ML14045A101

Byron Station, Units 1 & 2, Response to NRC Request for Additional Information on License Renewal Application and Environmental Report

ML14045A101
Person / Time
Site:	Byron
Issue date:	02/11/2014
From:	Gallagher M P Exelon Generation Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RS-14-051
Download: ML14045A101 (208)

Text

Ad MEMichael R Gallagher AVice President, License Renewal~Iii 'h ~rrtir'~Exelon NuclearExe!on Generation,.,

200 Exelon WayKennett Square, PA 19348610 765 5958 Office610 765 5956 Faxwww.exeloncorp.corn michaelp.gallagher@exeloncorp.comn 10 CFR 5010 CFR 5110 CFR 54RS-14-051 February 11,2014U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention:

Document Control DeskWashington, DC 20555-0001 Byron Station, Units 1 and 2Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-37 and NPF-66NRC Docket Nos. 50-454 and 50-455

Subject:

Response to NRC Request for Additional Information

-Additional

Request, datedJanuary 29, 2014, related to the Byron and Braidwood

Stations, Units 1 and 2License Renewal Application, Byron Station Applicant's Environmental Report

References:

1. Exelon Generation

Company, LLC letter from Michael P. Gallagher to NRC DocumentControl Desk, "Application for Renewed Operating Licenses",

dated May 29, 20132. Letter from Lois M. James (NRC) to Michael P. Gallagher (Exelon),

"Requests forAdditional Information for the Environmental Review of the Byron Nuclear Station, Units1 and 2, License Renewal Application

-Additional

Request, dated January 29, 2014In the Reference 1 letter, Exelon Generation

Company, LLC (Exelon Generation) submitted theLicense Renewal Application (LRA) for the Byron and Braidwood

Stations, Units 1 and 2. In theReference 2 letter, the NRC requested additional information to support the Staff's review of theByron Station Applicant's Environmental Report (Appendix E, Item E-2 to the LRA).The enclosure to this letter provides the additional information requested by the Staff.This letter and its enclosures contain no regulatory commitments.

February 11, 2014U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Al Fulvio, Manager, Exelon Generation LicenseRenewal, at 610-765-5936.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.Executed on: /1Respectfully, Michael P. Gallagher Vice President

-License Renewal ProjectsExelon Generation

Company, LLC

Enclosure:

Hard copies of Response Sheets plus other Relevant Documents cc: Regional Administrator

-NRC Region III (w/ Response Sheets only)NRC Project Manager (Environmental Review),

NRR-DLR (w/ Response Sheets only)NRC Project Manager (Safety Review),

NRR-DLR (w/ Response Sheets only)NRC Project Manager, NRR-DORL Byron Station (w/ Response Sheets only)NRC Senior Resident Inspector, Byron Station (w/ Response Sheets only)Illinois Emergency Management Agency -Division of Nuclear Safety February 11, 2014U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2bcc: (all w/ Response Sheets only)BYR Site VP -F. KearneyBYR Plant Manager -B. YoumanBYR Manager Chemistry, Rad Waste & Environmental

-A. CorriganBYR Environmental Chemist -N. GordonMid-West Mgr Environmental Programs

-R. BeemMid-West Principal Environmental Specialist

-J. PetroMid-West Senior Environmental Specialist

-F. Bevington Corp Dir Environmental Programs

& Reg Policy -Z. KarpaCorp VP Fleet Support -P. OrphanosCorp Dir Licensing

-G. KaegiCorp Mgr Licensing, Braidwood and Byron Stations

-P. SimpsonCorp License Renewal Mgr -A. FulvioCorp License Renewal Technical Lead -D. WarfelCorp License Renewal Engineering Mgr -A. PihaCorp License Renewal BYR Site Lead -D. BrindleCorp License Renewal Environmental Lead -N. RanekCorp License Renewal Licensing Lead -J. HufnagelExelon Document Control Desk Licensing Exelon Generation RS-1 4-051Enclosure Responses to Additional RAtsAQ-1e and AQ-IfByron Station License RenewalEnvironmental Review This Page Intentionally Blank Byron Environmental Audit -Request for Additional Information ResponseQuestion

1. AQ-le Category:

AquaticStatement of Question:

Provide the following information:

e. (ComEd 1981 b) Commonwealth Edison Company.

1981. Byron StationEnvironmental Report Operating License Stage. Vol. 2. Amendment No. 4 January1983 -coversheet and Section 3.4Response:

The requested information is attached.

Please note that Exelon Generation is providing theexcerpted section 3.4 from Volume 2 of the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage, as amended.

There were four amendments to the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage, which are listed below.Amendment No. 1, July 1981Amendment No. 2, September 1981Amendment No. 3, March 1982Amendment No. 4, January 1983Each amendment was incorporated into the original document using the change-page method,which involved removing affected pages from the original document and inserting revised pagesthat were marked to indicate the amendment number and the location on the page of affectedtext. Hence, any particular page in the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating LicenseStage, as amended, may be an original page, or a page that was revised by one or moreamendments.

The markings on each page indicate whether the page was changed by anamendment.

The pages being provided for each requested section were taken from a version of the fulldocument that was updated through Amendment No. 4 (January 1983). Each specific page ismarked with the most recent amendment number that affected the page. If no amendment number is marked on a page, then it was not changed from the original version published in1981.Also note that the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage consisted oftwo volumes.

Volume 1 contains an overview Table of Contents plus Chapters 1 and 2.Volume 2 contains the remainder of the chapters.

In both volumes, each chapter begins withdetailed Front Material (Table of Contents, List of Tables, and List of Figures) for the chapter,except Chapter 2 in Volume 1, for which the Front Material and Section 2.1 are missing from thePDF file that Exelon obtained from the NRC Public Document Room.List of Attachments Provided:

1. (CoinEd 1981b) Commonwealth Edison Company.

1981. Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage. as amended through Amendment No. 4, January 1983* Vol. 1 -Cover Sheet and Overview Table of contents;

• Vol. 2 -Cover Sheet,o Chapter 3 Front Material and Section 3.4, Heat Dissipation System This. Page Intentionally Blank Byron Environmental Audit -Request for Additional Information ResponseQuestion

1. AQ-lf Category:

AquaticStatement of Question:

Provide the following information:

f. Commonwealth Edison Company.

1981. Byron Station Environmental ReportOperating License Stage. Vol. 2. Amendment No. 4. January 1983. [Audit Reference Material]"

i) coversheet ii) Section 2.2.1, Aquatic Ecologyiii) Section 4.1.4.2, Aquatic Studiesiv) Section 5.1.3, Biological Effects [on the Rock River]v) Section 5.2.1.1.2, Aquatic Pathways for Biota Other Than Manvi) Section 6.1.1, Pre-Operational Monitoring of Surface Watervii) Section 6.2.1, Aquatic Monitoring

Response

The requested information is attached.

Please note that Exelon Generation is providing theexcerpted sections from the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage, asamended.

There were four amendments to the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage, which are listed below.Amendment No. 1, July 1981Amendment No. 2, September 1981Amendment No. 3, March 1982Amendment No. 4, January 1983Each amendment was incorporated into the original document using the change-page method,which involved removing affected pages from the original document and inserting revised pagesthat were marked to indicate the amendment number and the location on the page of affectedtext. Hence, any particular page in the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating LicenseStage, as amended, may be an original page, or a page that was revised by one or moreamendments.

The markings on each page indicate whether the page was changed by anamendment.

The pages being provided for each requested section were taken from a version of the fulldocument that was updated through Amendment No. 4 (January 1983). Each specific page ismarked with the most recent amendment number that affected the page. If no amendment number is marked on a page, then it was not changed from the original version published in1981.Also note that the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage consisted oftwo volumes.

Volume I contains an overview Table of Contents plus Chapters 1 and 2.Volume 2 contains the remainder of the chapters.

In both volumes, each chapter begins withdetailed Front Material (Table of Contents, List of Tables, and List of Figures) for the chapter,except Chapter 2 in Volume 1, for which the Front Material and Section 2.1 are missing from thePDF file that Exelon obtained from the NRC Public Document Room.

List of Attachments Provided:

1. Commonwealth Edison Company.

1981. Byron Station Environmental ReportOperating License Stage, as amended through January 1983. Front material andexcerpted sections 2.2.1, 4.1.4.2, 5.1.3, 5.2.1.1.2, 6.1.1, and 6.2.1* Vol. 1 -Cover Sheet and Overview Table of contents; o Section 2.2.1, Aquatic Ecology* Vol. 2 -Cover Sheet;o Chapter 4 Front Material and Section 4.1.4.2, Aquatic Studieso Chapter 5 Front Material, Section 5.1.3, Biological Effects [on the RockRiver], and Section 5.2.1.1.2, Aquatic Pathways for Biota Other Than Mano Chapter 6 Front Material, Section 6.1.1 Pre-Operational Monitoring of SurfaceWater, Section 6.2.1 Aquatic Monitoring, and 6.3 Related Environmental Measurement and Monitoring Programs Exelon Generation RS-14-051 Enclosure Responses to Additional RAIsAQ-le and AQ-lfByron Station License RenewalEnvironmental Review This Page Intentionally Blank RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le ResponsePage 1 of 18Byron Environmental Audit -Request for Additional Information ResponseQuestion

1. AQ-le Category:

AquaticStatement of Question:

Provide the following information:

e. (ComEd 1981b) Commonwealth Edison Company.

1981. Byron StationEnvironmental Report Operating License Stage. Vol. 2. Amendment No. 4 January1983 -coversheet and Section 3.4Response:

The requested information is attached.

Please note that Exelon Generation is providing theexcerpted section 3.4 from Volume 2 of the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage, as amended.

There were four amendments to the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage, which are listed below.Amendment No. 1, July 1981Amendment No. 2, September 1981Amendment No. 3, March 1982Amendment No. 4, January 1983Each amendment was incorporated into the original document using the change-page method,which involved removing affected pages from the original document and inserting revised pagesthat were marked to indicate the amendment number and the location on the page of affectedtext. Hence, any particular page in the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating LicenseStage, as amended, may be an original page, or a page that was revised by one or moreamendments.

The markings on each page indicate whether the page was changed by anamendment.

The pages being provided for each requested section were taken from a version of the fulldocument that was updated through Amendment No. 4 (January 1983). Each specific page ismarked with the most recent amendment number that affected the page. If no amendment number is marked on a page, then it was not changed from the original version published in 1981.Also note that the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage consisted oftwo volumes.

Volume 1 contains an overview Table of Contents plus Chapters 1 and 2.Volume 2 contains the remainder of the chapters.

In both volumes, each chapter begins withdetailed Front Material (Table of Contents, List of Tables, and List of Figures) for the chapter,except Chapter 2 in Volume 1, for which the Front Material and Section 2.1 are missing from thePDF file that Exelon obtained from the NRC Public Document Room.List of Attachments Provided:

1. (CoinEd 1981b) Commonwealth Edison Company.

1981. Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage. as amended through Amendment No. 4, January 1983* Vol. 1 -Cover Sheet and Overview Table of contents;

" Vol. 2 -Cover Sheet,o Chapter 3 Front Material and Section 3.4, Heat Dissipation System RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le ResponsePage 2 of 18This Page Intentionally Blank RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le ResponsePage 3 of 18BYRON STATIONENVIRONMENTAL REPORTOPERATING LICENSE STAGEVOLUME 1COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le ResponsePage 4 of 18Byron ER-OLSBYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION -UNITS 1 & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT -OPERATING LICENSE STAGECONTENTSCHAPTERVOLUMEIntroduction Chapter 1.0 -Purpose of the Proposed Facilityand Associated Transmission Chapter 2.0 -The Site and Environmental Interfaces Appendix 2.6A -Cultural, Historical, Archaeological LettersChapter 3.0 -The StationAppendix 3.5A -Data Needed for Radioactive Source Term Calculations forPressurized Water ReactorsChapter 4.0 Environmental Effects of SitePreparation, Station Construction, and Transmission Facilities Construction Appendix 4.5A -Construction Impact ControlLetterChapter 5.0 -Environmental Effects of StationOperation Appendix 5.1A -Plume ModelsAppendix 5.1B -Analysis of Thermal Plume forthe Blowdown Discharge from theByron Power StationAppendix 5.1C -Effects of Outfall Design onthe Thermal Impact of ByronStation Blowdown Discharge Appendix 5.2A -Examples of Dose Calculational MethodsChapter 6.0 -Effluent and Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs111222i RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le ResponsePage 5 of 18Byron ER-OLSAMENDMENT NO. 1JULY 1981AMENDMENT NO. 2SEPTEMBER 1981AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 1982AMENDMENT NO. 4JANUARY 1983CONTENTS (Cont'd)CHAPTERAppendix 6.1A -Formulas Used in Analyses of AlgalVOLUME2Chapter 7.0Chapter 8.0Chapter 9.0Chapter 10.0Chapter 11.0Chapter 12.0Chapter 13.0Amendment No. 1Amendment No. 2Amendment No. 3Amendment No. 4Data-Environmental Effects of Accidents

-Economic and Social Effects ofStation Construction and Operation

-Alternative Energy Sources andSites-Station Design Alternatives

-Summary Cost-Benefit Analysis-Environmental Approvals andConsultation

-References

-NRC Review Questions and Responses

-NRC Review Questions and Responses

-NRC Review Questions and Responses

-Voluntary Revisions 11121314ii RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1e ResponsePage 6 of 18BYRON STATIONENVIRONMENTAL REPORTOPERATING LICENSE STAGEVOLUME 2COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le ResponsePage 7 of 18 Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 1982CHAPTER 3.0 -THE STATIONTABLE OF CONTENTSPAGE3.1 EXTERNAL APPEARANCE 3.1-13.1.1 Structures 3.1-13.1.2 Arrangement of Structures 3.1-13.1.3 Architectural Features and Aesthetic Considerations 3.1-23.1.4 Release Points 3.1-23.2 REACTOR AND STEAM-ELECTRIC SYSTEM 3.2-13.2.1 System Description 3.2-13.2.2 Fuel Description 3.2-13.2.3 Power Output 3.2-23.2.4 Relationship of Station Heat Rate to Ex-pected Variation of Turbine Backpressure 3.2-23.2.5 Proposed Station Operating Life 3.2-23.3 STATION WATER USE 3.3-13.3.1 Circulating Water System 3.3-13.3.2 Service Water Systems 3.3-23.3.2.1 Nonessential Service Water System 3.3-23.3.2.2 Essential Service Water System 3.3-33.3.3 Steam Cycle Makeup and Potable WaterSupply Systems 3.3-33.3.4 Variations in Plant Water Use 3.3-33.4 HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM 3.4-13.4.1 Natural Draft Cooling Towers 3.4-13.4.2 Mechanical Draft Cooling Towers 3.4-23.4.3 Intake and Discharge Structures 3.4-2a3.5 RADWASTE SYSTEMS AND SOURCE TERMS 3.5-13.5.1 Source Terms 3.5-13.5.1.1 Sources of Radioactivity and Calculation Models 3.5-13.5.1.2 Tritium 3.5-33.5.1.3 Fuel Pool 3.5-53.5.1.4 Leakage Paths 3.5-63.5.2 Liquid Radwaste System 3.5-63.5.2.1 Objectives 3.5-63.5.2.2 Input to the Liquid Radwaste System 3.5-63.5.2.2.1 Steam Generator Blowdown 3.5-73.5.2.2.2 Chemical Drains 3.5-83.0-i RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le ResponsePage 8 of 18 Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 1982TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)PAGE3.5.2.2.3 Regenerant Waste Drains 3.5-83.5.2.2.4 Turbine Building Floor Drains 3.5-93.5.2.2.5 Turbine Building Equipment Drains 3.5-93.5.2.2.6 Auxiliary Building Equipment Drains 3.5-93.5.2.2.7 Auxiliary Building Floor Drains 3.5-103.5.2.2.8 Laundry Drains 3.5-103.5.2.3 Liquid Radwaste Discharges 3.5-103.5.3 Gaseous Radwaste System 3.5-113.5.3.1 Objectives 3.5-113.5.3.2 Gaseous Sources 3.5-113.5.3.3 System Description of the Gaseous RadwasteSystem 3.5-123.5.3.3.1 Building Ventilation Systems (Auxiliary Building and Solid Radwaste Building) 3.5-133.5.3.3.2 Normal Containment Purges 3.5-143.5.3.3.3 Steam-Jet Air Ejector 3.5-143.5.3.4 Gaseous Releases 3.5-153.5.3.5 Ventilation Stacks 3.5-153.5.4 Solid Radwaste System 3.5-163.5.4.1 Objectives and Design Basis 3.5-163.5.4.2 System Description 3.5-163.5.4.2.1 Drum Preparation Station 3.5-173.5.4.2.2 Decanting Station 3.5-173.5.4.2.3 Drumming Station 3.5-173.5.4.2.4 Drum Handling Equipment 3.5-183.5.4.2.5 Smear Test and Label Station .3.5-183.5.4.2.6 Dry Waste Compactor 3.5-183.5.4.2.7 Volume Reduction System 3.5-183.5.4.2.8 Radwaste Drum Storage Areas 3.5-193.5.4.2.9 Control Room 3.5-193.5.4.3 Interconnections with Liquid Radwaste 3Systems 3.5-193.5.4.4 Shipment 3.5-193.5.5 Process and Effluent Monitoring 3.5-203.5A DATA NEEDED FOR RADIOACTIVE SOURCE TERMCALCULATIONS FOR PRESSURIZED WATER REACTORS 3.5A-i3.6 CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE SYSTEMS 3.6-13.6.1 Cooling Water Systems 3.6-13.6.1.1 Circulating Water System 3.6-13.6.1.2 Service Water System 3.6-2a3.6.1.2.1 Nonessential Service Water 3.6-33.6.1.2.2 Essential Service Water 3.6-43.6.2 MakeupWater Treatment System. 3.6-43.6.2.1 Regeneration Wastes 3.6-43.6.2.2 Filter Backwash Effluent 3.6-53.0-ti RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le ResponsePage 9 of 18Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 1JULY 1981AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 1982TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)PAGE3.6.3 Waste Treatment 3.6-53.6.4 Potable Water System 3.6-53.6.5 Radwaste System 3.6-63.7 SANITARY AND OTHER WASTE SYSTEM 3.7-13.7.1 Sanitary Wastes 3.7-13.7.2 Other Waste Systems 3.7-13.8 REPORTING OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL MOVEMENT 3.8-13.9 TRANSMISSION FACILITIES 3.9-13.9,1 LocatiOn And Description of Rights-of-Way 3.9-13.9.1.1 Byron Station to the Wempletown Trans-mission Substation 3.9-13.9.1.2 Byron Station to the Cherry Valley "1Transmission Substation 3.9-23.9.1.3 Byron Station to the Existing CherryValley to Nelson Right-of-Way (ByronSouth Right-of-Way) 3.9-23,9.2 Line Design Parameters 3.9-33.9.3 Existing Substations Affected 3.9-33.9.3.1 Wenpletown Transmission Substation 3.9-33.9.3.2 Cherry Valley Transmission Substation 3.9-33.9.3.3 Ne~son Transmission Substation 3.9-33.9.4 Radiated Electrical and Acoustical Noise 3.9-33.9.5 Induced or Conducted Ground Currents 3.9-43.9.6 Electrostatic Field Effects 3.9-43.9.7 Ozone Production 3.9-43.9.8 Environmental Impact 3.9-53.9.9 Environmental Considerations of Trans-mission Routing 3.9-63.9.9.1 Byron to Wempletown Right-of-Way 3.9-63.9.9.2 Byron Station to Cherry Valley Substation 3.9-73.9.9.3 Byron South Right-of-Way 3.9-73.9.9.4 Summary 3.9-83.0-iii RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1e ResponsePage 10 of 18 Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 1JULY 1981CHAPTER 3.0 -THE STATIONLIST OF TABLESNUMBER TITLE PAGE3.2-1 Net Turbine Heat Rate 3.2-33.3-1 Average Seasonal Variations in CoolingTower System 3.3-43.3-2 Variations in Plant Water Use 3.3-53.4-1 Estimated Variation in Discharge Temperature of Blowdown 3.4-13.5-1 Parameters Used in the Calculation ofthe Inventory of Radionuclides in theSecondary Coolant 3.5-213.5-2 Tritium Source Terms and Release Pathsper Unit at the Station 3.5-223.5-3 Expected Annual Average Releases ofRadionuclides in Liquid Effluents 3.5-233.5-4 Expected Annual Average Release of Air-borne Radionuclides 3.5-243.5-5 Parameters Used in the Gale-PWR ComputerProgram 3.5-263.5-6 Gaseous Radwaste System Component Data 3.5-293.5-7 Additional Ventilation Releases fromPlant by Isotope 3.5-303.5-8 Annual Weight, Volume, and Activity ofRadwaste Shipped from both Units at theStation 3.5-313.6-1 Seasonal Analysis of Rock River Water 3.6-73.6-2 Average Blowdown Water Analysis 3.6-83.6-3 Estimated Average Quantities Discharged to the Atmosphere from Drift of TwoNatural-Draft Cooling Towers at theByron Station 3.6-93.6-4 Estimated Maximum Effluent Analysis 3.6-103.6-5 Estimated Average Effluent Analysis 3.6-113.7-1 Illinois Emission Standards 3.7-33.9-1 Environmental Considerations of NewTransmission Corridors 3.9-93. 0-iv RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1e ResponsePage 11 of 18Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 19823.4 HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM3.4.1 Natural Draft Cooling TowersAt the Byron Nuclear Generating Station -Units 1 & 2 (ByronStation),

natural draft towers were chosen for primary coolingand mechanical draft towers for essential service water coolingand for the ultimate heat sink. The use of cooling towersminimizes both the land area used for cooling purposes and theeffects of heat dissipation.

The operational effects of thecooling towers, with respect to meteorology, is discussed inSubsection 5.1.4.The two natural draft towers are located as shown in the propertydiagram, Figure 2.1-4. Each tower consists of a 495-foot highconcrete hyperbolic shell, a 605-foot diameter basin, and a272-foot exit diameter.

The towers are designed to dissipate approximately 15.2 x 10' Btu/hr of heat absorbed by thecirculating water system during a 13.1-second time-of-travel across the main condensers of the two units.The design parameters that significantly affect the temperature of the blowdown are those that affect the performance of thenatural draft towers. Each tower circulates 662,000 gallons perminute of cooling water, of which 35,000 gal/min is service 13water. At the design conditions of 890 F dry bulb temperature and 760 F wet bulb temperature, the towers cool the water from1160 F to 920 F.In a natural draft tower the cooling water being circulated through the plant falls through a draft of air; heat is carriedaway mostly by evaporation and partly by sensible heat transfer.

The rest of the water is collected at the bottom of the tower andreturned to the cooling cycle. The flow of air through the toweris caused by a "chimney effect:"

the density difference betweenthe cool outside ambient air and the less dense inside air warmedby the water. At the design conditions, the ratio of the waterflow to the air flow is approximately 2.35:1 by weight. Thisratio decreases in cooler weather; i.e., more air will passthrough the tower.The evaporation rate for the two natural draft towers when theplant is operating at full load varies between seasonal averagesof 38.7 cubic feet per second (cfs) of water in the winter and53.4 cfs in the summer. The maximum monthly evaporation has beencalculated to be approximately 54.6 cfs. The maximum drift losshas been specified as 0.002% of the circulating water flow or0.06 cfs.To keep the total dissolved solids (TDS) concentration within thelimits set by water pollution regulations and operating requirements, water has to be continuously withdrawn from thetower basin. This water is called blowdown.

For these purposes, 3.4-1 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1e ResponsePage 12 of 18Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 1982an average blowdown rate of about 30.1 cfs is required.

Thequantity of blowdown is dependent upon the water chemistry considerations and the evaporation rate of the cooling tower.The evaporation rate at any one time is dependent on the heatload and the ambient conditions at that time.Blowdown from the natural draft towers is returned to the RockRiver through a discharge structure (see Figure 3.4-1) at anaverage rate of 30.1 cfs and a maximum velocity of 4.3 feet persecond. There are two modulating valves on the blowdown line sothat blowdown can be stopped during shutdown or refueling.

TheTDS concentration of the blowdown averages about 1555 mg/liter.

13As a result of the discharge of the blowdown into the flowingRock River, a thermal plume is established downstream whosedetailed temperature profile depends on river conditions and theblowdown characteristics.

The extent and effect of this plumeare discussed in Section 5.1. A discussion of the blowdowntemperature is included in Subsection 5.1.2.The total water loss attributable to evaporation, drift, andblowdown has to be replaced to maintain a constant cooling waterflow. This quantity is called makeup and amounts to an averageof approximately 68.1 cfs in the winter and 86.3 cfs in thesummer for full load operation.

Table 3.4-1 shows the median monthly temperatures for theblowdown with both units operating at 100% load factor. Thepredicted temperature ranges from 60.40 F in January to 87.00 Fin July.3.4.2 Mechanical Draft Cooling TowersIn addition to the two natural draft towers, two mechanical drafttowers, which cool the essential service water, have been builtat the site. The mechanical draft towers are located as shown inFigure 2.1-4. Each tower consists of 4 cells. The overalldimensions of each tower are 50 feet high, 174 feet long, and 45feet wide. Each tower is designed to cool 52,000 gal/min ofwater from 1380 F to 980 F under post-accident conditions concurrent with a 780 F wet-bulb temperature.

The guaranteed water flow to each tower is 48,000 gal/min.

The cooling range 3under normal operating conditions,

however, will be approximately 100 F. The evaporation rate for these towers is a maximum of 2cfs, with a maximum blowdown of 1.56 cfs; drift losses arenegligible.

The maximum required makeup for these towers istherefore 3.56 cfs.3.4-2 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1e ResponsePage 13 of 18Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 19823.4.3 Intake and Discharge Structures Makeup is withdrawn from the Rock River through an intakestructure as shown in Figure 3.4-2. The location of the intake(river screen house) and discharge structures is shown on Figure3.4-3. The intake structure operating floor is located at anelevation of 687 feet above mean sea level (MSL), which is abovethe 1973 flood (flood of record) elevation of 683.6 feet MSL.3.4-2a RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le ResponsePage 14 of 18 Byron ER-OLSThe mean annual flow and 1-day low flow at the intake are 4730and 400 cfs, and the corresponding water surface elevations are672 and 670.4 feet MSL. The pump invert elevation of the intakechannel is 663.6 feet and the velocity in the intake channel isbetween 0.43 and 0.55 feet per second. The structure containsthree circulating water pumps, two for normal operation and onefor standby, each of which has a capacity of about 53.5 cfs. Thestructure also contains two diesel-engine-driven essential service water makeup pumps, one for each mechanical draft tower..Each pump has a capacity of about 3.5 cfs.The intake is protected by bar grills and traveling screens.

Thevelocity at the intake is between 0.43 and 0.55 feet per secondand decreases considerably with distance toward the center of theriver. This velocity exists from the mouth of the intake at thebar racks to within a few feet of the traveling screens.

Thevelocity through the traveling screens increases approximately two-fold because of the presence of the screens themselves.

Debris removed from these screens is disposed of off the site byan independent contractor.

These heat dissipation systems are summarized in the plant waterusage diagram, Figure 3.3-1.3.4-3 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le Response Byron ER-OLSPage 15 of 18TABLE 3.4-1ESTIMATED MONTHLY VARIATION INDISCHARGE TEMPERATURE OF BLOWDOWNDISCHARGE TEMPERATURE MONTH (OF)Jan. 60.4Feb. 61.1Mar. 66.0Apr. 73.0May 78.5June 84.0July 87.0Aug. 86.5Sept. 81.7Oct. 75.3Nov. 66.0Dec. 62.03.4-4 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le ResponsePage 16 of 18PLANss-& 11-r lapAm rEL.aasLd INVERT EL\SEE PLANSECTIONA-ABYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONUNITS 1 & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT -OPERATING LICENSE STAGEFIGURE 3.4-1DISCHARGE STRUCTURE Ii I 11 21FEET 0CLC0c -0u11S11ON NICLIAR GENERAIInG STATIONUNITS I & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT- OPERATING LICENSE STAGEFIGURE 3.4-2INTAKE STRUCTURE RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-le ResponsePage 18 of 18ROCKINVERT EL3I$C1AR1E FLUMEINVERT EL. *6I-0RUSERIVER7i"'-U"EL. $13'-l"41 MILES TO COMO iA. STATI'NORMAL WATER EL. 672.6'LOW WATER EL. 671.4'633.6' It EL. 633.2* 43" DIAMETER CIRCULATING WATER MAKE-UP LINE4 12" DIAMETER ESSENTIAL SERVICE WATER MAKE-UP LINEBYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONUNITS I & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT -OPERATING LICENSE STAGEFIGURE 3.4-3LOCATION OF INTAKE ANDDISCHARGE STRUCTURES RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 1 of 179Byron Environmental Audit -Request for Additional Information ResponseQuestion

1. AQ-lf Category:

AquaticStatement of Question:

Provide the following information:

f. Commonwealth Edison Company.

1981. Byron Station Environmental ReportOperating License Stage. Vol. 2. Amendment No. 4. January 1983. [Audit Reference Material]"

i) coversheet ii) Section 2.2.1, Aquatic Ecologyiii) Section 4.1.4.2, Aquatic Studiesiv) Section 5.1.3, Biological Effects [on the Rock River]v) Section 5.2.1.1.2, Aquatic Pathways for Biota Other Than Manvi) Section 6.1.1, Pre-Operational Monitoring of Surface Watervii) Section 6.2.1, Aquatic Monitoring

Response

The requested information is attached.

Please note that Exelon Generation is providing theexcerpted sections from the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage, asamended.

There were four amendments to the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage, which are listed below.Amendment No. 1, July 1981Amendment No. 2, September 1981Amendment No. 3, March 1982Amendment No. 4, January 1983Each amendment was incorporated into the original document using the change-page method,which involved removing affected pages from the original document and inserting revised pagesthat were marked to indicate the amendment number and the location on the page of affectedtext. Hence, any particular page in the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating LicenseStage, as amended, may be an original page, or a page that was revised by one or moreamendments.

The markings on each page indicate whether the page was changed by anamendment.

The pages being provided for each requested section were taken from a version of the fulldocument that was updated through Amendment No. 4 (January 1983). Each specific page ismarked with the most recent amendment number that affected the page. If no amendment number is marked on a page, then it was not changed from the original version published in 1981.Also note that the Byron Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage consisted oftwo volumes.

Volume 1 contains an overview Table of Contents plus Chapters 1 and 2.Volume 2 contains the remainder of the chapters.

In both volumes, each chapter begins withdetailed Front Material (Table of Contents, List of Tables, and List of Figures) for the chapter,except Chapter 2 in Volume 1, for which the Front Material and Section 2.1 are missing from thePDF file that Exelon obtained from the NRC Public Document Room.

RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 2 of 179List of Attachments Provided:

1. Commonwealth Edison Company.

1981. Byron Station Environmental ReportOperating License Stage, as amended through January 1983.* Vol. 1 -Cover Sheet and Overview Table of contents; o Section 2.2.1, Aquatic Ecology* Vol. 2 -Cover Sheet;o Chapter 4 Front Material and Section 4.1.4.2, Aquatic Studieso Chapter 5 Front Material, Section 5.1.3, Biological Effects [on the RockRiver], and Section 5.2.1.1.2, Aquatic Pathways for Biota Other Than Mano Chapter 6 Front Material, Section 6.1.1 Pre-Operational Monitoring ofSurface Water, Section 6.2.1 Aquatic Monitoring, and Section 6.3 RelatedEnvironmental Measurement and Monitoring Programs RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 3 of 178BYRON STATIONENVIRONMENTAL REPORTOPERATING LICENSE STAGEVOLUME 1COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 4 of 178Byron ER-OLSBYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION -UNITS 1 & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT -OPERATING LICENSE STAGECONTENTSCHAPTERVOLUMEIntroduction 1Chapter 1.0 -Purpose of the Proposed Facilityand Associated Transmission Chapter 2.0 -The Site and Environmental Interfaces Appendix 2.6A -Cultural, Historical, Archaeological LettersChapter 3.0 -The StationAppendix 3.5A -Data Needed for Radioactive Source Term Calculations forPressurized Water ReactorsChapter 4.0 -Environmental Effects of SitePreparation, Station Construction, and Transmission Facilities Construction Appendix 4.5A -Construction Impact ControlLetterChapter 5.0 -Environmental Effects of StationOperation Appendix 5.1A -Plume ModelsAppendix 5.1B -Analysis of Thermal Plume forthe Blowdown Discharge from theByron Power StationAppendix 5.1C -Effects of Outfall Design onthe Thermal Impact of ByronStation Blowdown Discharge Appendix 5.2A -Examples of Dose Calculational MethodsChapter 6.0 -Effluent and Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs11222222222i RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 5 of 178Byron ER-OLSAMENDMENT NO. 1JULY 1981AMENDMENT NO. 2SEPTEMBER 1981AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 1982AMENDMENT NO. 4JANUARY 1983CONTENTS (Cont'd)CHAPTERVOLUMEAppendix 6.1AChapterChapter7.08.0Chapter 9.0ChapterChapterChapter10.011.012.0-Formulas Used in Analyses of AlgalData-Environmental Effects of Accidents

-Economic and Social Effects ofStation Construction and Operation

-Alternative Energy Sources andSites-Station Design Alternatives

-Summary Cost-Benefit Analysis-Environmental Approvals andConsultation

-References

-NRC Review Questions and Responses

-NRC Review Questions and Responses

-NRC Review Questions and Responses

-Voluntary Revisions 222222222 j12 12Chapter 13.0Amendment No. 1Amendment No. 2Amendment No. 3Amendment No. 4221314ii RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 6 of 178 Byron ER-OLS2.2 ECOLOGY2.2.1 Aquatic Environment 2.2. 1. 1 Introduction The baseline aquatic monitoring program on the Rock River and sixcreeks in the area (Stillman, Mill, Woodland, Leaf, Spring, andSilver creeks) was initiated by Environmental

Analysts, Inc.(EAI) in April 1972 for the Commonwealth Edison Company (CECo).The 1972 through 1973 program was designed to describe theexisting Rock River aquatic environment and provide a basis forassessing the impact of construction and operation of theproposed Byron Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 8 2 (ByronStation).

Table 2.2-1 summarizes the physical,

chemical, and biological parameters measured during the 1972 through 1973 program.

Theresults and projections of construction impact concluded from the1972 through 1973 studies are included in the Byron StationConstruction Phase Environmental Report (ER-CPS),

Subsections 2.7.1, 5.1.1, 5.1.2, and 5.1.3 (Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN50-455).After the July 1973 field survey, a review was initiated thatresulted in the definition of the 1973 through 1974 aquaticmonitoring

program, which was initiated in September 1973. Thepurpose of the 1973 through 1974 monitoring program was to .provide a second year of data to supplement observations madeduring the 1972 through 1973 program.

Table 2.2-2 summarizes thephysical,

chemical, and biological parameters measured during the1973 through 1974 program.

Field surveys for the 1973 through1974 program began on the Rock River and six creeks in the area(Stillman, Mill, Woodland, Leaf, Spring, and Silver creeks) inSeptember 1973 and were conducted through October 1974. Thefollowing subsections present the results of the 1973 through1974 aquatic monitoring program.2.2.1.2 Obiectives The objectives of the 1973 through 1974 aquatic monitoring program were the following:

a. to continue monitoring chemical and biological parameters, using the sampling stations previously included in the baseline (1972 through 1973)monitoring program;b. to document the species composition, distribution, and abundance of ecologically important aquaticorganisms in the Rock River and several tributary streams;2.2-1 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 7 of 178 Byron ER-OLSc. to continue observation of the seasonal trends of thewater quality and biota of the study area; andd. to verify the predicted impact of the Byron Stationon the water quality and biota of the Rock River.22.1.3 Location of Sampling StationsThe locations of the sampling stations are shown in Figure 2.2-1.The Rock River was sampled at five stations, which were alltransects, from a point 2.4 miles upstream of Byron, Illinois, tojust upstream of the dam at Oregon, Illinois.

These transects were selected to yield data indicative of conditions in zones ofthe Rock River that could potentially be influenced by theconstruction and operation of the Byron Station.

The transectareas for this study reflected some of the ranges of habitatsbetween the Oregon and Rockford dams.River transect R-1 was located 2.4 miles upstream of Byron,Illinois.

This station was chosen to represent conditions wellabove the intake of the proposed station.

Transect R-2, chosento represent conditions in the vicinity of the proposed station's intake structure, was located approximately 300 yards above R-3,the discharge location.

Transect R-3, located 4.9 milesdownstream from the town of Byron, was chosen to correspond withthe discharge area. Transect R-4, located 0.7 mile below R-3,was chosen to include the area within the proposed station's thermal plume. Transect R-5, located about 1000 yards above thedam at Oregon, Illinois, was chosen to represent an area wellbelow the outfall of the proposed station.In addition to the Rock River sampling

stations, sampling siteswere established in the mouths of tributary streams leading tothe Rock River in the Byron site area. During the 1972 through1973 program, there were initially nine creek samplinglocations:

Stillman Creek (S-1); Mill Creek (S-2); WoodlandCreek (S-3), (W-1), (W-2), and (W-3); Leaf River (S-4); SpringCreek (S-5); and Silver Creek (S-6). During the 1973 through1974 program, Stations S-3, S-4, S-5, S-6, W-1, and W-2 wereretained.

2.2.1.4 SummaryThe following results were based on data obtained from the RockRiver and tributary streams near the Byron Station:a. Changes observed in the chemistry of the Rock Riverand tributary streams resulted primarily fromseasonal changes in temperature, precipitation, andriver discharge rates.b. With the exception of phosphorus and, in oneinstance, copper, all trace metal concentrations were2.2-2 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 8 of 178 Byron ER-OLSwithin the Illinois Pollution Control Board's (IPCB)Water Quality Standards.

C. The levels of algal nutrients in the Rock River weregenerally high, reflecting the agricultural practices in the surrounding area and the discharges of treateddomestic waste further upstream of the Byron Stationsite.d. Total bacteria, fecal coliform, and fecalstreptococcus for the river stations fluctuated seasonally, with the highest counts occurring inApril 1974 and the lowest in October 1974. Streamstations had a more varied response to seasonalchanges.e. Total coliform counts for the river stations exceededthe federal recommended level of 10,000 per 10milliýliers of sample on four of the six samplingdates.f. Seasonal fluctuations in fecal streptococcus numberscorresponded closely with the numbers of totalbacteria and fecal coliform bacteria at the riverstations and the fecal coliform at the streamstations.

g. Diatoms .dominated the Rock River phytoplankton community during all the months sampled, composing between 76% and 100% of the total phytoplankton community.

Members of five other algal divisions were also present.h. The highest phytoplankton standing crop values werenoted in the September 1973 sampling and the lowestin the January 1974 sampling, which is typical of theseasonality of phytoplankton populations.

i. Many of the dominant phytoplankton species that werepresent in the Rock River are indicative of eutrophic conditions.

j. Zooplankton populations and species diversity rangedfrom a low of 2 organisms per liter (at Station R-2)in January 1974 to a high of nearly 50 per liter (atStation R-2) in April 1974.k. The zooplankton community was dominated by rotifersat the Rock River stations on five of the sixsampling occasions and on one of the two periods ofsampling in the tributary streams.2.2-3 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 9 of 178 Byron ER-OLS1. The periphyton community was dominated by diatomsthroughout the study period, constituting between 90%to 100% of the total periphyton community.

m. Periphyton populations ranged from a low of 7 x 106cells/mg in March 1974 to a high of 1644 x 106cells/rm in September 1974.n. Benthic organisms collected in the Rock Riverincluded dipterans,

mayflies, caddisflies, snails,clams, and flatworms.

The pollution-tolerant tubificids,

however, dominated the benthicinvertebrate community.

o. Seven benthic substrate bottom types were described, with coarse gravel collected most often, followed bysand, muck, silt/sand, and muck/sand.

Othercombinations were collected less frequently.

p. During the 1974 through 1975 study period, 31 speciesof fish were collected, with carpsuckers, channelcatfish, and carp the most numerous.

q. Condition

factors, age class information, and lengthfrequency analysis provided no unexpected or abnormalresults.r. The results of the creel survey indicated that thefishermen's highest success rate was in June,followed closely by May and July, with the Oregon damarea being the most popular fishing site.s. Sixty fish larvae (predominantly from the minnowfamily) and two fish eggs were collected from thestudy area.t. No threatened or endangered fish species wascollected.

2.2.1.5 Water QualityPhysical,

chemical, and bacteriological parameters were sampledin the Rock River and six creeks in the area (Stillman, Mill,wooodland, Leaf, Spring, and Silver creeks).

