ML20003E112
| ML20003E112 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1981 |
| From: | TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20003E109 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8104020267 | |
| Download: ML20003E112 (215) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. C Docket No. 50-346 License No. NPF-3 i Serial No. 1-191 Mr. James G. Keppler 7 Page 2 March 31, 1981 cc: Victor Stello Jr., Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement USNRC Washington, D.C. 20555 (20 copies) Norman Haller, Director Office of Management and Program Analysis USNRC Washington, D.C. 20555 (2 copies) Harold Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation t
.USNRC Washington, D.C. 20555 (1 copy)
' f%
v Luis Reyes, Resident NRC Inspector Davis-Besse Nuclear Generating Station (1 copy)
'bj x/2-~ =
t e
.p dh yE-+ a w - .y *y w g f s , m+- e ~e -y , ay 4 r-h -y--w-----s -a-6= = n -we- -e+-r -*-,~-,-ee t'v --y,yy v wi-tryv---tt
TABLE OF CONTENTS Limiting Conditions For Operation I. Maximum Temperature 2.1.1 II. Reserved 2.2 III. Biocides 2.3.1 IV, pH Monitoring 2.3.2 V. Sulfates Monitoring 2.3.3 Envfronmental Surveillance VI. Water Quality Analysis 3.1.1.a.1 VII. Chemical Usage 3.1.1.a.2 VIII. Chlorine Monitoring 3.1.1.a.3 IX. Plankton Studies 3.1.2.a.1 X. Benthic Studies 3.1.2.a.2 XI. Fisheries Population Studies 3.1.2.a.3 XII. Ichthyoplankton 3.1.2.a.4 XIII. Fish Egg And Larvae Entrainment 3.1.2.a.5
-XIV. Fish Impingement 3.1.2.a.6 XV. Bird Collisions 3.1.2.b.1 .
XVI.. Vegetation Survey 3.1.2.b.2 XVII. Environmental Radiological Monitoring 3.2 Special Surveillance And Study Activities XVIII. Operational Noise Surveillance 4.1 XIX. Fish Impingement Study 4.2 XX. Chlorine Toxicity Study 4.3 XXI.. Additional Studies
O I O SECTIm 2.1.1 b!MN IEMPERATWE DIFFERENTIAL. O
7 b 2.1.1 TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL *F 1980 Minimum l'aximum t'anthly 1980 Oaily Average Daily Averace Averace January 10 19 15 February 6 18 14 March 9 19 16 April 2 16 10 May 0 2 1 June - 0 4 1 July 0 3 1 ( ) v August 0 2 1 September - 0 4 1 October 0 6 3 November 1 17 9 DecemberL 3 15 10 The maximum temperature differential of 20*F was exceeded at the following times: 6 January at 0700 (20.08'F), 0800 (23.44*F), 0900 (23.79'F), 2000 (24'.01*F) and 0000 (20.37*F); 7 January at 0100 (25.07*F), 0200 (24.62'F), 0300 (23.90*F), 1000 (20.61*F), 2000 (20.32*F), 2100 (20.60*F), and 2200 (21.15'F); 8 January at- 0600 (22.02*F); 16 January at 1500 (20.45*F),1600 (21.68"F),1700 (20.65"F),' and 1800 (21.19*F); 10 February at 0800 (20.54*F); 20 December at 1200 (20.44*F),' and 1900 (21.47*F); and 21 December at 1100 (23.01*F). b.
- - > - -- -- . g l
O I II O SECTION 2.2 THIS SECTION IS RESERVED i l l O
l, l l 1 I a III i SECTION 2.3,1 I ( BIOCIDES l I
.... - . . _ . . . , _ - _ _ . . _ _ . . . _ _ , . , _ _ _ _ _ _ . , _ _ _ _ . . ~ , . . _ _ - , . . - _ _ . . _ . . _ _
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ = _ . _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _
1 i , I .l e e t l j i i- i 1 ! 2.3.1 BIOCIDES ! l < 4 I Chlorine was the only biocide used at Davis-Besse during the i 1980 period. Monitoring of chlorine residuals is covered by i t i, i the Station's NPDES Permit. The limits of the permit were
- i. t not exceeded in 1980.
1 l > 1 .1 ) ! I f i i d 5 -f
\
t i e I . i. i l ( I, f' : I i l
- f I
I l I ll - S
._u..n.....-..._...,... ..___._._.__.,,..__a_. . _ _ _ . . . _ . _ , _ _ . _ . . , . - , - , . . , _ _ _ _ _
t I i 1 l . i, i l 1 l l l i l i d i IV j SECTION 2.3.2 PH b !TORING
. - _ _ - -.._-_.-.. . _ _ .._-._ _ _ _ _ _ .._ _ __ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . ~ . _ _ _ _ _
i 4 [ t ! 6 1 i ! l. t i ! 1- ! l t i i i s b j 2.3.2 pH MONITORING 1980 t. I i, i 1980 Minimum Maximum i s l January- 7.4 8.5 i , I e February 7.3 8,5 1 I Msrch 7.6 8.6 ! ,! , a f i . April 6.8 8.3 , , ! l 4 i l May 7.2 8.8 June 6.4 8.1 ! t July 6.1 7.5 ;
- - August 6.6 7.8 Septembet- 6.1 8.4 l October 6.7.- 8.4-t November- 7.0 8.3
- December 6.6 8.3 i
i 1 i The pH limit of 6-9 was not exceeded in 1980. [ 4 4 ., J-i s e i 4 T. i. 4._... . ..-;.- . .. . , _ , .._.,. - , ... _ . . . . , _ . . _ , , , . _ , _ ,, _ _ _ . _ . _ _ , . - . . _ _ _ _ . , , . . _ , . . . . _ . _ _ . - _ - - . . . . , - , ~ . _ _ - - . . - - . . ~ . , _ . . -
i V
=
SECTION 2.3.3 SULFATES b !TODING l i l i a
-a, _,_
_______._._..__...___._..________-.___.._______._w__. _. __ __ .-___. _ __ __.. _ i i 1 } i i e i i 1 i 2.3.3 SULFATE 1980 PPM 4 4 1980 Minimum Maximum Avet-age January 100 220 157 February 125 230 173
- March .90 160 129 April 80 340 167 l May 80 210 116 June- 75 300 - 135 July 80 120 ' 93
. Asgust 60 90 71 :
September 50 125 74 i October ' 50 125 71
- November- 50 125 76
. 1 December 50 100 73 The sulfate limit of 1500 mg/l was cot exceeded during 1980. +
O I 1 s JL m- tm-m-v w&de,-'w,wmem.o, --m,,,,me,.gm, w,y., ,,, ,,., _
O l i i VI l
- I SECTION 3.1,1.A.1 l
MTER QUALITY ANALYSIS E I l f O
CLEAR TECHNICAL REPORT N0. 213 l l l 1 l [ I LAKE ERIE WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM IN THE VICINITY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE l NUCLEAR POWER STATION FOR 1980 Environmental Technical Specifications Sec. 3.1.1.a.1 Water Quality Analysis l O Prepared by Charles E. Herdendorf and Patricia B. Herdendorf Prepared for Toledo Edison Company Toledo, Ohio Contract No. 28533 THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY , CENTER FOR LAKE ERIE AREA RESEARCH COLUMBUS, OHIO FEBRUARY 1981
O TABLE OF C0fGEfRS Page Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Field Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Laboratory Determinatior.s .............. 1 Results .......................... 1 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Seasonal Variations ................. 2 Station Vari ations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Water Quality Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Comparison of Pre-Operational and Operational Periods. 4 Re fe rences Ci ted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Figures .......................... 17 LIST OF TABLES
- 1. Analytical Methods for Water Quality Determinations .. 7
- 2. Lake Erie Water Quality Analyses for April 1980 .... 8 i
- 3. Lake Erie Water Quality Analyses for May 1980 ..... 9
- 4. Lake Erie Water Quality Analyses for June 1980 . . . . . 10
- 5. Lake Erie Water Quality Analyses for July 1980 . . . . . 11
- 6. Lake Erie Water Quality Analyses for August 1980 . . . . 12
- 7. Lake Erie Water Quality Analyses for September 1980 .. 13
- 8. Lake Erie Water Quality Analyses for October 1980 ... 14
- 9. Lake Erie Water Quality Analyses for November 1980 . . . 15
- 10. Mean Values and Ranges for Water Quality Parameters Tested in 1980 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 i _
- . - - - - . - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - ~ _ - - _ . - - , .
f LIST OF FIGURES Page.
- 1. Sampling Stations at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Pow e r S t a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
- 2. Mean Monthly Hydrogen-ion, Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen Measurements for Lake Erie at Locust Point D u ri ng 1980 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
- 3. Mean Monthly Turbidity, Suspended Solids, Transparency and Sulfate Measurements for Lake Erie at Locust Point During 1980 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
- 4. Mean Monthly Alkalinity, Dissolved Solids and Conductivity Measurements for Lake Erie at Locust Point
; During 1980 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
- 5. Mean Monthly Nitrate, Phosphorus and Silica
, Concentrations in Lake Erie at Locust Point f') s_,/ D u r i n g 1980 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
- 6. Trends in Mean Monthly Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen and Hydrogen-ion Measurements for Lake Erie at Locust Point for the Period 1972-1980 ............. 23
- 7. Trends in Mean Monthly Conductivity, Alkalinity and i Turbidity Measurements for Lake Erie at Locust Point for the Period 1972-1980 ................ 24
- 8. Trends in Mean Monthly Transparency and Phosphorus Measurements for Lake Erie at Locust Point for the Period 1972-1980 .................... 25 l
l i L Ns /
- ii L - .
O 3.1.1.a.1 WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS Procedures Water quality methodology used for this study is contained in CLEAR Procedures Manual No. 8, Procedures for Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Program at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station (Herdendorf, et al. ,1979). Water quality samples were collected and related sensor measurements were made at three stations (Figure 1) during the ice-free period of 1980 (April through November). Because of the severe winter of 1978-1979, spring sampling was delayed, and the April samples were obtained on 30 April 1980. The 14 water quality parameters measured and the analytical methods employed for these determinations are listed in Table 1. Field Measurements. Water quality measurements were made approximately every 30 days at Stations 1, 8 and 13 (Figure 1). Measurements of temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, transparency and solar radiation were made in the field at the surface and approximately 50 cm above the bottom. Temperature and dissolved oxygen were measured with a YSI model 54A meter, conductivity with a Beckman RB3-3341 solubridge temperature-compensated meter, transparency with a 30-cm diameter Secchi disk and solar radiation with a Protomatic underwater photometer (Table 1). Laboratory Detenninations. Water samples were collected at the surface and approximately 50 cm above the bottom using a three-liter Kemmerer sampler and were placed in one-gallon collapsible polyethylene containers. These containers, supplied by TECO Chemistry Laboratory, were filled completely, labelled with statian number, date and depth and delivered to the laboratory. Laboratory determinations of 10 water quality parameters (Table 1) were performed at TECO Chemistry Laboratory, normally within 1-10 days after sampling. Results The results of the monthly 1980 water quality determinations at Stations 1, 8 and 13 are presented in Tables 2-9. The monitoring stations have been selected to characterize Lake Erie water quality at several distinct areas within the vicinitf of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station (Figure 1). Station 1, at a point 500 feet offshore and 1,500 feet west of the discharge structure, is positioned to monitor nearshore water masses and serves as a control for the other two stations. Station 8 is 3,000 feet offshore and is positioned in the vicinity of the water intake crib. Station 13 is locatec 500 feet east of the discharge structure in the region of the discharge plume. All of the stations lie within Excepted Area "B" for Lake Erie water quality standards, established by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (1978,page80).
p Mean annual (April through November) values and ranges for the monthly ( water quality determinations for the 14 parameters are presented in Table 10. The results of the 1980 monitoring program indicate that none of the parameters examined exceeded Ohio EPA standsnis. Analysis Seasonal Variations. The quality of the water in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during the ice-free aeriod of 1980 was typical for the south shore of western Lake Erie and slowed normal seasonal trends. Average temperature rose 14*C from late April to late July and then dropped over 22*C by late November (Figure 2). Average dissolved oxygen concentrations fell from 10.8 ppm in late April to a low of 7.2 ppm in late August, then rose again to 13.8 ppm in late November. Hydrogen-ion concen-trations remained fairly' stable throughout the year, varying only 0.9 units (Figure 2). Mild turbulence in spring and fall is reflected by the higher turbidity and suspended solids measurements for these periods (Figure 3). The decreased sediment load during summer months accounts for the higher transparency readings in July, August and September (Figure 3). A three-fold improvement in the water clarity was noted between late April and August, but a smaller decrease was observed from August to late November. O Major dissolved ions, including c'alcium, magnesium, sodium and chloride were not measured in 1980, but sulfate generally yielded the highest Q- concentrations in the spring, the lowest concentrations in the sumer and intermediate values in the fall (Figure 3). Similar patterns were exhibited by other parameters, including conductivity and total dissolved solids which are measures of dissolved ions (Figure 4). Alkalinity, which is largely a measure of bicarbonate ions, showed a pattern similar to the other ions with the highest concentration in October (Figure 4). The biological nutrients, such as phosphorus, nitrate, and silica, also generally yielded high concentrations in the spring or early summer, their low concentrations in the late sumer and high values in the fall (Figure 5). This cycle is attributed to utilization of these nutrients by photosynthesizing plankton. In November, when primary production was at a lower rate, nitrate concentration rose to over ten times the October level. In July 1980 the dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration dropped to 6.6 ppm (Station 1), the lowest value recorded during the 1980 monitoring program. This represents a continuing improvement over the lowest concentration observed in 1977 (3.0 ppm) and is consistent with concentrations measured in earlier years: Year D0 Range (ppia) Year D0 Range (ppm) 1974 5.7-14.1 1978 5.7-12.5 1975 7.2-13.6 1979 6.6-12.7 1976 5.0-12.5 1980 6.6-14.2 v 1977 3.0-12.2 ..- 2 W __
The International Joint Comission recommends a minimum D0 level of b.0 ppm for Lake Erie water (Canada-United States Water Quality Agreement of 1978). However, Ohio EPA (1978) has established a minimum D0 standard of 4.0 ppm for the nearsbore waters of Lake Erie within the vicinity of Locust Point. Station Variations. Stations 1, 8 and 13 are located approximately 500, 3700 and 1,200 feet offshore respectively. In general no consistently significant differences in w2ter quality were observed between the stations. In April and tkvember when the concentrations of most parameters were the highest, a slight gradient was noted for most parameters fmm the closest inshore station (1) to the farthest offshore station (8). During the sunmer months these differences were not apparent. In November several of the dissolved and suspended materials parameters showed slightly higher concentra-tions at Stt ion 13 (Table ?). This may have been related to the proximity of the power station dischtrge; a slight elevt. tion (2 C) in water temperature was noted at Station 13 in relation to the other stations. Suspended solids, transparency and turbidity measurements indicate a general increase in water clarity from inshore to offshore, but differences were normally small. Differences between the surface and bottom water quality were also slight because of the shallowness (0.8-4.0 meters) of this portion of Lake Erie and its well-mixed nature. Some depressions in the level of D0 and small increases of suspended and dissolved materials were noted near the bottom. This may be due to the high oxygen demand of the sediments and the disturbance of these sediments by currents and wave action. As would be expected, the amount of solar radiation measured at the lake's bottom was significantly lower than the surface irradiance. The difference between surface and bottom readings at the three stations was found to be directly proportional to the water depth. Water Quality Trends. The Ohio State University, Center for Lake Erie Area Research, initiated water quality studies at Locust Point in July 1972. Over the past nine years most parameters have shown typical seasonal trends with only small variatiens from year to year. Trends for eight water quality parameters from July 1972 through November 1979 are shown on Figures 6, 7 and 8. Temperature and D0 show normal seasonal trends for each year with only minor variations from one year to the next over the entire period. Dissolved oxygen appears to have undergone more depletion in 1976 and 1977 than in previous years or in 1978-1980. Hydrogen-ion concentration (pH) and alkalinity have remained fair'y stable over most of the period with a slight increase in 1980. Transparency, turbidity, phosphorus and conductivity have shown some radical variations in the early and mid-1970's which were probably due to storms and dredging activities that disturbed the bottom sediments. Conductivity values in early May 1979 were high, equaling those recorded during the storm period of 1972. Phosphorus concentrations were low during 1977-1979 compared to earlier years but showed a significant increase in 1980. In general, however, no significant deviations fmm the nonnal quality of the water in this part of wstern Lake Erie have been observed during the past nine years. O i
- O Comparison of Pre-operational and Operational Periods. Data from 1974 l through August 1977 (pre-operat'ional period) when compared with data from September 1977 through 1980 (operational period) indicate that, in general, ,
concentrations of dissolved and suspended substances were higher during the l operational period, particularly the major ions, silica, conductivity. nitrate, I phosphate, turbidity and suspended solids. Dissolved oxygen and transparency
; were lower after operation. The magnitude of those differences was not great i and seemed to be caused by the general condition of the nearshore waters of 1
western Lake Erie rather than the operation of the power station. The data gathered thus far from the operational period do not demonstrate degradation of Lake Erie water quality as a result of the operation of the power station. I O t i r I I [
. - . , . . - . . . . _ . _ . . - - - , . _ - . , . - - . - - . . _ - = - - . . . ,
O REFERENCES CITED American Public Health Association. 1975. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 14th ed. APHA, New York. 847 p. American Society for Testing and Materials. 1973. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Part 23, Water; Atmospheric Analysis. ASTM, Philadelphia. 1108 p. Herdendorf, C. E. , M. D. Barnes .and J. M. Reutter. 1979. Procedures for Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Program at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. Ohio State University, Center for Lake Erie Area Research, CLEAR Procedures Manual No. 8. 34 p. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Water Quality Standards. OEPA Administrative Code, Chapter 3745-1. 117 p. Rich, P. R. and B. G. Wetzel. 1969. A Simple Sensitive Underwater Photometer. Limnology and Oceanography 14:611-613. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1974. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes. EPA Analytical Control Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio. 125 p. Welch, P. S. 1948. Limnological Methtds. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York. 381 p. O
.m a ~ --e.+. ---- m .--.._- A-- - _ m_ _ -- - --------_---- - ,_ _______
.a Amm. _
i ) i _ l l l TABLES I o b i l I l i l r h e b i
TABLE 1 ANALYTICAL METHODS FOR WATER QUALITY DETERMINATIONS REFERENCES FOR PARAMETER UNITS ANALYTICAL METHODS
- 1. Temperature 'C APHA (1975): Sec. 212
- 2. Dissolved Oxygen ppm APPA (1975): Sec. 4228
- 3. Conductivity ymhos/cm (25'C) ASTM (1975): D1125-64
- 4. Transparency meters Welch (1948): Secchi disk 4' 5. Solar radiation foot-candles Rich and Wetzel (1969):
Underwater Photometer
- 6. Nitrate (NO3 ) mg/l ASTM (1973). D992-71
- 7. Sulfate (S04) mg/l ASTM (1973): D516-68C .
- 8. Phosphorus (Total as P) mg/l APHA (1975): Sec. 425F
- 9. Silica (SiO2 ) mg/l ASTM (1973): D859-68B
- 10. Alkalinity (Total as CaC03 ) mg/l APHA (1975): Sec. 403
- 11. Suspended Solids mg/l APHA (1975): Sec. 208D
- 12. Dissolved Solids mg/l USEPA (1974)
- 13. Turbidity F.T.U. APHA (1975): Sec. 214A
- 14. Hydrogen-ion conc. (pH) pH anits ASTM (1973): D1293-65 O O O e -aw
O O O TABLE 2 LAKE ERIE WATER QUALITY ANALYSES FOR APRIL 1980
~
Dates: Field 30 April - Laboratory 2 May STATION NO. 1 STATION NO. 8 STATION NO. 13 STANDARD PARAMETER SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM RANGE MEAN DEVIATION Field Measurements: Temperature ('C) 12.0 12.0 12.0 11.5 ~ 12.0 12.0 11.5-12.0 11.9 0.20 10.8 10.7 10.9 11.0 10.8 10.8 10.7-11.0 10.8 0.10 4 DissolvedOxygen(ppm)) Conductivity (Anhos/cm 300 0.3 293 295 0.3 302 320 0.25 320 293-320 0.25-0.30 305 0.28 12 0.03 Transparency (m) Depth (m) 2.5 4.0 3.0 2.5-4.0 3.2 0.8 Solar radiation (ft-candles) 2200. 0.22 1100 <0.01 1400 0.05 <0.01-2200 783.4 930.4 Laboratory Deteminations: Nitrate (mg/1) 13.0 16.1 13.0- 16.6 11.6 15.0 11.6-16.6 14.2 2.0 Sulfate (mg/1) 39.0 39.0 38.0 37.0 36.0 35.0 35.0-39.0 37.3 1.6
. Phosphorus (mg/1) 0.22 0.22 0.35 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.22-0.35 0.28 0.05 Silica (mg/1) 1.29 1.22 1.25 1.37 1.33 1.78 1.22-1.78 1.37 0.21
' Total Alkalinity (mg/l 85 85 88 87 87 89 85-89 87 2 Suspended Solids (mg/l 33 34 37 40 41 110 33-110 49 30 Dissolved Solids (mg/l 204 196 .200 196 202 208 196-208 201 5 Turbidity (F.T.U.) 48 51 51 52 50 87 48-87 57 15 pH 7.8 8.0 7.8 7.7 7.9 7.7 7.7-7.9 7.8 0.1 Conductivity (pmhos/cm) 245 250 250 235 l 255 245 235-255 247 7 s
TABLE 3 LAKE ERIE WATER QUALITY ANALYSES FOR MAY 1980 Dates: Field 6 June Laboratory 9 June STATION NO. 1 STATION NO. 8 STATION N0. 13 STANDARD PARAMETER SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM RANGE MEAN DEVIATION Field Measurements: Temperature (*C) - 18.0 18.0 18.5 18.0 18.5 18.5 18.0-18.5 18.3 0.3 9.0 9.0 8.9 9.0 8.8 8.7 8.7-9.0 8.9 0.1 4, DissolvedOxygen(ppm)) Conductivity (pmhos/cm 345 345 350 365 380 382 345-382 361 17 ' Transparency (m) 0.53 0.55 0.50 0.50-0.55 0.53 0.03 Depth (m) 1.5 4.0 2.5 1.5-4.0 2.7 1.3 Solarradiation(ft-candles) 2500 1.50 2100 0.05 3500 0.20 0.05-3500 1350.3 1547.3 Laboratory Determinations: Nitrate (mg/1) 12.1 10.2 13.0 8.9 10.7 11.6 8.9-13.0 11.1 1.5 sulfate (mg/1) 33.0 33.0 32.5 32.5 32.5 32.5 32.5-33.0 32.7 0.3 Phosphorus (m 0.09 0.09 0.14 0.09 0.04 0.03 0.03-0.14 0.08 0.04 Silica (mg/1)g/1) 0.24 0.21 0.29 0.36 0.28 0.21 0.21-0.36 0.27 0.06 T@talAlkalinity(mg/1) 106 106 104 101 104 104 101-106 104 2 Suspended Solids (mg/1) 15 61 38 40 11 36 11-61 34 18 Dissolved Solids (mg/1) 212 218 218 204 210 212 204-218 212 5 Turbidity (F.T.U.) 56 51 47 49 42 39 39-56 47 6 pH 8.0 8.0 7.9 7.9 7.9 7.9 7.9-8.0 7.9 0.05 Conductivity (umhos/cm) 320 320 315 320 315 315 315-320 318 3 O O O
O O O TABLE 4 LAKE ERIE WATER QUALITY ANALYSES FOR JUNE 1980 Dates: Field 30 June Laboratory 7 July l - 1 STATION NO. 1 STATION NO. 8 STATION NO.' 13 STANDARD PARAMETER SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM RANGE MEAN DEVIATION , Field Measurements: Teamerature ('C) 21.5 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.5 21.0 21.0-21.5 21.2 0.3
- , Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) 8.0 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.0 8.0 8.0-8.2 8.1 0.1 g Conductivity (pnhos/cm) 400 400 320 335 320 320 320-400 349 40
- ' Transparency (m) 0.3 0.3 0.3 --- 0.3 0.0
.D;pth (m) 1.0 3.8 2.4 1.0-3.8 2.4 1.4 Salarradiation.(ft-chndles) 1000 3.00 2500 <0.01 2400 0.02 c0.01-2500 983.8 1200.2 Laboratory Determinations:
4 Nitrate (mg/1) 11.6 13.0 12.1 14.0 11.6 12.5 11.6-14.0 12.5 0.9
- i. Sulfate (mg/l) 24.0 24.0 ~20.5 21.0 16.0 16.5 16.0-24.0 20.3 3.5 Phosphorus (m 0.13 0.19 0.09 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.09-0.19 0.12 0.04 Silica (mg/1)g/1). 0.93 0.93 0.80 0.83 0.77 1.18 0.77-1.18 0.91 0.15
, TotalAlkalinity(mg/1) 105 105 105 105 105 105 --- 105 0
- Suspended Solids (mg/1) 121 164 42 61 66 31 31-164 81 51
, Dissolved Solids (mg/1) 198 212 208 206 204 202 198-212 205 5 ! Turbidity (F.T.U.) 77 80 46 53 55 47 46-80 60 15 , pH 7.9 8.2 8.1 8.0 8.1 7.8 7.8-8.2 8.0 , 0.2 Conductivity (umhos/cm) 340 340 340 340 340 350 340-350 342 4
TABLE 5 LAKE ERIE WATER QUALITY ANALYSES FOR JULY 1980 Dates:
. Field 30 July Laboratory 7 August STATION NO. 1 STATION NO. 8 SET,IONN0.13 l STANDARD PARAMETER SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM RANGE MEAN DEVIATION Field Measurements:
Temperature ('C) 26.5 25.0 25.5 25.0 28.0 26.0 25.0-28.0 26.0 1.1 Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) 8.3 7.0 8.3 6.6 8.6 7.9 6.6-8.6 7.8 0.8
- d. Conductivity (pmhos/cm) 345 350 265 .
270 265 270 265-350 242 106 7' Transparency-(m) 0.78 0.87 0.77 0.77-0.87 0.81 0.06 D;pth (m) . 1.5 4.0 2.5 1.5-4.0 2.7 1.3 Solar radiation (ft-candles) 2000 130 3900 15 5000 120 15-5000 1861 2166 Laboratory Determinations: Nitrate (mg/1) 4.5 . 4.5 4.8 4.8 5.4 4.2 4.2-5.4 4.7 0.4 Sulfate (mg/1) 27.5 27.5 25.0 22.5 25.0 25.0 22.5127.5 25.4 1.9 Phosphorus (mg/1) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.02-0.05 0.04 0.01 Silica (mg/1) 0.05 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.05-0.09 0.07 0.02 Total Alkalinity mg/1) 96 96 95 94 93 93 93-96 95 1 Suspended Solids mg/1) 12 22 8 10 11 9 8-22 12 5 Dhsolved Solids mg/1) 176 170 158 158 164 162 158-176 165 7 Turbidity (F.T.U.) 18 18 8 13 11 13 8-18 14 4 pH 8.4 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.4-8.6 8.5 0.1 Conductivity (umhos/cm) 305 305 300 300 320 300 300-320 305 8 O O O
O O O TABLE 6 LAK5 ERIE WATER QUALITY ANALYSES FOR AUGUST 1980 Dates: Field 30 Auaust Laboratory 10 September STATION NO. 1 STATION NO. 8 STATION NO. 13 STANDARD PARAMETER SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM RANGE MEAN DEVIATION Field Measuremenn: Temperature (*C) 25.5 26.0 24.0 24.5 25.0 25.0 24.0-26.0. 25 1
, DissolvedOxygen(ppm) 7.5 7.5 7.0 7.2 7.0 7.0 7.0-7.5 7.2 0.2 y Cor:ductivity (umhos/cm) 272 274 275 281 293 293 272-293 281 10 ' Transparency (m) 0.80 0.81- 0.81 0.80-0.81 0.81 0.01 D;pth(m) 2.0 3.5 M.0 2.0-3.5 2.5 0.9 Solar radiation (ft-candles) 800 20 1100 9 400 62 9-1100 399 461 Laboratory Determinations:
Nitrate (mg/1 2.4 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.5 2.1 1.2-2.1 1.7 0.5 Sulfate (mg/1)) 21.5 21.5 21.0 21.0 18.5 18.5 18.5-21.5 20.3 1.4 , Phosphorus (m 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01-0.02 0.01 0.004 Silica (mg/1)g/1) 1.18 0.33 0.25 0.31 0.33 0.28 0.25-1.18 0.45 0.36 Total Alkalinity (mg/l 84 85 83 85 83 83 83-85 84 1 SuspendedSolids(mg/l 17 17 .8 14 18 19 8-19 16 ,4 Dissolved Solids (mg/l 150 146 142 146 142 144 142-150 145 3 Turbidity-(F.T.U.) 24 16 9 14 18 16 9-24 16 5 pH 8.2 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 7.9 7.9-8.4 8.3 0.2 Conductivity (umhos/cm) 290 265- 295 265 260 - 255 260-295 273 15
- TABLE 7 LAKE ERIE WATER QUALITY ANALYSES FOR SEPTEMBER 1980 Dates:
Field 27 September Laboratory 2 October STATION NO. 1 STATION NO. 8 STATION NO. 13 STANDARD PARAMETER SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM RANGE MEAN DEVIATION Field Measurements: Temperature (*C) 15.5 15.0 16.2 16.0 16.0 15.0 15.0-16.2 15.6 0.5 9.5 10.8 9.2 9.2 10.0 9.3 9.2-10.8 9.7 0.6 L DissolvedOxygen(ppm)) Conductivity (pmhos/cm 260 260 260 260 245 255 245-260 257 6 Y Transparency (m) 0.50 0.65 0.55 0.50-0.65 0.57 0.08 DGpth (m) 1.3 3.5 2.3 1.3-3.5 2.4 1.1 Solar radiation (ft-candles) 3500 8.5 510 0.13 4000 8.5 0.13-4000 1338 1885 Laboratory Deteeninations: Nitrate (mg/1) 1.2 0.6 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.6-1.2 1.1 0.2 Sulfate (mg/1) 48.0 25.0 26.0 23.0 29.5 30.0 23.0-48.0 30.2 9.1 Phosphorus (m 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.01-0.08 0.03 0.03 Silica (mg/1)g/1) 1.01 0.14 0.08 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.04-1.01 0.23 ' O.38
' T3tal Alkalinity mg/l 91 91 87 89 91 90 87-91 90 2 Suspended Solids mg/l 56 56 26 23 38 197 23-197 66 66 Dissolved Solids mg/l 188 176 176 162 170 170 162-188 174 9 Turbidity (F.T.U.) 45 47 27 25 37 70 25-70 42 16 pH 8.4 8.3 8.4 8.3 8.2 8.0 8.0-8.4 8.3 0.2 Conductivity (umhos/cm) 285 295 285 280 280 300 280-300 288 8 O O O
*s
.t , ,
.\ /-
( TABLE 8 LAKE ERIE WATER QUALITY ANALYSES FOR OCTOBER 1980 Dates: Field 30 October Laboratory 7 November STATION NO.1 STATION N0. 8 STATION NO. 13 STAWDARD PARAMETER SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM RANGE MEAN DEVIATION 4 Field Measurements: 6.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.0-7.0 6.7 0.5
' Dissolved Temperature Oxygen(*C)(ppm) 12.0 11.4 11.1 10.9 12.5 12.4 10.9-12.5 11.7 0.7 4 Conductivity (pmhos/cm) 300 300 280 300 370 375 280-375 321 41 y Transparency (m) 0.33 0.53 0.53 0.33-0.53 0.46 0.12
- Depth (m). 1.2 3.5 2.5 1.2-3.5 2.4 1.2 Solarradiation(ft-candles) 1900' 19 1200 7 1400 45 7-1900 762 840 4
Laboratory Determinations: . Nitrate (mg/l) 1.9 0.6 1.2 0.6 1.2 1.9 0.6-1.9 1.2 0.6 Sulfate (mg/1) 32.5 J2.5 28.5 28.0 31.0 29.5 28.0-32.5 30.3 2.0 4 Phosphorus (m 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.01-0.04 0.03 0.01 Silica (mg/1)g/1) 0.07 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02-0.07 0.03 0.02 Total Alkalinity'(mg/l 133 130 130 131 132 132 130-133 131 1 Suspended Solids (mg/l 23 27 19 22 45 36 19-45 29 10 , Dissolved Solids (mg/l 202 186 206 184 188 186 184-206 192 9 Turbidity (F.T.U.) 21 20 18 18 27 23 18-27 21 3 pH 7.9 7.8 7.9 7.9 7.8 7.8 7.8-7.9 7.85 0.1 Conductivity (pmhos/cm) 327 316 325 322 325 325 316-327 32; 4 i t ___ _ _ __
d J
'V @
TABLE 9 LAKE ERIE WATER QUALITY ANALYSES FOR NOVEMBER 1980 Dates: Field 30 November Laboratory 4 December STATION NO.1 STATION NO. 8 STATION NO. 13 STANDARD PARAMETER SURFACE BOTTOM SURFACE ' BOTTOM SURFACE BOTTOM RANGE MEAN DEVIATION Field Measurements: Temperature ('C) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 1.0-3.0 1.7 1.0 13.8 13.8 13.9 14.0 14.2 13.2 13.2-14.2 13.8 0.3 ~g DissolvedOxygen(ppm)) Conductivity (pmhos/cm 350 310 280 280 310 310 280-350 307 26 i Transparency (m) 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5-0.6 0.53 0.06 Depth (m) 0.8 3.5 3.0 0.8-3.5 2.4 1.4 Solarradiation(ft-candles) 290 98 800 1 500 0.53 0.53-800 282 319 Laboratory Determinations: Nitrate (mg/1) 15.6 16.6 16.1 15.3 17.1 16.6 15.3-17.1 16.2 0.7 Sulfate (mg/1) 28.0 27.0 28.0 25.5 29.5 30.0 25.5-30.0 28 1.6 Phosphorus (mg/1) 0.04 0.07 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.18 0.02-0.18 0.07 0.06 Silica (mg/1) 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.13 0.11 0.08-0.13 0.10 0.02 Tctal Alkalinity (mg/1) 92 95 99 94 98 99 92-99 96 3 Suspended Solids (mg/1) 25 30 13 14 16 19 13-30 20 7 Dissolved Solids (mg/1) 160 176 17 6 162 17 6 174 160-176 171 8 Turbidity (F.T.U.) 26 26 19 17 19 19 17-26 21 4 pH 7.7 7.8 7.8 7.8 8.0 8.0 7.7-8.0 7.9 0.1 Conductivity (umhos/cm) 310 310 290 300 320 320 290-320 308 12 O O O
TABLE 10 MEAN VALUES AND RANGES FOR WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS TESTED IN 1980 APRIL-NOVEMBER 1980 MEAN RANGE UNITS PARAMETER
- 1. Temperature 15.8 1.0-28.0 *C
- 2. Dissolved Oxygen 9.8 6.6-14.2 ppm
- 3. Conductivity (field) 309 245-400 nmhos/cm
- 4. Transparency 0.54 0.25-0.87 m
- 5. Solar Radiation 970 40.01-5000 ft-candles
- 6. Nitrate 7.8 .06-17.1 ,mg/l 7.- Sulfate 28.0 16.0-48.0 mg/l
- 8. . Phosphorus 0.16 0.01-0.35 mg/l
- 9. Silica 0.47 0.02-1.78 mg/l
- 10. Total Alkalinity 99 83-133 mg/l
- 11. ' Suspended Solids 38 8-197 mg/l
~
' 142-218 mg/l
- 12. Dissolved Solids 183
- 13. Turbidity 35 8-87 F.T.V.
- 14. Hydrogen-ions 8.1 7.7-8.6 pH
- 15. Conductivity (lab) 300 235-350 pmhos/cm
['} V
, .. __ _ _ ._ ...~ _ __ _ . _ _ _ , - , . . . . . __ . . . . _ . _ _ . , .
uM % LAKr
.o; 0 -
L/
t*
car i Lake Erie
~N-4 ,. f 1
,, 8 1
Intake Crib ,j **...
- 91 Discharge Structure
. Mai sh **{:.*
m Cooling :
' . Area .
Tower : ." O 13
) ..... *.'.*
k _
) .
, Physical 'gd Factittles
- Marsh ANa
- 1000 *
- feet- .
i l FIGURE 1. Sampling Stations at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. i
n ,.. 25 - - Hydrogen Ions (pH) { Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) Tempernture ( C) 20 - -
~
15 - - L r/
' /
/ /
10 -
/ / / -
/ ...f ~~~
7 7 / /
/ /
y ,_ l ~/ ---
/ g l
/
/ / / '/ / ._ /
/ / / / / / /
s- / / / / / / / / -
/ / / / / / / /
/ / / / / / / /
/ / / / / / / '/
/
/# /# / #
/ #
/ #
/'
/
0 ' APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST S'EPT. OCT. NOV. FIGURE 2. Mean Monthly Hydrogen-ion, Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen Measurernents for Lake Erie at Locust Point for 1980.
O ) 1
/
g
,O
. N V
( m s )
) d (
m
) U i 1 T l y
/ F o ~ -
g ( S c . m n T ( y d e r
- C t e O e i d a t d n p a i e s f b p n l r s a u u u r S T S T l
El l l ]/ f _///// //7 '
.E T
P S
- . T S
U
. G
.U A
O - Y L
.U
.J 9
. - E 1 p[ / / / / / / /l / d. .JNU r i . - Y 7, d.AM . t u o t
- - L r//// .IR P
A O - = 0 0 5 7 S 0 1
,y
(
- 4 , :'
) )
, " - nI e
1 m c
/
g / m s e ( o . i
) h V r 1
/
g d i s ( m p /////// O N E k e m l y a ( o t L S y i t d v r i e i o n v t f i l c . o u s l k l A a i D s s d C n o
/f//l/// T C
O t n e m e l r u {l bl . s a e T M P f//l//s E S i t y v i t c u d T n S o C
'/l//// U G U
A d n d i a s O l o Y S
//l//// L U
J d l e v o s s . i 0 D8 9
, 1 E
y
/ l///// N U
J t g i n ni i r l u aD k l t A n i Y yo
/l l///// A M
l P h t t n s o u M c o nL a et L M a I l l/l/// R P A 4 E R U G I F O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 1 5
~ - - -
[ G- t n i o P V t f O N s u 2 ) , c 6 ' o L 1 t a e
. i
' T r C E O
e k
)
a L 1
/
g ) n i ( m ) 1
/
l g T s
/ n s
u r ( g m ( m /[# P E S i o t o e a h a t r p c a t s i r n o l t e h i i c P S N T n S o l l
]
]
j fl l
//(( U G
U A C a c i l J i S d n Y a L U , J s 7 u 4 r o h p s o E h N P 5
] f
////// ! U J
e t 2 a 1 ! <' . r t i N y . Y l0 1
. ] ,
[ A M h8 t9 n1 1 o 1 / << Mg n ni ar eu MD L 2 F // //// / I R P A 5 E 4 ' / l R 1 U G I F )u [' 0 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 0 0
=1 , 1 1 v
i No Measurements Available 30 . 25 - Temperature to . S) 43 . - g j t 15 - Oteoc!ved Os en (ppm)
- ~ .
, h .y!" -, v' g o nreeocenlen. \,*. .
5- (pH) ,# ,' c'
' ' 'l
O
! JA50NDJf4AMJJA50N
' ' ' ' ' 'l * ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' dJ F M A Ml'''''''''''''''''''d''''''
J J A 5 0 M D J F M A M J J A 5 0 N D'J F M A M J J A 5 0 N D'J F M A M J J A 5 0 N d'I' ' ' 'J 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1971 1973 1974 1975 FIGURE 6. Trends in Mean Monthly Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, and Hydrogen-ion Measurements for Lake Erie at Locust Point for the Period 1972-1980. O O O A
. - - ~ _ - - . 't O O O .
t 4 h' f 2
- No Measurements Avettable i $00-
,4 N- 1 4o0- .N
's tvity (umhos/cm) I s f=-- '
n .
/ l / -
N 4 4,6 100-A' , p i . ...., < n+ -
-A =w-- /j -
_ ~ I -
,,.t..,, .t>>a ..a e iTi a i n e i ni
/
et, e e i e i n e i il s ea e iaaa iei i a =I n a > i iin .....t.. ... it.,,. . g l J A 5 0 N DlJ f M A M J J A 5 0 N DQ F M A N J J A 5 0 N DiJ f M A M J J A 10 N 00 F n A M J J A 5 0 N DQ f M A M J J A 5 0 N D'J F M A11J J A 5 0 N D J F M A M J J 1977 1978 1979 1980 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 i FIGURE 7. . Trends in Mean Monthly Conductivity, Alkalinity and Turbidity Measurements for Lake Erie at Locust Point for the Period 1972-1980.
1.50 < ( _ . . . _ . _ i . ,, . :
\
l , 1.00- $ [Tr.nsp.rency ;rn) '
\.
, 0.75 1
\
tst
' 1 \
/
0.50 . / 1, r \ f,~
,'j \.
? '\r t %)
0.25 . , 1 q ', ', i - r.. 7 hPho.phoru. (mg/1) r ~~ .. . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . cr. .hm . .[k] . .m ., _ w r -Y. . . .# ..... . J A 5 0 N 05J F M A M J J A 5 0 M oiJ F M A M J J A 5 0 N 00 F M A M J J A 5 0 N DQ F M A M J J A 5 0 N 0'J F M A M J J A 5 0 N D'J F M A MJ J A 5 0 N dJ F M A MJ J A 5 0 ND'J 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1972 1973 1974 1975 FIGURE 8. Trends in Mean Monthly Transparency and Phosphorus Measurements for Lake Erie at Locust Point for the Period 1972-1980. O O O
O l i l VII s SECTION 3.1.1.A.2 CHEMICAL USAGE O f
,,r- ,,w,,., - - - - - - - - - - - , - .~,---r-,,< ,,--w.- . . . . , . ,,..w,..w-..., ,,,,...-.,,.,,,--,,~..-_--.~,,----.-,--.----.,en.,--------,-,-,----, -
- - - . . - - - - - - , , , ~ . , , , , , , - - - -
,? y
' '")
- pY r
')
TabidJ.' l-1 DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR-POWER STATION UNIT NO. 1 CHEMICAL USAGE 1980 CHEMICAL SYSTEM USE _-QUANTITY INTERMEDIATE FINAL Chlorine Circulating Water Biocide 24,000 lbs. N/A Unit discharge via cooling tower blowdown Chlorine- Service Water Biocide 20,071 lbs. Cooling Tower Unit discharge via Makeup cooling tower blowdown Chlorine " Cooling Tower Makeup Biocide O Cooling Tower Unit discharge via l Makeup cooling tower blowdown 4 H Chlorine. Water Treatment Disinfection 3,707 lbs. N/A Water dist. system Sulfuric. Acid Circulating Water Alkalinity 23,044 gal. Reacts with circu- Unit discharge via Control lating water cooling tower blowdown Sulfuric Acid Demineralizers Regeneration 11,474 gal. Neutralizing tank Unit discharge for neutralization Sulfuric Acid Water Treatment Stabilization 0 N/A Water dist. system Sulfuric Acid Neutralizing Tank Neutralization 85 gal. N/A Unit discharge Sodium Hydrox- Demineralizers Regeneration 57,379 gal. Neutralizing Tank Unit discharge ide for neutralization Sodium Hydrox- Neutralizing Tank Neutralization 46,051 gal. N/A Unit discharge ide 4 . 4 aOnly used when the unit is operating and service water is being returned to the forebay. I
Table 3.1-1 (Con't.) CHEMICAL SYSTEM USE QUAMTITY INTERMEDIATE FINAL Calcium Hy- Water Treatment Clarification 66,650 lbs. Sludge to the Supernatant from droxide and Softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge Sodium.Alumi- Water Treatment Clarification 4,720 lbs. Sludge to the Supernatant from nate and Softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge Nalco 607 Water Treatment Clarification 0 Sludge to the Supernatant from and Softening Settling Basin the settling basin y to the unit dis-charge Nalco 8184 Water Treatment Clarification 42.9 lbs. Sludge to the Supe rnatant from and Softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge Sodium Hy- Water Treatment Clarification 1,928 lbs. Sludge to the Supe rnatant from droxide and Softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge Sodium Hypo- Water Treatment Disinfection 132.1 lbs. N/A Water dist, system chlorite Avail. Cl 2 Sodium Hypo-chlorite Sewage Treatment Disinfection 1,116 lbs. N/A Unit discharge Avail. Cl 2
?
O O O
_(-'Nl' p g
-C/ C U Table 3.1-1 (Con't.)
I CHEMICAL SYSTEM- USE QUANTITY FINAL INTERMEDIATE Hydrazine Secondary Coolant Oxygen Scavenging 280 gal. N/A N/A Reactor Coolant Oxygen Scavenging 0 N/A N/A Component Cooling Oxygen Scavenging 3.2 gal. N/A N/A Auxiliary Boiler Oxygen Scavenging 8.4 gal. N/A N/A Heating System Oxygen Scavenging 1.5 gal. N/A N/A Ammonia Secondary Coolant- pH Control 129.1 gal. N/A N/A Auxiliary Boiler pH Control 15.7 gal. N/A N/A
- Boric Acid- Reactor Coolant Neutron Moderator 72,475 lbs. M. $ N/A Lithium Hy- Reactor Coolant pH Control 6,250 grams N/A N/A w droxide i
Morpholine Component Cooling pH Control 0 N/A N/A Nalco 39L Turbine Plant' Cooling Corro+1on Inhibi-4- tor 0 N/A N/A 3 Chilled Water Corrosion Inhibi-tor 0 N/A N/A
- Nalco 7320 Turbine Plant Cooling Microbiological 4
Control 0 N/A N/A Chilled Water Microbiological Control 0 N/A N/A Nalco 7326 Turbine Plant Cooling Microbiological Control 345 N/A N/A Sodium Hy- Turbine Plant Cooling pH Control 0 N/A N/A droxide a
i I VIII SECTIm 3,1,1.A 3 OURINE IiWITMING i I i ; 1 i I l s
? , , - _ . . - _ . - - . - _ _ , , . - . . . . . . . - . , - . , . _ . _ . - - - - . ~ - . . . _ . . . . . . . _ , . . . . . - . - . . . . - - - . . - .
l t 3.1.1.a.3 CHLORINE 3r(ITORING Chlorine monitoring is covered by the Davis-Besse Station's ' NPDES Permit. The limits of the permit were not exceeded during 1980. I I i l i l l l l
. _ _ _ _ , , . . _ . - . . ~ ~ _ _ _ , _ _ . . . . . - . . , _ _ _ . . , , , . _ _ . . . , , . . , , - _ - . - . , . . . , , . - - - . - - -
h h> # __ TEST TARGET (MT-3) kk I 1.0 !!HH LM E!$ E lh 1.l _
=
[" EE 1.8 1.25 P l.4 1.6 ill _
/ 4 6" >
4% + W
*$gf >h,'
%ii A)}y;; }.
