ML101310416

Rtl# A9.630F, 2009 Annual Environmental Operating Report (Non-Radiological).

ML101310416
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	02/25/2010
From:	Banko M D, Lange C L FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-10-050 RTL# A9.630F
Download: ML101310416 (80)

Text

RTL# A9.630F FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION B Vah t r ton 2009 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT NON-RADIOLOGICAL UNITS NO. 1 AND 2 LICENSES DPR-66 AND NPF-73 BEAVER VALLEY PiOWER STATION ENVIRONMENTAL

& CHEMISTRY SECT]ION TerennczR Approvný2009 ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT (Non-Radiological)

UNITS NO. 1 AND 2 LICENSES DPR-66 AND NPF-73 Prepared by: Cameron L. Lange (Via E-mail) Date: a_ ,ý_, _____Prepared by: Michael D. BankofiIVe-lt IL Reviewed by: Julie A. Fireston )_a pate:____pate: '6 /J Approved by: Donald J. Saleraý"\

Date: -C)

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 EXECU TIVE SU M M A R Y ............................................................................................

1 1 1.1 IN TR O D U C T IO N .................................................................................................

1 1.2

SUMMARY

& CONCLUSIONS

...................................................................

1 1.3 ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE ................

2 1.4 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

....... 2 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN NON-COMPLIANCES

...............

4 3 3.0 CHANGES INVOLVING UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS

.. .4 4.0 NONROUTINE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS .................................................

4 5.0 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM ..............................................................

5 3 5.1 SITE D ESCIPTIO N .......................................................................................

5 5.2 STU D Y A REA ................................................................................................

6 5.3 METHODS ....................................................

6 3 5.3.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring

..............................................

6 5.3.2 Fish M onitoring

...................................................................................

7 5.3.3 CorbiculaiZebra Mussel Density Determinations

..............................

8 5.3.4 Corbicula Juvenile M onitoring

..........................................................

9 5.3.5 Zebra M ussel M onitoring

.....................................................................

10 5.3.6 R eports ..............................................................................................

11 5.4 RESULTS OF THE AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM .....................

11 5.4.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Program ...............................

11 5.4.2 Fish Sam pling Program ......................................................................

14 5.4.3 Corbicula M onitoring Program ..........................................................

16 5.4.4 Corbicula Juvenile M onitoring

..........................................................

17 5.2.4 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program ...................................................

17 6.0 ZEBRA MUSSEL AND CORBICULA CONTROL ACTIVITIES

....................

20 3 7.0 R E FE R E N C E S ........................................................................................................

21 8.0 TABLES 9.0 FIGURES 10.0 PERMITS APPENDIX A. SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUM1BERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2009 BVPS 2009 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)

LIST OF TABLES 5.1 Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) Sampling Dates For 2009 5.2 Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 through 2009 in the Ohio River near BVPS (6 sheets)5.3 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Counts for Triplicate Samples Taken at Each Sample Station by Sample for May and September 2009 5.4 Mean Number of Macroinvertebrates (Number/mi

2) and Percent Composition of Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms, 2009 -BVPS 5.5 Mean Number of Macroinvertebrates (Number/m 2) and Percent Composition of Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms for the Control Station (1) and the Average for Non-control Stations (2B1, 2B2, and 2B3), 2009 BVPS 5.6 Shannon-Weiner Diversity, Evenness and Richness Indices for Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in the Ohio River, 2009 5.7 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities (Number/m 2) for Station 1 (Control) and Station 2B (Non-Control)

During Preoperational and Operational Years through 2009 BVPS 5.8 Total Fish Catch, Electrofishing and Seine Net Combined During the BVPS 2009 Fisheries Survey 5.9 Comparison of Control vs. Non-Control Electrofishing Catches, During the BVPS 2009 Fisheries Survey 5.10 Comparison of Control vs. Non-Control Seine Catches, During the BVPS 2009 Fisheries Survey 5.11 Fish Species Collected During the May 2009 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 5.12 Fish Species Collected During the July 2009 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 5.13 Fish Species Collected During the September 2009 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 5.14 Fish Species Collected During the November 2009 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 5.15 Estimated Number of Fish Observed During Electrofishing Operations 2009 Annual Environmental Report ii FENOC (BVPS) 5.16 5.17 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 LIST OF TABLES Catch Per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season During the BVPS 2006 Fisheries Survey Catch Per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season During the BVPS 2007 Fisheries Survey Catch Per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season During the BVPS 2008 Fisheries Survey Catch Per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season During the BVPS 2009 Fisheries Survey Unit 1 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 2009 from BVPS Unit 2 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 2009 from BVPS 2009 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)iii LIST OF FIGURES 5.1 Location Map for the 2009 Beaver Valley Power Station Aquatic Monitoring Program Sampling Control and Non-Control Sampling Stations 5.2 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Benthic Organism Survey Sampling Sites for the 2009 Study 5.3 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Fish Population Survey Fish Sampling Sites for the 2009 Study 5.4 Location of Study Area, Beaver Valley Power Station Shippingport, Pennsylvania BVPS 5.5 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among BVPS Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2009.5.6 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2009.5.7 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Intake Structure Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2009.5.8 Water Temperature, and River Elevation Recorded on the Ohio River at the BVPS Intake Structure, During Monthly Sampling Dates, 2009.5.9 Density of Zebra Mussel Veligers (#/m3) Collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, Intake Structure, Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, 2009.5.10 Density of Zebra Mussel Veligers (#/m 3) Collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, Barge Slip, Splash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2009.5.11 Density (#/m 2) of Settled Zebra Mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station Intake Structure, Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, 2009.5.12 Density (#/m 2) of Settled Zebra Mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station, Barge Slip, Splash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2009.2009 Annual Environmental Report iv FENOC (BVPS)

I 1.0 EXECUTIVE

1.1 INTRODUCTION

I This report is submitted in accordance with Section 5.4.1 of Appendix B: To Facility Operating License No. NPF-73, Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 2, Environmental Protection Plan (Non-Radiological).

Beaver Valley Power' Station (BVPS) is operated by FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC). The Objectives of the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) are: 3" Verify that the facility is operated in an environmentally acceptable manner, as established by the Final Environmental Statement-Operating License Stage (FES-OL) and other NRC environmental impact assessments.

o Coordinate NRC requirements and maintain consistency with other Federal, State, and local requirements for environmental protection.

o Keep NRC informed of the environmental effects of facility construction and operation and of actions taken to control those effects.To achieve the objectives of the EPP, FENOC and BVPS have written programs and procedures to comply with the EPP, protect the environment, and comply with governmental requirements primarily including the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) requirements.

Water quality matters identified in the Final Environmental Statements-Operating License Stage (FES-OL) are regulated under the National Pollutants Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No.PA0025615.

Waste is regulated under EPA Identification No. PAR000040485.

Attachment 10.13 contains a listing of permits and certificates for environmental compliance.

The BVPS programs and procedures include pre-work and pre-project environmental 3 evaluations, operating procedures, pollution prevention and response programs procedures and plans, process improvement and corrective action programs, and human performance programs.Technical and managerial monitoring of tasks, operations, and other activities are performed.

3 Any identified challenges, concerns, or questions are captured in the FENOC Problem Identification and Resolution Program with a Condition Report. Condition Reports include investigations, cause determinations, and corrective actions.During 2009 BVPS continued an Aquatic Monitoring Program to evaluate its potential impact on the New Cumberland Pool of the Ohio River, and to provide information on potential impacts to I BVPS operation from macrofoulers such as Asian clams and zebra mussels.I I 2009 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 1.2

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS There were no significant environmental events during 2009. During 2009, no significant changes to operations that could affect the environment were made at Beaver Valley Power Station. As in previous years, results of the BVPS environmental programs did not indicate any adverse environmental impacts from station operation.

1.3 ANALYSIS

OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMIENTAL CHANGE During 2009, no significant changes were made at BVPS to cause significant negative affect on the environment.

1.4 AQUATIC

MONITORING PROGRAM The 2009 Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) Units 1 and 2 Non-Radiological Monitoring Program consisted of an Aquatic Program that included surveillance and field sampling of the Ohio River's aquatic life in the vicinity of the station. The Aquatic Program is an annual program conducted to provide baseline aquatic resources data, to assess the impact of the operation of BVPS on the aquatic ecosystem of the Ohio River, and to monitor for potential impacts of biofouling organisms (Corbicula and zebra mussels) on BVPS operations.

This is the 34' year of operational environmental monitoring for Unit 1 and the 23r year for Unit 2. As in previous years, the results of the program did not indicate any adverse environmental impact to the aquatic life in the Ohio River associated with the operation of BVPS.The results of the 2009 benthic macroinvertebrate survey conducted in May and September indicated a normal community structure exists in the Ohio River both upstream and downstream of the BVPS. These benthic surveys are a continuation of a Fate and Effects Study conducted from 1990 through 1992 for the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP)to assess the ecosystem impacts of the molluscicides Betz Clamtrol CT-1, CT-2, and Powerline 3627 that are used to control biofouling organisms at BVPS. To date the results of the benthic studies have not indicated any impacts of operation at the BVPS including the use these biocides on the benthic community below the BVPS discharge.

Substrate was probably the most important factor influencing the distribution and abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. The generally soft muck-type substrate along the shoreline found in 2009 and previous years was conducive to segmented worm (oligochaete) and midge (chironomid) proliferation.

Fifty-four (54) macroinvertebrate taxa were identified during the 2009 monitoring program. One new taxon, Oxus sp. (a water mite)was added to the cumulative taxa list of macroinvertebrates collected near BVPS. No state or Federal threatened or endangered macroinvertebrate species were collected during 2009. In both May and September, oligochaetes were the most frequently collected group of macroinvertebrate.

There were no major differences in the community structure between control and non-control stations that could be attributed to operation of BVPS. The overall community structure has changed little since pre-operational years, and program results did not indicate that BVPS operations were affecting the benthic community of the Ohio River.2009 Annual Environmental Report 2 FENOC (BVPS)

I The fish community of the Ohio River near the BVPS was sampled in May (spring), July (summer), September/October (fall) and November (winter) of 2009 with nighttime electrofishing and daytime seining. Since monitoring began in the early 1970's, the number of identified fish taxa has increased from 43 to 78 for the New Cumberland Pool.Benthivores (bottom feeders including suckers and buffalo) and forage species (e.g. gizzard shad i and emerald shiners) were generally collected in the highest numbers in 2009. The total number of forage species collected in 2009 was less than in 2008, however. Variations in annual catch 3 were probably attributable to normal fluctuations in the population size of the forage species and the predator populations that rely on them. Forage species, such as gizzard shad and emerald shiner with high reproductive potentials, frequently respond to changes in natural environmental 3 factors (competition, food availability, cover, and water quality) with large fluctuations in population size. This, in turn, influences their appearance in the sample populations during annual surveys. Spawning/rearing success due to abiotic factors is usually the determining factor i of the size and composition of a fish community.

In 2009 the annual catch rate was 1.27 fish per minute. The greatest catch rate in 2009 occurred 3 in winter (November) when the catch rate was 1.45 fish per minute. Sauger, and shorthead redhorse sucker, contributed to the majority of this total. The lowest catch rate occurred in summer (July) with a rate of 0.98 fish per electrofishing minute. The annual catch rates were I consistent over the four years ranging from a high of 1.98 fish per minute in 2008 to 1.17 in 2007. 3 Little difference in the species composition of the catch was observed between the control (Station 1) and non-control (Stations 2A, 2B and 3) stations.

Habitat preference and availability were probably the most important factors affecting where and when fish were collected.

Results I from the 2009 fish surveys indicated that a normal community structure for the Ohio River exists near BVPS based on species composition and relative abundance.

In 2009, there was no indication of negative impact to the fish community in the Ohio River from the operation of B VPS.The monthly reservoir ponar samples collected in Units 1 and 2 cooling towers and the four I samples collected at the intake during 2009 indicated that Corbicula were entering and colonizing the station. Overall, the numbers of Corbicula collected in the samples were comparatively low, which continued the trend over the past few years of fewer Corbicula and reflected a water-body-wide trend observed in the Ohio River.In 1995, live zebra mussels were collected for the first time by divers in the BVPS main intake 3 and auxiliary intake structures during scheduled cleanings.