The results of thewater quality sampling program are described in this subsection with respect to observed seasonal variations, ranges of values,how they compare with the Illinois Pollution Control Board WaterQuality Standards (IPCB 1975), and any unusual values orconditions noted during the study period.2.2-4 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 10 of 178 Byron ER-OLS2.2.1.5.1 General Physical and Chemical Parameters Water samples for chemical analysis were collected September 11and October 16, 1973, and January 28, April 30, July 30, andOctober 8, 1974, from the mid-channel of five river stations (R-1through R-5), two tributary streams (S-3 and S-5), and twoWoodland Creek pools (W-1 and W-3).. Samples were taken fromtributary stream Station S-6 only in 1974. All parameters, withthe exception of pH, were analyzed in duplicate and averaged.

The results are presented in Table 2.2-3. Trace metal analysesare presented in Table 2.2-4. Measurements of physicalparameters taken in conjunction with water sample collection arepresented in Table 2.2-5.The changes observed in the chemistry of the Rock River andtributary streams from September 1973 through October 1974resulted mainly from seasonal changes in temperature, precipitation, and river discharge rates. The chemicalparameters analyzed tended to correspond with results of the 1972through 1973 sampling program (Byron ER-CPS).

The concentrations of all parameters were within the Illinois standards (IPCB 1975)with the exception of phosphorus and, in one instance, copper.Nutrient concentrations (nitrate,

nitrite, and phosphates) normally followed a fluctuating

pattern, with decreasing concentrations generally occurring during the winter months, Aswas the case for the 1972 through 1973 baseline study.The section of the Rock River adjacent to the Byron Station andthe tributary streaps draining this area appeared to be in astate of moderate eutrophication.

The chemistries of both theriver and tributary streams were similar on most sampling dateswith the exception of stream Stations W-1 and W-3. Theintermittent nature of the streams appeared to be the majorfactor affecting the observed differences.

2.2.1.5.2 BacteriaSamples for bacterial analysis were collected September 11 andOctober 16, 1973, and January 28, April 30, July 30, and October8, 1974, from the five Rock River stations (R-1 through R-5) andthree tributary stream stations (S-3, S-5, and S-6). Duplicate samples were cultured using three serial dilutions; the countsare presented in Table 2.2-6 as numbers peral00 milliliters ofsample.Total bacteria, fecal coliform, and fecal streptococcus for theRock River stations fluctuated seasonally, with the highestcounts occurring in April 1974 during peak runoff and the lowestcounts in October 1974. This relationship was also noted duringthe 1972 through 1973 baseline study. Similar fluctuations intotal coliform counts were observed, but the highest countsoccurred in January (1974) rather than April 1974. The streamstations had a more varied response to seasonal changes than theriver stations.

2.2-5 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 11 of 178 Byron ER-OLSTotal coliform counts for the river stations exceeded the federalrecommended level of 10,000 per 10 milliliters of sample on fourof the six sampling dates. Station S-3 exceeded the recommended level four of the six times, whereas Stations S-5 and S-6exceeded the level two of six times and two of four times,respectively.

The lowest counts for all the stations werereported for October 1974 and the next to the lowest on September 11, 1973.Although the fecal coliform samples collected were too few toallow number comparisons with the Illinois stream standardcounts, the samples obtained exceeded the numerical standard infour of the six samples collected for all the river stations andfor stream Stations S-3 and S-5. Fecal coliform was analyzedonly four times at Station S-6 and exceeded the numerical standard each time. The counts were generally highest in Apriland lowest in July for all stations except S-5 and S-6, which hadtheir lowest counts in September 1973.Seasonal fluctuations in fecal streptococcus numbers corresponded closely with total bacteria and fecal coliform bacteria counts inthe river stations and fecal coliform counts in the streamstations.

To date, there is no Illinois or federal standard forfecal streptococcus.

Fecal coliform to fecal streptococcus ratios (FC:FS) variedappreciably on a seasonal basis. Ratios for the five Rock Riverstations indicated contributions by domestic wastes. Ratiosgreater than 4.0, which occurred in September and October 1973,indicated recent pollution by domestic wastes. Ratios between0.6 and 4.0, which occurred during the remaining sampling dates,also indicated the presence of domestic wastes. A variedresponse to FC:FS ratios was observed in the stream stations.

Inmost instances, the ratios indicated contamination from domesticsources.2.2.1.6 Phytoplankton Phytoplankton samples were collected at river Stations R-2 andR-5 from September 11, 1973, through October 8, 1974, byimmersing several 1-liter polypropylene bottles beneath thesurface of the water. Phytoplankton samples were collected forthe last time at Rodk River Transects R-1, R-3, and R-4, and atstream Transects S-3, S-4, and S-5 on September 11, 1973. Table2.2-7 presents a cumulative taxonomic list of the organisms collected during the 1973 through 1974 study. A summary of theaverage numbers of species per milliliter and the relativeabundance by major groups for each sampling period is given inTable 2.2-8. Species-diversity values for the phytoplankton community are listed in Table 2.2-9. These findings arecomparable to the range of values found during a corresponding time period during the 1972 through 1973 baseline study.2.2-6 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 12of 178 Byron ER-OLSA total of 118 taxa were identified during the 1973 through 1974sampling program.

These included 59 diatoms, 43 green algae, 9blue-green algae, 4 euglenoids, 2 pyrrophytes, and I cryptophyte.

Numerically, diatoms dominated the community throughout the 1973through 1974 study, ranging from 76.38% on October 8, 1974, to100% on January 28, 1974. Dominant forms encountered during thestudy included Cyclotella meneghiniana.

Melosira

ambiqua, M.granulata.

2L. qranulata var. angustissima, Stephanodiscus hantzschii.

S. minutus.

S. subtilus.

and Nitzschia palea. Theseforms are commonly found in eutrophic waters.During the 1973 through 1974 study, standing crop values rangedfrom 176 cells per milliliter to 18,361 cells per milliliter.

The highest standing crop values for phytoplankton were noted inthe September 11, 1973, sampling and the lowest in the January28, 1974, sampling.

Variation in the phytoplankton standing cropvalues between the two river stations was not appreciably large.The data indicated that the phytoplankton community was fairlyuniform along this segment of the Rock River.Relative species-diversity values ranged from 0.2296 at StationR-2 on October 16, 1973, to 0.7567 at R-2 on July 30, 1974 (seeTable 2.2-9).2.2.1.7 Zooplankton Zooplankton samples were collected on six occasions fromSeptember 1973 through October 1974. Samples were takenSeptember 11 and October 16, 1973, from Stations R-1 through R-5and tributary streams S-4, S-5, and S-6. Samples collected during the remaining periods (January 28, April 30, July 30, andOctober 8, 1974) were taken only from Rock River Stations R-2 andR-5. Duplicate samples were taken at each location, and eachsample was the concentrate of 60 liters of surface water pouredthrough a #20 mesh plankton net. A cumulative taxonomic list ofthe zooplankton collected from September 1973 through October1974 is given in Table 2.2-10. Table 2.2-11 summarizes averagenumbers per liter with relative abundance by major groups foreach sampling period. During the 1973 through 1974 program,seasonal trends of zooplankton production at the Rock Riversampling locations reflected spring and fall maxima, with lowproduction in the winter and summer. Zooplankton numberscorresponded to numbers encountered during the 1972 through 1973baseline study.Total zooplankton numbers throughout the study (on riverstations) ranged from a low of 2 organisms per liter for StationR-2 on January 28, 1974, to a high of nearly 350 per liter forStation R-2 on April 30, 1974. The taxonomic composition ofzooplankton collected during the study included 3 copepodspecies, 7 cladoceran

species, 14 protozoa genera, and 18 rotifergenera.2.2-7 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 13 of 178 Byron ER-OLSRotifers were the numerically dominant taxa in the Rock Riverstations on five of the six sampling occasions and on one of thetwo periods in the stream sampling during the 1973 through 1974program.

Rotifers were also the most numerous organisms encountered during the 1972 through 1973 baseline study. Themost commonly occurring forms included the juvenile copepodstages (nauplii and copepodites),

the cladocerans Bosmina andChydorus, and the rotifer genera Brachionus, Keratella, andSynchaeta.

There were no noticeable differences in either the zooplankton composition or numbers between Station R-2 at the proposedoutfall area and the other Rock River sampling stations.

2.2.1.8 Periphyton Artificial substrate samplers were used to sample the periphyton community at five river stations (R-1 through R-5), threetributary stream stations (S-3, S-4, and S-5 from September through December 1973, and S-3, s-5, and S-6 from January throughSeptember 1974), and two Woodland Creek pool stations (W-1 andW-2) from September 1973 through September 1974. Table 2.2-12 isa cumulative taxonomic listing of algae identified in theperiphyton samples collected.

Analyses included species composition, relative abundance, biovolume,

biomass, and numbers per unit area. The periphyton data collected during the 1973 through 1974 monitoring programdid not deviate markedly from the information collected duringthe corresponding seasons of the 1972 through 1973 baselinestudy.A total of 266 algae taxa were identified from the September 1973through September 1974 samples.

These included 181 diatoms, 64green algae, 1 chrysophyte, 12 blue-green algae, 7 euglenoids, and 1 pyrrophyte.

Throughout the 1973 through 1974 samplingprogram, the community was dominated by diatoms, whichconstituted 90% to 100% of the total units counted.

Numerically, diatom lows in the river ranged from 7.15 x 106 cells/mi on March29, 1974, to 1644.53 x 106 cells/mz on September 27, 1974 Thedominant diatom forms during the 1973 through 1974 programincluded Melosira

ambiqua, Melosira granulata var. angustissima, Nitzschia

linearis, Navicula viridula var. avenacea, Gomhonema olivaceum, and Gomphonema

parvulum, all of which are commonlyfound in eutrophic waters.2.2.1.9 Benthos2.2.1.9.1 Ponar Dredge SamplesBenthos samples were collected on September 5 and October 19,1973, and on February 1, April 10, July 24, and October 28, 1974,from Rock River Transects R-I through R-5 and tributary streamStations S-3, S-5, W-1, and W-3.2.2-8 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 14 of 178Byron ER-OLSTable 2.2-13 displays the monthly distribution of benthic taxa bymajor invertebrate groups. The benthcs collected during theperiod of September 1973 through October 1971 were separated intoapproximately 101 taxa from five invertebrate phyla (see Table2.2-14).

Tubificidae (aquatic worms) were separated into 13species, Naididae (aquatic worms) into 2 species, and Hirudinea (leeches) into 2 species.

Chironomidae (midgeflies) wereseparated into 32 genera, other Diptera (true flies) into 7families, Ephemeroptera (mayflies) into 7 genera, and Trichoptera (caddisflies) and Odonata (dragonflies) into 5 genera each.Coleoptera (beetles) were separated into 9 genera within 3families, Crustacea into 3 orders, and Mollusca into 2 classes(Gastropoda

[snails]

with 5 genera and Pelecypoda

[clams] with 4genera).

Other organisms collected included Turbellaria (flatworms)

, Nematoda (roundworms),

and Acari (water mites).Samples studied for benthic substrate characteristics revealedeight bottom types collected during the 6 sampling months. Table2.2-14 depicts the distribution of benthic taxa by date andsubstrate type. Samples containing coarse gravel (cGr) supported the greatest number of invertebrate taxa (93). Samplescontaining sand (sd) supported the next highest (77 taxa),followed by fine gravel (fGr; 43 taxa), silt (St; 10 taxa), muck(Mk; 40 taxa) fine rubble (FR; 17 taxa),} detritus (D; 11 taxa),and mollusk shells (3 taxa). The bottom type definitions wereadapted from Lagler (1956) (see Table 2.2-15).

Table 2.2-16shows the occurrence of substrate type combinations in benthossamples collected from September 1973 through October 1974.Coarse gravel was collected most often (55 times), followed bysand, muck, silt/sand, and muck/sand..

Other combinations werecollected less frequently.

2.2.1.9.2 Artificial Substrate SamplesMacroinwrtebrate samples were collected on September 26, October25, November 28, and December 27, 1973, and on January 28,February 28, March 29, April 24, May 31, June 27, July 31, andSeptember 3, 1971. Modified Hester-Dendy multiplate samplerswere used in assessing the macroinvertebrate drift community structure.

Two steel plates, each holding five multiplate

samples, were positioned on the bottom of each side of Transects R-2, R-3, and R-4.The macroinvertebrates collected during the period of September 1973 through September 1974 in artificial substrate samples wereseparated into approximately 115 taxa from 1 invertebrate phyla(see Table 2.2-17).

Tubificidae (aquatic worms) were separated into 12 species, Naididae (aquatic worms) into 7 species, andHirudinea (leeches) into 4 species.

Crustacea were separated into 4 taxa, Ephemeroptera (mayflies) into 16 taxa, Trichoptera (caddisflies) into 5 genera, Chironomidae (midgeflies) into 33genera, and other Diptera (true flies) into 4 taxa. Coleoptera (beetles) and Odonata (dragonflies) were separated into 7 generaeach,. Plecoptera (stoneflies) into 5 species, Gastropoda (snails)2.2-9 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 15 of 178Byron ER-OLSinto 4 genera, and Pelecypoda (clams) into 1 genus. Turbelleria (flatworms),

Hemiptera (true bugs), and Acari (water mites) wereamong the other organisms collected.

Table 2.2-18 displays themonthly distribution of macroinvertebrate taxa listed by majorinvertebrate groups.A comparison of the numerical distributions, by taxa, ofmacroinvertebrates collected from September 1973 to September 1974 is given in Table 2.2-19, which also presents the totalnumerical occurrence for the entire sampling period. Dipteraaccounted for the largest number of organisms collected (4868),followed by Ephemeroptera (4244) and Oligochaeta (2120). On aper-month basis, however, Oligochaeta was the most abundantgroup, occurring in greatest numbers during 6 of the 12 monthssampled:

October, November, and December 1973, and January,April, and June 1974. Ephemeroptera, the second most abundantgroup reported during the study period, was found to be the mostabundant group during February, May, and July 1974. Diptera, thethird most abundant group, was numerically dominant in September 1973 and in March and September 1974. Odonata was foundsporadically.

In February 1974, Ephemeroptera and Oligochaeta were collected the most often. Fifteen Plecoptera (stoneflies) were found in the March samples and thirty were present in theApril samples.2.2.1.10 FishResults of the fish sampling by all methods from September 12,1973, through November 1, 1974, are presented in Table 2.2-20. Atotal of 31 species, representing 8 families of fish, werecollected during the 1973 through 1974 monitoring program,compared with a total of 42 species collected during the 1972through 1973 baseline study.Carpsuckers (Carpiodes sp.) were the predominant speciescollected during the 1973 through 1974 program, accounting for40.3% of the total number of fish collected.

Channel catfish(Ictalurus punctatus),

most of which were collected by hoop nets,accounted for 19.1% of the total catch, and carp (Cvvrinus carpio) accounted for 13.0%.The greatest differences between the 1973 through 1974 monitoring program collections and the 1972 through 1973 baseline study werethe greater numbers and relative abundance of channel catfishcollected during the 1973 through 1974 program and the greatervariety of minnows (Pimephales sp.), catfishes, and sunfishes (Lepomis sp.) collected during the 1972 through 1973 study.Commercial fish accounted for 62.4% of the total number of fishcollected during the 1973 through 1974 monitoring program (seeTable 2.2-21).

The classification of species into commercial, game, and forage types followed a classification of Illinoisspecies presented by Lopinot (1968). Ccmmercial fishing isrestricted on the Rock River. The river is divided into five2.2-10 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 16 of 178Byron ER-OLSsections by the Illinois Department of Conservation, and only onecommercial fisherman of partnership receives approval to fish ina section.of the 31 species of fish collected in the 1973 through 1974sampling

program, 14 were game species.

Although game fishaccounted for over 30% of the total number of fish collected, 62%of the game fish (or 19% of the total number of all the speciescaught) were channel catfish.

The composition of fish samplestaken from river Stations R-2, R-3, and R-4 did not differsubstantially by station in numbers of either species or fish.The percentage of forage fish in samples from river Stations R-1through R-5 was only 7.6% during the 1973 through 1974 monitoring

program, as compared with forage fish reported in the 1972through 1973 baseline study. The decrease in the relativeabundance of forage fish was due in part to a decrease in seiningeffort at a variety of shallow areas and to the increase in therelative abundance of channel catfish in the 1974 river samplesthat resulted from the addition of hoop netting to the samplingprogram.Station S-3 samples were composed of a greater number of species,particularly game species, than any other stream station samples.Most of the species collected from the stream stations were alsocollected from the river stations (see Table 2.2-20) because thestream stations were close to the river and the tributary mouthareas are used by many river species for feeding,

spawning, andprotection from river currents.

only two species, the sandshiner (Notrovis stramineus) and the hog sucker (Hypentelium nigricans),

were collected exclusively at stream stations.

Bothof these species also occurred in the main river, however, asobserved during the 1972 through 1973 baseline study.Seasonal changes in the distribution of fish within the studyarea may be indicated by the sampling results;

however, dailyfish movements due to weather and river flow conditions wouldalso influence sample size and composition.

Since all fishsampling was conducted in shoreline areas, the absence or declinein the number of a fish species may be attributable either tolocal movements from shallow to deep water or to movements toupstream or downstream areas of the river for purposes such asspawning or feeding.

Carp and carpsuckers were generally presentat the sampling stations throughout the 1973 through 1974 study.Game fish, other than channel catfish, were not collected insufficient numbers to indicate seasonal changes in distribution.

Channel catfish appeared to inhabit deeper mid-channel areas ofthe river during the cooler months and to inhabit shoreline areasor the entire river during the warmer months, as indicated by thecatfish catches per unit effort shown in Table 2.2-22.Condition factors (K) were determined for individuals of 14species of game fish (including catfishes) collected from theriver and stream stations from September 12, 1973, throughNovember 1, 1974. To present the data, K values were reported by2.2-11 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 17 of 178 Byron ER-OLSseason and by the total length range for each species (see Table2.2-23).

The low numbers of fish collected within each seasonand the length range for. most species made valid interpretations of condition factor data difficult.

During the spawning season(March and April), more variability in condition factors would beexpected within each length group because of probable groupings of gravid males and females, and gravid males and spent fish. Inmost length groups, catfish collected in March and April 1974 hadthe greatest range in K values for all months represented (seeTable 2.2-23).

Available literature on condition factors ofchannel catfish is conflicting with regard to sex differences andseasonal differences (Carlander 1969). Differences in reporteddata appeared to be caused by a variety of ecological conditions, including food availability and the standing crop of fish. Inthe Rock River, mean K values for channel catfish were higher inOctober and November 1974 than in September and October 1973.Seasonal trends in mean K values were not indicated for channelcatfish collected in this study.Other fish species were not collected in sufficient numbers toallow for a discussion of the condition of the fish; however, therange, mean, and standard deviation of K values for all the gamefish collected were calculated; these appear in Table 2.2-23.The ages of 237 fish of 10 game species (including channelcatfish) were determined from annular rings on scales, or in thecase of channel catfish, on cross sections of, pectoral spines.All the fish were collected from January 21 through November 1,1974. For each determination, January I was assumed to be thebeginning of each age class. The roman numerals in Table 2.2-24indicate the number of winters the fish had passed through.

Asufficient number of channel catfish were collected and aged toallow for the construction of length-frequency graphs for eachcollection period (see Figures 2.2-2 through 2.2-6). The totallength ranges of each determined age group were superimposed onthe length-frequency graphs. The results may be compared withthe total length-age group data for each species as reported inpublished literature; these data are presented in Table 2.2-25.The average lengths of channel catfish at calculated age groups(see Table 2.2-24) were slightly greater than those reported byAppelget and Smith (1951) for channel catfish collected in thevicinity of Lansing, Iowa (see Table 2.2-25).

Although thechannel catfish collected from the Rock River appeared to have arelatively fast growth rate, the oldest catfish collected was inage group IV and the maximum catfish total length was 38.5centimeters.

The greatest number of age group IV catfish werecollected in April 1974. Age group II catfish predominated inthe July 1974 samples.

Age group 0 catfish (larvae catfish),

aswell as young-of-the-year (less than 1 year old) of otherspecies, were probably not collected because the hoop-net meshsize was too large to retain them. Length-frequency and age datafor nine game species other than channel catfish are alsopresented in Table 2.2-24.2.2-12 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 18 of 178Byron ER-OLS2.2.1.10.1 Creel SurveyA creel survey was conducted along both sides of the Rock Riverbetween Byron and Oregon, Illinois, from May 5 through September 28# 1974. Figure 2.2-7 shows the fishing sites that weresurveyed.

The survey area was covered 5 days per week duringJune, July, and August 1974, and 2 days per week during May andSeptember 1974. During these periods, 965 anglers wereinterviewed (see Table 2.2-26).

Based on data presented in Table2.2-26, 0.204 fish were caught per rod-hour of fishing.

Thiscatch rate is one-half that determined during the 1972 through1973 baseline study, when creels were surveyed along the samestretch of river from August 19 through September 16, 1972, andfrom March 28 through August 31, 1973. During the 1974 survey,the highest success rate was in June, followed closely by May andJuly (see Table 2.2-27).

Over one-third of the total 3980 rod-hours were reported for August even though fishing success wasrelatively low during that month. The most heavily fished sitesin the survey area were below the dam at Oregon and near themouth of Mud Creek (see Table 2.2-28).

Success rates variedconsiderably along the river. The Woodland Creek mouth area hadthe highest fishing success rate although it represented only0.4% of the total number of rod-hours included in the survey.Sites that were both relatively heavily fished and had high catchrates were all located either just above or below the Oregon dam.The Oregon dam area was also a popular fishing site during the1972 through 1973 baseline survey (it represented 67.9% of thetotal number of rod-hours).

Table 2.2-29 lists the fish species caught by fishermen surveyedduring the 1974 creel survey. Eight species reported during the1972 through 1973 baseline creel survey were not reported in1974. Of those listed in Table 2.2-29, the redear sunfish(Lepomis microlophus),

black crappie (Pomoxix nigromaculatus) white bass (Morone chrysops),

yellow bass (&_ mississippiensis),

walleye (Stizostedion vitreum)

, hog sucker (Hypentelium niQricans),

mooneye (Hiodon terqisus),

and American eel (Anguilla rostrata) were not reported during the 1972 through 1973 baselinecreel survey. The redear sunfish,

mooneye, and American eel werenot collected by sampling methods in either the 1972 through 1973baseline study or the 1973 through 1974 monitoring study. Themooneye and American eel were present in fish collections takenfrom the Rock River from 1961 to 1969 (Rock 1969). The Americaneel however, is reported to exist there only as an oddity. Theredear sunfish occurs sporadically in southern and centralIllinois, mostly through human introduction (Smith 1965). It issuspected, therefore, that this species has been similarly introduced to the Rock River system. Channel catfish and carpwere predominant fish in the creels, accounting for 35. 8% and32.3% of the catch, respectively (see Table 2.2-30).

Suckers,yellow bullhead (Ictalurus natalis),

and bluegill (Lepomismacrochirus) were also important sport fish, based on the 1973through 1974 survey. The order of abundance of fish species forthis survey was very similar to the results of the 1972 through2.2-13 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 19 of 178 Byron ER-OLS1973 baseline survey. Most species were caught in greatestnumbers near the Oregon dam, although

catfish, carp, sucker,bullhead (Ictalurus natalis),

buffalos (Ictiobus bubalus , andsunfish were also relatively abundant in the Mud Creek mouth area(see Table 2.2-31).

Buffalo were not caught in the areaimmediately above or below the Oregon dam. The total lengths foreach species (or closely related species) caught by fishermen were within the same length ranges as those of the fish collected during the quarterly biological sampling program (see Table2.2-32).

Very few channel catfish over 38.1 centimeters werepresent either in creels or in quarterly samples.

Catfish wereby far the most preferred species by fishermen (see Table2.2-26).2.2.1.10.2 Eggs and LarvaeFish eggs and larvae were sampled monthly at Stations R-1 throughR-5, S-3, S-5, and S-6 from April 23 through July 3, 1974. Theresults of each sampling are presented in Table 2.2-33. Sixtyfish larvae (see Table 2.2-34) and two fish eggs were collected from the study area. The predominant larvae collected belongedto the minnow family. Carp accounted for 40% of the total numberof. larvae collected.

In addition to minnows, fish larvaeincluded white suckers (Catostomus commersoni

, sunfish,temperate bass (Morone sp.), and log perch (Percina caDrodes).

The presence of a high relative abundance of carp larvae in thesamples was probably a result of the large number of eggs thateach mature female is capable of depositing and the spawninghabits of carp. Fish larvae samples indicated that carp larvaedid not enter the drift component of the river biota in 1974until after the May 15 sampling.

Although Rock (1969) listed thelog perch as occurring in the Rock River, based on collections made between 1961 and 1969, adult.log perch were not collected ineither the 1972 through 1973 baseline study or the 1973 through1974 monitoring program.

The higher numbers of larvae collected at the river Stations R-2, R-3, and R-4 may reflect the greateramount of water filtered at those stations or the presence ofsuitable spawning sites upstream of these stations.

Severalemergent and submergent weed beds were present in the section ofthe river just upstream of Station R-2. In addition, threetributaries enter the river between the Byron Station and StationR-2. Many species of fish require or prefer weedbed areas ortributaries for spawning.

2.2.2 Terrestrial Environment 2.2.2.1 Introduction Although a detailed study of food habits, trophic relationships, and energy flow patterns was not part of the monitoring study,generalized food webs were constructed based on site-specific faunal data gathered from the baseline survey and the monitoring study to date. Two such food webs, for forest and meadowhabitats during the growing season, were constructed for2.2-14 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 20 of 178Byron ER-OLSZ4 CO= 4>1,-4C'4zP4H0HwU3 N.0 .44J 4J 40 0 0 4J44) '4 0.>1 > >4.4-) ) 4.) to I Uto: w $ 0 00o 0 a )t$4 k4 P-4.)4j ( 4) Q)0- 44J W U 40.0 0 .0 Q' 0444) O4).w a) 4) $4..-4.-.0 r.4)0 W) w w w -v m'4 '4k0a.- .4 4) 4) 4) a 14-)44) 0.0$ 4-'4 044) -'4)44 4) '14 )Q 4) 0(d4) 0 44)4 to J 0. 4)w C0~ ~ ON4144..w) o'. 0 4) ' 0 4)) .)1. W4 )-.4 C) --4 U -)U 0> d)4*4J g-I 4J-0r. C OJ-r.4&flE400 0r~.' 0 .'4 0 r.l ra 'j0 w Om -0 m :.r. 010044 04 04) >1-Q)) 0) Q ) c4-)'4U2A) > )4 > > -'q44)w0.1 -.04) -.04 M.004-) 0)-14J04-04J ME0 4) 0 (d 0d U >d D 4M (D.A4 CL0 0d). '4Q))-1 'ý4 .U) W40 W $.-44 W kV )t A004) 4) 4 U) 'd'-4.0a 41 -'4OM0 4) '48 -'. 00)(4.0 --C:U0 t '040400) 0; 0) ()14)>4) -4 0D--A 40 04U.0-. E 140.)r10 ..4)ýa,4) .14"4400 14)VU) _) 4 -i.4 4) M ( El4)V 1.iý 4)4) ' .)4W .9U) '40 040 0-'0--4 r-4 4)14)4) 1. k -'.4 U)M'44)0C U).-4 to C a)QA.U'4 Ur 0-00.90'40.4 1-4z 1.a4. ) D3 0M40 :3 r4 3 tr44) > 4) 0e 14 f ); 4r-44 -4 w 1 ) rM1.4 r1 5 0 W -4 4 4-4.-4) '0 U 4 4J 0) cc U 4)0 (d1400 C)4 4) 0)0)4U 44) 0 4) 10'4kr00 r 0 Id'4 M 014)r4C 4z0 w% a- -'4 9 4 4) 03 (d-'44 14) r.4 '41 0 '4 U)m4A )..4 )4~ 04) 4)4 C 4 %a ) )4 W W (100 1. Lý44) 0) t401 A0)4)400d

4) r140-4'414)m001. 4 w.r'44)4)C:

0 )M>10 W444 r1.40C1.M 0 4034J) (0-'4 0 '4) 4J -4 QU)L*-4lio M .0r.04) 4 -4)-A)14--4 4J 04.U)00U)4) V. 444 -44 .$4.0 U) 4) 4)00C4 '4 4) 4) 0 .0.)En ý4 4 -) 040 0 W .4U) I.--4 40 )0(14 a 44)'0)--)010%-4 4=>,>,-4 410Z134) -49) 04-4 -4)4) U)'4)>0104)E- (A4)'4)-404r4-41.4$4)4-H. 4)5-'4 04-C4 0-4.94H94)1.4J 0-f4)0(a0 04-)4fn 41001'0U.1.4)ti101I.443)1.4-,4)40>14'4) 4)-D 4>0>0 0z>1-40E000 4 40.0~0. .0 W4)to.C-4J4)0>Or.04).0ONr.4J -r41.4.4)0m 0 U-.42.2-39 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAt AQ-1f ResponsePage 21 of 178Byron ER-OLSz U>4W0.bU wE-400w>4-H 441V.10Vma0 (140'0>490(04 0$40U CO04414) 0 410 aQm0z01.40104Jm019>4'014 W.41E-aC0 a I"0 4 .04'0 014a .)'0-I 0.,0.0 3.* 4,4 4J A.-4 Z- 0 M 10 00 4-4 -r4I 4) 0JH .14-0 (041) 144'04-I000-4C~4(-4U)0E,Ht" 001 0.0) 4410,0414.0 a)44110 > 4401w400.-4 -4 W 14'a 4J)d)41 '0-rq44-10,03 -r.0)4140 -.4ao ww I 0 4).-4 WMH 4V J9w . '0 (141to 0041 r-01001ý040W 4 I 14 % 0.- .-I'0 01 0Z0 0 -J'4. -0.oN m30t 4)mm-.4 0i-40**.4 'UU) a0r.000>-.4 4(D I0.0(4) $40.1.4.0410001'0 a0 3.j14.0 '0W -4 1-4CW0 4J:04-w ( 0 -94.>004J 10ar.0*0 034moo0 00 .30 (a44.ý4 -4 414IJ0. 0 w0.4410414110$4> U W 9 0 (a W4 .' -11 4J 40 % 4-'0 )10,-4 004-O 4-1 Z 3 ( 0Z-M0r4,4 14 40'0-.4 0'101041 100 -14 U1 -.9: .0 4403 4J0~ 04410 0. 1-1 104J 414-.4 0*P.03 00.00W 0 )t4) 0. 0413101)4140E004130 -U. 140 '0-.4$41 0>1-,4 411W.0 0wU-1 0-r.4-JM441 a)0-. 1 00)443 a>110 -.U0--I 0to$41-04001C0014014.C: Uto 400 4 t-.4 1)0a410(U>4400'0 ,-.0 0.00 -J14 -41 0. 0 041 -I 10 IL-.H`-1m !u9 L9I-4 4J (a -A00 w 0 ,4 .r4-I .-4 10> 4 °0 0 P.-.001 0 -.4 00100 1 4.-I0- 10 044 1'0--I 4.0,.--4-.411-.4-.-0

.4a>-'>4- 4 rA.. $4 .00) LnU1w04410 I1 0-4 0 1 0 0to0 9: 8 iv U)0 10.0 0'>0 -414 0.0-.4 -H. 0-4.4 410. 01 -I -4i0 0.-044 431 4 tw0 -4 V a)-10 0100 41.r004 U 0 V-A-,-4 )0) -W $2: 413 04'0 0. 0 121109:01-HI410-4 .4 -44 .4 Q)-40 .0-4 .0-1V0 rd' 00-.4 0) 14EQ 1444110 4 00 4HMmP W4H412CQ.)r-.414041010C.a-4r.,.2.2-40 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 22 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-2SUMMARY OF THE~ 1973-1974 A JAT!IC MONITORING PROGRAMFREQUENCY PARAMETER Phytoplankton

& Zooplankton Quantitative Quantitative Periphyton Diatometers BenthosArtificial Substrates FishFish Eggs andLarvaeFish Creel CensusLOCATIONR-1 through R-5,S-3, S-4, and S-5R-l through R-5,S-3, S-4, and S-5R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-4, S-5,W-1, and W-3R-2, R-3, R-4R-l through R-5S-3, S-4, S-5,W-l, and W-3R-2, R-3, and R-4R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-4, S-5, W-1,and W-3R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-4 and S-5Study AreaR-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-1, andW-3R-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-1 andW-3R-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-1, andW-3R-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-l, andW-3R-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-1, andW-3R-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-1, andW-3R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-4, S-5, W-l,and W-3September andOctoberSeptember andOctober1973Monthly, beginning in September September andOctoberSeptember andOctober1974January, AprilJuly, and OctoberBi-Weekly, Junethrough September

January, April,July, and OctoberJanuary, March,May, July,September, andNovemberJanuary, April,July, and OctoberMonthly, January toAugustJanuary, April,July, and OctoberApril, May, June,and JulyMay through September

January, April,July, and OctoberApril and OctoberJanuary, April,July, and OctoberBacteriaSeptember andOctoberFish Muscle andLiver TissueWater Chemistry (22 parameters)

Quality ControlAnalysesDiurnal Dissolved OxygenTrace Metals (Cd,CO, Fe, Cu, Hg, Zn,Pb, Cr)Physical Parameters (Temperature, currentvelocity, turbidity, depth, light pene-tration, transparency)

OctoberSeptember andOctoberOctoberJulySeptember andOctoberSelptember andOctoberMay, July, andSeptember

January, April,July, and OctoberJanuary, April,July, and October2.2-41 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 23 of 178Byron ER-OLSC4E-4 HU. r0)4.10z4)4.H0 c0 01'400 1 w 0 In10*4In00 %to CO 0 %0>4U-~ 0 00In r-0-a 0n0 4004rn >-4(0tax r-1-400 CO 0% INE -400 ko tn Ma% U! -4* ( *E- 0% r'0n a.OC2-4 %D.-4 'a IN00'410In(N(N0%(Nan'4.(.40(NO('4 -'a 4'44' ~fl 'a0anMCOLnCOC4'B0D'a(N-4,-40%.'4.Inr- 0 0*44 C0 UAqr U) UinM' If M' -4.4 0i 0 0:r4 .- -'a 4(N ('4 '4 0-(N -40('40(N-40U.)v44 -4 (NH4. (N0IC. 0. (nEn'4 22:0% (N mI1-4 N4 (4"r 00% r".O 'a (N %a aI (N (N m (N0-40-41-40811 E*40-0 0*.A0 -A*-4 U41 041014..r4)r-40-21.-414J0$4.C-4jC)-4 -4O.-444 4-401a).0 -II.0400Cr d.14J?a)0(NM%(NIn-4(NIn-420H0ZH0 '4' 0ý-4 (N 0%-4InM-4%0,,4C;00rý-4ao00004= 0 0 'a'a (N 0 ~4('4 ('4 (N (N0a-400V000a ' '0%o%U.U.I'an04 ,,,I .InIA (NI (N-4 (4 r-4'I.C-.140.fitI"---4O~0fU0cc)0 .I ',:Om0 m~z IVWC 4.11-4 0.Z40 n300(Nt--4(N-400(N.44.4-4~In(Nan,-400-4en In -0fn r-4 -4) 00C -H0 41-4.4J ".V0A30 La54.4.C-0m2.2-42 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 24 of 178Byron ER-OLS-0000004..1081400010 >0l0 U09 ci C! 00In r- N 0 ccN N qw C" N-CO Ch r- r~- atm% N M~ M~ '-40 LA 00% 'CNN N M0 LA~3 0M MJ'01 0ý 1-4 rw r, N m~.4 1.4CO w v0 0% %D&ZI ~.0 M0oLA%0.4'0NIs0%000*LAen00,.4Ln'0LnN0 f"C!'C w%GoN 'W %D IV CON '-f N' -1 r40UN0I-.CN0'C'00L9LA LnN .4m% %D '0 C0 mN1 r. C" v 0%v0 N4 0 LA W0E.0w Z .4 t10801OLAto.r-1.to~ en A3+ 0== Wr Z 0'020 LA *0 C% wCO w q0H4 N4 NOD NLM Cm .4 N4 0%.4 M4 N m' r404.Lifs0N* -41z94N '40 Wl ' N%0 'C 0 0 OD0%*0% Cn 0%0%00'C0LAC0'30.40In.4000vI0 (-01% N4.40 * '00% Is 0.4Is '0 LA0 0 00 0 000UeRZ4MsA,Li4'.-4rMIs'C0%0P%LA0 LA..4 LAI Ir1 U,-N 94'-4 4.40cctoN0 (4z Id ý 0 CDz 1 M C4* M- N*0434J4.)'440014J$44.14.400'0C*r4r0Is'."0.(-3W 4.4PC 430Z (Am- q0ý4. C414041ýIs'-4I-,0(-42.2-43 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 25 of 178Byron ER-OLS0 04 4=Coh0Ito> nU E4'C-40 0%0U1'0en,nCoNN0'0NQ! 11! 40 4. 0%14 1..002.020% w. .4 %0 Ný 0%10 , (n en~ en -4ý IN 1! 0!% 0CO Go 1w r- %C-4SI.CDN-LnLnMbNLA0LAN0%-4I' ,4 -404 0 0.Ch 4 mbIN 9V. LA'0D P'b,-4 ,4o9 0Go m'0 M0LALnN4'0'00(A1NCOi-4In LA ,"N -4 C4 4woo N NHOO00ýb-b-ý 0 0I0%w Z0.4 r, LI-0 N 0C4 tN CO 0C4 N (4 N0040ýO0Coa0Co,4.Q'0 NA -IN INNNO C4'0 9-4 14 N4 0 c%n wo On m 0%1w 41 V. LA V00Co(4INN-4CoN4.0%Go'0!inNNCo-4NE-4CnE0m0for= IAz 2+. OZ4.aINNC!-40v0v0COInC!0vLAr-4C;0V-4 %0 Ný Q 0%a% wo Co m 0%-,4vCO-400IN0-4-400C!N-4M-40%0'0C!0%v-4C40%00,IN00% N4 Co,4Co LAN 0-40 1 4 CO 0W o CE-4CNz 4.1H. N 0.483 (a11CA 114.4 '0 Co0% I'-4 N44.LA0(A-44.~ZI -4toL '0 0 N LANý C Co 'i .4m. O On N41a.4M -14o 4.1-.4 EU0.a 0r C14ell-402.2-44 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 26 of 178Byron ER-OLS440UMNNO0c '0-1 %0 c0 E0 4 C1) M0E. Co0 0ý40 H 0%C_)~ E-2210V2 .m0 P00in~ in0 N 1w%D %0 0DN N9N=N0inrn.01vU 00~iO 0n0 v 0 koN-40%040Ni 0in toM0%-41C!inN-4 in-4 -4Go inM ein %0N inUn-4t- WP Cw LO COC;. C;enMino040tNm%Lir..LiC,CIN40m 0 w0 v mIn ta r-4 4M 1N1 r-4 N r4 r-4in o 040 14 :N4 ininN;0 M r-1 CO ILna% N en " `41-4 w0 v% -4in in In rn 0IV N4 v n LMW.0400(A 00 MM Nz+ 0)z(in N N0 -0 %H4 N N N Nqin 0-4 1-4 In '.o N-1 N4 N0% %0 %0a -ý-4N4 r4 -4N inr .1-4i0%Nin0H)9-4 in -W in -4inGoCýCno4*00%C4.Go0:in-4CD1;0f4.0G0z W. 4 C-4ODeN M 40 0Li n in r. t0N-.4 r L% m m.-4 r-' (i 1 41-4C;C4N0-4v00vMC-3-18CO,N Nr1z t -4 4nta 0C --4o 4o.,I-4 04J40) )4V '0)44 4-40 04JU0%0-41I-.Cin.4.C-140..40M.4.I--40I.,0MW. 446) U 9 4a U1 0 tir4 00 O a.-4 .4 Cm n2.2-45 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AG-If ResponsePage 27 of 178Byron ER-OLS0H EnE400 04A01Wzf)EC!r40 -Ch r. %%0 vw0Nm% .4 t-m N r-4r M Cq -a %0 0 0o oD 0 NM; NInV.w 0 '0 '0 w J %aM --4t I4 r1- ~0,-4.00a,0:0%N-41-4wDmv 0 vo a 001000-4min wP.- Nin 0%-4-4r4N00m0HOO0" 0 w 0N4 N I00nIC1NWen0-4 tEH Nto8'sH E-OM Eý00c;0 0%ID N4%aI IW) IA 4N% .-1 N-0O .0 00U-4 -4 HE0U010EN 0 r1-4 I,-ID 0 N 4 014 r-4 N N Nn C-1 en 00 %0 C".0 N *ON 0ýLn 4 9030-4-4IAU00enN0%0ven 0 en ts'm N N.-1 N Nun0H(InH0HF-4C,H000- Mw-Z d.-I N %0ID ( NmmzIDo-4v0 VIo 0 i0 0 00ý-40-400;vvvt- U. wA 0 -IIM OD 0 W 0r-4(a 0% N 0 CO-4C nm0 % m0%(nNN4.0.0C1-r-40r4.enN41o0%0-4r0r4r- r-a w.00 0N- enNWI04tNC4r-40mr-40r-40%0-4oqwAnr4.qwt-4.41000 I ien IE-4 0.:0)W-4r-40 IN z:z i 4 toN090OC4IDw0N0$4'-00"In-4O 00 LN4 NN0Cz M+ to mzN 0% .- e0 0 0 0 0VW0*.4 00.0 .4V 0o~ 0'4-4 44I0 00.90I-4.10%D-4r-.=ICq-4'00CO2.2-46 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 28 of 178Byron ER-OLSC40Uld C14f(4 08OE4aEm1Mýo a!i 0! i00 10 01 P enIV N. .* r14 40 N kA at%D n f"% N4 qinCN-4N-4NN M "~AS I *! 9 1 ! 121 a r- .n r- N1-4Uio '8 -4 '80% %O U '8dI r: 0% 0 0 9Mq W -4 4q 4q r1ý N4 inbi Ui Uýi i iinLiCAN%N'8M8MAid1 0! -4 '-.0ininC! 9CO win '8N'80I.,--4'8I.-C3inHOO0 U Cnc%0 '.4 C 0 0 OU tN r- qp 0% Lnen .4 N .-4 .-4 COin~~~ in 0EninIInwWn 0.i'8 '-4 0 N CO WUv8 in in 0 H- 0W% '8 .4 N r.400~~I%8 0 '14 a 0 %0 CONv N Nq 4%0 O 0% C -4CO -4 14 N N,-4r4 .4 N N.- 4 M 04 N N0 en 0% Go a14 .1 0 ; -4in20NE.iin20N142N(ato M1.4 OZ-4,-4-4 '8. cc 'v. 4, 4oC)4. in 0% cc (-tz 04.4~~ 0% N0%i3m% C4 % 0ZN inAM M,-4in r- inin-4-44,'8C inN '8-4'8 '8I.. ~-I., *~U CNin-4N'8-4I,04,-4'8do-N wCU ICLin I n~0%C,-4aC-40%Ln-4Ub 0o ,-4o 0o Co r- !% ,-4in C UO N.140440410 ~a9:00A8A'81~-k0.C4,,-4C0CO2.2-47 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 29 of 178Byron ER-OLS0w- 0 C. %000 'E4en rz >n0E-4Cn N LC4 eqNL%0-40G0MM OMOLM eq In Meq 0 v. r- N-0 %a 4. 1 4.'4LAmW 4 eq LAC! i N UeqLn0eq-40%-4LnC;N%0LACC.0~Id0.HOCOa MtLi-4-4 w qv,-4 ,-4 0Lm LA 4*-W %a %DLi-4V.9COOD V O 4LA %D 0 -V r-N r-4 eq -4 r4'4 -4 eq eq eqeq OD 0 %0 r-0 %D CO ON 1-4 U tC4 -4 e 4 -4 H W0WOE-.0OU)Ln0N4.000Nz0eq-40%a -Weq q. V.M~ -4eqeq 0 0 0 L.eq LA LA LA 0 NH r0 n0LA%0oý C! !%a CO UMe4 -4,-.,-4a0 N0r '0to00,-40Ina'I-80CO 4. (-4M ; C; N ;LO000 0OW aý -HOC -o 0 012Hix (-10 LLA eq4 14 eq eq4M MI 0 (3m~ 4. Ln4-000%,-4-W0CC%-4i (ýr- en9 -910eql00N-44.-4I.,CM,-'c,-40 IWZ 0tozz00o 0 0 0o

