 17.17 17.48 N 24.00 23 May 16.37 17.08 Y , 23.60 24 May 15.30 16.00 Y 22.92 8 June 16.25 17.00 N 361.00 9 June 19.15 19.45 N 25.45-l- 10 June 22.30 23.00 N- 27.55 11 June 19.30 20.25 N 21.25 12 June 17.43 18.15 N ~ 21.90 13 June 23.15 23.45 N 29.30 14 June 22.30 23.00 N 23.55 15 June 23.20 23.50 N 24.50 17 June 21.38 22.08 Y 46.58 l 19 June- 18.45 19.15 Y 45.07 l 21 June 18.18 19.19 N 48.04 23 June 18.40 19.15 N 47.96 25 June 20.25 21.25 Y 50.10 26 June 16.15 17.1$ N 19.90 27 June 17.45 18.35 Y 25.20 28 June 22.05 22.35- N 28.00 29 June 1.00 ,
-1.30 Y 2.95 l
l l
~ . . , - . -- . .~..* , , -
.- ... , . - , , - -4
)
O TABLE 45 (con't) TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR F0WER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1979 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OFF YES/NO OPERATION 1 July 20.55 21.25 Y 67.95 3 July 21.20 22.00 N 48.75 4 July 23.00 24.00 N 26.00 5 July 16.45 17.25 N 17.25 . 7 July 20.00 21.00 Y 51.75 8 July 22.00 23.00 N 26.00 9 July 18.35 19.35 Y 20.35 10 July 20.30 21.30 N 25.95 11 July 19.40 20.40 N 23.10 12 July 21.00 22.00 N 25.60 13 July 20.05 21.05 Y 23.05 14 July 18.15 18.45 N 21.40 15 July 18.30 19.00 Y 24.55 , 16 July 17.30 18.00 N 23.00 17 July 20.10 20.40 Y 26.40 18 July 17.20 17.50 N 21.10 19 July 19.10 21.00 Y 27.50 20 July 17.20 18.10 N 21.10 21 July 19.55 20.45 Y 26.35 22 July 20.00 20.30 N 23.85 25 July 20.12 20.42 Y 72.12 27 July 19.30 20.30 Y 47.88 28 July 16.45 17.15 N 20.85 29 July 16.15 19.16 Y 26.01 30 July 17.06 18.06 N 22.90 31 July 18.35 19.35 Y 25.29 1 August 16.30 17.30 N 21.95 2 August 16.45 17.45 Y 24.15 3 August 16.15 17.15 N 23.70 4 August 17.25 18.25 N 25.10 6 August 17.10 17.40 Y 47.15 7 August 16.00 17.00 N 23.60 8 August 17.35 18.05 Y 25.05 9 August 17.15 18.15 N 24.10 10 August 16.35 17.31 Y 23.16 11 August 18.45 19.15 N 25.84 13 August 21.45 22.15 Y 51.00 - l 15 August 17.00 17.30 , N '43.15 a 17 August 18.00 18.40 19.10 Y 18 August i 20.05 20.40 N '6.00 4 , 19 August i 16.45 17.45 Y 21.05
- 4 l
TABLE 45 (con't) f TRAVELING' SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER-STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1979 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OFF YES/NO OPERATION 20 August 20.30 21.30 N 27.85 21 August 17.00 18.00 Y. 20.70 22 August 17.50 18.50 N' 24.50 - 23 August 17.45 18.45 Y 23.95 , 24 August 20.55 22.00 N 27.55 25 August 17.00 18.00 Y 20.00 27 August 16.20 17.20 Y 47.20 28 August 18.50 19.50 N 26.30 29 August 16.45 17.45 Y 21.95 30 August 22.05 23.05 N 29.60 1 September '16.45 17.15 N 42.10 2 September 16.50 17.20 Y 24.05 3 September 16.45 17.15 N 23.95 O 4 September 5 September 6 September 16.50e 16.50 16.45 17.20 17.20 17.15 Y N Y 24.05 24.00 23.95 ; 7 September 17.00 17.40 N 24.25 8 September 18.12 19.18 Y 25.78
'9 September 18.30 19.45 N 24.27 10 September 17.30 18.45 N 23.00 11 September 17.40 13.40 N 23.95 12 September 19.25 20.33 Y -25.93 13 September 16.40 18.15 N 21.82
. 14 September 16.38 17.40 Y 23.25 15 September 20.00 21.00 N 27.60 16 September 16.31 17.02 N 20.02 17 September 16.35 17.05 N ,24.03 . 18 September 19.02 19.35 Y 26.30-20 September 18.40 19.10 Y 47.75 21 September ~ 16.25 16.55 N 21.45 22 September 16.35 17.05 Y 24.50 23 September 16.15 16.50 .N- 23.45 24 September 16.54 17.27 Y 24.77 25 September 16.20 16.57 N 23.30 26 September- 17.00 17.35 Y 24.78
-28 September 16.40 17.10 .N 23.75 29 September 16.11 16.44 Y 23.34 4 31 September 17.06 18.09 -N 49.65 1 October 20.06 21.07 N- 26.98 2 October 20.00 21.02 23.95' ] -
4 October 17.14 -18.25 Y Y 45.23 6 October 20.50 21.20 Y c50.95-
- ,, - . - , ,7--- -
y - - - - - , ,,,,,-y . -%,v -- . .<w,.y , - -,-.-
TABLE 45(con't) TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1979 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OFF YES/N0 OPERATION 7 October 18.35 19.05 N 21.85 8 October 20.11 20.41 Y 25.36 9 October 20.30 21.00 N 24.59 - 10 October 21.00 21.30 Y 24.30 ' 11 October 23.00 23.30 N 26.00 13 October 16.50 18.05 N 42.75 14 October 17.08 18.10 Y 24.05 15 October 21.10 22.20 N 28.10 16 October 21.20 22.25 Y 24.05 17 October 21.05 22.10 N 23.85 18 October 22.05- 23.10 Y 25.00 19 October 21.05 22.10 N 23.00 20 October 16.50 18.10 Y 20.00 21 October 16.35 17.35 N 23.25 22 October 16.38 17.38 Y . 24.03 23 October 16.40 17.00 N 23.62 - 24 October 16.45 18.00 N 25.00 25 October 16.45 17.45 N 23.45 26 October 16.05 17.15 Y 23.70 30 October 16.06 17.15 Y 96.00 31 October 18.30 19.30 N 26.15
~
1 November 23.15 23.45 Y 28.15 2 Novenber 20.40 21.10 N 21.65 3 November 17.10 17.43 Y 20.33 4 Noventer 23.00 23.30 N 29.87 5 November 23.20 23.40 Y 24.10 7 November 21.10 22.40 Y 47.00 8 November 17.45 18.45 N 20.05 l 9 Novenber 21.18 22.20 Y 27.75 10 November 22.00 23.00 N 24.80 11 November 18.00 19.00 N 20.00 l 12 November 17.07 18.07 N 23.07 l 13 November 17.22 18.25 Y 24.18 14 Novenber 16.37 17.37 N 23.12 15 November 16.57 18.00 Y 24.63 16 November 19.13 20.25 N 26.25 17 November 21.15 22.20 Y 25.95 18 November 20.40 21.45 N 23.25 19 November 22.00 23.10 Y 25.65 l 20 November 19.20 19.50 N 20.40 l
l l TABLE 45(con't) TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY T0.31 DECEMBER 1979 . TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION _ FISH HOURS SINCE. DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OFF YES/N0 OPERATION 21 November 19.12 20.15 Y 24.65 22 November 19.07 20.25 N 24.10 23 November 17.15 18.30 Y 22.05 24 November 21.10 22.10 N 27.80 4 25 November 19.30 20.30 Y 22.20 26 November 20.55 22.05 N 25.75 27 November 18.40 19.40 Y 21.35 28 November 20.35- 22.00 N 26.60 29 November 19.10 20.10 Y 22.10 30 November 21.00 22.30 N 25.20 3 December 19.45 20.00 Y 69.70 5 December 16.30 17.05 Y 45.05 O' 7 December 8 December 21.12 20.30 21.45 21.30 Y N 52.40 23.85 9 December . 17.20 18.10 Y 20.80 10 December 20.40 21.30 N 27.20 11 December 21.00 21.30 Y 24.00 12 December 19.00 19.30 N 22.00 13 December 17.05 17.35 Y 22.05 15 December 21.12 21.42 Y 52.07 16 December 16.30 17.05 N 19.63 17 December 17.00 17.30 Y 24.25 19 December 19.07 19.37 Y 50.07' 20 December 16.40 17.10 N 21.73 21 December 19.00 19.30 Y 26.20 22 December 20.43 23.10 N 27.80 23 December 21.20 23.00 Y 23.90 24 December 21.20 22.00 N 23.00 25 December 19.10 20.15 Y 22.15 26 December 19.30 20.10 N 23.95 27 December 27.20 22.30 Y 26.20 29 December 17.20 21.10 Y -46.80 31 December 22.00 23.30 Y 50.20 0
TABLE 46 FISil SPECIES IMPINGED AT Tile DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION: 1 January through 31 December 1978 NUMBER IMPINGED WEIGili (grams) LENGTil (mm) 95% Confidence 95% Confidence 95% Confidence SPECIES Interval Interval Interval F r Upper Mean Lower Upper Estimate Hean Lower nd B nd Bound Bound Bound Bound 4 9 4 0 8 75 39 110 Alewife 1 Black Crappie 82 53 128 17 16 17 117 116 119 , Blackside Darter 1 0.5 4 1 27 ~ Bluegill Sunfish 5 3 9 10 9 10 68 67 68 8 Bluntnose Minnow 1 1 3 1 25 , Carp 6 3 15 2 1 ,3 56 51 60 Channel Catfish 3 1 7 0.4 59 Emerald Shiner 991 636 1,545 1 1 1 60 60 61
,reshwater Drum 80 55 114 4 3 4 81 78 83 Gizzard Shad 391 201 758 7 6 8 88 87 90 Goldfish 3,299 2,435 4,468 5 i 5 6 72 71 73 Green Sunfish 5 3 11 12 9 16 58 48 68 Logperch Darter 12 8 21 2 1 2 63 60 67 Pumpkinseed Sunfish 9 3 24 11 9 13 82 77 87 Rainbow Smelt 69 45 107 1 1 1 60 59 61 Spottall Shiner 15 9 25 2 2 2 65 63 66
*
- 30 *
- Stonecat Hadtom 1 1 3 1 Trout-perch 29 20 41 4 4 5 80 77 82 88 85 White Crapple 22 15 31 8 8 8 91 l
Yellow Perch 1,582 1,082 2,312 5 5 5 83 83 84 TOTAL- 6,607 5,447 8,015 5 5 5 74 74 75
- Confidence intervals could not be computed when no more than one representative of a ,
given species occurred. , ! O O O.
C TABLE 47 . FISH. SPECIES. IMPINGED AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION: 1 January through 31 December 1979 NUMBER IMPINGED WEIGHT (grams) LENGTH (mm) . 95% Confidence 95% Confidence 95% Confidence SPECIES Interval Interval Interval Lower Upper Upper Mean Lower Upper Estimate Bound Bound Mean Lower Bound Bound Bound Bound i * *
. Alewife 1 0 5 0 100 17- 2 -1 5 59 57 60 '
Black Bullhead 17 17 Black Crappie 28 14 54 8 -27 44 81 70 91 5
~
1 Brown Bullhead 11 7 17 12 12 12 63 83 83 j Carp 3 1 9 12 99 t Emerald Shiner 2 14 90 511 1 1 1 55 54 55 Freshwater Drum 115 61 218 4 -1 8 82 79- 84 Gizzard Shad 162 95 275 8 0 15 91 88 93 Goldfish 3449 2266 5248 5 1 9 70 70 71 Logperch Darter 21 13 34 2 -2 7 66 63 70
- Pungkinseed Sunfish 3 1 9 1 36 1 Rainbow Snelt 32 18 55 2 -8 12 64 58 70 Spottail Shiner 9 5 16 3 -17 24 69 58 81
- Troutperch 5 2 15 4 -1 8 83 78 88
- Unidentified Sunfish 1 0 5 1 32
- White Bass 3 1 12 4 81 White Crappie 23 13 40 6 -16 28 69 62 75 l White Perch 3 1 9 2 2 2 62 60 64 i Yellow Perch 285 129 631 5 -3 13 76 73 78 TOTAL 4385 3128 6149 5 2 8 71 70 71
- Confidence intervals could not be computed when no nore than one representative of a given species occurred.
s . r
TABLE 48 A SUl1 MARY OF M0flTilLY FISil IMPIllGEMENT AT Tile DAVIS-BESSE flUCLEAR POWER STATI0ilS: 1 January through 31 December 1978 NUMBER IMPINGED WEIGilT (grams) LENGTH (mm) 95% Confidence 95% Confidence 95% Confidence 110NTilS Interval Interval Interval
' "*' UPP"" Upper Estimate 11ean Lower Upper Mean Lower Bound Bound Bound Bound Bound Bound January 45 31 66 13 12 14 104 102 106 February 17 9 31 5 5 6 76 72 79 ,
March 13 7 25 4 4 4 72 70 73 g April 2,875 2,157 3,833 5 5 6 79 78 79 7 May 648 479 874 5 4 5 79 78 79 June 45 29 69 12 7 17 92 86 98 July- 7 5 11 9 9 9 79 77 81 August 4 2 8 12 9 14 100 90 110 September 19 12 32 11 9 12 83 80 87 October 28 18 43 10 9 11 59 55 64 November 576 314 1,058 3 3 3 62 61 63 2,330 1,594 3,406
- 3 3 3 68 67 69 December TOTAL 6,607 5,447 8,015 5 5 5 74 74 75 I
l i g e O O e -
. . . _. .. _~ . - - - - - . - . . _ - - . _ _ - _ . - - - _ _ - - . - _ . . . . = - _ _ _ . . _ - - - . . - . . .- ~ . ~ .
TA 49 l A SUHHARY OF MONTHLY FISH IMPINGEHENT AT THE DAVIS-BESSE HUCLEAR POWER STATIONS: 1 January through 31 December 1979 NUMBER IMPINGED WEIGHT (grams) LENGTH (mm) 95% Confidence 95% Confidence 95% Confidence MONTHS Interval Interval Interval
" P Upper Lower Upper Estimate tiean Lower Mean d' Bo d Bound Bound Bound Bound January 2429 1363 4335 4 1 6 71 70 71 February 30 17 52 3 -4 10 62 58 66 ,
l- March 501 345 726 3 -0 7 64 63 65 g
, zu April 753 498 1137 3 -1 7 66 65 67 ..,
May 16 9 29 3 0 5 63 61 64 June 20 6 66 7 -42 56 77 65 89
- July 29 18 45 18 -18 53 108 100 116
- August 54 39 76 17 -177 210 63 51 76 September 35 20 60 5 13 22 62 52 71 i
i 2 0 8 .18 97 October 147 83 269 11 1 21 83 81- 86 November 367 172 786 9 5 13 84 83 85 December ! TOTAL 4385 3128 6149 5 2 8 71 70 71 , i 1 i }l ,
- s. . ;
i i I
TABLE 50 ESTIMATED 1978 SPORT Atl0 00fillERCIAL FISil liARVEST FR0t1 Tile 0llI0 UATERS OF LAKE ERIE" SPORT llARVEST C0ftfiERCIAL llARVEST TOTAL.IIARVEST flo. of Weight flo. of Weight flo. of Weight Individuals (Kilograms) Individuals (Kilograms) Individuals (Kilograms) Yellow Perch 11,483,000 1,116,386 9,178,000 b 890,294 20,661,000 2,006,680 f Walleye 1,652,000 1,515,906 O 0 1,652,000 1,515,906 White Bass 1,533,000 334,825 3,38D,000 b 736,842 4,913,000 1,071,667 Freshwater Drum 668,000 363,200 981,000 b 533,904 1,649,000 897,104 235,000>t 92,843 453,000 178,876 ' Channel Catfish 218,000 86,033 f Smallmouth Bass 32,000 20,203 O 0 32,000 20,203 Others c c 1,867,983 d _ 1,867,933e TOTAL 15,586,000e 3,436,553e _ 4,121,866 _ 7,648,419 a Scholl (1979). b Estimated based on mean weight of sport fish. C Data not available. d Thirty-eight percent carp.
- Excludes weight of "Others" caught by sport fishermen.
Closed to commercial fishing. , 9 O e
l o o . o l TABLE 51 COMMERCIAL FISH LANDINGS FROM THE OHIO WATERS OF LAKE ERIE: 1974-1979* SPECIES 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 Buffalo 14,528 14,982 13,620 15,890 16,344 14,982 Bullhead 12,258 14,074 ,19,522 29,056 32,688 24,062 Carp 1,284,366 1,265,298 1,196,290 1,249,408 701,430 883,938 Channel Catfish 136,200 117,566 101,242 115,316 92,843 107,144 Freshwater Drum 307,812 340,500 432,208 361,838- 533,904. 574,764 [ ! Gizzard Shad ** ** 274,216 228,816 706,878- 863,962 S~ Goldfish' 29,510 23,608 60,836 250,154 343,678 98,064 Quillback ** ** 57,658 46,762 46,762 36,320 Rainbow Smelt 2,270 4,086 15,890 454 4,994 **- l' Sucker 39,952 24,516 28,602 14,982 14,982 17,706 White Bass 1,314,330 760,450 680,546 501,216 736,842 866,232 Yellow Perch 797,678 675,552 652,852 1,051,918 890.294 1,189,934 4 4 TOTAL 3,934,364 3,241,106 3,533,482 3,865,810 4,122,774 4,677,108 l
- Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources (1980). Data presented in kilograms.
** Data'not available.
t 4 0
,g7 O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0, 0 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 9 1 0 8 9 1 8 8 0 334 2 4 2 8 1 9 7 0 4 7 1 9 1 2 4 9 5 2 18 8 4 1 0, 7 8 1, 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 8 2 5 4 1 8 2 7 4 2 7 2 04 3 3 51 7 0 3 2 9 9 1 2 5 7 4 9 01 4 2 1 8 6 7 3 0, 1 1 ,
)
s m a r g o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O i 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, Ra K 7 3 1 F9 ( 7 5 4 7 9 0 8 9 0 3 7 0 9 1 1 3 3 6 7 9 1 3 7 3 6 3 2 5 4 0 S9 T 1 4, 1 5 2 2 7, 2 G1 l N i G 1 9 I - I 2 D E 5 N5 W A. 97 E L B A 1 l i S I : 1 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0c 0 0 0c 0 0 0 O T FE I 6 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 7 8 8 LR 9 3 4 4 5 9 1 1 8 5 AE 1 4 6 4 5 1 0 6 5 4 4 3 I CE 4, 1 6 3 8, 1 RK 1 7 EA ML M O C c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0C 0 0c 0 0 0c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 7 0 8 2 4 9 0 9 1 7 8 1 6 1 3 6 9 6 31 2 6 8 5 1 5 1 4, 6, 1 7 S h m E s u h I i r s t C f D d i l E t a f e P a r h e m S C e S t k S s d t h i c s b o a l a d s h a w a h e n l e e w r i W b o B r s y i a h n h a f l b e i e f f l p n s z d e l n k k f l wf l r a e z l k i i c c n l o u u a h r i o a u a o u u a B B B C C F G G L Q R R S S W O
O O O TABLE 52(Cont'd) COM4ERCIAL FISH LANDINGS FROM LAKE ERIE: 1975 - 1979a WEIGHT (Kilograms) SPECIES 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 4 White Bass 1,932,000 1,162,000 948,000 1,590,000 1,626,000 Yellow Perch. 4,597,000 2,903,000 4,801,000 4,918,000 5,931,000 Others 927,000 833,000 928,000 7 % ,000 639,000 e O. N 41 . TOTAL 17,722,000 15,674,000 19,513,000 21,569,000 21,976,000 . a Muth (1980). b Not taken conenercially in Ohio and Mich19an waters. c Included with "Others" during this year. i i
~~ ~ --s .-. -- ----
1,
-! - 108 -
i d e , l .g i ! i i l l r FIGURES O I I l l l l O; l
i 4 Figure 1. Reactor Power Record for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1978). I 100 - , 1 90 - i 80 - M n, + re -
^
I i 70 - a Df w 60 - @
- 5. '
j g, i I ' S f G M- , ! if =- i
- e n-
) ? 10 - { Malatenas.ce Outage p l JANUARY flaauARY' MRCH APRIL ' MV ' JUNE '
.RE T
- AUGUST ' StPIDett OCIO8tR 'h0VEMBER 'DE OtER l
DATE t i 5 e i
- o I
=
R E B I C M O E D I p
) 1 R
[ 9 ( i 7 M - E V 9 0s 1 - ( i I 1 t R E i B n o l U C o
, i n
o -' - i t - R a E - r l t M
- E S '
T P E r S e - 4 w . o . P T S r U a G U e A l c I u N e T s L U s J e B
- 3 s
i D v a t n u O J e E h t 3 T A r D o f Y A d M r o c 3 e R r t i e R P w A o P l r o ' t c u C a a e A M R I 2 _ Y R A e I u r n a u r g f i I F Y R A u n A J J 0 0 3 0 9 o s 0 7 o s 0 5 0 4 o s 0 2
~
0 1 O
!a. n c8ko_
lli i !\ I, , !
8 sH' o
'RE
. B r M E . e C E . w D o
- P R _
_ E r M a E V e l O N l
. c '
u R E N B O ._ e T C . O s ( _ s 'R e E B M _ - E s T P i v 7 '5 E a D i s u _ e G h t W A J _ l r V f o t. 0
- J d
r e o g a c E t E e O u N U T _ R e J A c D n . i o t n a n e Y t n A a ia M r M e ' n . N e ) L . G 8 I R 7 P r 9 I" A e 1 i l w( o ' ll H
-8 P C R
1 A c M i t r i 'Y t n R A c U U l e E n
, r J
F R B E . s i o 4 f _ s t R A _ o a U N r t A G S s J _ 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 _ 3 0 1 9 0 a 0 7 M 0 5 0 4 = 0 2 0 1 e QE- myTa E r u _ i g F t
. i ; !1 ' . :,< i~ !. i , i , I 4 1
= Y t
t a e t C M n i o t t t a s t _ t S V 0 Is
. r e
w t o s l e P o i c _ r o a e l ~ c u t _ N i s _ e s t i r s t s 5 e B s i v T S a G U D U A e h t - r o Y f L U J d R r o c e E T A O E D n N U < o J i t a k r _ e _ n e Y G M r e w k o P c) t l a i9 r r7 A t9 c1 e( l l E , 1 u - s Y c a st oi m rn GU M
/ ' I
. r 4 a n
u a e s r i i g u p -i r F r a m A m J T 0 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 1 m " 0 7 _ n
= 0 4 m 0 2
0 1 _aE- 3#m3mN i
. . - _ . - . . ... .--..-. -.. -.---._ -.. - .-..- .-...-.. ~.-.. _. -....~ .- - . .
~
O . O O Figure S. Water Temperature Record for Intake and Discharge for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1978). i so - 886 a d _;y, y
\.:;AM'i y .
55 - I e b ' I h e*
- L a.
g
- li si s,f .
=
f ss . lj I. '
!,h t
e E"~ '$,A ' . ~ g 4 g
$ > (!6 , ,%
I
. 6 E 4%J L
1 v g . Q
- - , - ,, v.. .. . . , - - .. - ,.
i 9 t 9
Figure 6. Water Temperature Record for Intake and Discharge for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1979).
----inta.
f so -
-~
. -e. g >: s4o s :
h a. r I. ~all'
. )
i?'\l \, , l \ s, 10 - . .., ss - ,
\..
j Y1 I g s p; i. C 1i
. ' l . , )
s- ' l '. ; j ,O 3 < 55 -
' i W! 7 a
t : 1 l so - ,! ' ; f s_ 3
.g
}
l1l i l
' \
1
* ,f g[
4s -
/ ,,, 5,
's .
il t I, i ao . s
#.. id jg
,". . y,s . s il . La g' . .V 'ii %.n,'i\!.
35 - o---- g
- t . ! ",'
' '.n 3a _ l JANUARY l FEBRUARY l MARCH l APRIL l MAY l JUNE l JLLY l AUGUST l SEPTEMBER l OCTOBER l NOVLPEER l DECutER l
l DATE 1 l l l 8 9 e
- O -
O O
- Figure 7 Water Intake Conduit Flow Record for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1978).
l 120-110-
' 9 g 100-
!E
,0-l O
N 80-4 e
- g O~ 10- Y M
m C ' O 60 - ( 50- l 3. t y m 40 - 2 3 ,, . ; rl 1 1 ,~ u
=
E +
- ,o_
5 Note: intake flew I.31 < 10- djuharge flow JANUARV ' FEBRUARY' MARCH
- APRIL
- MAY ' JUNE JLLY ' AUGUST '5tPILMER' OC100ER
- NOVEMER' DECEMER
- DATE i l f g + l
- 116 -
W ,
~
E c' o .B
!w B.
af 8 a ~; - D ' n t se~ - y D E E C j 5 u - m
@ as
'G
= O I
=
I. - U m - A b. se 1-l o - c , - m 4 3 A
=o u
e E 2 k#= o - LL. l M -
= 1 1 -
3- 5 - d % s. 30 ; J - u e
$-e , x am o -
5
,ca
# " i=
~
4 - i i i e a i i i g a = 2 s R 2 2 (09W) AUG Jad suoLLE9 Jo suo1LL1W
Figure 9 Discharge Conduit Flow Record for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (1978). t 100-8 90-E go. 10-60- ' E e 2 50- " g.
+ i jf i
- J r dj p 20-5
/}A 7__1 _ , _ ,
10-1 N O ' ' ' JANUART ' Ff8auARV' MRCH APRIL ' My JtstE Jtt y ' AUGUST 'SEPTDetR' OCTOsta ' H0VINER* DECEMER' DATE
.y v
i e
wcn' l 4 a t t s O_ C _ E D _ l f t a s ._ n
. V I i
V 0 N o 5 i t a 4 t y 1 8 0 S T C 0 r P e w o r v I t t e D a , T F e I S _ l c , I _ u , N ._ e T S s U G s _ B e , U A
- I s
. i v a D e P, Y L J U h . t l f d r o . J E N U J E T A O _ r D o c l _ e R w o T A M l _ F t l i u . d) n9 L o7 RI P _ C9 A 1 e( g r , n l a1 ( h ' H ct C R si A in M DU l 0 Y R 1 A U R e B E r T u g i F
- f. l Y
R A U N A J 0 0 7 0 0 5 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 O OE_ Q go Co i .E;c i , .:
n 3 y - - L) .
) - ]
N
,7. g;' i -c x_
.~
as~y t J,- % , ,. :!'
'",, :. = ~ ^ ,
i- %- ". ...? [# y% ,pff *- JN- r';z'5 i U - .}'if()R s , ,,,...' LAKE L.r ..' i o - -- - massa
-.' (X,,
.s ERIE an n
!- ~...,..<)...,
2f y . .. .I.
*L w
a c*~*=~
- e we
-... 7 . g' _. . .v.. . ,.x. .
_. w . . p- _ n p/y_ . ~. < u . su.,a . 7
- _/,gy'._. -L
- i. !
l j .=.w 5 L, *,,. ',d,ps,:.*.,
- . ., V
.:.* . . s .
s,.,.c
. o. . o....
*f'
' , 2t_':h r e ~, s .
on ' w j 'y
~a a s sca,..
j(
- ~
~p,p]- : /. _
%; , s l 'I
*g ,4 3 -*- -* -*-
so son y.ounery gg -
,, n.
..,Ky .s. -f((.'.
" N .h ' . I e aw<e. P.e raw
[ F*
-"- .: o, i.
" e$,'.:..** . . . -
s5'.$8 ___ MAB5H i s. r ., c ... emn ei
' ^*
e
,, )
;j ,ja,3 ,, y,,,, ,, , ,, g,,,,,, 8 s 5 C.asseechen offace
\
I
,1 \ /.*,. ,
- 3,$
,. ~ w .*. a - - - - ' . , . .:
'.**o**.-**
l / '. e, ** 4 J\ .;
, w ,- -
---m-.~.n.n .
24, , M N * - 4. .
* ==w ww2
/ .
TOUS $AINT ELVER - d oavis-acsse ecci.can eowca swa wr to i S4TE PLAN --I
. FIGURE 11. STATION LOCATION MAP
, s '
e
. -- g- g - ee-%, + - - - + p % 9 .- , -,- .g-9--.g -.-m. 9 eu.i~.-g--+..w- - -y.--w-q. --+- ,wv. ,
en.
- 120 -
O I g1
- A (
y' "*% i f L 4 u3 s
-: s i y :
h
- 1 s
l
/ l e:i gz
' 3 5a
'M ,
5- b { .~
- L, -- \ d '. I,
't i
" 01 i
d} e t
\ p+ n)*4 a s w (3 3
-o D u
- i Il. F.) $ d sq o.o w 11 ?5 8
- - $ 3 II gy ecO n : 1 D
( w
& k o 5 - ~' o g "s 2
1 r a
- v -
1 3 3 w 2 3 i: 1 -. wa c cc s 1 i-' s 55
\. 't,- -
O m
} .~.-
o C3 4 o w M 3 ~
- et
>=
'h Z pe"% . ' .. . .