Overall, both the number of observations and densities of settled mussels were similar in 2003-present although somewhat higher in 2008. The density of veligers in 2009 was somewhat lower than in 2008, but was comparable to 2007. Although densities of settled mussels in the vicinity of BVPS are low compared to other populations such as in the Lower Great Lakes, densities comparable to those in the Ohio River are sufficient to cause problems in the operation of untreated cooling water intake systems.I 2009 Annual Environmental Report 3 FENOC (BVPS) i U I U U U I i i I U I I U I I I 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN NON-COMPLIANCES There were no Environmental Protection Plan non-compliances identified in 2009.3.0 CHANGES INVOLVING UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS No Unreviewed Environmental Questions were identified in 2009. Therefore, there were no changes involving an Unreviewed Environmental Question.4.0 NON-ROUTINE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT There were no non-routine environmental reports in 2009.2009 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)4 I I 5.0 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM This section of the report summarizes the Non-Radiological Environmental Program conducted for the BVPS Units 1 and 2; Operating License Numbers DPR-66 and NPF-73. This is a non-mandatory program, because on February 26, 1980, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) 3 granted BVPS's request to delete all of the Aquatic Monitoring Program, with the exception of the fish impingement program (Amendment No. 25), from the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS). In 1983, BVPS was permitted to also delete the fish impingement studies 3 from the ETS program of required sampling along with non-radiological water quality requirements.

However, in the interest of providing an uninterrupted database, BVPS has continued the Aquatic Monitoring Program.The objectives of the 2009 environmental program were: o To monitor for any possible environmental impact of BVPS operation on the benthic macroinvertebrate and fish communities in the Ohio River;o To provide a low level sampling program to continue an uninterrupted environmental U database for the Ohio River near BVPS, pre-operational to present; and" To evaluate the presence, growth, and reproduction of macrofouling Corbicula (Asiatic clam) and zebra mussels (Dreissena spp.) at BVPS. i 5.1 SITE DESCRIPTION BVPS is located on an approximately 453-acre tract of land on the south bank of the Ohio River in the Borough of Shippingport, Beaver County, Pennsylvania.

The Shippingport Atomic Power Station once shared the site with BVPS before being decommissioned.

Figure 5.1 is a plan view 3 of BVPS. The site is approximately 1 mile (1.6 km) from Midland, Pennsylvania; 5 miles (8 km)from East Liverpool, Ohio; and 25 miles (40 km) from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

The population within a 5-mile (8 kin) radius of the plant is approximately 18,000. The Borough of Midland, I Pennsylvania has a population of approximately 3,500.The station is situated at Ohio River Mile 34.8 (Latitude:

400 36' 18"; Longitude:

80' 26' 02") at 3 a location on the New Cumberland Pool that is 3.1 river miles (5.3 km) downstream from Montgomery Lock and Dam and 19.6 miles (31.2 kin) upstream from New Cumberland Lock and Dam. The Pennsylvania-Ohio-West Virginia border is 5.2 river miles (8.4 km) downstream 3 from the site. The river flow is regulated by a series of dams and reservoirs on the Beaver, Allegheny, Monongahela, and Ohio Rivers and their tributaries.

3 The study site lies along the Ohio River in a valley, which has a gradual slope that extends from the river at an elevation of 665 ft (203 m) above mean sea level; to an elevation of 1,160 ft (354 m) along a ridge south of BVPS. The plant entrance elevation at the station is approximately 735 I ft (224 m) above mean sea level.I 2009 Annual Environmental Report 5 FENOC (BVPS)

BVPS Units 1 and 2 have a thermal rating of 2,900 megawatts (MW). The circulating water systems for each unit are considered a closed cycle system with continuous overflow, using a cooling tower to minimize heat released to the Ohio River. Commercial operation of BVPS Unit 1 began in 1976 and Unit 2 began operation in 1987.5.2 STUDY AREA The environmental study area was established to assess potential impacts and consists of four sampling stations, each having a north and south shore (Figure 5.1). Station 1 is located at River Mile (RM) 34.5, approximately

0.3 miles

(0.5 km) upstream of BVPS and is the control station.Station 2A is located approximately

0.5 miles

(0.8 km) downstream of the BVPS discharge structure in the main channel. Station 2B is located in the back channel of Phillis Island, also 0.5 miles downstream of the BVPS discharge structure.

Station 2B is the principal non-control statioh because the majority of discharges from BVPS Units 1 and 2 are released to this back channel. Station 3 is located approximately two miles (3.2 kin) downstream of BVPS and only rarely is influenced by the BVPS discharge.

5.3 METHODS

Shaw Environmental, Inc. (Shaw) was contracted to perform the 2009 Aquatic Monitoring Program as specified in BVBP-ENV-00 1-Aquatic Monitoring (procedural guide). This procedural guide references and describes in detail the field and laboratory procedures used in the various monitoring programs, as well as the data analysis and reporting requirements.

These procedures are summarized according to task in the following subsections.

Sampling was conducted according to the schedule presented in Table 5.1.5.3.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring The benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring program consisted of river bottom sampling using a Ponar grab sampler at four stations on the Ohio River. Prior to 1996, duplicate sampling occurred at Stations 1, 2A, and 3, while triplicate sampling occurred at Station 2B (i.e., one sample at each shoreline and mid-channel) (Figures 5.1 and 5.2). In 1996, a review of the sampling design indicated that sampling should be performed in triplicate at each station to conform to standardized U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) procedures.

Therefore, starting in 1996, triplicate samples were taken at Stations 1, 2A, and 3, as in 1995, with triplicate samples also collected at each shore and mid-channel location at Station 2B. A petite Ponar dredge was used to collect these samples, replacing the standard Ponar dredge used in prior studies.Benthic macroinvertebrate sampling was conducted in May and September 2009. For each 2009 field effort, 18 benthic samples were collected and processed in the laboratory.

All field 2009 Annual Environmental Report 6 FENOC (BVPS)

I'I procedures and data analyses were conducted in accordance with the procedural guide. The contents of each Ponar grab sample were gently washed through a U.S. Standard No. 30 sieve I and the retained contents were placed in a labeled bottle and preserved in ethanol. In the laboratory, rose bengal stain was added to aid in sorting and identifying the benthic organisms.

Macroinvertebrates were sorted from each sample, identified to the lowest taxon practical and I counted. Mean density (number/m 2) for each taxon was calculated for each replicate.

Four indices used to describe the benthic community were calculated:

Shannon-Weiner diversity index, evenness (Pielou, 1969), species, richness, and the number of taxa. These estimates I provide an indication of the relative quality of the macroinvertebrate community.

I 5.3.2 Fish Monitoring 5 Fish sampling was conducted in 2009 to provide a continuous baseline of data and to detect possible changes that may have occurred in the fish populations in the Ohio River near BVPS.Fish population surveys have been conducted in the Ohio River near BVPS annually from 1970 I through 2009. These surveys have resulted in the collection of 73 fish species and five different hybrids.Adult fish surveys were scheduled to be performed in May, July, September, and November 2009. During each survey, fish were scheduled to be sampled by standardized electrofishing techniques at four stations (Stations 1, 2A, 2B and 3) (Figure 5.3). Seining was scheduled to be I performed at Station 1 (north shore) and Station 2B (south shore of Phillis Island) to sample species that are generally under-represented in electrofishing catches (e.g., young-of-the-year fish and small cyprinids).

Sampling was successfully completed as schedule except in September.

Seining was completed as scheduled, but a breakdown of the electrofishing boat motor precluded sampling.

Immediately after the boat motor was serviced in early October, the field crew returned to site and the electrofishing task was successfully completed.

Night electrofishing was conducted using a boat-mounted electroshocker with floodlights attached to the bow. A Smith-Root Type VI A variable voltage, pulsed-DC electrofishing unit I powered by a 5-kW generator was used. The voltage selected depended on water conductivity and was adjusted to provide constant amperage (4-6 amps) of the current through the water. The north and south shoreline areas at each station were shocked for at least 10 minutes of unit "on" time (approximately five minutes along each shore) during each survey.!I When large schools of fish of a single non-game species such as gizzard shad and shiners were encountered during electrofishing efforts, all of the stunned fish were not netted and retrieved onboard the boat. A few fish were netted for verification of identity, and the number of observed stunned fish remaining in the water was estimated.

The size range of the individual fish in the school was also estimated and recorded.

This was done in an effort to expedite sample processing and cover a larger area during the timed electrofishing run. Regardless of the number I of individuals, all game fish were boated when observed.I 2009 Annual Environmental Report 7 FENOC (BVPS)

Fish seining was performed at Station 1 (control) and Station 2B (non-control) during each of the four 2009 BVPS fishery surveys. A 30-ft long bag seine made of 1/4-inch nylon mesh netting was used to collect fish located close to shore in 1 to 4 ft of water. Three seine hauls were performed at both Station 1 (north shore) and Station 2B (south shore of Phillis Island) during each survey.Fish collected during electrofishing and seining efforts were processed according to standardized procedures.

All captured game fishes were identified to species, counted, measured for total length (nearest 1 mm), and weighed (nearest 1 g for fish less than or equal to 1000 g and the nearest 5 g for all other fish). Non-game fishes were counted, and a random subsample of lengths was taken. Live fish were returned to the river immediately after processing was completed.

All fish that were unidentifiable or of questionable identification and were obviously not on the endangered or threatened species list were placed in plastic sample bottles, preserved, labeled and returned to the laboratory for identification.

Any species of fish that had not previously been collected at BVPS was retained for the voucher collection.

Any threatened or endangered species (if collected) would be photographed and released.5.3.3 Corbicula Density Determinations for Cooling Tower Reservoirs The Corbicula Monitoring Program at BVPS includes sampling the circulating river water and the service water systems of the BVPS (intake structure and cooling towers). This report describes this Monitoring Program and the results of the field and plant surveys conducted in 2009.The objectives of the ongoing Monitoring Program are to evaluate the presence of Corbicula at BVPS, and to evaluate the potential for and timing of infestation of the BVPS. This program is conducted in conjunction with a program to monitor for the presence of macrofouling zebra mussels (see Section 5.3.5).Corbicula enter the BVPS from the Ohio River by passing through the water intakes, and eventually settle in low flow areas including the lower reservoirs of the Units 1 and 2 cooling towers. The density and growth of these Corbicula were monitored by collecting monthly samples from the lower reservoir sidewalls and sediments.

The sampler used on the sidewalls consisted of a D-frame net attached behind a 24-inch long metal scraping edge. This device was connected to a pole long enough to allow the sampler to extend down into the reservoir area from the outside wall of the cooling tower. Sediments were sampled with a petite Ponar dredge.Cooling tower reservoir sampling was historically conducted once per month. Beginning in December 1997, it was decided to forego sampling in cold water months since buildup of Corbicula does not occur then. Monthly sampling has been maintained throughout the warmer water months of the year. In 2009 sampling began in March and ended in early November.In 2009, once each month (March through November), a single petite Ponar grab sample was 2009 Annual Environmental Report 8 FENOC (BVPS)

I I taken in the reservoir of each cooling tower to obtain density and growth information on Corbicula present in the bottom sediment.

The samples collected from each cooling tower were returned to the laboratory and processed.

Samples were individually washed, and any Corbicula removed and rinsed through a series of stacked U.S. Standard sieves that ranged in mesh size from 1.00 mm to 9.49 mm. Live and dead clams retained in each sieve were counted and the numbers were recorded.

The size distribution data obtained using the sieves reflected clam width, rather than length. Samples containing a small number of Corbicula were not sieved;individuals were measured and placed in their respective size categories.

A scraping sample of I about 12 square feet was also collected at each cooling tower during each monthly sampling effort. This sample was processed in a manner consistent with the petit Ponar samples.Population surveys of both BVPS cooling tower reservoirs have been conducted during scheduled outages (1986 to present) to estimate the number of Corbicula present in these structures.

During the scheduled shutdown period for each unit, each cooling tower reservoir I bottom is sampled by petite Ponar at standardized locations within the reservoir.

Counts of live and dead clams and determination of density were made. There were no scheduled outages during 2009 when samples were collected.

5.3.4 Corbicula

Juvenile Monitoring The Corbicula juvenile study was designed to collect data on Corbicula spawning activities and growth of individuals entering the intake from the Ohio River. From 1988 through 1998, clam cages were deployed in the intake forebay to monitor for Corbicula that entered the BVPS. 3 Observational-based concerns that the clam cages would quickly clog with sediment during high sediment periods and, as a result, would not effectively sample for Corbicula, led to an evaluation of an alternate sampling technique.

From April through June 1997, a study was i conducted to compare the results of the clam cage samplers to a petite Ponar dredge technique to determine Corbicula presence and density in the BVPS intake bays. It was hypothesized that using a Ponar sampler to collect bottom sediments and analysis of those sediments would provide a more representative sample of Corbicula settlement and growth rates, and had the added benefit of not requiring confined space entry to conduct the sampling.

Results of the study confirmed this hypothesis.

During the 1998 sampling season, at the request of BVPS personnel, all clam cages were removed after the May 18th collection.