1
#+e$>Q%%4m e... m _
$**4 +++
E Akf,,h 4 -
'%g,g}
1 1 f i t t IX SECTION 3.1.2.A.1 PLANKTON STUDIES t f 4 1 1 f l .I. I 4 rn-- e .,w.m.-r .-,n.--,, r-m,,.~,--,,,,.n.e.ee.,.ym.n-.w_,,,,,.em,,w,-we,a-onww.,,nnee-,w.,m.mn.evw,n_,.-,,.a,n--,_,---mwe,wnw.w,,-en-am-
- CLEAR TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 208 .
I 1 i l i PHYTOPLANKTON AND ZOOPLANKTON DENSITIES FROM LAKE ERIE NEAR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DURING 1980 Environmental Technical Specifications Sec. 3.1.2.a. l. Plankton Studies (Phytoplankton and Zooplankton) Prepared by
- O Jeffrey M. Reutter and James W. Fletcher i
Prepared for Toledo Edison Company Toledo, Ohio ! f THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY o CENTER FOR LAKE ERIE AREA RESEARCH COLUMBUS, OHIO FEBRUARY 1981
. - . - . - - . _ . - . . _ . _ - , . . ~ . . - _ . . . _ . _ . . . . _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ . . , _ _ . . . _ _ _ , , _ _ _
3.1.2.a.1 Plankton Studies (Phytoplankton and Zooplankton) O Procedures Plankton samples were collected monthly (approximately once every 30 days) from April through November 1980 from 7 sampling stations in the vicinity of Locust Point (Figure 1). Actual sampling dates were determined by weather conditions and the availability of personnel and equipment. Four vertical tows, bottom to surface, were collected at each station with a Wisconsin plankton net (12 cm mouth; no. 20, 0.080 m mesh). Each sample was concentrated to 50 ml. Two samples were preserved with Lugol's and used for phytoplankton analysis. Soda water was added to the remairing 2 samples to relax the zooplankters prior to preser'.ation with 5% for'.alin. The volume of water sampled was comp: ted by multiplying the depth of the tow by the area of the net mouth. Thre? 1-ml aliquots were withdrawn from each 50-ml sample and placed in counting cells. Whole organism counts of the phytoplankton were made from 25 random Whipple Disk fields in each of the three 1-ml aliquots from 2 samples. When filamentous forms numbered 100 or more in 10 Whipple fields, they were not counted in the remaining 15 fields. Identification was carried as far as possible, usually to the genus or species level. All zooplankters within each of the three 1 ml aliquots from 2 samples were counted by scanning the entire counting cell with a microscope. Identification was carried as far as possible, usually to the genus or species level. Phytoplankton Results. Phytoplankters collected from April through November 1980 were divided into 41 taxa, generalsy to the genus level (Table 1). Seventeen taxa were grouped in Bacillariophyceae, 15 in Chlorophyceae, 2 in Dinophyceae, and 7 in Myxophyceae. Monthly mean phytoplankton populations ranged from 4,336/ liter on June 30 to 36,554/ liter on October 30 (Table 1). The mean density from all samples collected in 1980 was 14,835/ liter. Phytoplankton densities at individual sampling stations ranged from 3,193/ liter at Station 3 on June 30 to 85,449/ liter at Station 1 on October 30 (Table 2). Population pulses were observed in the spring and the fall (Figure 2). Both pulses were caused by diatoms (Figur,3). Monthly mean bacillariophycean densities ranged from 1,312/ liter on June 30 to 31,907/ liter on October 30 (Table 1). The annual mean bacillariophycean density from all samples collected during 1980 was 10,512/ liter o- 71 percent of the entire phytoplankton density. The dominant diatom taxa were Asterionella formosa on April 30, June 30 and October 30; Melosira spp. on June 6 and September 27; and Fragilaria crotenensis on July 30, August 30 and November 30. F. crotenensis had the largest annual mean population, 3,095/ liter. Diatoms were the dominant phytoplankton group on all dates but June 30 and July 30 constituting 99.8 percent on April 30, 74.3 percent on June 6, 67.5 percent on August 30, 69.1 percent on September 27, 87.3 percent on October 30 and 78.1 p?rcent on November 30. l l
s Monthly mean chlorophycean densities ranged from 7/ liter on April 30 to g 1,928/ liter on September 27 with an annual mean population from all samples collected during 1980 of 942/ liter or 6 percent of the total phytoplankton population (Table 1). The dominant green algae taxa were P_ediastrum duplex on April 30, June 6, June 30, September 27, and November 30; Bctryococ.cus sudeticus on July 30; Pediastrum simplex on August 30; and Mugeotia spp. on O'ctober 30. Pediastrum duplex had the largest annual mean density, 358/ liter. Chlorophycean densities peakeTin September but were never the dominant forms. Monthly mean myxophycean densities ranged from 18/ liter on April 30 to 10,936/ liter on July 30 with an annual mean density from all samples collected in 1980 of 3,373/ liter, or 23 percent of the total phytoplankton mean (Table 1). The dominant myxophycean taxa were Oscillatoria spp. on April 30, June 6, and from August 30 through November 30; and Aphanizomenon flos-acuae on June 30 and July 30. Myxophyceae was the dominant zooplankton group on June 30 and July 30 representing 48 and 79, respectively, of the entire phytoplankton density. Dinophyceans were represented by 2 taxa, Ceratium hirundinella and Peridinium sp. Ceratium was more abundant than Peridinium and reached its greatest density on June 30 at 53/11ter (Table 1). All raw data were keypunched and are stored in Columbus, Ohio at the offices of the Center for Lake Erie Area Research on the campus of The Ohio State University. Analysis. The Center for Lake Erie Area Research has monitored phytoplankton populations at Locust Point since 1974 (Figure 2). Radical A differences were noted between populations in 1974 and 1975, but 77 percent of the variation was explainable by variation in physical and chemical parameters of water quality (Reutter, 1976). Bacillariophycean and chlorophycean populations' observed in 1974 and 1975 were quite comparable (Figures 4 and 5). The myxophycear component of the populations accounted for the differences between the 2 fears. No myxophycean bloom occurred in 1974, whereas a huge Aphanizomenon _p. bloom occurred in August 1975. This bloom was highly correlated with increased transparency (80 percent greater than in 1974) and decreased turbidity (20 percent of that observed in 1974) (Reutter,1976). A correlation of this type was first hypothesized by Chandler and Weeks (1945). Bacillariophycean and chloroinycean populations in 1976 were similar in l size and composition to those observtd in 1974 and 1975 (Figures 4, 5, and 6). , The diatom population, especially, was strikingly similar from year to yee with l 1976 most resembling 1974. Populations were always greatest in spring and .'all. Pulses which began and ended abruptly were cormionplace. Chlorophycean populations tended to increase in the fall. A very small pulse was observed in June 1975 which was not observed in 1974 or 1976. The 1976 myxophycean population was between the extremes set forth in 1974 and 1975. A ' bloom of Aphanizomenon sp. occurred in July and August. This corresponded well in time of occurrence with the 1975 August bloom, but, it was slightly longer in peak duration, it was only one-third the magnitude of the 1975
; bloom and it started and ended much more abruptly. Again, these pulses appear to be explainable by variation in transparency and turbidity. Transparency in 1976 O)
( was similar to 1975 and much greater than 1974, while turbidity, though more variable than in 1974 or 197C, reached a low in July similar to that observed in
'1975 and below that of 1974 (Reutter and Herdendorf, 1977).
The 1977 phytoplankton population exhibited diatum blooms in fall and spring as in precedir,g years, however, the spring bloom was approximately twice as large as those observed from 1974-1976 (Figure 7). The myxophycean population showed pulses in summer as in 1975 and 1976, but blue-greens also increased in the f all which was only hinted at in previous years. Chlorophycean populations were generally low and were very similar to those observed in 1974 and 1976. The major differences between 1977 and previous years were in the size of the spring and f all diatom pulses and the sunner myxophycean pulse. Honever, lack of a large summer blue-green bloom was not unusual (1974) and the unusually long and cold winters of 1976-1977 and 1977-1978 undoubtedly had a large influence on diatom densities as they are cold water forms. Furthermore, the increase in the myxophycean densities in the f all of 1977 was due to Oscillatoria sp. which is also a cold water form. The 1978 phytoplankton population exhibited spring and fall blooms and was very nearly a mirror image of the 1977 population (Figure 2). All three major components of the phytoplankton--diatoms, greens, and blue-greens--exhibited relatively large blooms during 1978 (Figure 8). Although no unusual taxa were observed during 1979, phytoplankton densities were the largest observed to that date and exhibited pulses in the early spring and mid- to late-sunner. Diatoms (Asterionella formosa) caused the spring pulse, and their densities were more than 10 times greater than the fall pulse and more than twice as large as any previous diatom (or any group) bloom (Figure 9). The summer bloom was caused by blue-greens, Aphanizomenon flos-aquae, in July, August and September with green algae (Binuclearia tatrana) making significant contributions in September. The myxophycean densities were also the largest recorded to date. When divided into its three major components, Bacillariophyceae, Chlorophyceae, and Myxophyceae, the 1979 population, though much larger, was very similar to the 1976 phytoplankton population (Figures 6 and 9). The 1980 phytoplankton densities were some of the lowest observed to date (Figure 2). Diatom densities exhibited the typical spring and fall pulses observed in previous years, but no pulses of over 50,000/ liter were observed (Figure 3). However, the diatom densities observed were similar to those observed in 1974 (Figure 4). Green algae densities were also similar to those of 1974, showing no pulses. Myxophycean densities exhibited a small bloom in late July typical of previous years though somewhat smaller. In summary, phytoplankton populations observed at Locust Point during 1980 are similar to those of previous years and appear typical for those occurring in the nearshore waters of the Western Basin of Lake Erie. No adverse impact due to unit operation was detected. Zooplankton Results. Zooplankters collected April through November 1980 were grouped in 51 taxa generally to the species level (Table 3). Twenty-four taxa were grouped under 6 fera,14 under Copepoda,11 under Cladocera,1 under Protozoa, and 1 under Tardigrada. Monthly meau densities ranged from 5/ liter on April 30
[] to 676/ liter on July 30. The mean density from all samples collected in 1980 was V 279/ liter. Zooplankton densities at individual sampling stations ranged from 3/ liter at Station 1 on April 30 to 1,017/ liter at Station 1 on June 6 (Table 4). Monthly mean rotifer densities ranged from 0.3/ liter on November 30 to 256/ liter on July 30 (Table 3). The annual mean rotifer density for all samples collected in 1980 was 72/ liter or 25.6 percent of the entire zooplankton density. The dominant rotifer taxa during 1980 were Brachionus calyciflorus on April 30, Conochilus sp. on June 6, Trichocerca multicrinis on June 30, Brachionus - angularis on July 30, Polyarthra vulgaris on August 30 and September 27, and Keratella cochlearis on October 30 and November 30. Beachionus angularis had the largest annual mean density, 28/11ter. Rotifera was the dominant zooplankton group on April 30 and October 30 when it represented 75 and 49 percent, respectively, of the entire zooplankton density. Monthly mean copepod densities ranged from 1/ liter on April 30 to 285/ liter - on June 6 (Table 3). The mean copepod dansity from all samples collected in 1980 was 85/ liter or 30 percent of the entire zooplankton population. Cyclopoid J nauplii was the dominant copepod taxon during every collection but November 30 when cyclopoid copepodids were more abundant. Copepoda was the dominant zooplankton taxon on June 6, August 30, September 27 and November 30 when it constituted 56 percent, 34 percent, 45 percent and 49 percent, respectively, of the entire zooplankton density. Monthly mean cladoceran densities ranged from 0.2/ liter on November 30 to
. s 167/ liter on June 30 (Table 3). The mean cladoceran density from all samples i
collected in 1980 was 41/ liter or 15 percent of the total zooplankton population. Cladoceran populations were dominated by immature Daphnia on April 30, Daphnia retrocurva on June 6 and June 30, Eubosmina coregoni on July 30, August 30 and September 27, Bosmina longirostris on October. 30, and Chydorus sphaericus on November 30. Daphnia retrocurva had the largest annual mean density, 19/ liter. Cladocera was never the dominant zooplankton group. Monthly mean protozoan densities ranged from 0.2/ liter on April 30 and October 30 to 312/ liter on July 30 (Table 3). The annual mean density of 81/ liter was 29 percent of the total. zooplankton population. Difflugia sp. was the only protozoan taxon. Protozoa was the dominant zooplankton group on June 30 and July 30 representing 36 and 47 percent, respectively, of the entire zooplankton density. All raw data were keypunched and are stored in Columbus, Ohio at the office of the Center for Lake Erie Area Research on the campus of The Ohio State University. Analysis. Zooplankton populations at Locust Point have been monitored since 1972.- Densities observed in 1980 were very similar to the densities observed during- 1972,1973, and.1978 (Figure 10). These were the years with lower zooplankton densities and although-the 1980 densities were very similar, the lowest monthly densities observed to date were recorded in April, September,
' October and November.
hv Of the three major components of . the zooplankton population, rotifer densities are-by far the most erratic and unpredictable (Figure 11). On Figure 11 1976 results illustrate this vividly. Densities observed in 1980 were very similar to previous years, although the lowest monthly mean densities were observed in April, September and November. Copepod populations are much more regular and predictable than rotifer populations (Figure 12). They genert ly exhibit one peak per year and this usually occurs in the May/ June period. "his also occurred in 1980. With respect to population size, 1980 copepod densit -: were relatively low compared to 1973, 1974,1975 and 1977. However,1980 dei.sities were larger than 1978 and very similar to 1976 and 1979. As with the copepod densities, cladoceran densities are quite regular anc predictable from year to year. They often exhibit two peaks, one in the spring i and one in the fall (Figure 13). Only a spring peak was observed in 1980. Cladoceran densities during 1980 were lower than those observed during 1974, 1975, 1976, and 1978. However, they were similar to 1977 and 1979 densities and greater than 1973 densities. There are several plausible explanations for the variation which has occurred. Samples in 1972 were collected with a 3-liter Kemmerer water bottle at the surface, with a Wisconsin plankton net. A brief comparison study in 1973 showed that the vertical tow captured approximately 50 percent more taxa than a 3-liter grab (Reutter and Herdendorf,1974). The actual stations sampled have varied from year to year. In 1973 the intake and discharge pipelines were being dredged, and in 1972, tropical storm Agnes affected the weather. Due to the weather, samples were neither collected on the same day of the month each year nor spaced exactly one month apart. Hubschman (1960) pointed out the tremendous differences which occurred between daily samples, and these samples were taken monthly. Wieber and Holland (1968) showed that even with replication, wide variation can occur due to patchiness in population densities. The high spring populations from 1975 were undoubtedly largely due to early warming and lower turbidity as the total zooplankton population was significantly correlated with both temperature and turbidity (r = 0.587 and -0.328, respectively) (Reutter, 1976). Finally, operation of station circulating pumps was common in 1976, 1977, 1978, and 1979 and 1980. It should be noted that the occurrence of a new monthly maximum or minimum is not a particularly noteworthy or unusual event, and should not be interpreted as being due to unit operation. By chance alone, every year would have an equal probability of producing several new monthly minima or maxima even if the power station were not present. In summary, due to the large variability observed in previous years, zooplankton populations observed in 1980 should be considered typical for the south shore of the Western Basin of Lake Erie. No adverse impact due to unit operation was detected. O
l LITERATURE CITED Chandler,' D.C., and 0.B. Weeks. 1945. Limnological studies of western Lake Erie V: relation of limnological and meteorological conditions to the production _of phytoplankton_in.1942. Ecol. Monogr. 15:435-456. Hubschman, J.H. 1960.- . Relative daily abundance of planktonic crustacea in the island _ region of western Lake Erie. Ohio J. Sci. 60:335-d340.
'Reutter, J.M. 1976. An Environmental Evaluatior of a Nuclear. Power Plant on Lake Erie: Some. Aquatic Effects. Ph.D. Vissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 242 pp.
Reutter , J.M.~ and C.E. Herdendorf. 1974. Environmental evaluations oi , nuclear _ power plant on Lake Erie. Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Project
-F-41-R-S, Study-I and II. -U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Rept. 145 pp.
Wieber, P.H.;and W.R. Holland. 1968. - Plankton patchiness: effects on' repeated
, net tows. Limnol. Oceanogr. '13:315-321. ~(
(. u
- L
TABLE 1 MONTHLY MEAN DENSITIES
- OF INDIVIDUAL PHYTOPLANKTON TAXA AT LOCUST POINT - 1980 APRIL JUNE JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV.
DATE 30 6 30 30 30 27 30 30 MEAN TAXA BACILLARIOPHYCEAE (Diatoms) 13,151 3,828 3,095 Asterionella formosa 5,694 698 1,102 0 0 289 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 <1 A. gracillima 0
<1 0 0 0 0 <1 Yoscinodiscus spp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <1 Cymatopleura solea <1 78 Diatoma spp. O <1 <1 0 0 2 426 192 1,066 1,296 8,215 946 8,012 5,098 3,120 Fragilaria crotenensis 248 76 4 0 0 1 1 Gyrosigma spp. O <1 1 1 1,768 Melosira spp. 752 1,878 110 155 1,381 8,088 1,066 714 4' 0 0 0 0 <1 Nitzschia spp. 0 0 0 <1 0 0 0 <1 0 0 0 0 <1 Pleurusiana spp.
2,541 24 0 0 4 0 0 0 321 Sceletonema subsalsa
<1 0 0 0 0 <1 Stephanodiscus spp. 1 2 1 1,893 40 0 2 0 1,694 1,012 580 S. binderanus. 1 10 0 1 14 57 5 3 0 0 Surirella spp.
<1 0 0 0 0 0 0 <1 S. brightwellii 0 Tynedra spp. <1 4 0 0 0 233 3,509 2,230 747 Tabellaris spp. 1 122 6 0 0 39 4,050 2,113 791 11,130 3,836 1,312 1,510 9,613 9,601 31,907 15,187 10,512 Subtotal CHLOROPHYCEAE (Green Algae)
Actinastrum hantzschii ' O O 1 1 33 32 43 14 200 24 193 19 7 85 Binuclearia tatrana 0 61 174 0 85 Botryococcus sudeticus 0 1 0 503 179 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <1 Chaetophora sp. O <1 0 0 0 0 0 1 <1 1 <1 Closteriopsis longissima 0 <1 0 0 0 <1 , Closterium spp. 0 0 1 9 9 e
s ..-- 7
,f
;.%,, )'-
( s
. TABLE 1 CONT.
MONTHLY MEAN DENSITIES
- OF INDIVIOUAL PHYTOPLANKTON TAXA' AT LOCUST POINT - 1980
'DATE' APRIL JUNE JUNE JULY -AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. . TAXA 30 6 30 30- 30 .27 30 30 MEAN Mugeotia spp. 'l ' ,
8~ 0- 14 65 629 412 9 142 Occystis spp. 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 <1 Pediastrum duplex- 4 791 .340 226 527- 678 216, 81 538' P.' simplex 1. 2 64 .368 641 390 97 57 203
.Tcenedesmus spp.-
0 0 0 <1 d 0 <1 0 <1 S.--acuminatus 0 0 0 0 <1 0 0 0 <1
'Telenastrum spp. 0 0 23 3 0 0 0 0 3 Staurastrum paradoxum <1 30 279 94 1 4 0 <1 51
. Tetraspora spp. 0 0 <1 <1 0 0 0 0 <1 ao
' Subtotal 7 892' 881 1,412 1,440 1,928 '777 199 942 MYX0PHYCEAE (Blue-green Algae)
Anabaena spp. 0 4 2 3 125 96 5 0 29 A.-spiroides 0 2 7 14 45 13 6 0 11 Xphanizomenon flos-aquae 0 106 2,058 9,937 846 264 0 0 1,652 hicrocystis spp. O <1 0 1 330 24 14 0 46 Merismopedia spp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 <1 0 <1 Uscillatoria spp. .18 313 23 981 1,851 1,977 3,846 4.068 1,634
, Unknown Blue-green 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
' Subtotal 18 433 2,090 10,936 3,198 2,374 3,870 4,068 3,373
TABLE 1 CONT. MONTHLY MEAN DENSITIES
- OF INDIVIDUAL PHYTOPLANKTON TAXA AT LOCUST POINT - 1980 DATE APRIL JUNE JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV.
TAXA 30 6 30 30 30 27 30 30 MEAN DIN 0PFCEAE (Dinoflagellates) Ceratium hirundinella 0 1 53 6 <1 0 0 0 8 Peridinium spp. O <1 0 0 0 0 0 0 <1 Subtotal 0 1 53 6 <1 0 0 0 8 TOTAL 11,156 5,162 4,336 13,865 14 251 13,902 36 AS4 19,453 14,835 h
- Expressed as the number of whole organisms / liter and computed from duplicate vertical tows (bottom to surface) with a Wisconsin plankton net (12 cm diameter, 0.080 mm mesh) from 7 sampling stations on the dates indicated.
O O O
fN O r. O YA ..
. TABLE 2:
MONTHLY MEAN PHYTOPLANKTON DENSITIES
- FROM SAMPLING STATIONS'AT LOCUST POINT, LAKE ERIE - 1980 DATE APRIL JUNE JUNE ' JULY. AUG. ' SEPT. OCT. NOV. GRAND STATION
- 30 .6 30 30 30- 27- 30 30 MEAN 1 3,808 4,817 4,258 19,265- 9,148 31,539 85,449 24,060 22,793 3 12,167- 3,691 3,193 16,454 9,836 6,953 20,845 10,796 10,492 6 15,179 4,071- 3,251 15,768 6,327 13,877 20,153 6,547 10,647
- 8. 9,743 6,465 4,772 12,332 6,730 15,406 '26,120 9,281 11,356 13 13,358 5,861 5,275 12,089 52,652 15,403 25,724 10,053 17,552 .
, .14 10,666 5,550 5,872 '11,187 5,064 5,110 28,648 49,450 15,193 If 18 13,169 5,682 3,731 9,960 9,999 9,029 48,936 25,987 15,812 GRAND MEAN' :11,156 5,162 4,336 13,865 14,251 13,902 36,554 19,453 14,835
- Data presented as the number of whole organisms / liter and computed from duplicate vertical . tows (bottom to surface) with a Wisconsin plankton net (12 cm diameter, 0.080 mm mesh) at each of the indicated stations.
**See Figure 1.
r TABLE 3 MONTHLY MEAN DENSITIES
- OF INDIVIDUAL ZOOPLANKTON TAXA AT LOCUST POINT - 1980
' DATE APRIL JUNE JUNE JULY .AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV.
TAXA 30 6 30 30 30 27 30 30 MEAN ROTIFERA Asplanchna priodonta <0.1 0.3 0.0 4.5 0.3 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.7 Brachionus angularis 0.1 8.2 13.1 203.3 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.2 B. calyciflorus 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 EI. caudatus 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 li. havanaensis <0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 <0.1 <0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 li. quadridentatus 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 li. urceolaris <0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 L fonochilus sp. 0.0 52.2 8.9 2.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.9 l' Filinia terminalis 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Gastropus sp. 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 Hexarthra mira 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 Kellicottia longispina 0.0 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.9 0.0 0.3 Keratella cochlearis 0.1 13.6 3.9 2.1 3.4 14.4 36.0 0.2 9.2 fi. qcadrata , 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 fi. vulga 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 Lecane spp. 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 Notholca spp. 0.7 0.0 u.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.2 Ploesoma spp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 Polyarthra vulgaris ~~ 0.3 13.8 9.3 6.9 20.0 25.8 31.0 0.0 13.4 Pompholyx sulcata 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Synchaeta spp. 0.6 0.3 0.0 18.0 12.8 3.9 6.5 0.1 5.3 Trichocerca multicrinis 0.0 9.2 15.4 16.8 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 T. similis 0.0 <0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 Trichotria spp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 Subtotal <0.1 0.1 51.1 256.0 39.0 46.8 74.8 0.3 71.5 O O O
TABLE 3 CONT. MONTHLY MEAN DENSITIES
- OF INDI'V IDUAL .
ZOOPLANKTON TAXA AT LOCUST POINT - 1980 s 4 DATE' APRIL JUNE JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. TAXA 30 6 30 30 30 27~ 30 30 MEAN COPEPODA Calanoid Copepods Diaptomus ashlandii 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 D. minutis 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 <0.1 EI. oregonensis 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 <0.1 E. siciloides 0.0 2.0 8.1 4.6 1.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 2.0 fopepodids, calanoid '0.0 4.3 13.4 14.0 0.1 1.3 0.7 0.0 4.2 Nauplii, calanoid 0.0 1.8 1.1 5.5 0.2 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 Cyclopoid Copepods 4 J. Cyclops bicuspidatus thomasi 0.0 5.2 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.8 7' C. vernalis . 0.0 35.9 12.5 2.7 3.4 3.5 0.9 0.1 7.4 Mesocyclops edax 0.0 1.1 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.5 Tropocyclops prasinus mexicanus 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 L Copepodids, cyclopoid 0.2 19.0 11.7 9.8 7.6 15.0 15.2 5.0 10.4 Nauplii, cyclopoid 0.5 214.8 59.7 48.2 42.0 59.8 34.1 '4.8 58.0 Harpacticoid Copepods Canthocamptus robertcokeri <0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 Nauplii, harpacticoid <0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.0 0.0 <0.1 i Subtotal 0.8 285.4 108.2 85.6 55.5 81.? 51.2 9.8 84.7 4
- CLAD 0CERA Alona spp. 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 i Bosmina longirostris 0.0 13.3 1.1 <0.1 0.0 2.3 13.7 0.0 3.8 Ceriodaphnia lacustris 0.0 9.9 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Chydorus sphaericus 0.1 4.2 0.1 4.0 3. 2- 7.2 2.3 0.2 2.7 Daphnia galeata mendotae 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 <0.1 D. parvula 0.0- 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.1 i
DI. retrocurva 0.0 20.3 110.9 2.4 10.9 6.1 0.0 ?.0 18.8 Oiaphanosoma leuchtenbergianum 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.7- 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 i
TABLE 3 CONT. MONTHLY MEAN DENSITIES
- OF INDIVIDUAL ZOOPLANKTON TAXA AT LOCUST POINT - 1980 DATE APRIL JUNE JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV.
TAXA 30 6 30 30 3d 27 30 29 MEAN Eubosmina coregoni 0.1 12.8 52.7 13.4 20.1 12.4 9.7 <0.1 15.2 Leptodora kindtii 0.0 0.0 1.7 <0.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 Immature Daphnia 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 Subtotal 0.4 52.1 166.7 22.6 35.6 28.1 25.8 0.2 41.3 PROT 0ZOA Difflugia spp. 0.2 74.0 185.5 312.0 31.5 34.0 0.2 9.5 80.9 . TARDIGRADA <0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 TOTAL 5.3 511.8 511.6 676.3 161.7 190.3 151.9 19.8 278.6
- Data presented as number of organisms / liter and computed from duplicate vertical tows (bottom to surface) with a Wisconsin plankton net (12 cm diameter, 0.080 mm mesh) from 7 stations in Lake Erie at Locust Point in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.
~
O O O
n.
,,~.
'\
-\
gs TABLE 4 -l
' MONTHLY MEAN ZOOPLANKTON DENSITIES
- FROM SAMPLING' STATIONS!AT LOCUST POINT, LAKE ERIE - 1980 DATE : APRIL JUNE JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. GRAND 1 STATION
- 30 6 30 30 30 27 30 30 MEAN 1 .2.9- 1016.8- 622.6 762.4 102.7 252.0 397.9 47.2 400.6 3 4.4 '552.6 709.6 939.0 190.1 168.9 147.1 14.2 340.7
-6 8.3 621.4 .632.2 572.3 127.1 242.7 153.1 13.0 296.2 8 7.7 271.2 390.9 841.1 160.4 158.5 67.7 9.4 240.9
~ 13 .4.9 252.3 490.4' 382.9 168.8 201.9 108.5 15.8 203.2
, .14 - 4.4' 375.8 3F. 8 667.0 172.8 130.1 65.3 14.5 224.3 $ 18 4.4 492.4 370.5 569.3 209.8 177.9 103.9 24,9 244.1 GRAND MEAN 5.3 511.8 511.6 676.3 161.7 190.3 151.9 19.8 278.6
- Data presented as number of organisms / liter and compsted from duplicate vertical tows (bottom to sur. face) with a Wisconsin. plankton net :(12 cm diameter, 0.080 mm mesh) at each station.
**See Figure 1.
- - -n -s w --
4 26
=
LAKE ERIE l J H N 39 93 88 P1 i ( 7 T 23 i ..***,, .
,,
- 6
,L * .. 91 m :' 4 15
. MARSH
.* . . . "i; *
'24 II - 12 AREA O COOLING :" O G13 0 14 TOWER . *.,
i #* -
. .is STATION g4 ',
. $17
. 25 AREA
' I *
,,,,,,,, MARSH AREA *"I',
~
- 9 29 FIGURE 1
.. . I g ; .
,.* 1000 pggt DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 1 AQUATIC SAMPLING STATIONS i
G G e
l' o FIGURE 2. Monthly Mean Phytoplankton Poptlations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1974-1980.* i n ,. , 1 4> ' t 8 n f
- ,8 l
l
~- ;
y
^
- l l
- , e l
l C)
\, - : ;
- s. ~ - l l 4 :
i - l l ;
~- l l :
~ l I 1
l
- ! i l 1, 1 l
- l \ 1':
1
/
- L...
< * ..... :.;n....;; C . ....a L ........t;. ,a;a Loui..n;a C;.....n a i
- Dotted lines connect points (sampling dates) separated by more than a full calendar month.
Solid lines connect points (dates) in consecutive '
- s-[%J months.
FIGURE 3. Monthly Mean Bacillariophyceae, Chlorophyceae, and o y e Populations for Lake Erie at Locust 35,000 - 30,000 -
/, Bacillariophyceae C Chlorophyceae 25,000 -
b
.:2 $ 20,000 _ ! O e
15,000 - 10,000 - i ! 5,000 - M l j ! E" E I " 0 April June June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. (30) (6) (30) (30) (30) (27) (30) (30)
O O O-1 . i ) ) j 98,000 - i s f lBactuaricphyceae 1 Chlorophyceae 20,000 - _ Myxophyceae i b - 3
- q 15,000 -
l .5 l E .
, E y , 10,000 -
8 . l 5,000 ,
/ .
! r / - O '- " - - l APRIL AAY JUNE JULY. AUG SEPT ,OCT NOV FIGURE 4 MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE, CHLOROPHYCEAE, AND i MYXOPHYCEAE POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT - 1974. I
315 .. .
\
100 90 Bacillarlophyceae \
\
Chlorophyceae \ v N , 70
, Myxophyceae \
\
60 L . 50 E \ ! e
\
, N 30 i \ N 20
\ N m 10 3 0 DEC APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV FIGURE 5. MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE, CHLOROPHYCEAE, AND MYXOPHYCEAE POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT - 1975.
O
~
G e __
! O O O i i FIGURE 6. MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE, CHLOROPHYCEAE, AND MYXOPHYCEAE POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT,1976. g Bacillarlophyceae 90,000 .. Chlorophyceae l 80,000 -- Myxophyceae
\
\ ]
! 70,000 N b
! = \
60,000
.s N N 4 50,000 --
< \ \
i - 40,000 -- N N l 5 o - N N G0,000 N 8 \ O,000 - N N 10,000 N N N O _ - _
\ me=hs JULY AUG.
1 SEPT. OCT. 5 _s NOV. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE l 1 _ m .. - . . _ . . _ _ _ . . . _ . _ . . _ -
FIGURE 7 MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE, CHLOROPHYCEAE, AND MYX0PHYCLAE POPULATIO,.S } FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT, 1977. 220,000 -- 21J,000 - 200,000 - l Sac 111arlephyceae 39 180,000 - M# " ;h# C# 170 OM-160,000 - 150,000 = g 140,000= 5.
) 130,000 =
.5 12* 2 00 *
- 110,000 - -
$ ' i 100,000= ,
so,m0= 20,000-70,000= 60,000 - 50,000 = 40,000-30.000 =-
\ \
20,000 = N ' ~7 N N ,
-N N N l 10,000_
N N N N N 0 1 m C b \ \ JtME JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT, 80Y.
"A. MAf e
O FIGURE 8 MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE, CHIGROPHYCEAE, AND MYX0PHYCEAE POPULATIONS FOR LAKE ERIE AT LOCUST POINT, 1978. 280.000 '- ,
$ Bact11aric;h ceae i
~
] Chlorophyceae Qg 0.M0 cpg yc,,, -
110.000 - k 100.000 - O. 5 90.000 - g, 80.000 - 70.000 - S
- N s j 60.000 - g 3
$0.000 -
\
40.0"A- \ 30.000 - N N \ 20.000 - 5 \ \ \
\ \ \ \
10.000 - \
~
\ \
~
~
0- $tPI. N0Y. IAT JW JULT AUG. OCT. O
O FIGURE 9. MONTHLY MEAN BACILLARIOPHYCEAE, CHLOR 0PHYCEAE, AND MYX0PHYCEAE POPULATIONS F')R LAKE ERIC Af LOCUST POINT,1979. 733,663 216,958 418,298 1 5 Bacillariophyceae l' g Chlorophyceae g Myxophyceae i 100,000 - l c a 90,000 - K 80,000 - y 8 ' u ( 70,000 - l [ g ' E .' I! 0 s J F 5 60,000 - g . s E $ ! o 9 ,
- 50,000 - (
$' A r
l p 40,000- 7 g l 30,000 - l i 's f 1 i ! ! l 20,000 - l ! , s i B li l 8 l 1
' l 10,000 - l l ..
l l lW l E ' i ! ! 0 MAY MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. (1) (23) O O O . FIGURE 10. Monthly Mean Zooplankton Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1972 - 1980.* f i. per - nee-uer tw . 4 a -h " , i
- m .
} ser l
I* i i ser - 8* J ,/ - \ m / \ 4 m I w ',- \ / ,,J Ns s' , . m s, /
.. 9 F)
'a'rnan a a n so n a
, J a s o n oU i n a n j a a s i n oia i n a n j a a s a n dla i s i n j j i s o n 6U i n a n a a n s o n oU i n a n a a n s o n ola r n a n a a a s a s sa r n ne n aa a s o
~
- Dotted lines connect points (sampling dates) separated by more than a full calendar month.
. Solid lines connect points (dates) in consecutive months.
FIGURE 11. Monthly Mean Rotifer Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1972-1980.* too. m. g .jison. , . 3 e itoo-I i '*- ,?
=-
/ /l
/ s / ,
~~' ,'
too. 'N / .
'N \ k ,/
,ili o A 60 i A A A55116 k EO l kikS1116 A 6l} } Aikilil6 A bili ki A55116 A 6lii Alkj jii L a yj l Alij jiid s k;; A AA;jj li6aoIIE A j j iid n y
' ~
1373 1973 1974 1975 1978 1977 1976 ' " 1979 '1906'
- Dotted lines connect points (sampling dates) separated by more than a full calendar month. Solid lines connect points (dates) in consecutive months.
O O O
7 _ O - O o FIGl.'RE 12. Monthly Mean Copepod Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1972-1980.* 3 l
' 900 -
. gag .
I
, 000 . ~
i c"- 1
- t
' I. '
' a too . . ,
. i 4 300 -
/ .
M~ \
............................., = .........,. s........ ,. ......... m .........;---. . 1 . . . . . . ._ ,. L.
FMnMJJAhunu ', J A 5 0 M dJ F M AMJ J A5 0 M dJ F M AMJ J A 5 0 M dJ F M A MJ J A 5 0 N dJ F M AMJ J A 5 0 R DlJ F M AMJ J A 5 0 6 4J F M AHJ J A 5 0 N 4Jf F i 1972 1973 1974 19D 1976 1977 ins 199 19eo
- Dotted lines connect poir.ts (sampling dates) separated by more than a full calendar
) month. Solid lines connect points (dates) in consecutive months. 4 1r
FIGURE 13. Monthly Mean Cladoceran Populations for Lake Erie at Locust Point, 1972-1980.*
- m. -
soo - 5** E _IIOo- , t I I
- m. ,
m-
, ,di, n - , , , er , M , , , ,\ h e ....... ,J)i , , , , m.r , , , , i , i n r,, & ,,,,,,m.,,,,,,,au ei ... i J A 5 0 n 0M F M A M J J A S O N OW f M A MJ J A 5 0 n Du f M A M J J A 5 0 N OU f M A M J J o S O N DU F M AH J J A 5 0 N DlJ f II A MJ J A 5 0 N C$J F M AM MJ J A 50n Di IMAMddA5 GNU 1972 1973 1974 1973 1976 1971 1978 1979 1980
- Dotted lines connect points ('sainpling. dates) separated by more than a full calendar month.
Solid lines connect points (dates) in consecutive months. O O O
l l 1 f l 1 i j l ! l I 1
' I i
l l l , I I I i l i l l l t b X i l SECTION 3.L2.A.2 BEN mic STUDIES ! I I l l l l t l i o I - .. I ( l
- CLEAR TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 209 l
l I i r l . 1 i BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE POPULATIONS IN LAKE ERIE NEAR THE ; DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION t DURING 1980 Environmental Technical Specifications Ser! 3.1.2.a.2. Benthic Studies Prepared by O Jeffrey M. Reutter and Richard Froelich I Prepared for Toledo Edison Company i Toledo, Ohio , i l THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR LAKE ERIE AREA RESEARCH COLUMBUS, OHIO FEE'RUARY 1901 f iO . f
-ww--- e,wv~~- - - * - *=e-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - = = - w--ww-~ ---=w----~wv----www----- e=-~----.------- --s--- w--,~~~rv-=-~~~==www-= = = - ~ =- = e -=- ~ - = = = ~ - ----
O 3.1.2.a.2. Benthic Studies Procedures Benthic macroinvertebrates were collected once every other month
~
(approximately once every 60 days) from May through November 1980 (Table 1). The actual dates of collections were determined by weather conditions and personnel and equipment availability. Three replicates using a Ponar dredge (Area = 0.052 m2) were collected at Stations 1, 3, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, and 26 on each date (Figure 1). Samples were sieved on the boat through a U.S. f40 soil sieve, preserved in 10% formalin and returned to the laboratory for identi-fication and enumeration. Individuals were identified as far as practicable (usually to genus; to species when possible). Results were reported as number of organisms per m2 and computed by multiplying the number of each species in each replicate grab sarrple by 19.1. Results Benthic macroinvertebrates collected May through November 1980 were grouped in 25 taxa, generally to the genus or species level within 4 phyla (Table 2). Two taxa were in Coelenterata 9 in Annelida,12 in Arthropoda and 2 in Mollusca. Total benthic macroinvertebrate densities ranged from 156.0/m2 in May to 2,058.9/m2 in September, with an annual mean of 1,004/m2 These populations were dominated by annelids which made up 75.4 percent of the annual mean benthic macroinvertebrate density and arthropods which constituted 24.3 percent of this density. Annelids were the dominant benthic form during all collections. Immature oligochaetes (no hair setae) was always the dominant annelid taxon, while Arthropoda was dominated by Leptodora kindtii in May, Procladius sp. in July and September, and Chironomus sp. in November. Annelid densities ranged from 76 0/m2 in May to 1,563.0/mz in September. Arthropod densities ranged from 79.0/m2 in May to 486.4/m2 in September. All raw data were recorded ar,d are maintained on file at the offices of the Center for Lake Erie Area Research in Columbus, Ohio. Analysis Benthic macroinvertebrate populations collected at Locust Point during 1980 were typical for populations along the south shore of western Lake Erie and similar to those observed during preceding years (Figure 2). In fact, the 1978 annual mean was 1,107.5/m2 which is only 23.3/m2 greater than the density observed in 1979 (1,084.2/m 2 ), btiich in turn was only 80.1/m2 greater than that observed in 1980 (1,004.1/m2). Species composition, mainly imature oligochaetes, chironomids, and cladocerans, was also similar to that observed from 1972-1979 (Reutter, 1980). O 4
During the past nine years, a trend was noted of increasing population O density,asdistancefrcmshoreincreased(Reutter,1980). However, this trend has of ten been interrupted at individual stations due to the shifting substrate encountered in the Locust Point vicinity. This was also the case in 1980, as the greatest densities were observed at Stations 9 and 14 (the farthest off shore), but Station 17 (nearshore) exhibited a density greater than Station 18, which was farther from shore. It should be noted that the mayfly Hexagenia sp.,
= which was once comon in the Western Basin, was observed for the first time during the nine year study. This may be an indication of improving water quality in Lake Erie.
In sumary, benthic macroinvertebrate populations found at Locust Point during 1980 must be considered typical for those of the nearshore waters of the Western Basin of Lake Erie. Furthermore, no significan.t environmental changes due to unit operation were observed. O' I V O LITERATURE CITED Reutter, J.M. 1980'. Benthic macroinvertebrate populations inThe Lake Erie near Ohio State the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1979. University, CLEAR Technical Report No. 161. 8 pp. l )
~
O l 0 O TABLE 1 MONTHLY MEAN BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE DENSITIES
- FROM SAMPLING STATIONS AT LOCUST POINT, LAKE ERIE - 1980 DATE MAY JULY SEPT. NOV. GRAND STATION
- 26 26 27 21 MEAN 1 70.0 38.2 1101.4 82.8 323.1 3 25.5 140.1 2845.9 1725.4 1184.2 8 38.2 89.1 280.1 19.1 106.6 9 216.5 121.0 3119.7 4081.0 1884.5 13 286.5 12.7 261.0 63.7 156.0 14 38.2 3151.5 3310.7 2756.8 2314.3 15 19.1 1890.9 2667.6 630.3 1302.0 17 38.2 101.9 3266.1 2037.3 1360.9 18 579.4 127.3 2724.9 369.3 950.2 26 248.3 445.7 1012.3 133.7 460.0 GRAND MEAN 156.0 611.9 2058.9 1189.8 1004.1 2
*0ata presented as number of orga isms per m and computed from 3 grabs with a Ponar dredge-(A = 0.052 m ) at each station on the dates indicated.
**See Figure 1.
A V-
TABLE 2 MONTHLY MEAN POPULATIONS
- OF INDIVIDUAL BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE TAXA AT LOCUST POINT - 1980 DATE MAY 26 JULY 26 SEPT. 27 NOV. 21 GRAND TAXA MEAN COELENTERATA Hydra sp. (single polyp) 3.2 0.80 Hydra sp. (budding polyp) 5.1 '
1.27 Subtotal 8.3 2.07 a, ANNELIDA ' Hirudinea Helobdella elongata 0.6 0.6 . 0.6 0.48 H_. stagnalis 0.6 1.3 0.48 Oligochaeta Imatures (no hair setae) 70.7 389.0 1508.9 928.9 724.37 Branchiura sowerbyi 5.1 24.8 0.6 7.64 Limnodrilus cervix 2.5 17.2 20.4 19.1 14.80 L. claparedeanus 0.6 1.3 8.3 2.55 E. maumeensis 6.4 3.8 7.0 4.30 Uphidonais serpentina 3.2 2.5 1.9 1.91 Potacothrix_ moldaviensis 1.3 0.6 1.9 0.96 Subtotal 77.0 423.4 1563.0 966.4 757.45 ARTHROPODA Cladocera Leptodora kindtii 66.2 26.1 74.5 41.70 Amphipoda Gammarus fasciatus 0.6 0.6 0.32 O O O
TABLE 2 CONT. MONTHLY MEAN POPULATION 5* Of INDIVIDUAL BENTHIC MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE TAXA AT LOCUST POINT - 1980 DATE MAY 26 JULY 26 SEPT. 27 NOV. 21 GRAND TAXA MEAN ARTHROPODA Isopoda Asellus sp. 0.6 0.16 Diptera Chironomus sp. 3.8 21.6 131.2 117.8 68.60 Cryptochironomus sp. 1.9 14.6 4.5 12.1 8.28 4 i Glyptotendipes sp. 1.3 0.32 Polypedilum sp. 0.6 ., O.16 Procladius sp.- 2.5 120.3 257.2 84.0 116.03 Procladius pupae 0.6 1.3 0.48 Tanytarsus sp. 3.8 15.3 4.5 5.89
.Ephemeroptera Caenis sp. 3.8 0.6 3.8 2.07 Hexagenia sp.- ,
0.6 0.16 Subtotal 79.0 188.5 486.4 222.8 244.17 MOLLUSCA. Pelecypoda Imature 0.6 0.15 Proptera sp. 0.6 0.6 0.30 Subtotal , 1.2 0.6 0.45 TOTAL 15 6.0 611.9 2058.9 1169.8 1004.14 2
- Data present d as number of organisms /m and computed from 3 grabs with a Ponar dredge (A = 0.052 m ) at each of 10 sampling stations on the dates indicated.
i
t 4 26 LAKE ERIE
. 1
~
93 e8 J( 7 23 . 0 e1 h' .,* 9 15
- ' ., * . . " D *. '
. MARSH t AREA 24 . 11. '12 COOLING :* O .
-~~ C- 9 13 el4 a.*
OWER .';. i '. .
. 18 stY+e+
z . 9 17 STATION
' ' 1,
., 25 AREA f.',,,,,,,, MARSH AREA *I"'....,
~
., 9 29
;~"***
. FIGURE 1 j' 100 0 ); '.
Feet . DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 1 o AQUATIC SAMPLING STATIONS O O O
.; O
~\d
() V l - e I ^ FIGURE 2. ' Monthly Mean Benthic Macroinvertebrate Populations for
~
~
taxe Erie at Locust Point, 1972-1980.* ' I . 1 econ - moo -
> t
, s
$o g / 'g i fi 2000 -
;s i 5
s s i .I . s a 8e
'\
1 a 4 . I
'\ .
\ #
[ '. * 'I 'i s l ! N
\ }
l \s s i j \ i 1000 -
\e
\ / i l
\, s' '
f ,,,
'v%, ,
N /
'j j ,,,,,ii........ ..ti....,,,,,,,ii,,,,,,, r7iiiiiiiiiiiti,,iii.....,t....... ,iii.,fini.