.,9 3l n-1 1 ec w
0-4,~ > i,lii %
%g \,
,? 2
.. ,\, . . . . ' ,et s
w 9:, <. ,? a
- ,- O
~
'#d's x -- - Ni,<,5,. ,
<lb Y
u. f g% 9
.f 8
\ ' 7 ss gs p #
- 'g4
'4 ,
/
j* ', }:;; 11
,- ".l - -t-
,3, 4.;, \
s' s
'!g \"
'l ,-
E g
;- ' s' %* l e6 a ,s i.
~%,
\ S,'
}
~~
x . j
/ : ,
c-M .= c . - _ _ _ _
- 121 -
i Lo s ' l l PORT l f M l PORT l u
. ROCKFILL
/
MV ' e
. E $ h h m l 2 2 *
- i n..
i s ROCKFILL l PORT l 4 i l PORT l ! j O l LOW WATER DATUM E . 0 . LAkt sorrow a : r OESIGN , INTAKE . , INTAKE CRIS A B C O E VELOCITY ! DAVIS -EESSE 18'-1* 2T-O" 18' 1
- T-11 6'- 9" O.25 FT/SEC OREGON IT-O" 16'-O" IT-O" 5' - 10" 8'- 2" O.25 . FT/SEC !
PORT CLINTON ' I f-2" 5-8" 11'-2" T -i l" 6'-2" O.25 FT/ SEC f
*18'-2" or, the other side of the crib i
FIGURE 13, DETAILS OF WATER INTAKE CRIB O !
't 0 .
122 - O Z 9 5z
-I
, :s 85 -
H '
' . :t si s .,
3 I - i,
- m. ,L
,I p r 83 8E t;i 4k 4 he
*X
==-
i.- z p :: :: y
- ? w
, e :<
e - f e
- a* -
Z g e 2: :
- a . <
h m
- i. z
- w
...- r I, e . w z l . "I t: -i 5
< 5' '! m a :s l-.
c. f! h c - . a z 1 L. e
,M
- r-I m
.i :s l}
s c. s
, r s.- . s ,
']- . =
- . > r. .3 a.
b
- y. a w
( - g I 4 ( - t M_
,________,I I..
I i 1-
=
a w ii ii ii i I ( . , . . M i =l ,~y ql a, i,a
- 2 1 I ii I v 1'r - -,I - - -
- -- G.'4"EtE.i! - -- ,
~~
5 's r-, u__a r- - , t___a %e;_J ____________ - - m e q
.[l 1 ___ m g
.I I wr5*
. . !! c iI Ii tl . . . . . . . . . . . . , . .
il OOpOI i j}l # 4 . . ~ . . . . . . . . C
=
a t.- 1
'.o a 'i o of i I
d ..~..........- l .m l . .lib_d\O__'lD_d . . .
'90 a- -o = ,.- !H >
fiE ,l
- -s
/
I- {u g i ig y o - -- o g . , i. , l , i O
- 123 -
i I
.csv ustan esfa j
Owest sisTan naar o ii
' _X LAKE ERIE l
\ .
, " % 4i.40,_
- u come w.nea, u a
qann,a_ n44cananas, if roar nocx arm, i ef
""" "d cocuar rouir nas, = nsa, l M , "6 -
h .
- 0 r ~
m, , e_.._
,, s G
~~" ~ y O _
- ' o.vta
- PS A
-y^ 41' 35,-
B ATHY METRIC MAP - otm couTouns in Fm intow ton n1En ouva
+ LEAST DEPTH OVER REEF -
CONTOUR INTERVAL 8 FEET I 1 MtLES
. ._ _g O ,,euse is.eeems me m <couer eo1~r.
I
-. - , ,. -. -- . ,--,,.s - --- ,,
- 124 -
O f..= ...-. 7 .-..,.4 , r%
- -::: .. . . -.-4.. ..
W:: .. . ..... .
... . .- .. ... .. "I . ,. . .
.. . . . . .- . . . .. .. . ....- m 4;. ,. .
- ,..i. . .. . .
. r t: . . -
- p. . . . . -- - . .- - . . . . . .- .... .- .
v.r.yf.,. 15..t-*.e:.,:*e..
=*.;- e... . .r..e...m.
W.
- : ..tw . : .- -.. . .
.-..... ..... . ~... -.. .
.v. . ..+ . . . . .
.=
-.= .
=
r.?
- . .r :..a:p;s r: ::
w :
.w ;-
..m - -- ---- - -. . .. . . . .
.:~...:
.re:e.R', e
. : g:.. . :. .' . . . i =L"vi: :~:=: . .~. :*: . n = = = - - - -.....
=
-=.
- n. . : .;e;. .*
f ..%:.t ...:....
.. .: :~ ..
. ere.... . ; 4,'a ... . . . . . . .-.-.:.
.. . . . ~
7: ....*.- ....'..v..r..'..c.4.:.;-y 4
- v. . . - - - .: r
.y. ..
== .
..;.-.. : . , ...v.e f: . * . . *:. .t. ._
. .. . . . . ....n . -
- . .. ,..'..*.:.e.......
. s . t.: . .
s . . - . c. p . . .
. . = ..7tv.e. .- . .
;;s; .. ..* * ::. .~.,..; :..* :e.^..a=~nn..,..-
. . : q . . . .::. . - . ..
.e . :::. .. . .
,/.'. . ~ .a. -
. ~ . :e. s.. : t: .. .. .
_ pege . * * ..**4
.:. . f ...w.-.; c=r .c=.r * . '.2:. m..+~k....s ;ya . . .
,.l.;. *.: .=, * '.%*. s, @. . ....j.-..*
, .. . . . . . r % * :. - *
. .. ... . ? . := *** . g, .% ='; e - pc a
- * ~.
e; .e :. ;, .::.: ..':;:.- ... .d.-. .,. :a
... :.,* .i::= * ** u-. s..:w-N: ......
4;*:~. . . , *.....*e
...,,.;.s.- . .
e e, .n. * :e . s
~
- p. .e :. . . ::t. . :.;l. - , .. ;*-i,; e . *. . :' c.. - 2:l:;,.:. .: .:e - .l*)...;?.
'e *i. ::r... .:,*
r.
. . .* .....* .t %.~
- e. . *... *: .. ~...,
e.
.g . . .
* =: . .*. 4 . -: ..- . .
. - *. s.f - : * . . .. .T.... :,. . : . . .:
.: . +r.". ......-. ..
.. .e n
. < ::. T..:;: *.. :r;;.. ? ....o-
.~? *
*;;;;; . , ,\ **l, . :. l**
* *:c. :.m <! . -
/.: . . . .. * . * .e. * . V. .**::.:,,.*
. ..b... .,w.,...........,..
.t . . . . e,. ... . . . . . , - .
. .: t u *-
. . .;f.,. -..?- ::. . ...?. : . .'. . . .- -
-F,.,.-
- s. . ,W=v.;r e;,..:. ,;ea:....'.
- .. s...: ... ,.: ,.. " . . .v.; =. . : :.a . .
., . . . . . . * . . w;
- r . .s. ; ; : -.~ .
- .-r ::7. . .
. , . . . ? . .. .v .v w .v. x .. - . :. - . .
- . . . . . . . . . . . o. . *- ty ..-:.
. re; .. . . ...*g*...* .= .* - e .
. .+ *
- e ..*.\... ..? * ..
e,: ....e;. '. : ..
.. .y*:, ,
s
. ...)..e...
- . ...=..,*..**e.;,.....*,..:...?+*'.;,%:..,?,,ff.......,....
. . . .;, s e ' a.: :. , . l-l;:. ',4'...- 1 e ,. : .e.. ; .; .- .,, ...;;,:
,. . :., a .... ..
.e ~ ...':.. ....~*.*e. . ... ..- f'**./** .*
.; ;. -l q;- . 6,:..g
. .e-*.w.4 .s'. r - e.-: . ,;: 4 V: :s - n. a:. ..
a,a.-
.:: :/. e*
..a.. .- . .. >
.... ' *.f.
*Q;r". ,.. .ef,,,.::p;.ti,L . .
. g; .
.. . .,a.;/;
., .v *L .: .,.h.:::
. ,y
. . . (,p..,;?.: .e;;'. * .: ..~ . g: ,..e.
=
- .,.,.: v. . .:, : :;;4*f:. e.
-. .s- ..l': . . - ..
W. . ,. ; * . .e ,y . 2,: : %s:. * :*...
. . f.e. - - - - *
. . .: f : *.. : . t .U..e.
. . er .; , .. , . ,;;.,,
;;.;?..:.'. .:.... .e. -: : .
.:: .f- -
,.:.; .n :.p..: .:i.::.
A. .*:../ ... . .::.. .. v.i.
. . . e . .*- ,:.U : W.. .. . . .::o . .,.*:.. :- .. . . .. ]: e?:.".%*:.tn...*::: +:..
* : . ?: :?.' .C : .i-l. Q,:s: . :.. :..w: :
.. 2 : . .
7.-l3 :x. s::": v ::.*. .W T.: ..l;;*n,. e... .f:;;; 1 ;;. .s::_
.. . . _L:-.:.. ... :?. :. :..
- m. :::.:.e.;v*.
- - l;1 :;,.. :.;:::. . . .R. :..l .' .. .. . .ch . ;:;L . ..w =..=.=m. 4 . . - - - - - - .-
. . ..e w. ..:?.::.
e,. ;.. s. -: . .. .. , .. a : ... .;... . ..-
.. > .h. .. .,.. - -
/.,;;.,y. .. y:.*:. . ..*.g:e. .,.a.. ,..... . . .
. .w.::.a.. - . 2 ,. .. . , :. . :.
- r.a.'.t.?
f~.,? *
.7 .:p:.
.:^ * ? e'.,.
- . . e .
~:: , .- .<. < ~ :: .. .
+a:.
G,,,, : . , .:. - .
..~... ::.:y ' . :. .::.:.:M.. . ::.:.?. * .-.
tp. .
.:. . .v... * .; ;r. . . . . ... . . -
- . . . .--. . . : .: .c:.h:: ;w . .
-...3...?s*..~....W :+. *:-.~
Locust Po..snt
'. . e .:.:. . . . . . .: * . a:
.. .'.:a; ....: .
., u:: .?..: m.:.:,:s.. . ;- -
.~.w;.
~
- .s. ...:- ..d:,:.W:. .: :..e=w. 4. :.. .
. :+:f: a .::
. -v.:.
. . .~. . . s . w .~.-~. :
s ..r::.,.~e m...:.,. ww.,- u
- . .e: .
- .- .:: .*.:~+ar:: : e. + e.:.,.. w.,
a , , :
,:,:Q ,&::< .: ~.+:,.,.. . : uy.:
- g. y A . e-:u ,.if. .t,v.:.O. : t.',,. 7 = . .g v. 9 < . .: e ... . --
*R. 7 f. m
,** ,A... 1-:f ~%. :: :.a.
.. -:. .;:+:a . ..a. . , . t. .: *{. - : .=.:,. ' '-: W: a : ...v...'.=...-=.gg,. :e r.ww 8**'
.:w:-~~ . . a .. e .,s .- e ; + .- - --.
* ~.
- : :': '. r.e v'v.-
... ..e.s,' . ,"t.. w'.
. .' : .-<,"-..",..s
.r..-?,'.is'.
. , . . . . s...v.
- 5.
3,: + . M r .*. . ., - : . :a :- k .e ,.:, a,W e.e p .~.
.,.::::. :.-d . 4. . --, w- - . .
.- .:* e : t. :+. . i . .
. -P. .,s.'.wm.
- w, -. .,p,i:.s 4.*e:n. .. w w:a: .+:.. g;p . ,. .: , . .:.. :.. e,..
+??*.t.
- 4. . - :< .1:f . :
- 5- v.
.t : e. c: ef y; . .:
4 .- . 1,..:. .. +.t. .::=i.:*.,:s.*a e' . :*w..M - +.4.::4.*.*:.(g .. ;,.:y+:v-... -: < :-
- s. ,
- Of OI I*T*t/
SEDI ENT DalS 14 \l6.,;tU l I5%t
" w:.y...w . * . .: e .k.. . . .ag*. i , ; . 8.: s. .: 4.w . .
( fi y - .
- +. :%c.w
.4 ::v.+ > .. - :: .-
.;;+ *::<*..
. V W f '...... . a.... . ...*:-
. p. : :t.d..*.rr.n .. ;. f.ft.-
AA1A5 WITH MULTlPLE SYM80L5 C0N515T 0F AT . U@*.$".81.f.i.W':ff:).p :' -
.p. ,*.-. e.va D.[.* .t. **/ 5. * *.; : ti, M.
-' - - * < * ~ * *. -- * -
LEAsT to% F0A EACH 5(0iMENT. TTPE SH0WN i *
' '* t}?;%.. ..'**,!. .,.*.,.*.* * *.C.**: ?
- E.*.J.;,i . ; ,.*.,
".h.4+.g:.@ ;
. .... im. ,c ::.,.:
;:.,M.
DOLOMITE / LIMESTONE
.. . . . . : . v. ....s .. . . . .
. SAND (>90%)
- .k:} ': *;.' / 'f.W
- .~. f .;G.;%, :'*,d
.: . ;... ? .:
. . ~. :....
+. .: .:. ...s : . .... : e. . * . , .......;... : c. :=.:: ..es . ;.:: .1.*
- GRAVEL (>$0%) -- sitt & cla.y -
.***s e *
. . . .vg.
- -4..* :
.=4-FEET ~ ' "e ~ .c. e .w .<
.. .. .:.- .- " cc. .F' s i,.u. . 6 a-i.
.,,.,,.v. ..
. . *t.: w....... +:
l e espoo sopoo 6 a s.oo e . q;;.,. .:. : %;. .. ulLES .
. '
- C. .- . .I . . . . .
..u-e va i a e o e r o 'os.e ,,.., yl.C ,,,,,,
83w 83% -- g FIGURE 16. SEDIMENT DISTRIBUTION MAP OF WESTERN LAKE ERIE IN THE VICINITY OF LOCUST POINT
~
oo<.=
- _
LAKC O 26
- .,a . 0 f . v 's
,a
==&',' Lake Er.ie
, ERif 0600 44 1 i ,
-H- 99 O3 i
} B 7
23 42 ,
- e e27
. * ** . .. .ONavarre 21
- O1 4 15 5
Marsh ..*.....f** . g4 10 11 12 - Coolin9 i . O O O 28 M Tower :
- 9 13 4 14 9 10
- i a.....* * . ' .* . 3 18 t
- ( ..*.
e .
- S 18 pd Physical 20
- 4 17 Facilities
* .25
@ $ 22 .;
~
- s. /********
Navarre *. I'*., Marsh *
., g 29
; C . . .*.. ... * *
...+
'~1000 .
1
- feet *
,. (3OOm) i FIGURE 17 BIOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATIONS AT Tile DAVIS-BESSE HUCLEAR POWER STATION.
FIGURE 18. TRENDS IN MEAN MONTilLY TEMPER /quRE, DISSOLVED OXYGEN, AND llVDR0 GEN ION MEASUREMENTS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT FOR Tile PERIOD 1972-1979. . No Measurements Avaliable 30 . e 25 - Temperatse cc M 20 . 15 ' - Otsat tved Om gen (ppm)
~
~
10 - C
- -L un.
-_ .. ,t-
,- " W % x"
- ,t 9um
. , i 5- (pH) f' , l'
- - - ' ' = ' - - *- -
O
. J A 5 0 N DlJF M A M J J A 5 0 N dJ F M A MJ J A 50 N *)J F M AM J J A 5 0 N 0'J F M A M J J A 5 0 N D'J F M A M J J A 5 0 N dJ F M A MJ J A 5 0 N dJ F M A MJ J A 50 N D 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 O O O
O O O
~
4 FIGURE 19 TRENDS IN MEAN MONTHLY CONDUCTIVITY, ALKALINITY AND TURBIDITY MEASUREMENTS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT FOR THE PERIOD 1972-1979. . I 4 1 No A4eesurements Available 500-f hs 4 m '\ /
's lvity (umhoe/cm) p
,00 / ___ ,
,i
,i m: I i
M i l) Alkalinityh(m ,
-w iOO- , __
_7 _- w ..l... W ?... s 2 ,.'... . & c.- % s.'.'. N ... O J A S O N 0lJ F M A M J J A $ 0 N elJ F M A M J J A S O N DIJ F M A M J J A 5 0 N 0lJ f M A M J J A 5 0 N 0lJ F M A M J J A 5 0 Nl 0'J F M All J J A 5 0 N D J F M A M J J A 10 N 0 i 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1918 1979 l I 9 4 e
.r FIGURE 20 TRENDS IN MEAN MONTHLY TRANSPARENCY AND P110SPHORUS MEASUREMENTS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT FOR Tile PERIOD 1972-1979. .
i.sa. ,
; - - - - --- = u...or.m s. x.u i 1
i.25. 1 j Transparency (m) , 1.00-I. , m W I 0.75 j
\ -
' f l \ ,
._j I'
[N s,j I ,
/ ; j g, k
e e , s 0.z5. l % .. N .)1 r __q.. m......<..,.3 '. .d
/i r.. _................ m /,T:~7.7., .. , A. . . N'. . . ,-;r 1 A - '--e ^-*-r - -
J A 5 0 m WJ 6 M A M J J A 5 0 N D'J f M A M J J A 5 0 N D'J F M A M J J A 5 0 N D'J f M A N J J A 5 0 N D'J f M A H J J A 5 0 N 0'J f M A M J J A 5 0 N dJ F M AMJ J A 50ND 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 s . 9 O O e - - - - -
f i ( )
- J FIGURE 21. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Dissolved Oxygen in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13).
i M se i 13 - gg . ,,a=**'- N '*
/ * **
e s, s r*,,,, u r
" ~
\g ,)-f yQ .
..f j s ,
w 9 -
. N --
[ $ E 8 -
\, x 'g , .
, . ~ .
-#p '
i, . ;/ 'N u-K 4 E8 ~ i 2 5 - Leeead maalaus values 4 - f-----f mean values, t 1 std. dev. range of values for pre-operational data. (April 1974 . August 1977)
.... v.iues l 3 - C O mean value for operational data. (Sept.1977 to flow.1979) t
, . . a I k rch April by June July August September October llovember December j
,s .
l
FIGURE 22. Coinparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data of Hydrogen Ion Concentration (pH) in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13). s.o -
./
e' - _# .
.N,
/ , , ' , ','s j %
['/
"~~~~~
,,,, \
.t _ g .
s ,
) ! '
,s* y
' ' 2, 7
/ '.
x / i b I 7.5 - legend maatsua values l f -- faeanvalues,aistd.dev, range of values for pre-operational data. April 1974 - August 1977) 7.0 - alaisua values l C O mean value for operational data. (Sept.1977 to Nov. 1979) 5.5 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' learch April May June July August September October November Decesber F 4 9 O O
s O FIGURE 23. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Transparency (Secchi Disk) of Water at Station Discharge (Station 13). 4 1.3 - ttSC?$ 1.2 - menta m values 1.3 - f -f mean values, e I std. dov. range of values for pre-operettenal data. (April 1974
- August 1977) atalmus values i . O----O mean value for operational data. (Sept.1977 to flov.1979) 1.0 -
0.9 - e.s - i C
,s %
0.7 - J ( / 'N 8 i j o.s -
,i( ,
[, '5,/ - ['s %' a ,_, _ l N~
, / .'
I
,! ~~
>' / m >,...___ ,
"~
0.3 - [ 0.2 - s . 0.1 - ( t brch April my June July August Septentier Octreer lhavent,er December
, . , . _ - ,_. ., .m... . . . . . . _ . . . - . ~, - . . . . . - . - . _ . . . _ . . ~ ~ ...-._.m. _ < , . _, , . ,
e FIGURE 24. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Turbidity of Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13). i . 150 - I feeend masteun values
- -- mean values, a 1 std. dev. range of values for minlaus values Ipre-operationaldata.(April 1974 - August .977)
{ 0----O sean value for operational data. (Sept. 1977 to Nov.1979) 100
\\
H k ta 5
%'k ' e
& \
.k .
~
\
f 3 K u - s '% s
\
i \'
\ ,
\ s
\, y , P ~ ~~. . ,/
\~....... . . . - ,
> .'.z' g - "
' , , -y z, ,,....
~ . . . .
August September October November December Nrch April my June July s . O O O
. - .. -- . _ . . _ - . . . . - - . - . _ . - . - - - _ _ _ _ . . . _. . - - . _ - . - . .- -- ~ .-
e t FIGURE 25 . Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Suspended Solids in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13). 174 - j S v
~
g Leeead maalaus values 4 = mean values, e I std. dev. range of values for pre rational data. y ~ ' 118 -
. g statsua values }
c o mean value for operational data. (sept.1977 to siov.1979) 100 g s 90 - e-* i M - 3 ,9 i ,
} ,- , l y- .
I# - Y >
/
} \ '
5" -
'N s
( - / os y
/
a - s \ < 1,,,/
's
,,s, .-
! ao - g,<i- - ',-N[.........<i------ e
--d j 10 .
O June July August Septest.er October flovessier December fierch April May
% 0 t
FIGURE 26. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Conductivity of Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13). Legend , maalaus values l 3 f------f mean values, a I std. dev. ' range of values for pre-o rational data, (April 1974 - August 1977 a
.,,y
\, C 3 sean value for operational data. (Sept.1977 to Nov.1979) 400 -
t \.
\ \'
~
\ to
\
k i
\,,
\,
a i \. s s, Ig . o------- y-
,s,
,/
g
'g -
s N
'q j
# '%- s#
's,~~~ '
~. ,,'
gm . . . . . . . Nrch Aprl) Ny June July August September October Novester December O O O
i FIGURE 27. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Dissolved Solids in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No. 13). 400 , I r 300 - tegend maatsum values range of values for pre- rational data.
% h----k mean values.
- I std. dev.
300 , 's egngmum values lIA'IIIIII*A"I"'IIII P
's O---O mean value for operational data. (Sept.1977 to Nov.1979) 200 - s g
\
260 - 'g ' l \' [ 240 - ' I \ e 1 220 - (\ I y j
%~.
- 200 I ! N. d4 j; 100 -
Q 'by
- p" 7,-
' %s a
-M N N e, __
5 ,,p'
- - * % i i-- _e 160 N ,e 140 - '$,,# ,
120 - h 100 - f g . . . V . . . . . . July August September October November December March April May June 1, 4
FIGURE 28. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Calcium in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No. 13). 40 - Legend 55 - maatsua values m values, a I std. dev.rangeofvaluesforpreErationaldata. I I ,ean, , , , , , , , , (April 1974 - August 191 50 -
%, 0---O mean value for operational data. (Sept.1977 to Nov.1979) g g .
' s
, \
s \
'g m
[ 45 -
'g 1 's o e l 'I L, \.
-L s \.
C 40 -
's a 's\'
l'=-<- . 35 -
/
T ~w'N ',
------n
,... -:-r ~.'.
,/
/-~
a a a e a e e A 8 e March Aprti May June July August September October Noventer Decenter i e
~
9 9 - -
O O O FIGURE 29. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Chloride ir Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13). - ar - 9,
,, . \. < - .
.a.,_ .a,.a
\. T ,,,, ,,3 ,,, , , ,ga, ,,,, ,,,,, ,, ,,, ,, ,,, ,,,_,,),,,gg,,,3 ,,,,,
25 I (April 1974 August 1977
\*
,,,,,g,,
-
- C 3 mean value for oeerational data. (Sept.1977 to leav.1979) 24 23 8
y 22 - % w
's M e N 42 e 21 - 's,*-, q g
" s l N 20 -
%, ) o l a
l k.
's[<--w----< ,/ -o
, . ' ,# ,e I s
14 - a a a a
, e a g , ,
Octotter slovember December March April Ny June July August September b o
_ -- . .~. - . . . . . - _ _ . . - -. . .- FIGURE 30. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data of Sulfate in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13).
, .g %
te n4 maalaus values range of values for pre-o rational data.
\ f---f mean values, a i std. dev.'
(Aprtl 1974 - August 1977
'\ , ,g,g , ,, y ,
0----4 sean value for operational data. (Sept.1977 to flow.1979) k \ so _
\
% i (a
\ ,
03 6 % s 3 4
%,'\ .
{ 20 1 A;M' - s i
^
[ M~\ . >(% ,'y(. .A . N. t/ w ._, % y c-
,f /g's .
E f 20 x' -< 10 0 Leptember October llovember Decesk r hrch April May June July August s . s
- 9 e
O o o m FIGURE 31. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Sodium in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13). Is - Legend gy - esatsass values range of values for pre rational data. f---- mean values, a f std. dev. mistanas values l I' * * *I 16 O- --O sean value for operational data. (Sept.1977 to ' leav.1979) I 14 Las W
- a. \ ,
3 13 - *
- a
/ \
it ir -
- 1,, -
A\. ,- n, ' s,
~,
,/
/ \
s
.. n,
= ..< -
b C O',o*#. \ l ) % p i
- 10
- s't >-- ,__ j
\ s'
; >--N ,-*>~,w". ,/ \
s, s
,' ,s' g
.f * -
s - ,,- 0- . - )
~
s - 7 - 7 6 - a e a
. e e my June July August September October sloventar December h rch April 9
FIGURE 3?. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Magnesium in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No. 13). legend maalmass values I3 *
- f-----f mean values, a 1 std. dev, range of values for pre-o erational data, (April 1974 - August 1977 k ,g , g, ,, y ,,
O- ----O mean value for operatlanal data. (Sept.1977 to llow. 1979)
}
13
./
%s
- 1 \. '
/ \.
\.
\.
/ \.
\ \. *
\
/ - '
t
% i.
\
'\ .
\
I. / '\ ,o 5 g
/
i 3,
. i i
,/
- L' _O' i ,
Q./~s
,, g - o- - -
, 5 ,s %,
[-
' ~
,f' '\ ,
~______,
l f ., . I
~
% ,/
1," 6 my June August September October November December Nrch April , July g e O O O
~
O . O O 1 FIGURE 33. Comparison of Pre-operati,onal and Operational Data for Total Alkalinity of Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13). i i L ***M ggg -
% mestam values mean values, a I std. dev. range of values for l
f----- ** h
, g
'g
} state n values I {' %N***
6 . O- ---O siean value for operational data. 1977) 108: - t i II*PI' IIII "* 8- IIIII i % \ l
. 's k
\ i s
2 w
- 100 - \\
- 0 1
\ \. a
- s' \
, E.
\ \ '
,A.
~ ~ - /p- '\~ .
g M'.y-"~~~ ,'s,,/ s, ,
" '5 - -
's, \
, /f' '\,
's
(/
'4 f -
N 1 '3 ' _ _
's, ,/ \
\,a/
i ' i as - by June July August September October Neves6er December flarch kril e
FIGURE 34. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Nitrate in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13).
" - 1 tegend t
16 -
!* maal g values i5 -
t f---- mean values, a i std. dev.
...,_ . .. .e, range of values for pre-o 3 n a n - - " " "!erational data, O-- -Omean value for operettonal data. (Sept.1977 to Isov. 1979)
~
14 - 'g t t
- I 13 g ,
1, - I 11 g 8 a n w 10 - jg A 6 t . ' 3 - 1 i *
/ \.
g . h Ih ,'s, *
/ -
g<- E 7 -
<r
, ,'N(s, <t
\ /
9 E *
- 6 -
's ~
\ .
s
\' *
/
4 - w - .,
/
s s
)"~ ~~~~<
3 - 's , >~~..__ s I
's l---.mf y ..
y 0 - March April May June July August September Octot.er llovester Deccinber O O O
FIGURE 35. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Phosphorus in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No. 13). Seeead o.e - ===i=== vaias I Ir an values. a I std. dev. range of values for pre-operational data 1 1 minimum values l(April 1974 - August 1977) O-----Omean value for operational data. (Sept.1977 to leav.1979) e 0.3 - w 4 s W 3 8
- 4 6 4 .
I \ I \
=
Ian 0.2 (, I $
\%
4
\s s p s 0.1 -
g ,/ \ 5.,g' '$g . g - __'s ./e h ,,
, ->%.7 i g
0 March April May June July August September October leavember Deceder 4
+ .
FIGURE 36 Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Silica
- in Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No. 13).
. - I i i
i i i I i teneaa i maaluum values {------{ .e.. uins. e i sta. dev. yro rease er v. is7.iues rort pre-o!er.tton.14.ta.
- i. .,,,,,,.v.,,e, - u. i.n
\ 0- ---o mean value for operational data. (sept. 3977 to siov. Isis) 3 - t i
t i i t i i e
.- I ~
a s ' +
= \ e 1 1 22 h,
I i
; I
. - g E t I l h.
$ \
Q 's,
\
\
\
\ .
\ ' %
\ .),iP "., *' Ds
\
\;',,'.-
\',
'N ,........,,'.','d '
/ /g .
Nrch April my June July August C, . . l
'TM Septemt er October.
7, Novester Decenter O O O
O O O FIGURE 37. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data of Biochemical Oxygen Demand of Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13). i L19fai maataan values
. range of values for pre-operattomal data.
,\ f----{ mean values a i std. dev. (April 1974 - % st 1977) atalous values j F - - O sean value for operational data (Sept. 1977 to llow. 1979) 4 ~ '
\, ./ \ ~ .
f T. i ,,,A, \, \, ,
/ \, ,
,\
s , s g 3' - N, j Ns j ,,*" . $ gs *\ s ,- g = 3 \*
# J' / '%r ',, - s
's , ,
E \ / T' . i g Ns- ,, .. gs,
'g Im 2 -
\
g E \ 1l i i July August September October slavest,er Decenter
^
Nrsh April Ny June 4 . J t
f FIGURE 38. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Temperature of Bottom Water at Station Discharge (Station No.13). Es - 24 . p-
,Vl,<>-- h.- M II
- f 7,/ '%
20 - l o' Nh's,,.