Monthly petite Ponar grabs from the forebay in the intake building continued thereafter.

Samples were processed in the same manner as Cooling Tower Samples (Section 5.3.3). 3 From 2002 to present, because of site access restrictions, sampling with the petite Ponar has been moved to the Ohio River directly in front of the Intake Structure Building.

Collections are presently made in conjunction with the fisheries sampling (May, July, September, and November).

During each sampling month two Ponar grabs are taken approximately 20 feet off I 2009 Annual Environmental Report 9 FENOC (BVPS) 3 shore of the intake building.

These grab samples are processed in the same manner as when they were collected from within the Intake Structure Building.5.3.5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring The Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program includes sampling the Ohio River and the circulating river water system of the BVPS.The objectives of the Monitoring Program were: (1) To identify if zebra mussels were in the Ohio River adjacent to BVPS and provide early warning to operations personnel as to their possible infestation; (2) To provide data as to when the larvae were mobile in the Ohio River and insights as to their vulnerability to potential treatments; and (3) To provide data on their overall density and growth rates under different water temperatures and provide estimates on the time it requires these mussels to reach the size and density that could impact the plant.The zebra mussel sampling for settled adults was historically conducted once per month, yearlong.

Beginning in December 1997, it was decided to forego sampling in the colder water months of each year, since buildup of zebra mussels, does not occur then. Monthly sampling has been maintained throughout the balance of the year. In 2009 sampling occurred from March through November.A pump sample for zebra mussel veligers was collected at the barge slip location monthly from April through October in 1996 and 1997. The scope of the sampling was expanded in 1998 to also include the intake structure.

In June 1998, the Emergency Outfall and Emergency Outfall Impact Basin locations were also added. Additional pump samples were collected from the cooling towers of Unit 1 and Unit 2 in October 1998. In 2009 veliger sampling began in April and was conducted monthly through October.At the Intake Structure and Barge Slip the following surveillance techniques were used: o Wall scraper sample collections on a monthly basis (March through November) from the barge slip and the riprap near the intake structure to detect attached adults; and o Pump sample collections from the barge Slip and outside the intake structure, to detect the planktonic early life forms (April through October).At each of the cooling towers the following techniques were used: o Monthly reservoir scraper sample collections in each cooling tower (March through November);

and 2009 Annual Environmental Report 10 FENOC (BVPS)

U I 0 Pump samples in April through October to detect planktonic life forms.I At the Emergency Outfall and the Splash Pool the following techniques were used: o Monthly scraper sample collections in each (March through November);

and m o Pump samples in each from April through October to detect planktonic life forms. 3 5.3.6 Reports 3 Each month, activity reports that summarized the activities that took place the previous month were prepared and submitted.

These reports included the results of the monthly Corbicula/zebra mussel monitoring including any trends observed and any preliminary results available from the benthic and fisheries programs.

The reports addressed progress made on each task, and reported any observed biological activity of interest.

3 5.4 RESULTS OF THE AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM I The following sections summarize the findings for each of the program elements.

Sampling dates for each of the program elements are presented in Table 5.1. 3 5.4.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Program 3 Benthic surveys were scheduled and performed in May and in September 2009. Benthic samples were collected using a petite Ponar grab sampler at Stations 1, 2A, 2B, and 3 (Figure 5.2).Triplicate samples were taken off the south shore at Stations 1, 2A, and 3. Sampling at Station 2B, in the back channel of Phillis Island, consisted of triplicate petite Ponar grabs at the south side, middle, and north side of the channel (i.e., Sample Stations 2B1, 2B2, and 2B3, I respectively).

Substrate type is an important factor in determining the composition of the benthic community.

I The habitats in the vicinity of BVPS are the result of damming, channelization, and river traffic.Shoreline habitats at the majority of sampling locations were generally in depositional areas that consisted of soft muck substrates composed of mixes of sand, silt, and detritus.

One exception I was along the north shoreline of Phillis Island at Station 2A where hard pan clay dominated.

The other distinct habitat, hard substrate (gravel and cobble), was located in mid-channel of the back channel of Phillis Island. The hard substrate was probably the result of channelization and scouring by river currents.

In general, the substrates found at each sampling location have been 2009 Annual Environmental Report 11 FENOC (BVPS) consistent from year to year.Fifty-four (54) macroinvertebrate taxa were identified during the 2009 monitoring program (Tables 5.2 and 5.3), which was eight more than in 2008. A mean density of 796 macroinvertebrates/m was collected in May and 1,436/m 2 in September (Table 5.4). As in previous years, the macroinvertebrate assemblage during 2009 was dominated by burrowing organisms typical of soft unconsolidated substrates.

Oligochaetes (segmented worms), mollusks (clams and snails) and chironomid (midge fly) larvae were abundant (Table 5.4). As in 2007 and 2008, the total mean density of organism was higher in September than in May.Thirty-eight (38) taxa were present in the May 2009 samples. The same number of taxa (38) was present in the September samples (Table 5.3.1 and 5.3.2). Twenty-two (22) of the 54 taxa were present in both May and September.

As in 2008, immature tubificid worms were numerically the most abundant organism in both May and September.

The Asiatic clam (Corbicula) has been observed in the Ohio River near BVPS from 1974 to present. Zebra mussels were first collected in the BVPS benthic samples in 1998. Adult zebra mussels, however, were detected in 1995 and 1996 by divers in the BVPS main and auxiliary intake structures during scheduled cleaning operations.

Zebra mussel veligers, adults and juveniles were collected during the 1997-2009 sampling programs (see Sections 5.4.5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program).

Both live Corbicula and zebra mussels were collected in benthic macroinvertebrate samples in 2009.In 2009 a new taxa was added to the cumulative taxa list of macroinvertebrates collected near BVPS (Table 5.2). The new taxon was Oxus sp., a type of water mite. No state or Federal threatened or endangered macroinvertebrate species were collected during 2009.In the May 2009 samples, oligochaetes accounted for the highest mean density of macroinvertebrates and chironomids had the second highest (420/m 2 or 53 percent of the total density and 31 1/m2 or 39 percent, respectively) (Table 5.4). Mollusks and had a mean density of only 48/m 2.Organisms other then oligochaetes, chironomids and mollusks were present at a density of 217/im2 in May.In September 2009 samples, oligochaetes accounted for the highest mean density of macroinvertebrates and chironomids had the second highest (95 1/m 2 or 66 percent of the total density and 320/M2 or 22 percent, respectively) (Table 5.4). Mollusks had the third highest mean density in September 2009 (115/mi 2 or 8 percent) while the "others" category had the fourth highest mean density (50/mi or 3 percent).In May 2009, the highest density of macroinvertebrates (3,182/m 2) occurred at Station 2B3. In September, the highest density of macroinvertebrates also occurred at Station 2B3 (2583/m 2). In May the lowest mean density of organisms occurred at Station 1 (72/m2). In September, the lowest mean density of organisms occurred at Station 2A (788/mi).2009 Annual Environmental Report 12 FENOC (BVPS)

I I For a comparison of the control to non-control stations, Station 1 was designated the control station, because it is always out of the influence of the BVPS discharge and Station 2B (mean density of Station 2B1, 2B2, and 2B3) was designated as the non-control station, since it is the station most regularly subjected to BVPS's discharge.

Stations 3 and 2A may be under the influence of the plume under certain conditions, but it is unlikely that they are regularly influenced by BVPS.The mean density of macroinvertebrates in the non-control station was 20 times higher 3 (1,462/m 2) than that of the control station (71/mi) in May (Table 5.5). The high density of oligochaetes and chironomids in the non-control samples (1,348/mi 2) accounted for the majority of this difference.

A similar difference in density occurred in 2008. Overall the differences probably reflect the natural differences in substrate and natural heterogeneous distributions of these organisms between the stations rather than project-related impacts.In September, the density of macroinvertebrates present at the non-control (1,902/mr 2) was about 2.1 times greater than at the control station (903/m 2). The density of all classifications were greater in the non-control stations than the control station. Differences were within the expected range of variation for natural populations of macroinvertebrates.

Indices that describe the relative diversity, evenness, and richness of the macroinvertebrate I population structure among stations and between control and non-control sites were calculated.

A higher Shannon-Weiner diversity index indicates a relatively better structured assemblage of organisms, while a lower index generally indicates a low quality or stressed community.

Evenness is an index that estimates the relative contribution of each taxon to the community assemblage, the closer to 1.00, the healthier the community.

The community richness is another estimate of the quality of the macroinvertebrate community with a higher richness number I indicating a healthier community.

The Shannon-Weiner diversity indices in May 2009 collections ranged from 0.41 at Station 1 to 3 1.06 at Station 2B3 (Table 5.6). In May evenness ranged from 0.73 at Station 2B3 to 0.93 at Station 2B1. Richness was greatest at Station 2B3 (5.00) and lowest at Station 1 (1.24). The overall low indices at Stations 1 and 2A are attributed to the relatively few species collected; I three at Station 1 and four at Station 2A. These low numbers of organisms likely are due to natural variation in the Ohio River rather than due to BVPS operations.

The range in diversity of the macroinvertebrate community in September 2009 was comparable to that in May. There was I an increase in the number of taxa present at each sampling site in September compared to May.Relatively high numbers of taxa are frequently present in early fall due to the increased numbers i of aquatic stages of insects, especially chironomids, as well as the ability to identify to lower taxonomic levels many of the tubificids that are lumped together when immature.

Diversity ranged from 0.45 at Station 2B3 to 1.09 at Station 2A. Evenness was also somewhat leas in I September compared to May and ranged from 0.38 at Station 2B3 to 0.84 at Station 1. Richness was greatest at Station 2B 1 (3.97) and lowest at Station 3 (2.48). 3 2009 Annual Environmental Report 13 FENOC (BVPS)

In May 2009, the number of taxa, diversity, and richness indices were appreciably lower in the control station (Station 1) than in the non-control stations (2B1, 2B2, 2B3), even though evenness was comparable (Table 5.6). In September 2009 the indices betweenthe control and non-control stations were, in general, comparable.

Similar differences were apparent in the previous two study years and were likely due to natural variations in the local populations at these locations.

No impacts of the BVPS on the benthic community, as measured by differences between control and non-control zones, were evident in either May or September.

Substrate was probably the most important factor controlling the distribution and abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. Soft, mucky substrates that generally existed along the shoreline are conducive to oligochaete, chironomid, and mollusk habitation and limit species of macroinvertebrates that require a more stable bottom.The density of macroinvertebrates in May and September 2009 fell within the range of densities of macroinvertebrates collected at BVPS in previous years (Table 5.7). The community structure has changed little since pre-operational years, and the available evidence does not indicate that BVPS operations have affected the benthic community of the Ohio River.5.4.2 Fish Sampling Program In 2009, 233 fish representing 22 taxa were collected (i.e., handled) during BVPS surveys by electrofishing and seining (Table 5.8). All taxa collected in 2009 were previously encountered at BVPS. The most common species in the 2009 BVPS surveys, which were collected by electrofishing and seining combined, were shorthead redhorse sucker (18.9% of the total catch), followed by sauger (12.2%), emerald shiner (9.4%), smallmouth bass (9.0%), golden redhorse sucker (8.2%), smallmouth buffalo (7.3%), white bass (5.2%) and quillback (5.2%). None of the remaining 14 species contributed to more than 5 percent of the total handled catch. The most frequently observed but not handled fish in 2009 were gizzard shad (Table 5.15). Game fish collected in 2009 included channel catfish, black crappie, flathead catfish, white bass, bluegill, smallmouth bass, sauger, walleye, and spotted bass. Game fish represented 36.1% of the total handled catch, 21.9% of which were smallmouth bass and sauger.A total of 204 fish, representing 20 taxa, was collected by electrofishing in 2009 (Table 5.9).Shorthead redhorse suckers and sauger accounted for the greatest portion of the 2009 electrofishing catch (21.6% and 14.7%, respectively) followed by smallmouth bass (9.8%), golden redhorse sucker (9.3%), smallmouth buffalo (8.3%), quillback (5.9%) and white bass (5.9%). No other species collected contributed to greater than five percent of the total catch.Fish observed and not collected in the 2009 electrofishing study are presented in Table 5.15.A total of 29 fish representing 4 taxa was collected by seining in 2009 (Table 5.10). The most abundant taxa collected was emerald shiner (75.9% of the total catch) followed by spotfin shiner (17.2%), flathead catfish (3.5%) and smallmouth bass (3.5%). The game species were only collected as juveniles.

2009 Annual Environmental Report 14 FENOC (BVPS)

I i A total of 61 fish representing 15 species was captured during the May 2009 sampling event (Table 5.11). All but three of the fish were collected during electrofishing.