• o o~-4 C! C! CCm 0 0 fn4.I-.0I,0eq4.mf 0%rn 14.2.2-4800(-1I-'N'0-4Cc0.r.I.'0.U'00' .-4*.4 04i~0 *..4,-4 3-44I0a'@30 1..U4)'41 '4100"A4.N-4I,C4-3 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 30 of 178Byron ER-OLS0IV0I 'dM: In"-400.4 W0W.04C4o00404i-400,-4000MvMqW NN Man moo4 u'aN Nv-4" 0%n 0nw D w 0N m V04 in r-0 .04 0.'~0n w " e-it' % O r-.I0N4inc'HOCa En W004E-4EHE-HHE8 E-m0N 0 4 .-1 4 H EW 0Wm2 ao 0 W (.0N -1 r-1 iO Hcc 02 0 .-1 0 momJ-I0 0 za- CO 0to0 N ~ IDN O 0 M(14 N0 .- 11.-4 N N*0* 0* *0 04Oin -LN04en-40 ,-4 m %11 0% 0%Co C; CoD o, 0V V VI02HE-.oEnH08HN2 r0I-4 00 z -4to >4 U 0% 0! 'IHOC I .0a 01-4-NN040,-4V+wt ZDmz0%'-04%00C,0n0DVý0~Ia(.20U,'1 %D -4an %D an(a 1 0 a m' 0N4 I f r-4 1-400 0.014 z C; .Un 0,-4I-. (*-C4 (nl0o%r-4-4000widz m(.2E40 I 0 10r-1 CON4 5n 11 N4w010 10~404J)afa )4 1 444 440 00.0I-a-I1404a-00Go2.2-49 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 31 of 178Byron ER-OLSdjr0a 0U%b w'a (.4 'a 4. (.4 Co 0 0 a~- (.411% 0 P1 'a 4. U~~4I ~ 0 0 0 -4P1 P1 4.00; r-4 NýC4 .4 C40 0C4 a;ma 40% P. 'a ID 0an 'a 'S 0 4.-4 40%.0 1a 'a 0ý 0 0! 0zo~ ~ C1 C4 C. 0D *-en1 LO en V 0 0nCO O %0 r- t. a%ý40'a0rnanODC4ao%aan01140%m1N 0%an an0; 00ýC4'aC,i'0C140a.0~ UCdas.-tOH%0 N N 4 v I-. 4WCD an an N4 o anen M1 N C" Cm -0 'a 'r 0 4N4 u-4 'a ;n PwS 0% P14 w 4.an an m1 %0 %0 %a'a C- to 'a n 0%-7 cc 'a .4 Ch 0Oa; (- -~ 0 z *a*an 41 C!0 0:-4 .4 0 -4 N 4adW.4HOE44 00adt~oCa00 04009 1 0O wa 0 00% 9. 4. %D.-4 N4 C4 N,4 -Go14 4W 0Or-4 N r4,1 0 '-43HE4EnA000HWoH00HI 04.ro 0F4-0. 41w4 0.N 0 an 0D0% V. N' 0 asI IN an 4 1v000Van0P104.00P10P100VP100P1N0C,'Sv-404.,4anan ca-0 r00CN en0'aen00N-00%M:~ COo P..-4 0o 0P1 P14. 4*N P1ad 104. M10 oazIa-o to(cc -1r44.'00'a-4P.-404.P.b0Nan Go %ar- 0 C1P2 0. P00 0Om1 C"(dO0 w4L' 00 02.2-50 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 32 of 178Byron ER-OLS009II n mto0tO-40Pt-40%LA0toN! wo v

• vLM0 isLir-N4 en 0-4 -4 r4N-40to%00-.4t0LAGoN0to0Ptt0toO00.49d U4 0 0 C, w tw0 -Eý Mrn m k C00V -4E Ch a% %O CC> n-wmn4M P s io NO-4 -4N ,-4%0 C(" 0in in-4z CMOO00C4U1-400C0IM -4I in H N1-40EýO0IzPtiZ mt Z+ in Mto C;LA0% %0 r-%0 C4 LON -4 N40LnLA0CO-4Mo (n P 4tO U! 4, =-,-49 LAa Qo tOto0 isN4 L 0 N IV%0 qw Cn (" 4 r4 -4 N N0 0CD N4 -4A- LA 1-4isto0LAis0HE-400z0 AýZP -40 0W z CHisW -PP 400Ptto Nl 0%,-4 -,4 -.4-4 0 00is0%0vLA-400%0,-4to L ,-4 00 N4 .4%a 0% %0-440 0r-4 4to0%C;00r-00rt00.-4elinM0v0-4.4.en 0 0LA %0 LA0m Z i L ozA 0o I 0C o 0 0o o,-4$ 14CO 0N mt0to,-4000r.4.Go000 LA Ot LA "LA In LA~4 N %0o0o ov v-4 4 4.1P3 001 COMtCO 00 4.--A g41 V4)01.4.14 40 09n =n41U0-4tiGoC4140.2.2-51 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 33 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-4TRACE METAL ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLES COLLECTED FROMROCK RIVER AND TRIBUTARY STREAMS(All Values in ug/liter or ppb)TRACE METALSSTATIONApril 30, 1974R-1R-2R-3R-4R-5Cd Co .Cr CuFe AL. Mn Ni Pb Zn30.040.030.010.020.030.010.030.020.030.0<100<100<100<100<100<100100'100<100410010.0 <10.010.0 <10.0<10.0 <10.0<10.0 <10.010.0 <10.0<10.0 <10.010.0 <10.020.0 .10.01n.0 <10.0<10.0 <10.0S-3S-5S-6W-1W-3July 30, 1974R-1R-2R-3R-4R-510.030.020.020.020.0<10.0<10.010.030.0<10.0S-3S-5S-6W-1W-3100.0 30.0 <10.0100.0 10.0 <10.0<100.0 <10.0 <10.0<100.0 <10.0 <10.0<100.0 10.0 <10.0<100.0 10.0 <10.0<100.0 <10.0 <10.0<100.0 <10.0 <10.0100.0 <10.0 <10.0<100.0 10.0 <10.0<100.0 <10.0 <10.0<100.0 <10.0 <10.0<100.0 <10.0 20.0<100.0 <10.0 90.0<100.0 <10.0 30.0-100.0 60.0 <10.0<100.0 <10.0 <10.0<100.0 <10.0 <10.0100.0 <10.0 <10.0<100.0 <10.0 <10.060.0* 50.0* 50.0100.0110.0< 50.0110.080.0110.0* 50.0* 50.0170.0130.090.0< 50.0< 50.0140.090.0< 50.0< 50.0260.0360.0260.0510.0370.0470.0490.0230.0130.050.040.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<p.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.20.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2'0.2'0.2<0.2<0.220.020.0<10.010.0<10.020.050.230.030.060.010.020.0<10.0<10.0<10.010.030.010.070.040.070.060.0A0.070.090.090.050.090.070.060.0220.0240.0230.0210.0210.0220.0150.0140.0160.,0200.0190.0160.0230.0180.0200.0240.0150.0160.0190.0220.0200.0240.0210.0250.0260.0200.0180.0180.0210.0160.020.019.015.015.015.019.019.027.019.015.09.015.06.012.510.09.09.010.010.06.015.027.025".019.024.025.015.044.055.025.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0<10.0'10.0<10.0<10.0<10. 017.039.0<10.017.011.0<10.013.0<10.0<10.0<10.0October 8, 1974R-1R-2R-3R-4R-5<0.20.40.21.30.70.9<0.20.5<0.2<0.2S-3S-5S-6W-1W-32.2-52 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 34 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-5CUMULATIVE PHYSICAL DATAMID-CHANNEL LIGHT PENETRATION DEPTH)DEPTH CURRENT SURFACE VELOCITY SECCHI DEPTHa (nO)DATE (ft) (ft/sec)

(in) 50% 25%SAMPLING LOCATION:

11 Sept 73 7.016 Oct 73 6.628 Jan 74 10.030 Apr 74 9.930 Jul 74 7.08 Oct 74 4.0SAMPLING LOCATION:

11 Sept 73 6.616 Oct 73 9.228 Jan 74 11.430 Apr 74 10.130 Jul 74 12.08 Oct 74 9.0SAMPLING LOCATION:

11 Sept 73 7.616 Oct 73 8.028 Jan 74 14.230 Apr 74 11.030 Jul 74 11.08 Oct 74 12.0SAMPLING LOCATION:

11 Sept 73 8.716 Oct 73 10.328 Jan 74 14.430 Apr 74 12.830 Jul 74 11.08 Oct 74 11.0SAMPLING LOCATION:

11 Sept 73 7.916 Oct 73 7.228 Jan 74 11.430 Apr 74 9.030 Jul 74 10.08 Oct 74 8.0ROCK RIVER STATION R-I2.753.02.953.472.662.46ROCK RIVER STATION R-21.402.003.052.731.051.02ROCK RIVER STATION R-31.302.203.582.491.020.82ROCK RIVER STATION R-41.301.753.382.730.980.92ROCK RIVER STATION R-51.001.702.952.090.850.6210.69.77.74.39.715.013.014.66.34.010.316.013.712.36.34.011.715.014.714.37.74.411.716.012.013.35.73.810.314.018.611.76.36.018.322.025.018.06.06.824.330.024.018.05.77.724.735.024.019.05.76.722.729.025.018.03.36.024.025.026.017.712.08.027.035.034.027.08.09.032.042.033.426.37.79.734.743.033.730.3.8.08.435.338.034.724.06.0o8.730.036.0aMean of three determinations at mid-channel.

2.2-53 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 35 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-5 (Cont'd)MID-CHANNEL LIGHT PENETRATION DEPTIaDEPTH CURRENT SURFACE VELOCITY SECCHI DEPTHa (in)DATE (ft) (ft/sec)

(in) 50% 25WSAMPLING LOCATION:

11 Sept 73 0.5*16 Oct 73 1.628 Jan 74 b30 Apr 74 5.130 Jul 74 4.08 Oct 74 2.0SAMPLING LOCATION:

11 Sept 73 4.016 Oct 73 2.828 Jan 74 7.430 Apr 74 3.930 Jul 74 5.08 Oct 74 1.5SAMPLING LOCATION:

28 Jan 74 7.030 Apr 74 4.230 Jul 74 6.08 Oct 74 1.5TRIBUTARY STREAM STATION S-3<0.10'0.10b<0.10<0.10<0.10TRIBUTARY STREAM STATION S-50.501.000.13<0.10<0.10<0.10TRIBUTARY STREAM STATION S-60.100.14<0.10<0.10Cle715.7b6.312.314.014.018.37.39.713.016.09.79.014.025.0C12.0b10.47.323.0NAde5.324.36.7c16.0b12.712.00NA*7.0Bottom10.0C16.722.3Bottom7.015.725.0cSAMPLING LOCATION:

WOODLAND POOL W-I11 Sept 73 <0.5 <0.1016 Oct 7328 Jan 7430 Apr 7430 Jul 748 Oct 740.50.70.70.20.50.101.50<0.10<0.10<0.10SAMPLING LOCATION:

11 Sept 73 <0.516 Oct 73 0.528 Jan 74 0.530 Apr 74 0.530 Jul 74 0.38 Oct 74 0.4WOODLAND POOL W-3<0.100.101.50.100.10<0.10CCcCcccCcccccccCcccCcCCcCCcCCcccccC.CC.aMean of three determinations at mid-channel.

bPhysical conditions at time of sampling prevented obtaining data.CWater too shallow to obtain reading.dNA = Not Available.

eStream completely shaded by trees.2.2-54 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 36 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-6CUMULATIVE BACTERIA DATA(Counts Presented as Numbers per 100 milliliters of Sample)DATETOTAL TOTAL FECALBACTERIAa COLIFORMa STREPTOCOCCUSa SAMPLING LOCATION:

ROCK RIVER STATION R-111 Sept 7316 Oct 7328 Jan 7430 Apr 7430 Jul 748 Oct 74980,000235,000735,0001,820,000 1,290,000 10,7001,56019,00045,00027,50015,500600SAMPLING LOCATION:

ROCK RIVER STATION R-211 Sept 7316 Oct 7328 Jan 7430 Apr 7430 Jul 748 Oct 74975,000340,000800,0001,650,000 1,990,000 15,9003,60014,00049,50022,00016,5001,300SAMPLING LOCATION:

ROCK RIVER STATION R-310546056951050o151095957659014010139755765909010996358507528011 Sept 7316 Oct 7328 Jan 7430 Apr 7430 Jul 748 Oct 74FECAL b 781,2501,7003,900165551,090,000 465,000755.0002,265,000 1,150,000 18,1504,00014,00042,00034,50019,5002,200SAMPLING LOCATION:

ROCK RIVER STATION R-411 Sept 7316 Oct 7328 Jan 7430 Apr 7430 Jul 748 Oct 74805,000245,000820,0001.765,000 1,140,000 18,9502,30010,50045.50024,00012,0002,000SAMPLING LOCATION.

ROCK RIVER STATION R-511 Sept 7316 Oct 7328 Jan 7430 Apr 7430 Jul 748 Oct 74630,000350,000765,0002,465,000 630,00013,75088011,50036,50028,5007,5003,400201146951,23035701,8001,1001,3002,4501251952001,1501,3002,400451851151,1001,7502,5001051,200446502,1001,45055605423201,1002,250601,230771,3009752,950975907752,9501,5853,595FC/FSc7.823.22.85.61.60.712.010.12.23.21.41.420.08.31.73.10.52.011.511.12.82.91.44.32.25.73.01.21.68.60.071.91.43.20.34.0SAMPLING LOCATION:

TRIBUTARY STREAM STATION S-311 Sept 7316 Oct 7328 Jan 7430 Apr 7430 Jal 748 Oct 741,150,000 215,000840,000910,0001,150,000 14,4008407,00040,50012,00012,50011,0005701678107001903:0SAMPLING LOCATION:

TRIBUTARY STREAM STATIO33 S-511 Sept 7316 Oct 7328 Jan 7430 Apr 7430 Jul 748 Oct 743,900,000 240,000580,0002,285,OOC 800,0007,1001,8507,00034,53010,5007,0302503357956951,1 G52600.083.91.24.20.80.31.83.31.41.6SAMPLING LOCATION:

TRIBUTARY STREAM STATION S-628 Jan 7430 Apr 1430 Jul *49 Oct 74355,0001,925,000 370,00013,00027,50051,0008,0005,6004409051,1502,300aMean of two determinations.

bbMean of two determinations after October 16 sampling.

C Fecal Coliform to Fecal Streptococcus ratio.2.2-55 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 37 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-7CUMULATIVE TAXONOMIC LIST OF PHYTOPLA4KTON IN SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM ROCK RIVER AND TRIBUTARY STREAM STATIONS, SEPTEMBER 1973 THROUGH OCTOBER 1974TAXABacillariophyta Centrales Cyclotella atomusC. meneghinian-a C. pseudostelligera Melosiraam uqaM distansM. granulata M. granulata v.angustissima M. variansMiTcrosipona potamosSteehanodiscus astreaS. dubiuss. a-ntz-chii S. niagaraeS9. minutuss_. TuiiEETis PennalesAchnanthes-minutissima Amphora valTsA. ovalis v. pediculus Calone--eilewisii Cocconeis placentula CyjbeIla prostrata C.tumnidta Cymatopleura soleaDiatoma vulgar-i's-sp.Fragillaria capucinaGomphonema olivaceum G. parvulumGomphonema sp.Gyrosigýa scalproides Hantschjia up.Navicula cryptocephala N. cryptocepala v.venetaN. pymeaN. rhyncocephala N. rhyncocephala v.N. tripunctata N. triunctata v.schizonemoides N. viridula

v. avenaceaNiTtzschia acicularis N. amphibia.

N. dissipata N_. hunarica.

N. holsatica 97- ri~nearis Pennales (Cont'd)N. alEeaN. siodeaN. _tryblionela N__, trblionella v.victoriae Nitzschia sp.Nitzschia sp.,Nitzschia sP.2Surirella ovataSynedraacEn-a-stroides S. acusS. u- =naV__ sp.Chrysophyta Dinobyron divergens Chlorophyta Actinastrum hantzschii Ankistrodesmus convolutus A. falcatusAnkistrodesmus sp.Centractus sp.* Chlamydomonas sp.1*ChMX!aým-donas sp :2C orella vulgarisChlorella sp.Coelastrum sp.Cosmarium sp.5iy3osphaerium sp.Elakatothrix sp.Eudorina sp.Gloeoactinium limnecticum Golenkinia sp.Oph2 ý-ium sp.~sp.Oocystis sp.1Oocystis sp.2Pandorina sp.Pediastrum duplexP. sipleScenedesmus acuminatus S. anomalusS. arcuatusS. carinatus S. facIatusS97. Perforatus 97_u opMiensis 9S. sMithiiS. sooi v. verrucosa

s. iPn~osusScenedesmus sp.,Scenedesmus sp.2Chlorophyta (Cont'd)Scenedesmus up.3Scenedesmus sp.4Scenedesmus sp.5Schroederia spiralisSelanastrum sp.Sphaerocystis schroeteri Staurastrum sp.Tetrastrum staurogeniaeforme Treubaria.

sp.Cyanophyta Anabaena up.Chroococcus sp.Gomphosphaeria lacustris GOMphosphaeria sp.Oscillatoria op.Oscillatoria sp.19c4 tis sp.Rhaph7iops9 mediterranea Rhaphiopsis sp.Euglenophyta Eug12"a sp.Phacus sp.Str"oTmonas sp.Trachelomonas sp.Pyrrophyta Ceratium sp.Gymnodinium sp.Cryptophyta Cryptomonas sp.2.2-56 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 38 of 178Byron ER-OLS,-4N0n00E-401 >40E-4zE-101z0Cm c- -400I ý 1 Oi :1m- .-OdP1I %a -E-4.-4 0 4 v-~L0O -4 VNO%L n mO I i vC4 0 0-1 0 sz Z0z00in w LAS0 U1 m~e n0% 1-4r-I CO % I1C! I 1ý 900'. 0 .4-h40 0m'Ch .-4 (A -4O r-z 1-4CDLna%0-4 H-4a&4:0% Ln eniw -N4 00-4.0 w 0 N r- -4*-. 0 N4 -1 LA00-414)01-44-1ci)o 04 0 4.0. 0d).00>1 toz0HE54H12(a04J.r4-i.m10'-1.4*0H'.0-4410.00i 4-1 4$4 >4 0, >4£ 0(d 134044 4 04-0 0 0. 9 0.'-4 w w 0 4) 0or N.-4 0 C: 1 N4 >4 : >4U00 ri Uw AE4:>4>4C -0. 04 0 1.4000 Q C:0'4U) N 004)V>1 0 C: 1-40.(aN- on 0'>31 :3w0 0 CO2.2-57 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 39 of 178Byron ER-OLSLA HN r- %0Ch Ci I 0U) (D CD1 CD0E-M)I-LOtn140U)0(4 >4ni nH040>4000HE-4'4E-4(n04z>4'44Ch Cn m'RV ('4 00 C1 0% Cn 1wth L 0 00I) LA C; Cr-4r4tnit- r- ON* .0ON m~ r-Im 4. ('40O H4 0-4.CDH04>4E-04H4wl0H0HE-4.e :Ln LA1~ 004.4W4CACOI LACOw0"0CYNCo%D8C%00r.00('0'3:)44404 4 -)1 ý40 >> .9-,o x44.144)*.I 00 41w) U)r.4-1 rq.0 14>-41 >0WOU 0 Da)> 04 r- > >V*14 rd 4J1 41 1 t0U) w 000).-r- 4 64 -a *4 $400) C.)Om 0490to)~ to- Wto F 0 01 $4MX NHr- 04IVM $4(0toI 03 tI LN r4.I LDSLA0LOC4.r4100O14C.,CACD,Cyi0%E-1U0E~iU)>4 >41 E-40 IE-i04crz U H 04CA ~H 1 -5 UWzH P1~04 HZ A4 HZCn 0HIn H2.2-58 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 40 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-10CUMULATIVE TAXONOMIC LIST OF ZOOPLANKTON IN SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM ROCK RIVER AND TRIBUTARY STREAM STATIONS, SEPTEMBER 1973 THROUGH OCTOBER 1974TAXAArthropoda Crustacea CopepodaNaupliusCopepodid (cyclopoids)

Cyclops bisuspidatus thomasiCyclops vernalisEucyclopsi ilisCladocera Alonella sp.Bosmina longirostrissphaericus Daphnia galeata mendotaeDiaphanosoma brachyurMacrothrix laticornis Scapholeberis kingiOstracoda ImmatureRotiferaAsplanchna priodonta Brachionus angularis Brachionus bidentata Brachionus budapestinensis Brachionus calyciflorus Brachionus caudatusBrachionus guadridentata Brachionus urceolaris Brachionus sp.Cephalodella sp.Euchianis dilatataFilini-a longiseta Gastropus ltyliferKe1licottia bostonensis Kellicottia longispina Keratella cochlearis Keratella guadrataLecane bullaLecane sp.Le adella sp.Philodina sp.Polyarthra spp.Pompholyx sulcataRotaria sp.Synchaeta stylataSynchaeta sp.Testudinella patinaTrichocerca ap.Trichotria tetractis ProtozoaArcella sp.Carchesium sp.Centropyxis aculeataCodonella crateraS2_?d sp.U ella mespiliformis Difflugia acuminata Difflugia oblongaDiffluiia sp.Epistylis sp.Paramecium sp.Pleurotricha sp.Strombidium sp.Tokophyra sp.Vaginicola sp.Vorticella sp.Other organisms foundTardigrada Echiniscus sp.Macrobiotus sp.NematodaAnnelidaOligochaeta Arthropoda Insecta*Chironomidae 2.2-59 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 41 of 178Byron ER-OLSm %DOdP 0 -MoHn Z ~0rCa:0E.4rz0) gi ~4~~ -!)O 0! -!- 19 f!0 !9ru~0 01 P 0 -ie N Zj.......0 1OdPi r-1U)WO 0 HHI 4 0~H WW4 (-4 c-csU)H 0 ~~UHO H: .NN HOCC4~~~ M (-.0 % 4fl.'1 'eý ac o .H r 004 nC Drw C -0~ vdl r. en )-W 0H LACN.4H CHE-10 H S0041)CA>03 0) -,4Oj 4.) 40. 4.) t 4-4 4J 1044Id k414.,4 4. Nm- 0 ra'14 0O O -V44 0 4.00 0 4J :0 -x"41 0% V.40 r -4 ..I 4.)(L) -4 0nOmi 0 r.)04a m4 0) 0)63 0 ~-00 0 .0) 0 -1 ).0 44.Xaa -,- 0)03 0 0)r 004- 14 .) 1>0 $ .0 > w10 dPIIHLA0%C0r4 0"4fc'JOH 001%oCA)NOZOCO '0j Hn C'O4 0i c0), Ii ' ' o0H PA c4 4 0 11-1 0%DflO 0H '4L 0 HE C4 r,',H 0 k %-0 W4) 4A '.nt r4zH ~ ~ o~ o t0000 0 IfaA0 f 01a400 '04 0 L4J. 00 J$'0 w J) NU 0 m 0 N 0Om4) -'X:4 $4-140 14 H)(1 14 -4 4J1 H (d$14 4-4O ) iH0)4 .44 0 k0 .01-- 41 0 C144 0E- A# 0 E -2.2-60 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 42 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-12CUMULATIVE LIST Or ALGAE INHABITING PERIPHYTON COMMUNITY IN ROCK RIVER AND TRIBUTARY

STREA0MS, SEPTEMBER 1973 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 1974TAXABacillariophyta Centrales Coscinodiscus laustrisC. rothiiC ycro-teira atomusC. glomerata C. menephiniana C. pseudostelliera C. stelligera Melosira ambiguaff. distansM. granulata M. granulata var.angustissima M. italicaM. variansStegh-anidiscus astraeaS. astraea var. intermedia S. hantzschii S. invisitatus S. minutus9S. niagaraePennalesAchnanthes exiguaA. hauckiana A. hunaricaA.lanceolata.

A. lanceolata var. dubiaA. minutissima Xmphiorora ornataAmphora normaniA. ovalisA. o~ils var. oediculus AKmphora sb.Anomoeoneis sphaeroohora A. sohaerophora var.sculptaAster ie1la formosaCaloneis amehisbaena T. bacillaris C. bacillumCaloneis lewisiiC. ewTisii -var. inflataC. ventiosaC. ventricosa var.subundulata C. ventricosa var.truncataCocconeis d iminutaC. pediculus C. placentula Cmatople-ura soleaCý-fbella hyall3n-a Pennales (Cont'd)C. obtusiucula C. sinuataC. EiumiiaC. ventricosa Diatoma tenueD. tenue var. elongatum U. vuarethemia sorexEpithemia spEunotia curvataE. oectiinal-'

Fra~ilaria F. brevistriata var.caoitataF. construens F. crotonesis F. leptostauron var. dubiaF. pinnataFrustulia rhomboides F. vulgarisGomphonema abbreviatum G. acuminatum

d. acuminatum var.brebissonli G. acuminatum var.coronataG. oinstrictum G. gracilisG. lanceolatum G. olivaceum G. parvulumG. subtileG. sohaerophorum Gvrosigsma attenuatum Gyrosigma scalproides G. spencerii Gyroý5sigmýa

-sp.Hantzschia amphioxys Hantzschia sp.Meridion circulare NaiTcula accomodaW. 7caitataN. captata var. hungarica Navgiula closterium N. confervacea N. cryptoceohala N. crvotocephala var.SenetaN. caus- dataN. el-inensis N. exiguaN. graclloides Pennales (Cont'd)N. heufleriN. eiufleri var.-leptoceoha laN. integraN. meniscula N. minimaN. uEticaN. pe--l ulosaN. protracta N. ose-udo-rei1n ha r dti iN. ufN. raMlosaN. rai-osa var. tenellaN. l rn- dtiiN. reinhardtii var.ei ticaN. reinhar tii var.reinhardtii N. rhyncocephala N. sanctaecrucis N. scutiformis N. scutelloides N. symetrica N. teneraN. -ýEipunctata var.schizonemoides N. viridulaN. viridula var. avenaceaNeidiumdubium NitcTs-ia acicularis N. acuminata N. amohibiaN. angustata N. apiculata N. clausiiNi. aT~i-ipata, N. filiformis N. fonticola N. holsatica N. hungarica N. linearisN. obsidialis N. paleaN. punctataN. siimoidea N. Spaculoides N. sublinearis N. thernialis N. tryblionella N. tryblionelia var.victoriae 2.2-61 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-if ResponsePage 43 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-12 (Cont'd)Pennales (Cont'd)N. vermicularis Opephora martylPinnularia bicepsP. borealisP. brebissonii F. brebissonli var.diminutaP. interrupta P. subcapitata P.suaitat var.paucistriata P. sudeticaP. VirideFinnu-l-iFa sp.Rhoicosphenia curvataRh-opalodia jDibbaýStauroneis ancepsS. smithii§7. ?oeýicenteron Surirella angustata S. biseriata S. b htwelliiS. linearisS. ovataS. sp-rlisgyne-raactinastroides S. acusyne-dra delicatissima S. incisaS-. Aý- IticaS. pulchella S. radians var. radiansS. rumpensS. rum~ens var. socticas. socia.ul-naTabe-laria flocculosa Chlorophyta Actinastrum hantzschii A. hantzschii var.fluviateAnkistrodesmus falcatusA. convolutus Characium ambignumC. simneticum Characium sp.2Chlamydomonas spp.Chodatella C ophora sp.Closterum acerosumC. sphaericum Cosmarium sp.Crucigenia quadrataDictvosohaerium puIchelum Dictvosphaer um sp.Dinor n sp.Eu orina elegansEudorina sp.Gleocystis majorChlorophyta (Cont'd)G. vesiculosa Gleocystis sp.Gleobotrys limneticus Golenkinia diiataGbnqrosira debarxana Micractinium pusillumMicrospora sp.Oedoonium SF.O0cystis sop.-Pandorina, morumPandorina sp.Pediastrum duplexP. simpleProtoderma tetrasP. virdePseUdulvella americana Radiofilum Sp.Scenedesmus abundansS. abundans var.l-ongicauda.

S. acuminatus S. ijuga var. alternans S.dimoS. opoliensis S. quadricauda S. quadricauda var.aIternans S. quadricauda var. westiiS. guadricauda var. maximusSphaerocystis schroeteri Staruastrum paradoxum Staurastrum sp.Stigoolonium nanumStigeocolonium Sp.1 sp.2Tetraedro~sp.

Tetrastrum staurogeniaeforme Treubaria sp.Ulothrix subconstricta U. zonataUloTh--r sp.1Ulothrix sp.2Westella linearisGreen filamentUnidentified coccoid greenChrysophyta Chrysococcus rufescens var. triporaCyanophyta Anabaena sp.Chroococcus minutusChroococcus Sp.CTlindrospermum sp.Gleocystis sp.Gomphosphaeria sp.Lyngbea sp..erlsmopedia so.Microcystis sp.Cyanophyta (Cont'd)Oscillatoria sp.,Oscillatoria sP.2mPhoridium tenueUnidentifiea-ue-green Euglenophyta Euglena acusp .E ena sPhacusTracKelomonas sp.1Trachelomonas SPF2Trachelomonas sp.3Trachelomonas SP.4Pyrrhophyta Peridinium sp.2.2-62 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 44 of 17180E-4r'4ICNI E-'0E-4P4E-400U00E-0z0HE-4>4H-Byron ER-OLSm C (4 H H 0r C14CAI w% m3 r-1 r-1 M.r(I r-HCzIE-4'4:014 4)(U 0 4JU ai) 0 9-o 4 P rO .U 0 4-i0 Wz E-4 0 U 02.2-63 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 45 of 178Byron ER-OLSTAUB 2.2-14PRESENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF BMETIC TAXA IN SAKPLES COLLECTED AT ROCK RIVu T2 3WTAND TRIBUTARY STREAM STATIONS, SEPTEMBER 1973 THROUGH OCTOBER 1974DATE SUBSTRATE TYPEa1/73 1073 2fl4 4/74 7/74 10/4 Mkt D St Ed fG: c~r FR ShellTAXAPlatyhelminthes Turbellaria NematodaAnnelidaOligochaeta Tubificidae Limnodrilus cervixL. cervix var.L. meiteciL. hoffmeisteri var.L. udekemianus L. maumeensis E. clapared ianusr ter letoniAulodriluS americanus Tubifex tubifexpo-taothr-ix daviensis Branchiura sEfly3,Immature withoutiEapi1-liform cbaetaeImmature with capil-liform chaetaeNaididaeNais variabilis friciLumbriculidae Onchytraeidae Unidentifiable oligochaete Terrestrial oligochaeta Hirudinea Erpobdella ounctataD0ijjnraZava Arthropoda InsectsDipteraChironomidae Cr tochironosus sp.OiEthcd~idus sp.Rhe-otantarsus sp.Paracladopelma sp.Diameso sp.=r tous sp.Conchapelopia sp.Paratanytarsus sp.Pse ctcicadius sp.Tan u sp.g hironomus sp.Labrundinia sp.Cladotanytarsus sp.Endochironomus sp.Clinotanypus sp.XX XX XXXXXXXXXIXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXIXXXXSXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXKSXSXSKIXXXSSXXKXXXXXXXXXxXXXXXXXSIxxXxxCSXIXIIII'xKxXX XXX XX XXx iSK KX S* XIXXXSISKIK I X.5KXXKXXXXXXXXXX X X X S XX XX X XX X X XXX X XXX X X X XX XX XXX X XXXX XXXX XX XXXXaSee Table 2.2-18 for substrate type abbreviation explanation.

2.2-64 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 46 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLI 2.2-14 (Cont'd)TAXAParachironomus up.Coelotanu 9Eikleffiilla op.alopsectra 8p.Polpedlum5sP.

Chlrconomu-s sp,Micropaf9eca op.Tricholadius up.Trissocladius sp.Dicrotendipes 8p.erili-a sp.Tanytarsus up.M yto~tendipee sp.Parilauterorniella 99.Procladius sp.Pentaneurini adultpupaTabanidae immaturePsychodidae Ceratopogonidae Tipulidae Limnobhila sp.Simuliidae Prosimulium up.Empididae Anthomyi idaeAdult dipteranEphemeroptera Potamanthus up.Stenonema sp.Baetis op.Caens sp.-ric-rythbodes sp.Baetnsca sp.limbataHeptageniidae Trichoptera Leptocella sp.Cheumatopsyahe 5p.Hyyrojpsyhe sp._!ly.entropus ap.Tr aenodes sp.pupaadultOdonataDromogomphus up.I bus sp.Ugophus p.Soaltioihora up.Hemiptera Lygaeidae Bomoptera Apbididae (terrestrial)

DATE SUBSTRATE TYPE2L73 I1073 2/14 4/4 7/74 10f4 ME l Ht Sd f jrMctF ShelX xX X X X X XX X X X X X X X XX X X X X X X XX X X X XX X X X X X X X X X XX X X X X X X X x X XI .X X X IX X XX X X XX X XX X X X X X X X XX X X XX X X X XX X X X X X X XX X X XXX X X X X X X XXX X X X XX X Xx X X XX XXXXX X X XX X X XX X X X X X X X X Xx X X X X XxX XXX X XXX X XX XXXX X X XX X X XX XXXXXXXXXXXKIX XX XXX XX XX XX XXXXXXXKXXXX X X XX XX X XX XX X XX X XX X X XX X X XXXXXXXXXXXX X XX X XIXX XXXXX XXX XX xXXXX XX XXXXXXXX1KIXX X. X X X X XX XX XX X X XX X X XXIIaSee Table 2.2-18 for substrate type abbreviation explanation.

2.2-65 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 47 of 178Byron ER-OLSTA8ZB 2.2-14 (Cont'd)DATEMSU3SRATE T~St Sd fGr cGr PR StierlTAXA IZll /7 /47/41/414 1)~Coleoptera Elmidaeubraphia sp.StenemRis sp.Unidentifiable Hydrophilidae Derosus sp.K to2ilus sp .Ta t1u aD.Dytiscidae Agabus sp.D atcus sp.Rantus sp.Un'entifiable Hydroporinae Crustacea Ostracoda Amphipoda Gammarus sp.IsopodaAsellus intermedius Arachnida Ctenizidae AcariMolluscsGastropoda Amnicola sp.egmnaeasp.

Ph a ap.amIelasp.

Sphaeriun transversum Lasmigonia compressa XXXXX XX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XX XXXxXXX XXXXx XX X XXXX XXXXXXXIX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXxIXXXxXXxXX XXXXTOTAL43 24 33 374856 40 11'40 7743 93 17 3asee Table 2.2-18 for substrate type abbreviation explanation.