- e 18 -
/e#
,T w
a - v'/ .
=
34 . [ J
'/ \',
, E [ tt - j-d
?
10 -
./
4 Qs, I ',. I
%q f
/. tegend g
/
\
s 6 - # maatsum values \ 1 std. dev. range of values for pre-operational g
/ h----f mean values *** ~
- 4 -
/ alaimum values
/ O-----Omean value for operational data. (Sept.1977 to Nov.1979) %,
3 - p Septeneer October November Decesher March April May June July August 0 I, s . O e e
i i i- ,,,, . Figure 39. Mean Monthly Power Generation for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station,
- Unit 1 (1977 - 1979).
.00
=
900
;- . 90 000 = .
t 1 m
- m 700 - i '
l <- -
-. 4-e 2,1 +., h" fi .g
'd "t f. <
. . yo t.
Q , n f, .)
^' '
600 - ;
.,' l.. "[
$. k
,4
. + . s; _> ,
p, , i t'
, - L-, ,, ,
g .0 t j
-'.g -., h .
, e, ;'
500 = ! k lf O D e.,
.y h, .. p 7,
;', ,9 lj d - 3, -
I 'M; ,1 k t ""
- - , a 4 %
.f' 1 'y ,7 W, I n
T >
$Q y -
s; L , l l. l m == i
< e
(.1 400 -
-E
<*$ J. , '. -
_ se se -. s i
- j e - t< E n
yl
~
' , 32 > t T. ..ee.**e.ee...... -( )s' < .'. ......ee.....e. .. .. . .. . . .P.e.rio.d.
. .M.ea.n. . e e .9. 9. . .eeeeee- .ee.e. .. ..
i 300 g ; -1 + J,
,q
! 'j
,' is 4 l
,a i $
y , s e i
*i y-
, .= 30 W + ,5< . -
.1
-t 'a y ye ) ,
g * * . M , f [. s , , . 1
,+ ,
.x to
=, <
g L-- i
*< .w I ,,
1' 4 - f ;f, M .-
* ,g e. -
d' 3 i > , ;,. i t.' , 9: 100 = r: I
?. .
I
'I ,
+ T, f 'd - 1 l
G6; 1 't p 1- vg ji ; y ?, -6 1 '.1 le i'
- e, p t3 ,
i .p, Q.
; a 4
i 4 >'
,y + 's j
~ . 1, - ,
c []
+ . . , ,
O
- _t i n t r4 . a f.J y R -
g 5 8 ,5 8 J F M A N J J A 5 S N 9 J F M A N J J A 5 g a 3 ., 1977 1978 1979 , t j s
- i 4 .
J
~. . .-
98,000 -
?
's ,
));,, hBacillartophyceas 20,000 - m@t (lea Chlorophyceae
.:1 a ,
r Myxophyceae 5',V g yb >) q 15,000 - n h b< E j?
- 2 11 ,
o
' I.
$ . ?
h
, 10,000 - 4f} ;,
o v.. C d,5 '
?
p' ;- M 7 (p
'***** ~
N - k $f / ?h
$ & Q / p 4 lik 7 4 / $ ,_
O h _ [s: _, o i_ r L, m i m / h / 4 / APRIL MAY JUNE JULY. AUG SEPT OCT NOV FIGURE 40 MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE, CHLOROPHYCEAE, AND MYXOPHYCEAE POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT - 1974. O O O
O O O
~
4 315. 100s, T' 90 f e- Bacillarlophyceae \
~
\
i 80 - h - Chlorophyceae \ A Paul Ltd N y M Jg 3 70 . Myxophyceae \ 1 N i 60 - r' N
- c 5 '
t
\ ,
im 50 - ki i. N ! g a c NC k l h o 40 - iI \ (
-, T e:
l . j 0 go , i
- N N i .
20 - l f' \ \ T I.'. 'I N T
\ kr ~' (
10 -
}$
N N N is E- N \ if V h e l ,M % s1 N w\ fT .. APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC l FIGURE 41 MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE, CHLOROPHYCEAE, AND MYXOPHY,CEAE POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT - 1975.
FIGURE 42 MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE, CHLOROPHYCEAE, AND MYXOPHYCEAE POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT,1976. m 100,000 " Bacillartophyceae m., 90,000 .. N Chlorophyceae Ej 80,000 -.
\
.y Myxophyceae \ K 70,000 --
$; \ \
5 f N N -
! * >" " kj N N ,
c d 50,000 -- E
'q \ \ w o
? N N .
,]
. N N j
N
~
Jp' - N , 30,000 N \ {p 8
\ \ : *f 20,000 -- k s N
g
\
N lih g q n % N 9 hh} f- y \ \ h hh 5 -
~
!af f j N N if N r,_\ M N D N
's N -
O si k fi _. , ,- JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. 3! NOV. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE O e e ___
- 151 -
FIGURE'43 MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE. CHLOR 0PHYCEAE, AND MYXOPHYCEAE POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT,1977. l i 220.000 q R 210.000 - 200.000 - E Sac 111artophyceae 110.000 - .i
- 1. . . - :.
0 Om. 7 ...
$sopayceae 170.000 - -
160.000 - B l 1
- l r b m '
s J' 150.000 - 140,000 - ; h :t! 130.000 - ;' 1 L a 120. - m, . _ . e y e e . 2
- 110.000 - ,, t .
rc
- r- :
E m.a- i, 9 5-r - t ,0.a- . ,
. r > ><
F I y p -
- 00. a - H ., N:
a p-70.=- n &
>8
- t.
.0. - c N -
h ' t
,0.a-6 i c C -
P [ ;f
.0.000 - ; ) :
t u e H 30.000 - T r
?
- 5 s -s N
20.000 - E \ p p S
; \ ,
, c \
10.000-
!. N . ,
N H N s n \ " N N O 2 e
& A= c=N i
~s #r 5 2=5 U__N e5
- a. sm.
n. h t2 5 _ a. I e l l [
i 152 - O FIGURE 44 MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE, CHLOROPHYCEAE, AND - MYX0PHYCEAE POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT, 1978. l 280.000 ,
} O 6act11artopnyceae lH Chlorophycese 130.W -[
' # ~ I'~
r I' h Pyxophyceae - 110.000 - l" 100.000 R. 90.000 - E, 5 k. p 80.000 -. o i ro =a - m N (g E. 60.000 -I ,' g y 50.000 -p. t \ N ( \
\
? s \ N 40.000 -U \
r N s \ " 30.000 - e c
\ N -\ \
\
20.000 -?, 5 \ \ l \ _3
\ \ \ T \
10.000 - .; \ \ \ K kj
- b _
\ REN
~
\ b \ b \
HAT JUME M.T AUG. SEPT. ~OCT.Ei NOV. , 9
- 153 -
l FIGURE 45 MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE, _ CHLOR 0PHYCEAE, AND MYX0PHYCEAE POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT, 1979. t i
- 733,663 216,958 418,298 5 Bacillariophyceae
! 3 Chlorophyceae l g Myxophyceae . 100,000 -
! i 90,000 - l
! ; R 80,000-
- l l
3 j l
= l i q 70,000- l l 7 E -
- l 60,000 -
cn B x l l C ! j ! l l ! i 3 50,000 -
~
g i i s . i .8 l I 4 d 40,000-L( i C 30,000 - 3 I4 g i 20,000 - ] I I' l
. ?
10,000 - t.
! 1 g - 3. ,,. # 'I 34 i ! __
MAY MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. (1) (23)
154 - O FIGURE 46. MONTHLY MEAN PHYTOPLANKTON POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT, 1974 - 1979.* m.m m.
/ . ,
l l
. I l
l ,' f l
- , e t '
l l
; l
, a
- , 3
-- ,I f l'
l l l
- l )
f l
; l
. .l / i [1 >
l - I (
.. .. . , . .. .. . . .. . . .. .. . . .. L ,. . . ... . ; ; . .... ii .. ;., .g.,.; ;; ;. .
i- im im i- i- i.
- Dotted lines connect points (sampling dates) separated by more than a full calendar month. Solid lines connect points (dates) in consecutive months.
O
O O O Figure 47. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Diatom Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. 733,663 400,000 - ', M *"d maximum values
~
\ -- --{ mesa vaises, 2 i st4. de,.ragg,,gues,rgregationaldata, stalmum values l
~
-----mean value for operational data. (Septeneer 1977 - December 1979).
320,000 - '
\'
280,000 -
\, .
240,000 -
.e ,
; 200,000 -
{ 160,000 - g - i
$ 120,000 - k e _ m i 80,000 - i
/ 's s \
1 j s ,
/ g /
' '~
40,000 - / s
/- /
/ ..
\ ,- , f 0_
h s---- - M h-1 I I I I i l l l l M A M J J A S 0 N D MONTil , . , , , . , - , --~v--,- _,--,-w- , .~,--w- - - - . c ,,-w s-w-e ww ,- gme a,-v-v- w-,---- e-.,,m,-s-,,-m,wmu----,-- . - , . -v--- - - - - ,v--e. -w-- --.w ~ w -
i 156 - Figure 48. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Green Algae Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. 48,4,14
\ s' 26,000 -
f' i\
/
l' 24,000 - ,
\ 'f 22,000 - 's f
20,000 - f i 18,000 - f 8 16,000 -
~
- .\ l
- 14,000 -
R
/. ,
\
\ f l f12,000- '
/ N en l
[ '\ ,
\ l 8 1
Si 10,000 - ,
\
/ \
g - I \ .I! s x l ;
\,f 8,000 - '
[ i
\
{s I I
\
6,000 - >
. \
~
l if / I i
\ ?* / \
+
4,000 - /
\ '
/ g
\
t/ \ .. i 2,000 - .[ . \, 0- .. i e a i i i i i i M A M J J A S 0 N D ted MONTH maxisum values
. - - - - . mean values, 2 I std. dev. ra values for pre. rational data, minisum values I
-----mean value for operational data. (September 1977 . Deceder 1971).
- . - . _ _ - . . - _ - . . _ _ . . _ . __.---_ . -. - ... . = - -. . _ _ . . .
L O O O Figure 49. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Blue-green Algae Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. l Iegend samtmus values
---- mean values, f I std. dev. ra of values for pre- rational data.
320,000 - minfman values l(
'""-8"'"5 'l-
~
- ---mean value for operational data. (Septaneer 1977 - Decenter 1973).
280,000 - f 240,000 - "f 200,000 - .i v , a 5y, 160,000 - g
/\ s u
- g .
E 120,000 - [, ,
? -
o ~, N
\
d ls d 80,000 - /
- x
' ,' \
r
\s 40,000 - * /
/ \ sf, (N
/' s
- g. --_- -
-f l ---.
q __ l I I I I I I I 5 j' M A M J J A S C N D 1 MONTH e 4 4
e Figure 50. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Phytoplankton Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. s
~
'734,777 WM 400,000 - - i ..i...
[---- ....i .. i. . ..
,.g.,g g;;.. g g. g y.ii i
..t..
360,000 - \ - ---me.a ..iu. for oper.tton.1 d.t.. (September 1977 - Decem6er 1979).
~
320,000 -
\,
\'
280,000 -
\ ..
ji 240,000 1
\ ,
$ 200,000 - .. \ -
'k ,
2 I ~\ a \ < m g 160,000 - i [s O
,\ 7
' i
\
g 120,000 - [ \
/ e
/ y ,
, g 80,000 -
_ /
,/
N
\
\l #
! .. f \ /
\ l
/
/
\ ,/\
\
40,000 - , l e
/ \) s. -
'._.'s, f i
_ / __ s ._ '
/ b'
% __ _ f -
0- .. I I I I I I I I I I M A M J J A S 0 N D l l MONTil l , . l 1 O O O
O O O Figure 51 Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Phytoplankton l Densities at the Station Intake (Sta. No. 8).
'872 tona 400,000 - h ,472 , , , , , , , ,
{ [----{..nini.2iita..., re g ,.g,i, l g ,,g .:io 4.t.. 360,000 - ='a8= "1"5 i
-.- - --- ..in for op r.ti .i 4.t., (sept b.c isir - nece.6 r isis).
320,000 - i ._
\
280,000 -
- s. 240,000 -
=
\ , I C 9
i j 200,000 - ,\ g
\
& \ 8 8, 160,000 - I ,' \
s- \ , o /
\
j 120,000 - .N 'k -
/,s\
/ .
- ' s/ \ (-
80,000 -
' ,'s
\ [/ \ ,
f i s/ \j ,/ 40,000 - ,/ l \
\ \' f
/
\
s . ,. .,_ -/
/
_ / 1 ,", '
~
, "Q . f -- 0-
-- A i
I I I I I I I I I I M A M J J A S 0 N D MONTil i , l
Figure 52 Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Phytoplankton Densities at the Station Discharge (Sta. No.13). _ 889,947 g,j 400,000 - h * }
=a8- alai
- - -- - mean values.1 I std. dev, ra v ues for pre- attonal data.
"' ~ "'"'
360,000 - i
--- --uman value for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1973).
\
t 320,000 - -- 280,000 - {
/.
- s. 240,000 - k 5
I.\
> 200,000 - \ g i
g Si hl \' o
\
~
k 160,000 - 5 e -
\ .,. ! \ ,
j 120,000 -
- I m
's
(\ [ \' t y l ( r s' 's *
/
\ \s ,
80,000 - 1
/
,i ,
g
\ ./
,/ \
r g
~
j i
/
\ Y #
g / 's / 40,000'- / -- \ / i ,' N' e _ i
\_ls u
/_
0- .. 1 ee i i I i I i i i i 1 M A M J J A S 0 N D MONTH 9 O O
O ' O O Figure 53 Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Phytoplankton Densities at a Control Station (Sta. No. 3). 737 866 360,000 - .
\
320,000 - *~
\ '
280,000 -
- \,
240,000 - { Ii - y 200,000 - i li , [' .
.n '
)- l \ m
~
e 160,000 - s s g _ '.
/ s e
\
4 o
. 120,000 - \ ,
\,"g ,/
o , ' * / y
's \ ,
/
[i % 80,000 - '
/ / , s ..
l 1 % i - g N .
',e 40,000 - 's [ ,' $, /' ' s N,
's
\ e. , -
__ g--/ - r / .. 0 -- 1 2 "! t i i i i i i
==i-a values M A M J J A S 0 N D
----- mean values 2 I std. dev. range of values for pre-operational data.
alaimum values l ( April 1974 - August 1917). MNTH
-----mean salue for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1973).
FIGURE 54N0NTHLY MEAN ZOOPLANKTON POPULATIONS FOR. LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT, 1972 - 1979.*
~
1400" 1300-1200-1100-
,ID E $ = ,
{ 900-E a00-E { 700-d 600 's, 504- J ,e' 's, b
,# 9 t
40G- , i
\. ,
J
's 20w \, ~
\, ,-,' .. -
100 .
'N \ ,/
I JkkbhbbfMAMJJA50NDJFMAMJJA50NDJFMAMJJA50NDbFMAMJJA50N$55FMAMJ5 l 5hNFH AN J J Ak0YhJFM 'D fMMJJ A5b 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1972 1973 ,
- Dotted lines connect points (sampling dates) separated by more than a full calendar month. Solid lines connect points (dates) in consecutive months. ,
O O O
O O O FIGURE 55. MONTHLY MEAN ROTIFER POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT, 1972 - 1979.* 700 . t 600- g
$500- \
i b \ i 400- '\
@ '1 o'
l '.
' l;
* \ l ,
l' .
\.
g \ -, , , 100- '
\
/ ,'
4 likk$hfkkkNkkhkhkkkkNkYbkhk$kNhkkbkhfkkkNIk'hkhfkkkNkkbkIfNN$ inh 8$$l$Njk$$N$$nh~ ' '8 1972 1973 -1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979
- Dotted lines connect points (sampling dates) separated by more than a full calendar month. Solid lines connect points (dates) in consecutive months.
. FIGURE 56. MONTHLY MEAN COPEP0D POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT, 1972 - 1979.*
900 - 800 - , . . t 700 - e s
~
w s 3 500 - 400 . 2 30a . D tu - . -) \ . 100 - N% --- J (_J d.........i.......... _____
............................3...........3F JASON JFMAMJJASON M AMJ J AS O N uJ F M AMJ J A5 0NuJ f M1973AMJ J M* A50MMO E4J
" 1979 Nhf M AMJ J A50k 1975 1976 1977 1972 1973 1974
- Dotted lines connect points (sampling dates) separated by more than a full calendar month. Solid lines connect points (dates) in consecutive months.
l l l \ O O O
O O O FIGURE 57 MONTHLY MEAN CLA00CERAN POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT. 1972 - 1979.* 700 - 500 - U1
~ e k
h 500 - ! },00 t I . 200 - 1 i 100 - A Shkhb OlafM M))$ h~$) khbN k hh , Nk hi hA'M$hk$$k [MA'Mhhh'A50NO 1970 ' #3 1974 1975 1976 1977 3979 1972 1973 t
- Dotted lines connect points (sampling. dates) separated by more than a full calendar month.
Solid lines connect points (dates) in consecutive months. i i e 4
Figure 68 Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Zooplankton Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. ie w 1400 - ,,,, , ,,i,,,
---- sean values. 2 I std. dev. ra fv ue f .operettonal data.
mtatsum values I
-----mean value for operational data. (Septes6er 1977 - December 1971).
D 1000 - -- L -
' \ 8 U ' \
p '
; 800 - <
-. E be t
/
-\s \
'r \
a -
/ -
/ .
\
o E 600 -
/ '
\\
\ --
, \
/
e -
,. ' 'K - - - -_ ,
n
- y,' s 400 - i / ' -
-- \
N '
/ ,,
,/ s
~
s
~
r -' N . 200 - ,e .. s
- /
e' \ %
' \
f __
/
I I I I l l l l l M A ,4 J i A S 0 N D MONTil O O O
O O O Figure 59. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Zooplankton Rotifer Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. Legend maalmumvaps range of values for pre-operettonal data. h --- 1 mean values. 1 I std. dev. I I (1973 . August 1977). alnimum values
-----mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1973).
700 - L = 600 - 500 - - g .. .
;'- 400 - O g __
E, u " E 300 - f", ' , - - s
,. ____ s g, ,/ g , -
u -r s ; I-
/ l
\r 200 - '/~ G,%'r",/
j l e / . \ , N i 100 -
/
'y .~
/ N[ ,
N 0-I I I I I I I I I I M A H J J A S 0 N D MONTH s .
Figure 60 Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Zooplankton Copepod Densities in t.ake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.
- Inea4 _
800 -
--- mean values. I i std. dev. range of values for pre-operational data.
- A 1 (1973-Augusti977).
minimum values l 700 - . _ _ _ ,,a, ,aio, ,,, ,,,ra t i si da ta , g s ,ca.i,,, i,77 . o.< 6.r i,133. b 600 - h s
~
y 500 -
.:a _
E . p 400 - es _ o ~ l i 's ' .. m O
. g E 300 - ,
! \
s
~
f \ 200 -
/ \ s
\~
- p ..
.N,%
0 o ~ 100 - 8
/ s. .'. > c:c s __~~~
l f
~
ph/ ~ 0 i i i i i i i i i i M A M J J A S 0 N D MONTH s . 9 O O
i i t OFigura 61. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational O Data for Zooplankton Cladoceran Densities O in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. I ' 400 - Leses mestnum values
~
---- mean values, 2 I std. dev. range of values for pre-operational data.
A 1 (1973 - August 1977). statsum values I
- ---mean value for operational data. (5*ptes6er 1977 - Decea6er 1979).
300 - g - e r== b ' 5 200 -
/'
i* s' . E /# I s o _ fi \ss 5
, oI \\ to .
O i s i g-I s t .. \ 100 - 's 1 c -- s
'f I 's j \
/ /
l
-- \
g
~
, h s
\
l _ 7 0
\, ,
s -
/'
/
\
y r
/
8
's, .
/ , .
0- - i i i i i i M A M J J A S 0 N D MONTH .l -
+
s I
Figure 62. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Zooplankton Densities at the Station Intake (Sta. No. 8). tegend maalmun values
- - --- mean values.1 I std. dev. ran9e of values for pre-operationas data.
I (1973 - August 1977). 1600 - =8at=ua values l
--- -- mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1979).
1400 - 1200 - E - e E 1000 - ' N - g -
/ ,g
- y O
m e 800 - f
, K e e e s / .
f '
\
~
p \0 o . x 600 - / /$' i 5 - j
; \ .
400 - /j- ., 's' '
// -s, x
.7
- x 200 -
[ --'
/ ..
O i i i : : i l i M A M J J A S 0 N D MONTH s . O O O
1 O O O Figure 63. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Zooplankton Densities at the Station Discharge (Sta. No.13). - ! t 1 tegend maalsum values h ---- mean values, f I std. dev. re of values for pre-operational data. A 1 ( 973 - August 1977). mlntamm values I
-----mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - Deceeber 1979).
1400'- ee 1200 - .. 49 0' 1000 - q t -
- ~
y ; '~~bu
- a 800 - , -
? -
l / '\ -- e , -, , o 600 - i
'\ 'n
.. \x 's
/ -- - - -
j -
<00 - / 9, .. y i ,1 ..
,L - , N 200 - / -- -
, N --
i _
/
,/
\ .
? O i i .i i i i i i M A M J J A S 0 N 0 MONTH
. , s-e
Figure 64. Comparison of Pre-operational and Opera'tional Data for Zooplankton Densities at a Control Station (Sta. No. 3). Ltsd seastaans values h ----} mean A 1 values.1 I std. dev.range of values for pre-operational data. afnfaum values 1 (1973 - August 1977).
-----mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - Decenter 1979).
1400 - 1200 -
~
*(. t; 3 1000 -
e - l ' E 800 - ,' 's (
$* _ e' 'N ,,
E 600 - , l - -
.,/> ..
o l ,---- -- o i , N,
* ' N 400 - '
\%
- ..i, ll ,
~~~,
/
Y.' V. 200 - ..s
\
0 . , , , , , i i i i M A M J J A S 0 N D MONTH O O O ,-y3 - -
o o o 1 i FIGURE 65 MONTHLY MEAN BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT, 1972 - 1979.* 4000 - l 3000 - e
!l -
.g w a .
i 2000 - b 8 e' j 5, ',
'- / / ,' !!
< 8 J '\ , s.J , [ ,,'i, !
\ l \ s s 8000 - / ,
', /
'x l / I v
/ '\lfk\...
f LJ
' WH 1972 HlW*A*Htt1973 66 d5 HikM 1974 kH 695 H k k551 L b1976 1975 n 6la t n MMin 1977 n dini A ti kt 66 $4kAhiMi$4Mitnid t-3973 3973
- Dotted lines connect points (sampling dates) separated by more than a full calendar month. Solid lines connect points (dates) in consecutive months. '-
3 i *
-. s .
8' ,
\
2 p. i
O e . t n a o r i b t e a t t r S e v r n e i w o o r P . ~ D c a r M a e c l i c ,
, N h u . <
~
t N - n ', e e N-B s r e s . N
- s'
/
N , 0 o B o f s N s a i t v . ' , S a a D D l e p a h - ' - n t j - A o i f t o a f
/
K H T r y N N e t p i O n d c i
' f,,
,J N O
< a n i , , t a V - ,J a )
d 9 e 's / l 7
'e,/
l a 9 a h n 1 o n t i r o !
,M t
a e 6e i n " r r t i ep e
~ c a e r e o.
e . D e i p r o E
\, /
,A f
r) p7 r9 o1 7 7 7 9 1 e e / ss eu t r e r k / ug b P a /
/
l u aA m e L / ,H v t p f - f e o ni - - - - , - - - - o37 ( S e9 n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g1 n( a o s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a t s e 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 , r d a i i 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 r t v l a a i n e n o p s m en gBEsEn g[o &z u d d i t a o t s r e C D p I o s 2 s r
. e e o v , u f 6 i s l 6 a e a e
. ul v l u
a a e . v m u v r . n l n u a e a a i g imm t e e m F - - d a n a O e - - t
( D F Figuret67. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Benthic Coelenterate Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. e L151*4 maalmum values mean values 1 I std. dev. range of values for pre. operational data. 1 mlaimum values I (1973 - August 1977).
-----mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - Deceder 1979).
200 - N >* b 150 - M s E y 100 - c ng e f E / \ O / \ '%.
. 50 - i g s g 'i \ / .
y' e' i r
\ .- -
.n '
o- --- N ' "- * ' ' l . :' N. .. I I l l 5 I I I I I M A M J J A S 0 N D HONTH
% 8
Figure 68. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Benthic Annelid Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. e 3000 - 2500 - 2000 - q . W 9 5-4.s - 4 / N ' 1500 - s E ..
,/ g G j /\/ / '% , 7 o
E 1000 - a /-/\ s Ns
/ 's,-
- ~~
500 - / -
/
/
/
0- . I I l l t i I I I l M A M J J A S 0 N D i% MONTH maulmum values mean values. 1 1 std. dev. range of values for pre-operational data, t I minimum values I (1973 - August 1977). i -----mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1979). s O O O
O O . O Figure 69. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Benthic Arthropod Densities
- in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.
3000 - 4 2500 -
~
2000 - 5. 3 d 1500 - E N J' e e h1000- ,/ . s N o 500 - [ -
- h,~~
~
e
,j' s r
s
/ ,e.
N N ,
, \
~
o- -@ .'/ [ , N ,_ -f x. g I I I I I I I I I I t eead . M A M J J A S 0 N D nasimum values mean values. 1 I std. dev. ra fv sf -operational data, minimum values I
-----mean value for operattenal data. (September 1977 - December 1973).
j f i
l l Figure 70. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Benthic Mollusc Densities in Lake Erie in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. Legend maalmum values mean values. 2 i std. dev. range of values for pre-operational data. (1973. August 1977). alnimum values I
---mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1979).
5 - u 4 - r -- E. % b g 8 E *" 3 - \ - -- 2& \ 5
\ '
$g g -
\
- g. . .-_ ..___
s h L. I
/
/ g s /
/ \
\
\
),' .
\. s' ,, ..
o - . - Z
., f
/
\
\/ -
's 0 -
1 I I I I I I I l M A M J J A S 0 N D MONTil O G S
O O O Figure 71. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities at the Station Intake (Sta. No. 8). I!2f"I maximum values mean values. 1 I std. dev. ran9e of values for pre-operational data.
- (3973 - August 1977).
----- mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - Deceedner 1979).
4500 - 4000 - 3500 - e 3000 - -- ' D C f., 2500 - 7 E' 2000- /'s .
'~/\ '
/ 's e 1500 - ,
, ,/, ~~
;4 ~
x ,,
,1 \
1000 - i u,/ e
/ \s 500 -
N
-/
O-
/ --
N -- M I I I I I I I I I I M A M J J A S 0 N D l MONTH
i I t Figure 72, Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Data for Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities at the Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13). tegend l maalaus values
---- mean values ! I std. dev. range of values for pre-operational data.
1 (1973-August 1977).
"'"'""i"" I 5500 -
----- mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1973).
5000 - ' 4500 - 4000 - m 3500 - 4 . E a 3000 -
-- ~
m o c " # y 2500- /\ ,i ,'\ ' o / s f s \g o 2000 - I I s f i Z \ / \
/
1500 - .. / 's/ \ ,
/
\ ,/
1000 - --
,s
-[ ~ ~~' 'x , /
' N_ '
500 - ',
/7 %
. . ~
0- -- --
. am I I I I I I I I I l M A M J J A S 0 N D MONTil s
O O O
O O . O Figure 73. Comparison of Pre-operational a'nd Operational Data for Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities at a Control Station (Sta. No. 3). teeend mesma values
----- mean values, f I std. dev. ran9e of values for pre-operational data.
(1973-August 1977). minimum values I 5000 - . _ -- me.. v.iu. for e,.r. tion.i d.t.. (sept.mner isir - oece.6er isis). 4500 - 4000 - e 3500 - , D - . 5 3000 - i , o
$ 2500 - i
, /
f \
/
j 2000 - ,, f
/
\ - j
\
/ /
1500 - -o
\,,/ J l -
l t 1000 - '~y , 500 -
-/.
\ ,, !
0
\' ' _ u -- . % , "t l 5 5 5 g I I 3 s g M A M J J A S 0 N D MONTH I
e f ,
182 - Figure 74 . Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Alewife Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13). 350 - Legend maziense values mean values. f I std. dev. range of values for ore-coerational data. 300 - (1873 - 65=" 15773-
,,,,,,,,,, i ..
-. ---mean value for operational data. (Septeer 1977 - Deceeer 1979).
250 - ; 200 -
-e 150 -
u i -- e'n \ l 100 -
\ s
/ g
/ \
1
/ \
/ \
=
/ \
50 - --
,s .. / ~ , , __ .\
- s f , \
,/ ~~~ ,/
~
s y f \ 0-eW MONTH
l O O O l Figure 75. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Channel Catfish Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13). 20 - maniamma values
---- mesa values, f I std. dev. ra fv f -operational data.
statmum values
- -. ---mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - Deceadeer 1979).
15 - f 3 b R 0 10 - , s 00 g w z .