Shorthead redhorse sucker (25.9%), smallmouth bass (15.5%), golden redhorse sucker (13.8%), and smallmouth buffalo (12.1%) were the most common species boated during the electrofishing effort. Flathead catfish, smallmouth bass, spotted bass, white bass and walleye were the game species collected in May. Three emerald shiners were the only fish collected by seine netting in May.A total of 47 fish representing 13 species was captured during the July 2009 sampling event 3 (Table 5.12). A total of 39 fish representing 11 species was collected during electrofishing efforts. Shorthead redhorse sucker (33.3% of the total catch), sauger (15.4%), smallmouth buffalo (10.3%), carp (7.7%), and quillback (7.7%) were the most common species boated during i the electrofishing effort. Channel catfish, sauger, smallmouth bass, and spotted bass were the only game species collected during the July electrofishing study (Table 5.12). Hundreds of juvenile gizzard shad that were too small to be collected in the electrofishing nets were observed I but not boated (Table 5.15). A total of eight fish representing three species was collected by seine netting. Five spotfin shiner, two emerald shiners, and one juvenile flathead catfish were the only fish collected in the seine nets.During the fall 2009 sampling event, 52 fish representing 14 taxa were collected (Table 5.13). A total of 49 fish representing 13 species was collected during electrofishing during the first week I of October. Sauger (26.5% of the total catch) and white bass (16.3%) were the most abundant species. Golden redhorse sucker (12.2% of the total electrofishing catch), spotted bass (8.2%)and shorthead redhorse sucker (8.2%) were also relatively abundant.

Black crappie, bluegill, white bass, sauger, smallmouth bass'and spotted bass were the game species collected during electrofishing efforts in October. Three fish; two emerald shiners and one juvenile smallmouth bass were the only fish collected during the fall seine effort that took place in September.

During the November 2009 sampling event, 79 fish representing 15 taxa were captured (Table 5.14). A total of 58 fish representing 14 species were collected during electrofishing.

Shorthead redhorse sucker were the most abundant species collected by electrofishing and contributed to 20.7% of the total. Other relatively abundant species were sauger (19.0%), smallmouth bass (10.3%), smallmouth buffalo (8.6%), carp (6.9%) and golden redhorse sucker (6.9%). Game species collected by electrofishing included white bass, smallmouth bass, sauger, spotted bass, flathead catfish, and walleye. Fish observed and not collected in the November electrofishing study are presented in Table 5.15. A total of 15 emerald shiners were the only fish collected during seine netting.Electrofishing catch rates are presented in Tables 5.16, 5.17, 5.18, and 5.19 for fish that were, boated and handled during the 2006 through 2009 surveys by season (FENOC 2007, 2008 and 2009). In 2009 the annual catch rate was 1.27 fish per minute. The greatest catch rate in 2009 3 occurred in winter (November) when the catch rate was 1.45 fish per minute. Sauger, and shorthead redhorse sucker, contributed to the majority of this total. The lowest catch rate occurred in summer (July) with a rate of 0.98 fish' per electrofishing minute. The annual catch rates were consistent over the four years ranging from a high of 1.98 fish per minute in 2008 to 1.17 in 2007. Over the four years, the 'highest seasonal catch rates occurred in May 2008 (4.54 2009 Annual Environmental Report 15 FENOC (BVPS) fish per minute) and in May 2006 (2.85 fish per minute). The lowest seasonal catch rates occurred in July 2008 (0.68 fish per minute) and July 2006 (0.70 fish per minute).The results of the electrofishing sampling effort (Table 5.9) did not indicate any major differences in species composition between the control station (1) and the non-control Stations 2A, 2B, and 3. A greater number of fish representing more species was captured at non-control stations than control stations.

This was most likely due to the extra effort expended at non-control stations versus control stations (i.e., there are three non-control stations and only one control station).

In 2009, a comparable number of individuals, but fewer species were collected by seines at the control station compared to the non-control stations.

Both numbers of individuals and taxa were less than during electrofishing effort (Table 5.10).In 2009, species composition remained comparable among stations.

Common taxa collected in the 2009 surveys by all methods included redhorse sucker species, smallmouth buffalo, sauger, smallmouth bass, and emerald shiner. Little difference in the species composition of the catch was observed between the control (1) and non-control stations (2A, 2B and 3). Habitat preference and availability were probably the most important factors affecting where and when different species of fish are collected.

The results of the 2009 fish surveys indicated that there is a normal community structure in the Ohio River in the vicinity of BVPS based on species composition and relative abundance of fish observed during the surveys. Benthivores (bottom feeders including suckers and buffalo) and forage species (e.g. gizzard shad, emerald shiners) were collected in the highest numbers. The numbers of forage species were less than in 2008. Variations in annual catch were probably attributable to normal fluctuations in the population size of the forage species and the predator populations that rely on them. Forage species, such as gizzard shad and emerald shiner with high reproductive potentials, frequently respond to changes in natural environmental factors (competition, food availability, cover, and, water quality) with large fluctuations in population size, which could be the reason for the lower numbers of these species observed in 2009. This, in turn, influences their appearance in the sample populations during annual surveys.Spawning/rearing success due to abiotic factors is usually the determining factor of the size and composition of a fish community.

In addition, differences in electrofishing catch rate can be attributed to environmental conditions that prevail during sampling efforts. High water, increased turbidity, and swift currents that occur during electrofishing efforts in some years can affect the collection efficiency of this year.5.4.3 Corbicula Monitoring Program In 2009, two Corbicula (100 percent alive) were collected from the Unit 1 cooling tower basin during monthly reservoir sampling.

No Corbicula were collected in the scraping samples. The largest Corbicula collected was retained in a sieve with a 2.00-3.34 mm length size range (Table 5.20 and Figure 5.5). One Corbicula was collected in March and the other in May. The mean density of total Corbicula (live and dead) in Unit 1 in 2008 was 1 1/in 2.No sampling was conducted in April because the Unit 2 Cooling Tower could not be accessed due to unit shutdown.2009 Annual Environmental Report 16 FENOC (BVPS)

I£In 2009, no Corbicula were collected from the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir during monthly sampling (Table 5.21 and Figure 5.6). No sampling was conducted in November because the Unit 2 Cooling Tower could not be accessed due to unit shutdown.In 2009, BVPS continued its Corbicula control program (Year 16), which included the use of a molluscicide (CT-1) to prevent the proliferation of Corbicula within BVPS. BVPS was granted I permission by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to use CT-1 to target the Unit 1 river water system and the Unit 2 service water system. n In 1990 through 1993, the molluscicide applications (CT-1) focused on reducing the Corbicula population throughout the entire river water system of each BVPS plant (Units 1 and 2). In 1994 n and 1995, the CT-1 applications targeted the internal water systems; therefore, the CT-1 concentrations in the cooling towers were reduced during CT-1 applications.

Consequently, adult and juvenile Corbicula in the cooling towers often survived the CT-1 applications.

m Reservoir sediment samples taken after CT-1 applications represent mortality of Corbicula in the cooling tower only and do not reflect mortality in BVPS internal water systems. u The monthly reservoir sediment samples collected in Units 1 and 2 Cooling Towers in recent years demonstrated that Corbicula were entering and colonizing the reservoirs.

Overall, densities in Units 1 and 2 were somewhat less than those in 2008. The recent decrease of Corbicula at the I BVPS returns densities to levels more consistent with densities in the Ohio River in the mid-1990's, but well below those present during the 1980's. I 5.4.4 Corbicula Juvenile Monitoring Program Figure 5.7 presents the abundance and size distribution

'data for samples collected in the Ohio I River near the intake structure by petite ponar dredge in 2009. Seven live individuals were collected in May, 25 in July, two in September, and nine November for a total of 43 individuals.

They ranged in size from the 1.00-1.99mm size range that were spawned in 2009 to greater than 9.50mm that were spawned in prior years. The number of individuals collected in 2009 was somewhat higher than in 2008 (23 individuals), 2007 (14 individuals), 2006 (three individuals) and 2005 (17 individuals).

A spring/early-summer spawning period typically occurs in the Ohio River near BVPS each year when preferred spawning temperatures (60-650 F) are reached (Figure 5.8). The offspring from I this spawning event generally begin appearing in the sample collections in May. The settled clams generally increase in size throughout the year. The overall low numbers of live Corbicula collected in the sample collected outside the intake and cooling towers in 2009, compared to levels in the 1980's, likely reflects a natural decrease in the density of Corbicula in the Ohio River near BVPS. 3 5.4.5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program n Zebra mussels (Dreissena polynorp ha) are exotic freshwater mollusks that have ventrally 2009 Annual Environmental Report 17 FENOC (BVPS) 3 flattened shells generally marked with alternating dark and lighter bands. They are believed to have been introduced into North America through the ballast water of ocean-going cargo vessels probably from Eastern Europe. They were first identified in Lake St. Clair in 1988 and rapidly spread to other Great Lakes and the Mississippi River drainage system, becoming increasingly abundant in the lower, middle, and upper Ohio River. They use strong adhesive byssal threads, collectively referred to as the byssus, to attach themselves to any hard surfaces (e.g., intake pipes, cooling water intake systems, and other mussels).

Responding to NRC Notice No. 89-76 (Biofouling Agent-Zebra Mussel, November 21, 1989), BVPS instituted a Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program in January 1990. Studies have been conducted each year since then.Zebra mussels were detected in both pump samples (Figures 5.9 and 5.10) and substrate samples (Figure 5.11 and 5.12) in 2009. Zebra mussel veliger pump samples were collected from April through October 2009 (Figures 5.9 and 5.10). Veligers were collected at all of the six sites that were sampled in 2009. At most sample sites, densities of veligers generally increased through the year, peaked in July and August and then were less for the balance of the sampling year. This seasonal pattern is typical for zebra mussels in the northeastern United States. Spawning begins as water temperature reach approximately 14 degrees C and peak at water temperatures of 21 degrees C. Veligers densities usually peak about two weeks after the optimum water temperature for spawning is reached. Veliger densities then fall off as veligers mature and settle. The densities of veligers in the two cooling water reservoirs peaked earlier (June), which may be attributable to the higher than ambient temperatures in the Cooling Towers. The greatest density of veligers was present in the sample collected from the Unit 2 Cooling Tower reservoir in June 2009 (20,280/m 3). Veligers were present in every month sampled. From June through the end of veliger sampling in October, veligers were present in every sample collected at all locations.

Overall, veliger densities in 2009 were somewhat lower than in 2008 but comparable to the densities present in 2007. This is likely due to annual variability in numbers of veligers in the Ohio River.In 2009, settled zebra mussels were collected in scrape samples at the Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, the barge slip, and the intake structure (Figures 5.11 and 5.12). This is the first year that settled mussels were collected in either cooling tower. They were collected in the July sample only, and were present at a density of less than two mussels/m 2.The highest density of settled mussels in any sample collected was at the barge slip (61 mussels/m 2) in June. The mussels collected at each of the sites included individuals that were capable of reproducing.

The density of collected adult zebra mussels in 2009 was somewhat comparable to densities that occurred in 2008.Overall, both the number of observations and densities of settled mussels in 2009 were similar to those recorded in 2008, which was somewhat higher than the preceding five years. Although densities of settled mussels are low compared to other populations such as the Lower Great Lakes, densities comparable to those in the OhioRiver are sufficient to cause problems in the operation of untreated cooling water intake systems. This was evidenced by the observation of a very high density of mussels found on BVPS's grizzly bars. Whether the population of zebra mussels in this reach of the Ohio River is resurging or only yearly fluctuations are present 2009 Annual Environmental Report 18 FENOC (BVPS) cannot be determined.

In any case, the densities of mussels that presently exist are more than sufficient to impact the BVPS, if continued prudent monitoring and control activities are not conducted.

I I I I I I i I I I I I I I!I I I 2009 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)19 I

6.0 ZEBRA

MUSSEL AND CORBICULA CONTROL ACTIVITIES In 2009, BVPS continued its Corbicula and zebra mussel control program (16th year), which included the use of a molluscicide (CT-1) to prevent the proliferation of Corbicula within BVPS.BVPS was granted permission by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to use CT-I to target the Unit 1 river water system and the Unit 2 service water system.In 1990 through 1993, the molluscicide applications (CT-1) focused on reducing the Corbicula population throughout the entire river water system of each BVPS plant (Units 1 and 2). In 1994 through 2009, the CT-1 or 2 applications targeted zebra mussels and Corbicula in the internal water systems; therefore the molluscicide concentrations in the cooling towers were reduced during CT-I or 2 applications.

Consequently, adult and juvenile Corbicula in the cooling towers often survived the applications.