2.2-66 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ- If ResponsePage 48 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-15KEY TO BOTTOM TYPESSYMBOLBRBoCRFRcGrfGrSdStDPMkCDEFINITION Bed rockBouldersCoarse rubbleFine rubbleCoarse gravelFine gravelSandSiltDetritusPeatMuckClayCHARACTERISTICS Rock strataRocks over 12 inches in diameterRocks 6 to 12 inches in diameterRocks 3 to 6 inches in diameter1 to 3 inches in diameter0.125 to 1.0 inches in diameterSmaller than fGrVery fine grittiness Undecomposed plant debrisPartially decomposed plant materialBlack, decomposed organic matterCompact, stickySource: Adapted from Lagler (1956).2.2-67 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 49 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-16OCCURRENCE OF SUBSTRATE TYPES IN BENTHOS SAMPLES COLLECTED AT ROCK RIVER, SEPTEMBER 1973 THROUGH OCTOBER 1974SUBSTRATE TYPEaMkNh/SdMk/StMk/fGrMk/DMk/Sd/fGr 9/73141310/7 312102/741814/74 7/74 10/74 TOTAL443 279 2 113 6636330DStSt/SdSdSd/f GrSd/cGrSd/fGr/cGr fGrfGr/cGrcGrFR91378291414107332511IA91392648218355241971925583121261210'11Shells11aAdapted from Lagler (1956). Explanation of abbreviations in Table 2.2-15.2.2-68 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 50 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-17MACROINVERTEBRATE TAXA IN SAMPLES COLLECTED AT ROCK RIVER PUNSEPTEMBER 1973 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 1974TAXAPlatyhelminthes Turbellaria AnnelidaDATE OP SAMPLING92M3_1/73

= 1/73 17 1/7 2/77 3/77 4/74 /74 7/74 2MX X XxxOligochaeta Tubificidae Tubifex tubifexI-ydilu-templetoni Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri X XL. hoffmeisteri var.L. K IE7. laperedianus Xx XL. cervix var. xKlod-iflus americanus Branchiura go yPotamothrix Meolvyensis XImmature withjutcapilliform chaetae X XImmature with capilliform chaetae X XEnchytraeidae xxKxK'Cxxxxxxxx KK K x K x x X xx xx x x X x x X Xx x x x x X* xX x x x x x xx xx xxXX X K K X X KXx X X XXNaididaeNaie sp.95-15 communisNa-q- isilils varia=iiParanais friciPFarana-t-s

-toralisHomochta e a-i-iinaPristina osE-r-n-Pristin -l-ngiseta leidyiLumbriculidae Enchytraeidae Unidentifiable oligochaete Hirudinea Placobdella montifera E5 obdelaI sttePlacobdella rugosaArthropoda Crustacea Amphipoda Hyalella aztecaGammarus sp.IsopodaAsellus sp.Aselii intermedius DecapodaAstacidae InsectaEphemeroptera Heptagenia sp.Stenonema sp.Stenonema aresF. E-Rpuflrca-lum S. h~eiteoarsale x xS x x xxxxxxx xK X Xxxx x xxx xxx Xxxxxxx x x xx x X X X xK K x x xx X xX. Xx X X xX XX XxxKxKxNote: X -taxa found during specified time.2.2-69 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-if ResponsePage 51 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-17 (Contid)DATE OF SAMPLINGTAXA 9/73 10/73 11/73 12/73 1/74 2/74 3/74 4/74 5/74 6/74 7/74 9/7i4Ephemeroptera (Cont'd)S. gildersleevei xc-arol1ina S. frontal eKI6tamant-us sp. K X x x x K K K ICasnisop.

x e x x x x x xj!M~ia up xa limbata X K K K Ksp. x x xa--etisca sp. x KLa to-hiebia sp. XTricorythodes sp. X K K KTrichoptera Oecetis up. K xemataopsyche op. x x x x XHydropsyche sp. x X X X XTriaenodes sp. X x X X x x XNeureclipsis sp. X X x XDipteraChironomidae Calopsectra sp.Palypedilum up.Crvptochironomue ap.Dicrotendiges sp.Paracladopelma sp.Micropsectra up.Tanytarsus up.C~dtntarsua up.Br la sp.ficladius sp.Larsia sp.Cl-inatanu!f

• Paralauterborniel1a sp.Einfeldia sp.Procl-adus sp.GlyVtotendipes sp.Abiabesmyia sp.2K: sp.Tanf mus up.Endochironomus up.REo9taeytarsus up.Paraiironomus sp.Psectrocladius sp.Eukiefferiella op.Triosocladius sp.Phaenopsectra sp.Orthocladius sp.Cliotopu sp.avrelimia sp.Conchapelopia sp.Labrundinia sp.Coelotanypus sp.Cygtotendipes sp.Macrope opiiniPentaneurini pupaCeratopoganidae Empididae Tipulidae Limnophila sp.Simuliidae Prosimulium sp.Coleoptera ElmidaeDubiraphia sp.Macronychus sp.4iirocyIloepus sp.Stiernue s up.OptiOsevS sp.x Xx xx XX Xx xX XX XX Xx XxxxxxxxxxxxKK KX XX XKKKK KK KK KKK K KKK K KK K KK KK KKKK K KX XX xKX K KKKX XK K KxKxKxxxKKKKKKKKxKKKKK KKKKxKK KKK KKKxKKKKKKKKKKxK K KX x xXKKKKKKKx K K K X XX XX x K X XKNote: X -taxa found during specified time.2.2-70 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 52 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-17 (Cont'd)DATE OF SAMPLINGTAA !M7 10/73T 1173 12/73 1/74 2/74 3/74 4/74 5/74 /47/497Hydrophilidae Helophorus XByrrhidae XGyrinidae Dineutes sp.Plecoptera Taeniopteryx maurats~rl iine-ata1.Tdiciai7 Pteronarcys dorsataOdonataDromcgomphus sp.Styluussp.

A a asp.Ara sp.re sp.Agopus up.Lepidoptera Hemiptera Hebrus sp.Arachnida AcariArachnida (terrestrial)

MolluscaGastropoda

ýr! sp.!:n..gyrina ell HIThiicaLynnaea up.Lynaea catascopium Pleurocera acutaPelecypoda Ligumia sp.x Xxx IxxII x I I x X* xI I x xx IIxI xI II IxIIx xxIxX X xI IxI xXxIIxxXTOTAL36 48 35 21 17 26 43 51 41 34 41 44Note: X = taxa found during specified time.2.2-71 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 53 of 178Byron ER-OLS4~t.40km N en r--4m~ -4 M' t*n-4-44WH WW ENEn0.044094E.- 4N4 E.> 0.2 AlH- CA0ix xU000 z02 -0 E-" 44E- E-.[C C44 E-4Cd20LnoCOInl LM N r- ("4-4 -kn ~ -fn-4Cfn4 C4 M' iLn Cm("40 0 In Un0I..0044.t- V %D 4-4CO434)U'U04343430 4 0 4 1 ~0 4 0. 4 1' A 3 0 .4)40 N4 042.2-72 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 54 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-19MACROINVERTEBRATE NUMERICAL DISTRIBUTION BY GROUP FOR SAMPLESCOLLECTED AT ROCK RIVER TRANSECT STATIONS R-2, R-3, AND R-4STATIONR-2 R-3 R-4TAXA E N E W E W TOTALSEPTEMBER 26, 1973Oligochaeta 6 17 7 4 9 7 50Ephemeroptera 16 20 23 14 9 19 .101Trichoptera 3 3 6 0 0 0 12Odonata 12 7 21 5 7 12 64Diptera 118 135 83 318 87 100 841Coleoptera 1 2 1 2 1 0 7Other 8 6 4 2 5 2 27SUBTOTAL 164 190 145 345 i18 140GRAND TOTAL 354 490 258 1102OCTOBER 25, 1973Olxgochaeta 108 71 26 39 54 49 347Ephemeroptera 8 31 36 35 23 49 182Trichoptera 0 2 1 1 3 8 15OdOnata 3 25 15 14 13 33 103Diptera 3 16 13 9 20 23 84Coleoptera 1 8 9 1 8 3 30Other 12 15 8 3 15 1 54SUBTOTAL 135 168 108 102 136 166GRAND TOTAL 303 210 302 815NOVEMBER 28, 1973Oligochaeta 54 26 4 23 7 4 118Ephemeroptera 9 16 13 3 14 61 116Trichoptera 0 0 0 0 0 1 1Odonata 2 6 2 8 1 17 36Diptera 1 2 3 2 7 3 18Coleoptera 1 2 0 1 0 0 4Other 8 12 3 3 15 6 47SUBTOTAL 75 64 25 40 44 92GRAND TOTAL 139 65 136 340DECEMBER 27, 197301.gochaeta 36 31 5 0 16 0 88Ephemeroptera 1 0 2 2 0 3 8Trichoptera 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Odonata 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Diptera 3 3 1 0 2 0 9Coleoptera 1 0 0 0 0 0 1Other 1 1 0 0 0 2 4SUBTOTAL 42 35 8 2 18 5GRAND TOTAL 77 10 -23 110JANUARY 28, 1974Oligochaeta 53 1 0 0 6 0 60Ephemeroptera 3 3 0 3 0 0 9Trichoptera 1 0 0 0 0 0 1Odonata 1 0 0 0 0 0 1Diptera 1 1 1 0 0 0 3Coleoptera, 0 0 0 1 0 0 1Other 2 1 0 0 0 0 3SUBTOTAL 61 6 1 4 6 0GRAND TOTAL 67 5 6 78FEBRUARY 28, 1974Oligochaeta 15 1 4 6 2 11 39Ephemeroptera 21 4 4 0 8 4 41Trichoptera 3 0 0 0 3 0 6Odonata 1 6 0 0 3 2 12Diptera 4 2 7 0 2 0 15Coleoptera 0 0 0 0 2 2 4Other 4 27 0 7 8 13 59SUBTOTAL 48 40 15 13 28 32ORAND TOTAL 88 28 60 176Note: Numbers expressed are actual counts of organisms found on east and west ends ofriver transocts.

2.2-73 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 55 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-19 (Cont'd)R-2E FSTATIONR-3E NR-4E WTAXAMARCH 29, 197401igochaeta Ephemeroptera Trichoptera OdonataDipteraColeoptera Plecoptera OtherSUBTOTALGRAND TOTALAPRIL 24, 1974Oligochaeta Ephemeroptera Trichoptera OdonataDipteraColeoptera OtherSUBTOTALGRAND TOTALMAY 31, 1974Oligochaeta Ephemeroptera Trichoptera OdonataDipteraColeoptera OtherSUBTOTALGRAND TOTALJUNE 27, 1974aOligochaeta Ephemeroptera Trichoptera OdonataDipteraColeoptera OtherSUBTOTALGRAND TOTALJULY 31, 1974Oligochaeta Ephemeroptera Trichoptera odonataDipteraColeoptera OtherSUBTOTALGRAND TOTALSEPTEMBER 3, 1974Oligochaeta Ephemeroptera Trichoptera OdonataDipteraColeoptera OtherSUBTOTALGRAND TOTAL141121140265034246776117471276161212113132366098a86753137321872138504172010245126951*1376282111511312121429877023314383615713265111101379123126177393162154574755715874620811049615580212011781515413565312561361092060129023520927837161622100319001973191502807515857234157182192000001193122741265423609821074710101934538430048138770000017821221321212343152220181967118601214206581133'20:1726111740314101756485574601101458332132919691515128113219420109111122142680303.1155158272TOTAL9873313215071580486552205243828920471175153260503947314469647529139313336101061059193072919121973342161222442652399516167746778426307787236107931342332201083636501819023584 459 20502509874a Samples lost at R-212, R-2WI, R-2W2.2.2-74 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 56 of V87Byron ER-OLSU..0E--0-iz'C.c,nI'Col2~04E4'CIn-4 1 LA I II I I1CI-4 en0I4-4I I I 1.-4I , M I I I I II %D ID I Ln jCN-4 Il- I II 181 -4ul0'-4 .4 i -4 i 4(3 ON0 m 0 qv 0C,00-40C

-4A c; 0-4 c4 4~ cOan W M .-4 -4 MN NNqC41I .I Ifniw Lr-4-4CN I I INMO00I I N".41fA4M,-4 W -4CNIW r4 I I II*-4(3 I N 1 1 1 U) II I I II 1 I IINI I II IIN I1I1-4 .400%.-4-40-4-4 OD1 14It-I 010:-m -4I %D I Iif) N00C. N;U1 0:3 4).4@(A CI .4J 0 0~ 3 .(a ra : fn 040 rd -4 grI. '1 40 W :3~ wu 9) U :U) 13 0 4) Q) :3 0 :S $ r4 4.0 H C 4@3.- 400 4. 10 (0 0 C 14 111 4) -10g4J 1 4 -W 04 i CH(0 E -A U..-4 Ur 09::; 0- 4 .).a.. 0 0 (A0"' ~ 0 3$4~ 'OUC@ 0 -W 10 44 0r-r $4)U *.4~ r- 30 .04 0 0 41 0 1" U4 3 0 0 3- .4-U) 20 -04lJ kW 4) 0034z 00, Om 0000 go0 000 4. 0 0 0 0 (3 0 0 3 In3000 0 4Si o 1411 j -4 :3 :1-4 >1-1 ~~ ~ ~ ~0 '14$ J(ý4 -4 4JV. $34 0' U30 44.a-E@a)a w 0d a) 0 .IV> 0 d-4 )4,I0(10. Ca U 0.-1-1Z0-,1 a.C 1C i m 4 4jmH344)2.Ad 04@-0414 0 0 Ad .-4..4 cc oC~ C-~ 4 4 4id-_4 rI 0 g0 m44TO-. 4 -H4 Z-4 D 0c r J 9-40.0.00-4344100Intoz0Li2.2-75 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 57 of 178Byron ER-OLSz'zM0ElI0-4 C3 a m C34m w in~fI 4.C' -O 4 M-fI I 1 1 4Cliii 14m 1I I4InI lI II II I I (Y.-q..M -4 %n4 %o 4 I4r14 -4 an('4ien i ~um II w 1 01I 11 4 14 1I 4 '.4V 0 .m -4 43 '-4 C 4 4 W044 14-O1-443. 9.0 4 Ca r n40 0 4310 0 A 43 1 04 fdM c'~.C 01 4l344 V ar4J l9-Maaox 4400 (Ds44 00130 x 4 X N 0 0 o,1$4 j 0 F -.4 C ýt 0434 .4. A0 0 0 4JJ- 4 4x 4 .E0U0C41('4I-404400tois044aI-,43.,441M00o44443 4 03.tW4J=4m0.

$4C 04 4.) V 0. toao 0114 00$4 4 a443 w -.4C S >1 >'-4 0a v aWOM A 43a4.44 $4 k -4 .*4 .a-00a)34'0 L9.in.40CE.22.2-76 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 58 of 178 Byron ER-OLSin M in 0%U4 0 1;in 0ý in CO v U--D 4 -1 0(nLM mD In M r4 N.in -4 LA I%00%4).4-4 wA.4.4 %E-44En4 M% 0 n -~4 2LA~~~- 4)M 1 n ) 0 0C4 N4 N 4 -4 LC--. 01N1 ' i ~2~r- %04-4 iL4 r4 r4 rz 00% VA L n iEn

• 4 n N 0 0%.wN 0L4A 4 4J C00~0-0in .4 C- C- .4 -4 43 .C'4 '0) '4E-- HA4 M 0 C4 LN %0 -4 ý OA) toHA 04 M 4 N 0-W4 M4 N40.Cs.P P. 40 M 0 C- 0 0 .V U; 4)LA .0 0 C % M400 --- -~ 4 -AEn L4 ) 4)4- -4 % 0 N L 0 -1 4 C4 to-4 04 N 4 Qn 4M -NI 0%- -~4) 44o ~ ~ ~ 3 .. I L L 4 C0.44) 02M 1. GO r444w 0z~U U) U)(aC0 0 -0 4) N4 4.4) to 0 to f 4) t .0in to 0. N 0. ..4 4). ." 4 tr --.4- -1. -4). E.I% 0 0. A-0 0-0'U a A.C2.2-77 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 59 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-22CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT DATA FOR FISH COLLECTED FROM ROCK RIVER--,slrf Il~ft rn- -fU~l 14 ...~U~~f ". ~ mw~ 1,STATIONCOMMON NAMER-2 (FAST)Shorthead RedhorseChannel CatfishBlack CrappieTotalNet-Hours of EffortR-2 (WEST)CarpShorthead RedhorseChannel CatfishBluegillWhite CrappieBlack CrappieTotalNet-Hours of EffortR-3 (EAST)CarpRiver Carpsucker Shorthead RedhorseChannel CatfishYellow Basswhite CrappieBlack CrappieTotalNet-Hours of EffortR-3 (WEST)CarpRiver Carpeucker White SuckerShorthead RedhorseChannel CatfishWhite BassWhite CrappieBlack CrappieTotalNet-Hours of EffortR-4 (EAST)River Carpsucker Black BullheadChannel CatfishWhite CrappieBlack CrappieTotalNet-Hours of EffortR-4 (WEST)River Carpsucker White SuckerChannel CatfishWhite CrappieBlack CrappieTotalNet-Hours of EffortCATCH PER UNIT EFFORTaJAN 1974 APR 1974 JUL 1974 OCT-NOV 1974SCIENTIFIC NAMEMoxostoma macrolepidotumusPomox in nigqr~ornadjiltus Cyprinue carpioMoxostoma macrolepidotum ct-alurus

,nctatusLomsmacrocnirus Pomox21 annularis Pomoxis nir--omaculatus 0.50 (1) 0.25 (1) 9.5 (38)0.50 (l) 4.75 (19) 9.5 (38)0.5 (2)1.00 (2) 5.00 (20) 10.0 (40)48 96 960.250.2596(1)(1)C rinus carpioCarpiodes carpioMoxostoma macrolepidotum Yc-taiurus tMorons mississippi enaisPom--is annularis C rinus car ioCa carpoCatostomus commersoni Moxostoma msacrolepidotum Ictalurus punctatus Morons chrppsPom~ins -Tromaculatus pods car ioPomoxis annularis Pois atusCarpiodes aCatostomus commersoni Ictalurus punctatus Pomoxis annu--ar aPomoxis nFgromaculatus 0.25 (1)0.25 (1)0.50 (2)1.00 (4)960.00 (0)480.25 (1)0.25 (1)960.00 (0)480.25 (1)0.25 (1)960.25 (1)0.25 (1)963.00 (12)3.00 (12)960.25 (1)0.25 (1)0.25 (1)3.25 (13)4.00 (16)961.00 (4)1.00 (4)961.50 (6)1.50 (6)960.253.500.251.251.256.50.960.250.250.251.500.753.00960.250.500.252.751.251.256.25960.750.252.501.500.755.75960.754.000.251.006.0096(1)(14)(5)(5)(5)(26)(1)(1)(2)(2)(3)(12)(1)(2)(1)(11)(5)(5)(25)(3)(1)(10)(6)(3)(23)(3)(16)(1)(4)(24)0.25 (1)0.25 (1)0.50 (2)961.00 (4)0.25 (1)0.25 (1)1.00 (4)2.50 (10)960.25 (1)0.50 (2)1.25 (5)0.25 (1)0.75 (5)3.00 (12)960.00 (0)960.250.750.501.5096(1)(3)(2)(6)a Numbers in parentheses are actual numbcorrespond to fish per net per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.mrs of fish. Numbers outside parentheses 2.2-78 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 60 of 178 Byron ER-OLSa C4 ~~~%QW1 000 NN M C 000W 01 00-V 0! 9Iý "I..z w moo C' ON0C 40 04E- r- fnf N0%-Cio n 0 4 r- o4 o0 .4 C 00o 0 00! C! CU 1= !m'~ o or,= *ý a o m' an o* C4400Nn N 0 ('zM0.W %n wn 00zn ci4 0 m ND 00% No~~C W = 4WO 0 0==000% 0 040 IN 0r

• 1 *qr.W7 01. C0 >~- OINOWO0Lýz 0I. 0m0 V0A Zt=- C4 01 C "eO 14 0I mO" N1 to0 00 0 r.-440N 00.C% 014A 0I004-2.2-79 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 61 of 178Byron ER-OLS'Ow-WM1000C.'C..'N a:0rN4 r00NCD -4 1-4 0 -C-4rn .-COd.-0o -o aI4 .0000000o0 v0 ! C!10-0-4 0!0C!02 M 0C..C C'!00C 04 .II- *UCw0 M 0 0 C%..'t0c-4 .-4o1 in 0 ' C01l.4'0Io-4A.0% IN.40 0I..0 %fl.-IOM0-403In-II0UE..InHI0% UIC $4 0 Ir %9 1 l 1 0 11 j C0% 10 .40%0.4d 1-$a M'4 Xo40 0L)~ U4~ aO M -~.I~A%(0 O~ ~ ~ 0~-4 41O~ SA9 ga2.2-80 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 62 of 178Byron ER-OLS'01ý4 r4 0 400ICaSIInC4-4 -4 0 4 r4 0-#(n C"0! P-!40-in inN Nir-4-4-000 .4 -4 0 H.4.0NNN400 N N4 0N-4,Nan0 C4 C4O0-4 4 a -40 00ci0!0.1r- N --4.-4 tna010 00 C000 r-1 1w-W0.'a 'a0% 0%0 000.4.0 NNO 'a000bziCAW 044 a)4 4J 4)8q n 9: tr a

• 8 01C 0t* C0.1 1.4.-a 41P3 E nON-441"I. Id. anCoawl.4Jia441 4O41.1an CL.19:0 i C 0% rt 3C-4 -341waC+aaan -410H 4I.41.1 I.-alOIOIas,'1 12.2-81 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 63 of 178Byron ER-OLSiC,'Vv-41T03ini0U*D 0U -r- 1-0001-400UE.4IA0.0 IAa% -4 0 (.33.0 00 -0 00C41050U,0~ ~~~ 0.(0- a.00 00 ý400)0- 40ý -rf0 ý0 'q0Z.Hi(.10%-48000N ow *z4) 4.' Nu)0.0Ana% 0-4 C4.)00 d 41 :I0 m80'A-0%-I4..4.)80000 2w410)z4.4J 1g NWto0%4) 4 0%go --U04.O4.IUWEn0 W401-4I44j-A440U0-4L401) 014J) 000 00enI'.M:)H314 0-0 A..0 z. 4f"014W0A..2.2-82 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 64 of 178Byron ER-OLSE)Uz.N,II40en014140.L0ain in001014000r- r-10 00,0-40640 00 0-4.4. 4*ONNin i0 000.000 ini0rUý.0 do q0U Otr 'co 9zcmMfl MJUV 441 a~gI FAXm4.6.-4o'ac.. m w *>.i. ew-44~U)-4IX~ .14-4 0-0zi.~ 'IImmm-4~d4)04-4-42.2-83 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 65 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-24LENGTH-FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION ARRANGED BY AGE GROUPS FOR TEN SPECIESOF GAME FISH COLLECTED FROM THE ROCK RIVER.JANUARY THROUGH NOVE=MBER 1974JANUARY THROUGH NOVEMBER 1974GAME FISHDATENorthern Pike(Esox lucius)Jan 74LENGTH RANGES30.0-34.5 Total NumberAverage Length35.0-39.9 40.0-44.9 45.0-49.9 Total NumberAverage LengthNUMBEROF FISH11AGE GROUPI II II13.1-30.1-IVOct 74I1-1-1-2-44.0Channel Catfish(Ictalurus punctatus)

Jan 74Mar 74Apr 7417.0-17.9 18.0-18.9 19.0-19.9 20.0-20.9 21.0-21.9 22.0-22.9 23.0-23.9 Total NumberAverage Length5.0-5.96.0-6.97.0-7.98.0-8.99.0-16.917.0-17.9 Total NumberAverage Length19.0-19.9 20.0-20.9 21.0-21.9 22.0-22.9 23.0-23.9 24.0-24.9 25.0-25.9 26.0-26.9 27.0-27.9 28.0-28.9 29.0-29.9 30.0-30.9 31.0-31.9 32.0-32.9 33.0-33.9 34.0-34.9 35.0-35.9 36.0-36.9 37.0-37.9 Total NumberAverage LengthI1.111210151222.33484321234II43-21.-14 17.3 17.812 " -1 1 -1 2 -2 1 -1 3-- 8 --- 4 --1 2-1 1--- 1--- 2--- 3--- L--- 1110 21 1222.6 26.9 32.81-1-1--13 118.5 23.42.2-84 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 66 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-24 (Cont'd)GAME FISHDATEChannel Catfish(Cont'd)Jul 74LE.NGTH RANGES_ (cm)NUMBEROF FISHAGE GROUPI _. III IV V18.0-18.9

19. 0-19.920.0-20.9 21.0-21.9 22.0-22.9 23.0-23.9 24.0-24.9 25.0-25.9 26.0-26.9 27.0-27.9 28.0-28.9 29.0-29.9

30. 0-30.931.0-31.9 32.0-32.9 33.0-33.9 34.0-34.9 35.0-35.9 36.0-36.9 37.0-37.9 38.0-38.9 137101192359865251322397011II0112564432522.0I1020.3I24742229542I322.15132I1I13635.7ITotal NumberAverage LengthOct/Nov 74 20.0-20.9 21.0-21.9 22.0-22.9 23.0-23.9

24. 0-24.925.0-25.9 26.0-26.9

27. 0-27.928.0-2e.9 29.0-29.9 30.0-35.9 36.0-36.9 Total NumberAverage LengthWhite Bass(Morone chrysops) 44 2225.3 31.21I112 2 123.9 27.6 36.0Oct 7420.0-24.9 22Total NumberAverage LengthYellow Base(Moronem--l'saippiensis)

Oct/Nov 74 15.0-19.9 20.0-24.9 Total NumberAverage LengthGreen Sunfish(Lepomis cyanellus)

Apr 74 8.0-8.5Total NumberAverage LengthBluoegill (Lapomis macrochirus)

Jul 74 10.0-14.9 Total NumberAverage Length220.0218.52118.3111113.52.2-85 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 67 of 178 Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-24 (Cont'd)GAME FISH LENGTH RANGES NUMBER -AGE GROUPDATE (cm) OF FISH 1. 1 I_ XV *VSmallmouth Bass(M4croeterus dolomieui)

Jul 74 25.9-29.9 1 1Total Number 1 1Average Length 27.1Largemouth Bass(MicZo+terus amoidesAug 74 30.0-34.5 1 1Total Number 1 1Average Length 30.9White Crappie(Pomoxis Jan 74 15.0-15.9 1 1 --16.0-16.9

---

17.0-17.9

---

18.0-18.9

---

19.0-19.9

---

20.0-20.9

---

21.0-21.9 1 Total Number 2 1 1 -Average Length 15.1 21.0 -Mar/Apr 74 11.0-11.9 1 1 -- -12.0-12.9

---13.0-13.9 1 1 ---14.0-14.9 1 1 ---15.0-15.9

---16.0-16.9

-.. ..17.0-17.9 1 -18.0-18.9 1 -19.0-19.9

-.. ..20.0-20.9

..-.21.0-21.9 1- 1 --Total Number 6 3 3 -Average Length 12.9 18.8 -Jul/Aug 74 14.0-14.9 2 2 ---15.0-15.9 4 3 1 --16.0-16.9 3 3 ---17.0-17.9

---

18.0-18.9 2 -19.0-19.9 1 -20.0-20.9 3 -21.0-21.9 2 -22.0-22.9

---23.0-23.9 2 --1 124.0-24.9 3 -2 1 -25.0-25.9

.-....26.0-26.9 1 --1 -Total Number 23 8 11 3 1Average Length 15.7 20.5 24.7 23.0Oct/Nov 74 17.0-17.9 1 1 ---Total Number 1 1 -Average Length 17.1 -2.2-86 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 68 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-24 (Cont'd)GAME FISHDATEBlack Crappie(Pomoxisnigromaculatus)

Mar/Apr 74LENGTH RANGES(cm)10.0-10.9 11.0-11.9 12.0-12.9 13.0-13.9 14.0-14.9 15.0-15.9 16.0-16.9 17.0-17.9 Total NumberAverage LengthNUMBEROF FISH122AGE GROUPI. II IIIIV V121154 112.8 17.0Jul/Aug 7411.0-11.9 12.0-12.9 13.0-13.9 14.0-14.9 15.0-15.9 16.0-16.9 17.0-17.9 18.0-18.9 19.0-19.9 20.0-20.9 21.0-21.9 22.0-22.9 23.0-23.9 Total NumberAverage Length1111131221124112321101119112222116 814.6 17.4Oct/Nov 7411.0-11.9 12.0-12.9 13.0-13.9 14.0-14.9 15.0-15.9 16.0-16.9 17.0-17.9 18.0-18.9 19.0-19.9 112321Total NumberAverage Length9 114.7 19.62.2-87 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1 f ResponsePage 69 of 178 Byron ER-OLS.4 14z %0 00 0 Ct, %D %D4 %ac in %0 inE* % 0% at 0 0% Ch 0% 0%(14 -4 1 4 .4 .4 0% r-4;4 %a 44.) 0' 4 --0 ..4H tr 04 01 00g 4~ .~ V-4 -4 .40% -1. W4 .& .40 14 04In .4W %D r4 of 0. 094 0 010% to 00% i 0 0 r. N(a P4.4 U U .4 .1 U M4 A. wa .v4 0 i I% U; r %0 0Gn oOli 1 m en C4 -t 4 ..4 .m m20 > ' 0% IA r: 4E40HI 0D 0% 0 .4 0D I in en in wn -0 i04 004 44H1 v In 04 I n N 4 N .4 4 0'w N N4 N4 m N .4 .-400inA 03 In 0i .a~0 % a% .4 I.- (a Eý I N -N 1- M4 .4.4 m% 14 N (A C"j 44HjN 0 0 0 In Wn N qw*~ N r-4 ( ( 4 ( N 0hN (fl -0 W C% N4 wn 0) .M rI -r. w Z H at .4 NI 0 en GoMU AC"0. 4 0-~*4H CH 0A4 0 A 4) 0 A~0 to -4 0 0 .01 w O 0A ) -A 00 0ý U2 O (L) 144' .. I. r-4 0 (42 *.4 00 o -4H 9 (42 -o -04 0)to .4 4 40 *.0) 1020~ ~ 9: 01 0.. r4 VV

• mV V$4 ,ý4 $4 4 MO 4 w 4. 4Cn 04 4(S> 41 Ain~e > IA n nI 0 o VI I 0H -I qv In n %D %D0 E.0 00 0% % 0% Ch 4 4 0 0% 4U ~-1 0 4 `24 .4 I-0 10 041 0 .r..FA 4V 1 )0 4L .4) qw .4 m L .-41 0 Hm02 ( h 9 0 % r44 r. ~ 0 % C41 0:Ct rdC04 -1 C M o. -q4 C) -M .4 -.4ME-01 0) 4a0 0 C14 .. 4 40z.40! ~4.) 014 U14 o2 U (.4 CW2.2-88 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 70 of 178Byron ER-OLS* 0m -z .140£0m'4* "414Goin41410.-40r-4-'4r4%a 10%0 %a:S 0-4 0!0% InV CO-41-4U' n -4P -4M% in Le)a% .-4 0% 4m0%0,-4 ,'4 iO 0 .0,.-! 0 00 .=m IA N4Ln C1 -a m-1 N -4. 4 -4 c4 r'I) N N.4 N .- % I0~1 0! NU,0%-4144-4 -4 0%ta %DCm C%..I -4 Ch0% 0' 0I- r- N4NM N1 Nu, 4I c0N N4 NNq N -4o 9 1'-4wInChr-441C4ri%0'C1 =' C' -4 0 en 0 qw LA r. 1.4U) ~ ~ ~~ ItI -C n 4 -n C D M' 1043 r-41 r~n ' '44 40014 D w4 0 0 14 k4LA V 0) V 4) 0 0 0N to 00 0 to to tow1 0 C: C ) 0 01.4 01.4 14 r. 00 r 0 :A 0 0 0 0 4)0 .-H 0 0.41 0-ý4 4 004 00W- M 0H U4 A4) U0 U m W.1 ) 0 N 0H A.4 H O U.W 4 0) UN £4 'a 00 r 0 010 fi. 0 14U .34 0r %o 2~ t 449 W.~0.w U 4 0 44.-I 0 a r. .83 U) -'-4 ': -A4 00 0 r. (n 08 0 to-H r4 *4 -08 0 a)"4:-0 W0 0 1.4 r. 0 0-jC4 w5 -14 14, $4 .44 C 4- 00 000-HM 54-4~ -0 14). 00 *-`4:w0 414 $4-W $4 .-I- ` 141 -0 80 -40 141-4~ M r 0 -4 0 2; 0 -A4 410 9 V 0 -r r40.40 r 0( 0-HH C H I4 > ~ .4 0 ) U0 En 4 H > H~ ,.3 .:0044£0 EUL)U00% Ch a m CA0 0% nr-1 r4-4 4-4 r-144 0 0 ' I 0 0 C" I I. 0Ný r. 90 N n q r. N N .-ILA .59 hi~ Ln r.4 n A4~ > 4 Ad In In r-41An0% 0 8 0% 00% Ch 9 0 a, 0% ON 00%t 9-4 W..-4 0 z I4 C r-4 -4 Pw r-00to 8a ta10 I 0 w5444-)41 14 J to. '.82 .01 00Ur4 14 t1 -4441 00En4 043ý41011,0014 -0.2.2-89 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 71 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-26RESULTS OF PERSONAL INTERVIEWS WITH FISHERMEN ON ROCK RIVER FROM MAY 5 TO SEPTEMBER 28, 1974PARAMETER Number of Fishermen Interviewed Hours FishedTotal Number of Rods UsedAverage Number of Rods UsedNumber of Fish CaughtTotal Number of Rod-Hours Number Fish/Rod-Hour SPECIES PREFERENCE CatfishCarpBassBullheadCrappie and BluegillWalleye and Northern PikeBuffaloNo Preference STATISTICAL VALUE965258513811.4381239800.204PERCENT PREFERRED 60.0%3.8%4.5%1.3%1.3%5.5%0.3%23.5%2.2-90 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 72 of 178Byron ER-OLSP414HO0r44E-4WI4lz 0A00 w~P4E0 Hr41w Ln r-1 Ln r-Ln ON~ Ln m C%4C14 C14 C%4 H- H1co on 0~ 0 0%r H '. rLA LA C1 m mr- Go % 0 C%4w LA 04D 4H- in Cqm C4J H-. Ch -H- 49 H-0400HCD0O0N0)H;C1'4H-(L >i 0 4Jz >1 0 H- 01 00 0 0 0 )x I- z U2 t3E-40E-42.2-91 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 73 of 178HO 0D4 C4Byron ER-OLSC4 0% Ln I" W LA C %0o %D co Ln qwH 0% .Ho r4 C4 qw C4 1w H4 H U1 0Ln 0k C% N~ 4 H- Hq m N H- C4 C" 4oý o ; '0 0 : 0ý 0; 0; 0a 0 0 0 0C,.4C1E-1Hzr140z02rzIHEnU3Ena-z~OCQzN14C4'Ix-0E02ina H0 rnE-4 W:z N0021.9-1 .D HD 0 000 N 4W' SD 1 0-H N('1 H- 0 v N H- 4v 4' -F-4H H4 N H- 10c4' %0 4m N HA IV w %0 tr- (n 4' H 0o.H 4 H 0 4 H. C. H: N0 N 01-H N H- 0H1 En8 H94zUL UN 9 A 10 H 4 ' 1) 4H ID 4' 0 ON w0 w 0 Ný m'H CO N In fn) HH40F:4E-1HCo$4oo4) 1 00Dw 000 .E-4C)014(d0 4140 I0 A400m~~ rd w ic'1 ' 414 iU$4Id0001000%00 00 $40I!to 0O Hr-N- 041 o0002.2-92 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 74 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-29FISH SPECIES CAUGHT BY FISHERMEN INTERVIEWED ON ROCK RIVER FROM MAY 5 TO SEPTEMBER 28, 1974COMMON NAMESmallmouth BassBluegillOrange-spotted SunfishRedear SunfishWhite CrappieBlack CrappieWhite BassYellow BassWalleyeNorthern PikeChannel CatfishYellow BullheadFreshwater DrumSmallmouth BuffaloWhite SuckerRedhorseHog SuckerCarpMooneyeAmerican EelSCIENTIFIC NAMEMicropterus dolomieui Lepomis macrochirus Lepomis humilisLepomis microlophus Pomoxis annularis Pomoxis nigromaculatus Morone chrysopsMorone mississippiensis Stizostedion vitreumEsox luciusIctalurus punctatus Ictalurus natalisAplodinotus grunniens Ictiobus bubalusCatostomus commersoni Moxostoma sp.Hypentelium nigricans Cyprinus carpioHiodon tergisusAnguilla rostrata2.2-93 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 75 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-30NUMBERS AND PERCENT OF TOTAL CATCH OF FISH TAKEN FROM ROCKRIVER BY FISHERMEN INTERVIEWED FROM MAY 5 TO SEPTEMBER 28, 1974COMMON NAMEChannel CatfishCarpSuckersYellow BullheadBluegillDrumWhite BassSmallmouth BuffaloCrappieWalleyeSmallmouth BassRedear SunfishOrange-Spotted SunfishYellow BassNorthern PikeMooneyeAmerican EelTOTALTOTAL CAUGHT PERCENT OF TOTAL CATCH291 35.8262 32.380 9.973 9.059 7.310 1.210 1.28 1.07 0.95 0.61 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.1812 99.92.2-94 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 76 of 178Byron ER-OLSW.0%E-402E44A404E in0E-4H02HA4* 02(E4z040402(Eu0AH0 H j2.0102020202nHj0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ln In I01.40 0 0 0o 0 a 0* 0

• ao 0 0 0H .4 N W a% 02 -0CD o 1; V; ; cn c CInc o,-4o-,4o

• 000InIn rN4 ma0 0 0 *00a0, *0 01I 4ci *02*,,.-0 0 *-4 -,4 0,4.-4 02 0%C" 0 In .I --4-4 1- N ,Iq0 to 00r- -4 02 NNN IC%CniCM CDN F- F- 1') 02 I~F- 0 0 0% I~I .-ENEnE-'zHW4(444)0>1Ina) 02U34w4 -Eu14: EG E .4- 4.3Eu~~~ 03. 4 4 u ) (.e w~ED ~ E '1341 CO 1oW 0 $4 0 d )0 -$4 14 i': U) .1 .4 w 0 d 4to -.3.)14 mU- U4 r4 Adu 04)~V E4 A4 0& -4 .&l 0 .0D E0d (I. d E 0 m 0v $ 14I20in.E 14w m 00m 42.2-95 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 77 of 178Byron ER-OLSI4a~U004,q-4-4,- N -4.4 0; 0tm 0 -41 I. r --4 .4 O!iC- 4C -0 00CD01C4Nm*NN71-4E-10.E20nE-4zHz~02E-4Uz0EHNUz9!r, LAS04to)30 to100-4 n1 -4.- 0InN .0 --14A-4N-i-40-I I I0IV 1I IU,r-in-W -%-r noinCO Ln0I-a--4-4-4-4I I I I-4to 0I". 00r-4-"4,-i000NqI I000ILA;z0;N4000,-4a-000-400I -4rG".40N413a-40FA4)01000U.341$41g40z4.10.I I I0E,0110 44.0. 44r. tao. (D 0w2 $140 W2.~~.14 U41 to -4 4).a44 w1 'mu Na M.U) (a En -1 (a 0.a t7% 4D 00 -4 4)1 A ,4 044 1 m -4 A4 04 .4J 4 r4 -4 1 0 r41 4: 4 4 V0 0 $ 4 0 4J 04 2 0 EU 0 0) a CO 02 r 0 2 IM >4 U)9z2.2-96 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 78 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-33FISH EGGS AND LARVAE COLLECTED FRON ROCK RIVER STATIONS R-1 THROUGHRE-5 ANDS-3, S-5, AND S-6 BY TOW NET FROM APRIL 23 THROUGH JULY 3, 1974STATION TOTAL GALLONS FISH EGGS TOTAL NUMBER AVERAGEDATE FILTERED AND LARVAE COLLECTED NO.410,000 GALR-123 APR 74 a EggsLarvae 015 MAY 74 15,254 Eggs b 0 0Cyprinidae 2 1.3Catostomidae 1 0.7Total Larvae 3 2.010 JUN 74 9,683 Eggs 0 0!;4 rinus carpio 3 3.1Caea oconstans ic 1.0Total-Larvae 4 4.13 JUL 74 13,347 Eggs 0 0Larvae 0 0R-223 APR 74 a Eggs 0Larvae 015 MAY 74 17,773 Eggs 0 0Cyprinidaea 2 1.1Total Larvae 2 1.110 JUN 74 12,733 Eggs 0 0Cyprinidaeb 2 1.6C I carpio 3 2.4Lvae 5 3.93 JUL 74 a Eggs 0C rin carpio Ivae 1R-323APR 74 a Eggs 0Larvae 015 MAY 74 12,999 Eggs 0 0Catostomus cormersoni 1 0.8Percina caod 2 1.5

-1 0.8Total Larvae 4 3.110 JUN 74 Fertilized Eggs 1Unfertilized Eggs 1Cyprinidaec 1Cyprinus carpio 4Catostomidae ILe o as Sp. 1tarVLarvae 93 JUL 74 a EggsR-423 APR 74 a Eggs 0Larvae 015 MAY 74 17,774 Eggs 0 0Cyprinidaeb 2 1.1Catostomus commersoni 1 0.6Total Larvae 3 1.7aData unavailable due to flowmeter failure.bMinnows other than carp.Cjuvenile.

2.2-97 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 79 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 2.2-33 (Cont'd)TOTAL GALLONS FISH EGGSFILTERED AND LARVAESTATIONDATER-4 (Cont'd)10 JUN 743 JUL 74R-52315a12,468a8,8876,234APRMAY7474EggsCyprin carpioMorons op.TM. rvaeEggskCyprinus carpiosp.Total LarvaeEggsLarvaeEggsCyprinidaeb Catostomidae Percina caprodesTotal--Larvae.