~
/
5- ' 's
- r
/- ,- ' ,%'s
-- / -
,# \ ,
N o_ ><! [ ,, /N\ ' I I I I I I I I 4 A M J J A S 0 N MONTil 1
Figure 76. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Freshwater Drum Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13). 100 - tegend maalmum values 80 - -----
" " a '*1"'5. 2 85:4. dev. r. 9. or vaives ror pre per. to i 4.t.,
(1973-August 1977). statsum values I
-----mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1979).
E5-60 - B a 3 -
.L ,s y 40 -
- e
/K s a;
20 - ,
/ ,
\
g< s ~
/ s' y %,
's -N.
_. m _ g,
- ~
- s 0- _- _.
' s 'J - - - - - -_
A I I I I I I I I A M J J A S 0 'N 4 MONTH O O O
O O O Figure 77. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Gizzard Shad Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13). te m monimum values
---- mean values. 1 I std. dev. range of values for pre-eperational data.
I'"' ~ "* '"'I' 200 - mi.e aius.
~
-----sean 'value for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1973). --
150 - , , h - 5 - [ 100 - i's
,s,
,- y, g m
j ,- e 's .
,-l E _
,/ O,
\',
50 - */
' '\
\
/ .
\x r
/
_ _. s> _ h
#--fr ' '.
~
g_ __ I I I I I I I I A M J J A S 0 N MONTH f
Figure 78 . Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Spottail Shiner Catches in Gill Nets set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Powcr Station S' "#9* " "
- 1500-
- Leses maximum values
---- mean values. I 1 std. dev. range of values for pre-operational data.
- - (1973 - August 1977).
-----mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1979).
ee 1000-hi - g , a _ g
.s .
5 - z 500-u
/ \
_ / \
/ \
/ \
~ / \
\
f
\
/
_ / g
/ \
--/ g
_ / p' .\ \
,# % \.
' - ~ ~ __-Tg :__Q h r % _____,
I I I I I I I I I A M J J A S 0 N D MON'fH - S S
~
O
( x ( l I Figure 79. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Walleye Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13). l L egend l maalaus values
-r--- mean values. 2 I std. dev. ran statansa values I (ge of values for pre-operational data.
1973-Au9ust1977). , -----mean value for operational data (September 1977 - December 1975). 15 -
- 10 - - -
is. - 00 N 3 4J 8 O. 0 u
- 5-m
,s
_ /
~
~; -- - - - - - -
; . - -- -y- --
0- - - - - 4 t 1 I I I I I I I ' A M J J A S 0 N MONTH i 4
Figure 8a Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational White Bass Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13). legend maalaus values mean values. 2 I std. dev. range of values for pre-operational data. minimum values I (1973 - August 1977). 30 - - - - - - =*a val ** 'ar apara t 8aa*1 d* ** - (5*****6*r 8 577 - Dac'*6*r l"')- 25 - [, , m
\
w 5 20 - ' l .
\s t.
a g 15 - ,
/ \ -
g o
== '
/ g co 8
10 - g/ % g _
~
s %
~
' ~ ~
r 0-
} _ ) . __ } -c n ase I i I I i l i I A M J J A S 0 N HONTH 9
O O O
O O O Figure 81. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Yellow Perch Catches in Gill Nets Set in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Discharge (Station 13). lsmt maalaus values mean values. 2 I std. dev. re of values for pre. operational data.
' " ~ "*' ""
200 - = tat == veias I
-----mean value for operational data. (Septes6er 1977 - Deces6er 1979).
150
!sk s 4
2u
/ ,
8 o a 100 -
\ ,
G
=
g .. e
. ,,s* ~~'~~.
/ -
ss 50 -
,,,j' , '- N \s
\ '
/ - N..
s_~ .. s "" N,.
~
0- .. MONTH e
Figure 82. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Gill Net Results at the Station Intake (Sta. No. 8). tenend 2000 - ,,,,,,, ,,,,,, mean values. I 1 std. dev. range of ulues for pre-operational data.
. L l (1973 - August 1977).
1800 - "' a '" "i ""
-----mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1979).
1600 - 1400 - u 1200 - E - . B ~
- g. 1000 - g o - I S 800 -
5 z -
) L 600 - e
\
I s a s i \ 400 - I \
\
_ o s , I \ 200 - '
' S\ - ~\
~
C l
', ,/ k -
~'
~-M' _N /x \- - _ ,
0- -- I I I I I I I I I I A M J J A S 0 N D i MONTH ,. l O O O
O v - Figure 83. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Gill Net Results at the Station Discharge (Sta. No. 13). l. 1 Legend maalaus values mean values. 2 I std. dev. range of values for pre-operational data. 1400 _ * (1973-August 1977). minimum values
-----mean value for operational data. (September 1977 - December 1973).
leos - 1s- 1000 - r 3 - I N a g 800 - ,
- s. - -
48 W
~
'E
= 600 - , .
~z -
s /
! s a 1 \
400 - i s o s / l s, ,-- l 200 - S' '--
~ \ s--
-. ~ , 3
~
~ ~
O i , , , , , , A M J J A S 0 N D 1 MONTH i 5 4 I 4 1 % ' l l
,8 O
I D s t l u j I N s - e / I R
- t /
- e l /
N a ' n /s 0 l l o I i d l G a n ) O a r e p
\
\
o 3 s i
/
t . I S a o r N e p . O a
/ - t d S n (
a I A n . o H O l a i T N n t o a i t p o
/ ,
O M t S a e r r l P I e p r o J o t . - n - e o
- r C P
f r e o oh I J n s o - s n i I r ~ ap a n m o C a t n, I H 4 , 8 e r u
/ I A
g i - - - - - - - F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 3 a ce j = O
O O O. Figure 85. Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Gill Net Results at an Off-shore Control Station (Sta. No. 26). 1 1 700 - 600 - 3
!; 500 - e
.g 0 400 - 0 1
3 ' 7 ' 300 - ' Operational 7 200 - ,,,/ Pre-op -
, \
/
l s 100 - . V l 0 g g i : i i i i A M J J A S 0 N D ~ MONTH J i 4 l
1 l l O 1 ETEDR0 LOGICAL fGITORING ANALYSIS OF THERMAL INTERNAL BOUNDARY s) LAYER CONDITIONS FOR A COASTAL NUCLEAR 1 POWER PLANT 1982 ft! TEOR 0 LOGICAL DATA FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION . MONTHLY AVERAGES AND WINDROSES PRECIPITATION STUDY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION O
( O A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF THERMAL INTERNAL BOUNDARY LAYER CONDITIONS FOR A COASTAL NUCLEAR POWER PLANT by Jeffrey S. Lietzow Toledo Edison Company O 300 Madison Avenue Toledo, Ohio 43652 January 1983 , O
O The purpose of the Thermal ~ Internal Boundary Layer (TIBL). investigation was to provide. site specific background information on the formation of the TIBL at Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. Davis-Besse is located on the shoreline adjacent'to Lake Erie near Locust Point. The Thermal Internal Boundary Layer is a meteorological phenomenon and can be described as an atmospheric boundary layer that forms when air flows across the surface discontinuity between land and water. Because the two air layers many times do not have either the same temperature or roughness, an interface-is created. The air above the TIBL is stable and the air below the TIBL is unstable. The interface , which is formed usually starts at the point where the shore'and water
- meet. The height of the TIBL is determined by temperature difference,
! .how much greater the land temperature is than the water temperature. l surface roughness, wind speed, and insolation. 4 This TIBL formation is important in atmospheric dispersion estimates. For instance, if the release height of the air pollutants
.O (radionuclides, in this case) is within the boundary layer.. the air pollutants will diffuse until they reach the top of the boundary layer, and will then be reflected back down to the ground. Fumigation occurs and results in higher. pollutant ground-level concentrations than
- would be predicted by a simple Gaussian dispersion model. A similar i
- problem exists when the pollutants are released above the TIBL.
Hourly averages of the meteorological data.obtained from the meteorological monitoring system, located at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, were examined for a period between January -1,1982 and December 31, 1982. During this study the following meteorological f i conditions were used to characterize the TIBL formation: wind direction between 337.5* and 112.5*, land temperature greater than y water temperature, and wind speed greater than 0.5 mph and occurrence one hour after sunrise to one hour before sunset (daylight hours). } !O L . p
l Using these criteria, the meteorological data were reviewed to j determine when such conditions existed. The daca were compiled I and tabulated. The data were broken down into two onshore cat-egories, possible TIBL cases and non-TIBL cases. From within these two categories, the data were further examined to determine site specific characteristics of possible TIBL formation. Refer to Tables A-1 through A-5. The investigation showed that TIBL conditions do exist at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. Visual examination of velocity, temperature and stability data indicates that in most cases the . possible TIBL height at the tower was below 100m. The difference - between land temperature and lake temperature rarely exceeded 10*F. O r\ - \m,) ' TABLE A-1 Frequency of Occurrence of Onshore Flow G H A B C D Onshore Onshore Hours Obser- Onshore Onshore E F Flow Flow in _vations. Flow Flow TIBL TIBL (No TIBL) (No TIBL) Month Month (Hours) (Hours) % (Hours) % (Hours) % Jan 81' 744 456 39 8.6 0 0.0 39' 8.6 Feb 81 672 391 65 16.6 10 2.5 55 14.1 Mar 81 744 506 107 21.1 28 5.5 79 15.6-Apr 81 720 561 148 26.4 25 4.4 123 21.9 May 81 744 595 277 46.5 26 4.4 251 42.2 Jun 81 720 698 159 22.8 25 3.6 134 19.2 Jul 81 744 701 322 46.0 34 4.9 288 41.1 Aug 81 744 732 58 7.9 51 7.0 7 0.9
, Sep 81 720 548 153 27.9 5 0.9 148 27.0 Oct 81 744 744 300 40.3 60 8.1 240 32.2 Nov 81 720 712 224 31.5 32 4.5 192 27.0 Dec 81 744 581 52 9.0 1 0.2 51 8.8 A. Total hours in a month.
B. Hours of data analyzed or available. C. Hours of wind direction from 337.5* to 112.5*. D. Percent of data hours that on-shore flow occurred = (C/B) (100). E. Hours of wind direction from 337.5* to 112.50, wind speed greater than 0.5 mph, and ' TL>TW. F. Percent of available data hours that wind direction was from 337.5* to 112.50, wind speed greater than 0.5 mph, and TL>TW =.(E/B) (100). G. Hours of wind direction from 337.5* to 112.5* and TW>TL=C-E. H. Percent of available data hours of wind direction from 337.5* to 112.5* and TV>TL= (G/B) (100) TL = Temperature of Land TW = Temperature of Water O V TABLE A-2 Classification of Onshore Flow Based on Lake Temperature (TW) and Land Temperature (TL) D F A B C Onshore Onshore Flod Hours Data Onshore Flow E Occurrences in Available Flow (No TIBL) TIBL with TIBL Month Month (Hours) (Hours) % (Hours) % Jan 81 744 456 39 100.0 0 0.0 Feb 81 672 391 65 84.6 10 15.4 Mar 81 744 506 107 73.8 28 26.2 Apr 81 720 561 52 51.9 25 48.1 May 81 744 595 277 90.6 26 9.4 Jun 81 720 698 159 84.3 25 15.7 Jul 81 744 701 322 89.4 34 10.6 Aug 81 744 732 58 12.1 51 87.9 Sep 81 720 548 153 96.7 5 3.3 Oct 81 744 744 300 80.0 60 20.0 Nov 81 720 712 224 85.7 32 14.3 Dec 81 744 581 52 98.1 1 1.9 A. Total hours in a month. B. Hours of data analyzed. C. Hours of wind direction from 337.5* to 112.5* D. Percent of time onshore. flow (no TIBL) = (C-E) (100)/C. E. Hours of wind direction from 337.5* to 112.5*, wind speed greater than 0.5 mph, and TL>TW. F. Percent of time TL>TW (TIBL) of the hours of on-shore flow. F = (E/C) (100). TL = Temperature of Land. TW = Temperature of Water. 9
. . . . .- - .- .~. . . _ . _ - .--.
t' t f 1 2 TABLE A ' Duration of Possible Thermal = Internal Boundary Layer Formation f 'using TL > TW . Wind Direction-337.5*-112.5' l Wind Speed > 0.5'sph' ! t f i !
, DURATION !
MONTH DAY' HOURS TIME PERIOD I i r January 81 No Cases of T.I.B.L. l .i Total 0 . ! ! February 81 20 1 1400
+
l 22 1 0400 } 22 _ 1 0700 d
- 22 5 1000-1400
~ 25 1 1800 l 27 1 1400- ;
Total 10 ~! March 81 22 3 1600-1800 a ! 23 7 1200-1800 [ 24 7 1200-1800 : 25 1 1100 I 25 3 1400-1600 i . 26 2 - 1600-1700'
- 27 5 1400-1800 i
! Total' 28 : 1 April 81 06 1 1600 l 09 2 1700-1800 22 1 1200
- f
[ { '27 7 1200-1800 .i > 28 1 0200 ! ! 28 5 0800-1200 1
- 28 4 1500-1800
! 30 4 1500-1800 . l Total 25 ? e . l May 81 03 4 1500-1800 :! i 08 2- . 1300-1400 ; !~ 12- 2 1600-1700
- 13 2 1300-1400
16- 1 1300 , 19 4~ 1500-1800 l 20 7 1200-1800 22 2 1300-1400 -l t i ! r-
.;.-_.......-,_u
, , , , - . . . . - - - - . . J...~._.,..,-,._-...._,~._~.....--..,, . . . _ . . . . . . . . - , - - . - . - . - - , ,
l Table A-3 Cont. DURATION MONTH DAY HOURS TIME PERIOD 23 1 1800 27 1 1000 Total 26 June 81 02 8 1200-1900 04 5 1200-1700 05 2 1100-1200 12 1 1900 19 1 1500 21 6 1300-1800 30 2 1100-1200 Total 25 July 81 02 1 1400 05 9 1100-1900 06 2 1800-1900 07 8 1200-1900 18 6 1300-1800 25 8 1100-1900 Total 34 August bl 02 5 1300-1700 21 6 1200-1700 22 6 1300-1800 23 3 1400-1600 24 9 . 1100-1900 25 5 14u0-1800 26 8 1100-1900 27 8 1200-1900 Total 51 September 81 24 3 1600-1800 25 1 1300 25 1 1900 ec ' Total 5 . October 81 05 2 1800-1900 11 2 1500-1600 12 4 1400-1700 13 6 , 1400-1900 26 12 a 0800-1900 27 8 0900-1600 28 1 , f
, 1200 28 6 '
1400-1900 29 9 ' 1000-1800 , 30 10 1100-1900 i Total 60 , TL>TW - Wind Direction 337.5* - 112.5* - Wind Speed > 0.5 mph 4 0 w 5-3
- ... . - .. . ~ . - ~. .. . _ , - . ... . -..
e q , i I l Table A-3 Cont. DURATION MONTH ' DAY HOURS TIME PERIOD
- November 81 01 4 1300-1600 02 5- 1200-1600 03 7 1000-1600
~04 5 1200-1600 ,
! 13 2 1500-1600 i 14 7 1000-1600 ! 16 2' 1400-1500 .' Total 32 , December 81 22 1 1600 Total 1 i
- TL>TW - Wind Direction 337.5' - 112.5* - Wind Speed > 0.5 mph i-I r
a l
- i f r I.
e i
- i l
R ' i ( > i l: i t l !- i *
. . . . - . - -- - . _ . _ - - . . -. .----;....,,._.c_, .____......,.....__.....__..._.._.-...-_,s.-. . . . . _ , , , , . . . . . _ , -
TABLE A-4 Duration of On-Shore Flow (Non-TIBL Conditions) Using TW > TL Wind Direction 337.5' - 112.5' DURATION MONTH DAY HOURS TIME PERIOD January 81 02 2 1400-1500 03 4 0600-0900 14 8 1500-2200 15 1 0100 16 2 2000-2100 20 14 1100-2400 21 8 0100-0800 Total 39 February 81 14 3 1900-2100 20 1 0400 21 12 1300-2400 22 5 0100-0500 22 1 0700 22 5 1000-1400 25 1 1800 25 4 2100-2300 26 20 0100-2000
. 26 2 2300-2400 27 5 0100-0500 27 6 1400-1900 Total 65 March 81 13 2 1200-1300 16 15 0100-1500 18 1 2100 19 2 0100-0200 21 12 1200-2400 22 2 0100-0200 22 20 0500-2400 l 23 18 0100-1800 l 24 13 1200-2400 25 6 0100-0600 25 4 1100-1600 26 2 1600-1700 27 1 0800 27 9 1000-1800 Total 107 April 81 09 2 1700-1800 12 22 0300-2400 13 12 0100-1200 14 4 2100-2400 15 18 0100-1800 20 14 1100-2400 1
l
l l 2 Table A-4 Cont. DURATION i- -MONTH ' DAY HOURS TIME PERIOD i i 21 14 0100-1400 22 8 1100-1800 26 6 1900-2400 , , 27 21 0100-2100 28 2 0200-0300 28 5 0800-1200 i 28 4 1500-1800
- 29 4 0600-0900 30 12 1000-2100 Total 148-4 l May 81 01 23 0200-2400 02 17 0100-1700 1
03 8 1500-2200 i P5 3 2200-2400 ' 06 17 0100-1700 - 06 5 2000-2400 07 24 0100-2400 . 08 6 0100-0600 08 6 0800-1400
- 12 2 1600-1700 i 13 3 1200-1400 14 4 0300-0600 14 15 0800-2400 O- 15 16 1
1 0900 1300 j- 16 1 1900 17 23 0200-2400 j 18 24 0100-2400 1 19 20 0100-2000 19 2 2200-2400 i 20 18 0100-1800 ' 22 2 1300-1400 , 23 6 1800-2300 27 12 0900-2400 28 3 0500-0700 ! 30 11 1400-2400 - 31 20 0100-2000 1 Total 277 i-June 81 01 16 0900-2400 02 1 0100
, 02 11 1200-2200-
! 04 5 1200-1700 05 2 1100-1200 07 12 0800-1900 12 3 1900-2100
.13 3 0200-0400 13 5 0700-1100 17 5 1400-1800
, s 19 10 1500-2400 l 20 23 0100-2300 TW > TL - Wind Direction 337.5* - 112.5*
Table A-4 Cont. DURATION !!ONTH DAY HOURS TIME PERIOD 21 8 1300-2000 23 15 0500-1900 25 3 2200-2400 26 1 0100 26 10 1000-1900 27 12 1100-2200 30 14 1100-240C Total 159 July 81 01 7 0100-0700 01 2 0900-1000 01 12 1300-2400 02 12 1000-2100 04 4 1600-1900 05 14 1100-2400 06 19 0100-1900 07 9 1200-2000 09 1 2400 10 14 0100-1400 14 24 0100-2400 15 24 0100-2400 16 1 0200 16 17 0500-2100 17 8 1200-1900 18 6 1300-1800
- 2. 5 0500-0900 21 12 1300-2400 22 17 0100-1700 22 6 1900-2400 23 4 0100-0400 23 13 1200-2400 24 13 1000-2200 25 9 1100-1900 26 1 0500 26 3 2000-2200 27 24 0100-2400 28 2 0100-0200 29 11 0800-1800 30 11 1000-2000 31 17 0800-2400 Total 322 August 81 02 5 1300-1700 21 6 1200-1700 22 6 1300-1800 23 3 1400-1600 24 11 1100-2100 25 5 1400-1800 26 12 1100-2200 27 10 1200-2100 Total 58 TW > TL - Wind Direction 337.5* - 112.5*
t 4 Table A-4 Cont. 4 DURATION 1 01 MONTH DAY HOURS TIME PERIOD September 81 02 14 1100-2400 03 1 0100 03 14 0700-2000 08 2 2300-2400 17 7 1800-2400 1 18 18 0100-1800 3 20 7 1500-2100 i 21 17 0800-2400 22 24 0100-2400 1 23 16 0100-1600 4 23 3 2200-2400 I 24 - 6 1300-1800
- 25 1 1000
- 25 1 1300 l 25 2 1900-2000 .
.! 29 4 0200-0500 l 29 5 1900-2300 l 30 3 1100-1300 j 30 6 1500-2000 l 30 2 2200-2300 } Total 153 2 October 81 01 2 0200-0300 l 03 3 1500-1700
.~ 05 5 1800-2200 1 07 2 2100-2200 l 08 5 0100-0500 l 08 1 1100
} 08 5 1300-1700 i 4 09 15 1000-2400
- 10 1 0300
- 10 1 0500
- 10 18 0700-2400 q 11 24 0100-2400 12 24 0100-2400 1 13 2 0100-0200 13 8 1200-1900 i 15 2 2300-2400 1
16 17 0100-1700 16 1 2300 21 20 0500-2400 22 17 0100-1700 i 22 2 1900-2000 1 25 11 1400-2400 26 24 0100-2400
'27 16 0100-1600 28 -2 0800-0900 28 13 1200-2400 29 24 0100-2400 0100-2400 N 30 24 i
s 31 11 1200-2200 Total 300 TW > TL - Wind Direction 337.5* - 112.5*
Table A-4 Cont. DURATION MONTH DAY HOURS TIME PERIOD November 81 01 6 1300-1800 02 1 0300 02 7 1200-1800 02 5 2000-2400 03 19 0100-1900 04 1 0300 04 13 1200-2400 09 24 0100-2400 10 7 0100-0700 11 7 1200-1800 11 5 2000-2400 12 8 0100-0800 12 11 1200-2200 13 14 1100-2400 14 2 0700-0800 14 15 1000-2400 15 2 0100-0200 15 10 0800-1700 16 1 0100 16 2 0500-0600 16 8 1200-1900 19 5 0400-0800 19 12 1300-2400 20 1 0100 23 4 1900-2200 24 23 0200-2400 25 1 0100 25 4 0300-0600 25 1 1300 25 1 1600 30 4 2100-2400 Total 224 December 81 04 13 0500-1700 08 2 2300-2400 09 1 1100 09 1 2300 10 2 0500-0600 12 3 1200-1400 14 3 0700-0900 17 13 1200-2400 18 5 0100-0500 22 9 1600-2400 Total 52 TW > TL - Wind Direction 337.5* - 112.5' __ _ _ ___ ______J
i i 1
)~ TABLE A-5 Number of Days for Possible Occurrence of Thermal Internal Boundary Layer (TL>TW) 1 I
% of ,
I Days Days Month ! in TL>TW TL>TW Month Month Occurred Occurred ! i 1 } . f Jan 31 0 0 , i } ! Feb 28 4 17.8 f Mar 31 7 22.5 - . Apr 30 6 20 l May 31 10 35.4 ! Jun 30 7 23.3 i j Jul. 31 6 19.3 i l Aug 31 8 25.8 ! Sep 30 2 6.6 l ! Oct 31 10 32.2 3 Nov 30 8 26.6 Dec 31 1 3.2 i TL = Temperature of the land TW = Temperature of the water 1 t i i
- L ,u, m-,, -..,,,-,,,-,-----,----vn-,4 ,,e..e e ...-,,,ar--,,,s,,-n < ~ , , . , +,,,,,m,- m, ,-n-vr,,w n ,e s ew wr m m ., y , ,,g..~.,,,.,pwp -
l' i l . 4 i i 1 1-i 4 , i ! l' 1 4 t 4 i i t i i l' F . 4 l 1982 Meteorological Data for the i Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station' Windroses, Precipitation, and Daily 3 Meteorological Averages i Prepared by , l Kelly L. Clayton 1 l -l I l I 4 4 I I r 1 l l
, .---,e.v.-- - w-, ,-wr -
2,--,a -*e ,- - -e+*W---,e- -m- m- e-w-----we- w -- ewme=-=--- ee- a-*- *--- - --w+* we---++ ar- -we-w.--ew---+ +--e*---W--- +ee-+-
o This report summarizes meteorological data collected onsite at
' the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1982. Onsite weather data were collected from one 100m (340') freestanding meteorological tower, one 10m (35') satellite tower, and a ground-level precipitatiion monitor. Meteorological sensors are located at 10m (35'), 75m (250')
[ and 100m (340') above ground level. The main meteorological tower supports meteorological sensors at all three levels, while the satellite tower houses wind speed and wind direction sensors at i 10 meters. The meteorological data gathered from the main tower are: wind direction and wind speed from the 75m and 100m levels;
; ambient air temperature at all three levels; dewpoint at the 10m and .
i 100m levels, and differential temperatures (AT) between the 10m and 75m sensors and the 10m and 100m sensors. Precipitation is measured r j by a ground level tipping bucket system located at the base of the satellite tower. The sensors send signals which are recorded on a Meteorolog-h I ical Data Processing System (MDPS) designed, installed, and main-i > tained by an independent consultant. The analog signals are then converted to digital signals by a microprocessor and.sent to a
- DEC PDP 11/34 computer located in the Davis-Besse Administration
! Building. Software within the DEC PDP 11/34 computer system average j and store the meteorological data each hour. !. The wind direction and wind speed data for 1982 were graphed t onto windrose charts. Windroses were graphed with the wind direction I being the percentage of hours recorded for each of the 16 cardinal ! compass directions and wind speed in miles per hour (mph) averaged
- for the hours of.each wind direction (Figures 1-36).
The daily averages of all meteorological parameters were cal- ! culated and are included in'the following data' tables (Tables 1 - 12). l 'Similarly, daily precipitation data were averaged and tabulated in Tables 13 - 26. l l O-
Results-From the meteorological data collected onsite at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power-Station, the following-trends were identified. The predominant wind direction was from the west-southwest (WSW) during
. 1982 at all three sensor levels. The only variance from this occurred during May when the major wind direction was from the East (E).
The average wind speeds for all three sensor levels were: 9.2 mph-at-the 10m level, 13.7 mph at the 75m level, and 15.42 mph at the 100m level. The highest average wind speed at.all three levels occurred during January from the west-southwest (WSW) direction with an average . wind speed of 27.4 mph. . The precipitation data showed the greatest rainfall occurred during the month of November with 6.3 inches total. The average precipitation during 1982 at the Davis-Besse site was 2.5 inches per month. O 1 s 1-I I' '
a 4 l I l i t i i
}
2: 1 1 i 1 a 6 i i 4 b ' 4 i l i I i 1 ! TABLES 1-12 i, i MONTHLY DAVIS-BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA 1 O I a l i
Table 1 DAVIS tiESSE StiE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA JANUARY to 1982 illROU0il JANUARY 28, 1982 DA11Y AVERAGES 10H W SPD 10H W D1R 75H W SF D 75H W D1R 100H W SPD 100H W D1R 75H DE1.i DAY 10H DEW Fi 10H A TEMP __________ __________ __________ 22.1 DF 27.6 D F 15.7 HPil 250.8 DEO 20.5 HPil 261.9 DEO 21.7 HF'll 254.9 DEO -1.0 D F 1/ 1 105 6 DEO -0.7 D F 1/ 2 18.0 D F 28.6 D F 12.1 Hril 105.3 DEO 18.5 NF il 111.1 DEO 19.5 HPit 36.6 D F 10.0 HPil 133.4 DEO 18.0 NFil 148.1 DEO 19. 7 HPil 142.8 DEO 0.3 D F 1/ 3 35.4 D F 218.1'DEO -0.2 D F 1/ 4 29.7 D F 33.6 D F 26.7 HPil 215.0 DED 36. 4 Hi ll 225.3 DEO 43.2 MPil 28.9 D F 14.9 HFil 218.1 DEO 21.5 HFil 225.7 DEO 25.4 HPil 220 9 DEO -0.9 D F 1/ 5 20.5 D F 350.6 DEO 1/ 6 23.0 D F 27.0 D F 10.4 HFil 349.0 DED 15.6 NFil 358 6 DEO 18.2 Mill -0.8 D F 16.3 HFil 306.2 DEO 18.9 HPH 290 9 DEO -0.8 D F 1/ 7 9.0 D F 16.7 p F 11. 3 HF il 296.7 DEO 14.4 D F 16.1 NFil 242.8 DED 21.7 HPil 251.9 DEO 25.3 HFil 246.7 DED -0.9 D F 1/ B 7.8 D F 299 3 DED -1.0 D F 1/ 9 1.3 D F 6.9 D F 17.2 HPil 296.6 DED 22.2 HPH 306.2 DEO 25.1 HPil
-5.8 D F 27.6 HFil 258.6 DED 34.0 HFll 266.9 DEO 39.6 NFil 262.7 DED -1 1 D F 1/10 -9.6 D F 248.9 DED 1/11 -0. 4 D F 2.5 D F 27.1 HPil 245.2 DED 32.9 HPil 253.6 DED 38.0 HPil -1.2 D F 12.1 D F 9.3 HF'll 201.3 DEO 11.3 HFil 208.6 DEO 13.3 HFil 204.9 DEO -1.2 D F 1/12 7.9 D F 62.6 DED 0.5 D F 15.1 D F 20.0 D F 5.5 NF il 106.9 DEO 8.5 HFil 68.2 DEO 10.0 HF il 1/13 13.0 HF'll 273.8 DEO 0.2 D F 1/14 11.9 D F 13.9 D F 6.4 HPil 231.0 DEO 10.5 HPfl 272.7 DED 3.6 D F 7.5 D F 10.8 HPal 211.8 DED 14.8 HF il 220.1 DEO 17.7 HPil 216.0 DED -1.0 D F 1/15 33.5 HPil 262.2 DEO -0.9 D F 1/16 1.9 D F 6.2 D F 22.3 NFIl 258.3 DED 28.3 HF il 267.8 DEO
-9.6 D F 17.4 HPil 224.6 DEO 21.7 HPal 232.2 DED 25.0 HPil 227.5 DED -1.1 D F 1/17 -14.7 D F 12.4 HPH 203.8 DED -0.8 D F 1/10 3.0 D F 9.0 D F 7. 4 HF il 187.6 DEO 10. 3 HF il 201.7 DED 20.1 D F 6.9 HPil 76.4 DEO 10.6 HPil 91.4 DEO 12.8 HF H 88:2 DED -0.1 D F 1/19 15.0 D F 36.5 DEO 0.4 DF 17.4 D F 21.3 D F 10.3 NFil 49.1 DED 15.4 NFll 41.6 DEO 18.6 HPil 1/20 52.7 DEO -1.1 DF 17.3 HPil 51.4 DEO 22.0 NFil 60.3 DEO 25.4 HFil 1/21 12.0 D F 17.4 D F 07.9 DEO 76.0 DED -1.0 D F I 1/22 12.8 D F 16.7 D F .v .0 HPil 82.6 DEO 27.6 HPil 28.7 NFil 1/23 21.2 D F 28.5 D F 27.2 HPH 226.9 DED 26.9 HFil 235.5 DEO 999.9 HPil 999.9 DEG -0.6 D F i 7.8 D F 24.0 HPil 253.8 DED 30.0 HPfl 263.0 DED 999.9 NF'll 999.9 DED -1.2 D F 1/24 1.4 D F 190.0 DEO 251.8 DEO 9.0 HFil 276.3 DEO 4.2 MPil -0.3 D F 1/25 3.7 D F 8.3 D F 6.1 HPil 266.8 DEO 999.9 HPH 999.9 DEO 0.5 0 F 1/26 5.3 D F 10.6 D F 9.1 HFil 244.7 DEG 15.2 HFil 19.5 D F 11.2 HF fi 103.2 DEO 20.3 HF il 194.8 DEO 18.5 HPil 200.5 DEO 0.0 D F 1/27 7.7 D F 269.7 DEO -0.4 D F 1/28 19.6 D F 32.2 D F 18.0 HPil 246.4 DEO 25.8 HPil 257.2 DEO 26.8 HFil G G .