Reservoir sediment samples taken after CT-1 or 2 applications represented mortality of Corbicula in the cooling tower only and do not reflect mortality in BVPS internal water systems.In addition to clamicide treatments, preventive measures were taken that included quarterly cleaning of the Intake Bays. The bay cleanings are intended to minimize the accumulation and growth of mussels within the bays. This practice prevents creating an uncontrolled internal colonization habitat.2009 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)20

7.0 REFERENCES

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1994. Pennsylvania's Endangered Fishes, Reptiles and Amphibians.

Published by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission.

Counts, C. C. 11I, 1985. Distribution of Corbicula fluminea at Nuclear Facilities.

Division of Engineering, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

NUREGLCR.

4233. 79 pp.Dahlberg, M. D. and E. P. Odum, 1970. Annual cycles of species occurrence, abundance and diversity in Georgia estuarine fish populations.

Am. Midl. Nat. 83:382-392.

FENOC, 2003. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Nuclear Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 113 pp.FENOC, 2004. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. l&2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2005. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2006. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2007. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2008. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp.FENOC, 2009. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp.First Energy First Energy First Energy First Energy First Energy First Energy Hutchinson, G. E., 1967. A treatise on limnology.

Vol. 2, Introduction to lake biology and the limnoplankton.

John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York. 1115 pp. , Hynes, H. B. N., 1970. The ecology of running waters. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto.NRC, IE Bulletin 81-03: Flow Blockage of Cooling Tower to Safety System Components by Corbicula sp. (Asiatic Clam) and Mytilus sp. (Mussel).Pielou, E. C., 1969. An introduction to mathematical ecology. Wiley Interscience, Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.Robins, C. R., R. M. Bailey, C. E. Bond, J. R. Brooker, E. A. Lachner, R. N. Lea, and W. B.Scott, 1991. Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States and Canada (fifth edition).

American Fisheries Society Special Publication No. 20:1-183.2009 Annual Environmental Report 21 FENOC (BVPS)

Shiffer, C., 1990. Identification Guide to Pennsylvania Fishes. Pennsylvania Fish Commission, Bureau of Education and Information.

51 pp.Winner, J. M., 1975. Zooplankton.

In: B. A. Whitton, ed. River ecology. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. 155-169 p 2009 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)22

8.0 TABLES

TABLE 5.1 BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION (BVPS)SAMPLING DATES FOR 2009 Study Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Benthic Macroinvertebrate 21 17 Fish 21 7 17* 6** 10 Corbicula and Zebra Mussel 25 28 21 18 7 13 17 6 10 Corbicula CT Density Zebra Mussel Veliger 28 21 18 7 13 17 6*seine netting only**electrofishing only Table 5.2 Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2009 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum Class Famly Genus and Species Previous Collected in New in Sub-FPCihG G aCollections 2009 2009 Porifera SSpongillafragilis X Cnidaria ...IHydrozoa_]Cordylophora lacustris X H dridae Craspedacusta sowerbii x Hydra sp. x Platyhelmninthes Tricladida x Rhabdocoela X Nemertea x Nematoda x ,EUntoproc=

.Uiatella gracilis x Ectoprocta Fredericella sp. x Paludicella articulata X Pectinatella sp. X Plumatella sp. x Annelida Oligochaeta X X Aeolo somatidae X Enchytraeidae X X Naididae x Allonais pectinata X Am hichaeta leydgi X Am hichaeta s2. x Arcteonais lomondi X X Aulophorus sp. X Chaetogaster diaphanus X C. diastrophus X Dero digitata X Dero flabelliger x D. nivea X Dero sp. X Nais barbata X N. behnbigi X N. bretscheri X N. comnmunis X N. elinguis X N. pardalis X N. pseudobtusa X N. simplex X N. variabilis X X Na is SP. X Ophidonais serpentbia X Paranais frici X Paranais litoralis X Paranais sp. X X Piguetiella nzichiganensis

"_X Pristina idrensis X Pristina Iongisoma X Pristina longiseta X P. osborni X P. sima X Pristina sp. X Pristinella sp. X I I I 1 I I I I I I i i I i B I I I I Table 5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2009 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum Class Family Genus and Species Previous Collected in New in h C Sub-Family G a Collections 2009 1 2009 I Annelida Olieochaeta Naididae Pristinella ienkinae x x I I- 4*Pristinella idrensis x Pristina osborni X X Ripistes parasita X Slavina appendiculata X Specaria josinae X X Stephensoniana ttivandrana X Styladiafossularis x S. lacustris X Uncinais uncliata X Vejdovskyella cornata X Vejdovskyella intennedia X Vejdovskyella sp. X F n hlflclrl a 3'Tufl-d x Tubificidae x Aulodrilus limnobius X A. pigueti X X A. pluriseta X Aulodrilus .p. X Bothrioneurumn vejdovskyanumn X Branchiura sowerbyi X 3 flyodrilus templetoni X Linnodrilus cervix X L cervix (variant)

X L claparedianus X L hoffnzeisteri X X L mnaurneensis X X L prqfundicla X L spiralis X L udekemianus X Limnoodrilus sp. X Peloscolex mnultisetosus long identus X P. ti. mnultisetosus X Potainothrix mnoldaviensis X Potamnothrix sp. X P. veidovskyi x Psanmnoryctides curvisetosus X Tu bifex tub ifex X Unidentified immature forms: with hair chaetae without hair chaetae X-,x I x I Lumbriculidae X x Glossiphonfidae I x ___IHelobdella elongata x H. stagnalis X Helobdella

s. X Erpobdellidae 4 4-x Mooreobdella mnicrostoma X HapIotaxidae I[Stlodrilus sp.4 4-3'3'5. -- 2 Lumbricina jl~unibficidae X X Table 5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2009 in The Ohio River Near BVPS.Phylum Class Family Genus and Species Previous Collected in New in Sub-Family Collections 2009 2009 Artiropoda Acarina X S______IOxus sp._ _Ostracoda X Isopoda Asellus sp. X Arthropoda

]Arphipoda Talitridae Hyalella azteca X Ganmnaridae Crangonyx pseudogracilis X Crangonyx sp. X Gaininarus fasciatus X Gaini'arus sp. X X Pontoporeiidae Mon __ __ __ _ _ _IMo oporeia affinis X Decapoda X Collembola X Ephemeroptera X Heptageniidae X Stenacron o .X Stenonep a sp. _ _x ELhemeridae i bp eleL a sp. X Hexag' ena sp. X X lEphron sp. X Baetidae Ceraeai s. x Caenidae Caenis sp. X Serattella sp. X TricoryNtodae I rct hds s.X Megaloptera I Sialis sp. X Odonata Atria se. X Dromno goit!2hus spoliatusX Drpda omonophus sp. X Groinap~ hus s e. X Libellulidae I LibelUula sp. X Plecoptera XX Trichoptera X Hydropsy/chidae Cheumzatopsyche sp. X Hydrops. che sp. X Paraps, che sp. X Hydroptilidae Hydroptila se.Orthotrikhia se.Oxye thira s2.Leptoceridae Ceraclea sp. X Oece tis sp. X X Plenradde JCyrnellus sp X ITrichoptera Polycentropodidae Polycentropus sp. X I i I I U I a I I I I Table 5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2009 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum Class Family Genus and Species Previous Collected in New in P Sub-Familyh Collections 2009 2009 Coleoptera Hydrophilidae X Coleoptera Elmidae Ancyronyx variegatus X Dubirahia sg. X X Helichus sp. X Optioserus

2. X Stenelnis sp. X Psephenidae X Diptera YK Psychodidae X Pericona sp2 X Psychoda sp. X Telinatoscopus sp. X Unidentified Psychodidae pupae X Chaoboridae Chaoborus s2. X Simuhiidae

__________

~"Similium sp. X _____Clironomidae X X X Tanytarsini pupa X Chironominae pupa x Axams s2. X Chirononus sp. X X Cladopelina sp. X X Cladotanytarsus sp. X X sp. X X Dicrotendipes nervosus X Dicrotendipes

s. X X Glyptotendipes sp. X Hanzischia sp. X Microchironomus sp. X Micropsectra sp. X IMicrotendipes sp. x x Parachironomius s2. X Paracladopelina s2. x Paratanytarsus sp. X Paratendipes sp. X X Phaenopsectra sp. X X Polypediluin (s.s.) convictum type X I P. (s.s.) sirmlans type x Polypedilumn sp. X X Rheotanytarsus s2. X Stempelina sp X X Stenochironoinus sp. X Stictochironomus sp. X X Tanytarsus cqoffinani X Tanytarsus sp. X X Tribelos sp. X Xenochironomnus

s. X Tanypodinae X lanypodinae pupae x Ablabesmvia sp. X Clinotanypus sP. X Coelotanypus scapularis X Coelotanypus sp. X X Djalnabatista pulcher X DjalInabatista sp. X Procladius sp. X X Tanypus sp.x I Table 5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2009 in The Ohio River Near BVPS P Family Genus and Species Previous Collected in New in Phylum Class Sub Family Collections 2009 2009 Diptera Tanypodinae Th ieneinaniinyia group X Zavrelimyia sp. X Orthocladiinae X Orthocladiinae pupae x Crico topus bicinctus X C. (s.s.) trifascia X Crico topus (Isocladius)-sylvestris Group X C. (Isocladius) sp. X Cricotopus (s.s.) se. X X Eukiefferiella sp. X Hydrobaenus sp. X ULmnoplives sp. X Nanocladius (s.s.) distinctus X Nanocladius s2. X Orthocladius sp. X X Paramnetriocneinus sp. X Paraphaenocladius sp. X Psectrocladius sp. X X Pseudorthocladius sp. X Pseudosmittia sp. X Sinittia sP. X Theinemannim yia sp. X Diamesinae I Diamesa sp. X[ Potthastia sp. X Probezzia sp XX Wiedezia s. X ICulicoides sp. X X DoMichopodidae X Empididae X[Clinocera sp.X Eph),drid ae X Muscidae X.Rhagionidae X Tipulidae X Stratiomyidae x Syrphidac X Lepidoptera X Hydrachnidia X Mollusca Gastropoda X Hydrobiidae X X Amnicolinae Anmicola s2. X X Aminicola binneyana XlAmnicola limosa X Stagnicolaelodes X.PhysaeeaX a Pleuocea acuta X X[Goniobasis sp x]Physidae X Physa sp. X Physa ancillaria X_Physa integm X i 3 Ii 1 I I I ii a Il I I I ,, i3 Table 5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2009 in The Ohio River Near BVPS phylum Class Family Genus and Species Previous Collected in New in Sub-Family Collections 2009 2009 Mollusca Physacea Anclidae X X IFerrissia sp. X Planorbidae______

______Gillia atilis X X Valvatidae X Valvata perdepressa X Valvata piscinalis X Valvata sincera sincera X Valvata sp. X X Pelecypoda X ISphaeriacea X Corhiculidae

_____1 Corbicula fluminea X X Corbicula sp. X SShaeriidae X Pisidium ventricosum X Pisidiumsp.

X X Spphaerium sp. X X Unidentified immature Sphaeriidae X Dreissenidae Dreissenapolymorpha X X Unionidae x Anodonta grandis x Anodonta (imnmture)