EggsEggsCyprinidae Total LarvaeTOTAL NUMBERCOLLECTED 031L005056020111301.1022AVERAGENO./10,000 GAL040.84.801.11.11.13.301.61.610 JUN 743 JUL 74S-323 APR 7415 4AY 7410 JUN 743 JUL 74100 EggsLarvae100 EggsLarvae100 EggsCyprinus carpioCatostomus Total Larvae100 EggsCyprinidaeb Total Larvae100 EggsLarvae100 EggsCyprinidaeb Total Larvae100 EggsCatostomidae Total Larvae0000012022S-523 APR15 MAY747410 JUN 743 JUL 74 NOT SAMPLEDS-623 APR 74 10015 NAY 74 10010 JUN 74 1003 JUL 74 100a Data unavailable due to flowmeter bMinnows other than carp.cToo yound to identify.

(too shallow)EggsLarvaeEggsCatostomus commersoni Unldentifiahled Total LarvaeEggsLarvaeEggsTotP zasp.rvaefailure.0004401I0001120001100000100100200020020000040040001001000001001002000001001002.2-98 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 80 of 178Byron ER-OLSI4 .4 ,VI- I S I I t~4 Cl.-4 M~ ClC4C.=l14 N 14 .-II I i Im "WHmimru010015.4 Ow 0 00. Ci 4W4-) IV 01:j 0 V 00 0 -H. V 1 .4'a r$4 w Uo m v$ >1 C ri4 *-4*.4 .W 0 800 0 .41 0 'CC 0 4)H .ý 41 4 OW to 14 4 -2 Ha)$4 U 0 U) 0 v A UO 04W fI2.2-99 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 81 of 178.1LL CREEKO.1MANROCKR-2,SILVER0CREEKUlmiLEGEND:CREEKI.S0 -0.RIVER TRANSECTSTREAM STATIONPOOL STATION'-5SEINING LOCATIONBYROM STATIONDAMOREGONMILESBYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONUNITS I & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT -OPERATING LICENSE STAGEFIGURE 2.2-1AQUATIC SAMPLING SITES NEARTHE BYRON STATION RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-if ResponsePage 82 of 178AGE GROUPSIL.00z2-ILm1-4U.....I15t----1 I I..20225TOTAL LENGTH (CM)BYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONUNITS I & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT- OPERATING LICENSE STAGEFIGURE 2.2-2LENGTH AND AGE FREQUENCY FOR4 CHANNEL CATFISH COLLECTED FROMROCK RIVER DURING JANUARY 1974 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 83 of 178AGE GROUPSii:ýHHIxcazLWL00z2-.1 -HFla.51011520TOTAL LENGTH (CM)DIRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONUNITS I & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT -OPERATING LICENSE STAGEFIGURE 2.2-3LENGTH AND AGE FREQUENCY FOR5 CHANNEL CATFISH COLLECTED FROMROCK RIVER DURING MARCH 1974 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 84 of 178.4,o :c00O *:*:*:*:*:::*:::*::..................

I---J-I-... .........0CD toHSII :10 'ONBYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONUNITS 1 & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT -OPERATING LICENSE STAGEFIGURE 2.2-4LENGTH AND AGE FREQUENCY FOR56 CHANNEL CATFISH COLLECTED FROMROCK RIVER DURING APRIL 1974 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 85 of 1780'Ul0 -0............

-0"..... ..... .<

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

iiiiii~ i il -- -

~i!::si~~ii~~ii~~ii~:[i~~ii

.....:...:: ..:: ....ii::![::i

.=.. .. ... .. ... .. .* U*~ 0 00 K~ (0 9)HbIA AO 'ONBYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONUNITS 1 & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT -OPERATING LICENSE STAGEFIGURE 2.2-5LENGTH AND AGE FREQUENCY FOR106 CHANNEL CATFISH COLLECTED FROMROCK RIVER DURING JULY 1974 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 86 of 178(00us000I,-0z-JI.-0I,-HiHSIJ -40 'ONBYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONUNITS 1 & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT- OPERATING LICENSE STAGEFIGURE 2.2-6LENGTH AND AGE FREQUENCY FOR13 CHANNEL CATFISH COLLECTED FROM ROCKRIVER DURING OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER 1974 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 87 of 178ILL CREEKBYRONROCK RIVELEAFRIVERUS:ni0YRON STATIONFISHING SITESA BYRON AREA (1'-)B -WOODLAND CREEK MOUTH AREA (S-3)FC LEAF RIVER MOUTH AREA (S-4)G O ROCK RIVER TERRACE AREAUD E R-3 AREACREEK F MUD CREEK AREAG -STRONGHOLD AREAH -BLACKNAWN STATUE AREAR-6J I -R5 AREAI OREGON BOAT LAUNCH AREAN -L K AREA ABOVE OREGON DAMOREGON L -BELOW OREGON DAM (EAST END)M BELOW OREGON DAM (WEST END)MILESBYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING UNITS 1 & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT -OPERATING FIGURE 2.2-7,e1_STATiONLICENSE STAGEROCK RIVER FISHING SITES WHEREFISHERMEN WERE INTERVIEWED BETWEENMAY 5 AND SEPTEMBER 28, 1974 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 88 of 178BYRON STATIONENVIRONMENTAL REPORTOPERATING LICENSE STAGEVOLUME 2COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 89 of 178 Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 1JULY 1981AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 1982CHAPTER 4.0 -ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATION, STATIONCONSTRUCTION, AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTSPAGE4.1 SITE PREPARATION AND STATION CONSTRUCTION 4.1-14.1.1 Construction Schedule 4.1-14.1.2 Land Use 4.1-14.1.3 Water Use 4.1-44.1.4 Montitoring Program 4.1-54.1.4.1 Terrestrial Studies 4.1-54.1.4.1.1 Summary of 1974 Sampling Results 4.1-54.1.4.1.2 Summary of 1975-1976 Sampling Results 4.1-74.1.4.1.3 Summary of 1976-1977 Sampling Results 4.1-84.1.4.1.4 Summary of 1977-1981 Bird Impaction 3Surveys 4.1-94.1.4.2 Aquatic Studies 4.1-94.1.4.2.1 Summary of 1974 Sampling Results 4.1-94.1.4.2.2 Summary of 1975-1976 Sampling Results 4.1-124.1.4.2.3 Summary of 1976-1977 Sampling Results 4.1-154.1.4.3 Special Surface Water and Groundwater Studies 4.1-184.2 TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION 4.2-14.2.1 Access Roads 4.2-14.2.2 Clearing Methods 4.2-14.2.3 Installation Procedures 4.2-14.2.4 Consideration of Erosion Problems 4.2-14.2.5 Effects on Agricultural Productivity 4.2-24.2.6 Plans for Wildlife Protection 4.2-24.2.7 Plans for Disposal of Debris 4.2-24.2.8 Restoration Plans 4.2-24.2.9 Environmental Impact 4.2-34.3 RESOURCES COMMITTED 4.3-14.3.1 Land Resources 4.3-14.3.2 Water Resources 4.3-14.3.3 Materials Used 4.3-14.4 RADIOACTIVITY 4.4-14.5 CONSTRUCTION IMPACT CONTROL PROGRAM 4.5-14.5.1 Background 4.5-14.5.2 Responsibilities 4.5-14.0-i RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 90 of 178Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 1982TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)PAGE4.5.3 Control Measures 4.5-24.5.3.1 Erosion 4.5-24.5.3.2 Dust 4.5-24.5.3.3 Noise 4.5-24.5.3.4 Transportation Access 4.5-24.5.3.5 Dredge Materials 4.5-34.5.3.6 Aquatic and Terrestrial Ecology 4.5-34.5.3.7 Oils and Chemical Wastes 4.5-34.5A CONSTRUCTION IMPACT CONTROL LETTER 4.5A-i4.0-ii RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf Response Byron ER-OLSPage 91 of 178CHAPTER 4.0 -ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATION, STATIONCONSTRUCTION.

AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION LIST OF TABLES'NUMBER TITLE PAGE4.1-1 Land-Use Categories,

Acreages, andPercentages of Total Area Mapped 4. 1-214.1-2 Field Parameters for 1975-1976 Sampling 4.1-224.1-3 In-Situ Quality Profiles for 1975-1976 Sampling 4.1-234.1 -4 Fall Water Chemistry at Byron Station onOctober 7, 1975 4.1-254.1-5 Winter water Chemistry at Byron Stationon February 12, 1976 4. 1-264. 1-6 Spring Water Chemistry at Byron Stationon April 29, 1975 4.1-274.1-7 Summer Water Chemistry at Byron Stationon July 8, 1975 4.1-284.1-8 Trace Metals Analysis for 1975-1976 Sampling 4.1-294.1-9 Bacteriology Analysis for 1975-1976 Sampling 4.1-334.1-10 Field Parameters for 1976-1977 Sampling 4.1-354.1-11 In-Situ Water Quality Profiles for1975-1976 Sampling 4.1-364.1-12 Spring Water Chemistry at Byron Stationon May 24, 1976 4.1-384.1-13 Summer Water Chemistry at Byron Stationon August 2, 1976 4.1-394.1-14 Fall Water Chemistry at Byron Stationon November 1, 1976 4. 1-404.1-15 Winter Water Chemistry at Byron Stationon February 9, 1977 4. 1-414.1-16 Trace Metals Analysis for 1976-1977 Sampling

4. 1-424.1-17 Bacteriology Analysis for 1976-1977 Sampling 4.1-464.1-18 Surface Water Chemistry at ByronStation 4. 1-484.1-19 Groundwater Chemistry at Byron Station 4.1-494.4-1 Estimated Doses to Unit 2 Construction Work Force After Unit 1 Startup 4.4-34. 0-iii RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf Response Byron ER-OLSPage 92 of 178CHAPTER 4.0 -ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATION, STATIONCONSTRUCTION.

AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION LIST OF FIGURESNUMBER TITLE4.1-1 Construction Schedule for Byron Station4.1-2 Vegetation and Land Use of the Byron Station Site andAdjoining Areas, Summer 19764. 1-3 River Soundings in Vicinity of Byron Station Intakeand Discharge 4.1-4 Terrestrial Sampling Areas for May and October 1974Sampling Periods4.1-5 Aquatic Sampling Sites Near the Byron Station4.1-6 Surface Water Sampling Stations and Disposal AreasNear Byron Site4.1-7 Locations of Wells Used in the Water QualityMonitoring System4. 0-iv RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 93 of 178Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 1982endangered faunal species were observed on the site or areexpected to reside there.Comparisons of the survey results for Years 1 and 2 show nodetectable faunal changes except for the preemption of someadditional habitat because of station site expansion, and theplanting of several acres of former cropland and pasture inwildlife-food species.

Comparisons of seasonal bird faunasshowed high similarities between the data for Years 1 and 2,especially with regard to the more dominant species.

Commonmammalian species detected onsite were generally the same duringthe 2 years. For both mammals and birds, some yearly variation appeared in the relative abundances of common species.

Thisvariation,

however, was the result of sampling methodology andnormal variation.

None of the variations observed can bereasonably attributed to station construction activities.

No adverse impacts of construction activities on the fauna of thesite were detectable.

14.1.4.1.4 Summary of 1977-1981 Bird Impaction SurveysThe avifaunal survey to document any migratory bird fatalities that may result from direct collision with the meteorological tower, cooling towers, or containment and turbine buildings beganin August 1977. During the 1977 to 1979 survey periods, no deador injured birds were observed.

During the 1980 survey, ninedead birds were documented during the fall migratory season(October).

There were five golden-crowned

kinglets, one long- 3billed marsh wren, one white-throated

sparrow, one tennessee

warbler, and one warbler that could not be more completely identified due to its condition.

All of these birds werecollected from around the bases of the natural draft coolingtower structures.

During the 1981 survey period, no impaction mortalities were reported.

The results as briefly described herewere reported to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and theIllinois Department of Conservation.

4.1.4.2 Aquatic StudiesAquatic monitoring sampling locations are shown in Figure 4.1-5.4.1.4.2.1 Summary of 1974 Sampling ResultsThese data are derived from the "Sixth Quarterly Report" of EAI.Water Chemistry:

Changes observed in the chemistry of the Rock River and itstributary streams from September 1973 through October 1974resulted mainly from seasonal changes in temperature, precipitation, and river discharge rates. The section of theRock River adjacent to the Byron Station and the tributary 4.1-9 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 94 of 178Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 3MARCH 1982streams draining this area appeared to be in a state of moderateeutrophication.

Concentrations of all chemical parameters werewithin Illinois standards with the exception of phosphorus and,in one instance, copper. Nitrate and phosphate were consistently above levels reported capable of producing nuisance algal blooms.The chemistries of the river and tributary streams were similaron most dates sampled at all nine stream stations except W-3 andW-1. The intermittent nature of the streams appeared to be themajor factor affecting the observed differences.

Bacteria:

Total bacteria, fecal coliform, and fecal streptococcus countsfor the five Rock River stations fluctuated seasonally with thehighest counts occurring in April during peak runoff and thelowest counts occurring in October 1974. Similar fluctuations intotal coliform counts were observed, but the highest countsoccurred in January rather than April. Stream stations had amore varied response to seasonal changes than the river stations.

4.1-9a RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 95 of 178Byron ER-OLSSeasonal fluctuations in fecal streptococcus numbers corresponded closely with total bacteria and fecal coliform bacteria counts atthe river stations and fecal coliform counts at the streamstations.

Fecal coliform to fecal streptococcus ratios (FC:FS)varied appreciably on a seasonal basis. Ratios for the five RockRiver stations were indicative of contributions from domesticwastes. Ratios greater than 4.0,- which occurred in September andOctober 1973, were indicative of recent pollution by domesticwastes. Ratios between 0.6 and 4.0, which occurred during theremaining sampling dates, were also indicative of domesticwastes.Phytoplankton:

Phytoplankton was sampled at two river stations from September 8,1973, through October 8, 1974. A total of 118 taxa wereidentified during the study. Taxa included 59 diatoms, 43 greenalgae, 9 blue-greens, 4 euglenoids, 2 pyrrophytes, and 1cryptophyte.

Numerically, diatoms dominated the community throughout thestudy, ranging from 76.38% on October 8, 1974 to 100% on January28, 1974. Dominant forms occurring during the course of thestudy included Cyclotella meneghiniana, Melosira

ambipua, M.granulata,

1. granulata var. anqustissima, Stephanodiscus hantzschii, S. minutus, S. subtilus, and Nitzschia palea. Theseforms are commonly found in eutrophic waters.Zoop.lankton:

Zooplankton samples were collected on six occasions fromSeptember 1973 through October 1974. Samples were takenSeptember 11 and October 16, 1973, from river stations R-1through R-5 and from tributary stream stations S-4, S-5, and S-6.Samples collected during the remaining periods (January 28, April30, July 30, and October 8, 1974) were taken from R-2 and R-5only.Total zooplankton numbers throughout the study (at riverstations) ranged from a low of 2 organisms per liter from stationR-2 on January 28, 1974, to a high of nearly 350 per liter fromstation R-2 on April 30, 1974. Taxonomic composition ofzooplankton collected during the study included 3 copepod and 7cladocerau

species, 14 genera of protozoans, and 18 rotifergenera.Rotifers were the numerically dominant taxa in Rock River sampleson five of six occasions and in one of two periods of streamsampling.

Most commonly occurring forms included juvenilecopepod stages (nauplii and copepodites),

cladoceraus Bosmina andChydorus, and rotifer genera Brachionus, Keratella, andSvnchaeta.

4.1-10 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf Response Byron ER-OLSPage 96 of 178Periphyton:

The periphyton community was sampled at five river stations (R-1through R-5), three tributary stream stations (S-3, S-4, and S-5from September through recember 1973 and S-3, S-5, and S-6 fromJanuary through September 1974), and two woodland pool stations(W-1 and W-2) from September 1973 through September 1974.A total of 266 algae taxa were identified in September 1973through September 1974 samples.

Taxa included 181 diatoms, 64green algae, 1 chrysophyte, 12 blue-green algae, 7 euglenoids, and 1 pyrrhophyte.

Throughout the study, the community was dominated by diatomscomprising from 90% to 100% of the total units counted.

Dominantforms occurring during the study included fMelosira crranulata var.anqustissima, Nitzschia

linearis, Navicula viridula var.avenacea, Gompbonema olivaceum, and Gomphonema

parvulum, all ofwhich are commonly found in eutrophic, waters.Benthos and Macroinvertebrates:

Benthos collected during the six sampling months in the period ofSeptember 1973 through October 1974 were separated intoapproximately 101 taxa from five invertebrate phyla. Eight typesof benthic substrates were described from samples collected during this study period. Samples containing coarse gravel werefound to support the greatest number of invertebrate taxa.Correspondingly, coarse gravel was the substrate type most oftencollected in benthos samples.

Seventeen substrate types andcombinations were described from the samples.Macroinvertebrates collected during the 12 months from September 1973 to September 1974 were separated into approximately 115 taxafrom four invertebrate phyla. Ciptera accounted for the largestnumber of macroinvertebrates collected over the whole samplingperiod (4868), followed by Ephemeroptera (4244), and Oligochaeta (2120).Fish:Sampling stations in the Rock River and in three tributaries tothe river were sampled for adult fish by electroshocking,

seining, and hoop-netting.

Based on fish sampling from September 12, 1973, through November 1, 1974, sizable populations of carp(Cyprinus carpio),

carpsucker (Carpiodes spp.), redhorse(Moxostoma spp.), and channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) existin the section of the Rock River that includes the area justabove the Byron Station to the dam at Oregon, Illinois.

Channelcatfish, for which the river is best known, were most abundant inthe July 1974 samples.

The channel catfish population appearedto be restricted in age and size of individuals.

4.1-11 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 97 of 178 Byron ER-OLSA 5-month creel survey indicated that channel catfish and carpwere the most abundant.

Fishing pressure was greatest below thedam at Oregon and near the mouth of Mud Creek; fishing successwas greatest at the Woodland Creek mouth area and at the Oregondam.Sixty fish larvae and two fish eggs, predominantly minnowspecies, were collected from river and str'eam stations betweenApril 23 and July 3, 1974, inclusive.

4.1.4.2.2 Summary of 1975-1976 Samrling ResultsThese data for the first year of a 5-year aquatic ecology moni-toring survey, which was conducted on the Rock River adjacent tothe Byron Station and on the tributary streams draining thisarea, are derived from the annual report of the construction andpreoperational aquatic ecology monitoring program.Water Chemistry:

The field-measured parameters studied (pH, light penetration, transparency, and turbidity) are presented in Table 4.1-2, andprofiles of temperature, dissolved oxygen, current velocity, andconductivity are presented in Table 4.1-3. The results of theroutine water chemistry analyses are given in Tables 4.1-6through 4.1-7, and the trace analyses are in Table 4.1-8. Table4.1-9 summarizes the results of the bacteriological studies.A number of water quality parameters were found to exceed theIllinois Pollution Control Board Rules and Regulations thatbecame effective March 20, 1975 under the terms of the IllinoisEnvironmental Protection Act.General Standards:

Ammonia (NH., as N}): The limit cf 1.5 mg/liter was exceededduring the spring at all stations but W-2.Phosphate (PO as P): Ortho-phosphate levels exceeded the limitof 0.05 mg/liter at all stations during the summer and winter.In the spring, all stations but W-2 exceeded the limit, and inthe fall all stations except R-2., R-4, S-6, and W-2 exceeded thelimit.PH: Stations R-1 and R-2 fell below the range of 6.5-9.0 pHunits during the summer.Iron (Fe): The limit of 1.0 mg/liter was exceeded at allstations during the spring and summer. .Duning the fall, Stations-6 exceeded the limit, and Stations R-2, 4-6, and W-2 exceededit in the winter.4..1-12 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 98 of 178 Byron ER-CLSCopper (Cu): The limit of 0.02 mg/liter was exceeded only atstation S-4 during the spring.Public and Food Processing Water Supplv Standards:

Iron (Fe): The limit of 0.3 mg/liter was exceeded at allstations during all quarters.

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS): The limit of 500 mg/liter wasexceeded only at Station W-2 during the spring.All other parameters specified in these two standards categories that were tested for were within permissible limits.comparison of the 1975 through 1976 survey results with those ofEnvironmental

Analysts, Inc. (CECo 1973, EAI 1975) revealed onlya few differences.

Summer pH values were generally found to behigher in previous studies than those recorded in the 1975through 1976 survey. Nitrate concentrations were often muchhigher in the previous studies.

Turbidity values recorded by EAI.were uniformly lower than those measured during the 1975 through1976 study, and Secchi disk depths were greater in the EAI data.The most striking difference between these two data sets was inthe reported levels of trace metals. The concentrations of iron,copper, cadmium, and zinc have all apparently increased since theEAI studies were conducted.

Increases in levels of cadmium,copper, and particularly zinc were also noted in fish liversamples over the same period.Phvtoplankton:

Studies by EAI (CECo 1973, EAI 1975) covering the period from May1972 through October 1974 as well as the 1975 through:1976 studyshowed that the phytoplankton of the Rock River was dominated bycentric diatoms, with species of the pennate type present asoccasional dominants.

Species found to be dominant during the1975 through 1976 program were in-most cases the same as thosereported as dominants in the previous studies.

Phytoplankton densities (both numbers and biovolume) during the 1975 through1976 program were considerably higher than those reported by EAIduring the same seasonal periods.Zooplankton:

The structure of the zooplankton community in the Rock River, asexhibited in 1975 through 1976 quarterly samples taken in thevicinity of the Byron Station, is quite typical of lotic systems.River zooplankton is usually noted for extreme dominance byrotiferan species (EH&A 1976b). Most zooplankton groups arebetter adapted to either littoral or pond habitats, but a numberof rotifer species are able to exploit the lotic systems andreach high population densities, particularly in large slow-flowing rivers with dense phytoplankton:

communities (EHIA 1976b).4.1-13 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 99 of 178 Byron ER-OLSA number of species of copepods are adapted to open waters, butrelatively few species are abundant in flowing waters.The Rock River clearly satisfies Williams' (EH&A 1976b) criteria, and the results of zooplankton sampling in the 1975 through 1976study and previous ones (CECo 1973, EAI 1975) were typically riverine.

The number of species found in this and the previousstudies were virtually the same. Spring and fall samples yieldedthe greatest densities of zooplankton, and rotifers usuallypredominated except when copepod nauplii were at their maximumsin winter and early-spring.

Periphyton:

During the 1975 through 1976 study, all stations were.heavily dominated by diatoms.

Other groups, notably the Chlorophyta andCyanophyta, were locally important during the summer. Althoughcentric diatoms were important in the periphyton communities,.

they did not dominate as completely as they did in thephytoplankton community.

Standing crop sizes and seasonal patterns of abundance in thisstudy were considerably different from those found by EAI,although the species recorded as dominants in both studies werevery similar.Species diversity and redundancy values, and the species noted asdominants in this survey indicated that the communities areprobably subjected to at least a moderate degree of enrichment.

Benthos and Macroinvertebrates:

Dredge samples showed that the benthic fauna at all Rock Riverstations except R-I were dominated hy the Tubificidae.

StationR-1, and to a lesser extent S-3, had a fauna that was distinctfrom those of the remaining Rock River stations.

This difference was apparently due to the coarser sediments sampled at thesestations.

The fauna of W-2 was different from that of any otherstation, probably because of the nature of the small streamhabitat.

The results of the artificial substrate program showedthat all stations were similar in this respect and were dominated by organisms characteristic of erosional habitats.

Fish:The 1975 through 1976. fish study produced 38 species of fish fromthe Rock River. Estimates from the literature (CECo 1973, EAI1975) showed that 74 fish species occur in the system.Rough fish populations (suckers, carp, and buffalo) dominated thesystem both by number and weight. Game fish populations exceptfor Ictalurus punctatus (channel catfish) consisted of relatively few individuals.

4.1-14 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 100 of 178 Byron ER-CLSThe condition factor, age class information, length frequency

analysis, and incidence of parasitism provided no unexpected orabnormal survey results.

Samples collected above and below theByron Station discharge point gave no clear indication ofdifferences in productivity.

Creel census data indicated lower catches than those of theprevious EAI survey.4.1.4.2.3 Summary of 1976-1977 Sampling ResultsThese data for the second year of a 5-year aquatic ecologymonitoring survey, which was conducted on the Rock River adjacentto the Byron Station and on the tributary streams draining thisarea, are derived from the annual report of the construction andpreoperational aquatic ecology monitoring program.Water Chemistry:

The field-measured parameters studied (pH, light penetration, transparency, and turbidity) are presented in Table 4.1-10, andprofiles of temperature, dissolved oxygen, current velocity, andconductivity are presented in Table 4.1-11. The results cf waterc.,emistry analyses are given in Tables 4.1-12 through 4.1-15, andthe trace metal analyses in Table 4.1-16. Table 4.1-17summarizes the results of the bacteriological studies.Some water quality parameters were found to exceed the IllinoisPollution Control Board Rules and Regulations that becameeffective March 20, 1975, under the terms of the IllinoisEnvironmental Protection Act.General Standards:

Ammonia (NH4 as N): The limit of 1.5 mg/liter was exceededduring the winter at Stations R-1, F-2, R-3, R-5, and S-3.Phosphate (P04 as P): Ortho-phosphate levels exceeded the limitof 0.05 mg/liter at all stations sampled in spring except R-1 andW-2, at all but W-2 in summer, at no stations in fall, and at allbut S-5 in winter (Station W-2 was frozen).Iron (Fe): The limit of 1.0 mg/liter was exceeded at Station R-2in spring, and at Station R-3 in summer.C (Cu): Concentrations of copper exceeded the limit of 0.02mg/liter in winter at Stations R-1, R-3, S-3, and S-6.Public and Food Processing Water Supply Standards:

Iron (Fe): The limit of 0.3 mg/liter was exceeded at allstations in spring and summer and at Stations R-4, S-5, and S-6in fall.4.1-15 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf Response Byron ER-OLSPage 101 of 178Total Dissolved Solids (TDS): The limit of 500 mg/liter wasexceeded in fall at all stations but W-2, and in winter at allbut Station S-6 (Station W-2 was frozen).All other parameters specified in these two standards categories that were tested for were within the standard limits.Comparison of data collected during Year 2 with data of Year 1(1975 through 1976) and with that of EMI (CECo 1973, EAI 1975)shows that several of the parameters that had shown an increasefrom EAI values in Year 1 of the current study declined to levelsmore comparable with the previous data. The high summer pHvalues of Year 1 were not repeated.

Nitrate values remained wellbelow the high values recorded by RAI. Under the much-reduced flow regime, water clarity improved

greatly, as evidenced byturbidity and Secchi disk measurements.

The amount of totaldissolved solids increased considerably, however.The marked differences between EAI's trace metal concentrations and those of Year 1, especially concentrations of iron, copper,cadmium, and zinc, were less during the 1976 through 1977sampling.

Cadmium levels were now comparable to those of the EAIstudy. Iron was still present in notably higher concentrations than in the EAI study, although much lower than in Year 1 of themonitoring program.

Copper and zinc concentrations were stillgenerally higher than those found by EAI, but had droppedconsiderably and were now comparable in some quarters.

It is possible that the many large differences between theresults reported by EAI and those found in the Year 1 of the 5-year monitoring study were due in part to floods in the spring of1975, which may have leached deposits of chemicals from bottomdeposits.

With lower flows from the fall of 1975 through the endof the 1976 through 1977 study year, this leaching

declined, andwith it the levels of metal concentrations.

Phytoplankton:

No consistent differences in phytoplankton standing crop or pro-duction parameters were evident between Stations R-2 and R-5.Diversities were generally slightly higher during the 1976through 1977 study year and followed a different seasonal patternthan during 1975 through 1976. Dominant species and theirseasonal patterns of abundance, on the other hand, tended to bequite similar in the two years, with the greatest differences occurring during the summer samples.

Phytoplankton community structure and production parameters continued to indicate, as inprevious studies (CECo 1973, EAI 1975, EH&A 1976b), that the RockRiver is at least moderately enriched.

4.1-16 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 102 of 178 Byron ER-OLSZooplankton:

In Year-2 samples, zooplankton were again typical of riverinesystems, dominated strongly by rotifers, except in winter. Thealteration in sampling schedule may he responsible for many ofthe differences in the seasonal composition of the zooplankton, with samples collected at different points in the successional cycle. These variations within comparable seasons are indicative of the magnitude of variation that can he expected within aseason. Some differences among stations may be due to short-lived pulses in abundance that coincide with a water qualitychange downstream.

Severe winter weather provokes the greatestchanges in community composition and density, as seen incomparisons between winter and other quarters, and betweenwinters.Periphyton:

The periphyton community of the Rock River was heavily dominated ty diatoms.

Other algal groups were important only during thewarmest months. Species diversity and redundancy were similar tothose encountered during 1975 through 1976. These values and thedominant species present indicate that the Rock River continues to be at least moderately enriched.

Species composition, standing crops, and seasonal patterns of abundance were generally similar to those of the previous year. As in the 1975 through1976 study year, the biomass values measured during the 1976through 1977 study year did not consistently correlate withdensity by count or biovolume.

Benthos and Macroinvertebrates:

Both the natural and the artificial substrate communities observed in Year 2 were generally similar to those observed inthe 1975 through 1976 study. The natural substrates continued tobe dominated by the Tubificidae and Chironomidae, particularly atthose stations having the softest or finest grained sediments.

Species diversity was stable during the Year 2, relative to thatof the previous year, and was at an intermediate level betweenthe low diversities found in spring and summer (1975) and highdiversities of the fall. The species present in the sedimentvaried little between years. Although the rank order of dominantspecies was somewhat different in the two years, no particular significance could be ascribed to the changes.The artificial substrate communities showed few differences between Year 1 and Year 2. Relative to 1975, elevated standingcrops and lowered summer-fall (July, August, September) diversity was a result of large dipteran (Tanytarsus sp.) populations thatpeaked in August and September.

These changes may have resultedfrom an increase in food supply, represented by the increased periphyton standing crop observed during the second year.4.1-17 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf Response Byron IR-OLSPage 103 of 178Although total standing crops did not show any consistent patternamong stations, differences in dominant species and associated standing crops were encountered between left and right bankstations with much greater frequency than were differences between stations located along the same bank. The right bankartificial substrate communities appeared to contain a greaterproportion of Diptera and fewer Ephemercptera than the left bankcommuni ties.Fish:The 1976 through 1977 fish study found 40 species of fish, 5 ofwhich were not found during the 1975 through 1976 sampling.

Rough fish such as carp, suckers, and buffalo continued todominate the system by weight, although forage species, primarily

minnows, generally had the largest number of individuals.

Channel catfish was again the most abundant game fish. Adultgame fish collected were a higher percentage of the totalpopulation during the 1976-1977 sampling than during the1975-1976 sampling.

Condition

factors, year class data, and parasitism data yieldedno abnormal results.

Creel census data indicated poorer fishingduring the 1976-1977 census period than during the 1975-1976 period. The differences between years were significant, however,only in the fall hoop nets when much lower temperatures and flowsoccurred during the 1976-1977 sampling period and no fish werecaught. No rare and endangered species of fish were caughtduring the 1976-1977 sampling.

4.1.4.3 Special surface Water and Groundwater StudiesA detailed site geotechnical investigation identified an area ofsurface water and groundwater contamination by toxic materials that existed before the property was purchased by CECo.An initial investigation of the contamination problem wasperformed by Dames I Moore from May 25 through July 5, 1974, andthe results are contained in the "Report, Investigation

-BuriedToxic Materials and Extent of Contamination Near Byron,Illinois",

dated July 22, 1974 (Eames & Moore 1974). A spring1975 sampling and measuring program was conducted from April 8through April 20, and the results of this program are presented in the "Report, Results of Spring 1975 Sampling and Measuring Program:

Addendum to July 22, 1974 Report",

dated May 7, 1975(Dames & Moore 1975).The July 22 report concluded that drums and barrels containing toxic chemical wastes, such as cyanide,

arsenic, and cadmium, andbulk lots of solid wastes, such as those containing zinc andlead, and other refuse had been placed on and adjacent to theDirk farm before its purchase by CECo. CECo employedConservation Chemical Company of Kansas City, Missouri, alicensed waste disposal firm, to remove the drums and barrels,4.1-18 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 104 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABRL 4.1-2FIELD PARAMTERS FOR 1975-1976 SAMPLINGLIGHTPEIETRATION STATION p. (Secchi)

(cm)SAMPLESpring 1975(April 29)Summer 1975C(July 7 and 10)Fall 1975c(October 7)Winter 1976c(February 12)R-1R-2R-3R-4R-5S-5S-6W-1W-2R-1R-2R-3R-4R-5S-3S-5S-6W-2R-1R-2R-3R-4R-5S-3S-5S-6W-2R-2R-3R-4R-5S-3S-6W-27.87.27.67.9a7.97.87.2a6.46.46.66.86.96.87.07.07.48.58.78.78.78.78.58.78.7b7.87.87.77.87.87.87.912.0012.0012.0013.0014.0010.0013.00bb22.0022.0024.0025.0019.0017.0019.00ab16.0018.0016.0013.0013.0018.009.0010.00b48.3045.8055.3045.8060.90abTRANSPARENCY (extinction coeff. /cm)0.1400.1400.1400.1300.1200.170abb0.0800.0800.0700.0700.1000.1000.090abTURBIDITY (JTU)289254248232a274233bb36419019189135171194ab338334406348282320353282b0.1100.0900.1100.1300.1300.0900.1900.180b0.0010.0010.0070.0010.003ab814910912baNot sampled due to field error.bNot part of sample program.CStation W-1 was dry.4.1-22 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 105 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-3IN-SITU WATER OUALITY PROFILES POR 1975-1976 SAMPLINGDISSOLVED DEPTH TEMPERATURE OXYGEN VELOCITYa STATION (M) (.C .(mg/liter)

(r/sec)SAMPLESpring 1975iApril 29)Summer 1975c(July 7 and 10)CONDUCTIVITY (Pmho)R-1 0.02.2R-2 0.01.02.0R-3 0.04.0R-4 0.04.0R-5 0.01.02.0s-3 0.03.0S-5 0.01.8S-6 0.02.5W-lb 0.0W- 2b 0.0R-I 0.01.01.5R-2 0.01.02.0R-3 0.01.02.0R-4 0.01.02.03.0R-5 0.01.02.0S-3 0.01.0S-5 0.01.0S-6d 0.01.0W-2 0.010.510.213.013.013.09.59.09.59.113.013.013.09.09.09.59.210.69.519.016.224.224.024.026.126.326.326.026.026.026.026.526.526.525.425.125.126.026.026.026.026.025.824.010.3010.4010.2010.209.5010.9011.1010.9010.7010.4010.209.4010.7010.7011.0010.901L.0010.009.4010.806.407.207.007.307.007.307.107.107.007.006.806.906.806.806.506.207.007.207.807.607.407.407.200.820.850.600.800.650.600.600.700.200.500.500.400.500.500.400.600.600.400.400.500.400.300.400.300.400.200.000.000.00315290368370370310329311320360360365330340300305320360300458550550550600600600600590600600570590590590590550610600600610590650600a Blanks in column headed 'VELOCITY" indicate data not taken, except where footnoted.

b At Stations W-i and W-2 the velocity was unmeasurable.

c Station W-1 was dry.d Velocity was not measured'at Station S-6.4.1-23 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 106 of 178Dyroc fl-OLSTABLE 4.1-3 Cont'd)DISSOLVED DEPTH TESERiATUI OXYENeSTATON VAO 2°S.V...

-... (wSl/4iteU)

VELOCITY CONDUCTIVITY (misec) Ciamho)Fall 1975c(October 7)Winter 1976f'(February 12)3-1 0.01.0R- 29 0.01.02.0R-3 0.01.02.08-4 0.01.02.0R-5 0.01.02.08-3 0.0S*5 0.0S-6 0.01.0W-2h 0.0R-2 0.01.01.8R-3 0.01.01.5R-4 0.01.02.03.0R-S 0.01.02.0S-3 0.01.0S-6 0.01.0W-2J 0.016.216.015.015.015.015.615.415.215.515.015.015.214.214.816.017.516.913.615.4-0.2-0.2-0.50.0-0.3-0.3-0.5-0.5-1.0-1.0-0.8-0.8-0.80.0-0.5-0.5-0.54.215.0015.0014.4013.1014.0015.0015.0015.0015.0014.5014.2015.0015.0014.6015.0015.005.0012.008.7012.4012.4012.8014.0014.2014.4011.2011.0011.0011.0014.8014.6014.4013.8114.2010.6010.5011.600.400.400.300.200.200.200.200.200.200.200.200.100.200.100.200.100.100.100.120.180.100.150.150.100.150.200.200.150.150.180.100.080.100.000.000.00486600492650620482580550455580580670492455490530530550550550408283* Value of 15.00 is upper limit of detection.

f Station W-I was dry.8 Conductivity data not taken at Station R-2 in fall.h Velocity unmeasurable and conductivity not measured at StAtion W-2 in fall.i For winter 1976, the conductivity meter was broken, so all surface water samples wereanalyzed in the lab, and Stations R-1 and S-5 were inaccessible because of ice.J Velocity not measured at Station W-2 in winter.4.1-24 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 107 of 178"Byron ER-OLS-.9-- .0: Co. .g. 4.14.4 ...4,-t.,4 m040,4 000 000; .00 .4 000; tome 0,,0"I..0aU50'.4E~.4mana.400'(En'..~ 0-4'.40noU1-00a'a~Ea4~00C'01a410041-Io a. ad444a41'("tEt' I440. 0.4~MIdl~0a'4a'WE, O N taco t rt 000 WOW .IM " ,Oa! 9c; .; 0cooocooa: c:96.0cooocooocoo1! o01.,1! ý ccoocoooI A00!0! 1!1 OoW 1WO WeE M9t 0MW M!t1aO1 ! ! 1ý1zo0400 040404 000 040W 00W 000 00WWOW NNN WOW 00W 000 WOO OEWW1! ,-i IAvý9999 1oo1! c!c!.1ý.=c! Inc! c: 1ýMOO 04040 44.00 NOW M,4N .0MM .0MW 0.4W ~4~40EMMMM 0040 .000 0040 tototo MOM .0MM toOtoMMM MOM .0MM .0MM .0MM .0MM .0MM -4MM NMM000 WOW '.400 WM,.4 ecat 000 ONe toSto 000MM .0.0.0.0MM MME, .0MM .0MM .0MM .0MM .0MMUSU4.1-25 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 108 of 178Byron ER-OLSUoh aE4. 0.0 W0 As.49C% .4CC 0.0C 0.4. 00(4 less 8. .01ýC C! C!C CC C C!C .4!( c!19 9 9 9c 9 9:000~ ~ ZZ 00 0 0000 0 C0(4 C C 4CC C4 C C N t 4N000' 4CC C40 .4. "1. A".4, 000-I4aC05.45.C00.44..C4.8CUa9 C1.!1!c54C444!cOc!`ý N1! 7 *1! ý 1!0 C; °000 00 000ooo 1; c; Z. Z *0.50 400o 00000 000 000W I :::! -00 O'I 00 000 000 00o4" oct. ! o !m 0.0 .CU .1 099°o .. -.4.0 .4 APP.... .4El "001 C O C04 44 01 0C' .

Id0.5~I04 4000 CCC~ C I COC CC C.3'.4C(4 CC44% .40 CCC CCCa C.............