_ _ _ _ _ , . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _-- _ _ . _ _ . . . . _ . _ . . _ _ _ . _ . __ _ m._.- . .._m__-. - . --
) .
Table 2 DAVIS E' ESSE S11E AVERAGE WEAlltER DAIA FEBRUARY le 1982 THROUGil F EDliUARY 20e !?O2 DAILY AVERAGES , DAY ION DEW Fi SON A TEMP 10H W SFD 1018 W DIR 7541 W SF D 75H W DIR 10088 W SPD 100H W DIR 75H DELT 100H del.1
---~~----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ------- .. --~~.----- ------ --- ---------- ---------- ----------
2/ 1 11.7 D F 16.3 D r 9.2 HFH 243.0 DED 13.3 NFH 253.9 DEO 15. 4 HF'll 250.8 DEO 0.3 D F 0.1 D F 2/ 2 19.7 D F 23.6 D F 5. 8 HF'll - 88.9 DED 10.6 HFil 113.7 DEO 12.2 HrH 117.4 DEO l.2 D F 1.3 D F 2/ 3 22.3 D F 25.4 DF 15.7 HPil 10.4 DEO 20.1 al0H !?.4 DEO 22.8 HFH 12.2 DED -0.8 D F -1.0 D F 2/ 4 5.7 D F 10.5 D r 6.3 HFil 354.6 DED 10.8 HFil 17.7 DEO 31.8 HFH 13.6 DED 0.6 D F 0.5 D F 2/ 5 12.9 D F 13.7 p F 7. 7 HF'H 35.1 DEO 11.0 HFil 61.6 DED 12.8 HrH 64.8 DEO 0.8 D F 0.5 D F , 2/ 6 0.3 D r 2.7 D F 13.6 HFil 235.5 DED 20.6 HtH 248.7 DEG 26.0 H0H 246.3 DEO 0.3 D F 0.5 D F 2/ 7 2.8 D F 9.9 D F 17.3 HF'll 223.1 DED 26.4 HFil 233.2 DED 33.2 HrH 229.8 DEO 0.1 D F 0.1 DF 2/ 8 11.0 D F 17.4 D F 7.8 M0li 230.3 DEO 12. 0 HF il 243.3 DED 15.3 HrH 242.3 DEO 0.0 D F 0.2 D F 2/ 9 10.3 D F 15.9 D F 10.0 HFil 305.6 DED I 4.3 HFil 317.8 DED 16.2 HrH 309.0 DED -0. 4 D F -0.6 DF. 2/10 -8.3 D F ~3.7 D F 11.8 HF'N 230.2 DEO 18.1 NFH 243.1 DEO 20.3 HF H 239.3 DED -0.1 DF -0.0 D F 2/11 -1.0 D F 6.7 D F 9./ MF il 218.8 DEO 17.5 HFH 236.6 DEO 20.0 HFH 234.4 DEO 0.7 D F 1.1 D F 2/12 9.1 DF 13.8 D F 3.8 HF H 65.6 DED 6.2 NFH 45.9 DED 6.9 HI H 49.0 DEO 0.8 D F 1.0 D F 2/13 13.8 D F 16.0 D F 8.2 HF H 230.5 DEO 13.3 HFil 246.5 DEO 15.5 HF'll 248.9 DEO 0.8 D F 0.5 D r - 2/14 21.6 D F 29.4 D r 10.7 HFH 196.9 DED 17.6 NFH - 206.1 DEO 19.6 NFH 201.0 DED -0.6 D r -0.7 D F g i 2/15 35.5 D r 40.6 D F 13.2 MPII 211.5 DED 22.8 HFH 224.9 DED 28.4 HF'H 218.9 DEO 0.8 D F 1.0 D F to 2/16 32.7 D F 34.3 D F 11.2 HrH 54.3 DEO 18.2 HFH 45.4 DED 20.1 HIH 37.3 DED -0.1 D F -0.0 D F 8 2/17 23.3 D F 28.5 p F 21.0 NF'll 65.6 DEO 29.2 HFH. 72.5 DEO 30.5 HFH 64.4 DEO -1.0 D F -1.4 D F 2/18 32.5 D F 33.1 DF 7.9 HFH 113.2 DEO 12.8 HFH 134.9 DEO 13.4 H0H 134.5 DEO -0.5 D F -0.3 D F 2/19 31.3 D F 32.4 D F 9.8 HFH 262.5 DEO 14.0 NFH 270.6 DED 15.0 HFil 268.8 DEO -0.2 D F - -1.0 D F 2/20 33.0 D F 35.5 D F 10.3 Hril 231.6 DED 17.1 NF H 246.9 DEO 88.7 HFH 237.6 DEO -0.2 D F -1.0 D F 2/21 30.6 D F 33.9 D F 9.5 Hril. 307.0 DEO 15.8 HFil 333.6 DEO 17.4 HFH 325.0 DEG -0.3 D F- -0 5 D F
. 2/22 26.8 D F 33.8 D F 8.6 NF'H 272.0 DEO 14.4 HFH 292.0 DED 16. 0 HF'H 281.0 DED -0.5 D F -0.6 D F 2/23 27.8 D F 33.7 D F 11.8 HrH 348.1 DEO : 18.5 HF H 348.3 DEO 20.6 HFH 338.9 DEG -0.2 D F -0.2 D F 2/24 18.1 DF ^ 22.7 D F 17.1 HFH 37.3 DEO 20 7 NF'H 46.6 DEO 20.9 HF H 37.7 DEO -1.1 DF -1.6 D F 2/25 6.4 D F 16.9 D F 6.2 NF H 40.8 DED 8.1 HF H 32.7 DEO 8.1 NF H 24.0 DEG- -0.4 D F -0.6 D F 2/26 7.6 D F 17.7 D r 4.5 HF'H 211.7 DEG 9.1 HFH 256.1 DED 9.0 HF H 248.1 DED 2.1 D F 2.3 D F
, 2/27 13.7 D F ~21.3 D F 5.0 NF H 55.4 DED 8. 4 NF H 60.2 DEO 9.2 HFH 54.4 DEO 2.2 D F 2.4 DF 2/28 16.7 p F 21.3 D F 10.0 HFH 62.9 DED 15.9 HFH 88.5 DED 17 7 NFH 74.5 DEG 2.6 D F 2.7 D F 9
Table 3
' DAVIS DESSE SITE AVERAGE WEAlllER DATA HAREH 1. 1982 illROUGil NAREN 31, 1982 DAILY AVERADES 10H A TEHF 10H W SPD 10H W D1R 75H W SF D 7511 W D1R 100H W SF D 100H W DIR 75H DELT DAY 10H DEW PT - - ...--- --------- --------~.
3/ 1 25.0 D F 33.2 D F 13.2 HFil 233.5 DEO 21.5 HFil 246.7 DEO 24.4 Mril 237.1 DEO 0.7 D F 3/ 2 22.8 D F 26.6 D F 9.4 Hril 20.0 DEC 12.6 H011 6.6 DED 14.0 Mril 357.6 DEO -0. 7 D F 3/ 3 5.3 D F 10.9 D F 13.1 HPH 47.5 DEO 19.9 Hrli 61.0 DEO 20.6 HrH 54.4 DED 2.0 D F 25.3 D F 28.1 D F 14.9 HrH 133.8 DEG 21.2 H0ll 145.8 DEO 22.6 Hril 137.7 DEO -0.3 D F 3/ 4 3/ 5 15.0 D F 24.8 D F 8.6 HFH 252.4 DEO 12.4 HF*il 267.1 DEO 13 0 Mril 257.7 DEO -0.7 D F 19.7 D F 25.8 D F 3.5 NFH 290.7 DEO 5.5 litil 322.6 DEO 5.5 HPH 281 4 DED -0.1 D F 3/ 6 -0.7 p F 14.3 D F 23.6 D F 9.1 HF H 303.0 DEO 13.6 Hril 320.6 DED 14.7 Hril 312.7 DED 3/ 7 14.4 NFil 176.6 DED -0.9 D F 3/ 8 10.4 D F 21.0 D F 9.6 HFil 186.7 DEG 13.6 NF il 197.3 DED 12.6 D F 20.7 D F 13 6 Hril 226.9 DEO 19.6 HF il 243.0 DEO 21.1 Hril 234.7 DEO -0.3 D F 3/ 9 175 0 DEO 0.7 D F 3/10 26.2 D F 30.9 0 F 8.5 HF H 165.1 DEO 17.3 Hril 182.2 DEO 20.1 Hril 8.4 NF H 220.5 DED 18.9 NF H 235.7 DEO 21.6 Ntil 224.1 DEO 0.9 D F 3/11 39.5 D F 41.4 D F 126.2 DEC 15.1 HP11 139.3 DED 1.2 D F 3/12 35.1 D F 37.9 D F 6.9 HF H 118.0 DED 10.3 HFil 36.0 D F 46.0 D F 22.5 NFH 231.8 DED 3 3.9 11011 230.0 DEO 36.3 HF*il 238.6 DEO 0.3 D F 3/13 304.8 DEO 0.5 D F 3/14 30.1 D F 38.1 D F 8.6 Hril 295.0 DEO 13.7 HrH 346.7 DEO 14 7 Hril 34.2 D F 15.8 Mril 73.4 DEO 27.2 Hril 82.7 DED 29.8 Hril 81.7 DEO 0.0 D F 3/15 27 2 D F 160.6 DEO 1/16 42.0 D F 44.6 D F 9.7 Mril 140.0 DEO 19.7 Mril 159.3 DEO 21.8 HFil 1.2 D F 32.5 D F 37.4 D F 10.2 N0il 281.5 DED 14.1 HFil 293.0 DEO 14.9 ItFil 200.0 DEO -1.0 D F 3/17 251.1 DEO -0.2 D F 35.6 D F 38.5 D F 6.3 Hril 238.9 DEO 9.9 if l1 255.0 DEO 10.2 11F il 3/18 3/19 31.4 D F 34.4 D F 8.9 Mril 51.6 DED 15.1 HP11 60.4 DED 14.2 HF il 57.7 DED -0.5 D F 32.4 D F 33.9 D F 11.0 Hril 45.3 DEO 17.1 HFH 79.1 DEO 15.8 Mril 80.0 DED -0.7 D F 3/20 277.1 DEO 21.0 NF il 274.4 DEO -0.8 D F I 265.4 DEO 3/21 3/22 31.3 D F 29.6 D F 36.7 D F 37.8 D F 14.7 11.1 Hill HFil 256.4 DEO 20.4 Hril 16.5 HrH 269.2 DED 17.6 HPH 260.0 DED -0.7 D F y 3/23 30.4 D F 38.4 D F 7.0 Hril 209.3 DEO 12.7 HrH 230.0 DED 13.2 11F il 230.4 DEO 0.3 D F 3/24 33.8 D F 42 5 D F 7.7 ItrH 190.4 DEO 15.9 HPH 212.7 DEO 17.9 Hril 212.0 DEO 1.2 D F 3/25 32.7 D F 35.6 D F 9.6 Hril 350.0 DEO 13.8 NFil 5.5 DEO 15.7 Hril 3.0 DEO 0.7 D F 3/26 19.1 D F 28.4 D F 16.4 Hril 292.0 DEO 2 2.4 11011 302.4 DED 23.6 Hril 299.0 DED -1.2 D F 3/27 0.0 D F 23.8 D F 1 1 . 7 11011 328.3 DED 15.3 Hril 334.6 DEO 15.4 HPH 330.2 DED -1.4 D F 3/20 16.9 D F 30.6 D F 6.4 HPH 212.8 DED 10.5 HrH 232.5 DEO 10.9 HFH 230.7 DED 0.2 D F 3/29 21.4 D F 38.3 D F 6.9 Hril 142.2 DEO 14.0 HrH 168.9 DEO 14.7 Mril 172.6 DEO 1.8 D F 3/30 42.4 D F 55.3 D F 15.5 NFil 180.3 DEO 28.8 HrH 191.9 DED 31.5 HrH 191.1 DEO 0.8 D F 3/31 40.2 D F 53.1 D F 17.9 Hril 229.2 DED 27.7 HFH 240.0 DEO 30.4 HF il 238.1 DED -0.1 DF
- # G .
.. .. .- . - . _ . - . . . -_ . . -- - ~ ~ .
N l ' Table 4 ' DAVIS DESSE S11E AVERAGE WEATifER DATA AF*R i t. le 1982 THROUGH AFRIL 30. 1982 DAltY AVERAGES 300H W SPD 100H W DIR 75H DELT i 10H W SPD 10H W D1R 75H W SPD 75tf W DIR __........ ___....____ DAY 10H DEW Fi 10H A 1EHF ______ ___ .......___ 26.7 H0ff 281.2 DEO ~-0.3 D F . 272 8 DEO 25.1 ftFH 284.0 DEO -0.6 D F 4/ 1 26.0 D F 48.9 D F 17.2 HI'H 98.2 DEO 24.5 HrH 97 7 DEO 15.3 firH 89 4 DED 22 9 HF'N 225 7 DEO -1. 2 D F 4/ 2 30.1 D F 40.4 D F 39.1 HF'H 228.2 DEO 41.6 NFH 43.7 D F 28.9 HrH 220.2 DEG 31.4 HFH 293.2 DED -1.4 D F 4/ 3 36 5 D F 286.8 DEO 29.7 ffFil 297.0 DED -1.5 D F 4/ 4 12.7 D F 25.5 D F 23.5 HPH 57.2 DED 25.8 HFH 54.4 DEO 18.9 HF H 52 2 DEO 2 4. 4 Mi ll 336.7 DEO -1.4 D F 4/ 5 18 4 D F 27.0 D F 13.2 MrH 341.4 DEO 31.7 HF H 23.8 D F 23.7 HF H 333.7 DEO 14.3 HF'H 312.8 DES -1.1 DF 4/ 6 12.2 D F 308.7 DEG 3.5 HF H 317.4 DED 0.9 D F l 92DF 23.1 D F 10.9 tiF H 62.7 DEO 11.2 HFH 59.6 DEO 4/ 7 26.3 DF 8.0 H00f 113 9 DED 11.3 HIH 16. 4 HF H 351.1 DEO -0.9 D F 4/ 8 13 4 D F 352 9 DEO 12.5 firil 354.9 DEO 4/ 9 20 4 D F 33.4 D F 11 9 HtH ?.2 HFil 232 2 DED 20.3 HF H 231.3 DEO. -1 2 D F 31.5 D F 13.2 HrH 221 0 DEO 14.3 HF H 255.9 DED -1 1DF 4/10 25.3 D F 245.0 DEO 6.4 NFH 257.4 DED 0. 4 D F - 4/18 26.3 D F 34.6 D F 11 4 HtH 7.2 MPil 178.3 DED 16.5 HFH 176.0 DEO 30.2 D F 42.6 D F ?.6 HrH 165.4 DEG 26.7 HFH 277.6 DEO -0.4 9 F 4/12 271.7 DEO 39.0 NFH 281.1 DEG. -1 1 DF 38.9 D F 50.1 D F 16.0 HFH 63 4 DEO 10.1 HFH 61.9 DED 4/13 7 7 H0H 53.8 DEO 9.5 HF'H 105.8 DED 1.3 D F 4/14 30.6 D F 37.8 D F 83.4 DEO 14.0 Htff 101.2 DEO 15.7 HPH 1.0 D F 35.7 D F 41.7 D F 8.9 HF H 194.8 PEG 23.4 HFH 193.5 DEO 4/15 63.6 D F 10.5 HF H 184.2 DEO 20.9 HrH 28.3 HIH 237.7 DEO -0.9 D F 4/16 53.8 D F 17.5 HFH 231.3 DEG 24.2 NFH 240.4 DEO 251.0 DEO -0.2 9 F 4/17 49.5 D F 56.1 D F 14.6 HF H 253.1 DEO 15 6 HFH 48.8 D F 9.5 NFH 239.5 DED 21 5 HPH 202.3 DEG -0.0 D F 4/18 32.2 D F 195.4 DEO 18.9 HFH 204.9 DEO 35.4 D F 57.3 D F 10.3 HFH 236.6 DEO 23.2 HF H 234.4 DED -0.9 D F 4/19 14.7 HFH 227.4 DEO 23.7 HFH -1 1 D F 41.6 D F 53.9 D F 292.7 DEG 21.0 HF'H 288.6 DEO e 4/20 15.2 HFH 280.8 DEO 20.4 HFH -0.4 D F 6 4/21 17.0 D F 42.1 DF !!.1 HFH 324.3 DEO 11.6 HFH 320.4 DEG ' 43.3 D F 7.8 H0H 313.3 DEG 24.6 HFH 256.5 DEO -0.1 D F 4/22 16.2 9 F 243.7 DEO 22.2 HFH 257.9 DES 28.3 D F 52.4 D F 14.8 HrH 237.6 DEO 22.7 HF H 236.5 DEO 0.2 D F 4/23 13.1 NFH 224.6 DED 20.7 HFH 1.2 D F 4/24 32.6 D F 58.0 D F 16.9 H0H 219.6 DEO 18.5 HF H 220.9 DEG 59.9 D F 8.6 HF H 205.1 DEO 11.0 HFH 184.7 DE3 -0.1 D F 4/25 - 34.9 D F 153.5 DED 10.4 HF H 178.4 DEO -1.6 D F 50.3 D F 57.1 DF 6.4 ff 0H - 25.7 DEO 20.0 HF'H 21.3 DEG 4/26 16.6 NFlf 20.5 DED 3 8.2 HF H -1.6 D F 4/27 32.0 D F 44.3 D F 15,1 HF-H 68.4 DEO 15.4 NFH 65.9 DEO 26.8 D F 44.9 D F 12 7 H0H 62.1 DED 77.2 DEO 18.3 HFH 76.9 DEG -1. 3 D F 4/28 12.2 MPH 68.4 DEO 16.7 HFH 88.1 DED 0. 7 D F . 4/29 32.4 D F 48.3 D F 10.1 H0H 85.5 DEO 10.8 HFH 6.8 HFH 72.8 DED 4/30 38.0 D F 52.4 D F
_g_ 1 8 m e 46m6m6666w6666666666666w66666666 J e&GGGG&GGGGGGGG&&G&&GGa&&GG&&s&& WD G 8
- 3 O. m. N. m. M. W. 4. &. O. w. n. m. e. 4. e. C. O. M. e. h. r.e r.4 N. N. e. b. m. m. m. m. M.
- s0000m000m=0000000mOCa*==m000000 a t t i eas e e s s a I e I a e i e 0 1 e N I ue a t 0000000000000000000000000000o00
'emmm YYYY YYYYYYYYYYYWYYYYYYYYYYYYWYW m------=--m&-------=----G G 3e Ep e >. N. 4. e. m. m. e. n. >. 4. M. 4. M. n. e. n. >. >. W. e.=.4. m. m. 4 4. e. N. N. e. m.
O 3 m O O O M M M G M n e M a n w e e n O v e e g e M N e v e ra N
- O I nmNGO*MNem D O O m > p e ro N > M m e > N N > > O me M m a f4 N M N == m ri m NN a rt m N N
& I A 1 m4 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =i===============
6bbiasseiwimiss 6%ismesm66mibbi 3a I EEEEEEEEEEEE=EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
- M. m. 4. e. e. m. e. o. n. N. m. N. a. n. e. n. e.s N. m. e. a. r.a g.r.a N. M. N. w. M. M. 4 21 O I N D = N N e n te e mmammmmmmmm=Nmm e m h N M M M 4 4 m e e m m N==== M o ra m ma 0 4 mm= Nam m I 8
E 9 00000000C0000000000000000000000 m t wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww L I GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG B 31 e N. N. C. h. m. O. N. 4. N. e. m. m. a. n. f. e. n. b. M. m. b. e. w. e. >. N. M. 4. T. b. C. E I M&MNannO4MeOMammeOme4Mm>NOmnkm> n i a n s m O O c e N > m M m Ow m m > mNM n e M N > Ne T4 b e b ramNmNN ra > > O N I M = = re N M ra C
=
C
' ========
l=======================immmm-mem u W W tI EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEECOCEEEEEEEEEEE i uc-mwmimumim2 mmc ccmmm
= e a 3 1 C s b.M. E. N. m. M. O.D. M. O. b. N. C. e.b. e m e. N. A. N.e. m. m. O. O. n. n. O. D. N. b.
w Et ni 4bOnnbemem4M>nnamNeeOnkemmNewNO mammme mmm m a m m = = m re m mamm a 3 m N B W W O O C C O g E I W w M1 00000000000000C00000000000000CO m I wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww g >C > g C s e G G G G G G GG G G G G G GG GG G G GG G G G G G G G G G G o 6 > 2 1 s . .w . 3. M. O. m. 4. N. O. *. 4. b. 4. e. n. o. m. N. m. >. =. N.. N. a.e m e. be N. W. O C e J . El n==>emMm>4MNMnnoewn4>Mm4mpebeNN H = m
=
C O l mmN>4mMN4ComWWemNNra*4mNmebOOmm> G m l =mNM Nm w ra M ra rd wNmNm W m M W G & , D
================A66bi6bi66bAAAA6 ===============
6 1 6bb6ws66bbibb6a m mI EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
= I
> 2 s b. e. 4. M. S. N. a. N. m. N. >. >. n. b. r.4 0. N. N. D. O. m.e e. . b. a. n > O. m. b. n. M.
C # G El 0 8 v4NbNammNWmNe>OWN4bO*m44NNm>404 m m mmm a 1 i t N E 4 6666666666666666666666666666666 m W t b
=
= R &&GG&Ga&GA&GAGO&&&&&OOOO&&&&&G&
e C s# M. N. O. N. O. O. p .. m e. n. e. N. Q. N. a
. e. m. n. e. . C. O. N. O. b. r.4 0. m. m. M. n.
- El O l>ONNmeNONNObWnMenobNGSMObe4mObM nenn4N44WpN444444N4400440444N4N M
*8 C
E at
= 4 It 6666666666666666666666666666666 O
D O 3 4 W I
&&& GAG &&&GLO&&&&&&GaGGGa&GGGGGG E G 6
= p N. n. e. r.4 4. =. r.a e. N. M. N. e. 4. N. O. e. 4 0. =. O. 4 4. M. b. >. N. N. M. n. n. n.
i I e EI C lO4mmOmee4Nem4*>NonMeneembebmO=N eMMMeenemeennpeennnnnnnnennn444 P8 m t m m I
=
ea m N M e n 4 N m > O.=m r4 m=.M e. =n.=.4 N. .Q. b or4a NraremP4era m ra n 4reNN O ra >reOM m M C I NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
& B nennWOnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnenn e
C E l l l
- - - - .-~ --- . . - . - .. -- - .
a Table 6 a O\
- DAVIS DESSE StiE AVERAGE WEAlllER DATA JUNE le 1982 THROUGH JUNE 30. 1982 DAILY AVERAGES 10H W SFD 10H W DIR 75H W SPD 75H W DIR 100H W SPD 100H W D1R 75H DELT DAY ION DEW PT 10H A 1EHF --- _----- ..-- ---.-
6/ 1 53.1 DF 65.0 D F 11.9 Hril 266.0 DED 17.4 Hril 279 3 DEO 88 HPH----.- 275.9 DEO
.--.5 - 1. 0 D F 63.1 D F 8.8 N0H 248.0 DED 12.0 H0H 287.8 DEO 12.1 HF il 285.4 DEO 01 DF 6/ 2 46.0 D F 6/ 3 43.9 D F 56.2 D F 17.4 HF H 45.0 DEO 21.0 HF H 52.5 DEO 21 5 NFH 49.0 DES -1.6 D F 15.7 H0H 62.9 DE0' 16 2 H081 "9.7 DEO -1 4 D F 6/ 4 50.5 D F 50.6 D F 12.0 HPH 56.0 DEO 6/ 5 52.2 D F 59.2 D F 15.7 H0li 4.4 DED 19.5 Mril 10.8 DEO 21.1 HF H 6.9 DEO -1 3 D F -
51.3-D F 62.7 D F 10.9 HFH 29.8 DEO 14 7 HrH 35 9 DEO * ~n . 5 HF il 31.3 DEO -1 3 D F 6/ 6 130.4 DEO i 6/ 7 54.4 D F 62.4 D F 7.6 NFH 124 6 DEO 11 7 HF H 133 2 DEO 12.5 HFH -0.9 D F. 6.0 H0H 106.9 DEO 11.1 HFil 115.7 DEG 12.1 Mf Il 106 1 DED 02DF 6/ 8 63.2 D F 499DF 188.3 DEO -0 7 D F 6/ 9 60.9 D F 68.2 D F B.0 HF H 101.6 DEO 13 6 H0H 116.4 DEO 15 5 HFH 67.7 D F 10.9 NFH 278.8 DEO 15.1 HF H - 287.5 DEO 16.1 HF H 283 0 DEO -1 2 D F 6/10 54.7 D F 11 5 HFH 55.8 DEO -0.7 D F 6/11 46.2 D F 64.2 D F 7.9 HrH 62.8 DEO 10.9 HFH 58.6 DEO 5.8 HF H 205.6 DEO 10.6 H0H 215.4 DEO 12.1 NFH 214.2 DEO -0.3 D F 6/12- 47.8 D F 67.5 D F 287.6 DEO 15.4 H0H 287.0 DEO 02DF 6/13 47.4 D F 66.6 D F 9.8 HFil 245.9 DEO 14.7 HPH 68.5 D F 6.8 HF H 177.2 DED 11.3 HF H 245.1 DEO 12.6 H0ff 252.1 DEO 01 DF 6/14 48.2 D F 2* 5 HFH 208.0 DEO -0 4 D F 6/15 55.0 D F 70.4 D F 13.1 HF H 201 3 DED 22 8 NFH 209 5 DEO of.3 D F 10.4 HFH 27.1 DEO 12 9 HF H 32.9 DEO 13.9 HF H 29.2 DEO -1 2 D F 6/16 55.1 D F 10.9 N0H 251.2 DEO
-0.8 D F 6/17 51.0 D F 62.5 D F 7.5 H0H 236.9 DEO 10.4 HPH 253.0 DEO 67.5 D F 5.1 HPH 193.3 DEO 9.7 HF il 214.6 DEO 10.2 H0H 214.5 DEO 04DF 6/18 53.3 D F 283.7 DEO -0.6 D F 6/19 52.7 D F 63.2 D F 9.8 HFil 271.7 DED 15.4 NFH 286.6 DEO 16.6 HPH 61.7 D F 11.3 HFH 224.C DEO 18.7 HPH 238.8 DEO 20.8 HFH 237.4 DEO -0.3 D F 6/20 49.0 D F 14.3 HFH 278.6 DEU -0 9 D F f 49.0 D F 62 1 DF 9.1 HFH 263.9 DEO 13.4 H0H 275.3 DEO 6/21 6/22 *50.1 D F 63.4 D F 9.2 MPH 298.6 DED 13.3 HPH 305 3 DEO 13.8 HPH 299 1 DEO -1 1 D F - T 61.7 D F 6.4 HFH 321.5 DEG 7.6 H0H 340.1 DED 7 1 HPH 334 3 DEO -0 6 D F 6/23 45.8 D F 143.1 DED 9.0 HFH 128.7 DEO 02DF 6/24 50.4 D F 69.9 D F 5.8 HF H 128.5 DEO 7.8 HPH 70.6 D F 7.9 It0H 215.6 DED 14.6 HFH 228.5 bEO 16.7 HPH 227.7 DEO 0.4 D F 6/25 51.6 D F 65.6 D F 8.7 NFH 57.0 DED 10 6 NF H 61 4 DEO 11.0 HFH 57.6 DED -1.4 D F 6/26 59.3 D F 80.8 H8 H 90.1 DEG -1 3 D F 6/27 61.2 D F 45.9 D F 7.8 HFH 81 0 DED 10 4 H0H 90.7 DEO 70.6 D F 5.9 HFH 184.9 DEO 10 0 HFH 200.8 DEO 10.8 HFH 202.8 DEO 05DF d/28 64.4 D F 12.3 DES -1.3 D F 6/29 62.4 D F 73.3 D F 7.3 HOH 4.0 DEO 8 8 HF H 15.5 DEO 9.2 H0H 46.3 D F 67.1 DF 11.3 HFH 351 5 DEO 14.3 HOH 358.5 DEO 15.0 HPH 353.6 DEO -1.4 D F 6/30 i .