. .. ti .. . ii, J A 5 0 K I(J P M A M J J A 3 U R QJ t M A R J J A 3 U M LAJ t M A M J J A IJ F M A M J J A 5 0 h DlJ F M A M J J A 5 0 M qJ t M AH J J 4 50 N CjJ f MA M J J A 5 04 D}J FMA M J J A 5 0 h D j 1772 1973 1774 1 975 1976 -1977 1978 1977 1980 i
i
- Dotted lines connect points (sampling dates) separated by more than a full calendar month.
- Solid ~1ines connect points (dates) in consecutiva uonths.
a i 4 4 i i' . _ _
i ! I i 1 i i
.o XI .
t i l SECTION 3.1.2.A,3 FISHERIES POPtAATION STUDIES I l I l I l l m_,_m... . _ ~ _ ..-,.-,..m--__w...-...,,,m_mem+,,mmem,,,,m.m%.,my,--,_c.,_,w,,
CLEAR TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 216 i FISH POPULATION STUDIES FROM LAKE ERIE NEAR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DURING 1980 l Environmental Technical Specifications Sec. 3.1.2;a.3. Fisheries Population Studies Prepared by Mark D. Barnes ame Jeffrey M. Reutter Prepared for i Toledo Edison Company Toledo, Ohio ( THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR LAKE ERIE AREA RESEARCH COLUMBUS, OHIO FEBRUARY 1981 O l
3.1. 2. a . 3 Fisheries Population Studies Procedures Fish populations at Locust Point were sampled by 3 methods--gill nets, shore seines, and trawls--from April through November 1980 (Table 1). All fish captured were weigh'ed, measured, and identified to species (Trautman, 1957; Robins et al.,1980). All results were recorded and stored on magnetic tape at The Ohio State University Computer Center. Results were reported as catch per unit effort (CPE). Gill Nets. Experimental gill nets were set parallel to the intake pipeline at Stations 8 and 26 and parallel to the discharge pipeline at Stations 3 and 13 (Figure 1). Stations 3 and 26, control stations, were positioned 3C00 f t northwest of Station 13 (plume area) and 8 (intake), respectively. Each gill net, measuring 125 ft 1 6 ft and consistingJof five 25-ft contiguous panels of 1/2, 3/4,1,1\, and 2-inch bar mesh, was fished for approximately 24 continuous hours at 30-day intervals (Table 1). One unit of effort consisted of one 24-hr set with one of these gill nets. Shore Seines. Shore seining was conducted at 30-day intervals (Table 1) with a 100-f t bag seine (h-inch bar mesh) a+ Stations 23, 24, and 25 (Figure 1). The seire was stretched perpendicular to the shoreline until the shoregbrail was at the sn.er's edge. The offshore brail was then dragged through a 90 arc back to shore. Two hauls were made at each station in opposite directions. One unit of effort consisted of the two such hauls. Trawls. Four 5-minute bottom tows with a 16-ft trawl (1/8-inch mesh bag) were conducted at 30-day intervals (Table 1) on a transect between Stations 8 (intake) and 13 (thermal plume area) at a speed of 3-4 knots. For comparative purposes similar tows were conducted on a control transect between Stations 3 and 26. One unit of effort consisted of four 5-minute tows. Results Of the 52 fish species reported from the Locust Point vicinity since 1963, 27 were captured during 1980 (Table 2). No species not previously recorded at Locust Point were captured during 1980. The three fishing methods combined yielded a total of 108,877 fish of which 4.3% occurred in gill nets, 1.9% in trawls, and 93.7% in shore seines (Table 3). The combir.ed results of all three methods of capture indicated that the dominant species in the Locust Point vicinity during 1980 in order of abundance were: gizzard shad (85.7%), alewife (4.6%), emerald shiner (4.2%), yellow perch (2.8%), white bass (1.3%), freshwater drum (0.2%), white perch (0.2%), spottail shiner (0.1%), and carp (0.1%) (Table 4). No other species comprised more than 0.1% of the catch by number. Gill Nets. Gill nets set from April through November yielded 4,375 fish weighing 315.3 kg and representing 21 species (Tables 3 and 5). Monthly catches frca all stations combined ranged from 63 (CPE=15.8) in November to 1,304 (CPE=325.0) in August. Maximum catch occurred at Station 3 in August (402 fish), and minimum catch occurred at Station 26 in November (8 fish). Species
c:stured were both adult and young-of-the-year fish, with alewife, gizzard shad, spcttail shiner, channel catfish, white bast, white perch, yellow perch, and freshwater drum predominating. Shore Seines. Shore setning during 1980 yielded 102,067 fish weighing 736.2 kg and representing 21 species (Tables 3 and 6). P ,r.thly catches from all three stations combined ranged from 30 in May (CPE=1' )) to 69,455 in October (CPE=2,315.2). The.large catches in July censisted I imarily of young-of-the-year gf zzard shad and alewife, whereas the atypically large catch in October consisted almost exclusively of young-of-the year gizzard shad trapped by low water level between the shore and an offshore sandbar. Species captured in shore seines were primarily young-of-the year, with gizzard shad, alewife, emerald shiner, spottail shiner, white bass and yellow perch predominating. Trawls. Trawling in the Locust Point vicinity during 1980 yielded 2,075 fish weighing 44.3 kg and representing 14 species (Tables 3 and 7). Montnly catches from both transects combined ranged from 54 (CPE=27.0) on 21 November to 775 (CPE=387.5) on 5 November. Maximum catch occurred at Transect 8-13 on 5 November (451 fish), and minimum catch occurred at Transect 8-13 on 21 November (20 fish). Gizzard shad, alewife, spottail shiner, comon carp, channel catfish, brown bullhead, white bass, yellow perch, and freshwater drum were the predominant species captured, with alewife and gizzard shad represented primarily by young-of-the-year fish. Analysis (m The Lake Erie fish community at Locust Point since 1963 has been doainated by gizzard shad, alewife, spottail shiner, yellow perch, white bass, emerald shiner, and freshwater drum. Percentages and absolute numbers of these soecies have varied from year to year, but the same species have predominated. During 1980, fish sampling at Locust .9oint yielded similar results, except for a clearly increasing dominance of white perch. A large percentage of all the dominant species consisted of yosng-of-the-year taken close to shore by seining, but yearling-size and lart c individuals of these species were also numerically more abundant than other species captured during 1980. The open, wave-swept nature of the nearshore zone at Locust Point and the absence of aquatic vegetation and other sheltering structures precludes the establistraent of large resident populations of species which require more sheltered or quiescent conditions (e.g., comon carp, goldfish, bluntnose minnow, spotfin shiner, white sucker, shorthead redhorse, brown bullhead, brook silverside, white crappie, black crappie, logperch, and Johnny darter, all of which were collected but not abundant at Locust Poir.t during 1980), although s'01 populations or transient ind',viduals of such species do occur in the area. Of the approxistely 83 fish species present or fonnerly present in the coastal waters of Lake Erie, the majority are abundant only in bays, marshes, and estuaries or around islands, bars, points, and reefs. The less abundant species captured at Locust Point during 1980 were generally of this type. Pelagic and benthipelagic schooling species consisting of intermediate predators and benthic foragers (e.g., white bass, freshwater drum, yellow perch) and smaller planktivorous or benthic-feeding prey fishes (e.g. alewife, gizzard shad, [m D) emerald shiner, spottail shiner) dominate the nearshore comunity at Locust Point. Larger predators (e.g., channel catfish and walleye) are consistently comon but less abundant than these dominant species. This type of cocinunity, consisting of highly mobile groups of fishes, is typical of such nearshore habitats. Residents of deeper offshore waters (e.g., trout-perch and rainbow smelt) commonly move inshore and are collected at Locust Point during their spring spawning seasons. The silver chub is an Ohin endangered species consistently collected in small numbers at Locust Point. Thin was originaliy a comon nearshore schooling species which evidently succumt ed to increasing turbidity in the lake (Trautman, 1957). The white perch was first reported in Lake Erie in 1953 (Busch et al.,1977) and has recently become increasingly comc1 in the Western Basin, as evidenced by the collection of 40 individuals for the first time at Locust Point during 1979 (Barnes and Reutter,1980) and of 168 individuals during 1980 (Table 4). The total number of fish captured at Locust Point during 1980 was considerably greater than in 1978 or previous years but similar to the total number captured during 1979 (Barnes and Reutter,1980; Reutter et al.,1980). Variability in catch from year to year at Locust Point is a function of both sample timing and actual density of fish in the vicinity. The largest component of variability is found in the shore seine catch, which consists primarily of young-of-the-year. Time of day, light intensity, water temperature differences, turbidity, and wave action, as well as season and actual population densities, can affect the abundance of young-of-the-year within ran,e of shore seining on any sampling day. Results of this type are typical of schooling species, which generally are not uniformly distributed over a given area, and become more variable as sampling frequency decreases. Large shore seine catches of young-of-the-year alewife and gizzard shad accounted for the atypically high total catches of both 1979 and 1980. During shore seine sampling in April and June 1980, excess water effluent from Navarre Marsh was being discharged from the two culverts adjacent to Station 24. This relatively warm, organically rich effluent attracted large numbers of carp during April and carried black crappies and goldfish (and possibly other species) from the marsh into the lake during June, thus introducing an additional element of variability into shore seine catches. In the past, analyses of gill netting results at individual stations indicated that fish densities were generally greatest closer to shore. This pattern was not highly evident during 1980 (Figure 2). Largcr numbers of fish captured at all four statione during July, August and September consisted primarily of gizzard shad, yellow perch, white perch and spottail shiner. Abundance trends at control stations (3 and 26) were not markedly different from trends at test stations (8 and 13). No trend of attraction to or repulsion from the plume area (Station 13) or the intake area (Station 8) was evident. Trawling results indicated that fish populations in the vicinity of the intake-discharge complex (Transect 8-13) exhibited abundance trends similar to those around the control transect (Transect 3-26) (Figure 3). Large numbers of young-of-the-year gizzard shad accounted for the large catches on both transects in November. No trend of attraction to or repulsion from the intake-discharge area was evident. Seasonal abundance trends of fishes at Locust Point during 1980, as indicated by catch per unit effort of all three types of fishing gear used, were similar to seasonal abundance trends in previous years (Reutter et al., 1980). Densities of yearling and older fishes, as reflected in trawl and gill net catches, were greatest during summer, due probably to greater food abundance and ambient water temperature, as well as the general concentration movement of most _ _ _ _ . = . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ . I
- O species to inshore spawning areas during spring and summer. Young-of-the-year fish hatched in spring or summer generally become susceptible to shore seine capture during June, and large numbers may be captured in shore seines until August. Thereafter, increased size and dispersal of these fish and decreased numbers due to mortality result in decreased shore seine catch. Many young-of-the-year become susceptible to capture by gill net and trawl during fall.
In conclusion,. fish populations at Locust Point during 1980 were similar to those observed in the past. No indication of adverse impact due to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station was observed. i O s
~
. m
O LITERATURE CITED Barnes, M. D. , and J. M. Reutter. 1980. Fish population studies from Lake Erie near >the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1979. The Ohio State liniversity, Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, CLEAR Tech. Rpt. No. 162. 42 p. Busch, W.-D. N., D. H. Davies, and S. J. Nepszy. 1977. Establishment of white perch, Morone americana, in Lake Erie. J. Fish Res. Bd. Canada 34:1039-1041. Reutter, J. M., C. E. Herdendorf, M. D. Barnes, and W. E. Carey. 1980. Environmental evaluation of a nuclear power plant on Lake Erie, Project No. F-41-R, Final Report Study I. The Ohio State University, Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, CLEAR Tech. Rpt. No. 181. 308 p. Robins, C. R., R. M. Bailey, C. E. Bond, J. R. Brooker, E. A. Lachner, R. N. Lea, and W. B. Scott. 1980. A list of comon and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada (4th ed.). Amer. Fish. Soc., Spec. Publ. No. 12. 174 p. Trautman, M. B. 1957. The fishes of Ohio. The Ohio State University Press, Columbus. 683 p. O O O O
. 2.
LAME EnfE 1000 ft 93 98 9N
,. *****,, 4%
. ., e
" ' *i: .,
h !* MARSH AREA 24 ., COOLING
-
- l3 8 14 0WER . . , DISCHARGE PIPELINE S.... . ,*
4g@ * # 18 STATION g
- 25 AREA .
MARSH AREA *. J' * *,, ,: . I ** *
., 9 29 FIGl>RE 1
\ j AQUATIC LOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATIONS AT DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, LOCUST POINT, OHIO, DURING 1980 l i
FIGURE 2. Comparison of Gill Net Catch per unit effort from Stations 3, 8,13, and 26 at Locust Point during 1980. 500 - 3 _ _ . _ . _ 8 400 - 13 ,y
/
\ N' s%,
.__ ___ 26 /
n vi s
\ l N
/
9 is
.N ,/ 'Ns
/.\
300 -
\ / \
\ / ' N . ,/ sa 'N n
=
.\ / S'. - \ s t: i / / N. / \ \
4s \ -
/ - \ \
'xw 2c0 - i -
/ ,/ 7
/ x.
\ \s
= < / - g
\. ./ - x. \ \,
$ \ / J' \. \ \
$ \ 'i
/ \ \
'\
100 -
,e -
%q.g']', 4I/ N-
\. \
\
g
,,,- s, x N \
\
0
/ s._. %a . .
N i i , , , i i i 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEP OCT NOV O O O
O O O - FIGURE 3. Comparison of Trawl Catch per unit effort from Transects 8-13 and 3-26 at Locust Point during 1980. 500 - t 400 - 8-13 _-___- 3-26 7 m E 4
, ,s si y 300 -
' '\ ,/\
e u.
\
\ ,/ . '. 1 i \ / \
b / \
/
\
E / s
,/ \
g 200 -
/ \ > ~
5 j \
\ !
/
\
; \ . I \\
e i s / ) i \ l
/ \ '
100 - i 's /
/ 'N / ,
N% / ss , l ! si ! 0 , I I I I I I l l 15 15 15 15 15 15 lb 15 ! APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEP OCT NOV i l i
O TABLE 1 FISH SAMPLING DATES AT LOCUST POINT DURING 1980 GEAR APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEP. OCT. NOV. Gill Nets 26-27 24-25 26-27 2fi-26 30-31 27-28 25-27 29-30 Shore Seine 26 24 26 25 30 27 25 30 Trawl 30 26 30 25 26 27 -- 5.21 O O
nn. , G TABLE 2 SPECIES FOUND IN THE LOCUST POINT AREA, 1963-19801 hg R R R R g g g g g g g g R R R S SCIENTIFIC NAME 2 COMMON NAME 2 Amiidae X X Amia calva bowfin X Atherinidae X X X X X X Labidesthes siceutta brook silverside l Catostomidae X X X X Carpiodes cyprinus quillback X X X X X X X X X X Catostomus.commersons white sucker Bypenteliunt nigricans northern hog sucker X Ictiobus cyprinclZue bigmouth buffalo X X Ninytrema metanops spotted sucker Noxostoma erythrurum golden redhorse X X X X N. macrolepidocum shorthead redhorse f Centrarchidae X Ambloplites rupestris rock bass X X Lepomis cyanellus green sunfish 4 X J L. gibbosus pumpkinseed X X
,t L. humilis orangespotted sunffsh X
X X L. macrochirus bluegill L. microlophus redear sunfish X X Nicropterus dolomieui smallmouth bass X X X N. saZmoides largemouth bass X X X X Pomo.ris annularis white crappie X X X X X X X X X P. nigromaculatus black crappie X X X X X X Clupeidae X X X X X X Atosa pseudoharengus alewife X X X X X X X Dorosoma cepedianum gizzard shad X X X X _X Cyprinidae X X X X X X Carassius auratus goldfish X X X X X Cyprinus c upio comon carp X X X X X X X X C. carpio x C. auratus common carp x goldfish X X X X X X X X X X X Hybopsis storeriana silver chub X Notemigonus crysoleucas golden shiner X X X X X Notropis atherinoides emerald shiner X X X X X X X X X X X N. hudsonius spottail shiner X X X X X X X N. spilopterus spotfin shiner X N. volucellus mimic shiner X X X X Pimephates notatus bluntnose minnow P. promelas fathead minnow
- ('T X
.LJ d
TABLE 2 CONT. SPECIES FOUND IN THE LOCUST POINT AREA, 1963-19831 m n e m e ~ co e o E E E E E E.-.E - E SCIENTIFIC NAME2 COMMON NAME2 Esocidae X Eso: Iucius northern pike X Eso: masquinongy muskellunge Ictaluridae X X X X Ictaturus melas black bullhead X X X X X I. natalis yellow bullhead X X X X X X X X X I. nebuZocus brown bullhead X X X X X X X X X I. punctatue channel catfish Noturus flavus stonecat Lepisosteidae X X X . Lepisosteus osseus longnose gar Osmeridae X X X X X X X X X Osmerus morda rainbow smelt , i Percidae ! X X X Etheostoma nigrum johnny darter ' X X X X X X X X X Perca flavescens yellow perch X X X X X X X Percina caprodes logperch X X X X X Stizostedian canadense sauger X X X X X X X X X S. v. vitream walleye Percichthyidae X X Morone americcna white perch X X X -X X X X X X N. chrysops white bass Percopsidae X X X X X X X X Percopsis cniscomycus trout-perch Petromyzontidae X Petromyzon meinus sea lamprey i Salmonidae X X oncorhynchus kisutch coho salmon Sciaenidae
'X X X X X X X X X Aplodinotus grunniens freshwater dcom O $ M 8 $ S M E S I Includes species collected in Federal Aid Froject F-41-R and in cormercial gear prior to 1972 2Robins et al. (1980)
W y
~ N.]: J A TABLE 3 NUM8ERS'0F' FISH COLLECTED AT LOCUST POINT, APRIL-NOVEMBER 1980 1
USING EQUAL MONTHLY EFFORT WITH EACH TYPE OF FISHING GEAR S
. APSIL MAY JUNE JULT AUGUST SEPTDett DCT06tS NOVEM8tt TOTAL GEAR NO. 80. No. 10 . fe. No. No. No. No. NO. NO. NO. No. NO. NO. NO. NO. NO.
FI5H SPECIES F15M $PECIES F15H $PECl[5 FISH SPECIES F15N SPECl[5 FISH SPECl[5 F15H SPECl[5 FISH $PECIts Fl$N SPECIES I'3'*53 Elli Net 2 502 10 344 11 371 13 705 14 1034 13 839 9 877 11 63 5 4.735 21 I Store 5eine 3745 8 30 6 3539 10 24.955 7 158 9 143 7 69.455 3 42 3 102.067 21 Trawl" 78 6 66 9 118 7 42 3 9 453 11 108 6 775 4 54 6 ~2.075 14 a TOTAL 4325 15 440 15 4028 20 26,083 17 1645 18 1090 12 , 71.107 12 159 7 108.877 27 i I Values represent sum of catch per unit effort (CPE) results from all stations at which a type of gear was used each month Four units effort / month 3 three units effort / month "Two units effort /renth - Two units effort per gill cet are represented due to a severe storm and icw water levels, which prevented retrieval of nets untti after 48 hours. Calculated sum of CPE results is given parenthetically.
TABLE 4 MONTHLY CATCH IN NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS OF FISH BY SPECIES I AT LOCUST POINT DURING 1980 USING EQUAL EFFORT WITH TYPE OF GEAR MONTH PERCENT SPECIES APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEP. OCT.2 NOV. TOTAL TOTAL Alewife 27 3,743 253 376 564 7 4,970 4.6 Gizzard Shad 80 43 528 21,202 671 308 70,382 83 93,297 85.7 Rainbow Smelt 1 1 1 3 6 <0.1 Common Carp 36 4 16 18 26 1 101 0.1 Goldfish 1 6 2 2 11 <0.1 Common Carp X Goldfish 2 2 4 <0.1 i Bluntnose Minnow 1 4 5 <0.1 C' Silver Chub 2 28 3 2 35 <0.1 Emerald Shiner 3,622 802 14 40 11 17 17 4,523 4.2 Spottail Shiner 431 24 85 17 97 168 '86 39 947 0.1 Spotfin Shiner 3 3 <0.1 White Sucker 1 1 1 3 <0.1 Shorthead Redhorse 1 3 2 5 <0.1 Brown Bullhead 2 12 11 2 27 <0.1 Channel Catfish 1 1 34 7 3 1 47 <0.1 Trout-perch 8 1 2 11 <0.1 Brook Silverside 1 1 <0.1 White 9erch 1 1 79 76 7 4 168 0.2 White Bass 3 10 687 528 139 11 7 1,385 1.3 White Crappie 1 1 1 3 <0.1 Black Crappie 3 3 <0.1 Yellow Perch 116 200 1,748 450 282 177 39 8 3,020 2.8 Sauger 1 1 2 <0.1 Walleye 1 8 8 11 12 5 1 46 <0.1 1 O O O
TABLE 4 CONT. MONTHLY CATCH IN NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS OF FISH BY SPECIES I AT-LOCUST POINT DURING 1980 USING EQUAL EFFORT WITH TYPE OF GEAR MONTH PERCENT. SPECIES APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEP. OCT.2 NOV. TOTAL TOTAL Logperch 5 5 4.1 Johnny Darter I 1 <0.1 Freshwater Drum 20 104 54 5 . 34 24 4 2 247 0.2 ,
'No. Species 15 15 20 17 18 12 12 7 27 ---
TOTAL 4,325 440 4,028 25,083 1,645 1,090 71,107 159 108,877 100.0 1 Four units effort / month (gill net), three units effort / month (shore seine), two units effort / month (trawl) Includes 5 November trawl samples
TABLE 5 GILL NET CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POIhT 26-27 April 1980 LENGTH (m) WEIGHT (g)
Nlt!BER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL STATION SPECIES 6 321.0 300.0-372.0 337.2 2023.0 3 Ginard Shad Spottail Shiner 352 109.1 98.0-136.0 2.0 694.1 255.0 --- 237.0 237.0 Brown Bullhead 1 8,0 8.0 Trout-perch 1 100.0 --- 16&.0 --- 59.0 59.0 White Perch 1 1130.0 Yellow Perch 17 180'.5 150.0-198.0 66.5 378 4151.1 Subte .4 Spottail Shiner 12 110.2 100.0-121.0 10.8 129.0 8 Enancel Catfish 1 268.0 --- 165.0 165.0 292.0 --- 365.0 365.0 White Bass 1 174.0 147.0-186.0 62.0 310.0 Yellow Perch 5 Frechwater Drum 6 228.2 173.0-295.0 143.7 862.0 25 1831.0 Subtotal 172.0 47.0 47.0 Silver Chub 13 1 Spottail Shiner 31 103.0 95.0-127.0 11.0 342.0 Trout-perch 1 79.0 --- 3.0 3.0 22 170.8 141.0-194.0 55.5 1220.0 Yellow Perch Freshwater Drum 1 173.0 --- 38.0 38.0 56 1650.0 Subtotal 165.0 --- 37.0 37.0 26 Silver Chub 1 225.0 Spottail Shiner 22 106.5 98.0-115.0 10.2 Trout-perch 1 111.0 --- 11.0 11.0 Yellow Perch 16 170.4 142.0-255.0 59.5 952.0 Freshwater Drum 3 236.0 225.0-248.0 138.3 415.0 43 1640.0 Subtotal TOTAL 502 9272.1
*0ne 24-hr bottom set with a 125-ft experimental gill net consisting of five 25-ft x 6-ft contiguous panels of 1-in, 3/4-in,1 -in, li-in, and 2-in bar mesh.
O TABLE 5 CONT. GILL NET CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 24-25 May 1980 LENGTH (m) WEIGHT (g)
STATION SPECIES NtMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL
- 3. Gi:n rd Shad 3 373.7 315.0-455.0 542.7 1628.0 Silver Chub 10 171.6 165.0-177.0 44.1 441.0 Spottail Shiner 2 111.5 107.0-116.0 13.0 26.0 Yellow Perch 31 183.4 167.0-230.0 72.9 2260.0 Walleye 1 199.0 --- 55.0 55.0 Freshwater Drum 7 224;0 133.0-265.0 138.7 971.0 Subtotal 54 5381.0 8 Gizzard Shad 20 374.5 233.0-434.0 537.1 10743.0 Common Carp 1 383.0 ---
794.0 794.0 Silver Chub 1 168.0 --- 48.0 48.0 Shorthead Redhorse 1 469.0 --- 1049.0 1049.0 White Bass 2 279.5 -245.0-314.0 283.0 566.0 f3 83.2 4908.0 59 186.7 160.0-223.0 (V ) Yellow Perch
. Walleye 3 261.3 205.0-358.0- 208.0 624.0 Freshwater Drum 23 287.9 225.0-395.0 273.2 5283.0 Subtotal 110 25015.0 13 Gizzard Shad 12 366.9 291.0-428.0 512.1 6145.0 Comon Carp 1 403.0 ---
822.0 822.0 Co apx 1 284.0 --- 389.0 389.0 f Silver Chub 4 366.9 157.0-179.0 38.5 154.0 Spottail Shiner 6 116.5 110.0-125.0 12.2 73.0 White Bass 8 262.4 217.0-287.0 224.5 1796.0 Yellow Perch 11 180.8 146.0-207.0 74.1 815.0 Walleye .1 219.0 --- 92.0 92.0 Freshwater Drum 32 255.8 91.0-338.0 221.1 7074.0 Subtotal 76 17360.0 26 Silver Chub 13 169.9- 158.0-185.0- 48.2 626.0 Yellow Perch 65 173.1 84.0-204.0 65.0 4228.0 Sauger -- ~1 240.0 --- 111.0 111.0 Walleye . 2 197.5 197.0-198.0 68.0 136.0 Freshwater Drum 23 277.7 128.0-360.0 256.7 5903.0 Subtotal 104 11004.0 g!
- \
~ TOTAL 344 58760.0
~
#0ne 24-hr bottom set with a 125-ft experimental gill net consisting of five 25-ft x 6-ft contiguous panels of i-in, 3/4-in,1-in,_ li-in, and 2-in bar mesh.
TABLE 5 CONT. GILL NET CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 26-27 June 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
STATIO.N SPECIES NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL 3 Gizzard Shad 21 326.6 130.0-400.0 387.6 8139.0 Rainbow Smelt 1 163.0 --- 28.0 28.0 Spottail Shiner 10 110.5 92.0-120.0 8.9 89.0 Shorthead Redhorse 1 226.0 --- 114.0 114.0 White Bass 5 177 0 133.0-284.0 97.6 488.0 Black Crappie 1 109.0 --- 20.0 20.0 Yellow Perch 56 172.3 99.0-205.0 62.4 3495.0 Walleye 2 357.5 344.0-371.0 468.0 936.0 Freshwater Drum 18 173.1 98.0-271.0 70.1 1262.0 Subtotal 115 14571.0 8 Comon Carp 10 367.2 260.0-441.0 680.2 6802.0 Silver Chub 1 200.0 --- 67.0 67.0 Spottail Shiner 1 129.0 --- 20.0 20.0 Shorthead Redhorse 1 239.0 --- 510.0 510.0 Channel Catfish 4 343.3 297.0-390.0 482.0 1928.0 Trout-perch 1 126.0 --- 13.0 13.0 White Bass 4 242.8 183.0-285.0 197.3 789.0 Black Crappie 1 102.0 --- 14.0 14.0 Yellow Perch 56 166.6 107.0-200.0 56.4 3160.0 Walleye 1 231.0 --- 106.0 106.0 Freshwater Drum 9 204.8 135.0-306.0 118.0 1062.0 Subtotal 89 14471.0 13 Gizzard Shad 4 327.3 302.0-356.0 396.8 1587.0 Common Carp 3 441.7 341.0-511.0 1143.3 3430.0 Silver Chub 1 156.0 -- - 40.0 40.0 Channel Catfish 6 247.0 170.0-363.0 223.8 1343.0 White Bass 6 2%.5 265.0-330.0 397.2 2383.0 Black Crappie 1 110.0 --- 20.0 20.0 , Yellow Perch 60 171.4 142.0-207.0 60.8 3648.0 i Walleye 1 243.0 --- 125.0 125.0 Freshwater Drum 10 173.8 128.0-315.0 81.2 812.0 l Subtotal 92 13388.0 0
TABLE 5 CONT. GILL NET CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 26-27 June 1980 CONT.
LENGTH (m) WEIGHT (g) STATION SPECIES NLMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL 26 Gizzard Shad 13 346.5 235.0-410.0 495.0 6435.0 Comon Carp 1 462.0 --- 1219.0 1219.0 Silver Chub 1 167.0 --- 40.0 40.0 Shorthead Redhorse 1 262.0 --- 203.0 203.0 Channel Catfish' 2 323.0 282.0-364.0 652.0 1304.0 White Bass 1 2622.0 --- 255.0 255.0 Yellow Perch 44 168.8 91.0-211.0 58.8 2589.0 Freshwater Drum 12 143.6 128.0-166.0 33.6 403.0 Subtotal 75 12448.0 TOTAL 371 54878.0
/O*0ne 24-hr bottom set with a 125-ft experimental gill net consisting of five V 23-ft 'x 6-ft contiguous panels of 1-in, 3/4-in,1-in, li-in, and 2-in bar mesh.
P
,Y
TABLE 5 CONT. GILL NET CAICH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 25-26 July 1980 LENGTH (m) WEIGHT (g)
STATION SPECIES NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL 3 Alewife 1 94.0 --- 5.0 5.0 Gizzard Shad 32 279.6 80.0-402.0 363.1 11619.0 Coninon Carp 5 362.6 306.0-431.0, 720.2 3601.0 Spottail Shiner 4 113.5 107.0-117.0 11.3 45.0 White Perch 9 152.2 135.0-162.0 53.1 478.0 White Bass 3 197.3 169.0-233.0 120.7 362.0 Yellow Perch 32 176.3 144.0-217.0 68.1 2179.0 Sauger 1 290.0 --- 255.0 255.0 Walleye 7 281.3 242.0-346.0 222.6 1558.0 Subtotal 94 20102.0 8 Alewife 1 140.0 --- 20.0 20.0 Gizzard Shad 28 279.7 80.0-369.0 346.9 9713.0 Silver Chub 2 170.0 166.0-174.0 42.0 84.0 Spottail Shiner 2 106.0 100.0-112.0 6.5 13.0 Shorthead Redhorse 2 353.0 353.0-353.0 453.5 907.0 Channel Catfish 3 338.0 330.0-352.0 321.3 964.0 White Perch 6 152.7 132.0-170.0 48.3 290.0 White Bass 1 80.0 --- 4.0 4.0 Yellow Perch 283 174.3 100.0-206.0 19.8 5606.0 Walleye 1 233.0 --- 106.0 106.0 Subtotal 329 17707.0 13 Gizzard Shad 5 321.4 245.0-371.0 425.2 2126.0 Comon Carp 11 336.2 291.0-393.0 554.1 6095.0 Goldfish 2 264.5 25C.0-274.0 259.5 539.0 Spottail Shiner 2 116.0 115,.0-117.0 11.5 23.0 Channel Catfish 1 183.0 --- 49.0 49.0 White Perch 61 158.2 126.0-208.0 61.5 3750.0 White Bass 45 217.4 83.0-328.0 178.8 8047.0 Ye:10w Perch 26 179.6 140.0-202.0 70.9 1844.0 Subtotal 153 22473.0 0 TABLE 5 CONT. GILL NET CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST P0 INT 25-26 July 1980 CONT.
LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g) STATION SPECIES NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL 26 Gizzard Shad 14 282.1 80.0 -374.C 392.9 5500.0 Connon Carp 2 391.0 378.0-404.0 836.5 1673.0 Spottail Shiner 1 95.0 --- 4.0 4.0 Channel Catfish 2 200.0 198.0-202.0 63.5 127.0 White Perch 2 141.5 118.0-165.0 43.5 87.0 Yellow Perch 107 177.6 157.0-199.0 65.6 7023.0 Freshwater Drum 1 138.0 --- 28.0 28.0 Subtotal 129 14442.0 TOTAL 705 74724.0
*0ne 24-hr bottom set with a 125-ft experimental gill net consisting of five k' 25-ft x 6-ft contiguous panels of i-in, 3/4-in,1-in, li-in, and 2-in bar mesh.
L)
TABLE 5 CONT. GILL NET CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 30-31 August 1980 LENGTH (nm) WEIGHT (g)
SPECIES NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL STATION 3 Alewife 157 94.9 84.0-125.0 5.7 892.0 Gizzard Shad 140 157.0 84.0-370.0 53.6 7509.0 Common Carp 10 344.0 324.0-375.0 589.7 5897.0 Spottail Shiner 10 110.9 100.0-122.0 7.4 74.0 White Perch 7 174.9 155.0-190.0 62.1 435.0 White Bass 2 118;0 97.0-139.0 13.5 27.0 Yellow Perch 60 184.4 118.0-216.0 69.9 4193.0 Walleye 5 285.0 177.0-397.0 261.2 1306.0 Freshwater Drum 11 165.1 81.0-290.0 77.0 847.0 Subtotal 402 21180.0 8 Alewi fe 6 98.7 94.0-105.0 5.0 30.0 Gizzard Shad 50 147.3 84.0-348.0 47.4 2369.0 Connon Carp 3 286.0 252.0-340.0 352.0 1056.0 White Perch 13 172.9 142.0-215.0 68.1 885.0 White Bass 2 183.0 147.0-219.0 72.5 145.0 Yellow Perch' 113 188.1 120.0-220.0 68.6 7753.0 Walleye 1 175.0 --- 29.0 29.0 Freshwater Drum 3 88.3 83.0-92.0 5.3 16.0 Subtotal 191 12283.0 13 Alewife 2 90.5 89.0-92.0 4.0 8.0 Gizzard Shad 103 189.7 107.0-395.0 84.6 8713.0 Common Carp 5 303.4 233.0-340.0 408.2 2041.0 Goldfish 1 227.0 --- 170.0 170.0
" apx ! 335.0 ---
397.0 397.0 f Spottail Shiner 16 111.8 100.0-226.0 9.0 144.0 Channel Catfish 2 310.0 279.0-341.0 264.5 529.0 White Perch 51 176.0 142.0-343.0 70.6 3602.0 White Bass 5 178.4 97.0-305.0 143.8 ~19.0 Yellow Perch 30 173.5 111.0-212.0 57.2 1716.0 Walleye 2 147.5 145.0-150.0 18.0 36.0 Freshwater Drum 7 182.6 92.0-335.0 123.9 867.0 Subtotal 225 18942.0 0 t
a TABLE 5 CONT. GILL NET CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 30-31 August 1980 CONT.
LENGTH (m) WEIGHT (g) SPECIES. .NLMBER MEAN . RANGE. MEAN. TOTAL STATION 26 Alewife 51 90.9 71.0-102.0 4.7 240.0 Gizzard Shad 52 157.7 90.0-398.0 63.9 3321.0 Comon Carp 6 365.5 320.0-400.0 661.3 3968.0 Goldfish 1 281.0 --- 308.0 308.0
" PX 1 312,.0 --- 454.0 454.0 df Spottail Shiner 27 107.4 96.0-122.0 7.7 209.0 White Sucker 1 340.0 ---
454.0 454.0 White Perch 1 150.0 --- 43.0 43.0 Yellow Perch 65 172.0 117.0-207.0 58.1 3774.0 Walley 2 133.5 130.~ 0-137. 0 13.5 27.0
. .estwater Drum 9 126.6 85.0-255.0 43.4 391.0 Subtotal 216 13189.0 w>
TOTAL 1034 65594.0 f i ! *0ne 24-hr bottom set with a 125-ft experimental gill net consisting of five
~
25-ft x 6-ft contiguous panels of 1-in, 3/4-in,1-in, It-in, and 2-in bar mesh. l l . f") o
. . _.. . . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ .- .~.
4 TABLE 5 CONT. GILL NET CATCH PER UNIT EFF0P.T* AT LOCUST POINT 27-28 September 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g) STATION SPECIES . NUMBER . MEi" l RANGE MEAN TOTAL 3 Alewi fe 237 103.0 92.0-116.0 9.0 2123.0 Gizzard Shad 5 127.2 120.0-139.0 18.8 94.0 Spottail Shiner 59 113.3 90.0-162.0 12.6 745.0 White Perch 5 95.6 75.0-140.0 13.0 C5.0 Yellow Perch 42 176.6 120.0-210.0 64.8 2723.0 Walleye 2 177 5 160.0-195.0 52.5 105.0 Freshwater Drum 2 101.0 100.0-102.0 8.0 15.0 Subtotal 352 5871.0 8 Alewi fe 1 115.0 --- 12.0 12.0 Gizzard Shad 5 125.6 115.0-157.0 19.4 486.0 Spottail Shiner 5 113.4 95.0-122.0 12.6 63.0 White Perch 1 150.0 --- 49.0 49.0 Yellow Perch 45 187.6 142.0-338.0 83.3 3748.0 Walleye 1 180.0 --- 50.0 50.0 Freshwater Drum 7 173.3 30.0-318.0 93.6 655.0 Subtotal 85 S063.0 13 Alewife 39 99.8 84.0-114.0 8.1 316.0 Gizzard Shad 12 127.0 110.0-150.0 20.0 ?40.0 Spottail Shiner 41 115.0 103.0-131.0 13.4 549.0 Yellow Perch 32 185.0 150.0-304.0 72.2 2311.0 Walleye 1 387.0 --- 567.0 567.0 Freshwater Drum 3 94.3 87.0-105.0 7.0 21.0 Subtotal 128 4004.0 26 Alewife 85 98.0 75.0-119.0 7.6 650.0 Gizzard Shad 105 127.9 115.0-157.0 22.2 2334.0 Spottail Shiner 31 110.3 95.0-125.0 11.7 364.0 White Sucker 1 307.0 --- 358.0 358.0 White Perch 'l 84.0 --- 6.0 6.0 White Bass 1 90.0 --- 7.0 7.0 Yellow Perch 50 178.0 139.0-222.0 71.9 3595.0 Subtotal 274 7314.0 TOTAL 839 22252.0
*0ne 24 hr bottom set with a 125-ft experimental gill net consisting of five 25-f'. x 6-ft contiguous panels of i-in, 3/4-in,1-in, li-in, and 2-in bar mesh.
TABLE 5 CONT. GILL NET CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 25-27 October 1980 LENGTH (m) WEIGHT (g)
STATION SPECIES .NUM8ER** MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL ** 3 Alewife 341 98.9 74.0-125.0 3.3 1119.0 (170.5) (559.5) Gizzard Shad 124 90.9 78.0-137.0 6.7 827.0 (62.0) (413.5) Comon Carp 1 4%.0 --- 1417.0 1417.0 ( 0.5) '
. (708.5)
Spottail Shiner 11 109.0 100.0-118.0 11.2 123.0 ( 5.5) (61.5) White Bass. 1 134.0 --- 29.0 29.0 ( 0.5) ( 14.5) Yellow Perch 6 187.0 160.0-241.0 88.0 528.0 ( 3.0) (264.0) Subtotal 484 4043.0
-) , (242.0) (2021.5) 8 Alewife 18 107.9 91.0-186.0 9.5 171.0
( 9.0) (85.5) Gizzard Shad 8 116.3 8'.I.0-130.0 16.0 128.0
.( 4.0) (64.0)
Spottail Shiner 13 109.1 95.0-122.0 12.8 167.0 ( 6.5) ( 83.5) White Sucker 1 414.0 --- 794.0 794.0 ( 0.5) (397.0) White Perc:; 1 170.0 --- 76.0 76.0 ( 0.5) (38.0) White 8:,ss 2 121.5 120.0-123.0 26.0 52.0 ( 1.0) (26.0) ieilow Perch 16 189.6 145.0-219.0 87.8 1404.0 ( 8.0)' (702.0) Walleye 1 458.0 --- 1029.0 1029.0 ( 0.5) (514.5) Freshwater Drum 1~ 91.0 --- 9.0 9.0 ( 0.5) ( 4.5) Subtotal 61 7330.0
-(30.5)- (1915.0) g; wj
TABLE 5 CONT. GILL NET CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 25-27 October 1980 CONT.
LENGTH (m) WEIGHT (g) ! STATION SPECIES . NUMBER ** .MEAN . RANGE MEAN TOTAL ** 13 Alewife 78 107.0 90.0-138.0 10.5 822.0 ( 39.0) (411.0) Gizzard Shad 24 173.3 80.0-442.0 163.0 3913.0 ( 12.0) (1956.E) Spottail Shiner 39 112.2 98.0-130.0 13.5 528.0 (: 19.5) . (264.0) White Perch 3 133.3 127.0-138.0 30.7 92.0 ( 1.5) (46.0) White Bass 3 96.7 78.0-132.0 12.0 36.0 ( 1.5) ( 18.0) White Crappie 1 158.0 --- 35.0 35.0 ( 0.5) ( 17.5) Yellow Perch 7 188.0 178.0-197.0 83.9 587.0 ( 3.5) (298.5) Freshwater Drum 1 154.0 --- 37.0 37.0 ( 0.5) (.18.5) Subtotal 156 6050.0 ( 78.0) (3025.0) 26 Alewife 127 97.6 26.0-110.0 55.7 7073.0 ( 63 0 - (3536.5) Gizzard Shad 35 101.8 80.0-411.0 29.6 1036.0 ( 17.6) (518.0) l Spottail Shiner 10 108.0 100.0-123.0 11.3 113.0 ( 5.0) (56.5) ! Yellow Perch 4 185.0 177.0-200.0 83.8 335.0 ( 2.0) (167.5) l Subtotal 176 8557.0 ( 88.0) (4278.5) TOTAL ,877 22480.0 (438.5) (11240.0)
*0ne 24-hr bottom set with : 325-ft experimental gill net consisting of five 25-ft x 6-ft contiguous r,anels of 1-in, 3/4-in,1-in, li-in and 2-in bar mesh.
c2Two units of effort (18 hours) per net are represented due to a severe storm O and low water levels on 26 October, which prevented retrieval of nets after 24 hours. Calculated CPE ic represented parenthetically. TABLE 5 CONT. V GILL NET CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 29-30 .N vember 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
STATION SPECIES NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL 3 Gizzard Shad 6 260.0 117.0-413.0 381.5 2289.0 Rainbow Smelt 1 159.0 ' --- 22.0 22.0 Spottail Shiner 1 112.0 --- 11.0 11.0 Yellow Perch 1 195.0 --- 84.0 84.0 Subtotal 9 2406.0 8 Alewife 2 106.5 105.0-108.0 8.0 16.0 Gizzard Shad 2 130.5 122.0-139.0 20.5 41.0 Spottail Shiner 7 108.6 101.0-123.0 11.9 83.0 Subtotal 11 140.0 13 Gizzard Shad 20 186.4 87.0-470.0 221.1 4422.0 Rainbow Smelt 1 156.0 --- 19.0 19.0 t ; Spottail Shiner 12 106.3 98.0-117.0 11.1 133.0 V Yellow Perch 2. 184.0 171.0-197.0 75.0 15 0. 0 Subtotal .) 35 4724.0 26 Alewife 3 97.0 95.0-99.0 6.3 19.0 Gizzard Shad 3 116.0 98.0-127.0 16.0 48.0 Spottail Shiner 2 102.5 102.0-103.0 9.5 19.0 Subtotal 8 86.0 TOTAL 63 7356.0 ANNUAL GRAND TOTAL 4735 135316.1
*0ne 24-hr bottom set with a 125-ft experimental gill net consisting of five 25-ft x 6-ft contiguous panels of.1-in, 3/4-in,- 1-in, li-in,' and 2-in bag mesh.
A._/
TABLE 6 SHORE SEINE CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 26 April 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
STATION SPECIES NUMBER MEAN. RANGE HEAN TOTAL 23 Gizzard Shad 15 378.3 133.0-460.0 '615.2 9228.0 Common Carp 13 528.9 411.0-652.0 2348.3 30528.0 Emerald Shiner 2231 53.5 43.0-89.0 0.7 1561.7 Spottail Shiner 5 103.6 86.0-122.0 8.2 41.0 Brown Bullhead 1 197 0 --- 81.0 81.0 Subtotal 2265 41439.7 24 Gizzard Shad 29 383.5 105.0-463.0 678.5 19677.0 Common Carp 12 542.0 457.0-640.0 2377.5 28530.0 Emerald Shiner 31 53.7 46.0-73.0 0.8 24.9 Subtotal 72 48231.9 25 Gizzard Shad 30 409.2 309.0-487.0 689.7 20690.4 h Common Carp 11 553.2 460.0-720.0 2804.0 30844.0 Goldfish 1 107.0 --- 18.0 18.0 Bluntnose Minnow 1 53.0 --- 1.0 1.0 Emerald Shiner 1360 51.8 43.0-61.0 0.7 952.0 Spottail Shiner 4 97.0 74.0-105.0 7.3 29.0 White Bass 1 255.0 --- 227.0 227.0 Subtotal 1408 52761.4 TOTAL 3745 142433
'Two hauls through a 90' arc with a 100-ft bag seine (1-in bar mesh) at each station.
s i l 0
C (, TABLE 6 CONT. SHORE SEINE CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 24 May 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL STATION SPECIES Gizzard Shad 1 312.0 --- 323.0 323.0 2' Brown Bullhead 1 202.0 --- 145.0 145.0 2 468. Subtotal Comon Carp x Goldfish - 1 311.0 --- 464.0 464.0 24 Spottail Shiner 9 91.6 76.0-111.0 6.3 57.0 Brown Bullhead 4 223.5 204.0-267.0 186.8 747.0 Subtotal 14 1268.0 Gizzard Shad 5 380.6 315.0-425.0 614.0 3070.0 25 Connon Carp 1 363.0 --- 734.0 734.0 Spottail Shiner 1 48.0 --- 1.0 1.0 4
' (('N,) Brown Bullhead 6 246.8 200.0-315.0 241.8 1451.0 Channel Catfish 1 90.0 --- 6.0 6.0 Subtotal 14 5262.0 TOTAL 30 6998.0
*Two hauls through a 90* -arc with a 100-ft bag seine (1-in bar mesh) at each station.