.44.40.44 .444 .4(4 .4(4 .5(4 .4(4 0(4 .4:60~ ~ *~ ~ ~CCS44S4../--26 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 109 of 178't,4ITC1di40U000C0444041.44440~ 0000i'1oj00.0~j4~~oNIa ICIII-I44444~-44441044.4541o (ý99 n o mWON .40.4 040.0 4000 00 O@4444 @44040 404040 0.440 404,014 8 10001O ; cr- ; ci"!o.! ý .!0.00oo o. o... ... 1!90.0o o oC000404011! ý CByron ER-OLS.400 40..0. ... ..4.4. .©.4 I o4 .o000 :04 0 004 00 40404 .4 040 4o 9.,-000 000! 0009 009n 000*0c~04044 .%A4 WOW940404 40404 4040400 00 0009! 1: 1.44. @4..4,. , -.,,4-4 , 0"o. o.,.I. .=.'4-400 40N-4-4-4 0000 404040 ONO 0.00 400 @4040 .44,444 10.440-4 -4400N 40400 WON @40.0 00 004040.40.4400 A04.4 -4.4 -4.4 -4.4 ' .4 40 00 I -, I I. I -4.1-27 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 110 of 178Syron SR-OLSm 008.,000MM :004 9 o O oo SO O .o C 0 %9 Noo 04MS. ....... ... ..000 000 COO 000 000 000 000 000 000"I,_22N MM* ~W'021 o=S004ýW i om ' .£1 !9-o-~S~.M.M .4.NN040' me4m.m NO..°.000OWNN °NM0006oC;c; ; cC! 0 9cooor-. 9'rma040-40rm XM .4.4L AWN9 179 9 °i9 9o1OmN0910C!oo04m 040 OWA O OO W mmM WOW:= i"gma :l' :g :M 1 0 'tI"'0S.4.1-28 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 111 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-8TRACE M-lTAfS ANALYSIS FOR 1975-1976 SAMPLING(All Values in mA/liter)

STATIONR-1meanR-2meanR-3meanR-4meanR-meanS-3meanS-5meanS-6meanW-1meanW-2meanREEPLI-ATE Cd1 0.0022 0.0030.0031 0.0022 0.0020.0021 0.0032 0.0020.0031 0.0012 0.0030.0021 0.0020.0021 0.0032 0.0030.0031 0.0022 0.0050.0041 0.0012 0.0030.0021 0.0022 0.0020.0021 0.0022 0.0010.002Cu0.0220.0140.0180.0140.0140.0140.0130.0100.0120.0110.0140.013,b0.0190.0190.019.0.0080.0160.0120.0130.0200.0160.0110.0130.0120.0090.0080.009SPRING: APRIL 29, 1975Fe C n PF cr7.107.417.256.086.326.205.375.945.665.685.535.607.007.007.127.157.136.496.536.515.105.075.083.333.423.381.621.871.740.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.0100.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.0460.0470.0460.04X0.0660.0530..0340.0390.0360.0410.0400.0400.0310.0310.0460.0460.0460.0360.0380.0370.1660.0770.1220.0290.0270.0280.0130.0290.0210.030.020.030.020.020.020.010.010.010.020.010.020.020.020.040.030.030.020.030.030.030.020.030.010.010.010.020.010.020.0150.0100.0130.0130.0120.0130.0110.0090.0100.0060.0090.0080.0120.0120.0110.0140.0130.0070.0110.0090.0090.0100.0100.0060.0080.0070.0040.0030.0041Re licate 2 was lost in transit.bAsterisk

(*) indicates analysis not done because of lab error.4.1-29 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 112 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-8 (Cont'd)RSTATIONC cR-1meanR-2meanR-3meanR-4EPLI-meanR-5meanS-3meanS-5meanS-6meanW-2meanATE Cd1 0.0022 0.0020.0021 0.0022 0.0020.0021 0.0022 0.0020.0021 0.0032 0.0030.0031 0.0022 0.0020.0021 0.0032 0.0020.0031 0.0032 0.0020.0031 0.0022 0.0020.0021 0.0012 0.0020.002Cu0.0150.0110.0130.0110.0110.0110.00e0.0080.0080.0090.0070.0080.0060.0090.0080.0060.0090.0080.0080.0080.0080.0060.0110.0090.0070.0070.007SUMt4ER:

JULY 7, 1975Fe Co _97.26 0.008 0.00017.13 0.008 0.00017.19 0.008 0.00014.36 0.005 0.00014.66 0.007 0.00014.51 0.006 0.00014.56 0.005 0.00014.26 0.006 0.00014.41 0.006 0.00014.16 0.004 0.00013.75 0.006 0.00013.95 0.005 0.00013.53 0.005 0.00012.90 0.007 0.00013.22 0.006 0.00013.79 0.006 0.00013.96 0.004 0.00013.88 0.005 0.00014.76 0.006 0.00014.14 0.007 0.00014.45 0.007 0.00013.16 0.005 0.00013.04 0.007 0.00013.10 0.006 0.00013.58 0.007 0.00013.80 0.006 0.00013.69 0.007 0.0001Zn0.0330.0310.0320.0280.0280.0280.0270.0200.0230.0190.0170.0180.0170.0220.0190.0150.0190.0170.0220.0210.0210.0140.0110.0130.0140.0180.016P00.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.01C0.r0.0170.0100.0140.0040.0070.0060.0050.0070.0060.0040.0060.0050.0080.0040.0060.0050.0070.006.0.0120.0060.0090.0060.0080.0070.0050.0030.004CStation W-i was dry.4.1-30 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 113 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-I (Cont'd)REPLI-FALL: OCTOBER 7, 1975STATIONC CATE Cd Cu Fe COHg ZnPb CrR-1meanR-2meanR-3meanR-4meanR-5meanS-3meanS-5meanS-6meanW-2mean0.001 0.011 0.74 0.003 0.0001 0.024 0.01 0.0040.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0010.0090.0100.0090.0110.0100.0080.0090.0090.0110.0110.0110.0110.0110.0110.0110.0110.0110.0110.0100.0110.0090.0150.0120.0070.0090.0080.890.810.850.940.890.651.000.820.770.850.811.090.640.870.830.780.800.780.800.791.161.291.220.240.220.230.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0110.0070.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.0030.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.00010.0200.0220.0240.0270.0250.200.230.210.0240.0280.0260.0300.0230.0260.0280.0260.0270.0260.0260.0260.0240.0260.0250.0100.0110.0110.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.010.020.020.020.020.010.020.010.010.010.010.010.010.0040.0040.0040.0050.0050.0050.0050.0050.0050.0060.0060.0050.0050.0050.0050.0030.0040.0030.0040.0040.0040.0040.0040.0030.0020.003Cstation W-1 was dry.4.1-31 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 114 of 178 Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-8 (Cont'd)REPLI- WINTER: FEBRUARY 2, 1976STATIONcd CATE Cd Cu Fe Co Hg Zn Pb CrR-2 1 0.001 0.008 2.17 0.010 0.0001 0.025 0.01 0.0092 0.001 0.007 0.67 0.010 0.0001 0.018 0.01 0.013mean. 0.001 0.008 1.42 0.010 0.0001 0.021 0.01 0.011R-3 1 0.001 0.010 0.65 0.010 0.0001 0.016 0.01 0.0142 0.001 0.200 0.65 0.010 0.0001 0.016 0.01 0.012mean 0.001 0.105 0.65 0.010 0.0001 0.016 0.01 0.013R-4 1 0.001 0.010 0.56 0.010 0.0001 0.020 0.01 0.0102 0.001 0.009 0.53 0.010 0.0001 0.016 0.01 0.008mean 0.001 0.010 0.54 0.010 0.0001 0.018 0.01 0.009R-5 1 0.001 0.007 0.66 0.010 0.0001 0.016 0.01 0.0182 0.001 0.010 0.63 0.010 0.0001 0.016 0.01 0.011mean 0.001 0.009 0.64 0.010 0.0001 0.016 0.01 0.015S-3 1 0.001 0.006 0.49 0.010 0.0001 0.018 0.01 0.0052 0.001 0.009 0.47 0.010 0.0001 0.020 0.01 0.005mean 0.001 0.009 0.48 0.010 0.0001 0.019 0.01 0.005S-6 1 0.001 0.005 1.56 0.010 0.0001 0.008 0.01 0.0052 0.001 0.007 1.71 0.010 0.0001 0.010 0.01 0.006mean 0.001 0.006 1.63 0.010 0.0001 0.009 0.01 0.006W-2 1 0.001 0.012 2.91 0.010 0.0001 0.024 0.01 0.0062 0.001 0.006 3.06 0.010 0.0001 0.019 0.01 0.005mean 0.001 0.009 2.98 0.010 0.0001 0.021 0.01 0.006CStation W-1 was dry.dStations R-1 and S-3 were inaccessible because of ice.4.1-32 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 115 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-9BACTERIOLOGY ANALYSIS FOR 1975-1976 SAMPLING(All Values in No. ofColonies/100 ml ExceptWhere Noted)SPRING: APRIL 29, 1975STANDARDSTATIONR-1meanR-2meanR-3meanR-4meanR-5bmeanS-3meanS-5meanS-6meanW-1dmeanW-2meanREPLI- PLATECATE COUNTa1 46,0002 49,00047,5001 46,0002 33,00039,5001 48,0002 62,00055,0001 48,0002 33,00040,5001 ,c1 50,0002 90,00070,0001 57,0002 50,00053,5001 36,0002 36,00036,0001 35,0002 58,00016,5001 3,8002 3,5003,650T-COLI5,90055,00030,4506,00021,00013,50032,00047,00039,50020,00019,00019,5009,8009,80015,00023,00019,00038,00023,00030,5006,1004,8005,40023,00018,00020,5001,200100650F-STREP7,40030,00018,7003,10068,00035,5506,2004,0005,1003,50041,00022,2505,8005,30026,10010,60018,350124,0009,20066,6007,8003,7005,7501,1001,1401,120860100480RC.SUMMER:STANDARDEPLI- PLATEATE COUNTa1 76,0002 59,00067,5001 52,0002 49,00050,5001 42,0002 32,00037,0001 44,0002 25,00034,5001 41,0002 78,00059,5001 34,0002 34,00034,0001 41,0002 40,00040,5001 30,0002 37,00033,50050,0002 21,00035,500JULY 8, 1975T-COLI11,00014,00012,50010,00017,00013,50010,0009,0009,50020,00010,00015,00011,00010,00010,50013,00016,00014,50010,00014,00012,00013,00012,00012,500F-STREP5,5005,2005,3501,0001,2001,1007003005009001,1001,0002,0001,7001,8501,6001,4001,5002,5002,5002,5004,2004,5004,35012,000 1,00014,000 1,20013,000 1,100aValues in no. of colonies/ml.

bspring Replicate 2 was lost in transit.CAsterisk

(*) indicates analysis not done because of lab error.dstation W-1 was dry during summer, fall, and winter sampling.

4.1-33 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 116 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-9 (Cont'd)FALL: OCTOBER 7, 1975STANDARDPLATESTATION REPLICATE COUNTa T-COLI F-STREPR-1e 1 17,000 6,000 3002 11,000 8,000 400mean 14,000 7,000 350R-2 1 15,000 7,000 3002 13,000 8,000 600mean 14,000 7,500 450R-3 1 17,000 7,000 3002 14,"00 7,000 400mean 15,500 7,000 350R-4 1 31,000 6,000 3002 15,000 6,000 500mean 23,000 6,000 400R-5 1 12,000 5,000 3002 13,000 9,000 400mean 12,500 7,000 350S-3 1 20,000 7,000 2002 22,000 8,000 300mean 21,000 7,500 250S-5e 36,000 5,000 2002 23,000 7,000 200mean 29,500 6,000 200S-6 1 18,000 6,000 2002 13,000 6,000 300mean 15,500 6,000 250W-2 1 21,000 7,000 4002 19,000 5,000 200mean 20,000 6,000 300WINTER: FEBRUARY 12, 1976STANDARDPLATEREPLICATE COUNTa T-COLI F-STREP1 16,000 4,000*2 28,000 5,00023,000 4,5001 21,000 5,0002 25,000 1,00023,000 3,0001 26,000 2,0002 17,000 6,00021,500 4,0001 26,000 4,0002 31,000 5,00028,500 4,5001 23,000 3.0002 19,000 3,00021,000 3,0001 24,000 3,0002 18,000 2,00021,000 2,5001 31,000 3,0002 33,000 2,00032,000 2,500410220315290210250410210310120180150130110120200130165140220180avalues in no. of colonies/ml.

Station inaccesible during winter sampling because of ice.4.1-34 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 117 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-10FIELD PARAMETERS FOR 1976-1977 SAMPLINGSAMPLESpring 1976(May 24)Summer 1976(August 2)Fall 1976(November 1)Winter 1977(February 9)STATIONaR-1R-2R-3R-4R-5S-3S-5S-6W-2R-1R-2R-3R-4R-5S-3S-5S-6W-2R-1R-2R-3R-4R-5S-3S-5S-6W-2R-1R-2R-3R-4R-5S-3S-5S-68.18.18.18.18.28.28.18.18.79.08.68.68.78.88.89.08.88.08.18.18.07.08.07.98.28.18.07.97.97.97.97.87.67.8LIGHTPENETRATION (Secchi)

(cm)31.0038.2040.0032.0044.0038.0035.0026 o030.0026.0030.5033.5027.0031.0031.0023.00+93.0068.0074.0074.0057.0077.0026.0059.00+137.00158.00163. no154.00176.0050.00+130.00TRANSPARENCY (extinction coeff./cm) 0.0080.0090.0030.0040.0030.0010.0030.014+0.0040.0090.0050.0030.0170.0060.0040.009+0.0000.0010.0010.0020.0010.0010.0020.003+0.0010.0020.0040.0080.0010.001+0.005TURBIDITY (JTU)753864687868862123222121232022844455455122222224aStation W-1 was dry during all fourwinter sampling.

sampling programs; Station W-2 was dry duringbAsterisk

(*) indicates analysis not done because of field error.CCross (+) indicates analysis not done because water too shallow to measure.4.1-35 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 118 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-11IN-SITU WATER QUALITY PROFILES FOR 1975-1976 SAMPLINGSAMPLESpring 1976(May 24)Summer 1976(August 2)DEPTH TEMPERATURE STATIONa (meters)

(* C4R-1 0.01.0R-2 0.01.02.0R-3 0.01.02.02.8R-4 0.01.02.03.0R-5 0.01.02.03.0S-3 0.01.0S-5 0.01.0S-6 0.01.0W-2 0.0R-1 0.01.0R-2 0.01.02.0R-3* 0.01.02.0R-4 0.01.02.0R-5 0.01.02.03.0S-3 0.01.0S-5 0.00.5S-6 0.01.0W-2 0.016.015.517.017.016.817.217.217.317.317.517.317.317.317.417.317.317.317.017.017.817.517.617.615.524.824.825.025.025.024.524.524.525.025.024.524.024.024.024.025.024.826.023.024.820.521.0DISSOLV=OXYGEN0(mg/liter) 9.609.509.409.208.0010.8010.7010.7010.8011.4011.2011.2011.0010.4010.5010.4010.409.709.5011.1010.6010.309.909.1015.0013.5014.9014.2012.8014.0014.0012.4013.2010.608.9011.8011.8011.1010.7015.0015.0014.0012.8015.009.009.40VELOCITY CONDUCTIVITY (m/aec) .umoL0.750.600.400.350.300.450.400.300.300.200.300.300.300.200.250.200.100.200.100.250.200.100.100.200.450.400.200.250.150.200.200.150.280.200.100.150.150.150.100.200.150.150.100.100. Lo0.30500550470475470465470480480460470470470450475480480490500478600460475485490490498500510475-0-0495450450470480485490498495490450490450490aStation W-1 was dry during all four sampling progrems.

bupper limit of detection is 15.00 mg/liter.

CSubsruface conductivity not measured because of field error.4.1-36 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 119 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-11 (Cont'd)DTTON EPTH TPEKPERATURE

_______a (meters)

(*CSAM4PLEFall 1976(November 1)Winter 1977C(February 9)R-1 0.01.0R-2 0.01.02.0R-3 0.01.02.0R-4 0.01.02.02.5R-5 0.01.02.02.7S-3 0.01.01.5S-5 0.00.5S-6 0.01.0w-2 0.0R-1 0.01.02.0R-2 0.01.02.0R-3 0.01.02.0R-4 0.01.02.0R-5 0.01.02.03.0S-3 0.00.5S-5 o.0S-6 0.01.06.36.06.86.56.57.07.07.07.07.07.07.06.56.36.36.26.66.86.88.08.07.07.02.0-1.5-1.5-2.0-1.5-1.5-1.5-1.5-125-1.5-1.5-1.5-1.5-2.0-2.0-2.0-2.0-1.5-1.5-1.5-1.5DISSOLVE, (mg/liter) 11.8012.1013.1013.4013.6012.2012.2012.2012.4012.5012.4012.4012.3012.2012.207.8012.2012.2012.2011.2011.1014.2014.8013.5010.5010.4010.4011.1011.1011.0011.1011.1011.0010.9010.8010.8010.7010.6010.6010.508.808.8012.5011.2011.20VELOCITY COND0UCTIVITY (rn/See)

(ijeho)0.300.200.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.100.200.300.250.100.120.100.100.100.100.100.100.100.100.100.100.050.000.000.000.000.00405410450460460420420420420420425425400405408350410420420430430410410400375380380370370370390395395380385390375380380380385390350340350astation W-I was dry during all four sampling programs.

bupper limit of detection is 15.00 mg/liter.

CStation W-2 was frozen during winter sampling.

4.1-37 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 120 of 178Byron ER-OLS0.800..a0 00cW c 0 coo No.4 000 000 000.4..4 .4.. .4.4. .4.4 a .4 M.0.- 44.4 N N .I I .00OWN ONO NWO 40MW NOW ONW OWOCON WWN 000 0MW MOO ON'fl 0MM000 000......000 0000)0.1000 00900 COO9 000 000 9 000 000 00WNO OM WO W W OO OO .00 4 O WN0-4.0.4M OW OM.- WoW CoN .ON O. N 4i0344I.00Sammi ... ..44. 900 -0900ooNOWo00.cooocooocoo0.0Co.o9.0..a0ooWW W NNN 0440 NWN ONO WNN .4.4000; 000; 000 000 000 o000.. ... .............431 .....N. NO""NMM MM'i 1ý cý000 000 000r1 C!oAAA00000 000M 0M99 0MMc:3;&441 000 000 000 000 OWW 000040 WWW WWW 000 WWW CWW .4.4.44044 4'4NN 0MM MOM NNN ONO NONOW'44al.4040.14U-M- 4 -N --MN MNC04.1-38 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 121 of 178Byron ER-OLS4'a)a)CME.-d.c44-a)4.I4.00%*00a)0a= I>=1Oul0. 1InS)fa)a00 a)41zI9 0%000 MOO tWO 004 40Ww000 .40.4 Ca-S 000 a-Ma-oooi ooo I!o o1o oo o o oo oool.9 0 .9m.. .....0 0. 0. N.. .. .005 000% CCC OLCO HOC 000% MOO 000 oa... ...0 , CC ..a ..a ... Co. CCC;C;Cý CCC C C C;CC1 ;4 ;z ; z ;ýz zc CCC CC CCC ICCCCOccC C C 00Q% C!CC O C Co!'io!77o0,00c; 1ý 1;o;oc0000c00C; ; CAA,- 000p SOA MOM Ca-a-c! ! 1C! C!999w,,1! c ,-a! ..9 9,99 9 1om m 11! ":999mMa-N99 NaN N-N aN -M MN -a a-- aMHa H- H -H -Ha .N .4-N4 ..,I=I,C.=4.1-39 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 122 of 178MolByron ER-OLSCO 000 coo aoo .. 000 oo 0oo .0o9 0M! NOO 0 C! 9 N 9 9! 99 ! N 9-0 99,*024.E0.1 w00f0M .I ". NO .. ...1. 000.000 "' 0... .0 .0N00 .0ON N14 1 4n 619 rc!C; °n r:C; *; °.oC!o C!NOO ý ý1 1 140 014 NWO 000 9 0 1!1 NO NOý ýi:C!o1o~1U-.I000 000 0.0..0 ..c!i 9o .- .tn .201 .... ..jx -000II.1400 NON 14140 NNN NNN 14NN NONI.00S2201044S('INN NNN NN N fINN NNN N4'JNNNN.1 NONNNNNNNN N NNMNNNNNNONNNNN 441.404101 4 0 4 0 I 5 4 01 4 0101 -01 4j ON 010 0 01 N 014.1-40 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 123 of 178JON.0ICi.iByron ER-OLS... ... ... ... ...ocoo coo ... ... ...°.A00 M.. ... 0 i... .s .. ..4.. -.4.. .4..4 .4.. .4.4. .4.40IC44aCU00.o~o ..5;"tio! 9i .=.=liII ,II .,mI :-N MNN ...O -i ...l ...¢O 1C. 1.!=,- c;ooocoN° :Co.occNcoooCcc Ccc CCC 9.! CC9 9co cocOSO mom f-in.4 isf-.4 OOC Oem f-CM.4 .4 .4 .4 .4.4 .4 .4 .4 0.4Scm MSiisc; c;c! 1ýooo cci 000 OCO NON Sof-coo 0mm 055 mmm cmci f--f.40 .4N .40.40.40.40.40 7 17 1'? 1 7.1 7 I 7 1SgS3S3M3cgo3ci, 4.1-41 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 124 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-16TRACE METALS ANALYSIS FOR 1976-1977 SAMPLING(All Values in mg/liter)

STATION aR-1meanR-2meanR-3meanR-4meanR-5meanS-3meanS-5meanS-6meanW-2meanC1EPLI-SPRING: MAY 24, 1976LTE Cd1 0.0002 0.0000.0001 0.0022 0.0010.0021 0.0002 0.0000.0001 0.0022 0.0010.0021 0.0012 0.0010.0011 0.0002 0.0000.0001 0.0002 0.0000.0001 0.0002 0.0000.0001 0.0002 0.0000.000ZCU0.0060.0070.0070.0130.0120.0130.0060.0070.0070.0080.0140.0110.0090.0120.0110.0120.0100.0110.0100.0110.0110.0050.0070.0060.0120.0110.012Fe0.530.380.461.481.351.410.350.750.550.860.870.860.610.700.650.830.770.801.020.820.920.870.900.880.390.340.37Cot H, z._.. Pb0.000 0.0000 0.023 0.010.000 0.0000 0.220 0.010.000 0.0000 0.121 0.010.000 0.0000 0.017 0.000.000 0.0000 0.018 0.010.000 0.0000 0.017 0.010.000 0.0000 0.076 0.010.000 0.0000 0.022 0.010.000 0.0000 0.049 0.010.000 0.0000 0.032 0.010.000 0.0000 0.030 0.010.000 0.0000 0.031 0.010.000 0.0000 0.025 0.00.0.000 0.0000 0.054 0.000.000 0.0000 0.039 0.000.000 0.0000 0.079 0.020.000 0.0000 0.096 0.010.000 0.0000 0.087 0.020.000 0.0000 0.036 0.000.000 0.0000 0.046 0.000.000 0.0000 0.041 0.000.000 0.0000 0.016 0.010.000 0.0000 0.590 0.010.000 0.0000 0.303 0.010.000 0.0000 0.018 0.000.000 0.0000 0.017 0.000.000 0.0000 0.017 0.00Cr0.0060.0060.0060.0110.0120.0120.0080.0060.0070.0060.0080.0070.0090.0040.0070.0120.0110.0120.0050.0070.0060.0030.0030.0030.0040.0050.005aStation W-1 was dry during spring sampling.

4.1-42 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 125 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-16 (Cont'd)STATIONaR-1meanR-2meanR-3meanR-4meanR-5meanS-3meanS-5meanS-6meanW-2.meanREPLI-CATE121212221212122212SUMMER: AUGUST 2, 1976Cd Cu Fe Co H90.0010.0010.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0010.0000.0010.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0010.0000.0010.0000.0000.0000.0110.0160.0140.0080.0130.0110.0060.0080.0070.0100.0070.0090.0090.0060.0080.0060.0130.0100.0120.0050.0090.0180.0150.0160.0060.0040.0050.970.900.930.790.760.770.981.051.010.800.840.821.130.830.981.030.950.990.900.720.811.050.910.980.610.570.590.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.0000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000Zn0.0240.0260.0250.0110.0110.0110.0240.0130.0180.0160.0110.0140.0360.0010.0180.0160.0130.0150.0150.0070.0110.0300.0250.0270.0140.0080.011Pb0.000.000.000.000.000.000.010.000.010.000.000.000.010.000.010.000.000.000.010.000.010.020.010.020.000.000.00Cr0.0090.0080.0090.0080.0020.0050.0090.0090.0090.0080.0070.0080.0080.0120.0100.0030.0020.0030.0020.0020.0020.0160.0090.0130.0000.0000.000aStation W-1 was dry during summer sampling.

4.1-43 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 126 of 178 Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-16 (Cont'd)REPLI- FALL: NOVEMBER 1, 1976STATIONa CATE Cd CU Fe Co Hq Zn Pb CrR-1 0.000 07.012 0.22 0.000 0.0000 0.024 0.00 0.0032 0.000 0.010 0.33 0.000 0.0000 0.029 0.00 0.002mean 0.000 0.011 0.27 0.000 0.0000 0.026 0.00 0.003R-2 1 0.000 0.012 0.31 0.000 0.0000 0.020 0.00 0.0012 0.000 0.012 0.29 0.000 0.0000 0.021 0.00 0.002mean O.bOO 0.012 0.30 0.000 0.0000 0.020 0.00 0.002R-3 .1 0.000 0.021 0.29 0.000 0.0000 0.024 0.00 0.0042 0.000 0.016 0.32 0.000 0.0000 0.022 0.00 0.004mean 0.000 0.018 0.30 0.000 0.0000 0.023 0.00 0.004R-4 1 0.000 0.022 0.35 0.000 0.0000 0.022 0.00 0.0002 0.000 0.011 0.27 0.000 0.0000 0.021 0.00 0.000mean 0.000 0.016 0.31 0.000 0.0000 0.021 0.00 0.000R-5 1 0.000 0.015 0.29 0.000 0.0000 0.018 0.00 0.0032 0.000 0.011 0.26 0.000 0.0000 0.022 0.00 0.001mean 0.000 0.013 0.27 0.000 0.0000 0.020 0.00 0.002S-3 1 0.000 0.027 0.28 0.000 0.0000 0.021 0.00 0.0042 0.000 0.011 0.27 0.000 0.0000 0.020 0.00 0.004mean 0.000 0.019 0.27 0.000 0.0000 0.020 0.00 0.004S-5 1 0.000 0.017 0.32 0.000 0.0000 0.022 0.00 0.0052 0.000 0.020 0.32 0.000 0.0000 0.026 0.00 0.004mean 0.000 0.018 0.32 0.000 0.0.000 0.024 0.00 0.0058-6 1 0.000 0.011 0.34 0.000 0.0000 0.014 0.00 0.0032 0.000 0.010 0.34 0.000 0.0000 0.020 0.00 0.003mean 0.000 0.011 0.34 0.000 0.0000 0.017 0.00 0.003W-2 1 0.000 0.006 0.14 0.000 0.0000 0.010 0.00 0.0032 0.000 0.006 0.09 0.000 0.0000 0.010 0.00 0.000mean 0.000 0.006 0.11 0.000 0.0000 0.010 0.00 0.002aStationW-I was dry durinq fall eatuplinq.

4.1-44 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-If ResponsePage 127 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-16 (Cont'd)REPLI-STATIONa CATEWINTER: FEBRUARY 91977R-1meanR-2meanR-3meanR-4meanR-5meanS-3meanS-5meanS-6me anCd Cu0.000 0.0180.000 0.0380.000 0.0280.000 0.0070.000 0.0190.000 0.0130.000 0.0550.000 0.0190.000 0,0370.000 0.0170.000 .0.0210.000 0.0190.000 0.0160.000 0.0170.000 0.0160.000 0.0130.000 0.0510.000 0.3200.000 0.0200.000 0.0000.000 0.0100.000 0.0390.000 0.0180.000 0.028Fe Co0.10 0.0000.15 0.0000.13 0.0000.12 0.0000.10 0.0000.11 0.0000.11 0.0000.11 0.0000.11 0.0000.11 0.0000.12 0.0000.11 0.0000.11 0.0000.10 0.0000.10 0.0000.13 0.0000.14 0.0000.13 0.0000.15 0.0000.14 0.0000.14 0.0000.22 0.0000.22 0.0000.22 0.000HgZn0.0000 0.0480.0000 0.0680.0000 0.0580.0000 0.0400.0000 0.0380.0000 0.0390.0000 0.0490.0000 0.0470.0000 0.0480.0000 0.0520.0000 0.0420.0000 0.0470.0000 0.0410.0000 0.0720.0000 0.0560.0000 0.0380.0000 0.1000.0000 0.0690.0000 0.0010.0000 0.0010.0000 0.0010.0000 0.0220.0000 0.0140.0000 0.0180.000.020.010.020.030.030.000.030.020.020.010.020.000.030.020.020.030.030.010.030.020.030.030.030.0050.0040.0050.0110.0060.0090.0100.0070.0090.0040.0100.0070.0150.0130.0140.0060.0070.0070.0000.0000.0000.0060.0020.004PD _ raStation W-1 was dry and Station W-2 was frozen during winter sampling.

4.1-45 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 128 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-17BACTERIOLOGY ANALYSIS FOR 1976-1977 SAMPLING(All Values in No. of Colonies/100 ml Except Where Noted)SPRING! MAY 24, 1976sTANBARDSUMMER: AUGUST 2, 1976STATIONaR-imeanR-2meanR-3meanR-4meanR-5meanS-3meanS-5meanS-6meanW-2.MeanREPLI- PLATECATE COUNTr'1 18,0002 18,00018,0001 17,0002 16,00016,5001 25,0002 26,00025,5001 29,0002 21,00025,0001 29,0002 28,00028,5001 32,0002 34,00033,0001 27,0002 28,00027,5001 27,0002 23,00025,0001 33,0002 34,00033, 500T-COLZ4,7004,1004,400.2,8003,5003,1503,5003,3003,4003,6003,5003,5503,8003,7003,7503,7003,8003,7504,2004,3004,2503,8003,9003,8504,2003,9004,050F-STREP403537383637375546576058443841535152383938313734413839ST4UAKUREPLI- PLAýTE,CATE C1 22,0002 26,00024,0001 35,0002 39,00037,0001 68,0002 27,00047,5001 32,0002 37,00034,5001 32,0002 29,00030,5001 18,0002 28,00023,0001 26,0002 18,00022,0001 25,0002 34,00029,5001 15,0002 22,00018,500T-COLI3,3003,3003,3003,1002,9003,0002,8003,2003,0003,1003,7003,4004,0004,2004,1004,0003,2003,6002,2002,1002,1505,2002,2003,70015,00010,00012,500F-STREP37413936273122312627322929323018101430242722332870170120aStation W-1 was dry during all four sampling periods.bValues in no. of colonies/ml.

4.1-46 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 129 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 4.1-17 (Cont'd)FALLt NOVEMBER 1, 1976STANDARDPLATEbSTATIONa REPLICATE COUNT T-COLI F-STREPWINTER: FEBRUARY 9, 1977STANDARDPLATEbREPLicAT COUNT T-COLI F-STREPR-1meanR-2meanR-3meanR-4meanR-5meanS-3meanS-5meanS-6meanW-2cmean1 57,000 400 .3202 98,000 900 24077,500 650 2801 30,000 500 1802 51,000 400 210..40,500 450 1951 43,000 1,200 2802 28,000 200 10035,500 700 1901 52,000 900 5002 38,000 600 30045,000 700 4001 72,000 1,200 1402 94,000 1,100 20083,000 1,150 1701 75,000 1,500 1002 26,000 600 24050,500 1,050 1701 31,000 1,200 1002 50,000 800 20040,500 1,000 1501 87,000 1,300 2102 89,000 1,400 30088,000 1,350 2551 36,000 2,100 2002 80,000 1,700 10058,000 1,900 1501 8,900 2,3002 13,200 1,96011,050 2,1301 6,340 1,2402 15,200 1,34010,770 1,2901 7,500 1,7402 4,200 .1,5405,850 1,6401 8,200 1,9202 7,400 2,1007,800 2,0101 7,700 1,4202 2,980 1,6805,340. 1,5501 6,800 3202 1,190 3803,995 3.501 7,200 1,7602 6,100 1,6806,650 1,7201 5,700 1,1802 6,600 7206,150 9501151301223515251035232035283520281010*102545.35153023a Station W-I was dry during all four sampling periods.bvalues in no. of colonies/ml.

CStation W-2 was frozen during winter sampling.

4.1-47 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 130 of 178 :BYrn ER-OLS4)C0..0*4J MV000 41 )UU-z-.-.- 4) aC0 4 109 4Je mo" H J oH 4 0r ,a % 0C DaC41 13 ~4-00 N. &440 0v0 0C 00r -4Co Li Ci trw M4 H 0.m -0 £~ao-a~r~

e4o~rAN N4 H NNO4C CA(£0~4 U) ~ G.HD Ci Q DC '.0m V~~.)4 W.VC..r-4 C' C4 4( 00 >0 4to9on c0 0% 0.aqinHa HA Ha --n 4-4 UH ro.' ~ r4.1-48U RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 131 of 178L CREEKROCK RIVEREEKEAFOODLAND\CREEK0REEKU1~F1iimiiII.',LEGENDCREEK4R RIVER TRANSECTS STREAM STATIONW POOL STATION0 SEINING LOCATION2) BYRON STATIONwMILSOREGONBYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONUNITS I & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT -OPERATING LICENSE STAGEFIGURE 4.1-5AQUATIC SAMPLING SITES NEARTHE BYRON STATION RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 132 of 178 Byron ER-OLSCHiAPTER 5.0 -ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF STATION OPERATION TABLE OF CONTENTSPAGE5.1 EFFECTS OF OPERATION OF HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM 5.1-15.1.1 Effluent Limitations and Water QualityStandards 5.1-15.1.2 Physical Effects 5.1-45.1.2.1 The Environmental Report-Construction Permit Stage Model Study 5.1-45.1.2.2 The Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research Paily Model 5.1-55.1.3 Biological Effects 5.1-65.1.3.1 Effects of Released Heat on the RockRiver 5.1-75.1.3.2 Effects of Entrapment and Impingment of Juvenile and Adult Fish on theRock River 5.1-85.1.3.3 Entrainment Effects on the Rock River 5.1-95.1.3.4 Effects of Reactor Shutdown on theRock River 5.1-95.1.3.5 Terrestrial Effects of Operation ofHeat Dissipation System 5.1-95.1.4 Effects of Heat Dissipation Facilities 5.1-105.1.4.1 Impacts of Visible Plume 5.1-115.1.4.1.1 Natural Draft Cooling Towers 5.1-115.1.4.1.1.1 Temporal and Spatial Distribution of Visible Plumes 5.1-115.1.4.1.1.2 Visible Plume Impact Assessment 5.1-125.1.4.1.2 Mechanical Draft Cooling Towers 5.1-135.1.4.2 Impacts of Drift 5.1-135.1.4.2.1 Natural Draft Cooling Towers 5.1-135.1.4.2.1.1 Solids Deposition 5.1-145.1.4.2.1.2 Drift Precipitation 5.1-155.1.4.2.1.3 Airborne Solids 5.1-155.1.4.2.2 Mechanical Draft Cooling Towers 5.1-165.1.4.3 Other Cooling Tower Effects 5.1-165.1.4.3.1 Influences on Climate 5.1-165.1.4.3.2 Icing and Fog 5.1-175.1.4.3.3 Interactions with Atmospheric Constituents 5.1-175.1A PLUME MODELS 5.1A-i5.1B ANALYSIS OF THERMAL PLUME FOR THE BLOWDOWNDISCHARGE FROM THE BYRON POWER STATION 5.1B-i5.1C EFFECTS OF OUTFALL DESIGN ON THE THERMALIMPACT OF BYRON STATION BLOWDOWN DISCHARGE 5.1C-i5.0-i RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 133 of 178 Byron ER-OLSTABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)PAGE5.2 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT FROM ROUTINE OPERATION 5.2-15.2.1 Exposure Pathways 5.2-15.2.1.1 Exposure Pathways to Biota Other Than Man 5.2-15.2.1.1.1 Terrestrial Pathways 5.2-15.2.1.1.2 Aquatic Pathways 5.2-15.2.1.2 Exposure Pathways to Man 5.2-25.2.1.2.1 Terrestrial Pathways 5.2-25.2.1.2.2 Aquatic Pathways 5.2-35.2.2 Radioactivity in Environment 5.2-45.2.2.1 Surface Water Models 5.2-45.2.2.2 Groundwater Models 5.2-55.2.2.3 Gaseous Models 5.2-55.2.3 Dose Rate Estimates for Biota Other ThanMan 5.2-55.2.3.1 Gaseous Effluents 5.2-55.2.3.2 Liquid Effluents 5.2-55.2.3.3 Dose Effects on Biota 5.2-75.2.4 Dose Rate Estimates for Man 5.2-75.2.4.1 Liquid Pathways 5';2-75.2.4.2 Gaseous Pathways 5.2-85.2.4.3 Direct Radiation from Facility 5.2-85.2.4.4 Annual Population Doses 5.2-95.2.5 Summary of Annual Radiation Doses 5.2-95.2A EXAMPLES OF DOSE CALCULATIONAL METHODS 5.2A-i5.3 EFFECTS OF CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE DISCHARGES 5.3-15.4 EFFECTS OF SANITARY WASTE DISCHARGES 5.4-15.5 EFFECTS OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THETRANSMISSION SYSTEMS 5.5-15.5.1 Maintenance of Transmission Right-of-Way 5.5-15.5.2 Periodic Transmission Line Inspection Programs 5.5-15.5.3 Operational Aspects 5.5-15.6 OTHER EFFECTS 5.6-15.6.1 Introduction 5.6-15.6.2 Approach 5.6-15.6.3 Procedures 5.6-15.6.4 Noise Effects 5.6-25.6.4.1 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 5.6-25.6.4.2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 5.6-25.6.4.3 Department of Housing and UrbanDevelopment 5.6-25. 0-ii RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 134 of 178 Byron ER-OLSTABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)PAGE5.6.4.4 Preoperational Ambient Levels 5.6-25.6.5 Conclusion 5.6-35.7 RESOURCES COMMITTED 5.7-15.7.1 Resources Comitted During Plant Lifetime 5.7-15.7.2 Irretrievable Committments of Resources 5.7-25.8 DECOMMISSIONING AND DISMANTLING 5.8-15. 0-iii RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 135 of 178 Byron ER-OLSCHAPTER 5.0 -ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF STATION OPERATION LIST OF TABLESNUMBER TITLE PAGE5.1-1 Isotherm Areas Under Monthly AverageConditions at the Byron Station 5.1-195.1-2 Isotherm Areas for Case 1 ExtremeCondition 5.1-215.1-3 Isotherm Areas for Case 2 ExtremeCondition 5.1-225.1-4 Isotherm Areas for Case 3 ExtremeCondition 5.1-235.1-5 Comparison of Excess 50 F Plume Sizes 5.1-245.1-6 Natural Draft Cooling Tower DesignSpecifications and Operating Parameters 5.1-255.1-7 Mechanical Draft Cooling Tower DesignSpecifications and Operating Parameters 5.1-265.1-8 Frequency Distribution of VisiblePlume Length for the Byron Station's Two Natural Draft Cooling TowersOperating at.Full Load 5.1-275.1-9 Frequency Distribution of VisiblePlume Height for the Byron Station's Two Natural Draft Towers Operating at Full Load 5.1-285.1-10 Drift Droplet Size Distribution forthe Byron Station's Natural DraftCooling Towers 5.1-295.2-1 Concentration of Radionuclides in theDischarge and the Corresponding Bioaccumulation Factors 5.2-105.2-2 Annual Average Site Boundary Doses 5.2-115.2-3 Dispersion Factors (x/Q) and Deposition Rates for Points of Interest 5.2-125.2-4 Expected Individual Doses fromGaseous Effluents 5.2-135.2-5 Assumptions Used to Calculate Radio-nuclide Concentrations and Doses toBiota Other Than Man 5.2-145.2-6 Radionuclide Concentrations andInternal Data Rates to Biota OtherThan Man 5.2-155.2-7 Pathways Doses from Liquid Effluents 5.2-165.2-8 Consumption Factors for the MaximumExposed Individual 5.2-175.2-9 Annual Offsite Direct Doses to Indivi-duals Due to Contained Radiation Sources 5.2-185.2-10 Estimated Doses to the Population Within 50 Miles of the Station fromReleases of Gaseous Effluents 5.2-195.2-11 Estimates of the Annual Whole-Body

5. O-iv RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 136 of 178 Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 1JULY 1981LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd)NUMBER TITLE PAGERadiation Dose to the Population Within 50 Miles of the Byron Station 5.2-205.3-1 Estimated Average Blowdown Analysis 5.3-55.3-2 Average Chemical Discharges of theByron Station 5.3-65.3-3 Expected Maximum Chemical Discharges of the Byron Station 5.3-75.6-1 Predicted Noise Levels Due to NormalContinuous Operation 5.6-45.6-2 Predicted Noise Levels Due to ReliefValves Operation 5.6-55.6-3 Comparison of Preoperational andPlant-Operational Continuous NoiseLevels with U.S. EPA Guidelines 5.6-65.6-4 Comparison of Preoperational andPlant-Operational Continuous NoiseLevels with HUD Guidelines 5.6-75.7-1 Summary of Environmental Considera-tions for Uranium Fuel CycleNormalized to Model-LWR AnnualFuel Requirement 5.7-35.8-1 Estimates of the Costs of the PrimaryDecommissioning Alternatives for Each ofthe Byron.Station Units 5.8-35.0-v RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 137 of 178 Byron ER-OLSCHAPTER 5.0 -ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF STATION OPERATION LIST OF FIGURESNUMBER TITLE5.1-1 Surface Thermal Isotherms in Rock River Under Case 3Extreme Conditions 5.1-2 Spring Visible Plume Isopleths 5.1-3 Summer Visible Plume Isopleths 5.1-4 Fall Visible Plume Isopleths 5.1-5 Winter Visible Plume Isopleths 5.1-6 Annual Average Drift Deposition Isopleths 5.2-1 Possible Radiation Exposure Pathways for Local Floraand Local and Migratory Fauna5.2-2 Possible Radiation Exposure Pathways to Persons5.6-1 Noise Prediction Locations 5.6-2 Noise Levels at Point 1.5.6-3 Noise Levels at Point 25.6-4 Noise Levels at Point 35.6-5 Noise Levels at Point 45. 0-vi RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 138 of 178 Byron ER-OLSexamined the two worst cases of the Paily report: 1500 cfs and2200 cfs with an initial excess temperature of 39.30 F and44.70 F, respectively.