i
Table 7 DAV1B DESSE SIIE AVERADE WEAlllER DAT A JULY 1, 1982 IHROU0il JULY 31, 1982 DAILY AVERADES 75H U SFD 75H W DIR 100H W SF'D 100t1 W DIR 75t1 DELI DAY 10H DEW FT 10H A T E MP 1011 W SF 10H W DIR ___,.____'D__ ____ __ __ ________ . _______ _____ ____ ____-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - . . 358.7 DEO 10.1 HF'H 6.1 DED 10.7 HFil ___.8 0 DEO -1.1 DF 7/ 1 47.3 D F 67.8 D F 7.3 N0li 214.4 DED -0.1 Df 7/ 2 58.6 D F 68. 4 D F 7.0 NFil 208.3 DEO 12.0 HF'H 216.7 DEG 14.4 Hril 126.0 DEG B.1 HIH 136.8 DEG 8.9 NFil 137.4 DEG -1.2 D F 7/ 3 61.7 D F 67.1 DF 5.0 Htli 1 7 DED -0.6 D F 61.4 D F 67.9 DF 7.3 HPil 31 4 DEO 10.2 NFil 4.6 DEO 10.7 HPlf 7/ 4 6.9 liF H 71.9 DED -0.9 D F 59.2 D F 69.5 D F 4.5 NF H 68.6 DED 6.7 N011 73.1 DEO 7/ 5 17.3 NFil 108.7 DEO -0.2 D l' 7/ 6 66.9 D F 78 2 D F 6.8 HFil 183.1 DEG 15.2 HFil 189.9 DED 233.1 DEG 19. 4 flF il 247 0 DEO -0.3 D F 7/ 7 68.8 D F 70.1 DF 9.6 HF il 223.4 DEO 17.3 fiFil 260.7 DEO 9.4 HrH 200.5 DED 9. 9 HF'H 200.6 DEO 2.0 D F 7/ 8 61 6 DF 72.3 D F 5.9 firil 57 0 DEO -1.3 D F 60.2 D F 9.8 tif tl 52 4 DEO 11.6 tif il 56.9 DED 16.8 tiill 7/ 9 54.7 D F 15.9 t1Fil 173.2 DEO -0.6 D F 66.1 DF 75.3 D F 7.2 HI H 164.6 DEO 14.0 HFil 171.1 DEO 7/10 231.4 DED 2 1 . 9 11011 236.8 DEO 23.6 ftF il 234 6 DED -1.0 D F 7/11 64.5 D F 74.3 D F 14.0 HPH 16.3 HFil 255 1 DED -0.6 D F 72.4 D F 9.9 HtH 243.0 DEG 14.9 11F il 254.6 DEG 7/12 59.6 B F 26.4 DEG 9.8 #1018 26 4 DEO 0.0 D F 7/13 61.2 D F 72.0 D F 6.1 tiFil 36.6 DEG 8.9 til H
-0.2 D F 150.2 DED 9.2 ftF H 153.2 DEO 10.3 tif il 153.2 DEO 7/14 62.1 D F 75.3 D F 4.8 HF il U.1 HF H B2 6 DED 0.3 D F 4.9 NF il 93.9 DEO 7.3 HF H 89.5 DED 7/15 64.5 D F 77.4 D F 199,4 DEG 11.3 HFil 208.4 DEG 12. 7 HF il 209 0 DED 0.7 D F 7/16 64.0 D F 79.7 D F 5.3 HFil -0.7 p F 10.1 HF il 214.5 DEO 17.1 Ntli 219.7 DEO 19 4 HF H 219 3 DED 7/17 67.8 D F 80.3 D F 17.8 liF H 225 9 DEG -0.8 D F 68.5 D F 78.6 D F 9.2 #1PH 218 9 DED 15.1 NFil 226.0 DEO 7/88 252.4 DED 11.0 NFH 253.4 DEO -0.9 D F 7/19 66.4 D F 74.1 DF 7.1 tiPH 230.7 DEO 9.9 HPH 9.7 NFH 34.4 DEO 10.9 HFil 37.4 DEO 11.5 11FH 37.2 DEG -1.4 D F 7/20 57.2 D F 72.9 D F 92.5 DEG 9.2 NF'H 90 7 0E0 -0.9 D F l 7/21 56.9 D F 73.7 D F 6.2 Mill 93.5 DEO 9.0 HF'll O 6.9 t1F H 88.6 DED 10.1 NF il 87.7 DED 10.6 NFil 84.5 DEU -0 8 D F 7/22 60.1 D F 73.7 D F
- 9. 4 HF il 51.4 DED II .6 HFil 55.0 DEG 12.1 liPti 53.1 DEO -1.2 D F Y 7/23 60.4 D F 74.5 D F 92.3 DEO 10.6 11Fil 90.3 DEU -0.8 D F 7/24 56.5 D F 74.7 D F 6.9 t1FH 91.0 DED 1 0 . 2 #1081 76.5 D F 7.2 ftF H 236.3 DEO 12.0 HFH 242.0 DEO 12.5 11F H 244.3 DF0 1.8 D F 7/25 60.3 D F 273.1 DEO 31.7 HPH 278.8 DED -0.2 D F 7/26 66.9 D F 77.9 D F 7.1 HPfl 247.1 DED 10.9 HPil 7.0 NFH 119.0 DEO 9.9 tlF'll 127.3 DEO 10.4 HFH 131.7 DEO -0.9 D F 7/27 68.4 D F 78.1 DF 2 4 DED -1.1 DF 73.3 D F 10.8 HF'll 350.3 DEO 14.0 HFil 2.2 DEO 14.8 HPil 7/28 59.2 D F 9.5 HF H 219.9 DEG 0.2 D F 7/29 56.2 D F 71.7 D F 6.2 #1FH 222.0 DEO 9.4 HFH 216.3 DEG 6.8 NF'll 220.7 DED 11.1 HFil 238.1 DED 11.5 NF H 240 5 DEO 0.7 D F 7/30 56.9 D F 73.4 D F 320.6 DEO 0.2 D F 7/31 50.0 D F 70.7 D F 7.1 #1F H 288.0 DEG 9.9 liF H 316.4 DEG 10.3 tiFil G G e
. . _ _ . _ . . . .--_m-._ _ _ _ _ _ . - . - _ . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . . m . _ _ _ _ . . - . . . _ . _ - -.
Table 8 D5VIS DESSE SITE AVERAGE WEA1HER DATA AUGUSI te 1982 THROUGil AUGUST 31, 1982 DAllV AVERADES 75H W D1R 100ft W SPD 100H u DIR 75H DE1.1 10H DEW Fi 10H A TEMP ION W SF D SON W DIR 75H W SFD -- ------- DAY ... -..... .......... ---.------ .--- ----- ---------- 253.4 DEO 13.6 HPH 255.7 DEO 0.7 D F 59 9 D F 73.0 D F 8.0 fiFH 237.8 DEO 12.9 N0H 8/ 1 199.3 DEO 10.5 NFH 215.2 DEO 31.7 HF H 219.3 DES -0. 4 D F 9/ 2 62.9 D F 71.9 D F 6.5 Hrlf 177.5 pt0 -0.7 D F 6.4 H0H 173.0 DED 10.3 HFil 178.1 DEO 11.3 HF'H 8/ 3 67.2 D F 77.0 D F 265.1 DEO -0.2 D F 78.9 DF 6. 4 HFil 246.0 DEO 10.8 HPff 263.8 DEO 12 1 NFH D/ 4 70.4 D F 31.4 HrH 48.4 DEO -1 2 D F 64 7 D F 73.0 D F 9.7 Mf'H 47.8 DEO 31.1 HF il 50.7 DEO 8/ 5 13.2 HrH 79.3 DEO 13.5 Mill 76.9 DED -1 1 D F 8/ 6 64.0 D F 74.0 DF 9.5 N0H 76.6 000 97.1 DEO -0.4 D F 6.2 tith 102.7 DEO 9.9 HrH 99.1 DEO 10.5 HF H 8/ 7 65.3 D F 75.0 D F 15.2 HPH 234.2 DEO -0.4 D F l 8.0 firH 223.2 000 13.7 NF H 233.0 DED 0/ 8 66.9 D F 74.6 D F 13.6 itPH 291.0 DEO 14.6 HF H 292.5 DES -0.1 DF 57.2 D F 71 7 D F 8.8 NF'H 273.7 DEO -0 3 D F
- 8/ 9 7.4 Mrfl 281.4 DEO 31.2 tt0H 297.9 DED 11.5 HFH 299.6 DEO i 0/10 49.8 D F 63.1 DF 21.8 DEO 8. 4 HF'H .23.6 DEO 0.3 D F 47.5 D F 64.2 D F 4.1 HF H 354.8 DEO 8.3 HrH 11 DF 8/11 304.7 DEO 7.4 NFH 331.7 DED 7.2 HrH 336.7 DEO 8/12 468DF 65 4 D F 4. 7 tirli 10 9 NFH 153.5 DEO 1.5 D F 5.4 HFH 171.8 DEO 10.5 NFH 159.0 DEO 8/13 48 5 D F 66.1 DF 10.2 NF H 172.2 DED 10.7 HF H 179.3 DE8 1.4 9 F 8/14 529DF 69.6 D F 5 2 N0ff 189.9 DEO 8.6 HPH 123.0 DEO 1.0 D F 71.9 D F 5.0 til H 130.7 DEO 8. 4 HF H - 132.2 DEO 8/15 57 6 D F 155.3 DEO 150.7 DEO 1.1 D F 59 7 D F 73.6 D F 4.0 HF H 151.3 DEO 8.0 Mi H 8.2 tith 8/16 22.2 DEO 31.8 HrH 27.1 DED 12.3 HPH 26.0 DEO 0.2 D F 8/17 57.0 D F 72.2 D F 8.5 NF il 7.1 DED 1.3 D F 4.5 NFH 318 9 DEO 7.4 HF H 8.5 DE.0 7.2 MPH 8/18 52 0 D F 69.7 D F 20.4 H0H 232.1 DEO 0.3 D F 53.4 D F 72.7 p F 10.4 H0H 228.0 DEO 18.1 Mt H 233.5 DEO 0/19 14.6 HF H 292.4 DEO 16.0 ftF H 291.9 DEO -0 7 D F 9.9 NFH 282.4 DED 0/20 8/21 61.2 49 9 D
D F F 73.0 64.7 D D F F 10.4 HPH 23.4 DEO 13.9 HFH 32.0 DEO 14.3 HPH 32.4 DES -0.7 D F d e4 7.4 HFH 197.6 DEO 15.7 H0H 199.4 DEO 18.4 HF H 197.4 DEG -0.0 D F 8/22 49.0 D F 62.1 DF 11.6 HF H 239.3 DEO -0 4 D F '8 59.8 D F 48.4 D F 5.8 HF H 217.2 DEO 10.2 HF H 239.6 DED 9/23 233.1 D[G 11.4 HFH 231.8 DEO 1.0 D F 8/24 58.4 D F 49.4 D F 5.7 HrH 213.5 DEO 10.5 HFH 67.6 D F 11.5 H0H 290.3 DEO 17.1 HrH 303.3 DED 18.0 NF'H 302.8 DEO -0.3 D F 8/25 53 1 DF 242.6 DEO 13.8 HFH - 245.2 DEO 15DF 8/26 52.7 D F 66.5 D F 7.0 HFH 220.5 DEG 12.7 H0H 8.2 NrH 301.4 DEO 12.3 MOH 317.5 DEO 13.5 HFH 318.5 DEO -0 4 D F 8/27 55.8 D F 66.4 D F ?.7 HF H 39.9 DEO -0.8 D F 41.6 D F 61.5 D F 7 8 HPH 36.8 DEO 9.4 NF H 40.7 DED ! 8/28 167.6 DEO 11.9 HF'H 164.1 DEO 0.7 D F 8/29 40.6 D F 59.6 D F 5.0 ilFM 145.7 DEO 10.7 itFH 69.4 D F 7.0 HFH 208.5 DEO 13.5 HF'tf 204.5 DEO 15.7 HFH 203.6 DEO -0.5 D F 8/30 54 8 D F 12.5 HPH 79.7 DEO -0.8 9 F 63.3 D F 67.8 D F 7.9 HF H 85.3 DEO 11.7 NF H 83.3 DED 8/31 1 i i t b 5 o 4
Table 9 D' AVIS DESSE SilE AVERAGE WEA1HER DATA SEPTENDER le 1982 THROUGil SEF'IENDER 30. 1982 DAILY AVERAGES DAY 10H DEW P1 SON A IEHF ION W SFD 10ft W DIR 75H W SPD 75t1 W DIR 100H W SFD 100H W DIR 75H DELT 9/ 8 66.3 D F 73.2 D F 9.1 tirH 204.0 D[0 ---15. 0 NF il------ 212.6 DEO 16 3 HFil 212.9 DEO -0.7 D F 9/ 2 58.2 D F 70.0 D F 9.2 NFil 258.6 DEO 14.9 H0ll 275.2 DED 16.1 NFil 275.7 DED 0.1 DF 9/ 3 47.2 D F 62.4 D F 12.3 NFIl 283.0 DEG 19.3 HFil 293.2 DEG 20.7 HFil 293.7 DEG -0.4 D F 9/ 4 47.2 D F 60.0 D F 6.3 Hril 71.6 DEO 11 1 NFil 21.6 DEO 11.9 Hill 23.2 DEO l.0 D F 9/ 5 40.0 D F 66.1 DF 6.9 NFil 207.8 DEO 14.7 HF'll 215.6 DEG 17.3 NFil 215.6 DED 1.1 DF 9/ 6 54.4 D F 63.0 D F '9.5 NFH 311.3 DEO 14.0 HF'll 319.2 DED 15.1 #1011 323.1 l'E 0 1.0 D F 9/ 7 54.2 't F 62.2 D F 11.3 #1Fil 69.2 DEO 16.2 #1NI 71.5 DEO 16.8 HF il 69.3 DED -1.0 D F 9/ 8 49.3 D F 60.3 D F 4.6 tirll 128.3 DEO 6.7 Hill 99.3 DEO 6.9 HN1 93.6 DEO 0.7 D F 9/ 9 52.3 D F 62.0 DF 5.4 NFil 148.0 DED 10.1 HFil 145.3 DED 9.9 HFH 143.6 DEO 2.3 D F 9/10 59.7 D F 68.5 D F 5.4 #1Pil 161.2 DEO 31.9 Ntli 177.0 DED 12.3 NFil 179 6 DEG 2.5 D F 61.5 D F 73.1 DF 6.0 HPil 101.5 DEO 13.0 NF il !?6.9 DEO 15.4 Mril 208.1 DEI 1.7 D F 9/11 9/12 62.1 DF 73.1 DF 6.6 NF il 144.9 DED 15.5 NF il 156.H DED 18.0 HF il 158.9 DED 1.5 D F 9/13 64.4 D F 77.3 D F 5.0 NF il 176.1 DED 14.3 ftNI 187.7 "TO 16.0 HFil 189.7 DEO 0.4 D F 9/14 67.1 D F 73.1 D F 5 4 Hill 241.4 DEO 8 8 HNI 268.8 k.E0 9.9 HNI 275.7 DED -0.7 p F 9/15 62.1 D F 66.8 D F 6.2 Hril 13.8 DED 7 0 Hill 16.5 DEO 7.3 HPfl 11 0 DEO ~1.1 DF 9/16 48.3 D F 58.8 D F 10.1 itNI 322.7 DEO 14. 4 #1F il 331.7 DED 15.2 ftF il 331.8 DEO -0.9 D F 9/17 45.0 D F 53.2 D F 4.3 NF il 191.0 DEO 6.2 NFil 152.5 DEO 6.3 HNi 130.2 DEG t.7 D F 40.7 D F 62.3 D F B . 7 ttril 334.0 DEO 12.0 itNI 341.5 DEO 12.3 titti 339.7 DED -0.0 D F 9/18 9/19 42.9 D F 58.1 DF 6.5 NFil 230.8 DED 9.4 HNI 242.8 DEO 10.2 tilll 235.4 DEO 2.2 D F 9/20 43.8 D F 56.8 D F 10.1 ItF H 281.7 DED 16.7 HFil 288.9 DED 18.0 HFil 287.9 DED 0.3 D F 9/21 40.1 DF 49.7 D F 6.7 titli 278.5 DEO 10 0 HFil 298.0 DEO 10.1 #1NI 300 6 DEG 0.0 D F [ 9/22 46.0 D F 52.5 D F 8. 4 NF il 299.8 DEO 11 6 HN1 319.8 DEO 12.2 HF il 321.9 1E0 -0.2 D F e4 9/23 47.9 D F 57.0 D F 8.0 NF il 239.9 DEG 13 8 HNI 251.7 DEO 15.4 HNI 252.2 DED -0. 4 D F 8 9/24 51.0 D F 56.4 D F 7. 4 HFil 190.2 DED 15.7 HFil 192.2 DEO 17.9 HNI 191.4 DED -0.0 D F 9/25 55.0 D F 59.5 D F 5.1 HN1 146.3 DED 9.7 HFH 152.5 DEO 10.9 HF il 152 9 DEO -0./ pF 9/26 55.4 D F 59.5 D F 4.2 HNl 111.0 DEG 7 6 NFil 127.1 DEO 7.8 HFil 121 8 DEO 0.3 D F 9/27 53.4 D F 58.1 DF 7.5 NFil 302.9 DEO 11.7 Hill 314.8 DEO 12.5 HNI 316.2 DEO -0.9 D F 9/28 53.6 D F 58.7 D F 5. 4 NF H 159.9 DEO ?.2 ttF il 46.7 DEO 9 8 ilFil 46.6 DEO 1.0 D F 9/29 54.6 D F 61.1 DF 7.2 HN1 110.6 DEG 13.2 itNI 129.7 DED 15.2 HF il 131 2 DEO -0.0 D F 9/30 54.8 D F 63.0 D F 4.8 HNI 135.0 DEO 9.6 HNI 154.6 DEO 10.2 HPH 156.7 DEG 1.4 D F 1 9
~
G e - - - -
- _ _ _-- _ _ _. . .__. _ _ __. _ ._ . _ . _ . . _ . . _ . . .m . . - . . . _ - . . . _ -_ . m. - . _ .
Table 10 DAVIS fiESSE SliE AVERAGE WEAlllER DATA OCIODER 1. 1982 THROUGH OCTODER Jte 1982 DAll.Y AVERADES DAY 10H DEW Fi 10H A TEHF 10H W SF D 10H W DIR 75H W SFb 75H W DIR 100H W SPD 100H W DIR 75H DELT
- j. .__._ _.._...... ..._ _____ ___...__.. ____...___
i 10/ 1 53.9 D F 66.1 D F ?.1 HFH 230.1 DEG 15.4 HFil 271.8 DEO 16 4 HFH 288.2 DEO 1. 4 D F 10/ 2 52.9 D F 60.9 D F 9.8 HFil 92.3 DEO 14.7 HF H 96.2 DED 15.5 Mf-H 94.1 DF0 -0.9 D F, 10/ 3 55.1 D F 67.4 D F 7.2 NFH 262.0 DEO 14.3 HFil 273.9 DEG 16.3 HFH 275.7 DEO 0.7 D F 10/ 4 510DF 61.9 D F 9.1 HFH 77.8 DEO 13.1 HT H 81.3 DED 13.4 HI H , 78.9 DEO -1.0 D F t 10/ 5 57.4 D F 62.7 D F 4.7 HF H 107.1 DEO ?. 3 HI'H 116.4 DEO 9 4 HF'll 123.2 DED 1.3 D F 10/ 6 59.7 D F 69.1 DF 5.8 HF H 165.1 DED 14.9 Hf'H 181.4 DEO 8 6.9 HFil 184.8 DEO 2.8 D F 10/ 7 56.3 D F 66.8 D F 8.2 HF H 212 8 DED 16.0 HFil 224.1 DEO 17.8 Hf H 223.2 DED 0.8 D F 10/ 8 49.4 D F 61.5 D F 5.8 Mf H 212.0 DEO 10.9 Mf H 253.9 DEO 11.9 HFH 253.5 DEO 2.4 D F - 10/ 9 52 9 D F 68.0 D F 14.1 HF'll 81.8 DEO 21.5 HFH 85.5 DED 22.2 HFil 82.4 DEO -1.1 DF 10/10 56.6 D F 68.1 D F B. 7 HFil 168.9 DEO 14.7 HF'N 175.7 DED 15.6 HFH' 174.2 DED -0.3 D F 10/11 45.3 D F 57.0 D F 9.7 HFH 249.5 DED 14.2 NFH 265.0 DED 14.8 HFH 264.0 DEO. -0.1 D F 10/12 48.3 D F 54.3 D F 7.7 HF il 233.8 l'EG 12.0 HFH 244.6 DEO 13.1 HFH 242.9 DEG -0.7 D F 10/13 43.4 D F 53.2 D F 6.7 HFH 251.7 DEO 12.4 NfH 271.6 DED 14.0 HFH 273.0 DEO 0.2 D F 10/14 42.3 D F 52.9 D F 15.1 HFH 252.2 DEO 21.5 NFH 261.7 DEO 23.1 HIH 260.7 DEO -0.8 D F 10/15 38.7 D F 51.3 D F 15.1 HFH 277.7 DEO 22.2 HF'H 285.4 DEO 23.8 HFH 283.5 DEO -0.8 D F' 10/16 30.2 D F 43.4 DF 14.1 HFH 303.9 DEO 21.6 NFH 312.8 DEO 22.6 Nf'H 311 5 DEG -0.8 D F 10/17 33.1 DF 42.7 D F 7.4 HFH 354.1 DEO 11.7 NFH 14.6 DEO 12.4 NFH 12.2 DEO ' -0.2 D F 10/lR 31.9 D F 52 8 D F 6.7 HFH 189.4 DEO 15.9 HFil 198.1 DED 19.0 NFH 197.6 DEO 0.7 D F 10/19 41.8 D F 60.1 D F 9.2 HFH 192.1 DEO 19.1 HFH 198.8 DEO 22.1 HFH 197.4 DEO 0.3 D F 10/20 38.9 D F 50.5 D F 19.7 HF H 222.9 DEO .30.4 HFH 228.2 DEO 32.4 NFH 225.2 DEO -0.9 D F - 10/21 29.0 D F 42.0 D F 8.7 HFH 292.2 DEO 12.4 HFH 302.2 PEG 13.0 Mf'H 300.6 DEO- -1.0 D F g 10/22 25.5 D F 43.9 D F 6.9 NFH 308.8 DEO 9.5 HFH 322.8 DEO 9 6 HFH 322.2 DED -0.8 D F m 10/23 28.3 D F 41.9 D F 5.8 HI H 26.5 DEO 7.8 HFH 54.7 DEO B.2 HFH 52.0 DED -0 4 D F T 10/24 36.1 D F 44.5 D F 5.2 NF H 75.8 DEO 8.5 HFH 80.8 DEO ?.0 HFH 78.8 DEO 1.3 D F 10/25 40.0 D F 46.7 D F 6.1 HFH 329.0 DEO 7.8 NFH 18.8 DEO 8.0 HFH 29.5 DED 1.6 D F 10/26- 36.1 DF 47.8 D F 4.4 NFH 225.3 DEO B.2 HIH 283.6 DEO 7.9 HFH 292.2 DEG 4.2 D F 10/27 36.0 D F 50.6 D F 5.1 HF H 149.3 DED 11.9 HFH 176.0 DED 12 5 HFH 175.4 DEO 3.7 D F 10/28 34.9 D F 58.6 D F 6.9 HFH 183.3 DEO 18.4 Nf H 192.7 DED 22.1 HFH 192.3 DEO 1.6 DF 10/29 40.4 D F 55.0 D F 11.4 HFH 202.6 DEO. 22.2 HFH 211.3 DEO 25.1 HFH 210.0 DEO 0.6 D F < 10/30 44.2 D F '53.2 D F 6.9 HFH 195.9 DEO 15.4 HFH 208.6 DEO. 18 0 HFH 210.5 PEG 0.7 D F 20/31 57.5 D F 60.6 D F 7.1 HFil 209.5 DED 15.0 NFH 289.7 DEG 17 4 HFH 219.6 DEO -0.0 D F 1 4
Table 11
. DAVIS DESSE SITE AVERADE WEAlllER DATA HOVENDER 1, 1982 illROU0il NOVENDER 30e 1982 dally AVERAGES DAY 10H DEW PT 10H A TEMP 10H W SPD 10H W DIR 75H W SFD 75H W D1R 100H W SPD 100H W D1R 75H DE1. I ----- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- --.------- ---------- ---------- -----~~--- ----------
11/ 1 59.4 D F 64.1 D F B.6 HPil 200 5 DEO 1 5 . 0 #1011 221.4 DEO 16.7 NFil 224.1 DEO -0.2 D F 11/ 2 57.3 D F 61.0 D F 10.9 HPil 209.7 DED 17.1 HPil 218.6 DEO 19.0 HFil 220.9 DEO -0.4 D F
!!/ 3 44.6 D F 57.9 DF 9.0 #1Pil 205.0 DED 12. 3 HF'll 293.0 DEO 12.8 ftF'll 292.4.DEO -0.7 D F 11/ 4 33.1 DF 20.0 D F 19.9 lif H 261.2 DEO 22 1 ittil 269.3 DEO 36.9 HPil 268.8 DEO -1.7 D F 11/ 5 22.6 D F 31.7 D F 18 ? HPil 235.4 DED 24.1 NFil 242.5 DEO 25.6 NFil 241.6 DEO -1.2 D F 11/ 6 22.2 D F 31.0 D F 13.0 HPil 225.9 DEO 18.6 NFil 237.0 DED 20.2 HF'll 237.4 DED -0.6 D F 11/ 7 27.9 D F 44.3 D F 11.4 Hril 202.1 DEO 21.2 N0H 209.2 DEO 24.7 HFil 211.4 DED 0.2 D F 11/ 8 37.2 D F 50.0 D F 10.2 HFil 238.9 DEO 17 2 NF'll 252.5 DEG 19.3 HrH 253.2 DEO 0.0 D F 11/ 9 38.5 D F 44.9 DF 12.8 Hril 63.4 DEO 19 2 NFil 68.1 DEO 20.0 HFil 68.6 DLG -0.9 D F 11/10 39.7 D F 49.9 D F 10.5 NF il 118.8 DED 18.6 HFil 131.1 DEO 20.1 HF H 134.5 DED 0.3 D F 11/11 48.7 D F 57.2 D F 12.4 HFil 199.7 140 22.6 HFH 206.0 DEO 25.7 IWil 207.0 DED -0.3 D F 11/12 41.5 D F 50.3 D F 21.5 NFl! 224.7 DED 32.0 NF'll 232.2 DE O 34.7 HFil 231.2 DEO -0.6 D F 11/13 21.7 D F 32.7 D F 12.9 HFil 237.4 DEO 16.9 HF'll 269.7 DEO 17.7 HFil 268.7 DEO -1.2 D F 11/34 21.3 D F 31.8 D F 9.4 HPil 179.7 DEG 12.7 HPH 224.3 DEO 13.6 NFil 222.9 DEO -1,3 D F 11/15 17.9 D F 30.1 DF 9 8 HPfl 225.4 DED 14 8 Mril 256.9 DEO 16.2 HFil 257.4 DEO -0.7 D F 11/16 21. 3 1 F 33.9 D F 7.3 titil 195.1 DEG 14 9 HFil 231.9 DEG 17.4 HPil 214.0 DEO 0.2 D F 11/17 30.9 D F 39 9 D F 4 . 6 11011 142.7 DEO 10.6 NF il 147.4 DEO 10.4 HPil 175.5 DEO 27DF 11/18 38.9 D F 45.7 D F 4 5 HPH 110.5 DED 10.1 HFil 140.8 DEO 10.7 HPil 151.2 DEO 2.8 D F 11/19 45.1 D F 53.5 D F D.6 HPH 141.3 DED 16.5 HF H 154.7 DED 18.6 HFil 158.7 DED 1.3 D F 11/20 50.5 D F 55.9 D F 12.8 HF-11 181.2 UEG 22.6 titll 184.1 DED 25.1 #1F il 184.6 DED -0.9 D F 11/21 45.7 D F 51.0 D F B.0 HPH 191.5 DEG 15.1 Hril 336.8 DED 17.0 HPil 338.2 DEG -0.6 D F i 11/22 11/23 41.3 45.8 D
D F F 46.3 46.0 D F D F 10.2 ftPil 9.4 HPH 133.2 258.2 DEO DEO 14.5 HFil 14.2 NFH 67.6 306.2 DEO DEO 16.0 HF il 15.5 HPil 49.7 304.3 DEO DED
-1.0
-0.8 D
D F F g 11/24 23.6 D F 33.0 D F 14.9 HFil 286.0 DED 19.7 NFil 294.7 DED 20.6 HPil 295.6 DEO -1. 3 D F 11/25 17.4 D F 29.4 D F 12.1 HFil 203.4 DEG 16.7 Mril 227.6 DEO 1 8 . 3 11011 227.5 DED -1.1 D F 11/26 28.3 D F 33.7 D F 9.9 HPil 75.4 DEO 15.3 HF H 248.1 DEO 16.6 HF'll 249.4 DES -0.7 D F 11/27 17.6 D F 31.5 D F B.8 HPH 37.7 DED 11 5 firil 58.7 DEO 12.0 titil 58.6 DEG -1.2 D F 11/20 35.4 D F 40.6 D F 10.6 HPil 123.5 DEO 17.9 HFH 150.7 DEG 20.1 t1F'll 160.0 DEO -0.2 D F 11/29 36.5 D F 42.4 D F 13.6 HPil 136.8 DEG 19.5 tifil 238.2 DEO 2 1 . 2 #1011 238.5 DED -0.8 D F 11/30 43.7 D F 48.0 DF 6.3 HPfl 79.4 DEO 14.3 ftPH 190.0 DED 16.1 NFil 193.9 DEO 0.5 D F O O O .