4 G
TABLE 6 CONT. SHORE SE1NE CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 26 June 1980 LENGTH (m) WEIGHT (g)
STATION SPECIES NUMBER. MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL 23 Gizzard Shad 424 27.7 22.0~36.0 0.2 84.0 Emerald Shiner 453 68.0 55.0-106 2.6 1193.0 Spottail Shiner _29 36.7 28.0-10?.o 0.7 19.4 White Bass 299 28.8 20.0-39.0 0.3 86.0 Yellow Perch 686 32.4 22.0-37.0 0.3 203.3 Logperch 2 30.0 30.0-30.0 0.1 0.2 Subtotal 1893 1585.9 24 Gizzard Shad 52 31.4 21.0-47.0 0.2 10.4 Goldfish 6 39.8 35.0-46.0 0.5 3.0 Bluntnose Minnow 3 48.7 46.0-51.0 0.2 0.6 Emerald Shiner 113 67.7 53.0-110.0 2.4 271.0 Spottail Shiner 31 33.7 25.0-92.0 0.5 14.0 White Perch 1 118.0 --- 22.0 22.0 White Bass 260 28.9 23.0-41.0 1.0 250.0 Yellow Perch 277 30.6 21.0-38.0 1.3 359.0 Logperch 1 26.0 --- 0.1 0.1
'4alleye 2 34.5 33.0-36.0 0.2 0.4 Subtotal 746 930.5 25 Alefwife 27 27.3 17.0-33.0 0.1 2.7 Gizzard Shad 14 29.9 18.0-40.0 0.2 2.8 Bluntnose Minnow 1 41.0 ---
1.0 1.0 Emerald Shiner 236 64.6 57.0-96.0 2.2 510.0 Spottail Shiner 12 30.1 25.0-35.0 0.7 8.6 White Bass 112 28.9 19.0-142.0 0.6 62.0 Ycilow Perch 496 30.1 20.0-36.0 0.3 157.6 Logperch' 2 29.5 29.0-30.0 0.1 0.2 Subtotal 900 744.9 TOTAL 3539 3261.3 CTwo hauls through a 90* arc with a 100-ft bag seine (1-in bar mesh) at each station. 9 s-TABLE 6 CONT. SHORE SEINE CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POIfR 25 July 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
SPECIES. NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL STATION 23 Alewife 3097 37.0 21.0-58.0 0.4 1238.6 Gizzard' Shad 14133 37.5 28.0-106.0 0.3 4259.0 Emerald Shiner 10 69.3 47.0-82.0 1.3 13.5 Spottail Shiner 3 86.3 81.0-96.0 5.3 16.0 White Bass 8 6.7.1 60.0-78.0 3.4 27.0 Subtotal 17251 5554.1 24 Alewife 619 44.5 28.0-57.0 1.0 624.0 Gizzard Shad 2864 50.1 28.0-82.0 2.0 5718.5 Emerald Shiner 1 75.0 --- 2.0 2.0 White Perch 1 115.0 -- 22.0 22.0 White Bass 46 59.3 33.0-86.0 2.7 122.5
,O White Crappie 1 42.0 --- 0.5 0.5
'^
Subtotal 3532 '6489.5 Alewife 24 33.8- 21.0-62.0 0.4 10.3 (5 4112 44.4 '32.0-93.0 1.3 5251.0 Gizzard Shad Emerald Shiner 3 70.3 55.0-82.0 2.7 8.0 White Bass 33 43.2 28.0-78.0 1.0 33.5 Subtotal 4172- 5302.8 TOTAL 24955 17346.4
*Two hauls through a 90' arc with a 100-ft bag seine (1-in bar mesh) at each station.
. (W U
._ _ ,_ .~ -
TABLE 6 CONT. SHORE SEINE CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 30 August 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
SPECIES . NUMBER. MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL STATION 23 Gizzard Shad 2 87.5 65.0-110.0 7.0 14.0 Emerald Shiner 4 68.5 35.0-85.0 0.8 3.4 Spotfin Shiner 1 80.0 --- 2.0 2.0 White Bass 30 67.8 50.0-127.0 3.8 115.0 37 I 134.4 Subtotal 24 Alewife 4 45.0 42.0-50.0 0.6 2.4 Gizzard Shad 3 82.7 68.0-104.0 6.7 20.0 Spotfin Shiner 1 68.0 --- 2.0 2.0 Brook Silverside 1 67.0 --- 0.5 0.5 White Bass 10 67.3 55.0-82.0 3.1 31.0 Subtotal 19 55.9 25 Alewife 11 62.5 32.0-101.0 4.0 44.0 Gizzard Shad 14 75.9 42.0-115.0 1.8 25.5 Emerald Shiner 11 82.4 75.0-93.0 4.1 45.0 Spottail Shiner 1 94.0 --- 8.0 8.0 Spotfin Shiner 1 85.0 --- 7.0 7.0 White Perch 1 90.0 --- 11.0 11.0 White Bass 62 67.9 51.0-103.0 4.5 277.0 White Crappie 1 59.0 --- 4.0 4.0 Subtotal 102 421.5 TOTAL 158 611.8
- Two hauls through a 90 acr with a 100-ft bag seine (1-in bar mesh) at each station.
O TABLE 6 CONT. SHORE SEINE CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 27 September 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT _(g)
STATION SPECIES . NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL 23 Alewife 2 80.5 57.0-104.0 4.5 9.0 Gizzard Shad 3 59.3 55.0-65.0 1.3 4.0 Emerald Shiner 3 73.3 61.0-82.0 1.7 5.0 Spottail Shiner 1 70.0 --- 2.0 2.0 Subtotal 9 I 20.0 24' Alewife 1 33.0 --- 1.0 1.0 Gizzard Shad 23 86.3 33.0-126.0 7.9 181.0 Emerald. Shiner 1 62.0 --- 2.0 2.0 Spottail Shiner 1 101.0 -- . 9.0 9.0 Channel Catfish 1- 81.0 --- 3.0 3.0
, White Bass 4 82.0 77.0-86.0 5.8 23.0 i ) Subtotal 31 219.0 25 Alewife 3 100.7 100.0-102.0 8.0 24.0 Gizzard Shad 83 97.3 70.0-129.0 7.6 629.0 Emerald Shiner 7 77.4 60.0-92.0 2.9 20.0 Spottail Shiner 5 75.0 56.0-91.0 4.2 21.0 White Bass 4 97.0 70.0-133.0 10.3 41.0 Johnny Darter 1 40.0 ---
4.0 4.0 Subtotal 103 739.0 TOTAL 143 978.0
*Two hauls- through a 90* arc with a 100-ft bag seine (1-in bar mesh) at each station.
4 k v i
TABLE 6 CONT. SHORE SEINE CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 25 October 1980 LENGTH (m) WEIGHT (g)
STATION- SPECIES NUMBER MEAN RANGE MFAN TOTAL 23 Gizzard Shad 29558 100.0 83.0-118.0 8.1 239413.0 Emerald Shiner 3 7.3 60.0-97.0 2.7 8.0 Spottail Shiner '
. 101.0 ---
8.0 8.0 Subtotal 29562 , 239429.0 24 Gizzard Shad 22025 98.5 82.0-118.0 8.1 178404.0 Emerald Shiner 10 74.9 65.0-98.0 2.3 23.0 Subtotal 22035 178427.0 25 Gizzard Shad 17854 96.8 81.0-119.0 8.2 146402.0 Emerald Shiner 4 81.0 66.0-97.0 2.8 11.0 Subtotal 17858 146413.0 TOTAL 69455 564269.0
- Two hauls through a 90 arc with a 100-ft bag seine (1-in bar mesh) at each station.
O () TABLE 6 CONT. SHORE SEINE CATCH FER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 11 November 1980 e
LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g) STATION SPECIES NUMBER. MEAN . RANGE MEAN TOTAL 23 Gizzard Shad 10 101.6 97.0-106.0 8.9 89.0 Emerald Shiner 5 76.6 69.0-98.0 2.0 10.0 Subtotal 15 99.0 24 Gizzard Shad 10 153.8 97.0-118.0 9.6 96.0 Emerald Shiner 3 80.7 67.0-100.0 3.0 9.0 Spottail Shiner 1 99.0 --- 8.0 8.0 Subtotal 14 113.0 25 Gizzard Shad 4 9t.8 70.0-104.0 9.5 38.0 Emerald Shiner 9 77.0 67.0-100.0 2.6 23.0 Subtotal 13 61.0 ( '). 1 TOTAL 42 273.0
*Two hauls through a 90 arc with a 100-ft bag seine (4-in bar mesh) at each station.
I C 5 V
TABLE 7 g TRAWL CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 30 April 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
TRANSECT SPECIES NUMBER MEAN- RANGE MEAN T0TAL 8-13 Spottail Shiner 1 124.0 --- 11.0 11.0 Trout-perch 2 83.0 75.0-91.0 4.0 8.0 Yellow Perch 22 175.2 144.0-206.0 59.8 1315.0 Walleye 1 181.0 --- 52.0 52.0 Freshwater Drum 10 225.2. 173.0-269.0 122.8 1228.0 Subtotal 36 2614.0 3-26 Spottail Shiner 4 110.8 87.0-124.0 12.0 48.0 Trout-perch 3 108.7 89.0-128.0 15.0 45.0 White Bass 1 119.0 --- 27.0 27.0 Yellow Perch 34 176.5 71.0-216.0 64.3 2185.0 Subtotal 42 2305.0 4919.0 0 TOTAL 78
- Four 5-minute tows with a 16-ft trawl (1/8-in bag mesh) at each transect.
O TABLE 7 CONT. TRAWL CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 26 May 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
TRANSECT SPECIES NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL 8-13 Giz;ard Shad 1 130.0 --- 26.0 26.0 Spottail Shiner 3 115.7 113.0-120.0 10.0 30.0 Trout-perch 1 102.0 --- 9.0 9.0 Yellow Perch 14 171.4 100.0-199.0 61.8 865.0 Walleye 1 351.0 --- 454.0 454.0 Freshwater Drum 11 1 87. 0 136.0-256.0 72.7 800.0 Subtotal 31 2184.0 3-26 Gizzard Shad 1 145.0 --- 30.0 30.0 Rainbow Smelt 1 174.0 --- 33.0 33.0 Common Carp 1 379.0 --- 660.0 660.9 Spottail Shiner 3 110.3 107.0-114.0 6.0 18.0 Brown Bullhead 1 211.0 --- 151.0 151.0 Yellow Perch 20 172.0 146.0-196.0 59.6 1192.0
-'s-(~} Freshwater Drum 8 233.8 120.0-286.0 155.5 1244.0 Subtotal 35 3328.0 TOTAL 66 5512.0
*Four 5-minute tows with a.16-ft trawl (1/8-in bag mesh) at each transect.
/% ~.
< G
7 TABLE 7 CONT. TRAWL CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 30 June 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
TRANSECT SPECIES NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL 8-13 Brown Bullhead 3 201.3 184.0-215.0 132.0 396.0 Channel Catfish 6 218.8 204.0-235.0 98.2 589.0 Trout-perch 1 88.0 --- 10.0 10.0 Yellow Perch 30 82.7 20.0-221.0 24.2 725.5 Walleye 2 34.0: 25.0-43.0 0.5 1.0 Freshwater Drum 1 116.0 --- 20.0 20.0 Subtotal 43 1741.d 3-26 Common Carp 2 449.0 447.0-451.0 666.0 1332.0 Spottail Shiner 2 99.0 97.0-101.0 6.5 13.0 Brown Bullhead 8 203.0 165.0-282.0 133.3 1006.0 Channel Catfish 16 213.9 107.0-351.0 154.8 2477.0 Yellow Perch 43 103.4 24.0-207.0 37.0 1591.5 Freshwater Drum 4 120.3 15.0-238.0 61.8 247.0 Subtotal 75 6726.5 TOTAL 118 8468.0
*Four 5 minute tows with a 16 ft trawl (1/8 in bag mesh) at each transect O
() TABLE 7 CONT. TRAWL CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 25 July 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
' TRANSECT SPECIES NUMBER MEAN . RANGE. MEAN TOTAL 8-13 Alewife 1 54.0 --- 3.0 3.0 Gizzard Shad 8 54.9 38.0-80.0 2.8 22.0 Spottail Shiner 3 66.3 37.0-118.0 5.3 16.0 White Bass 84 40.7 21.0-246.0 4.4 373.0 Yellow Perch 1 164.0 --- 62.0 62.0 Walleye 3 178.0 100.0-238.0 40.3 121.0 Freshwater Drum 4 83.3 33.0-230.0 38.5 154.0 Subtotal. 104 751.0 3-26 Gizzard Shad 6 64.8 55.0-75.0 4.0 24.0 Rainbow Smelt 1 25.0 --- 1.0 1.0 Spottail Shiner 2 112.5 112.0-113.0 12.5 25.0 Channel Catfish 1 167.0 --- 186.0 186.0
\ White Bass 308 40.5 31.0-60.0 1.4 438.0 Yellow Perch 1 165.0 --- 52.0 52.0 Subtotal' 319 726.0 TOTAL 423 1477.0
*Four 5-minute tows with a 16-ft trawl (1/8-in bag mesh) at each transect.
{a
l l TABLE 7 CONT. TRAWL CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 26 August 1980 LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
TRANSECT SPECIES NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL C-13 Gizzard Shad 285 92.9 69.0-113.0 7.1 2023.0 Emerald Shiner 10 81.3 75.0-92.0 2.4 24.0 Spottail Shiner 10 86.6 55.0-130.0 7.0 70.0 Brown Bullhead 2 220.0 212.0-228.0 139.0 278.0 Channel Catfish 1 155.0, --- 122.0 122.0 White Perch 3 62.7 38.0-77.0 2.5 7.5 White Bass 21 65.0 42.0-111.0 3.5 73.0 Yellow Perch 2 202.0 195.0-209.0 91.5 183.0 Freshwater Drum 4 141.8 81.0-228.0 87.5 350.0 Subtotal 338 3130.5 3-26 Alewife 22 88.0 30.0-101.0 4.8 105.5 Gizzard Shad 22 87.6 49.0-119.0 5.5 120.5 Common Carp 2 391.0 378.0-404.0 779.0 1559.0 Emerald Shiner 15 79.7 72.0-90.0 3.1 46.0 Spottail Shiner 33 70.4 44.0-105.0 3.2 105.0 White Bass 7 67.7 41.0-98.0 3.7 26.0 Yellow Perch 12 134.9 66.0-210.0 42.3 507.0 Walleye 2 144.5 141.0-148.0 24.5 49.0 l Subtotal 115 2518.0 i #0TAL 453 5648.5
*Four 5-minute tows with a 16-ft trawl (1/8-in bag mesh) at each transect.
i O TABLE 7 CONT. TRAWL CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 27 September 1980 I
' WEIGHT (g)
LENGTH (m) I TRANSECT SPECIES NUMBER MEAN . RANGE MEAN TOTAL 8-13 Alewife 6 110.8 76.0-121.0 9.3 56.0 ? Gizzard Shad 50 125.3 100.0-150.0 18.8 940.0 Spottail Shiner 14 103.3 68.0-136.0 7.7 108.0
- j. Yellow Perch 8 119.6 62.0-197.0 32.8 262.0 Walleye 1 158.0 --- 30.0 30.0 Freshwater Drum 7 112.1- 75.0-201.0 18.3 128.0 Subtotal 86 1524.0 3-26 Alewife 2 110.5 105.0-116.0 11.5 23.0 Gizzard Shad 2 149.0 145.0-153.0 33.5 67.0 Spottail Shiner 11 95.5 72.0-114.0 7.3 80.0 White Bass 2 88.5 73.0-104.0 2.5 5.0 Freshwater Drum 5 125.8 90.0-215.0 27.4 137.0 Subtotal 22 312.0 TOTAL 10d 1836.0
*Four 5-minute tows with a 16-ft trawl (1/8-in bag mesh) at each transect. . v TABLE 7 CONT.
TRAWL CATCH PER UNIT EFFMT* AT LOCUST POINT 5 November 1980 LENGTH (m) WEIGHT (g) TRANSECT SPECIES NUMBER ttEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL 8-13 Gizzard Shad 439 127.5 102.0-152.0 19.1 8376.0 Spottail Shinw 6 111.0 76.0-136.0 9.2 55.0 Yellow Perch 4 161.5 135.0-186.0 59.0 236.0 Freshwater Drum 2 118.0 110.0-126.0 14.5 29.0 Subtotal 451. 8696.0 3-26 Gizzard Shad 315 129.3 102.0-152.0 19.7 6200.0 Spottail Shiner 6 101.7 79.0-111.0 8.2 49.0 White Bass 1 106.0 --- 4.0 4.0 Yellow Perch 2 161.5 138.0-185.0 60.5 121.0 Subtotal 324 6374.0 TOTAL 775 15070.0
*Four 5-minute tows with a 16-ft trawl (1/8-in bag mesh) at each transect.
O
TABLE 7 CONT. TRAWL CATCH PER UNTT EFFORT
- AT LOCUST POINT 21 November 1980 t
LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)
. SPECIES NUMBER MEAN RANGE MEAN TOTAL TRANSECT 8 Gizzard Shad 10 136.5 114.0-154.0 22.8 228.0 Rainbow Smelt 1 64.0 --- 1.0 1.0 Spottail Shiner 7 111.6 99.0-137.0 13.1 92.0 Yellow Perch 1 198.0 --- 88.0 88.0 Freshwater Drum 1 115.0- .
--- 15.0 15.0 Subtotal 20 424.0
.3-26 Alewife 2 99.5 99.0-100.0 7.0 14.0 I
Gizzard Shad 18 149.8 105.0-157.0 22.0 396.0 Spottail Shiner 9 99.9 80.0-110.0 8.8 79.0 Yellow Perch 4 186.0 171.0-195.0 83.5 334.0 Freshwater Drum 1 251.0 --- 187.0 187.0 Subtotal 34 1010.0 TOTAL 54 1434.0
*Four 5-minute tows with a 16-ft trawl (1/8-in bag mesh) at each transect.
1 1 f\ .
%.,,/
-p-. y , 'w, --
, . . , , - <,s. +. . . , - - - * = . -
I 4 I l c XII O SECTIm 3.1.2.A.ll ICHEY@UWKTM
CLEAR TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 210 : i
; O ICHTHYOPLANKTON STUDIES FROM LAKE ERIE NEAR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION
- DURING 1980
~
Environmental Technical Specifications
'Sec. 3.1.2.a. 4. Ichthyoplankton Prepared by
, Jeffrey M. Reutter
. C. Lawrence Cooper John R. Hageman Mark D. Barncs Donald L. Breier Audrey A. Rush Prepared for .
l Toledo Edison Company ! Toledo, Ohio THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR LAKE ERIE AREA RESEARCH COLUMBUS, OHIO FEBRUARY 1981
3.1.2.a.4 Ichthyoplankton Procedures Duplicate ichthyoplankton (fish eggs and larvae) suples were collected from the surfm and bottom of Stations 3 (control station), 8 (intake),13 (plume area), 29 (control station), and Toussaint Reef (Figures 1 and 2) using a 0.75 meter diameter heavy-duty oceanographic plankton net (No. 00, 0.75 mm mesh) equipped with a calibrated General Oceanics flow meter. Each sample consisted of a 5-minute circular tow at 3 to 4 knots with this net. Samples were collected on 17 occasions (approximately 10-day intervals or as weather allowed) between 13 April 1980 and 27 August 1980 from the Locust Point vicinity and on 13 occasions at Toussaint Reef. Sampling was terminated after 27 August because no larvae were found in samples collected during the day on 19 and 27 August and during the night on 19 August (see Secte 3.1.2.a.5 Fish Egg and Larvae Entrainment). It should be noted t" U.S. EPA (Grosse Ile office) terminated their Western Basin sampling on 1c July each year from 1975-1978. Samples were preserved in 3% formalin and returned to the laboratory for sorting and analysis. All specimens were identified and enumerated using the works of Fish (1932), Norden (1961a and b), and Nelson and Cole (1975). Results were reported as the number of individuals per 100 m of water calculated from the volume filtered (flow meter) and the number of individuals within the sample. Results Specimens collected during the 1980 field season were placed into 17 taxa (Table 1). Twelve taxa were to the species level, while the remaining 5 consisted of unidentified, unidentified crappie, unidentified shiner, unidentified sucker, and unidentified sunfish. Collections from Toussaint Reef (a spawning area) produced 10 taxa, all of which were found in Locust Point day or night samples (Table 2). Most larval densities at Locust Point were comparable to those observed at Toussaint Reef. However, of the species which were found in concentrations greater than 1.0/100 m3, emerald shiners and white bass were more' abundant at Toussaint Reef, and freshwater drum, gizzard shad and yellow perch were more abundant at Locust Point. The overall ichthyoplankton concentration at Locust Point (213.9/100 m3) was 2.4 times larger thar, that observed at Toussaint Reef (90.8/100 mJ). Gizzard shad, freshwater drum, yellow perch, and white bass were the dominant species at Locust Point respresenting 75 percent, 16 percent, 6 percent, and 2 percent, respectively, of the total ichthyoplankton density. At Toussaint Reef, gizzard shad, white bass, freshwater drum, emerald shiner, and yellow perch were the dcminant species representing 76 percent, 8 percent, 6 percent, 5 percent and 4 percent, respectively, of the total ichthyoplankton density. No other species, at either location, constituted as much as 1.0 percent of the total concentration. Stations 3, 13, (plume area), and 29 the inshore stations, exhibited the greatest mean larval densities, 264.16, 272.88, and 209.11/100 m3, respectively, while Station 8 (intake) yielded the lowest larval densities, 121.54/100 m3 (Table 1). All 4 stations had greater densities at the surface. Toussaint Reef had much higher larval densities at the bottom than at the surface.
Q All raw data were recorded and stored at the offices of The Ohio State University's Center for Lake Erie Area Research in Columbus, Ohio. A voucher collection of all samples is also maintained at these offices. Analysis Ichthyoplankton populations have shown tremendous variations since 1974. Emerald shiners constituted 81 percent of the 1974 larvae,1 percent of the 1975 larvae, 60 percent of the 1976 larvae, 3 percent of the 1977 larvae,14 percent of the 1978 larvae, 3 percent of the 1979 larvae and 0.5 percent of the 1980 larvae. Yellow perch constituted 5 percent of the 1974 larvae, 70 percent of the 1975 larvae, 4 percent of the 1976 larvae, 26 percent of the 1977 larvae, 2 percent of the 1978 larvae, 11 percent of the 1979 larvae and 6 percent of the 1980 larvae. Gizzard shad increased significantly until 1979 reaching 34 percent of the 1976 larvae, 56 percent of the 1977 larvae, 69 percent of the 1978 larvae, and 82 percent of the 1979 larvae. In 1980 gizzard shad fell to 75 percent of the ichthyoplankton density, but in actual numbers of larvae the density of shad increased from 51/100 m3 in 1979 to 163/100 m3 in 1980. It is felt that the above described variability is partially due to the fact that we are sampling schooling specimens. Consequently, when the net is drawn through a school the density appears quite high. This is also quite dependent on the seasonal frequency of sampling. For example, if the weather allows more frequent spring sampling but prohibits sumer sampling, then spring species m, such as perch and walleye appear relatively more abundant. (d i The 1979 ichthyoplankton density (66.79/100 m3) was 18 percent greater than the 1978 density (56.6/100 m3) (Reutter,1980), and the 1980 density was 3.25 times greater than the 1979 density. Walleye densities have varied from 6.1/100 m3 in 1978 to 0.15/100 m3 in 1979 to 0.78/100 m3 in 1980. Perch have increased from 1.2/100 m3 in 1978 to 7.5/100 m3 in 1979 to 12.9/100 m3 in 1980, while gizzard shad densitieg have increased from 38.9/100 m3 in 1978 to 54.6/100 m3 in 1979 to 102.6/100 m . in 1980. It appears that 1980 was an extremely successful spawning year for most species. In 1976, control stations (3 and 29) were established on either side of the intake (Station 8)/ discharge (Station 13) complex to determine if unusually large fish larvae populations were occurring due to possible spawning in the rip-rap material around these structures. This does not appear to be occurring to any significant degree as Station 13 (plume area) exhibited densities similar to Station 3 (control) and Station 8 (intake) exhibited the lowest densities. These lower densities observed at Station 8 are probably due to the fact that this station is the farthest from shore and in the deepest water. In sumary, there is no indication of significant spawning occurring at Locust Point. However, the nearshore waters here, as with the rest of the nearshore waters along the south shore of the Western Basin, appear to serve as a nursery around for larvae and, consequently, support large densities. Furthermore,~ due to the similarity between test and control stations, there is no indication that the activities of the plant have significantly altered these
/_{ populations.
V O LITERATURE CITED Fish, M.P. 1932. Contributions to the early life histories of sixty-two species of fishes from Lake Erie and it: tributary waters. Bull. U.S. Bur. Fish. 47:293-398. Nelson, D.D. and R.A. Cole. 1975. The distribution and abundance of larval fishes along the western shore of Lake Erie at Monroe, Michigan. Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. Institute of Water Research Tech. Rept. No. 32.4. 66 pp. Norden, C.R. 1961a. A key to larval fishes from Lake Erie. University of Southwe', tern Louisiana, Lafayette. Mimeo. Rept. 4 pp. Norden, C.R. 1961b. The identification of larval perch, Perca flavescens, and walleye, Stizostedion n vitreum. Copeia 61:282-288. Reutter, J.M. 1980. Ichthyoplankton studies from Lake Erie near the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1979. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. CLEAR Technical Report No. 163. 14 pp. O 0 o o .. o e26 LAKE ERIE 4H N gg
.3 ) es n
7 23 ,
*. . 6 e1 i ' e 15. .
- , * . . . " D *.
- S MARSH S AREA 24
- II- ^
I2 COOLING *
~
g g3 g34 ; TOWER .,, i g* .
. .is STATION g8 ' '. ,
- 25 e17
. AREA ., J
' I ** MARSH AREA '.I..!*.,
,.- %., e 29 FIGURE 1
.. . / '( ){
..* 1000
) feat . DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT 1 AQUITIC SAMPLING STATIONS
v i g,a ( atsi sisten estaun 1 ei
@...,..~..nr p
s K x LAKE ERIE
' N e ,....,Q y '*2 'Q,"c'*ect 41'4 0'-
w 7),3,,,3, NU comeGC 6 tazLnarr , urTLE P acer # est . car is TuasLE estrQ LOCUST POINT Resp Stw O (,ggu~o.u, O
, ,<~' to. .. . g -
o.a. a,..
.PS N
'4c 35' T^
BATHY METRIC MAP otrTH confouns m FEET sELOW LOW WATER DATUM
* + LEA 57 DEPTH OVEA REEF h
CONTOUR INTERVAL 8 FEET l FECT e
~
~ ~. ie se si se massa n-.~- .
a r s . , 4 s -
- ya e a 3 g,,,. r-83* 00' 1
,,,,,c6,.,
83*05' FIGURE 2. REEFS NEAR LOCUST POINT, O TABLE 1 ICHTHY 0 PLANKTON DENSITIES AT LOCUST POINT - 1980* ( ; 13 April 18 April 2.* 4ril 29 Nan 3 8 13 29 Mean 3 8 13 29 Mess
$MCl[5 3 8 13
$1rntnost 5tage I r.lamm Stage 2 5tage 3 Surface Botton Sub total" Ctrp Stage 1 5tage 2 Stage 3
*n eface Botton Subtotal" betald Stage 1 Shiner Stage 2 '
Stagt 3 Surface Bottom subtctal" T m riester Stage T - Drwe Stage 2 5tage 3 Surfact Bottom Subtotal"
-'~ s Glazard Shad Stage 1
> ; Stage 2 \ 5tage 3
's' 9 ,f,,,
80ttom Suttotal" Legperch 5tage 1 Dart er Stage 2 5tage 3 Surface Bottos 54totel" Ratntom Stage 1 Smelt Stage 2 5tage 3 Surface Bottom Sut total"
$9attall Stage 1 57.iner Stage 2 Stage 3
$ur face Botton Subtotal" Unideettfled stage 1 5tage 2 5tage 3 Surface
- Bottoa Subtotal **
Unidentified Stage 1 Cr:pple Stage 2 Sta,e 3 Sarface
- Sotton SubtotaI** - Unidenti fied Stage 1 Shiner Stage 2 stage 3 Surface Bottoe Subtotal" TABLE 1 CONT.
ICHTHYOPLANKTON DENSITIES AT LOCUST POINT - 1980* 13 April 18 Aprl) 25 April 29 Mean 3 0 13 29 Mean 3 8 13 29 Mean SPECIES 3 8 13 unidentt h ed Stage 1 Se ter Stage 2 Stage 3 Seface Botton Subtotal" unidentified Stage 1 Sunfish 5tage 2 5tage 3 Surface Botton Subtotal" t'alleye Stage 1 Stage 2 * ' 5tage 3 Surfact Bottom Subtotal"
- Mie Sass $ttge 1 Stage 2 5tage 3 Surface Botton Subtotal" thitef tsh Stage 1 0.4 0.09 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.32 5t6gs 2 Stage 3 surface 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.65 Bottom 0.7 0.18 0.4 0.09 0.5 0.4 0.a 0 1?
Suttotal** 1511ow Perch 5tage 1 Stage 2 5tage 3 Surface Botton Subtotal" 0.09 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.33 10 tat Stage 1 0.4 Stage 2 5tage 3 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.65 Surface 0.7 0.18 0.09 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.33 0.f' O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 t al** 0.0 0.0
~
9 ICHTHY 0 PLANKTON DENSITIES AT LOCUST POINT - 1980* 2 May 9 May 16 May
$TATI0lt 4PECIES 3 8 13 29 Nan 3 8 13 29 Nan 3 8 13 29 Pean Bluntnote Stage 1 Mtnno. Stage 2 Stage 3
$wrface Bottoa 5uttotal" Carp Stage 1 0.3 0.08 Stage 2 5tage 3 surface Bottoe 0.6 0.16 Suttotal** 0.3 0.08 Stage 1 0.3 0.08 (swrald Shiner Stage 2 Stage 3 0.6 0.16 Surface Sotton 0.3 0.08 Suttotal" Fres Neter Stage 1 Orum Stage 2 .
Stage 3 Surface Bottom Subtotal" Clarard Shad Stage 1 114.6 49.5 24.3 24.1 53.12 15.1 1.3 11.7 3. 8 9.48 Stage 2 Stage 3 Surface 76.9 41.1 19.2 23.9 40.26 6.4 10.1 7.7 3. 6 6.94 Bottom 152.4 57.9 29.3 26.3 65.99 73.8 4.5 15.7 4.1 12.01 Sut total" 114.6 49.5 24.3 24.1 53.12 15.1 7.3 !!.7 3.8 9.48
,_':gperch 5tage 1 arter Stage 2 > 5tage 3 Surface 80ttoe Subtotai" tainbow Stage 1 invit Stage 2 stage 3 Surface Botton Suttotal**
5pottati Stage 1 5;tner Stage 2 Stage 3 Surface Bottoe Suttotal" Unidentified Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Surface Bottos Subtotal" Unidentified Stage 1 Crappie Stage 2 Stage 3 Surface Bottes subtotal" Unideet t fled Stage 1 1.9 0.47 0.3 0.08 Shteer Stage 2 Stage 3
^
Surface totton 3. 8 0.94 0.6 0.16 Suttotal" 1.9 0.47 0.3 0* I TABLE 1 CONT. ICHTHYOPLANKTON DENSITIES AT LOCUST POINT - 1980* O 2 PJy 9 PJy 16 May
$3 g SPECIES 3 8 13 29 Nam 3 8 13 29 mese 3 8 13 29 meae un taenti fied Sta9e 1 Swcter ; Stage 2 Stage 3 Sur face Bottos 5.t ts tal" batdeettfied Stage !
5.aftsn Stage 2 5tage 3 Swrface 8sttos Swbtotal" s tallese State I 11.2 7.0 9.3 13.8 10. 32 0.6 0.9 4.0 1.37 Stage 2 0.7 0.3 0.25 5tage 3 Surface - Bottus 22.5 14.0 18.5 27.6 20.64 1.1 3.2 8.6 3.23 Swe tatal" 11.2 7.0 9.3 13.8 10.32 0.6 1.6 4.3 1.61 ntte tass 5tage 1 4.0 2.6 1.8 2.CS 3.6 0.3 1.0 1.3 1.53 5tage 2 Sta;e 3 5grface 2.4 2.1 2.6 1.76 0.6 0.6 1.3 0.6 0.78 Battca 5.5 3.1 1.0 2.43 6.5 0.7 2.0 2.29 5.htstal** 4.0 2.5 1.8 2. L8 3.6 0.3 1.0 1.3 1.53 Ea teftsh Stage 1
- Stage 2 5tage 3 0.5 0.13 5seface 1.1 0.26 tottcp '
Swe total" 0.5 0.13 Y;llo. Stage 1 0.5 0.5 0.23' 30.5 18.2 14.8 23.3 21.69 l21.0 8.1 8.9 10.1 12.04 P.rch 5tage 2 5tage 3 Surface 1.0 0.9 0.49 23.8 8.8 8.1 14.6 13.84 5.8 2.5 8.4 5.8 5.65 Botton 37.2 27.5 21.5 32.0 29.54 34.2 13.8 9.4 14.4 18.43 5 A total" 0.5 0.5 0.25 30.5 18.2 It.8 23.3 21.69 l21.0 8.1 8.9 10.1 17 c4 TOTAL 5tage 1 0.5 0.5 0.25 162.3 77.2 50.1 61.1 87.68 I 40.9 15.7 22.5 19.5 24.65 Stage 2 0.7 0.3 0.25 Stage 3 0.5 0.13 surface 1.0 0.9 1.1 0.76 103.1 52.0 29.9 38.4 55.86 12.8 13.2 17.a 10.6 13.52 tottos 221.4 102.5 F,. 3 83.9 119.49 69.0 18.2 28.9 29.0 36.28 Suttatal** 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.38 162.3 77.2 50.1 61.1 87.68 43.9 15.7 73 2 19 8 ?S *0 O TABLE 1 CONT.
, ICHTHYOPLANKTON DENSITIES AT LOCUST POINT - 1980*
23 May - 6 June 14 June STATI0ft 29 Mean 3 8. 13 29 Mean 3 8 13 29 Mean 5 PECKS 3 8 13 81untnose Stage 1 Minrow : Stage 2 State 3 Surface Bottom Suttotal" Carp - Stage 1 0.4 0.10 0.3 0.08 0.6 0.16 Stage 2 Stage 3 Surface 0.8 0.19 0.6 0.16 1.3 0.32 8cttoe 0.6 0.16 Suttotal" 0.4 0.10 0.3 0.08 Imerald 5tage 1 1.3 1.0 2.2 0.8 1.33 1.6 0.39
$hiper Stage 2 2.7 0.67 Stage 3 2.2 0.54 Surface 1.2 0.7 4.4 1.6 1.97 8.0 4.3 3.06 Botton 1.4 1.3 ! 0.70 0.5 0.13 Subtotal" 1.3 1.0 2.2 0.8 1.33 4.2 2.2 1.59 Frestwater Stage 1 2.0 19.1 1.2 1.4 5.91 0.7 2.7 0.85 Orve Stage 2 0.4 0.09 0.3 3.5 0.94 1.2 0.3 0.6 .0 54 Sta9e 3 Surface 34.1 1.3 9.84 1.4 3.0 0.7 1.3 1.62 Bottos 4.7 1.2 2.7 2.16 5.3 6.8 3.03 subtotal" 2.4 19.1 1.2 1.4 6.00 0.7 4.2 3.8 0.6 2.32 6tarard Sha4 5tage 1 31.2 51.5 18.4 10.8 27.97 2 34.7 355.0 504.3 1544.4 659.60 48.8 131.4 48.6 121.7 87.60 5tage 2 1.5 1.0 1.2 0.4 1.03 118.8 159.6 654.7 324.1 314.28 55.5 374.9 160.4 73.6 166.09 g -
Stage 3 18.1 27.2 182.7 24.1 63.05 16.9 72.1 9.7 29.7 32.08 n- Surface 25.1 65.1 28.6 6.9. 31.41 700.7 501.7 2533.4 3572.9 1827.19 219.7 841.5 389.9 192.6 410.92 tottoe 40.3 39.8 10.7 15.5 26.59 42.7 581.9 149.9 212.2 246.67 22.6 315.1 47.5 257.3 160.62 d futtotal" 32.7 52.5 19.6 11.2 29.00 371.7 541.8 1341.7 1892.5 1036.93 121.1 578.3 218.7 225.0 285.77 Logperch Stage 1 Osrter Stage 2 0.4 0.10 5tage 3 1.0 0.24 Surface 0.7 0.17 tottoe 0.8 1,3 0.51 Subtotal" 0.4 1.0 0.34 Rainbou State 1
$selt Sta9e 2 0.3 0.08 Sta9e 3 Surface 0.6 0.16 80ttom Subtotal" 0.3 0.08 Spotta11 Stage 1 shiner Stage 2 Sta9e 3 Surface letton Suttotal" .
U.aldentified Stage l' O.4 0.11 0.3 0.08 Stage 2 Sta9e 3 Surface 0.9 0.22 tottoe
- 0.7 0.16 Subtotal" 0.4 0.11 0.3 0.08 oridontified . $tage 1 0.3 0.08 Cr:pple State 2 Sta9e 3 0.3 0.08 surface Botton 0.7 0.7 0.33 Suttotal** 0.3 0.3 0.16 unidenti fled Stage 1 3.3 0.08 (v
j 5einer Stage 2 . Si. 3 38'p888 8.7 0.17 88ttem , SubtStel" 8.3 0.88 i
TABLE 1 CONT. ICHTHY 0 PLANKTON DENSITIES AT LOCUST POINT - 1980* 23 May 6 June 14 Jee SPECIES 3 8 13 29 Mean 3 8 13 29 Mea n 3 8 13 29 rean unidenti fj ed Stage 1 led er Stage 2 Stage '. Surface Bottom Swatctal" Unidentified Staat 1 Sw3ftsh Stage 2 5tage 3 Surface Bottom
$wbtotal" talleye Stage 1 1.0 0.3 0.3 0.43 Stage 2 0.3 0.08 Stage 3 0.7 0.17 , 1.0 0.25 Surface 0.7 0.17 0.7 0.17 Botton 2.1 0.7 2.0 1.19 1.3 0.33 Swatotalee. 1.0 0.3 1.4 0.68 1.0 0.25 thite Bass 5tage 1 3.1 1.9 4.4 11.8 5.46 0.3 8.5 2.0 2.72 1.2 0.31 5tage 2 1.5 2.4 2.9 1.9 2.19 0.3 2.4 6.9 1.6 2.80 13.4 19.1 15.8 12.08 5tage 3 0.8 1.0 0.9 14.3 4.23 1.3 8.9 13.2 10.3 8.44 25.6 2.5 25.9 25.3 19.81 Surface Bottem 6.6 2.8 7.9 9.4 6.69 3.0 0.7 23.6 0.7 6.99 1.2 12.4 6.3 4.96 4.4 11.8 5.46 2.2 4.8 18.4 5.5 7.71 13.4 1.2 19.1 15.8 12.39 56btotal" 3.7 1.9 thttefish 5tage 1 Stage 2 5tage 3 Su* face 80ttom Swe to tal" trilow Stage 1 196.5 50.6 84.6 87.0 104.67 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.43 Perch 5tage 2 1.9 1.6 3.0 1.63 6.5 0.6 2.6 2.70 5tage 3 0.4 .8 0.55 19.8 48.3 59.2 139.5 69.22 Surface 192.5 65.1 107.4 120.1 121.27 37.9 73.5 267.6 94.75 Botton 205.0 36.1 65.0 63.5 92.42 16.0 98.1 66.2 19.4 49.94 Swbtotal" 198.8 50.6 86.2 91.8 106.84 26 9 49.0 69.9 143.5 72.34 707AL 5tage 1 232.8 104.0 108.2 110.3 138.82 239.0 376.1 516.9 1548.9 670.23 49.5 136.8 48.6 121.7 89.15 3.4 1.0 2.8 3.7 2.74 127.2 162.4 658.6 32 9.6 319.44 55.5 377.9 163.8 74.2 167.86 5tage 2 45.23 Stage 3 0.4 2.5 0.72 38.3 78.0 261.2 165.1 135.64 J.2 73.3 31.3 46.2 219.1 131 1 137.7 142.6 157.65 741.1 549.4 2628.4 3852.4 1942.84 246.7 655.0 420.8 220.4 435.73 Surface
*G ton 254.0 78.8 84.3 90.5 126.89 67.9 683.5 244.8 225.3 307.78 23.7 321.0 66.6 263.6 168.73 Sub total" 236.6 105.0 111.0 116.5 142.27 404.5 416.5 1436.6 2043.7 1125.31 135.2 558.0 243.7 2a7 0 r? 73 O
TABLE 1 CONT. ICHTHYOPLANKTON DENSITIES AT LOCUST POINT - 1980*
< - ,)
i i w/ 27 Juee 10 Jwlt 21Jue n _ 3 8 13 29 Mean 3 8 13 29 rean 3 8 13 29 Penn SPICl[$ ti etnese Stage 1 Stage 2 0.3 0.07 ntanow * . 5tage 3 0.5 0.13 Surface Bottom
$wntstal
- 0.3 0.07 Carp Stage 1 0.7 1.3 0.6 0.64 5.2 0.6 2.4 3.5 2. 92 5tage 2 3.9 0.6 6.0 2.0 3.15 0.4 0.4 0.19 5tage 3 Surface 19.3 2.3 17.6 11.1 12.50 Sotto= 1.3 2.7 1.1 1.28
$wbtotal" 0.7 1.3 0.6 0.64 9.5 1.2 8.8 5.5 6.25 0.9 0.22 0.3 3.1 1.1 1.10 Euvrald Stage 1 3.9 2.2 5.6 2.94 0.2 3.4 0.7 1.08 Salaer Stage 2 12.1 7.5 12.8 8.08 C.06 0.2 Stagt 3 1.5 9.9 1.4 2.1 3.73 Surface 0.44 2.9 0.74 Bottom 32.0 19.5 36.7 22.04 1.6 .
0.9 0.22 0.7 6.5 0.7 1.1 2.23 Suttot al" 16.0 9.7 - 18.4 11.02 Fresh ater Stage 1 48.9 53.4 203.2 47.4 88.22 82 1.6 70.7 596.8 340.1 457.30 Orum Stage 2 10.8 1.7 3.12 29.2 34.3 23.0 17.5 26.01 6.8 7.6 3.59 Stage 3 surface 2.9 10.9 50.3 14.2 19.61 797.1 31.0 442.6 58.7 332. 35 Bottom 94.9 95.8 377.5 84.1 163.07 918.2 179.0 812.2 656.5 641.45 Suhtotal" 48.9 53.4 213.9 49.1 91.34 857.6 105.0 627.4 357.6 486.90 58.8 118.91 649.6 80.1 475.6 280.5 371.47 4.5 1.9 C.5 2.0 2.22 Gi nard Shed Stage 1 117.2 110.8 188.9 0.6 0.3 0.7 0.39 Stage 2 199.7 135.1 233.5 35.1 150.82 945.5 43.7 470.1 145.2 401.13 1.3 3.30 34.6 17.6 32.34 460.2 10.7 402.3 34.7 226.99 5.3 3.4 3.2 Stage 3 38.3 38.8 7.0 5.5 10.64 20.3 10.6 ii surface 373.6 269.7 446.4 2 05.1 323.68 3634.3 178.6 2393.6 414.7 If.56.32 C.l? 0.5 0.6 1.7 1.1 Sottos 336.9 299.7 467 .5 17.9 280.48 472.4 90.4 302.5 506.2 342.85 4.4 3.3 5.91 111.5 302.08 2055.3 134.5 1348.0 460.5 999.59 10.4 5.6
'd 5.9tetal" 355 .2 284.7 456.9 LCgperch Stage 1 Carter Stage 2 0.2 0.06 0.5 3.7 1.05 5tage 3 0.27 0.5 0.12 1.1 Surface 7.3 1.83 80ttos 0.06 0.5 3.7 1.05 5abtotalu 0.2 astabow Stage 1
$ melt 5tage 2 0.3 0.07 stage 3 Surface 0.6 0.14 8cttom 0.3 em
$@ total" Spottall Stage 1 0.3 0.07 0.4 0.11 Shiner Stage 2 Stage 3 Scrface 0.6 0.15 8 otto, 0.8 0.21 0.3 0.07 0.4 0.11 St.btotale.
unidentified Stage 1 5tage 2 5tage 3 Surface Sotto*
$sototal" unidenttfied Sta9e 1 Crapple Stage 2 Stage 3 Surface lottos a
sus tetal" Stage 1 Stage 2 4,unidenttfted intner 5taga 3 SurfsCS lottom
$wntotal" n-TABLE 1 C0:4T.