An examination of the two reports reveals a difference betweenthe areas contained within the excess 50 F isotherms for the sidecanal discharge.

The difference is caused by the phenomenon known as shore attachment.

Shore attachment is when the maximumwater temperatures of the discharge plume are found along thebank of a stream instead of at some distance offshore and whenthe flow within the discharge plume is fully mixed (nostratification) both with respect to thermal and density factors.The result, shore attachment, is that no diffusion or mixing withcooler water occurs on the bank side or along the bottom.Because of this reduced mixing, a greater area exists within thesame excess isotherms than exists in the non-shore-attached jetsexamined by Paily (1975a).The difference in areas within any excess isotherm reported inthe Paily and Giaquinta reports may be considered a result ofshore attachment assumptions versus non-shore attachment assumptions..

The Giaquinta report gives the greatest area thatis possible and the Paily report yields the minimum.

At a riverflow of 1500 cfs and discharge temperature of 39.30 F aboveambient, the area contained within the excess 50 F isotherm wouldrange from 0.3 to 6.6 acres and the maximum width would rangefrom 90 to 160 feet; for a river flow of 2200 cfs and discharge temperature of 44.70 F above ambient would range from 2.5 to 4.2acres and the maximum width from 175 to 140 feet. A comparison of the excess 50 F plume sizes for the extreme conditon flows aregiven in Table 5.1-5.The academic study of shore attachment is relatively new, and wastherefore not studied in the original Paily report (Appendix 5.1B). The distinctive behavior of a jet of water undergoing shore attachment was recognized and developed concurrently andmore or less independently by the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology (Jirka et al. 1975) and IIHR (Pailly 1975b), and fieldwork and application of those data was accomplished by Sayreduring the latter part of 1975, after the work of the Pailyreport (Appendix 5.1B) had been accomplished.

5.1.3 Biological EffectsThis subsection describes the predicted thermal impact of thecooling tower blowdown on the Rock River biota, the effect ofremoving a portion of the river's aquatic organisms in the makeupwater, and the potential for entrapment and impingement of fishon the traveling screens at the river intake structure.

For adescription of the intake structure's operating characteristics, see Section 3.4.5.1-6 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 139 of 178Byron ER-OLS5.1.3.1 Effects of Released Heat on the Rock RiverThe thermal discharge to the Rock River from the Byron Stationwill result in a thermal plume that will be well within theIllinois thermal limits (see Subsection 5.1.2) and therefore should not adversely affect biota outside the mixing zone. The50 isotherms under extreme weather and river water conditions have been calculated (see Tables 5.1-2, 5.1-3, and 5.1-4). ForCase 1, which describes conditons of minimum river flow, data ispresented in Table 5.1-2 of this Environmental Report. ForCase 2, which encompases maximum water temperatures, the. worstcase 50 F isotherm (910 F) will occur during July/August and willcover an area of 0.06 acres, when water temperature is 860 F anddischarge temperature is 93.50 F (see Table 5.1-3). For Case 3,low river flows, high wet bulb temperatures, and low river watertemperatures are assumed.

The maximum difference between riverwater and blowdown temperatures (44.70 F) will occur duringMarch/April (see Table 5.1-4). The predicted 50 isotherm, whichis 370 F when minimum water temperature is 320 F, will cover anarea of 23 acres, which is less than the approximately 26 acremixing zone allowed in Illinois.

Based on the data presented in Subsection 5.1.2 of this ER, it isconcluded that the majority of plankton species will beunaffected by the thermal plume. Those killed by the temperature increase will become part of the organic material available inthe food web. Furthermore, only a short period of time would berequired to reestablish normal plankton population numbers anddiversity below the outfall.Projected temperatures for the plume areas (see Subsection 5.1.2)should not adversely affect macroinvertebrate productivity.

Chironomids, which are the most common benthic insects found inthe biological studies (see Subsection 2.2.1.9),

are tolerant toelevated temperatures.

Gammon (1969) reported that the number ofchironomids found in samplers placed in effluents withtemperatures ranging from 850 F to 950 F were not reduced incomparison to control areas. Coutant (1962) reported thatchironomids of a riffle of the Delaware River, which were exposedto heated effluents from a steam electric generating plant, weretolerant to temperatures exceeding those projected for ByronStation.

Coutant (1962) found chironomids survived temperatures in excess of 930 F, and Walche (1948) reported that some membersof the most common invertebrates in benthos samples should not beadversely affected by elevated temperatures at the outfall.Markowski (1959) found oligochaetes living and reproducing in theeffluents of power plants with discharge temperatures in excessof 850 F. Species of Hexagenia have been found on artificial substrates at the mouth of the discharge canal from the DresdenNuclear Power Station (NALCO Environmental Science 1976).The thermal effects of blowdown discharge will not adversely affect Rock River fishes (Byron Station ER-CPS subsection 5.1.3)because plume temperatures will remain within the thermal5.1-7 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 140 of 178 Byron ER-OLStolerance limits of most Rock River species and the thermal plumeis restricted to a minor width and area of the river. Even iflethal temperatures should occur in a limited area of thedischarge plume, fish mortalities are unlikely since fishordinarily avoid lethal temperatures and seek preferred temperatures that are optimum for various physiological orecological processes.

5.1.3.2 Effects of Entrapment and Impingement of Juvenile andAdult Fish on the Rock RiverByron Station's makeup water intake on the Rock River is designedas a shoreline structure without a canal or other physicalfeatures that would attract juvenile or adult fish.The normal operational makeup rate will range from 61 to 98 cfs;it is predicted,

however, that during a small portion of thestation's operating time a makeup rate of 107 cfs will berequired.

Approach velocities will range from 0.48 to 0.55 feetper second (fps) depending upon river levels, at the maximummakeup rate of 107 cfs.It has been calculated that at the unusual intake flow of 107 cfs(one half of which passes through each of the two screens),

thevelocity of the water passing through the traveling screensranges from 1.52 fps to 1.74 fps depending on river level.At these approach velocities (0.48 to 0.55 fps) most of thehealthier adult fish found in the Rock River are expected to beable to swim away from the intake and avoid impingement (Schuler1967).Since swimming speed generally increases with size within aspecies, more small than large fish are expected to be impinged.

Temperatures as well as size influence impingement frequency.

Aswater cools down during fall and early winter, increased impingement losses may occur because cclder water temperatures reduce swimming speeds (Hocutt 1970).There will be no heated water, or other discharges, to attractfish around the intake. No deicing operation in the winter isrequired, and no deicing facilities have been installed.

Thereare no provisions for the addition of biocides to the makeupwater. The blowdown structure is located approximately 600 feetdownstream of the intake site. The distance between the makeupand blowdown structures should ensure that recirculation ofdischarge water into the intake does not occur.The engineering design and operation of the river intakestructure for the Byron Station ensures that there will be nosignificant entrapment of adult fish at the intake. Whatentrapment occurs will have no measurable influence on fishpopulation dynamics in the Rock River.5.1-8 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 141 of 179 Byron ER-OLS5.1.3.3 Entrainment Effects on the Rock RiverAt the station intake, the average Rock River flow is 4580 cfs.Planktonic organisms will be entrained in numbers proportional totheir frequency of occurrence in the volume of makeup water.During the summer this maximum loss is about 2% of the planktonpassing the plant intake under average flow and 7% under 7-day10-year low flow conditions.

As indicated in the FYES (seeSubsection 5.4.2.1),

since the generation time of plankters isshort (hours to days) and the proportion lost is small, theplankton productivity in the river should recover rapidly.The spawning and egg characteristics of Rock River fishesindicate that the eggs of the majority of the species of interest(game and commercial) should be only slightly affected byentrainment because'they are not normally drifting in thecurrent.

Many of the game species have adhesive eggs that may bedemersal or found in nests. Adhesive and/or demersal eggs foundfloating in the water column are usually there as a result of theriver current or some other physical force sweeping them awayfrom their substrate.

Of these eggs,., those that are fertilized may experienced high mortalities because they are not in theirnormal environment.

Many larvae of the species involved do occurin the water column, although often they are still confined tobackwater and headwater streams and do not occur in significant numbers in the mainstream of the river. Furthermore, undernatural conditions, only a fraction of the larvae that hatchsurvive, and it is highly questionable that the numbers entrained could have any measurable impact on the fish population.

5.1.3.4 Effects of Reactor Shutdown on the Rock RiverThere would be a potential for a lethal effect due to thermalshock if a total reactor shutdown were to occur during winterperiods when the thermal differential with the river water ishigh. The normal refueling shutdown schedule is once per yearper unit, when the unit has operated continuously at a 100% loadfactor, with only one reactor shut down at a time. If theassociated tower were shut down* the volume of heated waterreaching the river would be reduced by about half with aconcomitant reduction in plume size. Such a reduction wouldprobably concentrate the fish as they follow the forming gradientto their acclimation levels, but it is likely that they wouldreacclimate to a lower temperature when the population densitygot too high. Normal reactor shutdown usually proceeds at a pacethat would allow fish to acclimatize.

5.1.3 Terrestrial Effects of Operation of Heat Dissipation SystemThe potential for possible adverse effects of cooling tower saltdraft deposition upon the biota near the Byron Station hasresulted in a modification to the terrestrial monitoring program.Infrared aerial photographs are currently being taken to ensure5.1-9 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 142 of 179 Byron ER-OLS5.2 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT FROM ROUTINE OPERATION During normal operation of the Byron Nuclear Generating StationUnits I & 2 (Byron Station),

very small amounts of liquid andgaseous radioactive effluents will be released into theenvironment.

This section discusses possible radiological effects of thesereleases on persons and biota other than man.5.2.1 Exposure PathwaysRadioactive effluents from the Byron Station are a potential source of radiation exposure.

The possible radiation exposurepathways to biota other than man are identified in subsection 5.2.1.1.

Radiation exposure pathways for persons are discussed in Subsection 5.2.1.2.5.2.1.1 Exposure Pathways to Biota Other Than ManThe possible radiation exposure pathways for species of localflora and local and migratory fauna are shown in Figure 5.2-1.These exposure pathways are evaluated in this Subsection.

5.2.1.1.1 Terrestrial PathwaysRadioactive effluents from the Byron Station may enter theterrestrial environment in the form of liquid, gaseous, orparticulate material.

Terrestrial animals in the vicinity of theByron Station site may receive an external radiation dose as theresult of submersion in air containing beta- and gamma-emitting radionuclides.

The exposure rate will be approximately equal forall organisms exposed to the radionuclides in air. Inhalation ofthe gaseous effluent cloud will also result in a dose toterrestrial animals.

The most critical organ for exposure inthis latter pathway is the thyroid, which is capable ofconcentrating radioiodines present in air. Direct radiation fromcontaminated

surfaces, another possible exposure route, includesdirect exposure from radionuclides deposited on vegetation, soil,and exposed surfaces.

This pathway,

however, is less important than pathways in which uptake and concentration can occur. Otherimportant exposure pathways include exposure to contaminated shoreline sediments and ingestion of foods contaminated byirrigation with water containing diluted effluents.

5.2.1.1.2 Aquatic PathwaysSmall amounts of liquid radioactive effluent will be discharged into the Rock River with the cooling tower blowdown.

The liquidreleases will be diluted by the blowdown, and the radionuclides will either be dissolved or become suspended in the water. Biotafound in this area or those that reside in this area duringmigratory movements may be exposed to the radiation emitted bythese radionuclides.

5.2-1 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-If ResponsePage 143 of 178 Byron ER-OLSRadionuclides released to the river may be adsorbed on suspended particles and bottom sediment.

The suspended matter will settleto the bottom of the river, with the point of settling and thetime of settling depending on the size of the particles and theflow rate of the river. As a result, radionuclides mayaccumulate in the sediment in the vicinity of the Byron Stationdischarge for the life of the station.

Benthic organisms thatlive on or in this sediment could be exposed to the emittedradiation.

In addition, gamma radiation from such sedimentary

deposits, which accumulate near the bank and have only a shallowcovering of water, may result in shoreline exposures ofterrestrial organisms.

Some aquatic organisms may accumulate radionuclides in their bodytissues as a result of diet and direct absorption from riverwater. The radionuclides may then be transferred to birds orother terrestrial organisms that derive all or part of their dietfkom the river. Transfer in the terrestrial food chain isconsidered to be through successive trophic levels.5.2.1.2 Exposure Pathways to ManThe various possible pathways of radiation exposure to personsare shown in Figure 5.2-2.5.2.1.2.1 Terrestrial PathwaysRadioactive effluents could be distributed in the terrestrial environment as discussed in Subsection 5.2.1.1.1.

The criticalterrestrial pathways for persons are listed as follows:a. submersion in a cloud of gaseous effluents;

b. inhalation of gaseous effluents;

c. direct radiation exposure from radionuclide deposition on vegetation, soil, and exposed surfaces; andd. ingestion of contaminated food chain components.

Some of the most important gaseous effluents include radioactive noble gases and halogens released during normal operation of theByron Station.

These effluents would attach themselves toparticles in the air and deposit on vegetation, on the ground, oron a body of water. These radioactive materials could then beassimilated by land plants or animals.

Human consumption ofthese plants or animals would result in radiation exposure to theindividual.

Because a milk cow concentrates iodine in its milkand the human thyroid can also concentrate iodine, the air-grass-cow-milk pathway can be used to evaluate the thyroid dose fromdeposition of halogens.

5.2-2 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 144 of 178Byron ER-OLSCHAPTER 6.0- EFFLUENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMSTABLE OF CONTENTSPAGE6.1 APPLICANT'S PREOPERATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAMS 6.1-16.1.1 Surface Waters 6.1-16.1.1.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters 6.1-26.1.1.1.1 Baseline Program 6.1-26.1.1.1.2 Construction Stage Monitoring Program 6.1-46.1.1.2 Ecological Parameters 6.1-46.1.1.2.1 Baseline Program 6.1-56.1.1.2.2 Construction Stage Monitoring Program 6.1-126.1.2 Groundwater 6.1-216.1.2.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters 6.1-216.1.2.2 Models 6.1-236.1.3 Air 6.1-236.1.3.1 Meteorology 6.1-236.1.3.1.1 Instrumentation 6.1-246.1.3.1.2 Equipment Maintenance and Calibration Procedures 6.1-256.1.3.1.4 Regional Data Sources 6.1-286.1.3.2 Models 6.1-286.1.3.2.1 Short-Term (Accident)

Diffusion Estimates 6.1-286.1.3.2.2 Long-Term (Routine)

Diffusion Estimates 6.1-296.1.3.2.2.1 Joint Frequency Distribution of WindDirection, Wind Speed, and Stability 6.1-306.1.3.2.2.2 Effective Release Height 6.1-336.1.3.3 Cooling System Impact 6.1-366.1.3.3.1 Visible Plume 6.1-366.1.3.3.1.1 Visible Plume Model 6.1-366.1.3.3.1.2 Visible Plume Model Validity 6.1-44.6.1.3.3.2 Drift Modeling 6.1-456.1.4 Land 6.1-466.1.4.1 Geology and Soils 6.1-466.1.4.1.1 Office Studies 6.1-476.1.4.1.2 Field Studies 6.1-476.1.4.1.3 Laboratory Studies 6.1-486.1.4.2 Land Use and Demographic Surveys 6.1-486.1.4.2.1 Land Use Surveys 6.1-486.1.4.2.2 Demographic Surveys 6.1-486.1.4.3 Ecological Parameters 6.1-496.1.4.3.1 Baseline Program 6.1-496.1.4.3.1.1 Flora 6.1-506.1.4.3.1.2 Fauna 6.1-516.1.4.3.2 Construction Stage Monitoring Programs 6.1-526.1.4.3.2.1 Byron Station Ecological Monitoring Program for 1974 6.1-536.1.4.3.2.1.1 Flora 6.1-536.1.4.3.2.1.2 Fauna 6.1-536.0-i RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 145 of 178Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 1JULY 1981TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)PAGE6.1.4.3.2.2 Construction and Preoperational Terres-trial Ecological Monitoring Program for1975-1976 6.1-546.1.4.3.2.2.1 Flora 6.1-546.1.4.3.2.2.2 Fauna 6.1-576.1.4.3.2.2.3 Salt Drift 6.1-606.1.4.3.2.3 Construction and Preoperational Terres-trial Ecological Monitoring Program for1976-1977 6.1-606.1.4.3.2.3.1 Flora 6.1-606.1.4.3.2.3.2 Fauna 6.1-616.1.4.3.2.3.3 Salt Drift 6.1-626.1.4.3.2.4 Preoperational Terrestrial Ecological Monitoring 6.1-626.1.5 Radiological Monitoring 6.1-636.1.5.1 Sampling Media, Locations, and Frequency 6.1-636.1.5.2 Data Analysis, Analytical Sensitivity andand Data Presentation 6.1-646.1.5.2.1 Air Samples 6.1-646.1.5.2.2 Water Samples 6.1-656.1.5.2.3 Sediment 6.1-656.1.5.2.4 Fish 6.1-656.1.5.2.5 Milk 6.1-656.1.5.2.6 Vegetation 6.1-65a6.1.5.2.7 External Gamma Exposure 6.1-65a6.1.5.3 Program Statistical Sensitivity 6.1-65a6.1.5.4 Background Radiological Characteristics 6.1-666.1.5.4.1 General 6.1-666.1.5.4.2 Radioactivity in Air 6.1-676.1.5.4.3 External Gamma Radiation 6.1-686.1.5.4.4 Radioactivity in the Aquatic Environment 6.1-686.1.5.4.5 Radioactivity in Terrestrial Products 6.1-686.1.5.5 Summary 6.1-696.1A FORMULAS USED IN ANALYSES OF ALGAL DATA 6.1-i6.2 APPPLICANT'S PROPOSED OPERATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAMS 6.2-16.2.1 Aquatic Monitoring Program 6.2-16.2.2 Terrestrial Monitoring Program 6.2-16.2.3 Radiological Monitoring Program 6.2-16.2.4 Meteorological Monitoring Program 6.2-16.3 RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENT AND MONI-TORING PROGRAMS 6.3-16.0-ii RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 146 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE OF CONTENTS

.(Cont'd)

PAGE6.4 PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING DATA 6.4-16. 0-ili RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 147 of 178Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 1JULY 1981CHAPTER 6.0 -EFFLUENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMSLIST OF TABLESNUMBER TITLE PAGE6.1-1 Summary of the 1973-1974 Aquatic Moni-toring Program 6.1-706.1-2 Summary of Chemical and Physical Para-meters Monitored During Second Year(1973-1974)

Aquatic Monitoring Program 6.1-716.1-3 Summary of Water Chemistry Methods 6.1-726.1-4 Summary of Aquatic Biology Preoperational Monitoring Program after 1974 at ByronStation 6.1-736.1-5 Summary of Terrestrial Ecology BaselineMonitoring Program 6.1-746.1-6 Schedule of Spring-Winter Terrestrial Sampling for 1975-1976 6.1-756.1-7 Schedule of Spring-Winter Terrestrial Sampling for 1976-1977 6.1-766.1-7A Groundwater Monitorint Action Levelsby Well 6.1-76a6.1-8 Preoperational Radiological SamplingProgram 6.1-776.1-9 Practical Lower Limits of Detection (LLD) for Standard Environmental Radio-logical Monitoring Program 6.1-786.1-10 Expected Byron Background Radiation Levels Based on Ouad Cities Data 6.1-796.2-1 Standard Radiological Monitoring Pro- fgram 6.2-26.3-1 Fish Collected by the Illinois Depart-ment of Conservation from the Rock RiverNear the Byron Station Site in 1973, 1974,1976, and 1977 6.3-26. 0-iv RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 148 of 178 Byron ER-OLSCHAPTER 6.0 -EFFLUENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMSLIST OF FIGURESNUMBER TITLE6.1-1 Locations of Aquatic Sampling Stations6.1-2 Sample Creel Census Questionnaire 6.1-3 Creel Census Sampling Locations 6.1-4 Baseline Terrestrial Sampling Locations 6.1-5 1974 Vegetation Sampling Areas6.1-6 1974 Mammal Sampling Locations

6. 1-7 1974 Bird Sampling Quadrats6.1-8 Year 1 Terrestrial Sampling Locations 6.1-9 Year 2 Terrestrial Sampling Locations 6.1-10 Radiological Monitoring Sampling Locations

6. 0-v RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 149 of 178Byron ER-OLSCHAPTER 6.0 -EFFLUENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS6.1 APPLICANTIS PREOPERATIONAL MONITCRING PROGRAMS6.1.1 Surface WatersThis subsection describes the field and laboratory methodsemployed by Environmental

Analysts, Inc. (EAI) of Garden City,New York, during the preconstruction aquatic baselineenvironmental studies at the Byron Nuclear Generating Station -Units I & 2 (Byron Station) as reported in Section 2.2. The textcontains, technical descriptions of the analytical and fieldtechniques and procedures, and the field and laboratory equipment used in assessing aquatic conditions.

Sampling design,frequency, and locations for each specific phase of the overallprogram are described in each individual subsection, andinformation is provided on the precision and accuracy ofinstrumentation used to collect or analyze the data.The baseline surveys established sampling transects andinventoried

benthos, phytoplankton, zooplankton, periphyton, fish, bacteria, water'chemistry, and physical measurements.

The first year (1972 through 1973) baseline survey, conducted from April 1972 through July 1973 by EAI, was designed to deter-mine the identification and abundance of phytoplankton, zooplankton, periphyton, and benthos;

.to assess speciescomposition and size distributions of fishes; and to takereplicate samples of water chemistry,

bacteria, and physicalmeasurements in the intake and discharge areas. The results andprojections of construction impact concluded from the 1972through 1973 studies were included in the Byron NuclearGenerating Station Construction Phase Environmental Report(Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455),}

Subsections 2.7.1;5.1.1; 5.1.2; and 5.1.3.After the July 1973 field survey, a review was initiated thatresulted in defining the 1973 through 1974 aquatic monitoring

program, which was initiated in Septemter 1973 and conducted through October 1974. The purpose of the 1973 through 1974monitoring program was to provide a second year of data tosupplement observations made during the first-year (1972 through1973) program.

Tables 6.1-1 and 6.1-2 summarize the physical,

chemical, and biological parameters measured during the 1973through 1974 program.Locations of the sampling stations are shown on Figure 6.1-1.Sampling of the Rock River was undertaken on five transects (R-1,R-2, R-3, R-4, and R-5) from a point 2.4 miles upstream of Byron,Illinois, to just upstream of the dam at Oregon, Illinois.

Thesetransects were selected to yield data indicative of conditions inzones of the Rock River that could potentially be influenced bythe construction and operation of the Byron Station.

The6.1-1 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 150 of 178 Byron ER-OLStransect areas for this study reflected some of the ranges ofhabitats between the Oregon and Rockford dams. In addition tothe sampling on the Rock River, sampling stations wereestablished in the mouths of tributary streams to the Rock Riverin the site area. During the 1972 through 1973 program, therewere initially nine creek sampling locations:

Stillman Creek (S-1), Mill Creek (S-2), Woodland Creek (S-3, W-1, W-2, and W-3),Leaf River (S-4), Spring Creek (S-5), and Silver Creek (S-6).During the 1973 through 1974 program, Stations S-3, S-4, S-5, S-6, W-1, and W-2 were retained.

This subsection also describes a construction stage monitoring program conducted by Espey, Huston & Associates, Inc. (EHSA) ofAustin, Texas, that will continually assess the bioticcommunities in the Byron Station site area and document anymacroscopic changes that result from plant construction activities (see Section 4.1). Particularly important to thisprogram are those aquatic species that either are sensitive indicators of biotic stability or require additional examination to document their composition and abundance because of seasonalor annual population fluctuations.

The data from theseconstruction stage monitoring

studies, added to previous baselinedata collections, will reflect the natural biotic fluctuations inthe Rock River and the six creeks in the area (Stillman, Mill,Woodland, Leaf, Spring, and Silver creeks) before plantoperation.

Operational data can then be compared with thesedata.6.1.1.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters The programs and methods for measuring the physical and chemicalparameters of surface waters that may be affected by theconstruction and operation of the Byron Station are described inthis subsection.

6.1.1.1.1 Baseline ProqramPhysical and chemical parameters measured in the field during the1973 through 1974 baseline surveys included light penetration, current velocity, water temperature, turbidity, alkalinity, pH,and dissolved oxygen (DO). Water samples were collected in I-gallon containers from mid-channel at five Rock River stations, three tributary

streams, and two Woodland Creek stations (seeFigure 6.1-1). Each sample was preserved with chloroform at10 ml/gallon.

All water samples were refrigerated at 40 C beforeanalysis.

The parameters described in Table 6.1-2 were analyzedaccording to Standard

Methods, 13th Edition (American PublicHealth Association

[APHA] 1971), except for trace metals,calcium, magnesium, sodium, and total hardness, which wereanalyzed according to Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water andWastes (U.S. EPA 1971). All parameters, with the exception ofpH, were analyzed in duplicate and averaged, with valuespresented in milligrams per liter (mg/liter).

The U. S.Environmental Protection Agency Analytical Quality Control6.1-2 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 151 of 178 Byron ER-OLSLaboratory provided reference samples that served as independent within-the-laboratory checks on reagents, instruments, andtechniques.

Sample analysis checks were made by an independent laboratory, Illinois Water Treatment Company of Rockford, Illinois.

Standard deviations for most parameters werecalculated from 25 tests for each parameter to indicate anyvariability in the laboratory techniques.

Dissolved oxygenconcentrations were measured at mid-depth in the center of theriver and the tributary stream channels.

In conjunction with the chemical

analysis, selected physicalmeasurements were recorded (see Table 6.1-2). The following paragraphs describe the methods and instrumentation used to makephysical measurements.

Two instruments were used to determine flow rates of the water inthe Byron Station site area. The first instrument was a G. M.digital flowmeter (G.M. Manufacturing and Instruments Corporation El Cajon, California),

which is a propeller-driven device with adigital counter.

This meter was calibrated to a known flow rateand gave readings as units per given period of time. To obtainvelocities, readings were taken just below the surface for three60-second immersions with the front of the meter pointed againstthe current.The second method instrument was a Marsch-McBirney Model 711water current meter (Marsch-McBirney, Kensington, Maryland) witha solid-state water velocity sensor operating on the principle ofelectromagnetic induction.

The meter had a probe that canmeasure two orthogonal components of water flow, the side flowand the normal current.

The meter gave readings directly in feetper second. Water conductivity variations did not affect themeter calibration.

Air and water temperatures were normally taken-during allsampling periods of the 1973 through 1974 baseline surveys.Water temperatures were determined at mid-depth in the center ofthe river and stream channels.

The Yellow Springs oxygen meterwas equipped with an oxygen temperature probe to double itsfunction.

In addition, a standard centigrade thermometer wasused to periodically check meter accuracy.

Transparency was determined using an 8-inch diameter (20 cm)Secchi disk with alternating black and white quadrants.

The diskwas lowered into the water on a calibrated line. When thedemarcation between the black and white quadrants became obscure,the distance was recorded.

Three readings were taken at eachsampling station.In addition to taking Secchi readings during periphyton

sampling, an Inter-Ocean Model 510 submarine illuminance meter (Inter-Ocean

systems, Inc., San Diego, California) was used to record lightpenetration at this time. The instrument is designed to measurecomparative illuminance between the surface and various6.1-3 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 152 of 178 Byron ER-OLSsubsurface levels. This device employs battery operatedphotocells enclosed in a deck (or surface) unit, and asubmersible unit. Readings were taken from a meter aSillumination in lux units. Measurements for the survey includeda deck reading and two subsurface readings that were recorded asthe depths in inches at which 50% and 25% of the available lightpenetrated the water. Three measurements per station were taken.6.1.1.1.2 Construction Stage Monitoring ProgramDuplicate water chemistry samples for the parameters listed inTable 6.1-3 were taken quarterly at Stations R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-5, S-6, W-l, and W-2. Each sample was drawn from A 481-liter composite sample, as outlined in the phytoplankton prdqram(see Subsection 6.1.1.2.2).

Water chemistry samples fromStations R-2 and R-5 were taken from the same composites asreplicates 1 and 2 of the phytoplankton program (see Subsection 6.1.1.2.2).

All water chemistry and bacteriology samples werestored in sterile polyethylene

bottles, precharged (when appo-priate) with preservative, kept on ice, and transported on theday of collection to Aqualab, Inc., for analysis.

The specificanalytical techniques used for each parameter are referenced inTable 6.1-3.Temperature and oxygen profiles were taken at each monitoring station with a YSI model 51-A oxygen meter and a 5419oxygen/temperature pressure compensating probe on a 50-foot lead.Current velocity profiles at 1-meter intervals were taken at allRock River stations with a Price-type meter (W 6 L. E. GurleyCo., Model 665) fitted with a streamlined 30-pound weight.Light penetration and transparency were measured at all RockRiver stations using, respectively, a Secchi disk (Welsh 1948)and a 4w light meter constructed as outlined in Maddux (1966) andRich and Wetzel (1969).Turbidity was measured at all Rock River stations, in the field,using a Jackson Turbidimeter (APHA 1971) if turbidities were inexcess of #0 JTU. If turbidities weje less than 40 JTU, theywere measured in the lab with a Each Nephelometer.

Field meAsurements of pH were made at all stations using aChemtrix type 40, battery operated pH meter.6.1.1.2 Ecological Parameters The programs and methods for measuring the biological parameters of surface waters that may be affected by the construction andoperation of the Byron Station are described in this subsection.

6.1-4 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 153 of 178 Byron ER-OLS6.1.1.2.1 Baseline ProgramThe second year (1973 through 1974). baseline survey is summarized in Table 6.1-1. Sampling frequency varied from parameter toparameter in an attempt to correlate frequency with lifehistories.

The frequencies are included in Table 6.1-1 as wellas in the discussion of survey methods that follows.Bacteria samples were collected from the five Rock River stations(R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4. and R-5), three tributary streams (S-3, S-4,and S-5), and two Woodland Creek pools (W-1 and W-3).Samples were collected underwater in sterile BOD bottles, andplates were made the same day. Bacteria samples were analyzedaccording to procedures outlined in Standard Methods (APHA 1971).Two plates per bacteria sample were made for each test, and thecounts were averaged.

Total coliform and total bacteria tests were conducted usingpremade milliliter ampoules of ENDO and TOTAL agar. After anincubation of 22 to 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> at 350

• 0.50 C, counts were madeand numbers reported per 100 ml of water sampled.

The fecalstreptococcus test involved preparing an agar medium using M-Enterococcus agar, which has a high selectivity of recovery ofall fecal strep species.

Streptococcus plates were incubated 48hours at 350 +/- 0.50 C The fecal coliform test involved theirincubation in M-FC broth at 44.50

• 0.20 C for 22 +/- 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.Equipment for bacterial analysis included a vacuum pump, sterilemembrane filters of 0.45 pm pore size, sterile agar pads, dis-posable sterile petri dishes and pipettes, and a Napco constanttemperature apparatus for incubation.

Phytoplankton samples were collected on September 11, 1973 fromthe five Rock River stations (R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, and R-5) andthree tributary streams (S-3, S-4, and S-5). Beginning October16, 1973, phytoplankton sampling was conducted at river stationsP-2 and R-5 only. Duplicate samples were taken from mid-channel sampling locations by immersing 1-liter polypropylene bottlesunder the surface of the water. The phytoplankton samples werepreserved with formaldehyde at a 1:20 ratio. The preserved samples were transported to the laboratory, where they wereconcentrated 10 to 20 times by adding 1 to 2 drops of acidLugol's solution, which caused the organisms to settle to thebottom of the container.

Samples were allowed to settle for 48hours, after which the supernatant was siphoned off. Theconcentrate was then stored in 50-ml containers.

Permanent mounts (for diatom classification) and semi-permanent mounts (fornon-diatom identification) were prepared.

Phytoplankton were reported in units per milliliter using thefollowing system:6.1-5 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 154 of 178 Byron ER-OLSAlgal Form UnitDiatom Each FrustuleSingle celled Each cellColony Every four cells(except for thegenera AphanocaMsa, Aphanothece, and'Microcystis, whichwere reported in50-cell units).Filament 100-micrometer lengthsThe following taxonomic references were used to identifyphytoplankton species:

Bourrelley (1968,19703, Cleve-Euler (1968), Hustedt (1930), Patrick and Reimar (1966), and Prescott(1962). Samples were then examined for relative abundance, species diversity, biovolume, and biomass.

Relative abundance was expressed as the number of individual species per liter andas the percent of total number of organisms present.

The sevenmost abundant species present were selected as the dominantspecies.Species diversity was measured using the Shannon-Weaver (Shannon1948) index, which is described by the following equations (Lloydet al. 1968):1-IH = ( (N log N -Enlog n.) (6.1-1)i=1where:H = community diversity N = total number of individuals presentni = number of individuals of species is = total number of speciesand: 1max= log s (6.1-2)where:Smax= maximum diversity possible in a community com-posed of s speciesBiovolume was determined using the analytical method presented by Prescott (1951), which is described by the following equations:

N/1 = s A (6. 1-3)DF L- c Vd N CFc.ddf6.1-6 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 155 of 178 Byron ER-OLSwhere:N/I = number of individuals per literNs = number of individuals of species per transect ofcoverslip D F = diameter of field of microscope in centimeters L = length of coverslip in centimeters Vd = volume of drop of sampleNd = number of drops of sampleAc = area of coverslip C = concentration factorfand:pI/liter

= NlVi = biovolume (6.1-4)109where:N = number of individuals V1 = volume of individual species examinedBiomass was calculated from biovolume using the conversion factorof 1 gm = 1 cm'.Zooplankton samples were collected September 11 and October 16,1973, from mid-channel of the five Rock River stations (R-1, R-2,R-3, R-4,, and R-5) and three tributaries (S-3, S-4, and S-5).Beginning January 28, 1974, zooplankton sampling was conducted atriver stations R-2 and R-5 only. For each sample, 60 liters ofsurface water was concentrated by passing it through a No. 20mesh nylon plankton net (approximately 50 Am). For moreefficient and accurate measurement of water volume through thenet, water was poured through the net by bucket (UNESCO 1968).The concentrate, representing 60 liters of water, was preserved in bottles by adding formalin in a 1:10 ratio. Duplicate sampleswere taken at each location.

The zooplankton were examined byusing a Sedgewick-Raftex counting slide, which holds 1 cm3 ofwater. Three slides per sampling station were examined in full.Analyses were made of species composition, relative abundance, and total plankton count. Numbers of plankton per liter werecalculated using the following equation:.

Number counted/(cm')

x volume of concentrate (cm3) = Number/liter 606.1-7 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-If ResponsePage 156 of 178Byron ER-OLSZooplankton were identified using the taxonomic publications ofEddy and Hodson (1961), Edmondson (1959), Kudo (1966), Needhamand (1938), and Pennak (1953).Periphyton samples were collected at the five Rock River stations(R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, and R-5), three tributary stream stations(s-3, S-4, and S-5 from September through December 1973, and S-3,S-5, and S-6 from January through September 1974), and twoWoodland Pool stations (W-1 and W-2) from September 1973 throughSeptember 1974.Two diatometers of the Ruth Patrick (Patrick and Reimer 19660 andJ. W. Foerster (1969) design were placed at river transects R-1,R-2, R-3, R-4, and R-5, approximately 20 feet from shore. Onediatometer was placed at mid-channel near the mouth of each ofthe three tributary streams.

The other diatometer was placed ateach of two stations (W-1 and W-2) established further ubstreamon Woodland Creek. Each diatometer contained ten 25 x 75 mmmicroscope slides. Three slides were selected from eachdiatometer for analysis.

Samples were analyzed for speciescomposition, relative abundance, species diversity, community similarity, biovolume,

biomass, and chlorophyll a.Additional diatometers were placed at transects R-2, R-3, andR-4, two per transect, one diatometer on each side of the river.The additional samples were collected every other month,beginning in January 1974, and were analyzed for speciesdiversity, community similarity, biovolume, and biomass.

Theperiphyton communities present at each transect were comparedusing non-parametric analyses for differences on the sametransect and for differences between transects.

Lightpenetration, temperature,

velocity, and depth of the diatometer were conducted as ancillary measurements.

Species composition and relative abundance were determined bymethods described in the previous section for phytoplankton.

Species diversity was determined using the Shannon-Weaver diversity index just discussed for phytoplankton.

Community similarity was determined by Morisitals index of overlap, whichis described by the following equation as modified by Horn(1966):I = 2 (bi) (6.1-5)i= 1A s a.2 b.where: _- b + b B ]I = the index of overlapi = the species numbera. = the density of species i in sampling site A6.1-8 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 157 of 178 Byron ER-.OLSb -the density of i in sampling site Bs = the total number of different species in bothsitesA = the total number of individuals in sampling site AB = the total number of individuals in sampling site BThe periphyton communities present at each transect were comparedto determine degrees of similarity and difference.

The index isnot only a measure of similarity,

however, it is also a measureof the probability that two individuals drawn at random fromdifferent communities will belong to the same species relative tothe probability of finding two randomly chosen individuals of thesame species from the same community.

Biovolume was determined using the Prescott (1951) method ofanalysis.

Results were expressed as biovolume per squaremillimeter of slide area. Biomass was determined by theconversion factor of 1 gm = I cm kiovolume.

Benthic communities were sampled at the five Rock Rivertransects, the six stream mouth stations, and the two WoodlandCreek stations.

River stations were sampled using a Ponar grabsampler that is designed to cover a. 9 x 9-inch area of substrate surface.

A winch system was employed to lower and raise the 60-pound sampler.

This type of sampler is well adapted for use onsand, gravel, or rock bottoms.

The jaws are machined-tapered andhave an attached underlip that enables the jaws to avoid moststones and gravel, which jam other bottom samplers.

Twelve samples were taken in each river transect, four from nearshore on each side and four from mid-river during September andOctober 1973. Only six grab samples were taken at each rivertransect during February 1974 and each subsequent sampling month.As each sample was taken, grab size (light, medium, or full) andbottom type (sand, fine gravel, silt, muck, etc.), as outlined byLagler (1970), were recorded.

Two samples were taken at a point near the mouth of the sixstreams in the study area. The sampler used in these locations was a Birge-Ekman grab sampler that covered a 6 x 6-inch area.This sampler was used because soft sediment is commonly presentin the stream mouths and because, according to a study comparing the Ponar and Birge-Ekman

dredges, the Birge-Ekman model is moreeffective with soft substrates, such as silt and muck (Howmiller 1971).Benthos were sampled at two stations in Woodland Creek (W-1 andW-3), with three samples taken at each station.

All samples werewashed in a screen-bottom wash bucket. They were subsequently placed in plastic bags, marked for identification, and packed inice or refrigerated until the analyses were performed.

In the6.1-9 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 158 of 178 Byron ER-OLSlaboratory, each sample was sorted by hand using a series of U.S.Standard sieves. The organisms present were removed andpreserved for identification in vials containing 70% alcohol.Analyses included species composition, relative abundance, andweight (biomass).

Species composition of benthos will provide abasis for evaluating water quality in the study area (Hynes1963). The keys used for benthos identification were those ofEddy and Hodson (1961), Edmondson (1959), Pennak (1953), Needhamand Needham (1938), and Mason (1968).Fish egg and larvae sampling was conducted monthly during April,May, June, and July, beginning in 1974, at river transects A-ithrough R-5 and stream transects S-3, S-4, and S-5 using a #o. 10mesh nylon plankton net with a 0.5-meter diameter opening.