- +
-SI-1
\
. j 6666666666666666666666666666666
/"N > 0, a.&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
W 8
& I g M. N. M. N. N. 4. b. O. N. O. 4. m. m. O. *. C. O. b. b. m. >. m. M. M. M. O. n. 4. M. m. e.
E B 0000000m==O0000mmO0mO0000m=OmmO 6 s I ae e i a e a I is eI e 1 4 a 61 I e N i s 5 $
= B 000000000000000000G@C@c00090000 wwwwwwwwwwwwww
& I I wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
n&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& 2 1 e E 3 M. 4. b. >. >. N. a. n. O. N. N. m. O. e. e. m. N. O. M. e. N. O. R. M. M. O. N. S. N. O. e. O S S=4memeNN4Mn4SMmOMOmebNMMneNehe mNNam>SMNeeSNNebameN4MO O 8 kWOM444 m i mmN m N r4 NMMNamM =NNNammN wNNNN
& I i t 2222==2E22=23==3O==322222232232 m8 6Abe66Abebbibib6L66664666bebibb B ELEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE S I I
E g N. e. M. b. O. r.e b. S. m. 4. M. m. m. S. S. 4. M. e eO. e T. e b O W N O. D. N. M. m. N. N. N. O I 4 = p e O M T N p > N 4 0 P4 4 3 b M 4 0 n d m e O N e h m m M O 4
- Neemfortamm ===r4N a m NaNamNNMmmMNam a e a
M m 8 0 0000000000000000000000000000000wwwwwwww
& E w w w w w w w w w w w W W W W W w w w w w w w& & & & & & & & &
t 3 6 T. M. m. M. S. p. e. m. e. f. e. r.a b. =. N. 4. M. m. e. S. O. w. a .m. N. O. T. r.e b. O. N. E 9 4WNOpmONO4MMMNOODMWa>TbMMpeenNp n8 D N O M 4 4 4 m a raNMMNamM N = = > W M 4 SmNNNammNMSNNSemmM N4MO m N N r4 N 4 N 4 ==N m ee re C m C
& a
& 1 2323223222===3E222222322=E=2222 E A si4666mbibibib66bbsibA6b6bi4Abee w W G EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
= I e 3 t =. T. e. >. >. m. M. N e .p e4 M. 4 0. S. N. 6 4. S. p n.
. n. M. S. N. N. N. n. S. N. N. N.
C s W E 4 eSNMmmMNeN4WSheNDOebeMSmA4NDOOm NammmmNNamMNam 3 na mare =NNammmmmmmmm N W N s W W D C C C w E E e w w K 1 0000000000000000000000000000000 wwwww
> > m t w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w W W w w w w w& & & & & & _
@ C C & 0 &&&&&&&&&&G&&&&&&&&&&GO&&
W t 4 W > 3 9 g = a g O. N. M. m. N. m. D. O. 4. e. S. e. m. n. a. m. S. M. a. n. a. b. N. b. 4. N. N. N. m. 4. r.4 p = a E 8 e=MMONWOWOMenSDNNbNMOSeh>bebONO O 1 m O O ra n r p n n N a > O S 4 N 4 N N N N O N S O OmeNO W C G a I mmN *NN M N M rere m m M mNNNammn mNNNN . w m W
% & !===============================
& i &&mucmacmummmmummmcuccmecuccums o W l EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
.e P4 I
> S B I O. b. S. S. p .e. N. D. N. D. O. N. S. S. S. N. b. N. N. O. N. m. M. S. N.B. S. e. >. 4. m.
,C & 3
& = E 9 4SNNNebW=wmOOONN4mmeONe>4mep4SN 0 1 m == mammmm m a em == Nm
. m i a
N 2 i l w & 3 6666666666666666666666666666666
& W t E e t &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
W t U C t e. m. W. N. N. n. e. m..p O. S. e. b. S. h. p . M. O. O. N. S. A. N. m. >. w.. p 4 0 0. e. w g d
& E 1 4 N 4 0 e M S S M 6 4 = O M
- M N N 4 Pe= = M e S O m O S e h O e 0 4 4 p p e M M N N N N N M c M N M M M M M e n n e e n N r4 N 8
2
- i O
3 O E
- s
- 6 0 6666666666666666666666666666666 M I N
3 4 &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& w t S G I
> e N. W. e. e. M. S. M. W. e. m. 4. m. 4. W. O. D. S. D. O. N. D. O. N. 4 0. N. m. d. @. e. G.
a E t k n 4 4 W N C O w e e > > M NS MA NN aMra O M4 rd emmmNebeeN a,eppeeMMMmNa 2 N N ea v e n M M M m m a l . m m a s*NMen4NWhomNMep4NSbOmNMeW4NSDOm w k g mamammmmmmNNNNNNNNNNMM E C t %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% w & 8gNmammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmma N Pa N ra es N N N N N N re N N et re N N 04 r4 N N N N N N N N r3 N (N\ w a w , 1 i
- _ L _ A , n t
I u 4 s i i 4 k l 1 1 - 1 5 i i 1 4 e i h I l. TABLES 13-26 i 1 i MONTHLY DAVIS-BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA i 5 4 l l I l l
a Table 13 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA q
- JANUARY 1r 1982 THROUGH JANUARY 31, 1982 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 1/ 1 0.00 IN.
1/ 2 0.00 IN. 1/ 3 0.28 IN. 1/ 4 0.22 IN. 1/ 5 0.02 IN. 1/ 6 0.20 IN. i 1/ 7 0.00 IN. - 1/ 8 0.00:IN. 1/ 9 0.00 IN. 1/10 10.00 IN. , 1/11 0.00 IN. 1/12 0.01 IN. 4 1/13 0.05 IN. 1/14 0 .~ 0 0 IN. 1/15 0.00 IN. 1/16 0.00 IN. 1/17 0.00 IN. 1/18 0.00 IN. 1/19 . 0.00 IN. 1 1/20 0.00 IN. 1/21 0.00 IN. 1/22 0.18 IN. 1/23 1.19 IN. , 1/24 0.05 IN. 1/25 0.04 IN. . 1/26 0.00 IN. 1/27 0.00 IN. 1/28 0.00 IN. 1/29 0.05 IN. 1/30 0.76 IN.
! 1/31 0.24 IN.
I !O I l
I l Table 14 DA'.'IS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA FEBRUARY 1- 1922 THROUGH FEBRUARY 29, 1??2 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 2/ 1 0.09 IN. 2/ 2 0.00 IN. 2/ 3 0.14 IN. 2/ 4 0.00 IN. 2/ 5 0.19 IN. 2/ 6 0.00 IN. 2/ 7 0.00 IN. 2/ 8 0.02 IN. 2/ 9 0.14 IN. 2/10 0.00 IN. 2/11 0.00 IN. 2/12 0.00 IN. 2/13 0.00 IN. 2/14 0.00 IN. 2/15 0.00 IN. 2/16 0.00 IN. 2/17 0.02 IN. 2/18 0.09 IN. 2/19 0.01 IN. 2/20 0.00 IN. 2/21 0.01 IN. 2/22 0.00 IN. 2/23 0.00 IN. 2/24 0.08 IN. 2/25 0.00 IN. 2/26 0.00 IN. 2/27 0.00 IN. 2/28 0.00 IN. t l l
\
;1
' Table 15
.- DA'JIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA MARCH 1, 1992 THROUGH MARCH 31r 1?S2 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 3/ 1 0.00 IN.
3/ 2 0.34 IN. 3/ 3 0.00 IN. 3/ 4 0.69-IN. 3/ 5 0.00 IN. 3/ 6 0.00 IN. 3/ 7 0.00 IN. 3/ 8 0.02 IN. - 3/ 9 0.01 IN. - 3/10 0.00 IN. , 3/11 0.~17 IN. 3/12 0.10 IN. 3/13 0.21 IN. 3/14 0.00 IN. 3/15- 0.00 IN. 3/16 0.37 IN. 3/17 0.00 IN. 3/18 0.00 IN. s 3/19 0.04 IN. 3/20 0.20 IN. 3/21 0.00 IN. 3/22 0.00 IN. 3/23 0.00 IN. I 3/24 0.00 IN. 3/25 0.2? IN. 3/26 0.00 IN. 3/27 0.00 IN. , 3/28 0.00 IN. ; 3/29 0.00 IN. 3/30 0.38 IN. , 3/31 o0.01 IN. 4 r
-i l
l l S - (
Table 16 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA APRIL 1r 1982 THROUGH APRIL 20, 1952 DAILY TOTALS DAY R AIN ' FALL 0.00 IN. l 4/ 1 4/ 2 0 00 IN. 4/ 3 0.50 IN. 4/ 4 0.10 IN. 4/ 5 0.07 Ill. 4/ 6 0.00 IN. 4/ 7 0.00 IN. 4/ 8 0.00 IN. 1 4/ 9 0.00 IN. ' 4/10 0.07'IN. 4/11 0.00 IN. 4/12 0.00 IN. 4/13 0.00 IN. 4/14 0.00 IN. 4/15 0.00 IN. 4/16 0.56 IN. 4/17 0.08 IN. 4/18 0.00 IN. 4/19 0.01 IN. 4/20 0.08 IN. 4/21 0.00 IN. 4/22 0.00 IN. 4/23 0.00 IN. 4/24 0.00 IN. 4/25 0.06 IN. 4/26 0.03 IN. 4/27 0.00 IN. 4/28 ' 0.00 IN. 4/29 O.00 IN. 4/30 0.00 IN. 9 i Table 17 1 fs DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION ~ DATA MAY 1r 1992 THROUGH MAY 31r 1982 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL
----- ----a-----
5/ 1 0.00 IN. 5/ 2 0.00 IN. 5/ 3 0.00 IN. 5/ 4 0.00 IN. 5/ 5 0.00 IN. 5/ 6 0.00 IN. 5/ 7 0.25 IN. 5/ 8 0.04 IN. - 5/ 9 0.00 IN. ' 5/10 0 00 IN. '. 5/11 0.00 IN. 5/12 0.00 IN.
-5/13 0.00 IN.
5/14 0.00 IN. 5/15 0.00 IN. 5/16 0.00 IN. 5/17 0.00 IN. 5/18 0.01 IN. 5/19 0.02 IN. s/ 5/20 0.18 IN. 5/21 0.20 IN. 5/22 0.53 IN. 5/23 0.00 IN. 5/24 0.00 IN. = 5/25 0.00 IN. 5/26 0.09 IN. 5/27 0.68 IN. 5/28 0.00 IN. 5/29 0.00 IN. 5/30 0.04 IN. 5/31 0.00 IN. l 0
~
l Table 18 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA JUNE 1, 19S2 THROUGH JUNE 30r 1?S2 l DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 6/ 1 0.00 IN. 6/ 2 0.00 IN. 6/ 3 0.01 IN. 6/ 4 0.00 IN.
- 6/ 5 0.14 IN.
6/ 6 0.14 IN. 6/ 7 0.00 IN. 6/ 8 0.00 IN. 6/ 9 0.03 IN. 6/10 0.00 IN. 6/11 0.00 IN. 6/12 0.00 IN. 6/13 0.00 IN. 6/14 0.00 IN. 6/15 0.31 IN. 6/16 0.40 IN. 6/17 0.00 IN. 6/18 0.00 IN. 6/19 0.21 IN. 6/20 0.13 IN. 6/21 0.00 IN. 6/22 0.00 IN. 6/23 0.00 IN. 6/24 0.00 IN. 6/25 0.00 IN. 6/26 0.00 IN. I 6/27 0.00 IN. 6/29 1.08 IN. 6/2? 0.11 IN. 6/30 0.00 IN. G
~
3 Table 19 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA JULY 1r 19S2 THROUGH JULY 31, 1932 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 7/ 1 0.00 IN. 7/ 2 0.00 IN. 7/ 3 0.98 IN. 7/ 4 0.00 IN. 7/ 5 0.00 IN. 7/ 6 0.00 IN. 7/ 7 0.09 IN. ' 7/ 8 0.01 IN.
- 7/ 9 0.00 IN. '
7/10 0.39 IN. 7/11 0.00 IN. 7/12 0.00 IN. 7/13 0.00 IN. 7/14 o0.00 IN. 7/15 0.00 IN. 7/14 0.00 IN. 7/17 0.00 IN. 7/18 0.00 IN. 7/19 0.05 IN. 7/20' O.02 IN. 7/21 0.00 IN. 7/22 0.00 IN. 7/23 0.00 IN. 7/24 0.00 IN. 7/25 0.00 IN. 7/26 0.00 IN. - 7/27 0.00 IN. 7/28 0.00 IN. 7/29 0.00 IN. 7/30 0.04 IN. 7/31 0.00 IN. 1 O 4
-23 =
Table 20 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA AUGUST 1r 1982 THROUGH AUGUST 31r 1082 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL S/ 1 0.00 IN. 8/ 2 0.05 IN. 8/ 3 0.00 IN. 8/ 4 0.00 IN. 8/ 5 0.00 IN. S/ 6 0.00 IN. 8/ 7 0.00 IN. 8/ 8 0.12 IN. 8/ 9 0.03 IN. 8/10 0.00 IN. 8/11 0.00 IN. 8/12 0.00 IN. 8/13 0.00 IN. 8/14 0.00 IN. 8/15 0.00 IN.
- 8/16 0.00 IN.
l 8/17 0.00 IN. 8/18 0.00 IN. 8/19 0.00 IN. 8/20 0.59 IN. 8/21 0.00 IN. 8/22 0.00 IN. 8/23 0.22 IN. 8/24 0.01 IN. 8/25 0.00 IN. 8/26 0.00 IN. 8/27 0.00 IN. 8/28 0.00 IN. 8/29 0.00 IN. 8/30 0.00 IN. 8/31 0.00 IN. O Table 21 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA
' SEPTEMBER 1r 1?S2 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 1982 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN' FALL l 9/ 1 0.00 IN.
9/ 2 0.12 IN. 9/ 3 0.00 IN. 9/ 4 0.00 IN.
.9/ 5 0.00 IN.
9/ 6 0.09 IN. 9/ 7 0.07 IN. 9/ 8 0.00 IN.
- 9/ 9 0.00 IN.
9/10 0.00 IN. , 9/11 0.00 IN. 9/12 0.00 IN. 9/13 0.00 IN. 9/14 0.60 IN.. 9/15 0.12 IN. 9/16 0.00 IN. 9/17 0.00 IN. 9/18 0 00 IN. 9/19 0 00 IN. O 9/20 9/21 9/22 0.00 IN. 0.02'IN. 0.41 IN. 9/23 'O.00-IN. 9/24 0.04 IN. 9/25 0 02 IN.
- 9/26 0 14 IN.
l
' 9/27 0.97 IN.
9/29 0.00 IN. 9/29 0.00 IN. 9/30 0.00 IN. O
Table 22 OCTOBER DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA 1r 1992 THROUGH OCTOBER 31r 1982 Ol DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 10/ 1 0.00 IN.
. 10/ 2 0.00 IN.
10/ 3 0.00 IN. 10/ 4 0.00 IN. 10/ 5 0.17 IN. 10/ 6 0.00 IN. 10/ 7 0.07 IN. 10/ 9 0.00 IN. 10/ 9 0.00 IN. 10/10 0.02 IN. 10/11 0.00 IN. 10/12 0.00 IN. 10/13 0.10 IN. 10/14 0.00 IN. 10/15 0.08 IN. 10/16 0.00 IN. 10/17 0.00 IN. 10/18 0.00 IN. 10/19 0.00 IN. 10/20 0.11 IN. 10/21 0.00 IN. 10/22 0.06 IN. 10/23 0.00 IN. 10/24 0.00 IN. 10/25 0.00 IN. 10/26 0.00 IN. 10/27 0.00 IN. 10/28 0.00 IN. 10/29 0.01 IN. 10/30 0.00 IN. 10/31 1.02 IN. l 0 4
. Table 23 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA NOVEMBER 1r 1982 THROUGH NOVEMBER 30, 1982 DAILY TOTALS i
~ DAY RAIN FALL 11/ 1 2.27 IN.
, 11/ 2 0.46 IN.
11/ 3 0.00 IN. i 11/ 4 0.00 IN. 11/ 5 0.03 IN. I 11/ 6 0.00 IN. 11/ 7 0.00 IN.
' 0.00 IN.
11/ 8 11/ 9 0.05 IN. , j 11/10 0.03 IN.
! 11/11 0.15 IN.
I 11/12 0.44 IN. 11/13 0.00 IN. l
+ 11/14 0.00 IN. ! 11/15 0.00 IN. ! 11/16 0.00 IN.
- 11/17 0.00 IN. i 11/18 0.00 IN. 11/19 0.00 IN. l 11/20 0.81 IN. I 11/21 0.73 IN. i 11/22 0.00 IN.- 11/23 0.47 IN. 11/24 0.10 IN. 11/25 '0.00 IN. ! 11/26 0.17 IN. j 11/27 0.00 IN. 11/28 0.55 IN. 11/29 0.02 IN. l
- 11/20 0.00 IN.
i 4
- O ,
f i
Table 24 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA DECEMBER 1r 1982 THROUGH DECEMBER 31r 1?S2 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 12/ 1 0.20 IN. 12/ 2 0.00 IN. 12/ 3 0.03 IN. 12/ 4 0.17 IN. 12/ 5 0.10 IN. 12/ 6 0.01 IN. 12/ 7 0.00 IN. 12/ 9 0.03 IN. 12/ 9 0.00 IN. 12/10 0.01 IN. 12/11 0.00 IN. 12/12 0.00 IN. 12/13 0.00 IN. 12/14 0.00 IN. 12/15 0.68 IN. 12/16 0.17-IN. 12/17 0.13 IN. 12/18 0.00 IN. 12/19 0.41 IN. 12/20 0.00 IN. 12/21 0.00 IN. 12/22 0.10 IN. 12/23 0.0? IN. 12/24 0.09 IN. 12/25 0 75 IN. 12/26 0 00 IN. 12/27 0.38 IN. 12/28 0.51 IN. 12/29 0.00 IN. 12/30 0.00 IN. 12/31 0.00 IN. l r 4 1 i. Table 25 l' DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA l JANUARY 1r 1992 THROUGH DECEMBER 31r 1982 riON THLY TOTALS f MONTH RAIN FALL p 1/82 3.2? IN. i 2/32 0.79 IN. ! 2.83 IN. 3/82 4/32 1.56 IN. 5/32 2.04 IN. - l 2.56-IN. i 6/82 7/32 1.58 IN. 8/92 1.02 IN.
?/82' 2.60 IN. '
10/22 1.44 IN. 11/92 6.28 IN. '. 12/82 3.86 7N. i a t
-l t
4 [ \ I' t Y l I l-
TAgtE 26 . t'A91S 1;LESL S11L W illD D I S T E li> U l l uit DAVIS bE5it SIIL W]t#D DIS I Ri t<U g t op t o it WIND DIRECTIOtl US PELCIPIIATIOre 10 tt Wit'D DiktCllOH VS PRECIPII AII9 t FLFhunkY 1, Ivu2 IHROUbH fLl'RUARY 2ur 19U2 J AttV AR Y 1, 1982 THROULH J AtlU AR Y J1e 1YU2 IUI AL At100t#I OF llOURS Al EACH lelAL Attuurli ul ft00AS AT LAfff WIrlD l'IFEC T IUtl ikECllIIAT10H 611 HD DIRECiluH u!ND DIRECilett Ft EEIPI T A!!Ott WlHD DILLCTIOt4 ----------------
----------- - -------------- -~ -- ----------
ti 11 0.06
- H 40 0.17 0 0.04
- Ntil 3b 0.0Y NtlL
- 50 0.24
- NL 61 0.09 IfL
- ErlE 44 0.03
- LHE 76 0.13 30 0.29
- E 23 0.05 E
- LSE 28 0.21
- LSE 10 0.00 20 0.20
- SE 12 0.00 SE
- ty 0.11
- SSE 14 0.00 SSE -
S 57 0.35
- S 20 0.v0
$7 0.25
- SSW 66 0.05 SSW *
- 90 0.35
- SW 13Y 0.01 SW -
WSW 179 0.07
- USW 72 0.11 W 67 0.02
- W 24 0.01 wny 25 0.04
- utlW 27 0.03 HW 23 0.01
- HW 20 0.01 Nt!W 27 0.14
- t!NW 33 0.04 O HuuRS Of CALit 0 HOURS Of CAL tt DAVIS DLSSL S!!E Witip DIS 1hltulloH DAVIS BESSE Sli[ WIND DISTRIBUIl0tf 10 ft WIND DIRECT 10tl US PRECIPITATION 10 ft WillD DIRECII0t1 VS F FLCIPli Af !Ott 1, 1982 TitROUGH ttARCil 31, 1 Y S.! APRIL 1r 1YU2 IltkOUGH APRIL 30, 1V02 it AicE H 110UR5 AT E ACH TOTAL Att0UNT Of- Il0URS Al LAtti tul6L ArtDUtti Of WIND DIRECTION WItID DIF LCT I0tt PRECIPITATION WlilD DIRECTION WlHD DIRECT!Ote IPECIP!1 ATI0st H 20 0.12
- H 20 0.00 14HE 16 0.12
- title 30 0.00 tlE 45 0.07
- pc 4.; 0.00 -
EHE 56 0.10 EllE 76 0.0/ - E 37 0.31 E 56 0.00
- ESE 34 0.64 ESE 10 0.00 SE 16 0.13 St 33 0.00 -
SSE 37 0.07
- SSE 31 1.01
- S 75 0 14 S 43 0.12 SSW 63 0.39 S3y 53 0.34
- SH 54 0.02 SW B6 0.07 WSW 102 0.36 issu 303 0.05 W e3 0.00 y 55 0,30
- Wily 46 0.00 yrig 43 0.00 NW 44 0.24 pg 34 0,00
- Nt!W 30 0.04 NHW s 32 0.00 O liOURS OF CAltt ~
O HOURS Of CAlti O O O
. _ _ _ . - _ . _ . . _. , , _ _ _ . ~ . ~ _ . . _ , _
m.,._ ._. ___ m _.~%_ . _.. ._ . _ _ _ . ._ . . . . ._ m fm k g YAbl.E 27' 1 davis DESSE bill Willb DISIRilUllott DAY!U tri blL Sill Ultf D DIST Rit<UT iust to el WittD DIRECilutt VS ttECIPIT Aildte to n Wii8D DIRECiloff V5 tRECIIIphiloit MAY te 1YU2 IHAUUbH MAY Jie 1982 JUNL le 1YU2 IHROU6tl JUfft 30, 1YU2 llDURS Al 1 AEll IUI AL An0 UNI 06- HUURb Al L Afil IUIAL ANUUgli up' WIND DIhECi!ON WINI DIRECTION PPECIPITATION WillD DIELC110ff Wirth DIRECIIUni PEECItIIAI!Ott N 22 0.05 *
#1 30 0.12
- tlNE 25 0.00 IHIE 45 0.30
- ffE 58 0.15
- ttL 63 0.24.*
ENE 92 0.32
- LitL b4 0.2v * '
E 135 0.50 E 67 0.00
- i ESE. 62 0.19 ESE 24 0.01
- 1 SE 36 0.22
- SC 20 0.03 *
- SSE 24 0.16 SSE 17 0.00
- S 44 0.01 S 29 0.30 *
.SSW 66 0.03 SSW 83 0.12
- Su 68 0.02 SN 79 0.51 *i USW 35 0.10
- WSW 4U e.21.*
W 20 0.08
- H 39 0.03 *'
. HHW 14 0.06 WNW 21 0.00
- pu 24 0.13
- NW 49 0.40
- NNW 19 0.02 NNW 52 0.12
- O HOUR $ OF CALM 0 HOURS OF CALM DAVIS BESSE SITE WillD DISikibuilWN DAVIS DLSLE SITL W1HD DISIRit40ilON 10 h WIND DIRECT!0tl VS PRECIPITATION 10 h WittD DIRECTION VS PELCIPITalIUN JULY- 1e 1982 THROUGH JULY 31, tyU2 AUGUST 1e 1982 1HROUGH AUGUSI 31, 1982 HOURS A1 EAEH IDIAL AMOUNI Of floors Al EAEH TUTAL-ANDUffi Uf-WIND DIRECI!ON WitID DIRECI!ON PEECIPITAi!ON WIND DIRECT!Ulf WillD DIRECTION PLE Cit'I T A i! Off N 32 0.00
- tl 30 M
0.00
- NNE -37 0.08 *
.NNE 32 0.00
- ttE 53 0.00
- itC 47 0.00
- ENE b5 0.00
- EllE
- 60 0.00.* s
, E 50 0.00 C 51 0.01
- ESE 32 0.00
- ESE 22 0.00
- SE 44 0.24
- SSE 30 SE 20 0.00
- 0.49
- SSE 24 G 45
- 0.00
- 0.18 S 40 SSW 91 0.04
- 0.08
- SSW 96 0.03
- SW 110 0.37
- Su g24 o,23
- WSW. 90 0.03
- yy WSW o,4a =
H 25 0.09
- W WNW 11
- 43 0.27
- 0.00 ,WNW 30
.NW 13
- 0.01
- 0.06 NW 23 NHW 23 *- , ,
0.00
- 3 0.00 NNW. 22 0.00
- O HOURS OF CALH 0 HOURL UF CALN
TAB 4E 28 DA'/IS btSbt bl1L UltID Dl9thibuiluit D A'? ! U LLUbt SITE WillD DISIRibuilust 10 N WItf D DIRECi ture US OFLCIPI gni gott 10 il WillD D il.LC i l uti *.'S f tL C II'1 T All otl S L PIL eibt R 1, 1982 iltROUGH SLPTLetbE R 30, lY32 OLIOULR is !Y32 IHi<uubli UC l ubl f: 31e lY82 ilOURS AT EACil TOI AL AMuutti OF llOURS Al J ACll lulAL AMOUll f Of WIrID DIFECilON WillD DIRLL ilott FRLC IPi l A T IOtt UlflD DiktCilWN Ull!D DIFEC il utt itLCIPIT Alluti H 17 0.00 st 7 0.00
- HlfE 25 0.10 tralE 14 0.00
- tlE 29 0.20 tlE 23 0.14
- Et!E 46 0.03 LilE 35 0.00
- E 35 0.00 E 59 0.00
- ESE 32 0.17 ESE 32 0.00
- SE 34 0.06 LE 21 0.02
- SSE 39 0.05 SSE 30 0.20
- S 72 0.03 S 74 0.02
- SSW V7 0.01 SSW 127 0.2?
- CW $6 0.24 SW 70 0.2/
- USW 41 0.31 usW 97 0.00
- H 40 0.39 u 46 0.62
- WilW 30 0.36 ut W 34 0.00
- NW 46 0.55 litt 45 0.02
- t!rtW 21 0.00 flNW 29 0.00
- O it00RS OF CALH 0 HOURS nF CAtti DAVIS BESSL SIIL UlilD DISikilipilott DAVIS BESSL Sill WIND DISTRIBUTION 10 M WIND DIRECTIOtf VS PRLCit!! Alloit 10 N WIND DIRECT 10ft US PRECIPITATIOli DECLHDLR le XYu2 Ilfkuubli DECENFLN 31, 1982 NOVLMBER 1, 1982 IliROUGH NOVEMDLR 30, 1982 it00RS AI E ACil TOIAL AMOUNT OF BluuRS AT L AEll fulAL AHuurli UF FRECIPITATION WIND DIRECTIUM ult!D DIRECTIUN PFEL IPI'I A TIOff WitID DIRECil0N WIND DIRECTIDil ---------------- --.--------,-- ..------------ .-..--_. --_-_--_
6 0.00
- tt 15 0.00 n 0.10
- 7 0.01
- t!NE 10 tit!E 0.33
- 27 0.12
- git 13 t1E
- 44 0.43
- LilE 27 0.14 Litt 0,29
- E 41 0.10
- E 43 57 0.41
- fSE 27 0.b4 ESE 0.23
- SE 47 0.01
- EE 20 49 0.53
- S3E 35 0.12 SSE 0.39
- 70 0.06
- S 97 S
- 139 0.8H
- SSW 136 0./5 SSW 0.43
- SW B6 0.3V
- EH 56 61 0.61
- 1SW 80 0.34 WSW 0.00
- U 45 0.24
- H 67 0.76
- uttW 43 0,08 WNW 27
- 12 0.00
- ttW 27 0.06 NW
- 0,14
- NNW 14 0.85 ggnW 41 O iloilRS OF CALH 0 It0URS OF CAI.'h 9 O O
.. ._ . . - . - - ~ . _ . _ . . _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ . . . . _ . . - .___....__.____..~.._..__..__m _ _ _ _ . . . . . ; , l i-1-
t 1. 1-1 4-
^
,1 1 i i-t
)
i l
- l e
i 1982 WINDROSE CHARTS I FIGURES 1-12 = 10 METER SENSOR LEVEL , FIGURES 13-24 = 75 METER SENSOR LEVEL i FIGURES 25-36 = 100 METER SENSOR LEVEL , b I k i c t t l 1 3 i e E_._._._..____._..__ __..__'_.._._ _ _ , . , , , _ _ -. - . , . _ _ . _ . .