ICHTHYOPLANKTON DENSITIES 'AT LOCUST POINT - 1980* 10 Jwly 21 June 27 June STAi!C4 mean 3 8 13 29 mean 29 mea n 3 8 13 29 3 8 13 $P!CIll tmideati fie4 Stage 1 I.7 I.93 Swck;r Stage 2 Stage 3 15.4 3.66 Surface Bottoe II I 93 Swttotal" uaidentif tes stage i 0.3 C.07 Stefish 5tage 2 Sta9e 3 5.rface 0.6 0.14 8otton 0.3 0.07 36ttotal" kalleye 5tage 1 Stage 2 0.3 0.45 Stage 3 (.5 0.13
. 0.5 lurfata 3.1 0.77 80ttco 1.5 0.3 0.45 5.htstal'*
1.c2 1.5 1.7 0.2 0.85 0.9 0.22 1.3 0. 5', 1.7 0.6 t' .its Sass State 1 6.2 11.0 2.6 7.03 3.1 2.2 4.1 6.4 3.95 5tese 2 8.4 5.1 20.0 1.7 3.1 1.20 5.4 6.3 16.9 5.1 8.45 71.7 1.1 2.1 5tage 3 9.9 39.24 0.5 0.4 0.23 93 13.3 32.7 12.0 16.79 139.0 4.3 3.8 3.64 5.rfs- 23.2 5.2 14.61 13.2 3.4 12.0 14.2 10.69 6.0 9.5 tot' ; 18.3 11.8 3.2 4.8 0.2 2.05 12.5 27.9 8.6 15.70 76.1 3.8 7.9 12.1 24.97 Suttotal" l 13.8 httefinh 5tage 1 5tage 2 5tase 3 Surface j i actt as l 5.:t a ta l" l 1:llom Stage 1 Ferch 5tage 2 6.3 1,66 5tage 3 5.4 4.9 6.4 4.17 0.3 0.6 0.14 Surface 8.34 12.7 3.17 8sttes 10.8 9. 8 12.8 6.4 4.17 0.3 6.3 3.66 Svetotal" 5.4 4.9 6.2 4.9 2.2 1.3 4.16 TotAt 5tage 1 171.0 167.7 398.2 '107.0 211.00 1478.6 151.9 1076.6 173.4 624.7 832.92 0.8 3.7 1.4 0.3 1.54 Stage 2 220.2 148.7 268.0 39.4 169.06 989.9 80.9 503.2 414.4 436.34 50.1 253.92 7.3 3.4 6.5 1.3 4.63 5ta9e 3 49.1 50.3 57.8 22.8 45.02 539.4 11.8 6.5 20.5 8.5 8.0 14.63 Surface 386.4 294.3 529.4 231.3 360.34 4593.4 213.9 2841.1 484.4 2032.45 22.2 3,5 11.8 1.7 5.81 Betten 4 94.2 439.2 918.7 107.2 42).81 1425.3 275.1 1147.3 1207.9 1013.92 14.3 12.0 10.1 4.9 10.33 5.h tc tal" 440.3 366.8 724.0 169.2 425.08 3007.9 244.5 1994.2 846.2 1523.18 O ICHTHYOPLANKTON DENSITIES AT LOCUST POINT - 1980*
^ 17 July 29 July 8 August
[
\
IPICIII 17AT!QN 3 8 13 29 Mean 3 4 13 29 Mean 3 8 13 29 Psan 81satasse State I nianow 5tage 2 5tage 3 Surface lettom subtotel" Carp - Stage 1 0,3 0.08
- Stage 2 Stage 3 Surface Bottom 0.6 0.15 Jubtotal" 0.3 0.08 tmerald 8tste 1 0.3 0. 8 ' O.tt litner stage 2 0.3 0.4 0.37 0.3 0.07 Stage 3 2.6 0.3 4.7 2.7 2.58 0.6 0.16 Surface 5.8 1.2 9.6 6.0 5.66 1.3 0.31 se.tes a
0.8 0.8 0.80 0.8 0.15 Suttet:1** 2.9 0.6 S.I 3.3 2.97 0.9 0.23 Frr t tea t er Stage 1 0.2 0.cs De u.e Stage 2 Stage 3 Surface Bottom '. 0.5 0.11 Suttotal** 0.2 0.06 Glarard Shad Stage ! 13.2 19.1 10.4 8.0 12.70 0.2 0.06 Stage 2 12.4 !$.1 17.3 29.1 18.48 0.6 0.3 1.2 1.2 . 83 Stage 3 3.8 2.7 4.3 4.8 3.99 13.0 0.6 6.3 3.3 5.80 0.4 0.09 Surface 38.4 38.6 54.6 64.1 48.94 25.4 1.8 12.7 7.1 11.73 0.7 0.18 - Bottom 20.5 35.2 9.5 19.6 21.21 1.8 2.3 1.8 1.47 0.5 0.11 Sub to tal" 29.4 36.9 32.0 41.9 35.07 13.6 0.9 7.5 4.5 6.63 0.2 0.4 0.15 Lagperch State 1 0:rter Stage 2 5tage 3 f\
. Surface Sottom
' Suttotal" Ostebow Stagt 1 5 melt Stage 2 Stage 3 Surface 80ttom Sut total" Spottall stage 1 Shiner Stage 2 5tage 3 Surface Bottom Suttotal" Unidenttfted Stage 1 Stage 2 . 0.2 0.06 Stage 3 Surface
- Bottoat 0.5 0.11 Subtotal ** 0.2 0.06 Unlu ntified Stage 1 Crappie Stage 2 5tage 3 Surface Bottom Sut total" Unident t f t ed Stage 1
$mner stage 2 Itage 3 Surface
$ctroe 5u6t0181" f)
'w) 1 TABLE 1 CONT. ICHTHY 0 PLANKTON DENSITIES AT LOCUST POINT - 1980* O 17 July 29 July 8 August
$PECIES 3 8 13 29 Mean 3 8 13 29 Mean 3 8 i 13 29 Mean i
Unidenti f ted $tage 1 5ecker : 5tage 2 5tage 3 Surface Botton Subtotal" unidenti fied Stage 1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.23 0.3 0.08 Sunftst 5tage 2 Stage 3 Surface 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.47 tottom 0.6 0.15 Subtotal" 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.23 0.3 0.08 deliere Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Surface
- Bottom Subtotal" Westte Bass 5tage 1 0.3 0.08 Stage 2 htage 3 Surface Bottoe 0.6 0.15 Subtotala 0.3 0.08 Uhtteftsh 5tage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Surface '
Botton Subtotal" vello. Stage 1 0.6 0.3 0.23 Penn Stage 2 Sust3 Surface 0.6 0.6 0.31 Bottom 0.6 0.15 590 total" 0.6 0.3 0.23 TOTAL Stage 1 13.6 20.3 10.4 9.5 13.46 0.6 0.15 0.5 0.11 5tage 2 !2.8 15.0 17.7 29.1 18.66 0.9 0.3 1.2 1. 0.92 0.2 0.06 5tage 3 6.4 3.2 9.0 7.5 6.46 13.6 0.6 6.3 3. 5.98 0.4 0.09 Surfact 44.9 41.1 64.2 71.3 55.37 26.6 1.8 12.7 7.: 12.05 0.7 0.18 20.5 35.8 10.1 20.8 21.78 2.4 3.6 1.t 1.92 1.4 0.14 80 t '.se Si.atotal" 32.8 38.5 37.1 46.1 38.58 14.5 0.9 8.1 4.5 '.06 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.26 1 0
TABLE 1 CONT. ICHTHYOPLANKTON DENSITIES AT LOCUST POINT - 1980* 19 A m .t 27 Av9 ult "eam 5TATI:n SPICl[5 3 8 13 29 mean 3 8 13 29 Mean 3 8 13 29 reas 81we taote Stage 1 utano.
- Stage 2 0.C2 <0.01 5tage 3 Surface 0.01 0.cl Bottca 56ttotal.. 0.C2 *C.01 Carp Stage 1 0.39 0.11 0.21 0.71 0.23 Stag,3 0.23 0.04 0.35 0.16 0,19 Stage 3 0.02 0.02 0.11 Surface 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.04 84ttcm 1.24 0.30 1.14 0.65 0.83 Suttota1** 0.64 0.;5 0.58 0.36 0.43 ferrale Stage 1 0.38 0.48 0.46 0.16 0.37 Shiner Stage 2 0.76 0 *O C.81 0.59 Stage 3 0.20 0.c2 0.40 C.16 0.20 Surface
- 0.57 1.17 1.16 0.61 C. 58 Sottse 2.11 1.43 2.19 0.C3 1.44 httotal " 1.34 1.30 1.68 C.32 1.16 fresNater Stage 1 51.38 8.58 47.13 22.83 32.49 Dewe Stage 2 1.74 2.04 2.19 1.13 1.77 Stage 3 0.40 0.07 0.46 0.04 C.24 Surface 47.14 4.81 29.11 4.37 21.18 Sottos 59.90 16.48 70.45 43.72 47.64 Sub total ** 53.52 10.68 47.78 2 4. Ca 14.51 Glasard $P-as 5tage 1 72.31 47.43 75.46 120.83 79.01 D . Stage 2 78.51 42.95 93.53 35.80 61.95
{ 5tage 3 32.68 9.16 37.83 6.82 21.62
\ Ser face 301.45 115.22 346.65 *64.53 256.97 Bottom 65.54 83.12 60.96 62.36 63.17 Swetstal" .183.50 99.54 703.81 161 aa * ? 57 toggeech Stage 1 carter Stage 2 0.02 C.C1 Stage 3 0.02 0.09 0.22 0.C8 brface O.C3 J.tc C.03
' Sottoe 0.05 0.07 0.43 0.14 560totate. 0.C4 0.09 0 ?? O 09 estabow Stage 1 Savit Stage 2 0.02 <0.C1 Stage 3 0.02 <0.01 beface 0.c4 0.01 Bettca 0.03 C.01 Suttotal" C 04 0 Cl 5pottall Stage 1 'O.C2 a0.01 Shiner Stage 2 C.C2 0.01 Stage 3 brface 0.C3 0.01 Botton 0.05 0.01 httetal" 0.c4 0.01
{. un6devit tit ed Stage 1 0.05 C.01 Stage g 0.01 <0.01 Stage 3 . Surface 0.05 0.C1
$ctten
- 0.C3 0.04 0.C2 5.4 total ** 0.C1 0.05 0"
- LMeentified Stage 1 0.02 - 0.01 Crapote Stage 2 5tage 3 0.C2 *0.01 Surface settaa 0.04 0.04 0.02 Swb to tal" e ** a e' *~
1Dni Stage 1 0.13 0.02 0.04 a ,eentified r ,ta,e 2 itage 3 keface 0.04 0.01 Sottas 0.26 0.07-
- Sun total" 0.13 0.C2 0 04 TABLE 1 CONT.
ICHTHYOPLANKTON DENSITIES AT LOCUST POINT - 1980* 19 August 27 August Mean $PICIES 3 8 13 29 mean 3 8. 13 29 Mean 3 8 13 29 Mean unideP*lfity 5tage 1 , Suc k ee Stage 2 0.45 0.11 Sta9e 3 Surface 0.91 0.23 80ttce
$shtotal** 0.45 0.11 un identified Stage t 0.c2 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Senftsh 5tage 2 0.02 <0.01 Stage 3 Surface 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 80ttos 0.04 0.03 0.02 Subtotal" 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.02 kalleye Stase 1 0.76 0.41 0.62 1.06 0.71 Stage 2 0.04 0.04 0.02 5tage 3 .- 0.15 0.05 0.05 Surface 0.04 0.07 0.03 Botton 1.51 0.82 1.57 2.25 1.54 Suttotal** 0.76 0.41 0.81 1.16 0.78 White Bass Stage 1 0.85 0.38 1.12 1.00 0 84 5tage 2 0.77 0.63 1.06 0.68 0.77 Stage 3 5.44 0.58 2.83 iL 2.62 Surface 10.56 1.92 4.73 4.28 5.37 Bottom 3.55 1.28 5.30 2.25 3.10 Sut to tal" 7.05 1.60 5.01 3.27 4.23 tehttefigh 5tage 1 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.02 stage 2 5tage 3 0.03 0.01 Surface 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.05 Bottom 0.04 0.01
$wb to ta l" 0.03 0.02 0 05 0.03 0 01 Yellow Stage 1 14.65 4.63 6.37 7.12 8.19 Perch 5tage 2 0.50 0.13 0.39 0.25 Stage 3 1.52 3.13 4.45 8.68 4.45 Surface 15.39 4.59 11.61 24.04 13.91 tottoa 17.95 10.94 10.28 8.35 11.b8
$wbtotal" 16.67 7 76 10.95 1E_?" 17 c9 TOTAL Stage ! 140.89 62.09 131.48 153.30 121.54 5tage 2 82.99 46.47 95.14 38.19 65.70 5tage 3 40.28 12.98 46.26 17.62 29.28 Surface 376.19 127.90 393.58 298.13 2 98.95 Botton 152.13 115.15 152.18 120.08 134.88
$wbtotal** 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 764.16 121.54 272.29 Pc9 11 716 97
- Data presented as re./100 m . Stage 1 = proto-larvae, no rays in fin /finfold. State 2 = seso.
larvae, first ray seen in median fins. Stage 3 = meta larvae, pelvic fin bud is visible.
"This is the subtotal of the larval stages, it is the mean of the surface and bottom densities.
O
. TABLE 2 RESULTS OF ICHTHYO?LANKTON COLLECTIONS 4
AT TOUSSAINT REEF - 1980* g
) 0Aff APRll MY MY MT Just JM Jumt Jumt JULY JUL Y AuG AuG AUG PLAN 9 16 6 14 21 27 10 17 8 19 27 ACll5 25 2 4
1.1 11.4 1.0 8.3 0.3 1.70 teoreld 5tage i 2.81 I Satner stase 2 0.9 8.9 0.8 0.3 25.7 l 1.8 1.9 0.28 Stage 3 9.05 1.7 23.6 19.6 2.6 65.8 4.4 f Surface 0.53 80ttom 4.8 2.3 ! 12.2 1.3 33.9 1.2 4.79 4 5.btstal O.9 11.8 i 1.5 61.5 5.14 freshwater Stage 1 3.8 0.06 ] Stage 2 0.5 0.3 a Drum s 5tage 3 5.74 Surface 2.2 3.6 68.8 j 54.3 4.67 Sotton 5.4 1.1 5.20 ! Subto ta P' 3.8 0.5 1.8 61.5 143.8 278.1 3.8 0.6 45.64 Clatard Shad Stage 1 3.3 143.3 20.3 39.8 70.6 148.8 2.5 0.9 21.26 Sta9e 2 13.8 2.55 Stage 3 10.1 11.0 7.4 4.6 , i 62.4 103.8 223.7 20.5 33.33 Surface 6.6 15.9 78.1 346.9 645.1 1.4 2.9 105.59 Sotton 2 98.3 69.45 SubtotaP' 3.3 157.1 70.2 225.4 4 34.4 10.9 1.5 0.3 1.5 0.15 i Logoerch stage 1 0.02 Carter Stage 2 0.3 1 0.7 0.3 0.08 Stage 3 0.37 i Surface 4.2 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.11 i Botton . 0.25 SubtotaP* 0.3 . 2.5 0.3 0.5 0.04
' Muttled Stage 1 0.04 Sculpta - Stage 2 0.6 0.c9 Stage 3 1.2 0.07 Surface 0.9 0.28 tottom 3.6 0.17 SutrtotaP* 1.8 0.5 J aatchow 5tage 1 0.12 Smelt Stage 2 1.6 0.2 2.0 0.3 'O.20 Stage 3 0.04 ;
Surface 0.5 7.3 0.7 0.61 Sottom 0.32 C SubtotaP
- 0.2 3.6 0.3 I 5pottall. Stage ! 0.03
$niner. Stage 2 0.4 Stage 3 0.06 Surface 0.7 80tton 0.03 SubtotaP* 0.4 0.05 4
Walleye Stage 1 0.7 4 Stage 2 5tage 3 Surface 0.11
- Sottom 1.4 0.05 SubtotaP* 0.7 1-19.9 13.4 2.98 Wtte Sass $t.ge 1 5.4 3.57 5' age 2 2.9 43.4 4.8 0.3 0.70
- 5 age 3 0.72 J Sun.e 2.2 7.2 61.0 107.1 13.77 Bottoa 10.9 1.25 Subtota P
- 5.4 31.6 57.1 3.11 Yellow Perch 5tage 1 25.3 15.1 0.09 Stage 2 1.1 0.11 Stage 3 Id 0.3 1.80 Surfxe 13.8 4.4 5.20 Bottom 36.8 30.1 0.6 0.3 3.30 SubtotaP* 25.3 15.1 2.2 354.1 12.1 0.9 58.79 4
Stage 1 29.7 15.1 152.8 21.4 178.2 TOTAL. 49.6 76.4 192.6 28.2 0.9 28.00 Stage 2 0.6 15.8 4.01
'1.1 12.2 22.It 8.4 4.6 1.9 Stage 3 1.2 50.74 21.2 24.2 87.2 133.4 302.9 86.3 4.3 Surfu e .
3.5 3.4 130.91 Bottom 3.6 38.2 30.1 315.2 - 79.2 421.3 807.1 83.2 277.4 555.0 44.9 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 90.83 SuetotaP* 1. 8 ' O.0 29.7 15.1 169.7 3 N ata presented as no./100m . Stage t
- proto-larvae no rays in fin, finfold. Stage 2
- meso-larvae, first rey seen .
in medten fins. Stage 3
- meta-larvae, peleic fin Imd is etsitie.
This is the suttotal of the larval stages. It is the mean of the surface and bottom densttles. , V. ! t l O I XIII O SECTIort 3.1.2.A.5 FISH Eco AND LMVAE OmitmR t O a
CLEAR TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 211 l i l FISH EGG AND LARVAE ENTRAINMENT AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER . STATION DURING 1980 Environmental Technical Specifications Sec. 3.1.2.a.5 Fish Egg and Larvae Entrainment Prepared by Jeffrey M. Reutter Prepeeed for Toledo Edison Company Toledo, Ohio THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR LAKE ERIE AREA RESEARCH COLUMBUS, OHIO FEBRUARY 1981 O
O 3.1.2.a.5 Fish Egg and Larvae Entrainment Procedures Fish egg and . larvae (ichthyoplankton) entrainment at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station was computed by multiplying the ichthyoplankton concen-tration observed at Station 8 (intake) by the intake volume (Figure 1). Ichthyoplankton densities were determined on 13 occasions between 13 April and 19 August from four 3-minute, oblique (bottom to surface) tows at 3-4 knots made at night on each date (Table 1) with a 0.75 meter diameter heavy-duty oceanographic plankton net (N. 00, 0.75 m mesh) equipped with a calibrated General Oceanics flow meter. Oblique tows were selected as this is the technique required at intakes on Lake Erie by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency end U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. , Night sampling is also required by these agencies to minimize net avoidance by larvae and to more accurately assess densities of species which may cling to the bottom during daylight. Samples were preserved in 5% formalin and returned to the laboratory for sorting and analysis. All specimens were identified and enumerated using the works of Fish (1932), Norden (1961a and b), Nelson and 3 Cole (1975). Densities were presented as number of ichthyoplankters per 100 m of water. From the above estimates it was possible to determine an approximate period of occurrence for each species and a mean density during that period. For example, yellow perch were not observed on 2 May or earlier, or on 10 July or later (Table 1). They were present in samples collected 9 and 23 May, 6 June, and 27 June. Therefore, the period of occurrencer was estimated to have been from 6 May (the midpoint between 2 May and 9 May) to 4 July (the midpoint between 27 June and 10 July) (Table 2). Themeandefsityofyellewperchduringthis period was estimated g to have been 91.00/100 m , computed from the concentration 3 of 51.1/100 m observedon9May,theconcentgationof 369.0/100 m observed on 23May,andthecc.'cegtrationof 124.3/100 m observed on 6 June, the concen-observed on 14 and 2l. June, and the concentrgtfon of tration of 0.0/100 m 1.5/100 m observed on 27 June. It was this concentration, 91.00/100 m , which was multiplied by the volume of water drawn through the plant from 6 May to 4 July. The daily intake volume was computed by multiplying the daily discharge volume by 1.3. The daily intake volumes were then added for all days within the period of occurrence of the species in qsestion to determine the total intake volume during the period. All specimens were vouchered and all data were keypunched and stored at The Ohio State University's Center for Lake Erie Area Research, Columbus, Ohio. Results Ichthyoplankton densities observed at Station 8 (intake) during 1980 indicated that ichthyoplankters were entrained at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station from 7 April to 13 August (Table 1). April 7 was selected as the first day because a mottled sculpin and whitefish were collected on the first sampling date (13 April) and 7 April is half of the first sampling interval (12 days)
ahead of this first collection. August 13 was selected as the last day since it w is midway between 8 August, the last sampling date on which larvae were present, and 19 August, a sampling date on which no ichthyoplankters were collected. The mean larvae density from all night samples at Station 8 (232.36/100 m3 ) was 1.9 times greater tgan the mean density from all day samples collected at Station 8 (121.54/100 m ). Gizzard shad constituted 50 pprcent of the night ichthyoplankton population followed by freshwater drum at' 26 percent, yellow perch at 18 percent,' and whiu. bass at 5 percent (Table 1). Based on the results in Table 1, it is estimated that 40,824,258 larvae were entrained at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1980 (Table 2). Of this total, gizzard shad constituted 52 percent, freshwater drum 26 percent, yellow perch 16 percent, and white bass 4 percent. Analysis Ichthyoplankton entrainment at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1980 was typical for an intake on the south shore of the Western Basin of Lake Erie--it was strongly dominated by gizzard shad. As explained in the ichthyoplankton section of this report (Section 3.1.2.a.4), gizzard shad are increasing. It appears that walleye and yellow perch densities are fluctuating greatly pg from year to year. Walleye constituted 0.02 percent of the 1976 population, 11 U percent of the 1977 population, 22 percent of the 1978 population, 0.2 percent of the 1979 population and 0.4 percent of the 1980 density. Yellow perch constituted 5 percent of the 1974 larvae, 70 percent of the 1975 larvae, 4 percent of the 1976 larvae, 26 percent of the 1977 larvae, 2 percent of the 1978 larvae,11 percent of the 1979 larvae and 6 percent of the 1980 larvae (see Section 3.1.2.a.4 Ichthyoplankton). Entrainment of these species can be expected to fluctuate with their larval densities. i One way to put entrainment losses into perspective is to look at fecundity. Based on an average of 300,000 eggs / female gizzard shad (Hartley and Herdendorf, 1977),the21,277,642 larvae could have been produced by 71 females; based on an average of 331,000 eggs / female walleye (Hartley and Herdendorf,19/7), the 203,627 entrained larvae could have been produced by 1 female; and based on 44,000 eggs / female yellow perch (Hartley and Herdendorf,1977) the 6,713,798 entrained larvn could have been produced by 153 females. In actuality, the above estimates of the number of females required to produce the entrained larvae are quite low since they do not take mortality from egg to larvae into account. If we assume 90-99 percent mortality from eggs to larvae, then the entrained larvae could have been produced by 710 to 7,100 gizzard shad, 10 to 100 walleyes, and 1,530 to 15,300 perch. These values are less than 0.2 percent of the number of perch and walleye captured by Ohio sport fishermen in 1980 (0DNR,1981). l Another way to determine the impact of entrainment losses is to estimate the number of adults the entrained larvae might have produced had they lived. l p) i g v This technique requires some knowledge of the mortality between larval stages and between year classes. Patterson (19/6) has developed such estimates for yellow perch, and, since it is in the same family, the estimates will also be used here for walleye. Several assumptions are involved.
O I. All entrained larvae are killed. II. All larvae lost by entrainment are in their late larval stage. This provides a conservative or high estimate because it does not account for early larval mortality which may range from 83-96 percent (Patterson,1976). III. Yellow perch become vulnerable to commercial capture, and reach sexual maturity at age class III. IV. A one percent survival rate from late larvae to age III adults is assumed. Again, this is conservative since survival rates from late larvae to Y0Y = 4 to 17 percent; YOY to age class I = 12 to 33 percent; age class I to age class II = 38 percent; age class II to age class III = 38 percent (Patterson, 1976, and Brazo, et al., 1975). This trend translates to a survivorship ranging from 0.1 percent to one percent over the period from the late larval stage to age class III. Based on the above assumptions, the 203,627 entrained walleye larvae could have produced from 204 to 2,036 age class III adults and the 6,713,798 entrained yellow perch larvae could have produced from 6,714 to 67,138 age class III adults. The author feels the above impact assessments should be evaluated with great caution since they are based on the number of entrained larvae w91ch can vary greatly from year to year depending on the success of the hatch wi,:-h in turn is dependent upon the size of the brood stock and weather conditions ouring spawning and incubation. In the case of Davis-Besse, the off-shore intake, where larvae densities are lower (see Section 3.1.2.a.4), and the low volume intake due to the cooling tower and closed cooling system, necessitate a very low-level impact on Western Basin fish populations. O i J i O LITERATURE CITED Brazo, D.C., P.I. Tack and C.R. Liston. 1975. Age, growth and fecundity of 4 yellow perch, Perca flavescens, in Lake Michigan near Ludington, Michigan. Proc. Am. Fish. Soc. 104:727. Fish, M.P. 1932. Contributions to the carly life histories of sixty-two species of fishes from Lake Erie and its tributary waters. Bull. U.S. Bur. Fish. 47:293-398. Hartley, S.M. and C.E. Herdendorf. 1977. Spawning ecology of Lake Erie fishes. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. CLEAR Technical Report No. 62. I 10 pp. Nelson, D.D. and R.A. Cole. 1975. The viistribution and abundance of larval fishes along the western shore of Lake Erie at Monroe, Michigan. Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. Institute of Water Research Technical Report No. 32.4. 66 pp.
.. Norden, C.R. 1961a. A key to larval fishes from Lake Erie. University of Southwestern Louisiana, Lafayette. Mimeo Rept. 4 pp.
Norden, C.R. 1961b. The identification of larval perch, Perca flavescens, and , walleye, Stizostedion L vitreum. Copeia 61:282-288. Patterson, R.L. 1976. Analysis of losses in standing crop and fishery yields of yellow perch in the Western Basin of Lake Erie due to entrainment and impingement mortality at the Detroit Edison Monroe Power Plant. Large Lakes Research Station. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Grosse Ile, Michigan. > Ohio Department of Natural Resources. 1981. Status of Ohio's Lake Erie Fisheries: January 1, 1981. Division of Wildlife. 19 pp. 4 4
TABLE 1 ICHTHYOPLANKTON DENSITIES IN THE VICINITY OF THE INTAKE OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION - 1980* L APR A7R MAf MAf Mr JWE JWE Juht JWE JutY JAY Ax A% 3..
$PICIE5 13 25 2 9 23 6 14 21 27 10 17 8 19 Plu Carp Stage 1 1.4 0.3 0.13 Stage 2 1.6 0.12 Stage 3 Subtotal 1.4 1.9 0.25 Im rald stage 1 2.2 0.3 0.19 1hiner Stage 2 0.3 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.16 Stage 3 0.6 0.05 Swetetal 2.5 0.6 1.2 0.3 0.6 0.40 f res hwat er Stage 1 3.9 83.3 673.0 0.7 0.3 58.52 Orum stage 2 3.9 8.1 8.8 0.3 1.62 Stage 3 0.9 1.0 0.3 0.17 Subtotal 7.8 92 . 3 681.8 1.3 0.6 0.3 60.31 Gi n a rd Stage i 105.4 151.2 57.9 265.8 50.2 0.3 2.7 56.42 Shad Stage 2 1.3 249.3 251.0 1 32. 6 34.2 0.3 14.5 0.3 52.58 Stage 3 26.8 33.7 19.2 6.0 0.3 8.0 2.5 7.42 Subtotal 106.7 527.3 342.6 417.6 90.4 0.9 25.2 2.8 116.42 togpert h 5tage i 1.0 0.C8 0:rter
- Stage 2 Stage 3 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.19 subtotal 1.7 0.9 0.9 0.27 Mottled Step 1 0.2 g 0.02 Sc11 pin 5tage 2 5tage 3
$wbtotal 0.2 0.02 Ralebo= 5tage 1 0.3 0.02 feelt Stage 2 Stage 3 0.6 0.05
$dtetal 0.9 0.07 5pottall Stage 1 1.7 0.13 Shiner Stage 2 Stage 3 Subtotal 1.7 0.13 Unidentt f ted Stage 1 5tage 2 0.3 0.02 Stage 3 Suttotal 0.3 0.CZ o
Unidenti fied Stage 1 0.3 0.02 Shtner Stage 2 Stage 3 Suttotal 0.3 0.02 talleye Stage 1 12.7 0.5 1.2 1.11 Stage 2 0.4 0.5 0.07 Stage 3 0.6 0.6 0.09 Swetotal 13.1 1.0 0.6 1.8 1.27 C.ite Sans stage 1 65.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3 5.15 5tage 2 0.7 1.8 8.5 39.7 3.90 5tage 3 0.7 6.7 17.5 0.3 1.94 Suttotal 65.5 1.4 9.1 26.3 43.3 0.3 10.99 bhltef tsh Stage 1 0.2 1.0 0.09 Stage 2 Stage 3 0.8 0.06 Subtotal 0.2 1.0 0.8 0.15 Y;11cm Perch Stage 1 51.1 365.3 0.9 32.10 Perth Stage 2 3.5 4.4 0.61 5tage 3 0.2 119.0 1.5 9.28 Suttotal 51.1 369.0 124.3 1.5 41.99 TOTAL 5tage 1 0.4 1.0 63.9 536.8 257.3 62.4 351.0 725.3 0.6 3.0 0.3 154.00 Stage 2 0.3 5.3 254.7 257.2 150.1 84.3 1.0 14.5 0.7 59.11 5tage 3 0.8 0.2 148.4 40.4 38.4 9.3 1.3 8.9 2.5 19.25 Swbtotal 0.4 0.0 1.0 65.0 542.3 660.4 360.0 539.5 818.9 2.9 26.4 3.5 0.0 2 32.36 3
*04ta presented as sweer of Individuals per 100m and computed from 4 ob'Ja,a tows (bottee to surface) collected at night.
'This is the subtstal of the* larval stages. It is the mean of the surface and bottoe densttles. Stage I = prsto-larvae, no rays in fin /finfeld. Stage 2 = sese-1arvae, first ray seen in median fins. Stage 3 = seta-larvae, pelvic fin bud is visible. V V V TABLE 2 ICHTHYOPLANKTON ENTRAINMENT AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION - 1980 3c LARVAL /100 m NUMBER OF LARVAE ENTRAINED VOLUME OF 3 CONF NCE CON ENCE PERIOD WATER (100 m ) DURING HHICH INTERVAL INTERVAL WITHDRAWN ENTRAINMEgT DURING LOWER UPPER LOWER UPPER SPECIES b d OCCURRED PERIOD MEAN LIMIT LIMIT MEAN ~ LIMIT LIMIT Carp 18 June-4 July 20,041 1.67 -0.35 3.69 33,468 0 73,951 Emerald Shiner 30 May-28 July 74,029 0.86 0.15 1.57 63,665 11,104 116,226 Freshwater Drum 10 June-13 August 82,261 130.67 15.86 245.48 10,749,045 1.304,659 20,193,430 Gizzard Shad 16 May-13 August 112,473 189.18 74.33 304.03 21,277,642 8,360,118 34,195,166
. Logperch Darter 30 May-4 July 43,404 0.85 0.18 1.52 3C,893 7,813 65,974 i Mottled Sculpin 7 April-19 April -17,822 0.20 -0.44 0.84 3,564 0 14,970 Rainbow Smelt 30 May-10 June 16,248 0.97 -1.06 . 3.00 15,761 0 48,744 Spottail Shiner 30 May-10 June- .16,248 1.75 -1.13 4.62 28,434 0 75,066 Unidentified 28 July-13' August 24,234 0.34 -0.74 1.41 8,240 0 34,170 Unidentified Shiner 24 June-4 July 11,760 0.30 -0.64 1.23 3,528 0 14,465 Walleye 6 May-4 July 73,778 2.76 0.39 5.13 203,627 28,773 378,481 White Bass 16 May-13 July 69,930 23.80 3.86 43.74 1,664,334 269,930 3,058,738 Whitefish 7 April-16 May 45,426 0.49 0.07 0.92 22,P.59 3,180 41,792 Yellow Perch 6 May-4 July 73,778 91.00 -15.83 197.83 6,713,798 0 14,595.502 TOTAL LARVAE - 40,824,258 a
Estimated from Table 1. See discussion on page 1. b Estimated by multiplying daily discharge rate by 1.3 and adding all daily estimates for the specified period. cAverage concentration during their period of occurrence. d Values which would have been less than zero were rounded back to zero.
9 26 LAKE ERIE J$ N gg ~ 43 48 i 7 23 6 91
*.* 9 15 -
4' .***....i.
?
PMRSH AREA 24 M. y COOLING : ~ " GI3 OI4 T WER % ,, .. c@
. 91S STATION AREA
[ 1 25 317 P',,,,,,,, a MARSH AREA *I'**.....,
- S 29 FIGURE 1 J.* * . . . ., ~.
,.- 1000
) Feet DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 AQUATIC SAMPLING STATIONS
- O e -
O i O SECTION 3.1.2.A.6 l FISH IMPIMBE6 , O l
.,___._.-.-..___-_-....-.-...-.......-...-.--..-.-._...--.-..i
CLEAR TECHNICAL REPORT N0. 212 FISH IMPINGEMENT AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DURING 1980
- Environmental Technical Specifications Sec. 3.1.2.a.6 Fish Impingement
~
Prepared by Jeffrey M. Reutter Prepared for Toledo Edison Company Toledo, Ohio THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR LAKE ERIE AREA RESEARCH COLUMBUS, OHIO FEBRUARY 1981
,~-o-, e e e-w-wwg+--rgn-sm,---rp---ey e w me m ,- e. - e y_ mm,,e,, ,-ww,,_m_,,ewn.w,,,,-o.m e,- - - - -
3.1.2.a.6 Fish Impingement Procedures Between 1 January and 31 December 1980 the traveling screens at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station were operated 320 times. The date, time, and duration of each screen operation were recorded, even when the impinged fish werenotcollected(Table 1). Collections of impinged fish were mafe by Toledo Edison personnel during 147 of the 320 screen operations by placing a screen having the same mesh size as the traveling screens ( -inch bar mesh) in the sluiceway through which the backwashed material passed. Fish collected in this manner were placed in plastic bags, labeled with the date and time of screen operation, and frozen. The samples were picked up by personnel of The Ohio State University Center for Lake Erie Area Research (CLEAR) weekly. All specimens in all samples were identified (Trautman,1957) and enumerated. All specimens, or a representative number thereof, were also weighed and measured. In addition to the information pertinent to traveling screen operation, the total number and total weight of each species and the length and weight of each individual fish were also recorded. All these data were stored on magnetic tape at The Ohio State University for use with the Statistical Analysis System: SAS (Barr et al,., 1976) on an AMDAHL 370 computer. Since the time and duration of every screen operation was known, it was possible to determine the number of hours represented by each collection. From this a rate, fish impinged / hour, was developed and used to estimate impingement on days when samples were not collected. Results A total of 9,056 fish representing 23 taxa was estimated to have been impinged on the traveling screens at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station from 1 January through 31 December 1980 (Table 2). Goldfish was the dominant species impinged representing 47.2 percent of the total. Only 4 other species represented more than 2 percent of the total: gizzard shad, 28.7 percent; yellow perch, 8.3 percent; emerald shiner, 3.8 percent; and white crappie, 3.2 percent. l Impingement was also computed on a monthly basis (Table 3). Over half (51 percent) of the annual impingement occurred during January, and this January l total (4,626) was composed primarily of goldfish (53.5 percent) and gizzard shad (37.0 percent). Impingement from June through November was extremely low (216 fish), representing only 2.4 percent of the total. i Analysis With the exception of goldfish, black and brown bullheads, and black and white crappies, the impinged fish occurred in relative numbers which were not O l
D (V unusual for populations in Lake Erie at Locust Point. These 5 species occurred in relative proportions well above that of the open lake. This indicates probable use of the intake canal as a permanent residence for these species. Furthermore, due to the small sizes of these fish (they were young-of-the-year and yearlings) and results from previous trawling efforts (Reutter and Herdendorf,1975), it appears that these species are also spawning within the intake canal and, consequently, these losses should not be considered as a
- negative impact on lake populations of these species.
Impingement losses at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station during 1980 were extremely low even when compared to other plants on the Western Basin with lower generating capacities (Reutter et al.,1978). Tables 4 and 5 present sport and commercial fish landings fromThelhio waters of Lake Erie. Although the fish impinged at Davis-Besse were primarily young-of-the-year and yearlings (mean length,86 mm) and, consequently, much more abundant than the adults taken by commercial and sport fishermen, the total number impinged (including gizzard shad and goldfish which are not taken by sport fishermen) was only 0.06 percent of the number harvested by Ohio sport fishermen in 1980. This figure becomes even less significant when one realizes that the Ohio sport catch was only 52.1 percent of the Ohio 1980 commercial and sport catch from Lake Erie. The above comparisons make it obvious that impingement losses at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station have an insignificant effect on Lake Erie fish stocks and further justification of this is unnecessary. However, it should be noted that although by number impingement losses were 0.06 percent of the Ohio g) $ sport fishing harvest, by weight impingement was less than 0.002 percent of the 'd' Ohio sport harvest from 1980. Furthermore, based on the estimates of Patterson (1976) (See Section 3.1.2.a.5) the impingement of 750 young-of-the-year yellow perch, a species which is very important to sport and commercial fishermen, will result in the loss of only 13-42 adults which is from 0.0001 to 0.0004 percent of the number captured by Ohio sport fishermen in 1980. It should also be noted that no walleye were impinged and that impingement results were also extremely low in 1978 (6,607 fish) and 1979 (4,385 fish) (Reutter 1980). O,
LITERATURE CITED Barr, J., J.H. Goodnight, J.P. Sall, and T. Helwig. 1976. A user's guide to SAS
- 76. SAS Institute, Inc., Raleigh, N.C. 329 p.
Muth, K.M. 1980. Commercial fish production from Ltke Erie, 1979. USFWS Special Report for Annual Meeting Lake Erie Committee Great Lakes Fishing Commission Ann Arbor Michigan. March 18-19, 1980. 22 pp. Ohio Department of Natural Resources 1981. Status of Ohio's Lake Erie Fisheries. Ohio Division of Wildlife Publication. 19 pp. Patters'on, R.L. 1976. Analysis of losses in standing crop and fishery yields of yellow perch in the western basin of Lake Erie due to entrainment and impingement mortality at the Detroit Edison Monroe Power Plant, Large Lakes Research Station. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Grosse Ile, Mich. , Reutter, J.M.1980. Fish impingement at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station During 1979. The Ohio State University. CLEAR Tech. Rept. No. 165. 16 pp. Reutter, J.M. and C.E. Herdendorf. 1975. Pre-operational aquatic ecology monitoring program for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1. Toledo Edison Co. Contract No. 1780. 123 p. Reutter, J.M., C.E. Herdendorf and G.W. Sturm. 1978. Impingement and entrain-mant studies at the Bay Shore Power Station, Toledo Edison Company. The Ohio State University CLEAR Tech. Rept. No. 78b. Trautman, M.B. 1957. The Fishes of Ohio. The Ohio State University Press, Columbus, Ohio. 683 p. 9
h V TABLE 1 TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1980 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION- FISH HOURS SINCE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN DATE ON OFF YES/NO OPERATION 1 January 21.00 22.00 Y 22.00 2 January 18.30 20.00 N 22.00 3 January 22.15 22.45 Y 26.45 4 January 20.00 21.00 N 22.55 5 January 20.50 21.50 Y 24.50 6 January -18.25 19.25 N 21.75 7 January 18.05 19.05 Y 23.80
- 8. January 21.20 22.20 N 27.15 9 January 18.10 19.10 N 20.90 10 January 21.30 22.30 N 27.20 11 January. 17.30 18.30 N 20.00 21.45 22.45 N 148.15 q 17 January 18.90 Q 18 January 19 January 16.30 19.40 17.35 20.20 Y
Y 26.85 20 January 17.10 17.45 N 21.25 21 January 19.15 19.45 Y 26.00 22 January- '22.50 23.25 N 27.80 23 January 19.15 19.50 Y 20.25 24 January 19.45 20.15 N 24.65 25 January 16.35 17.05 Y 20.90 26 January 20.09 21.09 N 28.04 27 January 21.55 22.55 N 25.46 28 January 22.02 23.02 N 24.47 29 January 21.33 22.33 Y' 23.31 30 January 21.09 22.09 N 23.76 31 January- 21.40 22.40 Y 24.31 11 February 21.10 22.17 N 23.77 2 February 21.50 22.30 Y 24.13 3 February 19.30 20.35 11 22.05 4 February 16.30 18.05 N 21.70 5 February 20.30 22.18. N 28.13 6 February 16.28 17.59 N 19.41
-7 February. 16.05 18.30 N 24.71 8 February. 17.15 20.03 Y 25.73 9 February 16.20 17.20 N 21.17 10 February 16.35 17.40 Y 24.20' 11 February '17.50 18.50 N 25.10 7(. c) 12 February 18.15 19.15 Y 20.65 13 February 17.00 18.00 N 2? eTS i- 14 February 17.05 18.05 Y 24.05 TABLE 1 CONT.
TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1980 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN DATE ON OFF YES/N0 OPERATION 15 February 16.00 17.00 N 22.95 16 February 21.13 22.14 Y 29.14 17 February 20.30 21.30 N 23.16 18 February 16.29 17.29 Y 19.99 19 February 22.36 23.37 N 30.08 20 February 22.36 23.37 Y 24.00 22 February 16.30 17.00 Y 41.63 24 February 22.30 23.00 N 54.00 26 February 19.45 20.15 Y 45.15 28 February 16.38 17.13 N 44.98 29 February 18.40 19.10 N 25.97 1 March 22.30 23.30 Y 28.20 2 March 20.50 21.50 N 22.20 3 March 20.55 21.55 Y 24.05 4 March 17.45 18.45 N 20.90 5 March 21.35 22.35 Y 27.90 6 March 22.15 23.15 N 24.80 7 March 21.20 22.20 N 23.05 8 March 16.36 17.06 Y 18.86 9 March 16.25 16.51 N 23.45 10 March 16.54 17.24 Y 24.73 11 March 16.24 16.54 N 23.30 12 March 16.37 17.68 Y 25.14
- 13 March 16.20 17.50 N 23.82 15 March 16.22 17.22 N 47.72 16 March 17.24 18.24 N 25.02 17 March 18.00 18.30 N 24.06 18 March 21.00 21.30 Y 27.00 19 March 18.00 18.30 N 21.00
;h 20.20 20.50 Y 26.20
- t. J. 21.20 21.50 Y 49.00 e., sarch 21.00 21.30 N 23.80
" 23.00 24 March 20.00 20.30 25 March 20.00 20.30 N 24.00 j
26 March 20.20 20.50 Y 24.20 27 March 20.00 20.30 N 23.80 28 March 18.50 19.20 Y 22.90 29 Mi.rch 20.53 21.30 N 26.10 31 Mirch 17.15 17.45 Y 44.15 O TABLE 1 CONT. TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1980 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OFF YES/N0 OPERATION 2 April 16.10 16.40 N 46.95 5 April 20.40 21.10 N 76.70 6 April 21.20 21.50 N 24.40 9 April 22.15 22.45 N 72.95 10 April 20.27 21.27 Y 22.82 11 April 18.53 19.23 N 21.96 12 April 20.30 21.30 N 26.07 13 April 13.00 13.45 Y 16.15 16 April 20.45 21.15 Y 79.70 17 April 18.25 18.55 N 21.40 18 April 21.15 22.05 Y 27.50 19 April 21.05 22.30 N 24.25 20 April 21.30 22.00 Y 23.70 , O 22 April 20.47 21.20 N 47.20
-h 23 April 24 April 21.26 20.43 21.58 21.15 N
Y 24.38 23.57 25 April 22.07 22.38 N 25.23 26 April 20.44 21.15 Y 22.77 27 April 20.22 20.52 N 23.37 28 April 22.43 23.15 Y 26.63 29 April 21.07 22.40 N 23.25 30 April 21.55 22.05 Y 23.65 l 1 May 22.50 23.20 N 25.15 ! 2 May 21.30 23.00 Y 23.00 l 3 May. 21.55 23.25 N 24.25 l 4 May 22.45 0.15 Y 0.90 5 May 15.30 16.05 Y 39.93 l 8 May 5.30 6.20 Y- 62.15 0 #1ay 16.24 17.00 N .14.80 10 May 20.45 21.30 Y 28.30 l 11 May 16.11 17.24 N 19.94 12 May- 20.40 21.30 Y 28.06 l 13 May 18.00 18.35 N 21.05 14 May 21.37 22.07- Y 27.72 15 May- 13.20- 13.50 N 15.43 16 May 20.20 20.55 Y 31.05 17 May- 20.30 21.00 N 24.45 A 18 May 20.25 20.55 Y 23.55 (~f 20 May 22 May; 20.15 18.35 21.00 19.05 N Y 48.45 46.05
TABLE 1 CONT. TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FRCM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1980
=
TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN DATE ON OFF YES/N0 OPERATION 24 May 18.15 18.45 N 47.40 25 May 17.55 18.25 N 23.80 26 May 18.30 19.00 N 24.75 27 May 19.10 19.40 Y 24.40 28 May 17.30 18.04 N 22.64 29 May 17.00 17.32 Y 23.28 30 May 18.40 19.10 N 25.78 31 May 20.25 20.55 Y 25.45 1 June 21.05 21.35 N 24.80 2 June 17.45 18.45 Y 21.10 3 June 21.45 22.15 N 27.70 4 June 20.53 21.23 Y 23.08 5 June 17.40 18.50 N 21.27 6 June 16.52 17.27 N 22.77 7 June 17.30 18.03 N 24.76 9 June 18.05 18.30 N 48.27 10 June 15.40 16.10 Y 21.80 11 June 21.00 21.30 N 29.20 12 June 15.50 16.20 Y 18.90 14 June 16.00 16.30 N 48.10 15 June 18.40 19.10 N 26.80 16 June 15.40 16.10 Y 21.00 17 June 20.51 21.30 N 29.20 18 June 12.00 13.00 N 15.70 20 June 20.30 20.10 Y 55.10 22 June 18.40 19.00 N 46.90 22 Jure 21.05 21.45 Y 2.45 23 June 15.45 16.15 N 18.70 23 June 20.30 21.00 N 4.85 24 June 14.41 15.14 Y 18.14 25 June 16.49 17.20 N 26.06 26 June 17.22 17.52 Y 24.32 27 June 18.25 18.55 N 25.03 28 June 18.00 18.30 Y 23.75 29 June 17.50 18.30 N 24.00 30 June 18.05 18.35 Y 24.05 0 TABLE 1 CONT. O V TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1980 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OFF YES/N0 OPERATION 1 July ', 17.30 18.00 N 23.65 3 July 16.25 16.55 N 46.55 4 July 3.00 3.30 Y 10.75 6 July 17.45 18.20 Y 62.90 7 July 18.55 19.25 N 25.05 8 July 18.18 18.48 Y 23.23 9 July 17.34 18.05 N 23.57 10 July 18.32 19.02 Y 24.97 11 July 18.05 18.45 N 23.43 12 July 19.20 19.50 Y 25.05 13 July 16.35 17.18 N 21.68 44 July 17.15 18.40 Y 25.22 15 July 21.20 21.50 Y 27.10 p) t, 16 July
.17 July 18 July 18.50 18.40 19.20 19.10 N
Y 21.70 23.90 23.02 17.42 18.12 N 19 July 19.00 19.30 Y 25.18 20 July '18.27 18.57 N 23.27 21 July 18.05 18.35 N 23.78 22 July 18.15 18.45 N 24.10 23 July 20.20 20.50 Y 26.05
'24 July 20.,0 21.10 N 24.60 25 July 20.33 21.05 Y 23.95 26 July 14.30 15.00 N 17.95 27 July 13.35 14.05 Y 23.05 28 July 13.30 14.15 N 24.10 2 August _18.55 19.25 N 125.10 3 August 18.20 18.50 Y 23.25 4 August 17.00 17.30 N 22.80 5 August 18.15 18.45 N 25.15 6 August 20.25 20.55 Y 26.10 7 August 18.45 19.15 N 22.60 8 August 18.55 19.25 Y 24.10 9 August 18.45 19.15 N 23.90 10 August 18.15 18.45 Y 23.30 11 August 18.25 19.05 N 24.60 12 August- 20.40 21.10 Y 26.05 ,, 13 August 16.00 16.30 N 19.20 14 August 19.00 19.30 Y 27.00
('v') 15 August 15.30 16.30 .N 21.00 TABLE 1 CONT. TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1980 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN DATE ON OFF YES/NO OPERATION 16 August 17.05 17.35 Y 25.05 17 August 16.45 17.15 N 23.80 18 August 16.45 '7.15 Y 24.00 19 August 17.00 D . 79 N 24.15 20 August 16.40 17.10 Y 23.80 21 August 16.30 17.00 N 23.90 22 August 17.00 17.30 Y 24.30 23 August 16.45 17.15 N 23.85 24 August 17.15 17.45 Y 24.30 25 August 20.00 20.30 N 26.85 26 August 16.55 17.25 Y 20.95 27 August 17.00 17.30 N 24.05 28 August 16.50 17.20 N 23.90 29 August 17.40 18.20 N 25.00 30 August 19.30 20.00 N 25.80 31 August 19.45 20.15 Y 24.15 1 September 20.05 20.3E Y 24.20 2 September 19.30 20.vJ N 23.65 3 September 19.45 20.15 Y 24.15 4 September 20.30 21.25 N 25.10 5 September 16.45 17.15 N 19.90 6 September 12.40 13.10 Y 19.95 7 September 13.07 13.37 N 24.27 8 September 19.15 19.45 Y 30.08 9 September 21.15 22.00 Y 26.55 10 September 16.28 16.58 N 18.58 11 September 16.50 17.20 Y 24.62 12 September 16.20 16.50 N 23.30 13 September 16.15 16.45 Y 23.95 14 September 18.15 18.45 Y 26.00 17 September 21.05 21.35 Y 74.90 18 September 16.20 16.55 N 19.20 19 September 16.35 17.08 N 24.53 20 September 18.18 18.48 N 25.40 l 21 September 16.25 17.05 N 22.57 23 September 0.40 1.10 N 32.05 23 September 17.10 17.55 Y 16.45 24 September 18.48 19.18 N 25.63 26 September 17.26 17.56 N 46.38 27 September 18.18 18.48 N 24.92 28 September 16.38 17.41 N 22.93 29 September 16.35 17.05 Y 23.64 y TABLE 1 CONT. TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-E2SSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1980 I TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE
. -DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN l ON OFF YES/N0 OPERATION 2 October 20.20 20.50 Y 75.45 5 October 18.00 18.30 N 69.80
-6 October 21.55 22.25 Y 27.95 7 October 16.49 17.50 N 19.25 8 October 20.08 20.38 Y 26.88 9 October 16.48 17.41 N 21.03 10 October 16.43 17.15 Y 23.74
'll October 19.07 20.24 -N 27.09 12 October 16.55 17.39 N 21.15 13 October 17.13 17.57 N- 24.18 14 October 16.34 17.08 Y 23.51 15 October 17.03 17.43 N 24.35 16 Octot,er 16.34 17.10 N 23.67
' .f3 .24.00 16.40 17.10 (U )- 17' October 18 October 18.00 18.45 Y Y 25.35 19 October 18.55 19.35 N 24.90 25 October 23.07 23.37 Y 148.02 26 October 22.34 23.04 N- 23.67
-27 October 22.20 22.50 Y 23.46 28 October 21.40 22.10 N 23.C0 29 October. 22.42 23.12 Y 25.03 30 October 16.57 18.29 N 19.17 31 October 22.45 23.18 Y 28.89 1 November 19.55 20.25 N 21.07 2 November 20.00 20.30 Y 24.05 3 November 20.30 21.00 N 24.70 4 November, 18.00 18.30 Y ~21.30
- 6. November 0.45 1.15 Y 30.85 6 November- 21.30 22.00 Y -20.85 i 7. November 16.30 17.00 N 19.00 22.20 29.20
~
avember 21.35 Y-9 November. 20.10 20.40 N 22.20 10 November 17.'40 18.15 Y 21.75 23.00 28.85 11' November. 21.30 N
-12 November' 19.28 20.17- Y- 21.17 13 November ,18.35 19.20 N .23.03 14 November 20.00 20.30 Y 25.10 -f%j 15 November 16.25 16.55 N 20.25 v 16 November 16.55 17.25 Y 24.70 17 November- 15.42- 17.12 N 23.87
TABLE 1 CONT. TRAVELING SCREEN OPERATION AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER 1980 TIME OF SCREEN OPERATION FISH HOURS SINCE DATE COLLECTION LAST SCREEN ON OF YES/NO OPERATION 18 November 16.41 17.11 Y 23.99 19 November 16.39 17.09 Y 23.98 20 November 16.23 16.53 N 23.44 21 November 16.46 17.16 N 24.63 22 November 22.24 22.54 N 29.38 23 November 21.12 21.42 N 22.88 24 November 21.15 21.45 Y 24.03 25 November 18.44 19.14 N 21.69 26 November 20.45 21.15 Y 26.01 27 November 16.22 16.52 Y 19.37 28 November 16.27 16.57 N 24.05 29 November 16.55 17.25 Y 24.68 30 November 18.20 18.50 N 25.25 1 December 19.30 20.00 Y 25.50 2 December 19.38 20.08 N 24.08 3 December 20.12 20.42 Y 24.34 4 December 22.15 22.45 N 26.03 5 December 21.40 22.10 Y 23.65 7 December 20.35 21.35 N 47.25 8 December 20.55 21.25 N 23.90 9 December 20.35 21.20 Y 23.95 10 December 20.55 21.25 N 24.05 11 December 21.10 21.40 Y 24.15 12 December 21.25 21.55 N 24.15 13 December 20.18 20.55 Y 23.00 14 December 16.50 17.20 Y 20.65 15 December 20.45 21.20 Y 28.00 16 December 16.33 17.27 Y 20.07 17 December 17.18 17.52 Y 24.25 18 December 16.15 16.50 N 22.98 19 December 16.27 17.12 N 24.62 20 December 16.35 17.05 Y 23.93 21 December 17.30 18.00 N 24.95 22 December 16.45 17.15 Y 23.15 23 December 16.30 17.00 N 23.85 24 December 16.32 17.02 Y 24.02 25 December 16.33 17.03 N 24.01 26 December 16.34 17.04 N 24.01 27 December 20.40 21.10 Y 28.06 28 December 20.00 20.30 Y 23.20 29 December 20.15 20.45 Y 24.15 30 December 20.35 21.20 Y 24.75 31 December 19.55 20.40 Y 23.20 n m g TABLE 2 FISH SPECIES IMPINGE 0 AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAP POWER STATION 1 JANUARY THROUGH 31 DECEMBER 1980 NUMBER IMPINGED WEIGHT (grams) LENGTH (nun) 95% Confidence 95% Confidence 95% Confidence SPECIES ESTIMATE Interval MEAN Interval MEAN Lower Upper Lower -Upper Lower Upper Bound' Bound Bound Bound Bound Bound Alewife 31 16 59 9 -13 31 96 86 105 Black Crappie 185 106 325 10 -19 40 83 78 88 .L Bluegill 21 12 36 7 -25 40 69 55 83 ? Brown Bullhead 13 7 26 5 0 10 74 73 74 Carp 2 1 3 922 343 Emerald Shiner 343 182 645 1 0 1 55 54 56 Freshwater Drum 180 121 266 10 5 15 89 87 92 Gizzard Shad 2,603 1,905 3,559 9 5 12 92 92 93 Goldfish 4,278 2,979 6,144 12 8 15 88 87 89 Green Sunfish 3 1 8 3 -26 32 51 30 71 Logperch Darter 61 42 89 2 -4 8 62 59 66 Mudminnow 28 15 53 4 -2 10 70 68 73 Pumpkinseed Sunfish 4 1 13 14 100 Rainbow Smelt 114 65 202 1 -1 3 63 61 55 Spottail Shiner 12 5 30 2 -6 10 66 60 '? i Stonecat Madtom 2 0 6 1 57 Troutperch 54 34 85 4 -1 9 77 74 80 Unidentified Bullhead 3 1 13 195 230 Unidentified Crappie 5 2 15 11 95 Unidentified Sunfish 24 10 57 1 0 2 33 31 36
TABLE 2 CONT. FISH SPECIES IMPINGED AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION 1 JANUARY THROUGH 31 DECEMBER 1980 NUMBER IMPINGED WEIGHT (grams) LENGTH (mm) 95% Confidence 95% Confidence 95% Confidence SPECIE 5 ESTIMATE Interval MEAN Interval MEAN Interval Lower l Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Bound Bound Bound Bound Bound Bound White Bass 45 23 86 7 -11 25 83 77 89 , White Crappie 295 162 537 6 0 12 75 74 77 g Yellow Perch 750 434 1,294 5 1 9 78 77 80 TOTAL 9,056 7,402 11,075 9 7 11 86 85 86
- Confidence intervals could not be computed when only one representative of a given species was collected.
O O O
Q p (~)')
%. 0 Q TABLE 3 A
SUMMARY
OF K)NTHLY FISH IMPINGEMENT AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION 1 JANUARY THROUGH 31 DECEMBER 1980 NUMBER IMPINGED WEIGHT (grams) :.ENGHT (m) 95% Confidence I 95% Confidence 95% Confidence MONTH ESTIMATE MEAN MEAN Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Bound Bound Bound Bound Bound Bound January 4,626 3,378 6,335 9 6 11 84 83 85 February 1,392 722 2,683 11 5 18 94 93 95 y March 784 543 1,133 9 2 16 80 79 81 April 522 321 850 4 -5 12 68 67 70 May 656 356 1,212 6, 1 11 79 78 80 June 88 52 149 25 -20 71 102 97 107 July 52 21 131 5 -15 25 54 43 65 August 10 5 22 12 108 September 2 1 3 922 343 October 9 5 16 11 8 13 106 105 107 November 55 38 80 14 1 28 99 97 102 December 860 641 1,153 12 9 15 96 96 97 TOTAL 9,056 7,402 11,075 9 7 11 86 85 86
- Confidence intervals could not be computed when only one fish was collected during a given month.
TABLE 4 ESTIMATED 1980 SPu2T AND COMMERCIAL FISH a HARVEST FROM THE OHIO WATERS OF LAKE ERIE SPORT HARVEST COMMERCIAL HARVEST TOTAL HARVEST SPECIES No. of We19ht No. of Weight No. of Weight Individuals (Kilograms) Individuals (Kilograms) Individuals (Kilograms) D Yellow Perch 11,806,000 1,370,626 10,442,000 1,211,272 22,248,000 2,581,898 e 2,228,000 1,820,540 Walleye 2,228,000 1,820,540 O 0 b 3,909,000 863,962 White Bass 729,000 161,170 3,180,000 702,792 b 595,194 Freshwater Drum 393,000 196,128 800,000 399,066 1,193 3000 b 864,000 206,570 Channel Catfish .408,000 97,610 456,000 108,960 h' 8 42,000 12,258 Smallmouth Bass 42,000 12,258 0 0 c c d Others --- 947,498 --- 947,498 TOTAL 15,606,000 d 3,658,332 d --- 3,369,588 --- 7,027,920 a 0DNR (1981) b Estimate based on mean weight of sport fish c 0ata not available d Excludes "Others" caught by sport fishermen
' Closed to commercial fishing O O O
O
;y (
t.) (,)
.iABLE 5 COMMERCIAL FISH LANDINGS FROM THE OHIO WATERS OF LAKE ERIE: 1974-1980*
SPECIES 1974' 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
"" .10 14,528 14,982 13,620 15,890 16,344 14,982 13,166 Bullhead 12,258 14,074 19,522 28,148 33,142 25,424 21,338 Carp- 1,284,366- 1,265,298 1,196,290 1,249,862 701,884 899,374 609,722 136,200 117,586 101,242 116,224 93,070 108,960 108,960 Channel Catfish.
Freshwater Drum 307,812 340,500 432,208 365,470 539,806 577,034 399,066 Gizzard Shad ** ** 274,216 .228,816 706,878 888,478 221,098 Goldfi:h 29,510 23,608 60,836 250,154 343,678 89,438 37,682 y;
** ** 57,658 46,762 46,762 37,682 32,234 Guillback Rainbow Smelt 2,270 4,086 15,890 454 6,356 <454 <454 Sucker- 39,952 24,516 28,602 14,982 15,436 19,068 11,804 White 8 ass ,
1,314,330 760,450 680,546 501,670 765,898 881,668 702,792
. Yellow Perch 797,678 675,552 652,852 1,056,004 958,394 1,215,812 1,211,272
't I TOTAL 3,934,364 3,241,106 3,533,482 3,874,436 4,227,648 4,758,374 3,369,588
- *0hio Department of Natural Resources (1981). Data presented in kilograms.
- ** Data not available.
F F i I, ! r I i t
/ i i
t I L l ! I f I l l l ! i l l j. I I l i i .I I r XV i l ,
}
SECTIm 3.1.2.s.1 l l: BIRD CCRISIMS l f I h I s E ( .I l-i 4 II l i. p.
ANNUAL REPORT DAVIS-BESSE BIRD HAZARD MONITORING CONTRACT JANUARY 1981 David A. Lindsey and William B. Jackson Center for Environmental Research and Services At the Davis-Besse nuclear power station site, bird mortality was monitored for the eighth consecutive spring and the ninth con-secutive fall migration seasons. The surveys consisted of almost daily, early-morning or late-evening site visits in the spring between mid-April and the end of May and in the fall between early ) September and late October. The procedure on site included examin-ation of roof areas and the grounds around the reactor and turbine buildings (Unit I structures) and the base of the cooling tower. Inspection Criteria Unrestricted routine. inspections were possible around the cool-ing tower, while, due to security restrictions, the roof areas and the grounds of the Unit I structures were monitored only oc week-ends. Areas under major guy wires, transmission lines, and the meteorological-micro-wave tower also were inspected on weekends. All weekend inspections were contingent upon guard escort avail-ability. All surveys included the recording of current environ- . mental conditions, numbers and species of bird mortalities, and their locations. All binis found dead were collected and frozen for later.necropsy. Bird censuses were conducted on the site three times during each migratory season. D 0
2 New regulations further restrict the inspection of roofs of Unit I structures, as personnel are now prohibited from searching roofs numbered three and four while the reactor is "on line", be-cause emergency steam release hatches could burst open in the event of a large pressure release. Since approximately 80% of the previous bird mortalities associated with these structures have occurred on roofs three and four, the restricted access could significantly bias Unit I structure mortality figures. Portions of these roofs are hid-den from view from adjacEut roofs, so Complete visual surveys are not even possible. Spring Mortality During the 1980 spring collecting period the power plant was not operating; and the base of the cooling tower was drained, making pick-up of the carcasses at the location where they originally fell possi-ble. Bird mortalities were monitored following standard pr ocedures, on nearly a daily basis, from April 20 through May 31. Of only 26 birds found this season, 24 were found at the cooling tower (Fig. 1). At this structure 13 birds (54%) were retrieved from the southeast sector, six (25%) from the northeast, and five (21%) from the north-west sector. The carcasses were identified and classified into loca-I tion and necropsy categories (Table I). Mortality dates, numbers, and weather variables were then categorized (Table II). Only two birds were found at the Unit I structures, and no birds were found under guy wires, transmission lines, or at the meteorological-micro-wave tower. O
3 g The last two spring collecting periods have yielded mortalities that are well below the mean spring mortality of 44. During both periods the reactor was not "on-line", and the base of the cooling tower was drained. Factors that might contribute to increased mor-tality when the plant is "on-line" include the presence of water in the cooling tower base and wind-blown water spray that drops from the water dispersion slats to the cooling tower base. These factors increase the probability of mortality by almost ensuring that a stunned bird, dropping into- the cooling tower base, would die of exposure or drowning. Fall Mortality During the 1980 fall collecting period the power station was "on-line" the last three weeks of the fall migratory period. How-(^'s ever, even when the station was not "on-line", the base of the tower was filled, and water spray dropped from the south section of the cooling tower. Sloshing water in the tower base prevented deter-mination of specific drop locations, and an unknown number of birds may-have drifted away through water outlets. On several occasions birds were seen drifting in the interior of the tower and could not be recovered. Bird mortalities were' monitored on nearly a daily basis from September 12. through October 25~. Of the 112 birds found this sea-son,101 were found at the cooling' tower (Fig. 2). At this structure 49 birds- (48%) were retrieved from the southeast sector, 31 (31%) from the northeast,:12 (12%) from the northwest, and nine (9%) from the southwest. sector. The carcasses were' identified and classified
,rx .
into location and necropsy categories (Table IV). Mortality dates, () numbers,~ and weather variables were then categorized -(Table Y).
4 Only eight birds were found at the Unit I structures, and no birds were found under guy wires or the meteorological-microwave e tower. However, three birds were found under switchyard trans-mission lines; and two of these, an American Coot and Great Blue Heron, are rather large birds. These are the first recorded mor-talities of these species in association with Davis-Besse switchyard transmission lines. While large-species mortality at Davis-Besse is undoubtedly rare, transmission lines and guy wires can be hazardous to large species during the extremely foggy or low visibility situa-tions that frequently occur during the spring and fall along the lakeshore. Necropsy Examinations Necropsy examinations included the determination of the extent of hematoma under the skull, presence or absence of bone fractures, bill damage, " broken" necks, and crushed skulls. Birds collected during the fall migration period were aged by determination of skull ossification. As in the past, the most frequent injuries were to the head and neck, indicating occurrence of frontal impact (Table X). Weather Patterns and Mortalities Weather conditions monitored at the Davis-Besse site during the spring and fall seasons included: cloud cover condition, wind dir-ection and speed, and synoptic weather condition. On clear or partly cloudy days the top of the cooling tower always was visible; however, on totally overcast days the top of the tower was frequently obscured by a low cloud ceiling. Previously winds and synoptic weather condi-tions have been related to migrational patterns, and mortality trends have been shown.
5 CN Heavy spring migration usually occurs in association with low O pressure systems and southerly wind flow; heavy fall migration, with high pressure systems and northerly wind flow. Significant mortality usually occurs when these conditions are associated with adverse weather conditions (i.e., high winds and low visibility). This fall's highest mortality (n = 40), which is the third larg-est kill in a single day at the site occurred on the evening of October 8 and morning of October 9 when favorable migration condi-tions with clear skies and moderate northerly winds prevailed. Under such conditions mortality usually is negligible. One plausable ex-planation can be' determined from monitored conditions. For several days previous to October 9 the wind flow was from the south; and the sudden change of wind direction, from southerly to northerly flow, allowed for the occurrence of a large southward migration across Lake Erie. The number of mortalities, unusually high under these conditions, could indicate the extent of this migrational surge, possibly due to a greater number of birds waiting for favorable wind and pressure conditions to move across the lake. Observations by. Milton B. Trautman (personal communication) during his residence on South Bass Island indicated the occurrence of high mortality at the: Perry Monument under similar weather con-
.ditions with a large bird migration across the lake. It is also interesting to note that 85% of the mortalities were kinglets and that 98% of all mortalities were picked up in one quadrant of the tower, the southeast. ).
v
6 As in the past, occurrences of high fall mortality (eight on more birds found around the cooling tower base) can be correlated 9 with low pressure systems having moderate to strong northerly wind flow and cloudy to total overcast cloud cover conditions. Analysis of this fall's data also shows that 75% of high mortality occur-rences were correlated with a rapid change in wind flow, from a south or southwest to a north or northeast direction. Loss of Mortalities Several incidents of predation upon bird carcasses lying outside the base of the cooling tower were recorded. Previously, individual scavengers or their signs have been observed on site; those most frequently involved were skunks or raccoons. This year red foxes were seen on every bird census, and possibly this opportunistic predator also played a role in bird losses. It is difficult to assess the overall impact of scavenger pre-dation, as birds may have been removed from around the base of the cooling town" and eaten off-site. Recognition of on-site predation also is difficult, because only a few remains of the carcass may be evident (i.e., feathers or tarsi). Several predation studies con-ducted at .he cooling tower this year indicated that 19 (or 53%) of the scavenged birds were eaten off-site and 17 (or 47%) were eaten on-site; the greatest scavenger pressure occurred on the west side of the tower. While previous predation studies had indicated the greatest predation pressure occurred on the north side of the tower, recent maintenance work in the northeast quadrant could have forced predators from this area. The increased scavenging of birds from O i
7 the west side of the tower could be reflected by the low estimates of mortality for this side of the tower this year. A summary of the scavenger predation investigations is pre-sented in Table IX. Recent investigations estimate the predation rate to be approximately 20%. The "true" predation rate is prob-ably lower, as scavengers undoubtedly were conditioned to the pre-sence of abundant prey as a food source around the tower base dur-ing these investigations. Previous investigations estimated the predation rate to be as high as 70%; however, it is believed that this estimate was-biased by sample size and uncompleted fence con-struction around the cooling tower. Other Mortalities Bird mortalities also may occur within the cooling tower itself. Many incidents of roosting and several of nesting by pigeons, starlings, . Q' O and grac<les have been recorded. One of the spring mortalities re-sulted from the' fall of a' young grackle from a nest within the tower. When the water dispersion slats were cleaned by maintenance crews, skeletal remains of several birds were found. These were determined to be nesting and not migrational mortalities. While the cooling tower was being constructed, survey personnel observed birds enter-ing the structure from above. Bird Censuses Periodic censuses of bird populations at the Davis-Besse site and Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge were continued using previously established routes. These consisted of perimeter surveys of the Davis-Besse neclear power station marshes in spring during April and
8 May (Table III) and in fall during September, October, and November (Table VI). Summer breeding bird censuses consisted of perimeter surveys of the Davis-Besse and Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge marshes in mid-June (Table VII and VIII). Although the 1980 censuses yielded greater numbers of birds migrating through and nesting in these lake-shore marshes, the numbers of species recorded are not significantly different f rom previous years. The numbers of birds cbserved might be influenced by differential familiarity with these marsh areas by census personnel or specific environmental conditions at the time of the survey. Conclusions The impact of the cooling tower and other structures at the Davis-Besse site on migrant birds is minimal. Even if some mortalities are missed because of entrapment within the cooling tower, limited roof access or circulation within the water-filled tower basin, or are re-moved be scavengers, the number of birds killed is virtually always less than thc 100 birds per night indicated in the technical specifi-cations and usually little more than that number for the entire fall migration season. This is the period of expected heaviest mortality because of the larger numbers of birds in the air. O
~ ~
f% 0 [* Q]. p) Q TABLE I
. Species recovered at Davis. Besse Nuclear Power Station spring migratory' season.1980 Date # Species- Location * - Necropsy Comments A B Quad 4/7 1 ' Ruby-crowned Kinglet X NW Heavy Hematoma 4/12 2 Water Pipit' Xs SE Light Hematoma
-4/20 3 . Yellow-rumped Warbler X SE Unable to Assess Predation 4 . Ruby-crowned Kinglet unit-1 structure ** Unable to Assess Decomposition 5/7 .5 ~ Ruby-crowned Kinglet X SE Unable to Assess Decomposition 6 Common Yellowthroat X SE Broken Neck -
Bill Damage 7 White-throated Sparrow X NE Light Hematoma 8 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X NE Heavy Hematoma 9 Common Yellowthroat X NE Light Hematoma Bill Demage 5/11 10 White-eyed Vireo X NW Unable to-Assess Predation 11 Ovenbird X NE Heavy Hematoma Broken Neck
- 12 Blackburnian Warbler X NE Light Hematoma 13 Common Yellowthroat unit-1 structure Light Hematoma 5/14 14 ovenbird X SE Light Hematoma 15- Savannah Sparrow X SE Heavy Hematoma Bill Damage 16 .American Redstart X SE Light Hematoma Broken Neck 5/16 17' American Redstart X NW Light Hematoma 5/19 18 Yellow Warbler X NW Light Hematoma Broken Neck 19 Magnolia Warbler X SE Unable to' Assess Predation
TABLE I (con't) Date # Species Location
- Necropsy Comments A B Quad 5/23 20 Least Flycatcher I SE Heavy Hematoma 21 Blackburnian Warbler X SE Broken Neck 22 Magnolia Warbler X SE Light Hematoma Broken Neck 5/24 23 Wood Thrush 'X SE Light Hematoma 6/6 24 Common Yellowthroat X SE Light Hematoma Est. Mort. 6/1 25 Least Flycatcher X NE Light Hematoma Est. Nort. 6/1 26 Common Grackle X NW Light Hematoma Immature Fall from Nest
* -- Location A=0utside of Tower Structure. B=Inside of Tower Structure Quad = Quadrat NE= Northeast. NW= Northwest. SE= Southeast. SW= Southwest ** -- unit-1 structure = reactor shield and turbine buildings notes during the spring migratory period the base of the cooling tower was drained O O O
'N
'~
p (v/
\ /
x/ l I TABLE II. Weather Conditions and Mortality Spring Migratory Season. 1980 Cloud Cover Conditions ' Winds
- Date- Est. Date Number Time of Direction Speed Synoptic Weather Conditions **
Pick-up of Mortality Found Pick-up -1 1 -1 1 -2 -1 1 2
' Tower:
i -
'4/7 4/6-7, 1- Tot. Overcast W S mod. str. H) H3 H3 H3 4/12 '.4/12-23 1 Tot. Overcast SSW SSW mod. str. H3- H3 L1 L2 4/20' 4/19-20 1 Clear W SW mod. it. H2 H3 H3 H1 5/7 5/6 7- 5 Cloudy WSW WSW mod. mod. L4 Li L1 L2
, 5/11 5/10-11 3 Cloudy W SW mod. mod. H) L1 L2 L1
'5/14 5/13-14' 3 Tot. Overcast WSW W lt. str. Li L3' Hi H3 r 5/16 5/15-16 1 Clear N ENE lt. it. H2 H2- H2 H2 ;
5/19 5/18-19 2 P*.. Cloudy. NW- NW- mod. mod. L2 L4 L4 H1 5/23- 5/22-23 3 Pt. Cloudy N E mod. mod. H2 H2 H2 H) (
, 5/24 5/23-24 i Clear E NE mod. mod. H2 H3 L1 L1 6/6 5/31-6/1 3 Clear SW SW mod. mod. L4 H1 H2 H3 i'
k Unit-1 Structures i' 4/20 4/19-20 1 Clear W SW mod. It. H2 H3 H) H1 5/11 5/10-11 1 Cloudy W SW mod. mod. H3 L1 L2 L1
* -- Winds -1= Previous Day or Evening. 1= Day or Evening of Pick-up i ** -- Synoptic Weather Conditions -2= 0700 Hrs Previous Day. -1= 1900 Hrs Previous Day 1= 0700 Hrs Day of Pick-up. 2=1900 Hrs Day of Pick-up t
notes Synoptic Weather Conditions -1 and/or 1 indicate conditions at estimated time of mortality e 1
l O TABLE III. Spring Bird Census. Davis Besse Perimeter Survey. 1980 Weathers 4/20. sunny, warm, max. 70 0 P, light SW wind 5/11. sunny. warm, max. 75 P. light SW wind 5/24. sunny, warm. max. 800 P. moderate NE wind Species No. of Birds Seen April 20 May 11 May 24 Pied-billed Grebe 1 -- 1 Great Blue Heron 43 55 60 Green Heron 3 3 1 Common Egret 19 28 35 Black-crowned Night Heron 30 50 43 Canada Goose 95 120 90 Mallard 42 35 41 Pintail 3 - Blue-winged Tecl 25 12 18 Northern Shoveler 21 7 2 Wood Duck 2 1 1 Black Duck 2 -- -- Red-breasted Merganser 15 -- -- Turkey Vulture 3 -- -- Red-tailed Hawk 1 -- -- American Kestrel 2 -- 1 Ring-necked Pheasant 1 -- -- Common Gallinule 4 7 5 American Coot 2!0 600 500 Killdeer 4 5 3 Ruddy Turnstone -- -- 3 Spotted Sandpiper -- 6 -- Greater Yellowlegs 3 1 2 Lesser Yellowlegs -- 7 -- Pectoral Sandpiper 5 -- -- Least Sandpiper -- 4 6 Herring Gull 40 53 45 Ring-billed Gull 12 25 10 Bonaparte's Gull 3 -- -- Black Tern -- -- 3 Mourning Dove 6 5 2 Yellow-billed Cuckoo -- 1 -- Great Horned Owl 2 1 -- Common Nighthawk -- 4 -- Belted Kingfisher 2 -- -- Common Flicker 2 6 2 Red-headed Woodpecker 4 1 1 Hairy Woodpecker 1 -- -- Downy Woodpecker 3 2 1 Eastern Kingbird -- 3 2 1 -- Great Crested Flycr:tcher -- Horned Lark 3 -- -- Tree Swallow 75 80 86 Barn Swallow -- 4 2 Purple Martin -- -- 7 Blue Jay 9 3 -- Tufted Titmouse 5 2 5 House Wren -- 1 -- Gray Catbird -- 1 1 Brown Thrasher -- 2 1 O
. . .. _. _ . . - - - _ .- - -. _ ... . _ . = _ - . ~ _ . - . . - - . . - . , _ . . - - _ _ - . - - . -
b en% TABLE III. (con't) Species No. of Birds Seen April 20 May 11 May 24 American Robin 9 6 4 1 1 Wood Thrush -- Veery -- 1 -- Eastern Bluebird -- -- 1 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 3 -- -- Cedar Waxwing -- 2 -- Starling 25 40 45 Black-and-white Warbler -- 1 --
'Prothonotary Warbler -- 1 Golden winged Warbler -- 2 --
Blue-winged Warbler -- 1 -- Yellow Warbler -- 5 10 Magnolia Warbler -- 3 7 Black-throated Blue Warbler -- 1 -- 2 Yellow-rumped Warbler -- 5 Blackburnian Warbler -- 1 -- 1 Ovenbird -- 1 Cor. mon Yellowthroat -- 3 7 Wilson's Warbler -- 2 -- Canada Warbler -- 2 -- 2 1 American Redstart -- House Sparrow 3 7 -- 1 -- Eastern Meadowlark -- Red-winged Blackbird 130 150 150 1 Northern Oriole -- 1 6 Common Grackle 15 9 Brown-headed Cowbird -- 3 5 Scarlet Tanager -- 2 2 1 -- , Northern Cardinal 3 Rose-breasted Grosbeak 2 -- -- Indigo Bunting -- 7 8 American Goldfinch -- 1 2 Rufous-sided Towhee 2 3 --
- 1 --
Savannah Sparrow -- Tree Sparrow 1 -- Pield Sparrow 12 20 11 White-crowned Sparrow -- 6 7 White-throated Sparrow 2 5 3 Song Sparrow 5 10 7 Rock Dove 15 5 3 TOTAL Species 51 69 53 ' Individuals 959 1449 1266 t e f l~ LSs./- )
TABLE IV Species recovered at Davis Besse Nuclear Power Station fall migratory season. 1980 Date # Species Imm! Location ** Necropsy Comments A B Quad 9/4 1 Tennessee Warbler X NE . Unable to Assess Predation 9/12 2 Common Yellowthroat X X SE Heavy Hematoma Broken Wing 3 Blk.-thr. . Green Warbler X X SE Light Hematoma 4 Ovenbird X X SW Broken Neck 5 Magnolia Warbler X SW Light Hematoma 6 Magnolia Warbler X X NW Light Hematoma 7 Magnolia Warbler X X SW Crushed Skull 8 Bay-breasted Warbler X X NW Heavy Hematoma 9 Bay-breasted Warbler X X SW Light Hematoma 10 Wilson's Warbler X SW Crushed Skull 9/14 11 Magnolia Warbler X X NE Light Hematoma 12 Bay-breasted Warbler X X SW Unable to Assess Predation 13 Bay-breasted Warbler X X NE Heavy Hematoma 14 Blackburnian Warbler X X NE Light Hematoma 15 Blackburnian Warbler X X NE Light Hematoma Hematoma on Breast 16 Blackburnian Warbler X X NE Broken Neck 17 Blackburnian Warbler X X SW Heavy Hematoma 18 Blackburnian Warbler X X SE Light Hematoma 19 Common Yellowthroat X X NE Light Hematoma Bill Damage O O O
.,"5 jQ () (/ . v' TABLE IV (con' t) Date # Species Imm! Location ** Necropay Comments A B Quad
~9/14 20 Amon Yellowthroat X NE Heavy Hematoma 21 Chestnut-sided Warbler X X NE Crushed Skull 9/15 22 Red-eyed Vireo X NW Heavy Hematoma
,9/17 23 Unidentified X SE Unable to Assess Decomposition 24 Red-eyed Vireo X X NE Unable to Assess Decomposition
'25 Red-eyed Vireo X X NE Light Hematoma Broken Neck 26 Chestnut-sided Warbler X X NE Heavy Hematoma 27- Blackburnian Warbler X NE Heavy Hematoma 9/20 28 magnolia Warbler X X- NE Heavy itematoma 9/21 29 Common ' Yellow throat X unit-1 otructure*** Light Hematoma 30 Bay-breasted Warbler X unit-1 structure Unable to Assess Decompooltion 31 Ruby-crowned Kirglet unit-1 otructure Unable to Assess Decomposition
.9/22~ 32 Magnolia Warbler X X NE Ifeavy Hematoma 33 Red-eyed Vireo X NE Ifeavy llematoma 34 Bay-breasted Warbler X X NW Unable to Annens becorposition 35' Tennessee Warbler X X NE Heavy Hematoma Droken Tarnus 9/23 36 ovenbird X X NE Light Hematoma 37 Ovenbird X NE Heavy itematoma 38 Magnolia Warbler X X SW Heavy itematoma 39 Magnolla Warbler X X NE Light Hematoma
TAlLE IV (con' t) Necropsy Comments Date # Species Imm' Location ** A B Quad ___ 9/23 40 Magnolia Warbler X X NE Light Hematoma 41 Common Yellowthroat X NE Light Hematona 42 American Redstart X X 3W Light Hematoma American Redstart I X NE Unable to Assess Decomposition 43 9/24 44 Magnolia Warbler X X NW Heavy Hematoma 45 magnolia Warbler X X NW Heavy Hematoma Broken Neck 46 Common Yellowthroat X X NW Hematoma on Breast 47 Wilson's Warbler X NW Heavy Hematoma Bill Damage 48 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X NW Light Hematoma 49 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X NW Light Hematoma 9/29 50 American Redstart X X NE Light Hematoma Philadelphia Vireo X X NE Light Hematoma 10/3 51 transmission lines **** Unable to Assess Decomposition 10/5 52 Groat Blue Heron American Coot transmission lines Unable to Assess Decomposition 53 54 Ovenbird X transmission lines Unable to Acsess Decomposition 55 magnolia Warbler X X NE Broken Neck Broken Wing Sora unit-1 structure Unable to Assess Decomposition 56 unit-1 structure U.nabl e to Assess Decomposition 57 Rock Dove 58 Common Yellowthroat X unit-1 structure Unable to Assess Decomposition X unit-1 structure Unable to Assess Decomposition 59 Blk.-thr. Green Warbler G G e
,,~ O a}. v V, -- TABLE IV (con't) Date # Species. ImmI Location ** Necropsy Comments A B Quad 10/6- 60 Common Yellowthroat X- NE Light Hematoma 10/9 61 Long-billed Marsh Wren X SE Heavy Hematoma 62 Rose-breasted Grosbeak I X SE Heavy Heaatosa 63 Red-eyed Vireo ~ X X SE Light Hematoma 64' Blk.-thr. Green Warbler X X- SE Heavy Hematoma 65- Tennteaaa Warbler I X SE Heavy Hematoma 66 Ruby-crowned Kinglei X X SE Heavy Hematoma 67 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X SE Heavy Hematoma 68 - Ruty-crowned Kinglet X X SE Li6 ht Hematoma 69 Ruby-crowned Kinglet I SE Heavy Hematoma 70 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 1 SE Crushed Skull . 71 Ruby-crowned Kinglet I SE Heavy Hematoma 72 Ruby-crowned Kinglet I X SE Heavy Hematoma 73 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X SE Hr avy Hematoma Bill Damage 74 Ruty-crowned Kinglet I X SE Light Hematoma 75 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X SE Heavy Hematoma
- 76. Ruby-crowned Kinglet X SE Heavy Hematoca Bill Damage 77 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X SE Heavy Hematoma 78 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X SE Crushed Skull 79 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X SE Heavy Hematoma
TABLE IV (con't) Date # Species Imm* Location ** Necropsy Comments A B Quad 10/9 80 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X SE Heavy Hematoma 81 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X SE Heavy Hematoma 82 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X SE Light Hematoma 83 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X SE Heavy Hema'eoma B4 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X SE Crushed Sku'11 85 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X SE Heavy Hematoma Bill Damage 86 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X SE Heavy Hematoma Bill Damage 87 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X SE Light Hematoma 88 Ruby-crowned Kinglet I SE Heavy Hematoma 89 Golden-crowned Kinglet X SE Heavy Hematoma , 90 Golden-crowned Kinglet X SE Light Hematoma 91 Golden-crowned Kinglet X X SE Heavy Hematoma Bill Damage 92 Golden-crowned Kinglet X SE Heavy Hematoma 93 Golden-crowned Kinglet X SE Light Hematoma 94 colden-crowned Kinglet X SE Heavy Hematoma 95 Golden-crowned Kinglet X X SE Light Hematoma 10/10 96 Common Yellowthroat X X SE Heavy Hematoma 97 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X SE Light Hematoma 98 Golden-crowned Kinglet X X NW Heavy Hematoma 99 Golden-crowned Kinglet X SE Light Hematoma O O O
a. e.r.r erh
. - (N
'J 4
TABLE IV (con't) Date # Species' Imm* Location ** Necropsy Comments A B Quad 10/10 100 Golden-crowned Kinglet X X SE Light Hematoma 10/11 101 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X- X SE Crushed Skull 102 Ruby-crowned Kingle;, I X SE Crushed Skull 103 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X NE Heavy Hematoma 10/12 104 Common Yellowthroat X X SE Heavy Hematoma 105 Common Yellowthroat X X NE Light Hematoma Broken Neck 10/13 106 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X SE Heavy Hematcma 107 Golden-crowned Kinglet X X SE Heavy Hematoma } 108 Golden-crowned Kinglet X X SE Heavy Hematoma 10/14 109 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X NE Heavy Hematoma , 10/15 110 magnolia warbler- X NE Crushed Skull ! Bill Damage
, 10/16 111 Ruby-crowned Kinglet X X NW Heavy Hematoma e
i 11/2' 112 Red-eyed Vireo unit'1 structure
- Unable to Assess Decomposition 1
* -- Imm'.= Immature as determined by Skull Ossification and plumage criteria
[ ** -- Location A=0utside of Tower Structure. B=Inside of Tower Structure Quad = Quadrat NE= Northeast, NW= Northwest, SE= Southeast, SW= Southwest i -- unit-1 structure = reactor shield and turbine buildings I * -- transmission line = switch yard trancmission lines > i-i 4 4 mai m &%4' r - -
TABLE V. Weatner Conditions and Mortality Fall Migratory Season, 1980 Cloud Cover Conditions Winds
- Date Est. Date Number Time of Direction Speed Synoptic Weather Conditions **
Pick-up of Mortality Pound Pick-up -1 1 -1 1 -2 -1 1 2 Tower: 9/4 9/3-4 1 Pt. Cloudy WNW W lt. it. H3 H1 H2 H3 9/12 9/11-12 9 Cloudy WNW NE str. mod. H3 H2 H2 H2 9/14 9/13-14 11 Tot. Overcast NW NW str. str. H3 L2 L'e H1 9/15 9/14-15 1 Tot. Overcast NW NE str. mod. L4, H1 Hi H2 9/17 9/16-17 5 Cloudy SE NW lt. med. H3 I.
- L1 L2 9/20 9/19-20 1 Clear SE S lt. mod. H2 H2 H3 H) 9/22 9/21-22 4 Pt. Cloudy S S mod. str. L1 L1 L1 L4 9/23 9/22-23 8 Cloudy S NW str. It. L1 L4 Hi H1 9,'24 9/10-23 6 Cloudy S NW str. It. L1 L4 H1 H1 9/?9 9/28-29 1 Clear WSW SE mod. mod. H2 H2 H2 H3 10/3 10/2-3 1 Tot. Overcast WNW SW lt. str. L4 L1 L1 L1 10/5 10/4-5 1 Tot. Overcast WNW NNW mod. mod. L3 L3 Hi H2 10/6 10/4-5 1 Tot. Overcast WNW NNW mod. mod. L3 L3 H1 H2 10/9 10/8-9 35 Clear SW NE mod. mod. L4 di H1 H1 10/10 10/8-9 5 Clear SW NE mod. mod. L4 H1 H1 H1 10/11 10/10-11 3 Tot. Overcast SW NW lt. str. L1 L2 L4 H1 10/12 10/11-12 2 Tot. Overcant NW NW str. mod. L4 H1 H2 H2 10/13 10/11-12 3 Tot. Overcas t NW NW str. mod. L4 Hi HE H2 10/14 10/13-14 1 Tot. Overcast NNW NW lt. mod. H2 H2 H2 H2 O O O
- ~ . - - . . ~.
; \._ .
/
TABLE V. (con't) Cloud Cover . Conditions Winds
- Date Est. Date Number Time of Direction Speed Synoptic Weather Conditions ** f
' Pick-up of Mortality Pound Pick-up -1 1 -1 1 -2 -1 1 2 10/15 10/14-15 1 Clear NW ENE mod. It. H2 H2 H3 H3 10/16 10/15-16 1 Pt. Cloudy ENE W lt. it. H3 H3 H3 H3 Unit-1 Structures and Switch Yard Transmission Lines:
9/21 9/11-14 3 Tot. Overcast NW Im str. str. H3 L2 L4 H1 10/5 9/22-23 7 Cloudy S NW str. .It. L1 L4 H1 H1 6 11/2 10/12-13 1 Tot. Overcast NW NW str. mod. L4 H1 H2 H2
*-- Winds -1= Previous Day or Evening, 1= Day or Evening of Pick-up
**-- Synoptic Weather Conditions -2= 0700 HrsPrevious Day, -1= 1900 HrsPrevious Tay 1= 0700 HrsDay of Pick-up, 2= 1900 MrsDay of Pick-up note Synoptic Weather Conditions -1 and/or 1 indicate conditions at estimated time of mortality l 1
i i i
O TABLE VI. Fall Bird Census. Davis Besse Perimeter Survey, 1950 Weather: 9/ , partly cloudy, warm. max. 70 0 P. light NW wind 10 . partly cicudy, cool, max. 600 F, light NW wind 11 2. clear-partly cloudy, cool, max. 55 P. light d wind Species No. of Birds Seen Sect. 23 Oct. 10 Nov. ? Pied-billed Grebe 5 17 3 Great Blue Heren 54 36 9 Green Heron 3 2 -- Great Egret 44 21 2 Cattle Egret 1 -- -- Black-crowned N16ht Heren 16 18 -- Canada Goose ik2 131 340 Mallard 765 278 340 2 -- 4 Pintail Black Duck 3 19 11 Green-winged Teal -- 170 12 Blue-winged Teal 7 102 32 American Widgeon -- 2700 34 Northern Shoveler 7 -- 12 Wood Duck 41 23 3 Redhead 2 -- 25 Bufflehead -- -- 5 Red-tailed Hawk -- - 2 Cooper's Hawk -- -- 1 American Kestrel -- 1 1 Conson Gallinule 1 - -- American Coot 261 800 3050 2 - 4 Killdeer American Woodcock -- 1 -- Lesser Yellowlegs 12 - 1 Spotted Sandpiper -- -- 1 Herring Gull 22 25 130 Ring-billed Gull 8 45 175 Belted Kingfisher 2 1 -- Common Flicker 5 5 2 Downy Woodpecker -- 4 1 Yellow-bellied Sapsucker -- 1 -- Tree Swallow -- 200 -- Blue Jay -- 4 -- White-breasted Nuthatch -- 1 -- Red-breas ted Nuthatch -- 3 -- Brown Creeper -- 1 -- Gray Catbird -- 1 -- Hermit Thrush -- 2 -- Swainson's Thrush -- 5 -- Golden-crowned Kinglet -- 25 -- Ruby-crowned Kinglet -- 15 -- Cedar Waxwing i 2 25 Starling 1430 30 2500 Tennessee Warbler -- 1 -- Magnolia Warbler -- 2 -- Yellow-ru= ped Warbler -- 71 -- Red-winged Blackbird 3200 20 2 Rusty Blackbird -- - 15 1 Northern Cardinal -- --
~
9
f
) '
1 J
.I TABLE VI. (con't) ,
Species No. of Birds seen ( 4 Sept. 23 Oct. 10 Nov. 2 ; 1 2 16 Slate-colored Junco -- 2 21 35 t White-throated Sparrow 6 15 i Song Sparrow 3
?
Species 27 40 32
! TOTAL Individuals 6069 4803 719) i 1
l
)
i e I L I r L I , 8 i l I
, _ _ _ . . _ _ . . . . . - - . _ _ . . _ _ . ~ . _ , _ . - . _ _ _ _ - . . . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ .
O TABLE VII. Breeding Bird Census. Davis BeMe Perimeter Survey, 1980. Weather 6/16. sunny, warm, max. 75 P. light W wind 6/23. sunny, warm, max. 85* P. light SW wind Times 6/16. 09:00-15:00 6/23. 15:00-21:00 Species No. of Birds Seen Estimated Min. June 16 June 23 Resident Pop. Pied-billed Grebe -- 1 2 Great Blue Heron 80 76 T* Creen Heron 5 7 8 Common Egret 30 116 T Black-crowned Night Heron 70 44 T Canada Goose 115 94 120 Mallard 45 49 50 Blue-winged Teal 20 3 20 Wood Duck 2 22 22 Red-tailed Hawk -- 1 2 American Kestrel -- 1 2 Common Gallinule 5 2 6 American Coot 20 18 20 Killdeer 8 7 8 Herring Gull 90 54 T Ring-billed Gull 10 76 . T Black Tern -- 10 10 Rock Dove -- 4 4 Mourning Dove 10 2 10 Common flicker 5 6 6 Downy doodpecker -- 1 2 Eastern Kingbird 5 4 6 Great Crested Flycatcher 1 -- 2 Tree Swallow 95 105 110 . Barn Swallow 6 -- 6 Purple Martin -- 7 8 Catbird -- 1 2 Brown thrasher C -- 2 Robin 4 -- 4 Starling fo 53 60 Yellow Warbler 15 28 30 Common Yellowthroat 10 14 14 House Sparrow 3 -- 4 Red-winged Blackbird 170 250 250 Common Grackle 50 3 50 Brown-headed Cowbird -- 2 2 Cardinal 2 -- 2 Indigo Bunting 6 18 18 American Goldfinch - 1 2 4 Pield Sparrow -- 6 Song Sparrow 2 6 TOTAL Species 31 34 41 Individuals 956 1082 1082
' Transients 9
7 TJBLE VIII. Breeding Bird Census. Ottawa Wildlife Area Perimeter Survey,1980. Weather: 6/18. sunny-overcast. . rara, max. 75* P. moderate SW-NW wind 6/22. sunny, warm, max. 800 F. light SW wind . Tinto 6/18. 15:00-21:00 6/22. 09:00-15:00 l Species No. of Birds Seen Estimated Min. June 18 June 22 Resident Pop. Croat Blue Heron 47 23 T* Common Egret 60 27 T Black-crowned Night Heron 9 i T Canada Goose 630 523 630 2 -- 2 Blue Goose 2 Pintail 1 1 Green-winged Teal 7 5 8 2 4 Northern Shoveler 3 122 Mallard 191 121 Blue-winged Teal 4 5 6 Bald Eagle 3 3 4 34 44 44 Killdeer 2 Spotted Sandpiper -- 1 Greater Yellowlegs -- 2 2 Lesser Yellowlegs -- 2 2 Least Sandpiper 12 1 12 Wilson's Phd arope 1 2 2 Herring Gull 35 47 T m Black' Tern '. <2 1 -- 2 Mourning Dove 2 1 2 1 2 Yellow-billed Cuckoo -- 4 Common Flicker 3 -- Red-headed Wo;dpecker 1 -- 2 Eastern Kingbird 1 -- 2 43 34 44 Tree Swallow 4 Barn Swallow 3- -- Purple Martin 20 25 26 1 2 Catbird i 2 2 Robin 2 Starling 480 150 480
- 1 2 Yellow Warbler --
6 6 Common Yellowthroat 2 House Sparrow 2 -- 2 ' Red-winged Blackbird 180 93 180 2 -- 2 Northern Oriole 8 46 Common Grackle '45 1 -- 2 Brown-headed Cowbird 14 Indigo Bunting 13 9 1 -- 2 American Goldfinch - - - 1 2 Field Sparrow Song Sparrow 10 33 34 34 30 41 TOTAL Species
-Individuals 1852 1175 1852
*Translents
/% U
O TABLE IX. Summary of previous ant' current scavenger predation investigatirns conducted at the cooling tower. Previously collected site mortalities were placed randomly and incre-mentally around the cooling tower base. Quadrant
!(NE) II(SE) III(SW) IV(NW)
Spring 1974 Total Bird / nights
- 20 8 4 3 35 No. preyed upon 7 0 0 1 8 Percent loss 35 0 0 33 23 Spring 1975 Total Bird / nights 54 57 29 29 169 No. preyed upon 18 26 10 11 65 Percent loss 33 46 34 38 38 Fall 1973 Total Bird / nights 4 6 7 7 24 No. preyed upon 4 4 3 5 16 Percent loss 100 67 43 71 67 Fall 1974 Total Bird / nights 17 16 7 2 42 No. preyed upon 15 11 4 2 32 Percent loss 88 69 57 100 76 Fall 1975 Total Bird / nights 75 75 75 75 300 No preyed upon 17 15 11 25 68 Percent loss 23 20 15 33 23 Fall 1980 Total Bird / nights 48 40 32 32 152 No. preyed upon 8 1 13 14 36 Percent loss 17 2.5 41 44 24 aNf"nhb$ $N'n0[nhek#ofnkNINe$frdsEanefoht.plaed ut per
o o o s+ ' L ., TABLE X. . Summary of necropsy examinations, spring and fall 1980.* Spring i HH LH BN BD TOTAL UA 14 6 3 28 5 1-No. observations 5 18 50 21 11 100 ! Percent i Fall l BD BT BW CS HB TOTAL UA I ! HH LH- BN I e 30 6 8 2 9 2 ITO 16
.No. observations ~ 52 1 100 ;
48 27- 5 7 1 2 8 2 ) Percent. e 1-3-
?
l i HH = heavy hematoma, LH = light hematoma, BN = " broken neck", BD = bill damage, } ! BT = broken tarsus, BW = " broken wing", CS = " crushed skull", HB = hemotoma on breast, i i UA = unable to assess due to decomposition or predation ' 1
.! I ) i
{ ! i f
! [
O
, i4 i
# I eg J '
s
/ k'g4
*', s 3-I
# s ?. .
( g
'4 4 2- T i v 8
. a r---
A- t -), 3-ej '
, 8 4 o-R 4 4 4 4
4 4 4 d
- n
~
9 s/ i 4 k b 4 4
.2 4 .
$h 385 un a -
O e O
$ e a 24 r.
A h 8 2 .se u e 48t
$ CEE h
O O O - COOLING TOWER N A r 3 birds A
, 3 bird A 4 bicds f
, 3 birds 16 birds A ---s A e s e NW NE h f&i, '
s - 4 e SW SE s e .* *_ Out-take e * . - - - g .
- A, C3 birds 9 irds 4 birds Embankment
' 7 bird % A 4 birds AA A 3 .irds l
Fig. 2 Distribution of ortalities A A \ 3b ds recovered during the fa
~
migration o eae period 1980, A = mortality n=101) 5 'rds floating in ramp A O~ = floatir.g inside tower 0 Entrance 1,0 2,0 30 4,0* 5,0 Neters i
4, , i i l 1 l l l i l r
.'l l, .
I L I 3 l 1 1 1 4 f r r XVI I i. t SECTION 3.1.2.s.2 l I VEGETATION SUWEY I I ll L r i l l l l I I f
i i 1 s iG 4 r 1
+
3.1.2.b.2 VEGETATION SURVEY l l i The vegetation survey was not required for the year 1980. j t i
'! i 2
i I 1 i i ! I i S
.h I i
- 1 4-g i
i , i l l 1 [ f l [ I L . . . - . . . , _ . . . _ . . . - , . , , , - . . _ . _ . . _ _ . _ , _ . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ , . . _ _ , _ . _ , _ - - . . . . . . . _ ~ . . - - _
_ _ _ -_-___ _ _ -- a m s _-- ..-..L. 4 .- .a .- - .
..-m _ _ 4 l
1 O l l XVII O SECTION 3.2 ENVIRONENTAL RADIOLOGICAL b lTORING O
@;HAZEON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES A OMSiON OF HAZLETON LABO AATOAIES AME AICA. INC it$00 F DONTAGE AOAO NORTHBAOOK, ILLINOIS 80062. U S A REPORT TO TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY TOLEDO, OHIO OPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT NO. 1 /3 OAK HARBOR, OHIO V ANNUAL REPORT - PART I
SUMMARY
AND INTERPRETATION JANUARY - DECEMBER 1980 FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES CORPORATION PROJECT NO. 8996 Approved by: IK G.//luebner, M.5. Diredtor, Nuclear Sciences l
- p. 12 February 1981 I
b ( AHONE 13121584 -0700 o TELE x PH 94831 HAZE S N054kl
HA2LETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O PREFACE The staff of the Nuclear Sciences Department of Hazleton Environmental Sciences (Hazleton) was responsible for the acquisition of the data presented in this report. Samples were collected by members of the staf f of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station and by local sample collectors. The report was prepared by C. R. Marucut, Group Leader, under the direction of L. G. Huebner, Director, Nuclear Sciences. She was assisted in the report A. Galioto, L. Kuckla, N. preparation by the following staff members: C. Lamich, D. Rieter, J. Woods, and S. Yamagata. O l l I i l l O l 11
Ham.aTON CNVIRONMENTAL. SCCNCCO O TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 11 PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. Li st of Fi gures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv List of Tables ...................... v 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM . . . . . . . 3.1 Methodology ..................... 3 3.1.1 The Ai r P rogram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1.2 The Terrestrial Program . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1.3 The Aquatic Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1.4 Program Execution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.1.5 Census of Milch Animals . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8 3.2 Resul ts and Di scu ssi on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.1 Effect of Chinese Atmospheric Nuclear Detonation .................. 9 3.2.2 The Air Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 9 3.2.3 The Terrestrial Environment . ......... 3.2.4 The Aquatic Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3.2.5 Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 17 4.0 FIGURES AND TABLES .................... 33
5.0 REFERENCES
]
(~ - 111
HAZLETON CNVIRONMENTAL BCCNCE'3 O LIST OF FIGURES No. Caption Page 41 Sampling locations on the site boundary of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 4-2 Sampling locations (except those on the site periphery). Davis-Besse Nuclear Power 5tation . . . . . . . . . . . 19 I l O l l l 9 iv l
i l L HAzLaTON CNVlftONMENTAL SCCNCE") l [ LIST OF TABLES l Title Page No.
- t I 4.1 Sampling locations. Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.
l 20 j Unit No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 23 l t 4.2 Type and frequency of collections . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sample codes used in Table 4.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 ! 4.3 !
. . ................... 25
. 4.4 Sampling Summary Environmental radiological monitoring program summary . . . 26 4.5 i t i f, I i I i l Y ,
$ f-1
HA71 STON ENVIRONMENTAL SCENCC3 9
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Because of the many potential pathways of radiation exposure to man from both natural and man-made sources, it is necessary to document levels of radio-activity and the variability of these levels which exist in an area prior to the anticipated release of any additional radioactive nuclides. To meet this objective, an extensive preope ational environmental radiolo-gical monitoring program was initiated for the Toledo Edison Company in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station site. This program included collection (both onsite and offsite) and radiometric analyses of airborne particulates, airborne iodine, ambient gamma radiation, milk, groundwater, meat and wildlife, fruits and vegetables, animal and wildlife feed, soil, surface water, fish, and bottom sediments. Approximately 5 years of preoperational monitoring were completed in April 1977 by the same labor-atory that currently operates under the name Hazleton Environmental Sciences (HES). Fuel elements were loaded in Unit 1 on 23 through 27 April 1977 and the initial criticality was achieved on 12 August 1977. Unit 1 achieved one hundred percent of its operational capacity on 4 April 1978. Approximately 2-1/2 years of operational monitoring was completed by the end of December 1979. This report presents the third full year of operational data for the Environ-mental Radiological Monitoring at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. The program was conducted in rucr'nace with the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Technical %r ifkstions: Appendix B to License No. NPF-3, Section 3.2. O 1
HAZLETON ENVIRONMEN TAL SCIENCES (] V 2.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Operational Nuclear Stations are required- by Federal Regulations to submit Annual Operational Reports to the U.S. NRC. The reports must also include the results of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program. This ' report summarizes the results of such a program. The program was conducted in accordance with the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1 Technical Specifications: Appendix B to License No. N2F-3 Section 3.2. This program included collection (both onsite and offsite) and radiometric analy-( ) ses of airborne particulates, airborne iodine, . ambient gamma radietion, milk,
-- ground water, meat and- wildlife, fruits and vegetables, animal and wildlife feed, soil, surface water, . fish,- and bottom sediments. -
Results of sample analyses during- the period January - December 1980 are summarized in Table 4.5. . Tabulations of data for all samples collected during this period, additional statistical analyses of the data, and graphs of data trends are presented in a separate report to the Toledo Edison Company (lies 1981). Radionuclide concentrations measured at. indicator locations were compared with levels measured.at control locations and-in preoperational studies. The comparisons indicate background-level radioactivities in all samples col-lected with following exception: The tritium ' level in beachwell water from T-7, 0.9 miles HNW of the station.
. collected 14 January 1980 was about 510 pCi/l above the background level of 450 pCi/1 measured in nearby untreated surface water. The slightly elevated level could be attributable to the station operation; however, the level was more than thirty-nine times lower than the annual average concentration
. allowed by the EPA-Hational Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulation (40 CFR 141) and was about 0.017% of maximum permissible concentration for tritium in -
) unrestricted areas (3,000,000 pCi/1). The three subsequent quarterly samples did not indicate a significant difference between the background tritium levels and the levels from the beachwell at T-7.
2 e >
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O 3.0 EiiVIROi"EfiTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM 3.1 Methodology The sampling locations for the Preoperational Environmental Radiological
!!onitoring Program at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station are shown in Figures 4-1 and 4-2. Table 4.1 describes the locations, lists for cach its direction and distance from the station, 'and indicates which are indicator and which are control locations.
The sampling program monitors the air, terrestrial, and aquatic environ-me nt s. The types of-samples collected at each location and the frequency of collections are presented in Table 4.2 using codes defined in Table 4.3. The collections and analyses that comprise the program are des-cribed in the following pages. Finally, the execution of the program in the current reporting annual period (January - December 1980) is g discussed. ,_ 3.1.1 The Air Program Airborne Particulates The airborne particulate samples are collected on 47mm diameter membrane filters of 0.8 micron porosity at a volumetric rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. The filters are collected weekly from eleven locations (T-1, T-2, T-3, T-4, T-7, T-8, T-9, T-11, T-12, T-23, and T-27), placed in individ-ual glassine protective envelopes, and dispatched by mail to HES for radiometric analyses. The filters are analyzed for gross beta activity approximately five days after collec-tion to allow for decay of naturally-occurring short-lived radionuclides. The quarterly composites of all air particulate samples from indicator locations (T-1, T-2, T-3, T-4, T-7, and T-8) and of all air particulate samples from control locations (T-9, T-11, T-12, T-23, and T-27) are gamma-scanned and ana-lyzed for strontium-89 and -90. 9 3 L
HA7LETON ENVIROHMENTAL SCENC33 Airborne Iodine Each air sampler is equipped with a charcoal trap in-line after the filter holder. The charcoal trap at each location is changed at the same time as the particulate filter and analyzed for iodine-131 immediately after arrival at the laboratory. Ambient Gamma Radiation The integrated gemma-ray background from natural radiation is measured with themoluminescent dosimeters (TLD). Monthly and quarterly TLD's are placed at thirteen locations (the eleven
;.ir sampling locations and locations T-5 and T-24).
On 1 January 1980 eighteen (18) new TLD sampling locations were added to the program. Twelve locations (T T-49) were established at the site boundary ranging in distance from 0.5 mi to 1.2 mi from the stack. Six locations were estab-lished at a distance of 3.7 mi to 5.0 mi from the stack. Since (A
')
about 50% of the outer 5 mi ring is over Lake Erie, only six additional locations were required to cover all sectors on the land. Each shipment of TLD's includes controls which are stored in a shield at the station and returned with the field TLD's after their removal. In-transit exposures are measured by the con-trol TLD's and subtracted from the field TLD measurements to obtain their net exposure. 3.1.2 The Terrestrial Program l l Milk Two-gallon milk samples are collected semi-monthly during the grazing period (May through October) and monthly during the rest of the year from two indicator locations (T-8 and T-20) and one control location (T-24). The milk samples are analyzed for iodine-131, strontium-89 and -90, calcium, stable
-potassium, and are gamma scanned. ,q L) 4
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL ECCNCQ Groundwater One-gallon well water samples are collected quarterly from two indicator locations (T-7 and T-17) and from one control loca-tion (T-27). The gross beta activity is determined on the suspended and dissolved solids of each sample. The samples are also gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 and -90, and tritium. Edible Meat Semi-annually, domestic meat samples (chickens) are collected from one indicator location (T-32) and one control location (T-34) and one representative species of wildlife (muskrat or raccoon) is collected onsite (T-31). In addition, one water-fowl species and one snapping turtle are collected annually onsite (T-31) or in the site vicinity (T-33). Gamma-spectro-scopic analysis is performed on the edible portions of each sample. Fruits and Vegetables Semi-annually, two varieties of fruits and vegetables are collected from each of the two indicator locations (T-8 and T-25) and from one control location (T-34). The edible por-tions are gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 and
-90.
Green Leafy Vegetables Monthly, during the harvest season, green leafy vegetables are collected from one indicator location (T-36) and one control location (T-37). The samples are analyzed for iodine-131. Should green leafy vegetables from private gardens be unavail-able, nonedible plants with similar leaf characteristics from the same vicinity may be substituted. Animal-Wildlife Feed I An! mal feed is collected semi-annually from one indicator location (T-8) and one control location (T-34). Cattlefeed is collected during the first quarter and grass is col'.ected during the third quarter. Also, once a year, a sample of smartweed is collected from location T-31 (onsite). Gamma-spec-troscopic analysis is performed on all samples. 5
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CCCNCCC (s Soil Once a year, soil samples are collected from all eleven air sampling locations; six indicator locations (T-1, T-2, T-3, T-4, T-7, and T-8) and five control locations (T-9, T-11, T-12, T-23, and T-27). Gamma-spect 'oscopic analysis is performed on all samples. 3.1.3 The Aquatic Program Treated Surface Water Weekly grab samples of treated water are collected at one indicator location (T-28, Unit 1 treated water supply, onsite) and two control locations (T-11 and T-12, Port Clinton and Toledo filtration plants). The samples from each location are composited monthly and analyzed for gross beta activity in dissolved and suspended solids. Quarterly composites from ee-h location are gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 aid p -90, and tritium. V Untreated Surface Water Weekly grab samples of untreated water from Lake Erie are collected from one indicator location (T-3) and from two control . locations (T-11 and T-12, Port Clinton and Toledo l filtration plants, untreated water tap). In addition, hourly l grab samples are collected from one in-plant water supply i (T-28, Unit 1 untreated water supply, onsite). The samples l from each location are composited monthly and analyzed for i gross beta activity in dissolved and suspended solids. Quar-l terly composites from each location are gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 and -90, and tritium. l Fish i i l Two species of fish are collected semi-annually from each of ! two locations in Lake Erie; from one indicator location in
'the vicinity of the discharge (T-33) and one control location approximately 15 miles from the plant (T-34; Put-In-Bay area).
' The flesh is separated from the bones and analyzed for gross L -(v r g) . beta and gamma-emitting isotopes. ! 6 t-
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CCIENCQ O Bottom Sediments Semi-annually, bottom sediments are collected from three locations in Lake Erie; at two indicator locations, intake (T-29) and discharge (T-30), and at one control location about 5.3 miles WNW from the plant (T-27). The samples are gamma scanned and analyzed for gross beta and strontium-89 and -90. 3.1.4 Program Execution Program execution is summarized in Table 4.4. The program was executed as described in the preceding sections with the following exceptions:
- 1. There were no gross beta i air particulate and airborne iodine-131 data from locations T-1, T-2, and T-3 for the collection period ending 5-19-80 because there was no power at these locations for the whole week.
- 2. There were no gross beta in air particulate and airborne iodine-131 data from Location T-8 for the collection period ending 11-24-80 because of pump malfunction.
- 3. There were elevated LLD's for gross beta in air particulate and airborne iodine-131 data from Location T-9 for the collection period ending 9-29-80 because of a blown fuse resulting in very low volume.
- 4. There was no gross beta in air particulate datum from Location T-23 for the collection period ending 2-20-80 because the filter paper was inadvertantly lef t out.
- 5. There were no gross beta in air particulate and airborne iodine-131 data from Location T-23 for the collection periods ending 7-21-80 and 7-28-80 because of pump malfunc-tion.
- 6. There were elevated LLD's for gross beta in air particulate and airborne iodine-131 from Location T-23 for the collection period ending 9-15-80 because of pump malfunction resulting in very low volume.
- 7. There was no TLD data from Location T-39 for the exposure period October-December 1980 because the TLD's were lost in the field due to vandalism.
O 7
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENT /4. SCIENCES O
-q)
- 8. Only two weekly samples of untreated surface water were collected from Lake Erie (T-3) during the months of January, February, and March of 1980 because the lake was frozen.
3.1.5 Census of Milch Animals In compliance with the Environmental Technical Specifica-tions for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, the annual census of milch animals was conducted on 10 October 1980 by plant personnel . There were no known' milk producing goats within a 15 mile radius of the station, except three at the Al Waugh Farm, 7. miles SW from Station. There were eight milking cows at Alvin Gerner Fam, 3.5 miles south frca sta-tion, but the milk was used for feeding calves. Cow herds counted were: Earl Moore Fam, 2.7 miles WSW of the station, 48 cows; Daup Farm, 5.4 miles SSE of the station, no milking cows (15 cows - raising for beef, no milk sold); and Carl Gaeth Farm, 5.5 miles WSW of the station, 30 cows. The Moore and Gaeth fams are indicator location T-8 and control location T-208, respectively. f% ( ,) . 3. 2 Results and Discussion The results for the reporting period January to December 1980 are presented in summary form in Table 4.5. For each type of analysis of each sampled medium, this table shows the annual mean and range 4 for all indicator locations and for all control locations. The location with the highest annual mean and the results for this location are also given.
.The discussion of the results' has been divided into three broad cate-gories; the air, terrestrial, and aquatic environments. Within each category, samples are discussed in the order listed in Table 4.4. Any references to previous environmental data for the Davis-Besse Nuclear -
Power Station refer to data collected by HES (or its predecessor com-panies, NALC0 Environmental Sciences and Industrial BIO-TEST Labora-tories, Inc.). The tabulated results of all measurements made during 1980 are not included in this section, although references to these results are made in the discussion. The complete tabulation of the results is submitted
~
to the Toledo Edison Company in a separate report. L 8
HAZLETON CNVIRONMENTAL CCCNC2O O 3.2.1 The Effect of Chinese Atmospheric Nuclear Detonation One nuclear test in the atmosphere was reported during the 1980. The test was conducted by the People's Republic of China on 16 October 1980. The reported yield was in the 200 Kiloton to 1 megaton range. Grcss beta results for air particolates indicate that the effect of the fallout in the central 'Jnited States was not noticeable until two weeks after the test. During the previous Chinese tests in 1977 and 1978, the effect was noticed about one week after the test. This delay is probably attribu-table to dry weather following the test postponing the rainout of radioactive particles until second or subsequent passes of the radioactive cloud over the United States. Absence of iodine-131 in milk and only slight increase of beta activity in airborne particulates supports this assumption. 3.2.2 The Air Environment Airborne Particulates Gross beta measurements yielded annual means that were nearly identical at the five control locations and ag the six indicator locations (0.029 pC1/m3 and 0.030 pC1/m , respectively). There were two locations with the identical highest annual mean (0.035 pCi/m3), two indicator locations, T-2 and T-8, and one control location, T-9, Oak Harbor, 6.8 mi SW of the station. Gross beta activities at all locations were also statistically analyzed by months and quarters. Slightly higher averages were for the months of January, July-August, and November-December, and fourth quarter. The elevated activity in gross beta observed early in the year was due to residual fallout from the 14 December 1978 weapons test. Slightly higher activity during the months of July and August was due to a delayed spring peak, which 'has been observed almost annually (1976 and 1979 were l exceptions) for many ' years (Wilson et al. ,1969). The spring peak has been attributed to fallout of nuclides from the stratos-phere (Gold et al., 1964). Increase of the activity during the fourth quarter was attributable to the fallout from the nuclear test conducted 16 October 1980. Strontium-90 annual mean activity was identical for both indicator and control locations (0.00016 pCi/m 3) and was more than the factor of two lower from levels observed in 1979. Strontium-89 activity was below the LLD level of 0.0001 pC1/m3 in all samples. 9
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCENC2
)
Gamma spectroscopic analysis of quarterly composites of air particulate filters yielded nearly identical results for indicator and control locations. The predominant gamma-emitting isotope was beryllium-7 which is produced continuously in the upper atmosphere by cosmic radiation (Arnold and Al-Salih, 1955). Trace amounts of niobium-95, ruthenium-103, cesium-137, and cerium-141 were detected in some samples during the fourth quarter. Presence of these isotopes in the atmosphere is attributable to the fallout from previous nuclear tests (Cs-137) and to the fallout from the most recent test conducted 16 October 1980. There was no indication of a station effect on the data. Airborne Iodine Weekly levels of airborne iodine-131 were below the lower limit of detection (LLD) of 0.02 pCi/m 3 in all samples. Ambient Gamma Radiation
/ r At regular thirteen (13) locations the monthly TLD's measured a
() - mean equivalent dose of 13.6 mrem /91 days at the indicator locations and a mean of.14.5 mrem /91 days at control locations. These results were in agreement with the values obtained by quarterly TLD's and were nearly identical to the levels observed in 1979 -(12.6 mrem /91 days and 14.1 mrem /91 days, respectively). The highest annual means for monthly TLD's (18.0 mrem /91 days) and for quarterly TLD's (19.2 mrem /91 days) occured at indicator locations T-8 and T-24. At the special twelve locations established at the site boundary, tl.e mean equivalents were essentially identical to those measured at the regular indicator locations (13.6 mrem /91 days and 13.2. mrem /91 days, monthly and quarterly, respectively). At the special six locations established within 3.7 mi to 5.0 mi radius the mean dose equivalent was higher (16.4 mrem /91 days and 17.5 mrem /91 days, monthly and quarterly, respectively). iiigher_ gamma radiation measured at locations away from the lake was observed in previous years and is attributed to the higher g - potassium-40 content in the soil. k[- 10
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENC2') The annual mean dose equivalent for all locations measured by monthly and quarterly TLD's was 14.8 mrem /91 days. This is lower than the average natu{al background radiation for Middle America , 19.5 mrad / quarter ; and is primarily due to lower potassium-40 content in soil in the area. 3.2.3 The Terrestrial Environment Milk A total of 5( analyses for iodine-131 in milk were performed during the reporting period. All samples contained less than 1.0 pCi/l of iodine-131. Strontium-89 was below the LLD level of 3.4 pCi/l in all samples. Strontium-90 activity was detected in all samples but two and ranged from 0.72 to 3.84 pCi/1. The annual mean value for strontium-90 was slightly higher at the control locations (2.04 pCi/l) than at the indicator locations (1.49 pCi/1). The location with the highest mean (2.30 pC1/1) was control location T-20B. The mean values were similar to those measured in 1977, 1978, and 1979. The activities of Ba-140 and cesium-137 were below their respective LLD's in all samples collected. Results for potassium-40 were nearly identical at control and i Micator locations (1190-1160 pCi/1). Indicator location T-20B had the highest mean (1200 pCi/1). Since the chemistries of calcium and strontium, and potassium and cesium are similar, organisms tend to deposit cesium-137 in muscle and soft tissue and strontium-89 and -90 in bones. In order to detect potential environmental accumulation of these radionuclides, the ratios of the strontium-90 activity to 1This estimate is based on data on pp. 71 and 108 of the report Natural Background Radiation in the United States (National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements,1975). The terrestrial absorbed dose (uncor-rected for structural and body shielding) ranges from 35 to 75 mrad /y and averages 46 mrady f ar Middle America. Cosmic radiation and cosmogenic radionuclides contribute 32 mrad /y for an average of 78 mrad /y or 19.5 mrad / quarter. 11
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENC23 the weight of calcium and of the cesium-137 activity to weight j' of stable potassium were monitored in milk. The measured concentrations of calcium and stable potassium were in agree-ment with previously determined values of 1.16 0.08 g/l and 1.5020.21 g/1, respectively (National Center for Radiological Health,1968). No statistically significant variations in the ratios were observed. Groundwater (Well Water) Gross beta activities in suspended solids were below the LLD of 0.6 pC1/1 in all control samples and was at the LLD level in indicator samples. Gross beta activities in dissolved solids averaged 2.8 pC1/1 at the indicator locations and 5.5 pCi/l at the control location. The location with the highest annual mean was the control location T-27 and averaged 5.5 pCi/1. The range of gross beta activities were similar to those observed in 1978 and 1979. Only three of twelve samples contained slightly more than the LLD of 390 pCi/l of tritium. The mean tritium activity measured at T-7 was 590 pCi/1, only about 140 pC1/1 above the background s level of 450 pCi/1 measured in untreated surface water from Lake Erie.
'u)
Strontium-89 and strontium-90 activities were below the LLO's of 2.6-pC1/1 and 2.1 pci/l in all samples. All samples were below the LLD of 5.7 pCi/l for cesium-137 activity.
.The activities detected in well water were not significant when
-compared with the LLD and were not attributable to the station operation, except tritium -level (960 pCi/1) in well water from T-7. The elevated level in sample collected 14 January 1980 could be attributable to the Station operation.
Edible Meat In edible meat samples (chickens, racoon, muskrat, goose, and snapping turtle) the mean potassium-40 activity was 2.13 pCi/g wet weight for the indicator locations and 1.35 pC1/g wet (7 weight for the control location. Cesium-137 activity was below (j the LLD of 0.028 pCi/g wet weight in all samples. 12
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CCIENC]O O Fruits and Vegetables Strontium-89 activity was below the LLD of 0.007 pCi/g in all samples. Strontium-90 activities averaged 0.005 pCi/g wet weight at the indicator locations and 0.002 pC1/g wet weight at the control location. The radiostrontium activity detected was attributable to fallout from previous nuclear tests. The only gamma-emitting isotope detected was naturally-occurring potassium-40. The mean activities were 3.61 pCi/g wet weight for indicator locations and 1.35 pCi/g wet weight for the control locations. The activity detected was similar to that detected in 1977, 1978, and 1979. All other gamm-emitting isotopes were below their respective LLD's. Green Leafy Vegetables Green leafy vegetables (cabbage and lettuce) collected during , harvest season were analyzed for iodine-131. All results were below the LLD of 0.202 pCi/g wet weight. All gamma-emitting isotopes, except potassium-40, were below their respective LLD's. Potassium-40 activity averaged 3.02 pCi/g wet weight and 1.76 pCi/g wet weight fcr indicator and control locations, respectively. Animal-Wildlife Feed In grass, smartweed, and silage the predominant gamma-emitting isotope was potassium-40. The annual mean for control location T-34 was slightly higher (5.77 pCi/g wet weight) than the mean value for indicator locations (5.04 pCi/g wet weight). All othor gamma-c.mitting isotopes were below their respective LLD's. Soil Soil samples were collected in June 1980 and analyzed for gamma-em'.tting isotopes. The predominant activity was potas-sium-4 which had a mean of 15.4 pCi/g dry weight at indicator 13
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENC'33 (Of locations and of 22.1 pCi/g dry weight at control locations. Cesium-137 was detected in nine of eleven samples. The mean activity at the indicatoe location was 0.22 pCi/g dry weight and 0.89 pCi/g dry weight at the control locations. The highest cesium-137 activity, 1.83 pCi/g, was detected at the control location T-23,14.3 miles SE of station. The level of activities and distribucion pattern was very dmilar to those observed in 1978 and 1979. All other ga.w-emitting isotopes were undetectable. Trace amounts of niobiur-95 and zirconium-95 were detected in two of eleven samples. Presence of these gamma emitters in soil is attributed to the fallout from previous nuclear tests in the atmosphere. 3.2.3 The Aquatic Environment Water Sar.ples - Treated In treated water samples the gross beta activity in suspended (N solids was below the LLD of 0.8 pCi/1 in all but two samples. . Ll The detected activity in these two samples was at or near the LLD level (0.8 and 1.0 pCi/1). Gross beta 3ctivity in dissolved solids averaged 2.4 pCi/1 at indicator locations and 2.6 pCi/1 at- control locations.'The values are similar to those measured in 1975,-1976,.1977, 1978, and 1979. Annual mean tritium activities were similar at indicator and control locations (290 and 325 pri/ , respectively). 1 Strontium-89 activity was below the LLD level of 4.4 pCi/1 in all samples. Strontium-90 activity (1.4 pCi/1) was detected in one sample collected at T-28, unit 1 treated water supply, onsite, and' was .at the LLD level of 1.4 pCi/1. Essentially identical results we.e obtained in 1979. Water Samples - Untreated In untreated water samples the mean gross beta activity in . . suspended solids was 2.1 pC1/1 at indicator locations and 1.8 pCi/1 at- control locations. In dissolved solids the mean activity was 3.8 pCi/1 at indicator and 3.3 pCi/1 at control locations. For total residue-the mean activities were 4.8 pCi/1.at, indicator locations and 3.9 pCi/1 at con *rol loca-
, tions. None of these results show statistically sign..icant L'j differences between indicator and control locations.
14
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CClZNCE3 The mean tritium activity for indicator and control locations were essentially identical (450 and 430 pCi/1, n espectively). These results were slightly higher than those obtained fcr treated water, (290 and 325 pCi/1, respectively) but differences are not statistically significant since the counting uncertainty is larger than the difference (110-190 pCi/1). Strontium-89 and strontium-90 levels were below their respective LLD's (1.7 pCi/1 and 1.3 pCi/1, respectively) in all samples. Cesium-137 activity was below the LLD of 6.8 pCi/l for all locations. Fish The mean gross beta activity in fish muscle was nearly identical for indicator and control locations (2.25 and 2.47 pCi/g wet weight,respectively). Potassium-40 was the only gamma-emitting isotope detected. The mean potassium-40 activity was ". 33 pCi/g wet weight for the indicator location and 2.24 pC1/g wet weight for the control location. Cesium-137 activity was below the LLD level of 0.068 pCi/g wet weight in all samples. The levels of activities were similar to those observed in 1978 and 1979. Bottom Sediments The mean gross beta activity in bottom sediments was 24.3 pCi/g dry weight for indicator locations and 15.0 pC1/g dry weight for the control location. The location with the highest mean was indicator Location T-30 (26.4 pCi/g dry weight). Location T-30 had also the highest mean potassium-40 activity (24.8 pCi/g dry weight) which was the major contributor to the gross beta activity at all location. Strontium-89 activity was detected in one of six samples collected at indicator Location T-27, Magee Marsh (0.02 pCi/g dry weight). O 15
4 HAZLATON CNVIRONMENTAL SCl2NCCO n v The mean strontium-90 activity was 0.020 pC1/g dry weight for indicator locations and 0.021 pCi/g dry weight for control location. The location with the highest mean was indicator Location T-30 (0.002 pCi/g). The difference between these values is insignificant. Cesium-137 activity was below the LLD of 0.09 pCi/g for control location and 0.19 pCi/g for indicator locations. Almost identical levels, distribution, and composi-tion of the detected radionuclides were detected in 1978 and 1979. 3.2.5 Sumrnary and Ccnclusions Results of sample analyses during the period January - December 1980 are summarized in Table 4.5. Tabulations of data for all samples collected during this period, additional statistical analyses of the data, and graphs of data trends are presented in a separate report to the Toledo Edison Company (HES 1981). Radionuclide concentrations measured at indicator locations were compared with levels measured at control locations and in p preoperational . studies. The comparisons indicate background-level radioactivities in all samples collected with following V exception: The tritium level in well water from T-7, 0.9 miles NNW of the station, collected 14 January 1980 was about 510 pC1/1 aboy; the background level of 450 pC1/1 measured in nearby untreated surface water. The slightly elevated level could be attribu-table to the station operation; however, the level was more than thirty-nine times lower than the annual average concentra-tion allowed by the EPA National Interim Primary Drinking Water l Regulation (40 CFR 141) and was about 0.017% of the maximum permissible concentraticn for tritium in unrestricted areas (3,000,000 pCi/l). t l l I l l-v 16
HAZLOTON ENVIRONM3NTAL CCIENCES O 4.0 FIGURES AND TABLES O O 17
~
O O 7 -
@ Sompting location
---. Site boundary
. 4, 6 l'
$,5,* / ,,#
.~
2 *~~ M K._ ,, h sonnow rir x d);. -
*$$E* ). ~blSCSIG
( O /y,p 4q., 1 fyrag6 ; LAKE
,0#' +%,
( - ' I '
'5 } N/
ouer-wasua no4o ,,____,
- O.5 mi 2 .
+ ^ - .
i h DAVIS - BESSE sonnow cits NUCLEAR POWER STATION j.
.I ^O i.omi -
LJ NAVARRE
- h 00ApaY a MARSH l.5 mi
'. w '
, .e @. @ @ ---
@ s
?.M ' -
-- - . J.y. .
.. . s '.
Y '-
. y .:. c9: P :. ,
c .. : ' , . t.
. N A,4 e .
.. TOUSSAINT R/vER 4. ; &ls . :. . . , . - ~.
,-,.m;.- e
, .[
; . . : .6 : ' ' - _
Figure 4-1. Sampling locations on the site periphery of the Davis-Besse fluclear Power Station, Unit No. 1.
North be c f . 4,. . Middle Boss 1. . . & o Toledo p 12 ' , . :. - a n N. sty
@ I S80'*5 W Oregon ..',. ,' 3 3,, 1 I
f 2 -
.'27 A b
l (
)
'O 3yg South Boss 1.
1 r. g y
- y. net I
4 E poetM **f ' ' 25 ., , . . . 2 \ p,1 \OokHarbo, 53 52 5
. s. . . .. . . .-
,o sS \ @E -
. .: 2.
n
-: Port Clinton .. ;
e-f
# t' \ 7 i .
4 - 10 mi- ':-
~
.- . : ~. .
24 ' '- h 6
~
pt' * -
..' , ,. 'Sondusky .,,
Bowling Green 15ml b '
'g '
t / go',p \l ' 20erJ. Fremont l N/ 25 mi. k N 3 g
~
Fosto lo Fiqure 4-2. Samoling locations (excepting those on the site periphery), Davis-Besse Nuclear o ower Station, Unit No. 1.
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CCaa:NCO:3 O Table 4.1. Sampling locations, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1. Type of Code Location, T-1 I Site boundary, 0.6 miles NE of station, near intake canal. T-2 I Site boundary, 0.9 miles E of station. T-3 I Site boundary,1.4 miles SE of station, near Toussaint River and storm drain. T-4 I Site boundary, 0.8 miles S of station, near Locust Point and Toussaint River. T-5 I Main entrance to site, 0.25 miles W of station. T-7 I Sand Beach, 0.9 miles NNW c c :.!ation. T-8 I Earl Moore Farm, 2.7 miles WSW of station. T-9 C Oak Harbor, G.8 miles SW of station. T-ll C Port Clinton, 11.5 miles SE of station. T-12 C Toledo, 23.5 miles WNW of station. T-17 I Irv Fick's well onsite, 0.7 miles SW of station. b T-20 C Daup Fann, 5.4 miles SSE of station. c Al Waugh Fann, 7.5 miles SE of station. T-20A C
. T-20B C Gacth Fann, 5.5 miles WSW of station.
l T-23 C Put-In-Bay Lighthouse,14.3 miles ENE of station. T-24 C -Sandusky, 24.9 miles SE of station. T-25 I Miller Fann, 3.7 miles S of station. T-27 C Magee Marsh, 5.3 miles WNW of station. T-28 I Unit 1 treated water supply, onsite. [ T-29 I Lake Erie, intake area,1.5 miles NE of station. l l T-30 I Lcke Erie, discharge area, 0.9 miles ENE of station. (v 20 l L __
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENC~'O O Table 4.1. (continued) Type of Code Locationa T-31 I Onsite. T-32 I Land, within 5 miles radius of station. T-33 1 Lake Erie, within 5 miles radius of site. T-34 C Land, greater than 10 miles radius of site. T-35 C Lake Erie, greater than 10 miles radius of site. T-36 I Miller farm, 3.7 miles S of station (or the private garden or farm having the highest X/Q). T-37 C Fruit stan-,12.0 miles SW of station (or the fam 10 to 20 miles from the site in the least prevalent wind direction). T-38 I Site boundary 0.6 ENE of station near lake. T-39 I Site boundary 1.2 miles ESE of station near ditch Toussaint. T-40 I Site boundary 0.7 miles SE of station near dit:h Toussaint. T-41 I Site boundary 0.6 miles SSE of station ne." ditch Toussaint. T-42 I Site boundary 0.8 miles SSW of station by ECC. T-43 I Site boundary 0.5 miles SW of station along Route 2 fence. T-44 I Site boundary 0.5 miles W of station by railroad tracks. T-45 I Site boundary 0.5 miles WNW of station on access road behind cooling tower. T-46 1 Site boundary 0.5 miles NW of station along access road. T 47 I Site boundary 0.5 miles N of station along access road by gate. O 21
4 Hawa mN CNVIRONMENTAL SC12NC3:3 O Table 4.1. (continued) Type of Code locationa T-48 I Site boundary 0.5 miles NNE of station by lake. T-49 I Site boundary 0.5 miles NE of station along access
- road by lake.
T-50 I Erie Industrial Park 4.5 miles ESE of station by Water Tower. T-51 I Daup Fam, 600 Tettau Road, Port Clinton, Ohio 4.5 miles SSE of the station. T-52 I Miller Fann 3.7 miles S cf site on West Camp Road W. T-53 I Nixon Farm 4.5 miles SSE of site on West Camp Perry West Road. T-54 I M. 3eier Farm 4.8 miles WSW of site on Genzman 4 Road i , . T-55 I Lenke Farms 5 miles west on site of Route 2. 4 al-Indicator locations; C = Control locations. bFann went out of business in April 1979. Replaced by T-20A.
- cGoat dried up in August 1979. Replaced by T-208 in December 1980.
l I. . 22
Table 4.2. Type and frequency of collection. Sampling Location Type Weekly Monthly Quarterly Semi-Annually Annually 1 I AP Al TLD TLD SO 2 I AP Al TLD TLD S0 3 I AP Al SWU TLD TLD S0 4 I AP Al TLD TLD S0 I TLD I TLD 5 7 8 I I AP Al AF Al TLD TLD M a TLD WW TLD VE b AF c SO SO lq 9 C AP AI TLD TLD SO O 11 C AP Al SWU SWT TLD TLD SO Z 12 C AP Al SWU SWT TLD TLD S0 m WW 2 17 I a C M 20'f 20A C M o a Z m 20B C M " S0 E 23 C AP AI TLD TLD a " 24 C TLD M TLD b 25 VE 27 C C AP Al TLD TLD WW BS S0 3> 28 I SWU SWT h 29 I BS n 30 I BS iii 31 I WL SMW Z 32 I ME m d 33 I F WF ST m c 34 C ME Vb d AF 35 I F 36 C 37 I GLV 38-55 I TLD TLD
'b Semi-m nthly during the grazing season, May through October.
Two varieties from each location. cCattlefecu _9llected during the 1st quarter, grass collected during 3rd quarter. d Two species from each location. yFarmwentoutofbusinessinApril1979. Replaced by T-20A. Goat dried up in August 1979. Replaced by T-20B in December 1979. O O O
Ham ERTON CNVIRONMENTAL CCI~NCJG O V
- Table 4.3. Sample codes used in Table 2.
Code Description AP Airborne Particulates AI Airborne Iodine TLD (M) Therduminescent Dosimeter - Monthly TLD (Q) .nermoluminescent Dosimeter - Quarterly M Milk WW WellWater(Groundwater) ME Domestic Meat VE Fruits and Vegetables GLVa Green Leafy Vegetables AF Animal Feed (silage, grain, grass) SMW Smartweed SWT~ Surface Water - Treated (TPP) SWU Surface Water - Untreated F Fish BS Bottom Sediments SO Soil WL Wildlife (muskrat or raccoon) ST Snapping Turtle WF Waterfowl (goose) O 24
Table 4.4. Sampling summary. Collection Number Number of Number of Sample Type and of Samples Samples a Collected Missed Remarks Type Frequency Locations Air Environment See text p. 7 Airborne particulates C/W 11 365 7 366 6 See text p. 7 Airborne iodine C/W 11 0 TLD's C/M 31 372 C/Q 31 123 1 See text p. 7 7 Terrestrial Environment N Milk (May-Oct) G/SM 3 36 0 (Nov-Apr) G/M 3 18 0 h Groundwater G/Q 3 12 0 0 Edible Meat z
- a. Domestic meat G/SA 2 4 0 m 1 2 0 Z
- b. Wildlife G/SA S
(one species)
- c. Waterfowl G/A 1 1 0 g
- d. Snapping Turtle G/A 1 1 0 g m g
- Fruits and Vegetables G/SA 3 12 0 m
(two varieties from each location) 6 0 {> Green leafy vegetables G/M 2 F (during harvest season) # Animal-wildiife feed Collected 1st Q
- a. Cattlefeed G/A 2 2 0 h
- b. Grass G/A 2 2 0 Collected 3rd Q z 1 0 0
- c. Smartweed G/A 1 Soil G/A 11 11 0 l Aquatic Environment Treated surface water G/WM 3 156b o 3 14 5b 11 See text p. 8 Untreated surface water G/WM G/HM 1 52b o Fish (two species) G/SA 2 8 0 Bottom sediments G/SA 3 6 0 a
Type of collection is coded as follows: C/ = continuous; G/ = grab. Frequency is coded as follows: /HM = hourly grab composited monthly; /WM = weekly grab com-posited monthly; /W = weekly; /SM = semi-monthly; /M = monthly; /Q = quarterly, b
/SA = semi-annually; /A = annually.