X Elliptio sp. X Quadrula pustulosa X Unidentified imumature Unionidae X

BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COUNTS FOR TRIPLICATE SAMPLES TAKEN AT EACH SAMPLE STATION FOR MAY AND SEPTEMBER 2009 May Sept Scientific name Location May Location Sept 2009 1 2A 2B1 2B2 2B3 3 Total 1 2A 2B1 2B2 2B3 3 1 Total Total Ainicola sp. 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 4 Ancylidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Arcteonais lonondi 0 0 0 0 25 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 Aulodrilus pigueti 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Branchiura sowerbyi 1 0 0 1 7 0 9 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 11 Chironomid pupae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 2 Chironomidae 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 Chironoinus sp. 0 0 5 0 42 0 47 0 1 3 2 7 4 17 64 Cladopelma sp 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Cladotanytarsus sp 0 0 0 0 2 0 *2 0 1 3 1 0 0 5 7 Coelotanypus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 Corbiculafluminea 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 Cricotopus (s.s.) sp. 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Cryptochirononzus sp. 0 0 1 0 7 1 9 2 3 8 0 2 3 18 27 Culicoides sp. 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 3 Dicrotentipides sp 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 Dreissena polymorpha 0 0 0 12 1 0 13 1 5 0 0 0 0 6 19 Dubiraphia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 Enchytraeidae 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Garnrnarus sp. 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 5 0 0 1 0 7 9 Gillia atilis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 1 0 8 8 Goniobasis virginica 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2!-Ixagenia sp. 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 4 0 0 5 6 Hirudinea 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 3 3 H-ydrobiidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 10 0 0 0 12 12 Immature tubificid without 3 3 4 20 64 7 101 38 1 15 71 140 56 321 422 Limnodrilus hoffineisteri 0 0 0 3 5 3 11 1 1 1 4 13 7 27 38 Limnodrilus maumeensis 0 0 0 1 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 10 Lumbriculidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 Microtendipes sp. 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 3 Nais variabilis 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 5 6 8 Ocetis sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 Oligochaeta 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Orthocdadius sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 Oxus sp (Hydracharina) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 Paranais sp 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 9 1 7 0 0 1 18 20 Paratendipes sp. 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Phaenopsectra sp. 0 0 3 11 1 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Pisidium sp. 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 8 3 1 0 13 14 Pleurocera acuta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 2 Plecoptera 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Polypedilur sp. 0 1 3 5 16 0 25 5 3 22 1 1 1 33 58 Pristina osborni 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 8 4 2 2 16 22 Pristinella jenkinae 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Probezzia sp. 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 Procladius sp. 0 0 0 0 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Psectocladius sp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 Specaria josinae 0 0 0 0 8 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 Sphaeriur sp. 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Stempellina sp. 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Stictochirononius sp 0 0 2 0 1 0 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 9 12 Stylodrilus sp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 Tanytarsus sp. 0 0 3 0 7 0 10 1 22 20 1 0 0 44 54 Valvata sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 VlonthlyTotal 5 1 7 1 27 57 222 1 15 1 63 55 120 1 97 181 1 85 601 934 I I am W -M- -M 1--TABLE 5.4 MEAN NUMBER OF MACROINVERTEBRATES (NUMBER/M 2) AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF OLIGOCHAETA, CHIRONOMIDAE, MOLLUSCA, AND OTHER ORGANISMS, 2009 BVPS May Station I (Control)

1. m 2A % j 2B1 (Non-control) 2B2 (Non-control) 2B3 (Non-control) 3 Total Mean#/________

2________

%________

1. _M2________%____%___j

% #/r2 #/Ml %Oligochaeta 57 80 72 71 57 15 358 44 1792 56 186 87 420 53 Chironomidae 0 0 14 14 287 74 244 30 1304 41 14 7 311 39 Mollusca 14 20 0 0 43 11 215 26 14 0 0 0 48 6 Others 0 0 14 14 0 0 0 0 72 2 14 7 17 2 Total 72 100 100 100 387 100 817 100 3182 100 215 100 796 100 September Station 1 (Control) 2A 2B1I (Non-control) 2132 (Non-control) 2B33 (Non-control) 3 Total Mean#/M2 % #/M2 % 2 I I % #/m2 % #/m2 %2 2 % #/M2 %Oligochaeta 702 78 43 5 444 26 1161 84 2311 89 1032 85 951 66 Chironomnidae 129 14 545 69 874 51 100 7 158 6 115 9 320 22 Mollusca 57 6 115 15 373 22 57 4 29 1 57 5 115 8 Others 14 2 86 11 29 2 72 5 86 3 14 1 50 3 Total 903 100 788 100 1720 100 1390 100 2583 100 1218 100 1436 100 TABLE 5.5 MEAN NUMBER OF MACROINVERTEBRATES (NUMBER/M 2) AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF OLIGOCHAETA, CHIRONOMIDAE, MOLLUSCA, AND OTHER ORGANISMS FOR THE CONTROL STATION (1) AND THE AVERAGE FOR NON-CONTROL STATIONS (2B1, 2B2, AND 2B3), 2009 BVPS Non-Control Station May Control Station (Mean) (Mean)#/M2 % #/m 2 %Oligochaeta 57 80 736 50 Chironomidae 0 0 612 42 Mollusca 14 20 91 6 Others 0 0 24 2 TOTAL 71 100 1462 100 Non-Control Station September Control Station (Mean) (Mean)#/m 2  % #/mE %Oligochaeta 702 78 1309 69 Chironomidae 129 14 377 20 Mollusca 57 6 153 8 Others 14 2 62 3 TOTAL 903 100 1902 100 i I I I I I!U I i i I i i I i I TABLE 5.6 SHANNON-WEINER DIVERSITY, EVENNESS AND RICHNESS INDICES FOR BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES COLLECTED IN THE OHIO RIVER, 2009 Station May 1 2A 2B11 2B2 2B13 3 No. of Taxa 3 4 13 9 28 6 Shannon-Weiner Index 0.41 0.55 1.03 0.77 1.06 0.65 Evenness 0.86 0.92 0.93 0.81 0.73 0.83 Richness 1.24 1.54 3.64 1.98 5.00 1.85 Station Sptember 1 2A 2B 1 2B2 2B3 3 No. of Taxa 13 15 20 14 15 12 Shannon-Weiner Index 0.65 0.91 1.09 0.53 0.45 0.60 Evenness 0.58 0.77 0.84 0.46 0.38 0.55 Richness 2.90 3.49 3.97 2.84 2.69 2.48 I Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations 1 (Control)and 2B (Non control), BVPS, 1973-2009.

Preoperational 1973 1974 1975 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 248 508 1116 2197 August 99 244 143 541 1017 1124 Mean 173 376 630 1369 1017 1124 Operational 1976- 1977 1978 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 927 :3660 674 848 351 126 August 851 785 591 3474 601 1896 Mean 889 2223 633 2161 476 1011 Operational 1979 1980 1981 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 1004 840 1041 747 209 456 Aug/Sept 1185 588 1523 448 2185 912 Mean 1095 714 1282 598 1197 684_ _ _Operational 1982 1983 1984 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 3490 3026 3590 1314 2741 621 September 2958 3364 4172 4213 1341. 828 Mean 3223 3195 3881 2764 2041 725 Operational 1985 1986 1987 1 2B I 2B 1 2B May 2256 867 601 969 1971 2649 September 1024 913 849 943 2910 2780 Mean 1640 890 725 956 2440 2714 I I I I I I I I I U I I I I I I I Table 5.7 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations I (Control)and 2B (Non control), BVPS, 1973-2009 (Continued)

Operational 1988 1989 1990 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 1804 1775 3459 2335 15135 5796 September 1420 1514 1560 4707 5550 1118 Mean 1612 1645 2510 3274 10343 3457 Operational 1991 1992 1993 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 7760 6355 7314 10560 8435 2152 September 3588 2605 2723 4707 4693 2143 Mean 5808 4480 5019 7634 6564 2148 Operational 1994 1995 1996 1 2B I 2B 1 2B May 6980 2349 8083 9283 1987 1333 September 1371 2930 1669 3873 1649 2413 Mean 4176 2640 4876 6578 1814 1873 Operational 1997 1998 1999 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 1411 2520 6980 2349 879 1002 September 1944 2774 1371 2930 302 402 Mean 1678 2647 4176 2640 591 702 Table 5.7 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations 1 (Control)and 2B (Non control), BVPS, 1973-2009 (Continued).

Operational 2003 2004 2005 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 7095 10750 2752 4558 516 1146 September 2193 6464 10062 7604 4773 6435 Mean 4644 8607 6407 6121 2645 3791 Operational 2006 2007 2008 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 143 1242 559 912 158 1252 September 229 2199 560 3794 1161 2150 Mean 186 1721 560 2353 660 1701 Operational 2009 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 71 1462 September 903 1902 Mean 487 1682 U I I U I I I I I I TABLE 5.8 TOTAL FISH CATCH; ELECTROFISHING AND SEINE NET COMBINED DURING THE BVPS 2009 FISHERIES SURVEY Common Name Scientific Name Number Percent Smallmouth buffalo Ictiobus bubalus 17 7.30 Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus 1 0.43 Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus 3 1.29 Carp Cyprinus carpio 10 4.29 Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus 2 0.86 Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides 22 9.44 Flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris 3 1.29 Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens 1 0.43 Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianuin 5 2.15 Golden redhorse sucker Moxostonia erythrurum 19 8.15 Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus 7 3.00 Mooneye Hiodon tergisus 3 1.29 Quillback Carpiodes cyprinus 12 5.15 River carpsucker Carpiodes carpio 2 0.86 Sauger Sander canadense 30 12.88 Shorthead redhorse sucker Moxostoma macrolepidotum 44 18.88 Silver redhorse Moxostoma anisurum 2 0.86 Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomnieu 21 9.01 Spotfin shiner Notropis spilopterus 5 2.15 Spotted bass Micropterus punctulatus 8 3.43 Walleye Sander vitreuin 4 1.72 White bass Morone chrysops 12 5.15 Total Fish Collected in 2009 233 100.00 TABLE 5.9 COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL ELECTROFISHING CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 2009 FISHERIES SURVEY Non- Total Common Name Control % control % fish %Smallmouth buffalo 9 13.24 8 5.9 17 8.33 Black crappie 1 0.7 1 0.49 Bluegill 1 1.47 2 1.5 3 1.47 Carp 4 5.88 6 4.4 10 4.90 Channel catfish 2 1.5 2 0.98 Flathead catfish 1 1.47 1 0.7 2 0.98 Freshwater drum 1 0.7 1 0.49 Gizzard shad 5 3.7 5 2.45 Golden redhorse sucker 7 10.29 12 8.8 19 9.31 Longnose gar 2 2.94 5 3.7 7 3.43 Mooneye 3 2.2 3 1.47 Quillback 3 4.41 9 6.6 12 5.88 River carpsucker 1 1.47 1 0.7 2 0.98 Sauger 10 14.71 20 14.7 30 14.71 Shorthead redhorse sucker 18 26.47 26 19.1 44 21.57 Silver redhorse 2 1.5 2 0.98 Smallmouth bass 8 11.76 12 8.8 20 9.80 Spotted bass 1 1.47 7 5.1 8 3.92 Walleye 1 1.47 3 2.2 4 1.96 White bass 2 2.94 10 7.4 12 5.88 Electrofishing Totals 68 100.00 136 100 204 100.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I U TABLE 5.10 COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL SEINE CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 2009 FISHERIES SURVEY Common Name Control % Non-control

% Total fish %Emerald shiner 11 73.33 11 78.57 22 75.86 Flathead catfish 0.00 1 7.14 1 3.45 Smallmouth bass 0.00 1 7.14 1 3.45 Spotfin shiner 4 26.67 1 7.14 5 17.24 Seine Totals 15 100.00 14 100.00 29 100.00 TABLE 5.11 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE MAY 2009 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Electrofishing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B E-3 Total % Total %Smallmouth buffalo --3 2 2 -0 0.00 7 12.07 Black crappie -----0 0.00 0 0.00 Bluegill ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Carp ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Channel catfish ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Emerald shiner 3 -----3 100.00 0 0.00 Flathead catfish --1 ---0 0.00 1 1.72 Freshwater drum -----1 0 0.00 1 1.72 Gizzard shad ---1 1 -0 0.00 2 3.45 Golden redhorse sucker --4 1 -3 0 0.00 8 13.79 Longnose gar --2 0 0.00 4 6.90 Mooneye ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Quillback

--1 1 1 2 0 0.00 5 8.62 River carpsucker

--1 0 0.00 2 3.45 Sauger ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Shorthead redhorse sucker --6 4 1 4 0 0.00 15 25.86 Silver redhorse -----1 0 0.00 1 1.72 Smallmouth bass --5 2 2 -0 0.00 9 15.52 Spotfin shiner ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Spotted bass -- -0 0.00 1 1.72 Walleye -1 0 0.00 1 1.72 White bass -1 0 0.00 1 1.72 Total 3 0 23 12 10 13 3 100.00 58 100.00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U U I I I* Gear = (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining TABLE 5.12 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE JULY 2009 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Electrofishing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B E-3 Total % Total %Smallmouth buffalo --2 2 0 0.00 4 10.26 Black crappie ----0 0.00 0 0.00 Bluegill ----0 0.00 0 0.00 Carp --1 2 -0 0.00 3 7.69 Channel catfish ---1 --0 0.00 1 2.56 Emerald shiner 2 ----2 25.00 0 0.00 Flathead catfish --1 12.50 0 0.00 Freshwater drum -----0 0.00 0 0.00 Gizzard shad ---2 0 0.00 2 5.13 Golden redhorse sucker ---1 0 0.00 1 2.56 Longnose gar ----0 0.00 0 0.00 Mooneye ----1 1 0 0.00 2 5.13 Quillback