10 METER JANUARY 82 N NNE NW ENE a bhW/$2a. Sw)) gyw my i ESE SW SE l S DAVIS-BESSE SITE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 1 wmo-sperg m wmoo acN _ i 10 METER FEBRUARY 82 N NNW [ g WNW ENE W f llt \ y p (g
~
q ws ESE
% SE sS SE S
DAVIS-BESSE SITE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION wind-S D- - WND DIRECTM-r-a _gg_
10 METER MARCH 82 i N NNW NE ' NW ENE
///
y' W U \ l
\
\v
\ -
m'\ 1 O - ESE SE SE S I DAVIS-BESSE SITE
~
**S@ ~ MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION M DIRECT G - m FIGURE 3 l
10 METER APRIL 82 O N NNE
.g N
WNW
<~e
\\ \.
I 00 004
. \\ $
f\%Q'),o)))j* WSW / SE SE S l g wmo-sn o- - MONTHLY ND D STR BUTION g FIGURE 4 WND DmEC'.DI - 10 METER MAY 82
)
N unw - ne NW ENE r W !Ib- \ i { u
\\\' ~
Y [ SW E
/
SS SE S r DAVIS-BESSE SITE (s} MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 5 WINO DIRECTM wm 10 METER JUNE 82 N l NE NW NE WNW ENE i W b/_ , !
\\
' 'T e
Ws
\\ - )
J/jt , EsE SW sE ss ' sE S DAVIS-BESSE SITE weesgo- _ MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION g Wnoomecia m FIGURE 6 i 10 METER JULY 82 O N NNW NNE NW l l ENE
\
\
/ d l1 W .
\ \ 1 9- E
(-t
\ l ESE SW SE S
DAVIS-BESSE SITE O WW ..a..
- uoara'v wiao oiSTRieuriO" WW.omecTm -.
~
10 METER AUGUST 82 N l NNW NE NW
=
C ENE C W ' IIL g
+
\Y v- --' .
E xN
\ EsE sw E
ss st S DAVIS-BESSE SITE I MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION : WIND-SPE D- l Wuo otntcTm --, l
10 MET 5R SEPTEMBER 82 d N NNW NW E WNW ENE
/
g .
/
\
l0 WS ESE SW SE S i DAVIS-BESSE SITE
--Sgo- -
MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION WIND DIRECTION ,,. FIGURE 9 J' l l l l l 10 METER OCTOBER 82 N NNW 4 NW E WN ENE
/-
)).J.
W '
\ \ .
~~
\\\\' l E
WS
\\ x e ESE SW SE
~
S DAVIS-BESSE SITE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
"'" ~*@ -
i FIGURE 10 e 10 METER NOVEMBER 82 N NHW E WNW ENE W SIL \ E
\
\'
' ~ ]f l
g ( )\ xx m - WS ESE x SW SE S DAVIS-BESSE SITE l wino-Si>tro- MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION nWRE 11 ( wmooi cim
10 METER DECEMBER 82 N NNw NNE NW E
\\ ~
ywf_,)),[* SW E SE S DAVIS-BESSE SITE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 12 WINO DmECTM - 75 meter JANUARY 82 NNW NE NW WNW Ol' W pp
'\
\ s ***
\
gany , jEsE s SW Sg SE MONTHLY D D STR BUTION wino-SPEED mph FIGURE 13
~~
~:~2~ - ....
75 meter FEBRUARY 82 O N , NNW NNE NW g
\
# )))g.
g\ ~ SS gg 8 MONTHLY ND D STR BUTION _ . . . . . . . - me e
- 2 . ,.
75 meter MARCH 82 O N NNW NNE NW ll[t?L - db6. ,
,? /
f _3 EsE sW g 3,
/
ss , 33 S MONTHLY ND D STR BUTION o _ s...- _ ,- 1, WIND DIRECTION /o ,
75 meter APRIL 82 1
- N NNW NE NW E
WNW ENE I $$$0l!DiukkG .
]ftGV } j}l e SW SE SS -
3g i S MONTHLY ND D STR BUTION _ , _ . m_ m o
' ::"2 ..,.
75 meter MAY 82 N NNW NE NW . WNW
\ ENE W #
p l wSw s
\
SW . g SS gg S MONTHLY D D STR BUTION i wino-snEo maa FIGURE 17
- ,g. _,,_
75 meter JUNE 82 O NNW NE NW ,
'N
\
s .N . . w L' M gay _ ,ey y , x _ 7-SE S MONTHLY ND D STR BUTION _.......N ,1ces,1e e
-. -g.
l 75 meter JULY 82 N NNW NME _ E WNW . 7 ~ s u
~
\
, bl'////td' oGM o pg z
F T"W, (( , x . - SS 3g S DAVIS-BESSE SITE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION WIND-SPEED mph FIGURE 19 re .s,.
75 meter AUGUST 82 O N NNW NNE NW
\
mg.
' LJ' W
1
\
37 / EsE sw , SE MONTHLY ND D STR BUTION wmo-SPEED mph FIGURE 20
,1_,.
75 meter SEPTEMBER 82 ( N NNW NNE l '. NW g WNW ENE-o ((q$h$tR'm@ q sy '$ y)/...
/
sw se ss - se S MONTHLY D D STR BUTION o _.......N ,_m1 rf .s .
75 meter OCTOBER 82 O NNW NE e wNw w W Ol \\ \ l 997 p 1 \ g/s. .
- sw ,,
ss , S MONTHLY ND D STR BUTION wmo-speso .pn FIcURE 22
. ,3_v. _,,_
75 meter NOVEMBER 82 O j NW e WNW W I/ , o
}f $ x f ~""%]/j)
)
SW x - S. S MONTHLY D D STR BUTION O _ . _ _ ,_ 2,
- 3,g. .,s.
75 meter DECEMBER 82 0 NNW NNE E x \ .
~
w __ I i .T \N ggg; me y 7 EsE
's \ /
sw / , SS SE s MONTHLY ND D STR BUTION wmo-SPEED men FIGURE 24 r f .s,_
100 meter JANUARY 82
~
O _ ,, l
= NW
,y pq
# 5I
+ SE S DAVIS-BESSE SITE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION WINO-SPEED-men WIND DIRE *6
/
100 meter FEBRUARY 82
~
G N NNW NNE NW W - 'O l E
\\\\\ t
' TIT'jj 1 r
\Q
\ / ) O
\.\ \ / /
** \ s / EsE
\
C
. s sw Q ,
ss sE WIND-SPEED moh
*'"D 0'".Eggg/o 100 meter MARCH 82 NNW NNE NW W IL '
m p p y o ,g
# SE N
SS 3g [ WIND-SFEED-mph WIND DIRECTION-100 meter APRIL 82 e!
. nw a
1 , .s \\ 1
, ,, jj j , )
ws) /
/ ese
\\ \
SW g SE l i DAVIS-BESSE SITE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
' no-speso wi me
_ .m.- , , 100 m;ttr MAY 82 N NNW NE
- E ENE W l- \
o
#3*
%U[ 'IU }ll ESE N -
SW g SS - SE S DAVIS-BESSE SITE j MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 29 WINO DIRECT ON-% 100 meter JUNE 82
. 1 NNW _
NE NW gg s
\\
wj. I pgggef7=
\ :
SS SE S WIND-SPE ED- mph WIND DIREC N-4 100 meter JULY 82 NNW NE E o W gysy g b cp
/
yf ese sw se ss 3, S MONTHLY ND D STR BUTION
.wlNo-sPEEo mon wino o ascT -%
100 meter AUGUST 82 l J NNW Nw s
- x88...
;i///
jGhdk;d6@ '
}$k@[
l p)ese *
\\
\
A SW
" se S
DAVIS-BESSE SITE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION j, , ,, ,,, , FIGURE 32 W- = g 100 meter SEPTEMBER 82 N NNW
' NW 3
ll Amp $ lt,,b$t: c. y gd Q ; o p i j ) /.. r x ,
$W E SE S
l DAVIS-BESSE SITE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION WIND-SMED mots FIGURE 33 WIND DIREM fo
100 meter OCTOBER 82 NNW NE e
/ 3\\\ .N.
W \ v' \ yng . S' < /. SE S MONTHLY D D STR BUTION WIND-SPEED moh l_. ..yp 100 meter NOVEMBER 82 O N NNW NNE ENE h@l@$2 ld o q
\
y m y y)
\ , N SW SE DAVIS-BESSE SITE WINO-SPEED
- mon WIND OlRECTION8o i
1 1 100 meter DECEMBER 82 9' N NNW NE NW E s
\\ ENE
~
'~\\N\
,gmy))J$ :""y j] .
ESE
\, '
\ '
SW g SS SE S WIND-SPEED- mph WINO DIRE N- % 6 i l PRECIPITATION STUDY t OF DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 I i I i 1 i i e BY i MATT LEWCZYNSKI i 4 i 4 l i i i l JULY 1982 i 1 I I l 4
1 4 f j' j TABLE OF CONTENTS !. PAGE i i
SUMMARY
l APPENDIX A: DAVIS-BESSE PRECIPITATION WINDROSES ! 1. April'1981 A-1 , i
- 2. May 1981 A-2 !
l j' 3. June 1981 A-3 s
- 4. July 1981 ' A-4 -
- 5. August 1981 A-5 j '
l
- j. 6. September 1981 A-6 ,
i l 7. October 1981 'A-7 ! 8. November 1981 A-8 l 4
- 9. December 1981 - A-9 ,
j 10. January 1982 A-10 t l j 11. February 1982 A-ll l , 12. March 1982 , A-12 i i i I 1 e t i-l 4 l' t w -v- +-v -fe-- - w-g ,--- wnu mewe4 4 --
'=se4* A'-Wt*?v'e-'-' - - - - -t-W 3-J'='M'-p7w w -
sre- e- e 'WiP' * 'YV~W w g* --4h1
APPENDIX B: TABLES - Hourly Records by Month
- 1. April 1981 B-1 l
- 2. May 1981 B-2
- 3. June 1981 . B-4
- 4. July 1981 B-7
- 5. August 1981 B-10
- 6. September 1981 B-12
- 7. October 1981 B-15
- 8. November 1981 B-19
- 9. December 1981 B-21
- 10. January 1982 B-24
- 11. February 1982 B-28
- 12. March 1982 B-30 Total Daily Data by Month (Using Available Data)
- 13. April 1981 B-34
- 14. May 1981 B-36
- 15. June 1981 B-38
- 16. July 1981 B-40
- 17. August 1981 B-42
- 18. September 1981 B-44
- 19. October 1981 B-46
- 20. November 1981 B ,48
- 21. December 1981 B-50
- 22. January 1982 B-52
- 23. February 1982 B-54 24, March 1982 B-36 l
11
G 'i b Monthly Directional Precipitation Analysis ,
- 25. April 1981 B-58
- 26. May 1981 B-59
- 27. June 1981 B-60
- 28. July 1981 B-61
- 29. August 1981 B-62
- 30. September 1981 B-63
- 31. October 1981 B-64
- 32. November 1981 B-65
- 33. December 1981 B-66
- 34. January 1982 B-67
- 35. February 1982 B-68
- 36. March 1982 B-69 O
- 37. Summer Directional Precipitation Analysis B-70
- 38. Fall Directional Precipitation Analysis B-71
- 39. Winter Directional Precipitation Analysis B-72
- 40. Spril Directional Precipitation Analysis B-73
- 41. Dominant Rates of Precipitation B-74 l
l Water-Land Relationship
- 42. Summer B-75
- 43. Fall B-76
- 44. Winter B-77
- 45. Spring B-78
- 46. Dominant Wind Directions B-79 O -
iii
( PRECIPITATION STUDY April 1981 - March 1982 DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION
SUMMARY
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between amount, duration and rate of precipitation, and wind direction at the . Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. . The meteorological data used in this study were taken from the Davis-Besse meteorological monitoring system and the precipitation a recorder at the Crane Creek Wildlife Refuge. Data from Crane Creek were used only when Davis-Besse data were unavailable. The Davis-Besse meteorological monitoring system consists of two towers - a 100m freestanding tower and a 10m satellite tower, and recording equipment in a shelter at the base of the 100m tower. Wind speed and direction i data used in this report were taken from a sensor on the 10m level of
's the satellite tower, and tne rainfall was measured at im near the base of that tower. Using this information, a precipitation wind rose
, for each month was developed. From this study it was found that (i) in summer 64% of the time precipitation fell when the wind was blowing from the land toward the lake, (ii) in the fall 56% of the tine the precipitation fell when the wind was blowing from the lake to the land, (iii) in winter and in spring, the percent of time precipitation fell during off-shore flows and on-shore flows was roughly equal. During the ttne periods over the course of the year that pre-cipitation was actually falling, the rate was 0.06 inches per hour. l
-..~ . _ _
,a m .a4,_ m mmm -4 a
} < I 5 E i t l 4 ) l I J e h r < APPENDIX A j DAVIS-BESSE PRECIPITATION WINDROSES i i 1 f
360* N O 315 45 e e/ / . 4 + n
~
~
_ O(s. su - k~r n s,,g, gl l
\ ll),
.y .
,f/ - n.
)3 w - - p .- as.
202.5 157.5 180* l$$'*l~?$$'?l"~~' o memI[w"'*'ese APRIL 1981 , A-1
FIGURE 2 0 360* N O* 315*j/ # -
! ! %. s i 292.5 ,
7.5'
/ ,
W h $ll lh(( .
\v
; e
\
N '\ 'A
/ //
tse g ' y # 225* f3 202.5* 157.5* 180*
--,((j,77i dC'."N~' "'
..c, r " L . O MAY 1981 A-2 m
FIGUEB 3 380* N O' 292.5 31 e N ' x \5* 67 5'
/ \
((Ill ~\ , \ o; a , o 22h ' 5' 202.5 157.5 180*
~~:':::.;~~~'
~ ~
_.01. JUN E 1981 A-3
FIGURE 4
~
i t as& N &_ ' E f f x 8%
, $$lkr
?
10 WM Drection t%) 0 50 INM WW y////////. Precipitation lin wel 0-@ PftECIPITA CN ROSE JULY 1981 A-4
, FIGURE 5
,, - - ~ %J 260* N O* 3325 -
- 22.5*
315 i 45* 292.5 ' 5'
\
'WNW '
NE.
,, W lfl./,,,' '
\ C
( ,- 5 - !
\,
\
b L/ y ESE m f, ./ 20$.5* - 157.5 180* Wind Directionl%I Q.50 IDuring Precipitation) *
'MM@ Precipitation lin hundredthol o 100
<-- l PftECIPtTA CN OSE AUGUST 1981 A-5
~
l
I I FIGURE 6 9 360' N O s.
/// _ _ l - -
1 NI . u l-
.s-202.5 157.5*
180*
--- b i o.Ico ~~
_,==_ # SEPTEMBER 1981 A-6 l
FIGURE 7 ( ) I 360 N O 3 - 2.5* Ne. Ir///
)
, Y '
\
247.5* 22i* 22$ 7 15' 202.5 - 157.5 180
~~ ~ $ I..IU b rI , f 7xo
-.23 OCT.OBER 1981 A-7 f
FIGLE 8 380* N O* 337.5* 2.5* 31 45*
, 67.8 WN E' I
[ ( x 202.5 157.5 1 _;;;,_; .;_P,11., _ .. E O PREC1PtTATION WINOROSE NOVEMBER 1981 i
FIGURE 9 O* N 0* 337.5 _ 22.5 7 y[315 , P' ~ k x ,, l f(( \ . l , ; y, E I "f11) O \ x\!' /
;[
Y l 202.5 157.5 180 wm oirection:m 0 50
'*MM Preepitation lin hundredthal O 100
\.
PRECIPITA CN CROSE DECEMBER 1981 A-9 l i
FIGURE 10
~
e L 380* N O E 315 45* 292.5 / 67.5' I I l . _ {f { .
\\ _
1 P 202.5 ' 157.5* 1M*
- ~~:'L.,.
-._= =L.
JANUARY 1982 A-10 I
f FIGURE 11 380 N O*
// [ ' ' $$) ,\
p v u y
,,( t "Y
s 225*
- kyl[j 202. 157.5 180
--<a2,,I.IiI,$,1.io.m g
^
-c.,1r7"'Lo
~
FEBRUARY 1982 A-11 1
1 FIGURE 12 380* N O* I 3 -
~
292. - 67.5' WN M4
# N sQ%\ _,,,yJhn/g 8
y/ a- = 202.5 157.5 1
~
....,==. O MARCH 1982 A-12 ,
-4 ;st am_. 4e a4 ee..s-- m e.-i .a ma.-.-m.2 *.m --,,. 44- - -4A. es, -m+ ---a e < um4 g*a A N
f I t 4 i t 4 1 . i T, l I 1 2 i 5 l APPENDIX B TABLES i I Y i s i I h r 6 I t t 1 a i i l i i 1 l t t Y re. . -. - , , . , - .,-. ,. ., ,....-,.-,,n,.,-~,,,,-
- TABLE I L
MONTH - APRIL, 1981 HOURLY RECORDS i INCHES 10 M WIND GENERAL THAT FELL DIRECTION WIND WATER, LAND ** DAY HOUR IN HOUR (IN DEGREES) DIRECTION RELATIONSHIP t 01 13 0.1 241 WSW L-W i 01 19 0.1 279 W L-W- -
! 03 16 0.1 210 SSW L-W 09 05 0.2 240 WSW. L-W 11 19 0.4 135 SE' L-L 11 24 0.2 202 SSW L-W 13 16 0.1 124 ESE L-L ! 13 18 0.1 67 ENE W-L 14 03 0.3 197 SSW L-W 14 05 0.2 200 ESE L-W
! 22 11 0.2 102 ESE W-L 22 19 0.1 140 SE L-L i 28 13 0.6 119 ESE W-L 28 18 0.4 2 N W-L' I
- j.
- Only the total daily data are known for these days unless some specific
!. hours have been documented.
** Indicates if wind was blowing from land to water (L-W), water to land
~
(W-L), or land to land (L-L). O B-1 a -. w , ~ - - , - - - - - - - -,
.--n ,,,a . - - - - - e ,n.-, , --- .,
1 1 TABLE 2 MONTH - MAY, 1981 HOURLY RECORDS INCHES 10 M WIND GENERAL THAT FELL DIRECTION WIND WATER, LAND ** DAY HOUR Id HOUR (IN DEGREES) DIRECTION RELATIONSHIP 05 21 0.1 312 NW L-L 12
- 0.02 - -
14
- 0.48 - -
15
- 0.18 - -
16
- 0.01 - -
20 10 0.1 23 NNE W-L 22 07 0.1 230 SW L-W 22 08 0.3 240 WSW L-W 24 21 0.01 247 WSW L-W 25 07 0.01 201 SSW L-W 27 04 0.01 191 SSW L-W 27 05 0.02 268 W L-W 27 06 0.03 300 WNW L-L 27 07 0.01 311 NW L-L 27 08 0.01 324 NW L-L 27 09 0.02 351 N W-L 27 10 0.04 352 N W-L 27 11 0.03 353 N W-L 27 18 0.01 315 NW L-L
- Only the total daily data are known for these days unless some specific l hours have been documented.
** Indicates if wind was blowing from land to water (L-W), water to land (W-L), or land to land (L-L).
B-2
TABLE 2 MONTH - MAY, 1981 HOURLY RECORDS (CONTINUFE) INCHES 10 M WIND GENERAL THAT FELL DIRECTION WIND WATER, LAND ** ~ DAY HOUR IN HOUR (IN DEGREES) DIRECTION RELATIONSHIP f 28 01 0.04 286 WNW L-W-28 02 0.04 286 WNW L-W 28 03 0.05 290 WNW L-W 28
- 0.02 - - -
30 05 0.02 198 SSW L-W 30 06 0.01 156 SSE L-L O
- Only the total daily data are known for these days unless some specific hours have been documented.
** Indicates if wind was blowing from land to water (L-W) , water to land (W-L), or land to land (L-L).
4 4 .I E i 1 0 1 B-3
.- r n,. n.-, e.e--,. .n, -
TABLE 3 MONTH - JUNE, 1981 HOURLY RECORDS INCHES 10 M WIND GENERAL THAT FELL DIRECTION WIND WATER, LAND ** DAY HOUR IN HOUR (IN DEGREES) DIRECTION RELATIONSHIP 03 20 0.01 229 SW L-F 03 21 0.06 227 SW L-W 05 08 0.10 190 S L-W 05 15 0.01 232 SW L-W 05 16 0.03 198 SSW L-W 05 19 0.01 208 SSW L-W 08 18 0.18 227 SW L-W 08 19 0.01 179 S L-W 08 20 0.03 202 SSW L-W 08 21 0.24 195 SSW L-W 08 22 0.12 215 SW L-W 08 23 0.61 297 WNW L-L 08 24 0.22 296 WNW L-L 09 01 0.14 250 WSW L-W 09 17 0.02 245 WSW L-W 09 19 0.01 255 WSW L-W 09 21 0.02 237 WSW L-W 09 22 0.01 219 SW L-W 09 23 0.02 214 SW L-W
- Only the total daily data are known for these days unless some specific hours have been documented.
- Indicates if wind was blowing from land to water (L-W), water to land (W-L), or land to land (L-L).
B-4
'v .
TABLE 3 MONTH - JUNE, 1981 HOURLY RECORDS. (CONTINUEL) , 5 INCHES 10 M WIND GENERAL THAT FELL DIRECTION WIND WATER, LAND ** DAY HOUR IN HOUR (IN DEGREES) DIRECTION RELATIONSHIP 13 08 0.06 111 -ESE W-L 13 09 0.08 32 NNE W-L - 13 10 0.13 56 ENE W-L 13 11 0.14 66 ENE W-L 13 12 0.10 114 ESE L-L i 13 13 0.22 153 SSE L-L i 13 14 0.09 157 SSE L-L 13 15 0.03 166 SSE L-W 4 1 13 16 0.08 182 S L-W 13 17 0.01 195 SSW L-W-4 13 18 0.01 183 S L-W 13 23 0.01 201 SSW L-W 14 07 0.01 218 SW L-W 4 4 14 08 0.01 218 SW- L-W i 14 09 0.04 217 SW L-W-l 16 14 0.02 248 WSW L-W 19 07 0.16 214- SW L-W 20 24 0.01 146 SE. L-L 4 21 01 0.04 132 SE L-L Q
- (,/
- Only the total daily data are known for these days unless some specific hours have been documented.
** Indicates if wind was blowing from land to water (L-W), water to land (W-L), or land to land (L-L).
s B-5
l TABLE 3 MONTH - JUNE, 1981 HOURLY RECORDS (CONTINUED) INCHES 10 M WIND GENERAL THAT FELL DIRECTION WIND WATER, LAND **. DAY HOUR IN HOUR (IN DEGREES) DIRECTION RELATIONSHIP 22 01 0.01 205 SSW L-W 22 02 0.03 200 SSW L-W 22 03 0.36 214 SW L-W 22 04 0.97 308 NW L-L 22 05 0.01 198 SSW L-W 24 07 0.15 161 SSE L-W 25
- 0.61 - -
30 23 0.01 9 N W-L
- Only the total daily data are known for these days unless some specific hours have been documented.
** Indicates if wind was blowing from land to water (L-W), water to land (W-L), or land to land (L-L).
O B-6
l l TABLE 4 l MONTH - JULY, 1981 HOURLY RECORDS-INCHES 10 M WIND GENERAL THAT FELL DIRECTION WIND WATER, LAND ** DAY HOUR IN HOUR (IN DEGREES) DIRECTION RELATIONSHIP 01 07 0.03 6 N W-L. 04 15 0.01 330 NNW L-L' 04 21 0.01 186 S L-W 09 17 0.42 272 W L-W 09 18 0.01 117 ESE L-L 09 19 0.06 340 NNW W-L-
. 09 20 0.21 322 NW L-L 15 08 0.04 77 ENE W-L 17 07 0.02 224 SW L-W 19 15 0.01 205 SSW L-W 19 16 0.01 177 S L-W 20 04 0.03 200 SSW L-W 20 05 0.01. ~194 SSW L-W 20 06 0.01 209 SSW L-W 20 07 0.12 202 SSW L-W 20 09 0.06 206 SSW L-W 20 11 0.03 198 SSW. L-W 20 12 0.04 219 SW L-W 20 14 0.01 269 W L-W
!
- Only the total daily data are known for these days unless-some specific
[ _ s hours have been documented.
. ** Indicates if wind was blowing from land to water (L-W), water to land (W-L), or land to land (L-L).
L B-7 i
TABLE 4 MONTH - JULY, 1981 HOURIY RECORDS (CONTINUED) INCHES 10 M WIND GENERAL THAT FELL DIRECTION WIND WATER, LAND ** E D HOUR IN HOUR (IN DEGREES) DIRECTION RELATIONSHIP 20 16 0.33 296 WNW L-L 20 17 0.02 292 WNW L-W - 21 01 0.13 211 SSW L-W 21 16 0.38 25 ENE W-L 21 17 0.01 114 ESE L-L 21 18 0.36 45 NE W-L 22 08 0.04 33 NNE W-L 24 08 0.05 153 SSE L-L 26 03 0.35 263 W L-W 26 04 0.12 125 SE L-L 26 05 0.01 54 NE W-L 26 06 0.12 134 SE L-L 26 07 0.01 204 SSW L-W 27 08 0.33 57 ENE W-L i
- 28 03 0.40 126 SE L-L l
28 09 0.01 212 SSW L-W 28 13 0.02 237 WSW L-W 28 14 0.02 247 WSW L-W 28 17 0.02 289 WNW L-L l
- Only the total daily data are known for these days unless some specific l hours have been documented.
** Indicates if wind was blowing from land to water (L-W), water to land (W-L), or land to land (L-L).
B-8
TABLE 4 HONTH - JULY, 1981 HOURLY RECORDS (CONTINUED) INCHES 10 M WIND- GENERAL THAT FELL DIRECTION WIND WATER, LAND ** DAY HOUR IN HOUR (IN DEGREES) DIRECTION RELATIONSHIP 29 08 0.20 348 NNW W-L 31 08- 0.37 109 ESE W-L
- Only the total daily data are known for these days unless some specific hours have been documented.
** Indicates if wind was blowing from land to water (L-W), water to land (W-L), or land to land (L-L).
O l O B-9
,,,,,y...,4m..-y rr..-,me- -. , . ,,,..,,y_ . , . . ...,e. ,-,, , , ,4,w_-- ._-.,.-.,_gv.,% -
. , , . . , ,..c. . %- --
TABLE 5 MONTH - AUGUST, 1981 HOURLY RECORDS INCHES 10 M WIND GENERAL THAT FELL DIRECTION WIND WATER, LAND ** DAY HOUR IN HOUR (IN DEGREES) DIRECTION RELATIONSHIP 03 07 0.04 174 S L-W 03 09 0.07 258 WSW L-W 03 10 0.02 334 NNW L-L 03 13 0.02 143 SE L-L 08 15 0.04 275 W L-W 08 16 0.05 263 W L-W 09 21 0.09 171 S L-W 09 22 0.01 167 SSE L-W 10 23 0.07 189 S L-W 11 04 0.15 285 WNW L-W 11 05 0.14 257 WSW L-W 11 06 0.01 203 SSW L-W 28 02 0.06 191 SSW L-W 29 05 0.01 178 S L-W 29 06 0.04 192 SSW L-W 29 11 0.01 190 S L-W 29 13 0.28 197 SSW L-W 29 14 0.27 354 N W-L 29 15 0.11 10 N L-L
- Only the total daily data are known for these days unless some specific hours have been documented.
- Indicates if wind was blowing from land to water (L-W), water to land (W-L), or land to land (L-L).
B-10
TABLE 5 MONTH - AUGUST, 1981- l l HOURLY RECORDS ~ L (CONTINUED) v 4 3 INCHES -10 M WIND GENERAL THAT FELL DIRECTION WIND WATER, LAND **
- DAY HOUR IN HOUR (IN DEGREES) DIRECTION RELATIONSHIP l 29 16 0.04 152- SSE L-L i
l 29 17 0.11 30 NNE W-L i - ! 29 18 0.01 146 SE L-L ) . 29 24 0.01 196 SSW L-W I ' i 31 04 0.02 194 SSW L-W 4 } 31 08 0.05 218}}