Theboat was anchored at each transect, with the flow of the riverdetermining the amount of water filtered through the net. Flowrates just below the water surface, where the net was suspended, were measured at each station using a G. M. digital flowmeter.

The amounts of water filtered through the net in a given periodof time were thus determined.

The net was left in the water for 15 minutes at each transect.

The flow rates of the river averaged from I to 2.5 ft/sec, orless than 3 knots (1 knot = 0.5 m/sec). These speeds aregenerally considered equal to or slower than a low-speed tower;thus, a low filtration

pressure, or pressure drop, across themeshes of the net was attained to better prevent damage to thefish eggs and larvae (Tranter 1968).upon completion of a 15-minute sampling period, the collected material was transferred to jars from the plankton bucketattached to the net, and formalin was added in a 1:10 ratio forpreservation.

In the laboratory, each sample was picked throughby hand, and the numbers of fish eggs and larvae were recorded.

These numbers were then used as an indication of abundance for agiven volume of water.Fish sampling was conducted by seining and electrofishing.

Seinesamples were collected either with a 10-foot or a 50-foot beachseine with 0.25 inch mesh. The seining catch was expressed innumbers of fish caught per square foot of net coverage.

As the least selective of all active fish sampling methods(Ricker 1968), electrofishing allows maximum coverage of ahabitat, a necessity in survey work. Each river station waselectrofished for 15 minutes on each side of the river. Theelectroshocking unit uses a Homelite 2000-watt, 230-volt, 3-phasegenerator.

Each of the three leads was run from the generator, past a series of toggle switches and a dead-man microswitch

assembly, to lightning rod electrodes suspended from a boomapproximately 6 feet in front of the boat. A distance of 6 feetbetween electrodes ensures complete coverage of the unit when itis in operation.

The generator and shocking assembly was modeled6.1-10 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 159 of 178 Byron ER-OLSafter the electrofishing units used by the Illinois Department ofConservation.

Length-weight curves were computed for certain species by usingthe following length-weight equation (Lagler 1970):log W =log a + n log L (6.1-6)where:L = lengthW = weighta = interception of the y-axislog a = Ealog W "(logq L) -)EL .'2loq ,.loci W)n .(" log L)2* --'og L)2=n = FoCI W (N *loci a)E log LCondition factors for 10 individuals of each of the 5 mostimportant species were computed from parameters from sexed fishto provide indexes of physical condition.

The condition factor(K) is defined mathematically as:WK = L3 (6.1-7)where:W = weight of an individual fishL = length of an individual fishAnalyses of stomach contents and ectoparasites of 10 individuals of each of the 5 most important species were documented.

Stomachcontents for specific foods were reported as percentages of totalnumbers of ingested material.

For ectoparasite work, theanterior gill arch was examined, and parasites were counted andidentified using publications by Inman and Hambric (1970) andAmlacher (1970).Fish were identified with the aid of keys developed by Eddy(1969), Hubbs and Lagler (1959), and the Illinois Department ofConservation (1970).A creel census was conducted by interviewing fishermen who usethe Rock River within the study area. A questionnaire wasprepared, and a fieldworker interviewed bank fishermen.

Information sought in the interview included data relating tospecies preference, hours fished on day of census, numbers offishing trips to Rock River per year, and average catch per trip.6.1-11 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 160 of 178 Byron ER-OLSother data such as species caught, lengths and weights of fish ontheir stringer, numbers of rods used, and suitability of the dayfor fishing were also recorded.

Creel census data will beprojected for use in estimating fishing pressure in the studyarea and to define zones in the study area most heavily used bysport fishermen.

A sample creel census questionnaire is shown inFigure 6.1-2.6.1.1.2.2 Construction Stage Monitoring ProgramThe construction stage aquatic monitoring program described Lnthis subsection is part of a 5-year study that began in March1975. Table 6.1-4 presents a summary of the program.

Allsampling programs are conducted quarterly at specified stationsamong those identified and located in Figure 6.1-1.The term "dominant" refers to any species or taxonomic unit thatconstitutes 51 or more of the total standing crop at thelocation(s) under consideration.

Bacteria samples were collected at Stations R-1 through R-5, S-3,S-5, S-6, W-1, and W-2 on a quarterly schedule.

Each sample wasdrawn from a 48-liter composite sample taken as outlined in thephytoplankton section that follows.

Bacteria samples fromStations R-2 and R-5 were taken from the same composites asreplicates 1 and 2 of the phytoplankton program.

Allbacteriology samples were stored in sterile polyethylene bottles,precharged (when appropriate) with preservative, kept on ice, andtransported on the day of collection to Aqualab, Inc. foranalysis.

The analytical techniques used are referenced in Table6.1-3.Phvtoplankton samples were collected quarterly from Stations R-2and R-5. Four replicate samples were taken, each consisting ofeight 6-liter, plastic kemmerer bottle hauls from a depth of Imeter. The 48-liter replicate was accumulated in a polyethylene container and continuously mixed as the required subsamples werewithdrawn.

sampling at Stations R-2 and R-5 was conducted simultaneously, using two crews, to ensure the comparability ofthe results.Phytoplankton enumeration was accomplished using a 2-literphytoplankton sample drawn from each replicate and preserved with-M3- (Meyers 1971) at a final concentration of 3%.Lab processing included the identification and enumeration ofpreserved material.

Approximate phytoplankton densitities werefirst estimated in order to calculate the number of fields to becensused for a given collection date.total plankton were counted starting with a suitable volume,determined In a preliminary examination, of fixed material placedin a sedimentation chamber to concentrate the plankton.

Settlingwas facilitated by the addition of a small amount of deterqent 6.1-12 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 161 of 178 Byron EP-OLS(APHA 1971), and sedimentation was assumed to take place at amaximum rate of 3 hr/cm (Vollenweider 1969). That is, theminimum sedimentation time for a sample was equal (in hours) tothree times the height of the water column in centimeters.

Theconcentrated sample was enumerated at 400x magnification in acounting chamber that was shallow enough to allow the use of ahigh-dry (40x) lens (Palmer and Maloney 1954). All organisms encountered in these water mounts were enumerated with non-diatoms identified and measured and diatoms simply counted andlumped under "centric" and "pennate" categories.

The number offields counted within each of the four replicates was adjustedfor each collection date to ensure that at least the minimum of500 individuals was counted in the least dense sample for thatdate. The same number of microscope fields (at 400x) was used tocount each replicate.

Biovolumes for the species present in a sample were estimated byfirst measuring the dimensions of all the individuals encountered, up to a maximum of 10, 10 being the number ofindividuals usually considered adequate (APHA 1971). Biovolumes were then calculated on the basis of geometrical formulaeappropriate to each species.Diatoms were enumerated by separate counts to identify, measure,and enumerate diatom species because they were usually notdistinguishable in the water mount preparations.

An aliquot fromeach sample was taken, concentrated by centrifuging, acidcleaned, mounted in HyraxR, and enumerated using the methodsoutlined in Patrick and Reimer (1966) and APHA (1971) to obtainrelative abundances.

A minimum of 300 individuals was ountedfrom each replicate.

These proportional counts were then appliedto the total counts of combined diatom taxa enumerated in thewater mounts to break down the total counts into individual species abundances.

Less error was introduced into the censusesby this method than would have been introduced by an attempt toequate absolute abundances (density and biovolume) of diatoms andother algae using entirely different sample treatments.

Biovolume was expressed in p1/liter units. Density was expressed as Wo. cells/ml where possible.

Filamentous forms were expressed as standard length units of 100 pm/ml, colonial forms withconsistent cell numbers were recorded as a single unit, and largecolonies with variable cell numbers were reported in terms ofcell groups. The biovolume formula of single counting units islisted for each taxon in Appendix 6.1A, Table 6.1A-1. Speciesdiversity (HB) and redundancy (r) were calculated according tothe methods outlined in Wilhm and Dorris (1968). The following equation was used to calculate species diversity (He):H' ME P (6.1-8)where:pi = the proportion of the ith species6.1-13 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 162 of 178 Byron ER-OLSRedundancy (r) was then calculated using the following equation:

r = (B'max -') / (B'max -H' min) (6.1-9)Chlorophyll a was analyzed from a 2-liter subsample from eachreplicate.

These subsamples were placed in 1-liter polyethylene bottles and immediately frozen on dry ice. The samples were keptfrozen and in darkness until analysis.

Samples taken for chlorophyll a analysis were concentrated byfiltration through AA (1.Opm) Millipore filters (Creitz andRichards 1955), and the pigments were extracted in 90% acetone.Optical density (O.D.) was measured on a spectrophotometer usingan absorption cell with a path long enough to produce an O.D.reading between 0.2 and 0.5. The exact procedures followed werethose outlined in Stickland and Parsons (1968). Chlorophyll aconcentrations were calculated using the Chlorophyll-Pheophytin Method (Strickland and Parsons 1968; APHA 1971; Moss 1967;Lorenzen 1967). This method was preferred over the trichromatic method (Parsons and Strickland 1968), which is standard inoceanographic work, because fresh waters often containsignificant quantities of the chlorophyll degradation productpheophytin which, if present, can lead to serious overestimates of chlorophyll a.Primary production was measured using the carbon-14 technique outlined in Section 601f of Standard Methods (APHA 1971) and inStrickland and Parsons (1968). This method results in anestimate near the net production, since the quantity measured isthe amount of radiocarbon residing in the particulate phase ofthe sample at the end of the incubation period. This valuerepresents the total carbon fixed during incubation, minus thecarbon released in respiration or excreted from the algalpopulation.

The radiocarbon source used consisted of a C-14 labeled sodiumbicarbonate solution of 5 pCi total activity sealed in l-mlampoules, which were obtained in standardized lots from NewEngland Nuglear Corporation.

Incubations were performed in 300-ml Wheaton BOD bottles that were sterilized before each use.Two three-bottle sets, each consisting of two light (clear)bottles and one dark (to correct for heterotrophic fixation andadsorption) bottle, were filled with water from the first two 48-liter composite samples taken at the appropriate stations (oneset for each sample).

The two three-bottle sets were thus takenfrom the same samples as replicates 1 and 2 for water chemistry, phytoplankton, and chlorophyll a determinations.

The contents ofa l-ml C-14 ampoule were added to each bottle, and all bottleswere suspended at a standard depth of 1 meter from an anchoredfloat at the station from which the sample water was collected.

Samples were allowed to incubate from 2 to 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />. Incubation was terminated by the addition of 2 ml of 37% formaldehyde.

Inthe lab, the entire contents of each bottle was filtered through6.1-14 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 163 of 178 Byron ER-OLSa 0.45 jo membrane filter that was then dried and dissolved in adioxane cocktail.

The rate of p-decay (as counts per minute) wasthen determined in a liquid scintillation counter.

At this timethe background radioactivity and total activity of the lot ofampoules were also determined.

The calculations were performed as outlined in Standard Methods (APHA 1971).Zooplankton samples were collected quarterly at Stations R-2 andR-5 (see Figure 6.1-1). At each station, the quarterly sampleconsisted of four replicates, each a composite of eight verticalhauls with a No. 20 (80 prm) mesh plankton net. The samples wereimmediately preserved by adding a sufficient amount of 37%formaldehyde to yield a final concentration of about 5%.In the lab, sample volumes were standardized to 1 liter andsurveyed to determine the volume to be processed in order thatthe least dense replicate from the two stations would yield acount of at least 300 zooplankters.

The subsamples were thencounted in Sedgwick-Rafter cells at 100x magnification.

Cladocerans and adult copepods were identified to species, aswere rotifers when possible.

Immature copepodite stages ofcopepods were identified as cyclopoid,

calanoid, or harpacticoid.

Copepod nauplii were identified as such, without furtherdifferentiation.

Densities were calculated as number per cubic meter. Speciesdiversity (H') and redundancy (r) indexes were calculated asoutlined by Wilhm and Dorris (1968). The following equation wasused to calculate species diversity (H'):H' mOi ln pi (6.1-8)where:pi = the proportion of the i thspecies Redundancy (r) was then calculated as follows:r = (HI max- Be) / (H' max -He m6nmBax m-x Hmin)619station differences in abundance of categories and dominants weretested by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA),

and subsequent pair-wise testing of station means was done by Scheffe's multiplecomparison.

Before testing, a In (x + 1) transform was appliedto the density data. For all statistical tests, an a priorilevel of significance of 5% (P<0.05) was chosen.Periphyton samples were collected in two separate

programs, the"quarterly" series and the "bimonthly" series. Laboratory processing for the two programs was identical.

It is discussed in the following paragraphs.

6.1-15 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 164 of 178 Byron ER-OLSThe quarterly periphytor samples were collected from naturalsubstrates at Stations R-I, R-5, S-3g S-5, W-1, and W-2 duringMay and July. All samples were taken at an approximately 0.25-meter depth using a toothbrush and a series of acetate templates to remove all growth from 10 cm2 on each of eight replicate substrates at each station.Beginning with the October sample, this program was changed intwo ways. First, periphyton was no longer collected from naturalsubstrates but from plexiglass slides identical to those used inthe bimonthly collections.

The following discussion of thebimonthly series thus applies to the quarterly series beginning with the October 1975 samples.

Second, three more stations, R-2,R-3, and R-4, were added to the quarterly series. Eightreplicate substrates were taken from a single diatometer at eachstation.The bimonthly fartifical substrate) series of periphyton sampleswere taken at stations on either side of the river at StationsR-2, R-3, and R-4. A diatometer was positioned on each side ofthe river at these locations.

These locations (stations) weredesignated 2R and 2L, 3P and 3L, and 4R and 4L with the R and Lrepresenting the right (west) and left (east) sides of the river,facing downstream.

After approximately 1 month's exposure, fourof the eight replicate samples were removed from each diatometer.

The sample surfaces consisted of plexiglass slides having a totalsurface area of 20 cm. These were held in a vertical positionin the diatometer to minimize siltation.

The diatometers werefloating plexiglass platforms designed to hold the substrate slides at a constant depth of 0.25 meter (modified from APRA1971). Collections were made by placing Tach replicate slide(four per station) in a labeled Whirl-Pak bag with a smallamount of distilled water and M3 perservative (Meyers 1971). Theperiphyton was subsequently scraped from the substrates in thelab.Lab processing for all periphytor samples was carried out in thesame way regardless of the program it came from. scrapings fromhalf of the replicates from each station were suspended in 50 mlof water and M3 fixation.

From this point on, identification andbiovolume estimates followed the procedures outlined in thephytoplankton paragraphs except that concentration by settlingwas generally not necessary.

The results were expressed on anareal basis as specified (i.e., density as No./10 cmg andbiovolume as pl/10 cm2). The geometrical formulae used tocalculate biovolumes, and the taxa to which they were applied,are listed in Appendix 6.1A, Table 6.1A-1. Species diversity andredundancy values were calculated according to the methods ofWilhm and Dorris (1968) (see Appendix 6.1A, Table 6.1A-2).

Thefollowing equation was used to calculated species diversity (H'):HI lEpiIn P1 (6.1-8)where:.6.1-16 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 165 of 178 Byron ER-OLSPi -the proportion of the ith speciesRedundancy (r) was then calculate4 using the following equation:

r = (B"max -H') / (E'max -Hemin ) (6.1-9)Scrapings from the remaining substrates at each station (bothprograms) were placed in separate crucibles, dried to constantweight at 1050 C, and ignited for 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> at 5000 C in a mufflefurnace.

The ash was then rewetted with a few drops of distilled water and again dried to constant weight at 1050 C (APHA 1971).The purpose of the rewetting procedure was to ensure that thewater of hydration of clay and other minerals, driven off at5000 C, but not at 1050 C, was reintroduced and thus would not bereported as organic matter. Biomass was reported as thedifference in sample weights before and after ignition per 10 cm2(ash-free dry weight).

"Constant weight" was defined (APHA 1971)as a change of 0.5 mg or less between two successive series ofoperations (heating, cooling in a desicator, andyweighing).

Allweighings were to the nearest 0.1 mg. A Mettler H6 balance wasused for all of the weighings.

Benthic macroinvertebrate populations were assessed in twoseparate programs that sampled different portions of the totalcoommnity.

The "dredge benthos" program consisted of samples of organisms and sediments taken directly from the river bottom. In the"Hester-Dendy"

program, artificial substrate samplers were usedto provide habitat space for benthic organisms.

Dredge Benthos:Field Processing required four replicate benthos samples to becollected at Stations R-1 through R-S,. S-3, S-5, W-1, and W-2during each quarterly sampling period, using a Ponar grab.Immediately after collection, the samples were split byquartering, and portions were retained for total organic carbonand particle-size analysis.

The portion intended for organiccarbon analysis was frozen and transported to the lab for furtherprocessing (see water chemistry section).

Particle size andorganism aliquots were preserved.by adding a 37% formaldehyde solution.

Lab processing included washing and sorting dredge samples usinga standard no. 30 mesh sieve and a binocular microscope.

Afterwashing and sorting, all macroinvertebrates (from both programs) were preserved in a 70% ethanol -5% glycerine solution untilfinal disposition.

Organisms requiring examination with acompound microscope (e.g., Oligochaeta and Diptera) werepermanently mounted in Berlese's medium (Galigher and Kozloff1971). organisms were identified to species where possible andthe results reported as density (No./m2).6.1-17 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 166 of 178 Byron ER-OLSParticle size analysis was carried out using the methods outlinedin Folk (1968). U. S. Standard No. 4 and No. 200 sieves wereused to separate the following particle size categories:

Gravel = >4.75 -mSand = 4.75 mm>d>0.074 mmSilt 4 Clay = d>0.074 mmThe silt and clay fractions were separated and theircontributions estimated by using the pipette technique.

Hester-DendX Sampling Proqram:Benthic organisms were collected from four replicate artificial substrates every month (March through August in 1975; from Aprilthrough September beginning in 1976) at Transects R-2, R-3, andR-4. Two samplers were located on each side of the river atthese transects.

The substrates used were modified Hester-Dendy samplers.

These were constructed of nine circular, hardboard plates 6.3 cm in diameter.

The plates were arranged in sequenceso that the spacing of the plates varied from 0.3 to 1.3 cm. Thetotal surface area exposed in these samplers was about 0.06 mi.The samplers were exposed for a 2-month period, suspended justbelow the water surface from an anchored float. They werecollected with a dip net, and the entire sampler was stored in aquart mason jar containing 10% formalin for transport to the lab.The Hester-Dendy substrates were brushed and washed on No. 30mesh sieves and examined using a binocular microscope.

Theresults were expressed as No./m2 for each species.

As with thedredge samples, identification was to species where possible.

species diversity and redundancy were calculated according to themethods outlined in Wilhm and Dorris (1968).Fish were sampled quarterly at six stations by electroshocking,

seining, and hoop netting.

Drift net samples at eight stationswere collected monthly from May through August (see Figure6.1-3). A creel census was conducted from Byron to the Oregondam roughly every three days during June, July, and August 1975(see Figure 6.1-4).The 1975 through 1976 quarterly seine, electroshock, and hoop netsamples were collected from April 28 through May 1 (spring),

July7 through 10 (summer),

and O5ctober 10 through 16 (fall), 1975.No February 1976 (winter) sample was collected due to ice con-ditions on the river.Drift net collections at Stations R-1, B-2, R-3, R-4# R-5, S-3,S-5, and S-6 were made over a 4-month period on April 30 and May1, June 6 through 7, July 8 and 14, and August 5 through 7# 1975.6.1-18 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 167 of 178 Byron ER-OLSThe samples collected included those from three river transectstations (R-2, R-3, and R-4) and three creek mouth stations (S-3,S-5, and S-6). The west bank of the Rock River in the vicinityof the transects is largely comprised of a gravel bottom whereasthe east bank has primarily a silty mud bottom..

Because of thedichotomous

habitat, samples were collected along both shorelines at the three transect stations.

Creek stations were generally sampled by seining once up the creek from the mouth and once inthe river itself at the mouth. The duplicate 2000 ft2 seinehauls were made on two consecutive days at each station using a50-foot long by 12-foot wide keep seine of 1/2-inch Ace mesh.Hoop net collections were made at six stations with the netsgenerally placed in 5 to 6 feet of water. The hoop nets usedwere 7-ring nets, 4 feet in diameter and 16 feet long with 2-inchsquare mesh. A net was placed at each creek mouth (S-3, S-5, andS-6) and on each side of the river at the three transect stations(R-2, R-3, and R-4). Nets were attached to stakes driven intothe bottom and oriented downstream.

Bait was canned dog foodduring the spring and dog food plus cheese during the summer andfall. Nets were left in place for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> on each of twoconsecutive sampling days.Electroshocking was done with a 220-volt, a-c pulsed signaldelivered through two 5-foot electrodes.

The electrodes wereboom-mounted on the front of the collection boat. Two nettersswept each station, for 30 minutes shocking time on each of twoconsecutive days. At the river transect

stations, each shoreline was shocked for 15 minutes per day.Drift net samples were collected monthly from May through Augustat nine stations (R-1 through R-5, S-3, S-5, S-6, and W-1). Thenets were No. 0 mesh 5:1 drift nets with 0.5-meter diameters.

AGeneral Oceanics Model 2030 flow meter was installed in the mouthof each net. Each flow meter was calibrated against theinstrument's calibration curve and found to be within acceptable limits of variation from the. standard curve. The threshold velocity for this model, equipped with the low-speed rotor, is 3cm/sec with a linear response range of 5 cm/sec to I meter/sec for the low-speed rotor. Nets were anchored in place facingupstream for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. collected samples were immediately preserved in formalin.

For fish taken by seines, hoop nets, and electroshocking, thefollowing procedures were used:a. Each fish was identified to the lowest possible taxon(species level with few exceptions for larvalfishes).b. Total catch was enumerated.

6.1-19 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 168 of 178 Byron ER-OLSc. Total length was recorded in millimeters.

d. Individual body weight was recorded in grams afterweighing on a milk-scale type balance, accurate to 1ounce~, for larger specimens or on an 0 Haus Dial-Q-Gram balance, accurate to within 0.1 gram, forsmaller specimens.

e. Scale samples were taken from fish examined forlength and weight with the exception of minnows andcatfish.

Carp scales were also collected and aged.Ten or more scales were removed from each specimenand placed into appropriately labeled scale envelopes for later analysis.

For analysis, scales were soakedin water and brushed to remove residual tissue.Annuli were counted by direct observation with astereoscope.

Age estimates were confirmed by readinga minimum of three scales per individual.

f. The gill chambers and external body surface of allspecimens were checked for evidence of parasites anddisease.

Inspection included surveying the specimenfor the presence of, or damage due to, the following organisms:

bacteria, viruses, fungi, protozoans,

copepods, roundworms, flatworms,

leeches, mollusks, and lampreys.

g. A maximum of 10 adults of each species taken each dayat each station by each gear type were eviscerated and their sex determined.

Cyprinids, other thancarp, were an exception as their sex was notdetermined.

h. The stomachs collected in the previous step wereexamined and their contents recorded for all adultgame fish, ictalurids, and carp. The stomachcontents were analyzed for relative abundance ofvarious food items.i. During the spring and fall sample periods, muscle andliver tissue from each of the two numerically mostimportant carnivorous and herbivorous species wascollected for heavy metal and insecticide analysis.

Tissue from fish taken from a number of samplestations was composited for analysis whereverpossible.

Game fish species were usually present inlow numbers and consequently tended to be represented from only one or two stations.

Tissue samples wereanalyzed for trace metals (copper,

cadmium, lead,zinc, and mercury) and pesticides (dieldrin, endrin,DDT, heptachlor,

lindane, and aldrin) by anindependent Illinois State certified laboratory.

6.1-20 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 169 of 178Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 1JULY 1981During the months of June, July, and August 1975, a creel censuswas performed approximately every 3 days during daylight hours onthe Rock River from Byron to Oregon, Illinois.

Nine areasaccessible from the roads paralleling the Rock River on the east(rural route) and on the west (State Hwy 2) were sampled duringeach separate creek census effort (see Figure 6.1-4). The usualsurvey took approximately 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> to accomplish.

On four occasions (June 6 and 26, July 29, and August 29) thecreek census was conducted from a boat starting at Byron andfinishing at the Oregon Dam. Thirty of the total of 207interviews were obtained on these occasions.

Figure 6.1-2 is an example of a creel census questionnaire.

Whenever

possible, the length and weight of all fish caught bythe fisherman were recorded;

however, on numerous occasions per-mission to measure the fish was not granted.6.1.2 Groundwater The groundwater regime of the Byron Station site was investigated on a regional and site basis through an integrated program ofoffice studies, field investigation, and laboratory testing.

Theobjectives of the regional survey were to determine theoccurrence,

movement, use, and general quality of groundwater.

As a part of this investigation, the regional hydrogeological system and available piezometric surface maps were reviewed.

Groundwater pumpage data were collected on a county-wide basis.Data for all water wells within 2.25 miles of the site, andpublic groundwater supplies within 10 miles, were tabulated.

The site-area survey refined the regional data and provided site-specific physical and chemical parameters from borehole loganalyses, observation wells, piezometers, pumping tests, waterpressure tests, and water sample analyses.

These data wereuseful.in evaluating the groundwater resources and developing predictive models. The properties and configurations of thelocal aquifers at the site are described in Subsection 2.4.2.6.1.2.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters The monitoring program for groundwater quality and levels in thevicinity of the site began in December 1975 and was modified inApril 1980. This modification involved the establishment ofaction guides. The guides determine that action should be takenwhen specific values of the monitored parameters no longer fallwithin the guide limits (action levels).Water quality analyses are performed in accordance with StandardMethods for Examination ofWater and Wastewater, 15th Edition(APHA 1979) and Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes(U.S. EPA 1979). Water levels are determined using a meterconnected to a probe that is lowered into the well. The meter6.1-21 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 170 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 6.1-1SUMMARY OF THE 1973-1974 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAMPARAMETER Phytoplankton

& Zooplankton Quantitative Quantitative LOCATIONR-1 through R-5,.S-3, S-4, and S-5R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-4, and S-5R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-4, S-5,W-1, and W-3R-2, R-3, R-4FREQUENCY 1973September andOctober1974January, AprilJuly, and OctoberPeriphyton September andOctoberDiatometers BenthosArtificial Substrates FishFish Eggs andLarvaeFish Creel CensusBacteriaFish Muscle andLiver TissueWater Chemistry (22 parameters)

Quality ControlAnalysesDiurnal Dissolved OxygenTrace Metals (Cd,CO, Fe, Cu, Hg, Zn,Pb, Cr)Physical Parameters (Temperature, currentvelocity, turbidity, depth, light pene-tration, transparency)

R-1 through R-5S-3, S-4, S-5,W-1, and W-3R-2, R-3, and R-4R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-4, S-5, W-l,and W-3R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-4 and S-5Study AreaR-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-l, andW-3R-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-1 andW-3R-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-l, andW-3R-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-l, andW-3R-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-l, andW-3R-1 through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-l, andW-3R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-4, S-5, W-l,and W-3September andOctoberMonthly, beginning in September Bi-Weekly, Junethrough September

January, April,July, and OctoberJanuary, March,May, July,September, andNovemberJanuary, April,July, and OctoberMonthly, January toAugustJanuary, April,July, and OctoberApril, May, June,and JulyMay through September.

January, April,July, and OctoberApril and OctoberJanuary, April,July, and OctoberSeptember andOctoberSeptember andOctoberOctoberSeptember andOctoberOctoberJulySeptember andOctoberSeptember andOctoberMay, July, andSeptember

January, April,July, and OctoberJanuary, April,July, and October6.1-70 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 171 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 6.1-2SUMMARY OF CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PARAMETERS MONITORED DURING SECOND YEAR (1973-1974)

AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAMCHEMICAL PARAMETERS Total.Suspended SolidsTotal Organic SolidsTotal Dissolved SolidsBiochemical Oxygen Demand 5-DayTotal Organic CarbonDissolved OxygenpHConductivity HardnessAlkalinity Chlorides SulfatesCalciumMagnesiuin ColorSilicaTotal Phosphate Orthophosphate NitrateNitriteAmmoniaSodiumTRACE METALSCadmiumChromiumCobaltCopperIronLeadManganese MercuryNickelZincPHYSICAL PARAMETERS Temperature Current VelocityTurbidity DepthLight Penetration Transparency 6.1-71 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 172 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 6.1-3SUMMARY OF WATER CHEMISTRY METHODSPARAMETER HardnessTotal Alkalinity Chlorides SulfatesCalciumMagnesium ColorSilicaTotal Phosphate Orthophosphate NitrateNitrateAmmon iaTotal Suspended Solids (non-fil-terable residue)Total OrganicSolidsBiochemical Oxygen DemandTotal OrganicCarbon (TOC)TOC (sediments)

TRACE METALSCadmiumCopperIronZincLeadChromiumMercurySodiumBACTERIOLOGY Total BacteriaTotal ColiformFecalstreptococci UNITSmgCaCO3/litermgCaCO3/liter mgCl'/liter mgSOI/liter mgCa/liter mgMg/liter APHA unitsmgSiO2/litermgP/liter mgP/liter mgN/liter mgN/liter mgN/liter mg/litermg/litermg/litermgC/liter

%CmgCd/liter mgCu/liter mgFe/liter mgZn/liter mgPb/liter mgCr/liter mgHg/liter mgNa/liter Colonies/ml Colonies/ml Colonies/

100 mlMETHODEDTAMethyl-orange Argentometric Gravimetric Atomic Absorption Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometric Heteropoly BluePersulfate Digestion Ascorbic AcidAscorbic AcidBrucineDiazotization Nesslsrization Filtration Ash-Free Dry WeightS.M.ap. 179p. 526p. 96p. 331p. 210p. 210p. 392p. 306p. 526p. 532p. 532p. 461p. 240p. 226p. 291p. 292p. 489ASTMb EPAcp. 170 p. 76p. 43 p. 246p. 23 p. 29p. 51 p. 286p. 692 p. 102p. 692 p. 112p. 42 p. 246-p. 259-p. 259-p. 259p. 185p. 134p. 278-p. 2785-DayCombustion-Infrared Combustion-Infrared Atomic Absorption Atomic Absorption Atomic Absorption Atomic Absorption Atomic Absorption Atomic Absorption Atomic Absorption Atomic Absorption Standard Plate CountMembrane FilterMembrane Filterp. 257 p. 702 p. 221p. 257 p. 702 p. 221p.p.p.p.p.p.p.p.210210210210210210210210p.p.p-p.p-p.692692692691692692p. 101p. 106p. 108p. 120p. 110p. 104p. 118p. 660p. 679p. 690astandard Methods (APHA 1971)bAnnual Book of Standards (American Society for Testing and Materials 1972)cMethods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes (EPA Water Quality Office 1971)6.1-72 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-1f ResponsePage 173 of 178Byron ER-OLSTABLE 6.1-4SUMMARY OF AQUATIC BIOLOGY PREOPERATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAM AFTER 1974AT BYRON STATIONPARAMETERS Phytoplankton andZooplankton Periphyton Diatometers (Quarterly Program)Periphyton Diatometers (Bi-monthly)

Benthos (grabsamples)Benthos (artificial substrates)

FishElectrofishing and SeiningHoop NetsCreel CensusFish Eggs and LarvaeWater Chemistry (21 parameters, seeSubsection 2.7.1.1.1)

Trace Metals(Cd, Co, Fe, Cu, Hg,Zn, Pb, Cr)FREQUENCY

February, May, August,NovemberFebruary, May, August,NovemberJanuary, March,May, July,September, NovemberFebruary, May, August,NovemberApril, May, June, July,August, September

February, May, August,NovemberFebruary, May, August,NovemberMay, June, July, AugustApril, May, June, July,AugustFebruary, May, August,NovemberLOCATIONMid-channel R-2 and R-5Mid-channel R-1through R-5, S-3,S-4, S-5, W-l, andW-2 (i)2L, 2R, 3L, 3R,4Land 4R(2)R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-5, W-l,.andW-2 (1)2L, 2R, 3L, 3R,4L,and 4R(2)R-2, R-3, R-4, S-3,S-5, and S-6R-2, R-3, R-4, S-3,S-5, and S-6Study AreaMid-channel R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-5, S-6, andW-1R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-5, S-6, W-1,and W-2(l)R-1 through R-5,S-3, S-5, S-6,W-l, W-2(l)February, NovemberMay, August,6.1-73 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 174 of 178LL CREEKMANREEKROCK,LEAFOODLAND\CREEK01.13PRINGCREEKiimiaz:ýr1iE iLEGEND:CREEKR RIVER TRANSECTS STREAM STATIONW POOL STATION0 SEINING LOCATION0 .BYRON STATIONMOREGONI 1I1MILESBYRON NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONUNITS 1 & 2ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT -OPERATING LICENSE STAGEFIGURE 6.1-ILOCATIONS OF AOUATICSAMPLING STATIONS RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 175 of 178Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 1JULY 19816.2 APPLICANT'S PROPOSED OPERATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAMS6.2.1 Aquatic Monitoring ProgramOperational monitoring will be initiated when Byron Unit 1becomes operational.

The monitoring program will be conducted inaccordance with the requirements specified in Byron Station NPDESPermit Number IL0048313 and with an agreement with the IllinoisDepartment of Conservation.

This agreement consists of anevaluation, by an acceptable third party, of past and proposedaquatic monitoring programs for validity and reliability todetect gradual changes that could have an effect on the generalecology of the Rock River.6.2.2 Terrestrial Monitoring ProgramThe monitoring programs described in Subsection 6.1.4.3.2.4 willcontinue for 1 year after the beginning of commercial operation of the Byron Station.

Since the noise levels due to theoperation of the station were predicted using standard acousticmethodology for environmental noise emmissions from power plants,a confirmatory monitory program will be implemented.

Thisprogram will consist of actual measurements of the noise levelsat the four locations identified in Figure 5.6-1, and also at thetwo locations identified in Figure 2.7-1. These measurements will be taken first when Unit 1 and again when both Units I and 2are operational.

6.2.3 Radiological Monitoring ProgramThe preoperational radiological monitoring program described inSubsection 6.1.5, with the addition of 40 other TLD sitesdistributed about the site boundary and at 5 miles, will continuefor 2 years after commercial operation of the Byron Stationbegins. Thereafter, the monitoring program that will be usedwill be the one described in Table 6.2-1.6.2.4 Meteorological Monitoring ProgramThe meteorological measurement program currently used at theByron Station site is described in Subsection 6.1.3.1.1.

It isproposed that this program continue through the operational phaseof the Byron Station.

Any change in plans will be reported in asupplement to this Environmental Report.6.2-1 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 176 of 178Byron ER-OLSAMENDMENT NO, 1.JULY 1981TABLE 6.2-1STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM:.1.8SAHMP XEDIAAir. monitoring coL&LCTION SITESNear Field *nearsite

1. 1 (East)tearsits 62 (West)Byron..Far FieldNearsite

1. 3 (South)Oregon.Stillman ValleyPaynes PointMtr MorrisSame Am For Air Monitoring Sites plus. to other sitesdistributed, about the siteboundary and at 5 miles2 Dairy FarmsTYPE or AMALYSISFliter -Gross BetahCharcoal 131Sampling Train.*-Test and.Maintenance Filter Exchange:

Charcoal ExchangeSampling Train'-Test and: Maintenance Gamma Radiation FPEQWENUI WeeklyBi-Weekly.

WeeklyWeeklyýBi-Weekly WeeklyQuarterly 1lMilk1-131Surface waterCooling WaterSampleFishSedimentDownstream of discharge.:

InletDischarge Oregon Pool ofRock River.Downstream of discharge:

Upstream of intakeGame isotopicrsSBeta:Tritiumisotopicaamsa isotopicWeekly during* Grasing.

Season -May to Oct.monthly:-

Nov.to Apr.Monthly analysisof Weekly composite

.WeeklyQuarterly Composite Semiannually Annually6.2-2 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 177 of 179 Byron ER-CLSFish Eggs and Larvae:Fish egg and larvae% data will be collected at one river transectupstream of the Byron Station intake and in the intake forebay tocontrast intake with river numbers.

Sampling will be conducted for one full spawning period after Unit 2 is declaredcommercially operational by CECo.6.2.1.1.2 Temperature when CECo has declared both Byron Units 1 and 2 to be incommercial operation with licenses to operate at full poweroutput, plume studies will be conducted at 3-month intervals thatwill terminate when four plume studies representing the fourseasonal river conditions have been completed.

6.2.1.1.3 Water Chemistry Water chemistry samples will be taken upstream of the riverscreen house, in the outfall of the Byron Station blowdownstructure,

and downstream from the blowdown structure.

Sampleswill be taken quarterly at mid-channel at each designated station.

Table 6.2-1 shows the water quality parameters thatwill be measured during the Byron Station operational-phase program.6.2.2 Terrestrial Monitoring PrcqramThe operational-phase terrestrial ecological monitoring programwill focus on the possibility of Byron Station cooling towerimpacts.

An avifaunal survey will begin when the containment buildings and/or cooling towers reach 30 feet or more in height.This monitoring program will document any migratory avifaunal fatalities that result from direct collision with these stationstructures.

The program will continue through 1980 as anintegral part of the 5-year constructicn and preoperational monitoring program.In addition, a 15-square-mile, aerial infrared photogrammetric monitoring program was implemented in July 1977. This program isdesigned to document any vegetational changes that result fromplant construction and operation.

This program will be continued through and after plant operation to ensure completedocumentation of any conceivable postoperational impacts fromcooling tower salt drift.6.2.3 Radiological Monitoring ProgramThe monitoring program described in Table 6.4-1 will continue for2 years after commercial operation of the Byron Station begins.Thereafter, the monitoring program that will be used will be theone described in Table 6.2-2.6.2-3 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 178 of 179Byron ER-OLS AMENDMENT NO. 1JULY 19816.3 RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENT AND MONITORING PROGRAMSThe Byron Nuclear Generating Station -Units 1 & 2 (ByronStation) aquatic monitoring area is shown in Figure 2.2-1. Theintake and discharge points of Byron Units 1 and 2 are locatednear Rock River mile 115. Agencies and/or groups known to haveconducted environmental studies in this area are described in thefollowing paragraphs.

The Illinois Department of Conservation conducted extensive sampling of the Rock River in Illinois including the area nearthe plant during 1965, 1973, 1974, 1976, and 1977 to assess the Igeneral status of fish populations.

They also conducted restricted sampling for selected parameters during 1971 and 1976.Samples were collected by electroshocking at 6 stations during1965, 11 stations during 1974, 5 stations during 1976, and 11stations during 1977. In 1973, two 4-mile sections of the RockRiver were sampled intensively by electroshocking, basket trap,and trap net. One of the stations during the 1974 sampling wasalso sampled by basket trap. Some of the stations sampled during1977 will be sampled annually to measure changes in population.

Special samples were collected by seining with a 30-foot bagseine at two stations during 1971 to determine generalreproductive success and by electroshocking at four stationsduring 1976 to determine walleye abundance.

Stations in theimmediate vicinity of the Byron Station discharge were sampled bynet, basket, and electroshocking in 1973 and 1974 and byelectroshocking in 1976 and 1977. A summary table of catch perunit effort for each species for these years is included as Table6.3-1.The Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety (IDNS) is expected toconduct a small radiological monitoring program at and near theByron Station once station operation begins. In addition, it isexpected that IDNS will conduct independent effluent measurements 1both on and off site.6.3-1 RS-14-051 Enclosure, RAI AQ-lf ResponsePage 179 of 179Byron ER-OLSQ 0H-14-N411N .4in r- NNUtm. m4 .4N 4-00WD.4i*4 t-C"Ina;m1l C C"4 M 0000 m If0.440.4 '%0 ccDw00 4 1M NM -.4N 00 01,4 R'C; 4m0en00m0&n0.r4 .4 `C0 00C;C64ioM .4.4iiqm 4 mc i' 0: .00 o mO0 wmr4 Qw inN4 m t i 0 m-1 .4 .44 (q00-4 00Q0QV6C!CDC r-NOC.440atvw4#00000000ný0000 020000w N%coo0 0U$4 0 0$4 ~ $ M4 'Mo $ 44 VAaC d1 -1 0W '61 fa0 f1 %2 0110.W A. 44444Aa44 4441241 41 $40 4" a"'44 041) rj A3 0S. 41 414a1~d4

)043 to V1 4) m.4'1 O , 43 tomt 41 O- 4) id...01. 0 C0' Go 41 aA1 -4 J4 D'4~. 0MA. I440 adM 0' =4.4M gW 'W4 aA O 01~ AZ$4A4004

'6e4a 'A14 41 '4344.4 8.14 a.i$ 4m $4 93 41 r-4 a $4O 0 o 1 M 1w 0 410.4Ca3U)44 00.0 go 416.3-2