---2 1 -0 0.00 3 7.69 River carpsucker

---

0 0.00 0 0.00 Sauger --2 1 1 2 0 0.00 6 15.38 Shorthead redhorse sucker --5 7 -1 0 0.00 13 33.33 Silver redhorse -----0 0.00 0 0.00 Smallmouth bass --1 1 -0 0.00 2 5.13 Spotfin shiner 4 1 --5 62.50 0 0.00 Spotted bass -- 1 1 0 0.00 2 5.13 Walleye -- -0 0.00 0 0.00 White bass ---0 0.00 0 0.00 Total 6 6 2 11 13 6 9 8 1 100.00 39 100.00* Gear = (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining 3 I 3 I TABLE 5.13 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2009 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Electrofishing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B E-3 Total % Total %Smallmouth buffalo ---1 -0 0.00 1 2.04 Black crappie ----1 0 0.00 1 2.04 Bluegill --1 1 1 -0 0.00 3 6.12 Carp --1 -1 1 0 0.00 3 6.12 Channel catfish ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Emerald shiner ---2 66.67 0 0.00 Flathead catfish ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Freshwater drum ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Gizzard shad ----1 -0 0.00 1 2.04 Golden redhorse sucker --2 1 3 -0 0.00 6 12.24 Longnose gar ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Mooneye ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Quillback

---1 --0 0.00 1 2.04 River carpsucker

---

0 0.00 0 0.00 Sauger --4 5 2 2 0 0.00 13 26.53 Shorthead redhorse sucker ---1 1 2 0 0.00 4 8.16 Silver redhorse -----1 0 0.00 1 2.04 Smallmouth bass 1 1 1 1 33.33 3 6.12 Spotfim shiner ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Spotted bass --1 1 2 -0 0.00 4 8.16 Walleye ------0 0.00 0 0.00 White bass --2 3 3 -0 0.00 8 16.33 Total 0 3 11 14 16 8 3 100.00 49 100.00 I I U.3 I I I I I I I I I I U* Gear = (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining TABLE 5.14 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE NOVEMBER 2009 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Electrofishing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B E-3 Total % Total %Smallmouth buffalo --4 1 -0 0.00 5 8.62 Black crappie -----0 0.00 0 0.00 Bluegill -----0 0.00 0 0.00 Carp --2 2 -0 0.00 4 6.90 Channel catfish ---1 -0 0.00 1 1.72 Emerald shiner 6 9 ---15 100.00 0 0.00 Flathead catfish ---1 -0 0.00 1 1.72 Freshwater drum -----0 0.00 0 0.00 Gizzard shad ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Golden redhorse sucker --1 1 2 -0 0.00 4 6.90 Longnose gar ----3 -0 0.00 3 5.17 Mooneye ---1 -0 0.00 1 1.72 Quillback

--2 1 -0 0.00 3 5.17 River carpsucker

---

0 0.00 0 0.00 Sauger --4 3 2 2 01 0.00 11 18.97 Shorthead redhorse sucker --7 4 1 -0 0.00 12 20.69 Silver redhorse ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Smallmouth bass --2 1 3 -0 0.00 6 10.34 Spotfin shiner ------0 0.00 0 0.00 Spotted bass ---1 --0 0.00 1 1.72 Walleye --1 -1 1 0 0.00 3 5.17 White bass ---1 1 1 0 0.00 3 5.17 Total 6 9 23 12 19 4 15 100.00 58 100.00* Gear = (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining TABLE 5.15 ESTIMATED NUMBER OF FISH OBSERVED

• DURING ELECTROFISHING OPERATIONS, 2009 Common Name May July Sept/Oct Nov Total Unidentified redhorse suckers 5 6 3 14 Walleye/S auger 1 1 Longnose gar 1 2 3 Smallmouth buffalo 1 1 Gizzard shad loos los 100s Unidentified black bass 2 2 Total 6 100s los 8* = Not boated or handled U I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I Table 5.16 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVIPS 2006 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (mrin) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Spring 41 Black buffalo 10 0.2439 Black crappie 1 0.0244 Gizzard shad 9 0.2195 Golden redhorse sucker 19 0.4634 Quillback 2 0.0488 Sauger 17 0.4146 Shorthead redhorse sucker 16 0.3902 Skipjack herring 1 0.0244 Smallmouth bass 11 0.2683 Spotted bass 5 0.1220 Striped bass x White bass 1 0.0244 Walleye 10 0.2439 White bass 15 0.3659 Season Total 117 2.8537 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Summer 40 Black buffalo 2 0.0500 Black crappie 1 0.0250 Gizzard shad 3 0.0750 Golden redhorse sucker 4 0.1000 Longnose gar 2 0.0500 Shorthead redhorse sucker 12 0.3000 Silver redhorse 1 0.0250 Smallmouth bass 3 0.0750 Season Total 28 0.7000 Table 5.16 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2006 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (mrin) Common Name Collected' CPUE (fish/min)

Fall 40 Black buffalo 3 0.0732 Bluegill 1 0.0244 Carp 3 0.0732 Gizzard shad 5 0.1220 Golden redhorse sucker 2 0.0488 Longnose gar 4 0.0976 Mooneye 1 0.0244 Quillback 2 0.0488 Sauger 5 0.1220 Shorthead redhorse sucker 14 0.3415 Silver redhorse 1 0.0244 Smallmouth bass 2 0.0488 Spotted bass 1 0.0244 White bass 1 0.0244 Season Total 45 1.1250 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Winter 40 Black buffalo 18 0.4500 Carp 1 0.0250 Channel catfish 1 0.0250 Flathead catfish 1 0.0250 Freshwater drum 4 0.1000 Gizzard shad 18 0.4500 Golden redhorse sucker 2 0.0500 Mooneye 3 0.0750 Quillback 6 0.1500 River carpsucker 1 0.0250 Shorthead redhorse sucker 11 0.2750 Walleye 1 0.0250 White bass 1 0.0250 Season Total 68 1.7000 161 258 1.6025 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I Table 5.17 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2007 FISHERIES SURVEY Count of Season Effort (min) Common Name species CPUE (fish/min)

Spring 41 Smallmouth buffalo 5 0.122 Black crappie 1 0.024 Bluegill 1 0.024 Gizzard shad 3 0.073 Golden redhorse sucker 16 0.390 Longnose gar 1 0.024 Northern hog sucker 1 0.024 Rock bass 1 0.024 Sauger 6 0.146 Shorthead redhorse sucker 7 0.171 Silver redhorse 3 0.073 Smallmouth bass 2 0.049 Spotted bass 2 0.049 White bass 1 0.024 Season Total 50 1.220 Count of Season Effort (min) Common Name species CPUE (fish/min)

Summer 41 Smallmouth buffalo 5 0.1220 Carp 5 0.1220 Flathead catfish 1 0.0244 Gizzard shad 12 0.2927 Mooneye 1 0.0244 Quillback 1 0.0244 Sauger 1 0.0244 Shorthead redhorse sucker 3 0.0732 Silver redhorse 1 0.0244 Smallmouth bass 4 0.0976 Spotted bass 2 0.0488 Walleye 1 0.0244 Season Total 37 0.9024 Table 5.17 (Cont'd)CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2007 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Fall 40.00 Smallmouth buffalo 7 0.1707 Bluegill 1 0.0244 Channel catfish 2 0.0488 Flathead catfish 1 0.0244 Freshwater drum 2 0.0488 Gizzard shad 1 0.0244 Golden redhorse sucker 1 0.0244 Log perch 1 0.0244 Longnose gar 5 0.1220 Sauger 2 0.0488 Shorthead redhorse sucker 3 0.0732 Silver redhorse 1 0.0244 Smallmouth bass 7 0.1707 White bass 1 0.0244 Season Total 35 0.8537 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Winter 40.00 Smallmouth buffalo 6 0.1463 Bluegill 1 0.0244 Carp 1 0.0244 Gizzard shad 2 0.0488 Golden redhorse sucker 4 0.0976 Longnose gar 1 0.0244 Mooneye 1 0.0244 Quillback 1 0.0244 River carpsucker 1 0.0244 Sauger 13 0.3171 Shorthead redhorse sucker 12 0.2927 Smalimouth bass 13 0.3171 Spotted bass 7 0.1707 Walleye 2 0.0488 White bass 2 0.0488 Season Total 67 1.6341 162.00 189 1.1667 U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Table 5.18 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2008 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Spring 40.5 Smallmouth buffalo 6 0.1481 Bluegill 1 0.0247 Carp 1 0.0247 Channel catfish 10 0.2469 Freshwater drum 2 0.0494 Golden redhorse sucker 18 0.4444 Quillback 9 0.2222 Rock bass 1 0.0247 Sauger 51 1.2593 Shorthead redhorse sucker 40 0.9877 Silver redhorse 11. 0.2716 Smallmouth bass 18 0.4444 Spotted bass 4 0.0988 Walleye 12 0.2963 Season Total 184 4.5432 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Summer 41 Smallmouth buffalo 5 .0.1220 Bluegill 1 0.0244 Flathead catfish 1 0.0244 Freshwater drum 4 0.0976 Gizzard shad 4 0.0976 Longnose gar 3 0.0732 Quillback 1 0.0244 Sauger 2 0.0488 Shorthead redhorse sucker 2 0.0488 Smallmouth bass 4 0.0976 Spotted bass 1 0.0244 Season Total 28 0.6829 Table 5.18 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2008 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Fall 41 Smallmouth buffalo 2 0.0488 Carp 1 0.0244 Channel catfish 2 0.0488 Freshwater drum 1 0.0244 Gizzard shad 17 0.4146 Golden redhorse sucker 3 0.0732 Mooneye 1 0.0244 Northern hog sucker 0 0.0000 Quillback 4 0.0976 Sauger 2 0.0488 Shorthead redhorse sucker 7 0.1707 Silver redhorse 1 0.0244 Smallmouth bass 9 0.2195 Spotted bass 1 0.0244 White bass 1 0.0244 Season Total 52 1.2683 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Winter 40.4 Smallmouth buffalo 3 0.0743 Bluegill 2 0.0495 Carp 0 0.0000 Gizzard shad 3 0.0743 Golden redhorse sucker 9 0.2228 Largemouth bass 1 0.0248 Longnose gar 2 0.0495 Quillback 2 0.0495 River carpsucker 1 0.0248 Sauger 10 0.2475 Shorthead redhorse sucker 15 0.3713 Silver redhorse 1 0.0248 Smallmouth bass 4 0.0990 Spotted bass 4 0.0990 White bass 1 0.0248 Season Total 58 1.4356 163 322 1.9767 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Table 5.19 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2009 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Spring 40.3 Smallmouth buffalo 7 0.1737 Flathead catfish 1 0.0248 Freshwater drum 1 0.0248 Gizzard shad 2 0.0496 Golden redhorse sucker 8 0.1985 Longnose gar 4 0.0993 Quillback 5 0.1241 River carpsucker 2 0.0496 Shorthead redhorse sucker 15 0.3722 Silver redhorse 1 0.0248 Smallmouth bass 9 0.2233 Spotted bass 1 0.0248 Walleye 1 0.0248 White bass 1 0.0248 Season Total 58 1.4392 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Summer 40 Smallmouth buffalo 4 0.1000 Carp 3 0.0750 Channel catfish 1 0.0250 Gizzard shad 2 0.0500 Golden redhorse sucker 1 0.0250 Mooneye 2 0.0500 Quillback 3 0.0750 Sauger 6 0.1500 Shorthead redhorse sucker 13 0.3250 Smallmouth bass 2 0.0500 Spotted bass 2 0.0500 Season Total 39 0.9750 Table 5.19 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2009 FISHERIES SURVEY Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Fall 40.5 Smallmouth buffalo 1 0.0247 Black crappie 1 0.0247 Bluegill 3 0.0741 Carp 3 0.0741 Gizzard shad 1 0.0247 Golden redhorse sucker 6 0.1481 Quillback 1 0.0247 Sauger 13 0.3210 Shorthead redhorse sucker 4 0.0988 Silver redhorse 1 0.0247 Smallmouth bass 3 0.0741 Spotted bass 4 0.0988-White bass 8 0.1975 Season Total 49 1.2099 Number Season Effort (min) Common Name Collected CPUE (fish/min)

Winter 40 Smallmouth buffalo 5 0.1250 Carp 4 0.1000 Channel catfish 1 0.0250 Flathead catfish 1 0.0250 Golden redhorse sucker 4 0.1000 Longnose gar 3 0.0750 Mooneye 1 0.0250 Quillback 3 0.0750 Sauger 11 0.2750 Shorthead redhorse sucker 12 0.3000 Smallmouth bass 6 0.1500 Spotted bass 1 0.0250 Walleye 3 0.0750 White bass 3 0.0750 Season Total 58 1.4500 161 204 1.2687 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 5.20 UNIT 1 COOLING RESERVOIR MONTHLY SAMPLING CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR 2009 FROM BVPS Area Live Maximum Minimum Estimated Collection Sampled or Length Length Number Date (sq ft) Dead Count Range (mm) Range(mm) (per sq m)3/25/2009 0.25 Dead 0 0 Live 1 0.001-0.99 0.001-0.99 43 4/28/2009*

0.25 Dead -Live --5/21/2009 0.25 Dead 0 0 Live 1 2.00-3.34 2.00-3.34 43 6/18/2009 0.25 Dead 0 -0 Live 0 --0 7/7/2009 0.25 Dead 0 --0 Live 0 --0 8/13/2009 0.25 Dead 0 --0 Live 0 --0 9/17/2009 0.25 Dead 0 --0 Live 0 --0 10/6/2009 0.25 Dead 0 --0 Live 0 -0 11/10/2009 0.25 Dead 0 -0 Live 0 -0 Dead 0 --0 Unit summary Da Live 2 2.00-3.34 0.001-0.99 11*Not sampled due to unit shutdown TABLE 5.21 UNIT 2 COOLING RESERVOIR MONTHLY SAMPLING CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR 2009 FROM BVPS Area Maximum Minimum Estimated Collection Sampled Live or Length Range Length Number Date (sq ft) Dead Count (mm) Range(mm) (per sq m)Dead 0 ....0 3/25/2009 0.25 Le 0 0 Live 0 ---.... 0 Dead 0 ....0 4/28/2009 0.25 Le 0 0 Live 0 ---.... 0 Dead 0 ....0 5/21/2009 0.25 Le 0 0 Live 0 ---.... 0 Dead 0 ....0 6/18/2009 0.25 Le 0 0 Live 0 ---.... 0 Dead 0 ....0 7/7/2009 0.25 Le 0 0 Live 0 ..... 0 Dead 0 ....0 8/13/2009 0.25 Le 0 0 Live 0 ---.... 0 Dead 0 ....0 9/17/2009 0.25 Le 0 0 Live 0 ---.... 0 Dead 0 ....0 10/6/2009 0.25 Le 0 0 Live 0 ---.... 0 Dead ......11/10/2009*

0.25 Le L ive ---.-.-.--..--

Unit Dead 0 ...... 0 summary Live 0 ...... 0*Not sampled due to unit shutdown U I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I

9.0 FIGURES

M -I M -so M- M M MI M M M- e M 0 IU Figure 5.1 2009 Beaver Valley Power Station Aquatic Monitoring Program Sampling Control and Non-Control Sampling Stations LEGED 1:31,250 (at center)l BeSthic samplo site0 Bcavir 2A 2w000 Meete LocatonMaforeaverValle Powe Station Be c O Meters t Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Benthic Organism Survey Sampling Sites for the 2009 Study>~SL Figure 5.2m mm ----M -m

-IM man W M -M m ----M M on dustry Shlppinuport LEGEND CM Electrofishing site SSeine siteSato ZAA 2;x' Fee R, IloG Mete-c Figure 5.3 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Fish Population Survey Fish Sampling Sites for the 2009 Study 2 C m 2 0 2 m 2-4 m 0-4 Figure 5.4 Location of Study Area, Beaver Valley Power Station Shippingport, Pennsylvania BVPS M O s W m m m -m m m m m m --I m no ON M m W M m = M Mm mm-- -M Sm =Comparison of live Corbicula clam density estimates among 2009 BVPS Unit 1 cooling tower reservoir events, for various clam shell groups.500 W 450< 400_350 300 o 250 o 200 a: In 150 M 100 z 50 0 TOTAL#/m2 950mm 6.30-9 .49 mm 4.75-6 29m m 3.35-4.74mm SIZE RANGE V2.00-3.34 mm 1.00-11.99 M M 0.01-0.99 mm Figure 5.5 Note: Not sampled in April Due to Shutdown Comparison of live Corbicula clam density estimates among 2009 BVPS Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir events, for various clam shell groups.Lu--0 M z 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 TOTAL #/m2 A 9.50 M M 6.30-9A9 mm 4.75-629 SIZE I S 3.35-4.74 m m SZ 2.00-3.34 mm 100-1.99 mm 0.01-0.99mm Figure 5.6 Note: Not sampled in November due to shutdown M Im!M M ImnM M m M m m -m -M No mM IMM m M --m n -mmn om M -Comparison of live Corbicula clam density estimates among 2009 BVPS Intake Structure sample events, for various clam shell groups.-j 0 U-0 w z 14-12-10-8-6-4-2-0-SIZE RANGE 5/21 7/7 9/17 11/10* 0.01-0.99 mm 0 0 0 0 03 1.00-1.99 mm 1 1 0 0 M 2.00-3.34 mm 0 4 0 4 D 3.35-4.74 mm 1 4 1 0 E 4.75-6.29 mm 0 0 0 0" 6.30-9.49 mm 1 5 1 0*>9.50mm 4 11 0 5" TOTAL 7 25 2 9 Intake structure bottom samples are collected from the Ohio River at the Intake Building.Figure 5.7 Water Temperature and River Elevation Recorded at the Ohio River at BVPS Intake Structure During 2009 on Monthly Sample Dates.80 676 75 674 70 65 60 672"- 60 : m , 55 670 Q E0 50 4668 45 40 35 666 30 664 3/25 4/28 5/21 6/18 7/7 8/13 9/17 10/6 11/10 2009 Monthly Sample Dates-- temp-- --elevation Figure 5.8 I -No M M --m m --

--- M --m -m up -Density of zebra mussel veiligers collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2009*Unit 1 Not Sampled in April Due to Shutdown 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 i-m---.4 3 -Intake Structure/Open Water Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir*

Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir I4/28 0 0 6720 05/21 50 30 100 06/18 5070 8890 20280 07/7 160 250 5445* 8/13 930 2020 3030* 9/17 30 230 1520 0310/6 1090 500 820 Sample location Figure 5.9 Sample location Figure 5.9 I Density of zebra mussel veligers collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2009 20000 -18000 -16000 -14000 12000 n S.10000 1 8000 6000 4000 20 00 Barge Slip Splash Pool Emergency Outfall Facity 04/28 0 0 0 05/21 100 0 30 06/18 8645 5775 700*71 17580 5215 610* 8/13 10800 12650 7700 U 9/17 170 140 100 0 10/6 350 550 1220 Sample location Figure 5.10 OR M mom M me MMM M MM M M M MM M M

-! W -M i- no M M M man W M --"*Density of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2009 Note: Unit 1 Cooling Tower Not Sampled in April Due to Shutdown Figure 5.11 Density of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2009 65 60 50 40 30 20 10 0-I ML Barge Slip Splash Pool Emergency Outfall Facility 03/25 4 0 0 04/28 0 0 0 05/21 3 0 0*6/18 61 0 0 07n7 16 0 0 08/13 0 0 0* 9/17 16 0 0* 10/6 1 0 0 Figure 5.12 M M M m N M m M M M M M # m W -OW --

£ 10.0.I II PERMIT S I I I££I£I Attachment 10.1: PERMITS & CERTIFICATES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE Registration Number Regulator/Description Expiration BVPS EPA generator identification Resource Conservation

& Recovery Act PAR000040485 (RCRA) Identification number for regulated waste activity.

Also used by PA DEP Indefinite to monitor regulated waste activity under the Pennsylvania Solid Waste Management Act (SWMA).04-02474 BVPS EPA Facility Identification Number for CERCLA/EPCRA/SARA.

Used for SARA Tier II reporting and emergency planning.

Indefinite 04-02475 FE Long Term Distribution Center/Warehouse (22) EPA Facility Identification Number for CERCLAIEPCRAISARA.

Used for SARA Tier II reporting and Indefinite emergency planning.PA0025615 BVPS NPDES Permit number under US EPA and PA DEP. 12/27/2006 Continued pending approval of renewal application.

04-13281 BVPS Unit 1 PA DEP Facility Identification

& certificate number for regulated storage tanks. Indefinite 04-13361 BVPS Unit 2 PA DEP Facility Identification

& certificate number for regulated storage tanks. Indefinite OP-04-00086 PA DEP State Only Synthetic Minor Permit for emergency auxiliary boilers, 10/12/2012 emergency diesel generators, paint shop and other miscellaneous sources..N/A PA DEP Open Burning Permit for operation of the BVPS Fire School- annual application and renewal 12/31/2010 042009 450 002RT US Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Registration 06/30/2012 200100242 US Army Permit for maintenance dredging (With Encroachment/Submerged Lands 12/31/2011 Agreement

1. 0477705, this allows maintenance dredging.).

0477705 Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for construction and Indefinite maintenance of current barge slip. (With US Army Permit #200100242, this allows maintenance dredging.)

06786A Encroachment Pern-it/Submerged Lands Agreement for transmission line over Ohio Indefinite River @ Mile 34.5 18737 Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for Unit 1 intake and discharge Indefinite (main combined intake and outfall structures) 0475711 Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for construction and Indefinite maintenance of Unit 2 auxiliary intake-End Table -

APPENDIX A SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME'OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2009 BVPS 1 Nomenclature follows Robins, et al. (1991)I I i ,li I 5 I i I IJ I i I Page 1 of 3 Family and Scientific Name Lepisosteidae (gars)Lepisosteus osseus Hiodontidae (mooneyes)

Hiodon alosoides H. tergisus Clupeidae (herrings)

Alosa chrysochloris A. pseudoharengus Dorosoma cepedianum Cyprinidae (carps and minnows)Campostoma anomalum Carassius auratus Ctenopharyngodon idella Notropis spilopterus Cyprinus carpio C. carpio x C. auratus Luxilus chrysocephalus Macrhybopsis storeriana Nocomis micropogon Notemigonus crysoleucas Notropis atherinoides N. buccatus N. hudsonius N. rubellus N. stramineus N. volucellus Pimephales notatus P. promelas Rhinichthys atratulus Semotilus atromaculatus Catostomidae (suckers)Carpiodes carpio C. cyprinus C. velifer Catostomus commersonii Hypentelium nigricans Ictiobus bubalus I. niger Minytrema melanops Common Name Longnose gar Goldeye Mooneye Skipjack herring Alewife Gizzard shad Central stoneroller Goldfish Grass carp Spotfin shiner Common carp.Carp-goldfish hybrid Striped shiner Silver chub River chub Golden shiner Emerald shiner Silverjaw minnow Spottail shiner Rosyface shiner Sand shiner Mimic shiner Bluntnose minnow Fathead minnow Blacknose dace Creek chub River carpsucker Quillback Highfin carpsucker White sucker Northern hogsucker Smallmouth buffalo Black buffalo Spotted sucker Page 2 of 3 Family and Scientific Name Moxostoma anisurum M. carinatum M. duquesnei M. erythrurum M. macrolepidotum Ictaluridae (bullhead catfishes)

Ameiurus catus A. furcatus A. melas A. natalis A. nebulosus Ictalurus punctatus Noturus flavus Pylodictis olivaris Esocidae (pikes)Esox lucius E. masquinongy E. lucius x E. masquinongy Salmonidae (trouts)Oncorhynchus mykiss Percopsidae (trout-perches)

Percopsis omiscomaycus Cyprinodontidae (killifishes)

Fundulus diaphanus Atherinidae (silversides)

Labidesthes sicculus Percichthyidae (temperate basses)Morone chrysops M. saxatilis M. saxatilis x M. chrysops Centrarchidae (sunfishes)

Ambloplites rupestris Lepomis cyanellus L. gibbosus L. macrochirus L. microlophus L. gibbosus x L. microlophus Micropterus dolomieu M. punctulatus M. salmoides Pomoxis annularis P. nigromaculatus Common Name Silver redhorse River redhorse Black redhorse Golden redhorse Shorthead redhorse White catfish Blue catfish Black bullhead Yellow bullhead Brown bullhead Channel catfish Stonecat Flathead catfish Northern pike Muskellunge Tiger muskellunge Rainbow trout Trout-perch Banded killifish S I I I I I I it Brook silverside White bass Striped bass Striped bass hybrid Rock bass Green sunfish Pumpkinseed Bluegill Redear sunfish Pumpkinseed-redear sunfish hybrid Smallmouth bass Spotted bass Largemouth bass White crappie Black crappie I,'I Page 3 of 3 Family and Scientific Name Percidae (perches)Etheostoma blennioides E. nigrum E. zonale Perca flavescens Percina caprodes P. copelandi Sander canadense S. vitreum S. canadense x S. vitreum Sciaenidae (drums)Aplodinotus grunniens Common Name Greenside darter Johnny darter Banded darter Yellow perch Logperch Channel darter Sauger Walleye Saugeye Freshwater drum