Samples are sent to laboratory weekly. O O O
' ,J - v Q}
Table 4.5 Enviromental Radiological Monitoring Program Summary. Name of facility Davis-Besse __ Nuclear power Station Docket No. 50-346 Location of f4ctlity Ottawa Ohio Reporting period January - December 1980 (County, state) Indicator location with Highest Control l Annual Mean Locations i Number of Sample Ty and Locationg Non-routine Type r of Mean(F Mean(F) Mean(F) Analysesa ttob Range locattand Range Range Results' (Units) T-1. Site boundary 0.035 (52/52) 0.029 (257/257) 0 Airborne . GB _ 565f 0.002 0.030(308/308) (0.005-0.146) 0.9 mi E (0.012-0.138? (0.002-0.130) Particulates T-8. Earl Moore Farm 0.035 (52/52) (pCf/m ) 3 2.7 mi WSW (0.10-0.146) T-9. Oak Harbor- 0.035 (52/52) 6.8 mi SW (0.006-0.0%)
- (LLD 0 Sr-89 8 0.0001. .<LLD -
hA9 0.00016 (4/4) 0 Sr-90 8 0.00005 0.00016 (4/4) (0.00009-0 00028) (0.00008-0.00031) GS 8 M NA 0.092 (4/4) 0 Z Be-7 0.003 0.094 (4/4) (0.081-0.112) (0.067-0.123) $
- (LLD 0 m K-40 'O.01 (LLD -
0.006 (1/4) 0 E-95 0.0006 0.004(1/4) NA 0.001 (1/4) 0 Zr-95 0.0026 <LLD .NA 0.006 (1/4) 0 Ru-103 0.0006 0.007(1/4) NA
- (LLD 0 Ru-106 0.0028 (LLD -
- (LLD 0
' Cs-134 0.0004 (LLO - 0 E Cs-137 0.0G7 0.0007 (1/4) NA 0.0008 (1/4) Le 141 0.0013 0.0007 (l/4) NA 0.0008 (l/4) O
- <tLD 0 Ce-144 0.0029 <tLO -
- <L LD 0 Airt orne I-131 566 0.02h ulD -
lodine (pCl/m3 )
Table 4.5 (continued) Name of facility Davis-8 esse Nuclear Power Station Indicator Locatfori with Highest Control Sample Type and Locationg Annual Mean Locations humber of Type Number of Mean(F) Mean(F) Non-routine (Units) Analysesa Mean(Fj Ltob Range Locationd Range Range Results' TLD (Monthly) Ganna 156 1.0 13.6 (84/84) T-8 Earl Moore Farm 18.0 (12/12) 14.5 (72/72) 0 (mrem /91 days) (7.8-21.6) 7.7 mi WSW (15.3-21.6) (8.7-20.6) T-24. Sandusky 18.0 (12/12) 24.9 mi SE (15.1-20.6) TLD (Quarterly) Garma 52 1.0 13.8 (28/28) T-8, Earl Moore Farm 19.2 (4/4) 15.6 (24/24) 0 (arem/91 days) (7.1-23.2) 2.7 mi WSW (15.5-22.6) (8.4-21.9) y TLD (Monthly) Ganna 144 1.0 13.6 (144/144) T-44, Site boundary 20.6 (12/12) None 0 (arem/91 days) (7.1-23.3.) 0.5 mi W (17.5-22.6) r-(Inner Ring Site Boundary) TLD (Quarterly) Gamma 1.0 13.2 (47/48) T-45 Site boundary 20.9 (4/4) None 0 Z (arem/91 days) (9.5-20.9) 0.5 mi WNW (15.9-26.7) M (Inner Ring g Site Boundary) , TLD (Monthly) Gamma 72 1.0 16.4 (72/72) l T-54, M. Beier Farm 16.9 (12/12) None 0 5 m (mres/91 days) (13.1-19.3) 4.8 mi WSW (14.0-19.2) O N (Outer Ring, app. 2 5 mi distant) $ m TLD (Quarterly) Gamma 24 1.0 17.5 (24/24) T-50, Lenke Fara 18.8 (4/4) None 0 (mrem /91 days) (16.5-18.8) 5 mi W (14.3-21.2) (Outer Ring, app. 5 mi distant) F UI Milk (pC1/1) 1-131 54 1.0 <LLO - - (LLD 0 0 m Sr-89 E4 3.4 (LLD - - (LLD 0 g O Sr-90 52 0.51 1.49 (16/18) T-208, Gaeth Fam 2.30 (18/18) 2.04 (36/36) 0 m (0.72-2.20) 4.5 mi WSW (1.50-3.84) (1.01-3.84) (A GS 54 , K-40 l T-208, Gaeth Fam 100 1160 (18/18) : 1200 (18/18) 1190 (36/36) 0 (930-1350) l 4.5 mi WSW (920-1480) (603-1480) Cs-137 7.1 <LLD - - (LLD 0 Ba-ho 5.7 <LLD - -
<LLD 0 (g/1) Ca 54 0.01 1.0 (18/18) T-2CB , Ga et h I a risi 1.1 (18/18)) 1.1 (36/36) 0 (0.6-1.3) 4.5 mi WSW (0.7-1.4) (0. 7-1. 4 )
T-24. Tof fs Dairy 1.1 (18/18) 24.9 mi SL (0.1-1.3) 1 r O O O
f3 ,, g I
!v) f
(,/ q
' Table 4.5 (continued)
Nome of facility Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Indicator Location with Highest Control Type and Annual Mean locations haber of Sample Locationg Non-routine Type Number of Mean(F) Mean(F) Mean(F)
. Analysesa LtDb RangeC Locationd Range Range Results' (Units)
Milk (pCl/l) (Cont'd) T-208, Gaeth Fars 1.37(18/18) 1.30 (36/36) 0 (g/I) ,K 54 0.04 1.33(18/18) (0.70-1.58) (stable) (1.06-1.53) 4,5 et W5W (1.05-1.67) , T-208, Gaeth Farm 2.3 (18/18) 2.04 (36/36) 0 lI (pCl/g) $r-90/Ca 54 0.5 1.5 (16/18) i (0.8-2.3) 4.5 ml WSW (1.0-3.0) (0.9-4.3)
- (LLD 0 (pCl/g) Cs-137 52 6.4 (LLD -
0.6 0.6 (2/8) T-7, Sand 8each 0.6(2/8) <t LD 0 iO Well Water GB (55) 12 0.9 al NNW (0.6-0.6; 'Z (pCl/1) (0.6-0.6) GB (DS) 12 1.0 2.8 (8/8) (1.8-3.8) T-27 Magee Marsh 5.3 al teef 5.5(2/4) (3.6-7.3) 5.5 (2/4) (3.6-7.3) 0 lg , T-27. Magee Marsh 5.5 (2/4) 5.5(2/4) 0 - 5.3 et teef (3.C.7.3) (3.6-7.3) 2
$ EB (TR) 12 T-7,' Sand Beach 590(3/4) (Ll' ) 0 H-3 12 380 540 (4/8)
(380-960) 0.9 al Iwai (430-%0)
- (LLD 0 Sr-89 8 2. 6 (LLD -
Sr.90 8 2.1 (LLD - - (LLD 0 W 9g GS 8 Z (LLD 0 g3 Cs-137 5.7 (LLD - - IB 8 N Edible Meat GS (pC1/g wet) 0 K-40 0.1 2.13 (6/6) 1-32. Lieske Fars 2.32 (2/2) 1.35 (2/2) (1.15-3.38) 3.0 ml W (2.10-2.48) (1.13-I.57)
- (LLD 0 Cs-137 0.02P (LLD -
<LLO O fruits and . Sr-89 9 0.007 (LLD - -
Vegetables (pC1/g wet) 0 Sr-90 9 0.002 0.005 (4/6) 1-25, Miller Farm 0.006 (2/3) 0.002 (3/3) (0.002-0.009) 3.7 al 5 (0.003-0.009) (0.002-0.003) ! G5 9 i 7. ,N) 27m $w '" fi7- ) i 9- )
- <t tD u Nb-95 0.023 (L t D -
Table 4.5 (continued) Name of facility Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Indicator Location with Highest Control Saryle Type and Annual Mean Locations Number of Locationg Non-routine Type Number of Mean(F) Mean(F) MeanfFj Range Range Resultse (Units) Ananysesa I LLDb Range Locationd 0.039 RLD GLD 0 Fruits and Zr-95 - - Ve9etables . I (pCi/9 (Cont dw)et) 0.20 (LLD - RLD 0 Ru-106 - 0.02i GLD 0 Cs-137 RLD - - 7 Ce-lal 0.042 RLD - - (LLD 0 r Ce-144 0.11 <LLD - - (LLD 0 m
-4 Green Leafy I-131 6 0.202 (LLD - - (LLD 0 0 Vegetables Z (pC1/g wet) GS 6 m K-40 0.1 3.02 (3/3)
(1.81-3.99) T-36, Miller Fam 3.7 mi 5 3.02 (3/3) (1.81-3.99) 1.76 (3/3) (1.67-1.84) 0 fg Nb-95 0.016 <tLD - - (LLD 0 0 ro Z e 0 Zr-95 0.026 (LLD - - (LLD [ m 0.014 <LLD - <LLD 0 Cs-137 - 0.037 (LLD - - alb 0 Ce-141 Ce-144 0.12 (LLD - - (LLD 0 m D Animal-Wildlife GS S jij Feed g (pC1/g wet) Be-7 0.57 GLD - - dLD 0 g m 0.1 T-34, Location 5.77 (2/2) 5.17 (2/2) 0 g, K-40 5.04 (3/3) (3.24-7.80) 2.5 mi S (4.35-7.19) (4.35 ./19) 0.068 (LLD - <tLD 0 Nb-95 - Zr-95 0.096 (LLD - - CLD 0 0.048 (LLD - (LLD 0 Ru-103 - 0.051 (LLD - (LLD 0 Cs-137 - 0.17 <tLD - <LLD 0 Ce-141 - 0.34 - (LLD 0 Ce-144 <LLD -
)
]
TNII4.5 (continued) Name of facility , Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Indicator Location with Highest Control Annual Mean- Locations Number of Sample Type and Locationg Mean(F) Mean(F) Non-routine Type . Munber of Mean(F) Range Results' Analysesa ttob Locationd Range (Units) RaneeC , Soll (pCf /g dry) . (LLD 0 Be-7 1.0 GLD - - T-8, Earl Moore Fam 30.7 (1/1) 22.1 (5/5) 0 K-40 0.1 15.4 (6/6) (4.1-30.7) 2.7 at WSW - (14.8-26.3) 0 I Zr-% 0.11 (LLD T-12. Toledo 0.23 (1/1) 0.23 (1/5) 25.2 at Isti - - T-4, Site boundary 0.16 (1/1) (LLD 0 Iti- % 0.09 0.16 (1/1)
- 0.8 mi 5 -
<tLD 0 Ru-103 0.084 GLD - -
(LLD - GLD 0 Ru-106 0.51 - T-23, Put-in-Bay 1.83 (1/1) 0.89 (4/5) 0 b Cs-137 0.05 0.22 (5/6) I (0.06-0.18) Lighthouse - (0.45-1.83) O 14.3 mi ENE w Z o (LLD 0 Ce-U l 0.19 RLD - -
'<tLD - GLD 0 Ce-144 0.42 -
I t
' Treated Surface 36 0.8 0.8 (1/2) 1-12. Toledo Tap 1.0 (1/24) 1.0 (1/24) 0 W GB(SS) 2.3 at WNW - - 0 Water (pCl/1) E T-11, Port Clinton 3.0 (12/12) 2.6 (24/24) 0 Z GB (DS) 36 1.0 2.4 (12/12) g 9.5 al SL (2.6-3.6) (1.1-3.6) 5 ! GB(TR) 36 1.0 2.4 (12/12) T-11, Port Clinton 3.1 (12/12) 2.6 (24/24) 0 W (1.9-3.1) 9.5 mi SE (2.6-4.3) (1.7-4.3) 350 (4/4) 325 (8/8) 0 H-3 12 ?% 290 (4/4) T-II, Port Citnton (240-360) 9.5 mi SE (240-460) (240-460)
GLD 0 Sr-89 8 4.4 <LLD - - 1.4 (1/4) (LLD 0
$r-90 8 1.4 1.4 (1/4) T-28. Unit i
- Treated Water -
Supply, Onsite GS 8
- <t L D 0 Cs-131 5.7 <tLD -
r -- Table 4.5 (continued) Name of facility Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Statien Indicator Location with Highest Control Sample Type and Annual Mean Locations Number of Locationg Non-routine Type Number of Mean(F) Mean(F) (Units) Analysesa LLDb Mean(F) Range Locationd Range Range Results' T-28. Unit 1 2.2 (3.12) 1.8 (6/24) 0 Untreated Surface GB(55) 45 1.C 2.1 (1/21) , Water f (1.0-3.0) treated water (2.0-2.6) (1.1-2.0) j (pCl/1) supply, onsite
' T-3, Lake Erie 3.9 (9/9) 3.3 (24/24) 0 lGBQS) 45 1.0 3.8 (21/21)
(2.4-6.8) site boundary. (3.3-5.1) (2.5-5.1) 1
) 1.4 at SE of II Toussaint R. and i>
stom drain
! GB(TR) 45 1.0 4.6 (21/21) T-3, Lake Erie 5.0 (9/9) 3.9 (24/24) 0 $
site boundary (3.3-7.8) (2.5-7.7) O
! (2.4-8.9) 1.4 mi SE of g
' Toussaint R. and I stom drain H-3 16 350 450 (2/8 T-11, Port Clinton ,500 (1/4) 430 (2/8 0 $
(430-470 9.5 mi SE - (430-500 33 0 Sr-89 8 1.7 (LLD - - <tLD 0 2 1.3 (LLD (LLD 0 Sr-90 8 ! - -
, I ,'-
t GS 8 l
! <tLD 0 ID
. f" Cs-137 6.8 i (LLD - -
i I g T-35, Lake Erie 2.47 (4/4) 2.47 (4/4) 0 0 Fish G8 8 0.1 2.25 (4/4) (pC1/gwet) (1.80-2.66) 15 mi NE (1.88-3.06) (1.88-3.06) GS 8 l h 0 E K-40 0.1 2.33 (4/4) T-33, Lake Erie 2.33 (4/4) 2.24 (4/4) (2.24-2.57) 1.5 mi NE (2.24-2.57) (2.14-2.29) 0.068 <LLD - <LLD 0 Cs-131 - 0 0 0
g p
%.;i (u,/ l (J )
Table 4.5 (continued) Name of facility Davis-Besse Nuclear power Station Indicator l Location with Highest Control Sample Type and Locationg Annual Mean Locations Number of Type Number of Mean(F) Mean(F) Non-routine (Units) Analysesa LLDb Mean(F) Range - Locationd Range Range Results' Botton Sediments GB 6 1.0 24.3 (4/4) T-30, Lake Erie 26.4 (2/2) 15.0 (2/2) 0 (pct /g dry) (19.5-33.3) Discharge Area (19.5-33.3) (15.0-15.1) 0.9 at M Sr-89 6 0.02 <LLD T-27 Magee Marsh 0.02(1/2) 0.02 (1/2) 0 5.3mi M - - Sr-90 6 0.010 0.020(4/4) (0.012-0.023) T-30 Lake Erie Discharge Area 0.022 (1/2) (0.022-0.023) 0.021 (1/2) 0 f 0.9 al M GS 6 0 K-40 0.1 23.5 (4/4) T-30, Lake Erie 24.8 (2/29 18.0 (2/2) 0 Z (17.2-32.4) 5.3 at M (17.2-32.4) (17.3-18.7) ,g Cs-137 0.09 0.19 (1/4) T-29. Lake Erie 0.19 (1/4) (LLD 0
- Intake Area - -
M 1.5 mi NE s lz aG8 = gross beta SS = suspended solids DS = dissolved solids, TR = tots 1 resi.te. 1 E bLLD = nominal lower limit of detection based on 3 sigma counting error for background sample. cMean based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses. (F). dLocations are specified by station code (Table 4.1) and distance (miles) and direction relative to reactor site.
'Non-routine results are those which exceed ten times the control station value. I fThree results have been excluded in the determination of the raans and ranges of gross beta in air particulates. The results were W unreliable due to pump malfunction or low volume. O 9 Quarterly composites of all *amples from indicator locations and control locations were gamma scanned separately. Thus, the location with E the highest annual inean cannot be identified. Z hTwenty-six results have been excluded in the determination of the LLD of airborne fodine-131. These results have been excluded due to ()
apparent pump malfunction or low volume. m 10ne high LLD value of 1.7 resulting from low chemical recovery has been excluded from determination of LLD. (A JTwo high LLD values (5.0 and 5.8 pC1/1) have been excluded from the deteminattat of LLO. High values resulted from high dissolved solids content necessitating the use of small volume for analysis.
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCCNC]O O
5.0 REFERENCES
Arnol d, J. R. and H. A. Al-Salih. 1955. Bery111um-7 Produced by Cosmic Rays. Science 121: 451-453. Gold, S., H. W. Barkhau, B. Shlein, and B. Kahn. 1964. Measurement of Naturally Occurring Radionuclides in Air, in the Natural Radiation Environment, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 369-382. Hazleton Environmental Sciences, 1979. Operational Environmental Radio-logical Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Oak Harbor, Ohio, Annual Report, January-December 1978.
. 1980. Operational Environmental Radiological Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Oak Harbor, Ohio, Annual Report, January-December 1979.
. 1981. Operational Environmental Radiological Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1, Oak Harbor, Ohio, Final Report - Part II, Data Tabulations and Analyses.
January-December 1980. NALC0 Environmental Sciences. 1978. Preoperational and Operational Radio-logical Monitoring for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Oak Harbor, Ohio, Annual Report. January-December 1977. National Center for Radiological Health. 1968. Section 1. Milk and Food. Radiological Health Data and Reports. Vol . 9, November 12, 730-746. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Environmental Radiation Data, Report 12 (April 1978) and Report 14 (October 1978). Eastern Environ-mental Radiation Facility, Montgomery, Alabama. Wilson, D. W. , G. M. Ward, and J. E. Johnson. 1969. In: Environmental Contamination by Radioactive Materials, International Atomic Energy Agency, p.125. O 33
O XVIII 1O SECTION ll.1 OPERATIONAL NOISE SURVEILLANCE i l 0
t l l 1 > j l i 1 j ! 1 I 1 4.1 OPERATIONAL NOISE SURVEILLANCE l l Operational Noise Surveillance was not required in 1980. , t P i J l i i f I I l i 1 t [ l l t r n 1 i I L P
,w-.- , er , ,-- me . w .. , -
._,_a , a _ a_ _ -,a wa s, x -_m. _- -,,-.
_ a ,,s ,,_ >a s _,a , . O XIX O SECTION 11. 2 FISH IMPINGEMENT STUDY O
1 , i ; i,
- i.
1 i I 4.2 FISH IMPINGEMENT STUDY j The fish impingement study is reported in Section 3.1.2.a.b. f i 1 i i i i I I r _ _ _ - - _ . - . . _ - . - - - - , - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - ~ ~ - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' ' ~ - - - ~ ' ' ' ' -~~'
m_as. . %.mam%m6-+-4.-w 4-.- ---aa_e -- ---.ul m - 4d -h--m-- - a....Aa- ---- . . h_..--A. 2 m _ ____ . . A t I k l i I . 9 1 1 i 1 l I i i i I SECTION 4.3 CHURINE IOXICITY STUDY I i J i I Y I a 1; _~___ _ ______ _
L i i l 4.3 CHLORINE T0XICITY STUDY ! l The chlorine toxicity study was not required for the year 1980. : t i ! i 4 a 4 4 i l J .l 1 l i l O
,u,_ A__ .J. ._ , A. - wa-m Cam.+ _A.am.A. - _ea__ .- .__ _ ._ _ _a _ mm,_
l .f t I i i l MI O ADDITIONAL STUDIES l l t
, ANNUAL REPORT DAVIS-BESSE H RRESTRIAL MONITORING CONTRACT JANUARY 1981 A. Plant Communities Ernest R. Hamilton During the spring and fall of 1980 seedlings of woody species were again sampled in all permanent 1/2 m x 2 m plots at both the Davis-Besse and Ottawa sampling sites. In addition, the canopy individuals were sampled in the permanent 10 m x 10 m plots at the Davis-Besse Cooling Tower Woods sites.
As in the past, the vegetation and soil moisture data repre-sent a continuation of those included in previous reports. All S methods of data calculation are identical to those previously de- ' {d L scribed (June,-1974 report). Emphasis is again placed on fluctua-tion of numbers of individuals of the various species. The in-cluded importance values represent a combination of vegetational ! parameters and thus indicate relationships of species ~to each other in the community. Cooling To.ier Woods The prevailing soil moisture conditions in all three sampling levels of the Fulton soil appeared to be nearly optimal during the spring gennination and subsequent early growth period (Fig. A-1). These soil moisture conditions remained slightly below saturation
~ levels with minimal fluctuations until the end of June. Numbers-L of individuals of most species increased from the levels recorded In l
l
nc in the spring of 1979, and this trend continued into the fall (Table A-1). The reduced soil moisture fluctuations throughout the growing season, as compared to previous years, enhanced sub-sequent seedling germination and survival and resulted in a'sub-stantial increase in numbers of individuals from the spring of 1979 to the fall of 1980 (success rate - 133%). The dram: tic increases of such species as Acer negundo_(Box-Elder) and the diagnostic indicator, Celtis occidentalis (Hackberry), (Hamilton and Limbird,1979) of the Fulton Soil illustrate this favorable response to nearly optimal moisture conditions during the grow-ing season. Moisture conditions in the Toledo Soil were at saturation for nearly the entire spring germination period and into the.first week of July (Fig. A-2), and visual ponding was evident during this period. T* e remaining growing period through September was then characterized by a deficiency of moisture and almost drought-like conditions. The response of the species to these conditions is evident with a drop in numbers of individuals from the fall of 1979 through the spring and into the fall of 1980 (Table A-2). These drier sumer conditions h3ve allowed an increase in survival of Celtis occidentalis (Hackberry) seedlings that are favored by drier conditions (Hamilton and Forsyth,1972). Such fluctuating spring and fall moisture conditions undoubtedly create stress as the limits of tolerance are approached and result in a decrease in success rate for most species. This is particularly true when comparisons are made with survival in the Fulton soil. O
A-3
' These additional data once again illustrate the critical nature of soil moisture conditions throughout the entire growing period. Widely fluctuating soil moisture limits survival rates and species success. At this time the Cooling Tower has not oper-ated through all or most of a growing season, but it would be reasonable that fluctuations in the reproductive layer-would be minimized and a stable species composition of the future canopy would be maintained.
The sampling of the arborescent layer of the Cooling Tower Woods in 1980 gave us a basis for again depicting the relationship of woody species with soil types (Table A-8). The same general trends that were described with the 1974 data (Hamilton and Limbi <-d,1979) are fm still valid in 1980. The three tree species, Celtis occidentalis (Hackberry), Gymnocladus dioica (Kentucky Coffee-tree), and tiorus_ alba (White Mulberry) are still significantly more important in areas of Fulton soil; and two species, Ulmus rubra (Slippery Elm) and Gledit-sia triacanthos (Honey-Locust), still significantly more important in areas of Toledo ~ soil. The species more characteristic of somewhat more mature woods of the Davis-Besse site such as Acer negundo (Box-Elder), Celtis occidentalis (IMkberry), and Gymnocladus diocia (Kentucky Coffee-tree), aie increasing in numbers and basal areas, while the' shade-intolerant tree species, such as Crataegus sg. (Haw-
.thorne) and Ulmus rubrq (Slippery Elm), are decreasing.
p k ) v
R-4 The loss of several insignificant species from the Toledo soil over the past six years is likely due to excessive moisture and de-creasing light factors that contribute to the elimination of indivi-duals over time. The dramatic increase in number, basal area, and importance value for Acer_ negundo (Box-Elder) indicates that this species is approaching its maximum development in the successional pattern of these woods. Hackberry-Box-Elder and Hackberry II Communities Soil moisture values in the Hackberry II community are also at saturation during the spring gennination and initial growing period (Fig. A-3). The soil composition, however, is basically a medium-to-coarse sand with some pebbles, with silt evident only near the 50 cm depth, and a decided lack of clay. The result is a lack of any standing surface water that inhibits germination and survival as is so characterstic of the Toledo soils. Conse-quently, in this setting germination and at least initiel survival are favored with a resulting increase in numbers of individuals of most species (Table A-3). This is particularly true of Partheno-cissus quinquefolia (Virginia Creeper) and to a lesser extent Celtis occidentalis (Hackberry). Fluctuating moisture with a dry period during July reduced the numbers of individuals of species with some-what limited ranges of tolerance, as is evidenced by the sharp drop in numbers of Parthenocissus quinquefolia (Virginia Creeper) with a survival rate of only 40%. The same general tre: ds are evident in the Hackberry-Box-Elder community. Soil moist tre levels are near saturation into July, but 9
A-5 the drop in moisture values during the remainder of the growing season are not as severe as in the previous comunity (Fig. A-4). Values f number of individuals increase dramatically, espe-cially /or Parthenocissus quinquefolia (Virginia Creeper) and Celtis occidentalis (Hackberrry) and to a lesser extent for Acer negundo (Box-Elder) (Table A-4), Although the total seedling success rate drop: approximately 25%, the drier conditions in middle sumer favor Celtis occidentalis (Hackberry), which can now outcompete other less tolerant species. Moisture conditions in late summer, however, were adequate for germination and at least initial survival of Fraxinus pennsylvania var. subintegerrina (Green Ash), a species that requires moist conditions to germinate. Other Communities p) y Data for both the Hackberry I and Kentucky Coffee-tree com-munities have again been included (Fig. A-7 Tables A-6 and A-7). These study areas are small (7 and 6 quadrats, respectively), but the data trends are consistent with patterns of the-other communi-ties, and no alterations in these areas havc been observed. Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge The tremendous increase in total numbers of individuals from the previous year has resulted from the proliferation of seedlings l. of Rhus radicans (Poison Ivy) (Table A-5). Examination of the total canopy composition reveals the loss of nany large trees that have succumbed from previous high water levels. Consequently, l Rhus radicans (Poison Ivy), a light tolerant species, has responded
,m accordingly and.accot!nts for approximately 50% of the importance value in both spring and fall.
A-6 Summary The most conspicucus and important component in the accumulated data is the yearly and seasonal changes in numbers and importance values of the woody species seedlings. These fluctuations are wholly natural occurrences and directly related to fluctuations in edaphic factors, particularly soil moisture. Successful germination and initial seedling growth are limited by saturated soil and standing water in the early sping, which re-duce soil oxygen and nutrient uptake. Additional germination in the late spring and early sus.ner and seedling survival are promoted by optimal soil moisture, while extremes result in seedling mortality. The effects of such factors as light can be superimposed on moisture. Openings in the canopy create drier forest-floor conditions that permit tremendous increases in light-tolerant species. Over time, assuming moisture input from the cooling tower, a stabilization of soil moisture will decrease seedling fluctuations, stabilize canopy composition, and result in a restricted number of species for the potential canopy. Thus the end result could be the development of a stable, self-perpetuating climax comunity that is controlled by edaphic conditions, particularly moisture. However, up to the present time, no direct effects on vegetation or community succession resulting from the limited operation of the cooling tower have been detected. References Hamilton, E.S. and J.L. Forsyth. 1972. Forest comunities of South Bass Island, Ohio. Ohio Acad. Sci. 74:182-184. Hamilton, E.S. and A. Limbird. 1979. Soil types and arborescent species of a specific woodlot in Ottawa County, Ohio. Ohio Jour. Sci. 79:195-203.
a Table A.I. Phytosociological data for Cooling Tower Woods derived from fall and spring (1/2 a 2 m) quadrat studies. 1974 76, fall 1977 and spring and Fall 1978-80 NUISERS OF IN01V100AL5 FULTON SOIL (N=71) Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Fall Spring Fall Sprino Fall Spring Fall 75 76 76 77 78 78 79 79 80 80 SPfClf5 74 75 Parthenocissus quinquefolta 42 72 18 93 19 497 165 137 96 143 257 101 45 87 40 15 43 50 100 87 125 189 151 231 Celtis occidentalts 102 37 67 72 92 201 245 251 236 298 273 Rhus radicans 44 Acer negundo 33 531 125 154 104 539 434 304 472 522 a29 531 24 12 28 35 _ 123 43 32 1 33 49 75 Ribes americanum 73 10 5 17 7 74 70 11 33 54 78 Crataegus sp. 14 26 2 5 21 42 8 9 28 13 10 Vltis sp. 7 27 1 2 4 28 18 6 34 14 21 7 10 1 Cornus drumondt 2 21 11 5 23 4 2 4 15 1 Gleditsia triacanthos 1 2 1 1 Prunus virginiana 1 4 I 5 6 3 3 1 Ulmus rubra 4 10 1 10 Lontcers tatarica Frastnus pennsylvanica var. subfate9errina 4 1 1 1 3 Gpmocladus dioica 2 1 1 2 1 Rubus occidentails 1 Solanum dulcamara 1 6 2 7 9 Montspermum canadense 3 6 3 3 Rosa sp. 1 Ulmus americana 8
$siles sp. 1 Carya Ovata 222 909 250 379 298 1350 1106 913 1012 1245 1283 1341 TOTAL IMORTANCE V4LUt5 m
i Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall s Nj SPECIf5 74 75 75 76 76 77 78 78 79 79 80 80 Parthenectssus quinquefolta 23.36 16.00 10.44 24.76 8.27 34.50 14.41 14.63 11.a0 12.25 18.a6 9.52 Celtis occidentalls 17.52 11.51 19.61 6.13 17.49 5.95 11.71 12.80 16.45 16.70 14.33 18.02 thus radicans 16.49 11.51 11.79 14.42 19.38 7.75 15.63 20.85 21.75 19.05 17.3a 16.74 Acer segundo 13.42 40.33 40.61 37.31 32.18 35.25 31.44 28.14 37.15 32.30 31.11 32.85 5.P4 Ribes americanum 11.21 ' 3.93 6.88 9.75 12.50 9.20 5.12 4.80 0.65 3.25 4.88 Coataegus sp. 7.64 4.09 4.65 1.52 6.13 0.80 8.40 10.45 2.05 5.20 7.35 9.58 Vltis sp. 6.32 6.17 -2.00 2.96 0.F9 3.25 4.22 1.69 1.35 2.45 2.34 1.58 2.74 2.67 1.46 0.95 1.09 3.0J 4.83 3.50 1.35 4.25 2.15 Cornus drunsondt 0.65 0.75 3.25 2.59 1.45 4.35 0.95 0.53 0.76 61editsia trfacanthos 0.47 3.33 0.47 0.60 0.52 0.30 0.30 Prunus v*rginfana 1.00 0.80 0.34 0.26 Ulmus rubra 0.47 0.21 Lonicera tatarica . . 0.87 2.41 2.11 0.92 Frestnus pennsylvanica var. subintegerrina 0.74 0.30 0.26 0.13 0.34 Epnocladus dioica 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.25 0.30 0.18 Rubus occidentalis 0.24 Solanum dulcamara 0.30 1.10 0.60 0.50 0.50 Montspermum canadense 0.30 0.60 0.34 0.26 Rosa sp. . 0.30 Ulmus americana . 1.25 tailas sp. 0.25 Cerge TOTAL 180.04 100.01 H.99100.05101.33 99.95 99.75 99.95 101.35 98.90 100.22 100.01 Note: Totals de not etways eque) 1005 because of roundin9 off individual values. n u'
pmytosociological data for Cooling Tower Woods dertves from f all and sering i O fable A.J. (1/2 a 2 e) quadrat studies. 1974-76. fall 1977 and sprin9 and fall 1978-80. [ IpJaetts CF tmoly!DUAt3 TOLEDO 50fL (N=35) Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Fall Spring Fall Sprtrg Fall 5prmg Fall 74 75 75 76 76 77 78 78 79 79 M n0
,5PECits Parthenoctssus winquefolta 5 18 10 12 4 208 57 26 34 69 42 23 3 6 4 4 14 6 4 30 29 17 25 Celtis occidentails 3 Rhus radicans 41 63 25 33 44 62 102 113 96 84 123 113 Acer negundo 8 186 42 33 23 238 26 21 172 152 sa 97 35 40 29 40 31 41 23 52 7 41 93 81 Ribes americaew 16 1 10 3 30 15 4 11 15 11 l Crataegus sp. 1 Vitts sp. 16 23 2 4 4 30 32 14 8 25 7 7 9 14 2 1 2 3 Cornus drumondt 31 3 13 6 12 1 2 Gleditsia triacanthos 1 Prunus virgtntana 1 2 3 3 Ulms rubra Lontcera tatartca Fraatnus pennsylvantea var. subtategerrina 1 Cyanocladus dtotca 16 2 Rubus occidentalls 12 10 Solanum dJ1camara 4
Mentspermum canadense Rosa sp. UIsus pericana Smilan sp. Carya ovata TOTAL 121 455 115 137 115 586 309 262 384 422 385 341 IMPORTA4Cf YAttt5 Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall ca ll Spring Fall spring Fall 5;rin Fall SPitifs 74 75 75 76 76 77 78 78 79 79 M M Parthenoctssus quinguefolia 5.48 16.03 7.50 7.53 4.53 31.20 16.99 10.33 7.30 12.30 10.81 8.16 Celtis occidentalls 2.55 1.43 6.83 2.63 4.81 3.88 3.78 3.04 11.45 11.10 8.84 10.80 khus radicans 26.69 14.43 16.95 19.43 29.86 9.44 25.65 30.03 22.50 18.25 22.85 22.38 Acer negundo 9.49 27.56 25.66 20.74 18.51 36.40 11.23 10.93 36.80 31.15 26.10 29.45 Ribes americanum 25.93 12.59 35.93 27.87 30.15 9.37 7.26 19.95 1.25 10.85 20.81 17.92 Crataegus sp. 2.83 4.10 1.30 5.17 2.64 11.86 8.25 1.10 5.40 7.26 5.84 vitts sp. 18.25 12.10 !.84 15.02 7.16 5.46 13.61 8.83 5.35 6.50 4.35 2.92 Cornus drwoondt 5.25 2.67 2.33 0.97 0.85 1.40 Gleditsia triacanthos 1.09 8.26 4.21 7.03 4.97 6.20 0.65 1.59 Prunus virginiana 0.42 Ulmus rubra 2.44 2.15 1.40 Lonicera tatarica Frantnus pennsylvanica var. sublategerrina 1.02 Gymnocladus diotca Rubus occidentatts 5.00 0.94 Solanum dulcamara 2.63 2.70 Mentspermum canadense . 1.00 Rosa sp. Ulmus americana
$stlam sp.
Carya ovata TOTAL
- 100.00 99.63 100.01 100.01 99.99 99.96 1c0.04 100.00 99.95 100.00 101.02 100.02 Note: Totals do not always equal 1001 because of rounding off individual values.
O fable A 3. Phytosociological data for Hackberry II (N=22) derived from fall and spring (1/2 a 2 m) quadrat studies, 1974 76. fall 1977 and spring and fall 1978-80. IRpW(R$ OF IN0!V!00ALS Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall 80 74 75 75 76 76 77 78 78 79 79 80 SPEC!!S 7 6 7 8 5 8 Prunus virginiana 2 Perthenocissus quinquefolta 10 20 37 52 104 46 122 24 75 190 76 10 18 8 22 13 9 4 20 21 10 Rhus radicans 8 12 20 44 34 56 95 126 59 94 110 147 Celtis occidentalls 18 25 17 27 46 38 39 40 22 19 53 43 Cornus drummondt 30 64 8 12 4 8 2 10 6 2 6 10 5 Vitts sp. 14 4 12 31 Rubus occidentalis 7 9 8 19 22 22 13 38 16 20 69 50 Ribes americanum 17 2 1 4 1 Lonicera tatarica 1 Sellan sp. I 2 1 2 1 2 4 2 Rosa sp. 5 2 2 3 Montspermum canadense 1 Acer ne9 undo 2 Senocladus dioica 2 1 1 61editsf a triacanthos 1 1 3 Viburnum lentago 158 63 154 168 253 224 351 137 251 476 376 TOTAL 101 IMPORTANCE VALUES
)
V Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall 75 76 76 77 78 78 79 79 80 80 SPEC!f5 74 75 2.31 4.50 3.85 6.00 5.00 2.06 3.53 Prunus virginiana Porthenectssus quinquefolia 11.92 18.30 25.16 24.57 31.97 19.15 29.50 16.95 24.05 29.29 18.94
- Rhus radicans 6.84 6.59 10.68 8.26 4.70 9.53 5.85 3.56 3.15 6.55 5.26 5.38 Celtis occidentalis 14.93 11.94 27.51 22.23 22.11 23.48 38.95 32.34 39.75 35.85 24.64 35.64 Cornus drusmondi 25.55 27.57 26.11 22.10 22.65 16.83 19.50 14.79 16.30 10.60 14.92 12.96 3.39 16.15 16.01 8.46 12.28 4.05 4.25 2.50 2.05 3.42 2.27 Vitts sp.
8.39 9.18 7.24 3.65 5.72 Rubus occfdentalls Ribes americanum 17.02 6.40 12.46 12.13 10.80 12.53 5.85 9.96 11.60 8.25 12.69 11.42 Lonicera tatarica 1.61 3.36 1.65 2.89 1.63 Smiles sp. 1.25 1.79 1.30 2.10 0.56 1.86 Rosa sp. 1.90 1.25 2.24 2.50 1.25 1.18 Montspersum canadense , Acer negundo 0.91 Synocladus diofca 1.04 61editsfa triacanthos 2.10 0.96 1.03 1.25 0.96 1.30 . Viburnue lenta 90 1UTAL 96.96 99.49 100.01 99.99 100.00 100.02 101.20 99.98 100.05 100.30 99.98 100.05 note: Totals do not always equal 1005 because of rounding off individual values, g
7able A.4. phytosociolo9 feel data for Mackberry 80s. Elder Cornunity (M=38) derived from fall and spring (1/2 a 2 m) quadrat studies. 1974 76, fall 1971 and fall and spring 1978 80. NUM8tR$ OF 190!Vf D'AS Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Scring ra11 m 75 75 76 76 77 78 78 79 79 80 jp[,(!!! 74 25 13 25 57 23 24 49 42 25 prunus virginfant. 18 34 106 124 55 106 176 41 parthenocissus quinquefolia 17 40 31 51 98 thus radicans 1 1 'l 3 2 6 11 10 6 29 17 16 2 3 2 4 4 1 2 6 9 Vitts sp. 3 5 14 33 113 214 201 160 171 208 222 18 31 22 Celtis occidentalls 13 9 8 18 12 6 1 14 G Cornus drupinondi 16 16 8 19 12 12 16 14 18 21 9 9 19 $ 81bes americanum 18 63 88 22 257 128 135 119 Acer negundo 5 122 4 90 4 4 5 7 4 5 3 4 1 Gymnocladus dfolca 8 1 3 2 Crataegus sp. 1 4 6 10 9 3 Rubus occidentalls 6
$stlas sp.
18 35 r'rastnus pennsylvanica var. subintegerrina 43 Fraatnus pennsylvantea 2 Solanum dv1 camera 6 11 Rosa sp. 2 4 Gleditsia triacanthos 2 Meetspermum canadense , 145 333 525 426 526 574 647 490 87 276 41 204 TOTAL 5 IMposTAMCf VALy($ Fall Sprin9 Fall Spring Fall Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring 20 Fall
??
76 76 17 78 78 79 79 Sp[Cl[5 74 75 75 18.34 13.06 7.42 7.35 8 03 7.25 10.50 8.45 5.13 . prunus virgfnfana 17.61 12.89 9.75 parthenoctssus quinquefella 22.30 20.19 17.36 28.96 23.13 18.55 23.a6 12.45 12.85 22.12 3.91 Rhus radicans 1.42 0.64 2.78 1.91 1.53 3.76 1.90 3.84 1.95 5.85 3.31 Vitts sp. 8.50 3.40 2.10 2.68 4.69 2.10 1.83 0.55 0.50 1.69 10.33 22.95 13.44 52.01 7.35 19.60 33.37 34.80 37.86 29.30 27.55 29.00 35.07 Celtis occfdentaffs 15.19 5.41 21.47 6.41 8.42 3.32 4.65 4.55 2.40 0.45 1.86 1.47 Cornus druninondt 3.05 4.81 1.64 l 8.67 6.39 9.85 8.57 8.53 3.37 3.25 3.88 Afbes america w S.35 33.80 10.21 32.24 13.02 21.97 19.00 9.73 41.00 22.65 22.52 22.69 Acer segundo 1.09 0.54 1.88 4.19 2.35 1.90 1.38 1.30 1.00 Sjunociadus dfolca 3.83 3.68 1.M 1.10 l Cretaegus sp. 1.02 0.69 1.45 2.50 2.75 2.38 Rubus occidentails 2.90 5mtlan sp. 6.56 6.00 Fraatnes pennsylvanica var. subintegerrina 6.25 Fraafnus pennsytrantca 0.90 Solanum dulcamara 2.35 1.30 Rosa sp. . 0.61 1.88 Gleditsfa triacanthos 0.90 Mentspersum canadense 99.90 100.04 99.99 707ALS 99.99 100.01 100.00 98.00 99.99 100.07 95.15 99.96 100.05 Notes fotals do not always equal 1001 because of rounding off ladividual values.
n S
. b Table A-5. Seedital data for Ottama 8ational Wildif fe Refute 5aselin9 Area.
Ottaus vetetation (1/2 x 2 M) sprint and fall 1978-80. NUMS[15 0F leol1IOUALS IMPORTANCE VAttT5 5pring Fall 5pring rail 5 print Fall Sprin9 Fall Spring F F 5prin9 Fall SNCits 78 7s 79 79 80 80 78 78 79 79 80 to 8hes radicans ' 2356 2686 1734 1584 4366 3252 46.10 ~ 51.35 43.10 37.30 49.45 47.47 Vitis sp. 175 130 126 244 222 203 9.95 9.01 8.56 10.30 8.63 8.68 fra:Inus peansylvanica 113 160 106 168 22 19 7.07 9.25 5.89 6.02 1.57 0.91 Cornus drummondi 211 112 177 189 229 88 10.30 6.76 9.04 8.06 8.21 4.27 parthemoctssus quinquefella 115 45 162 145 291 253 3.95 2.75 5.12 5.11 5.64 6.48 8thes americanun 83 77 % 79 142 153 4.30 3.95 4.88 3.71 4.58 5.51 Crataegus sp. 24 53 8 26 8 12 2.06 3.06 0.63 2.03 0.67 0.66 Cornus obilgua 9 12 0.79 0.66 Cornus - 40 40 16 41 38 1.95 2.67 0.79 2.46 . 0.60 Lindera bensoin 13 17 5 31 32 48 0.79 0.97 0.26 1.22 1.32 1.93 Quercus rubra 13 3 8 II 4 11 1.54 0.37 0.79 1.08 0.38 1.16 Wimus rubra il le 9 4 5 10 1.32 1.10 0.99 0.24 0.% 0.64 Viburnum lent 49e 13 39 49 31 13 0.34 2.99 3.52 1.67 0.83 Subus occidentalls 44 28 10 17 13 2.78 1.23 0.52 0.64 0.83 Tilla americana Il 10 19 16 11 19 0.97 0.68 1.68 1.24 0.44 1.26 Acer saccharinum 8 6 Il 13 0.52 0.54 0.71 1.18 Swercus alba 2 3 1 0.23 't.43 0.19 Cary4 cordiferets - 11 4 2 2 1.02 0.42 0.19 0.19 Acer rubrum 13 2 8 1 0.99 0.20 0.75 0.19 Corylus americana 2 3 5 1 0.13 0.23 0.39 0.20 Quercus bicolor 6 18 2 6 3 0.13 1.93 0.20 0.62 0.39 santhosylum americanum 3 6 le 6 0.16 0.19 0.44 0.24 Ostrya virgiatene 2 4 0.23 0.23 prunus virginiana 2 2 3 0.22 0.20 0.15 Carya ovata .5 23 2 4 1 0.28 4.79 0.13 0.38 0.19 Mentspermum canadensa la 1 45 86 36 58 1.10 0.13 2.14 2.95 1.69 2.20 Acer negundo 9 0.46 Solanum dulcamara 4. 3 6 0.29 0.26 0.59 6panocladus dteica 6 0.21 Sellas 91auca 9 7 15 20 9 5 0.39 0.73 0.76 0.86 0.43 0.24 Populus deltoides 1 I 0.13 0.20 Sosa sp. 34 42 34 43 2.11 2.12 1.68 2.03 Carpinus carollana 4 7 3 6 0.46 0.47 0.20 0.41 frasinus pennsylvanica var subfata9errina 65 199 219 116 4.32 10.60 9.13 6.65 Quercus palustris 9 0.66 0.23 Carya lacIntose 6 2 0.26 0.21 Cornus a101onifera 1 IS 3 0.20 0.67 0.22 Fraalnus nigra 1 1 0.19 0.20 llem verticillata 4 0.20 Viburnum prunifolium 14 1.48 Euonymus atropordureus 25 32 1.43 1.91 TOTAL 5 3322 3445 2734 2964 5730 4450 100.05 100.03 103.11 100.46 100.19 100.00 flota: Tctals do not always equal 1005 because of rounding off individual values.
Table A.6 Phytosociological data for Hackberry 1 Community (97) drrived from fall and sprirs (1/2 a 2 m) quadrat studies, 1974 1976 fall 1977, and spring and fall 1978 80/ NLDf8f s10F thplVltet.5 Fall Speleg Fall Spring Fall Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fal! 80 74 75 75 76 76 77 78 14 79 79 80
$PEClf5 Prunus virginiana Il 13 24 14 26 43 21 40 9 20 2 10 15 29 28 8 5 22 19 Parthenocissus quinquefo!!a 5 2 2 9 thus radicans 2 i 4 1 6 2 9 4 3 1 4 Vitis sp.
3 9 6 5 25 21 Staphytes trifolia 10 12 10 8 1 11 4 7 46 30 13 6 16 Celtia occidentalis 2 2 1 !! 10 2 6 4 2 1 2 5 3 Cornus drummondt Il Frasinus pennsylvanica var. subintegerrina 1 Cleditsia triacanthos ! l 9 3 1 5 Crataegus sp. 2 Ribes americanus 2 3 Subus occidentalis Viburnum lentago 3 43 30 26 53 40 56 146 74 49 35 94 64 TUTALS IMPORTANCE VAWF5
- Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall 74 75 75 76 76 77 78 78 79 79 80 no SPECll5 Prunus virginiana 24.97 41.63 40.10 24.87 38.50 28.75 25.95 40.60 2 7. t> 0 17.24 *,.36 Parthenocissus quinquefo!!a 16.92 11.18 12.40 22.30 29.51 27.50 19.95 30.67 9.60 10.90 18.07 26.40 Shus radicans 7.61 Vitis sp. 18.02 8.24 9.91 9.32 4.13 3.35 4.97 3.30 5.99
~
Staphylea trifolia 19.41 31.33 5.61 !$.78 5.16 9.25 7.75 13.98 8.75 14.45 14.90 24.21 Celtis occidentalis 4.60 13.42 6.38 17.!! 12.38 29.75 23.13 29.85 35.50 25.93 31.65 Cornus drusumondi 16.04 33.05 5.52 14.03 4.13 5.53 4.31 3.30 6.60 4.26 6.12 Frasinus pennsylvanica v r. subintegerrina 29.91 Cleditsia triacanthos 5.41 4.13 5.01 4.40 5.05 Crataegus sp. 4.26 Ribes americanus 2.98 Itubus occidentalis 2.98 6.12 Viburnun lentago 3.43 TOTALS 100.00 99.91 100.00 99.99 100.00 100.02 100.09 101.01 99.80 10?.10 100.04 99.89 Note: Totals do not always equal 100% because of rounding off individual values. O
b b fable A 1. Phytesociological data for Kentucky Coffee Tre. comunity (N=6) derived from fall and spring (1/2 a 2 m) quadr 6t studies. 1974-87. fall 1977. and spring and fall 1978-80. IRSSER$ OF IN01VIDtl4t$ Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Falt Spring Fall Spring Fall Spring 83 Fall 80 75 76 76 77 78 78 79 79 74 75
$PICit$
' 4 2 2 2 4 3 Prunus virginiana 2 1 1 12 18 42 12 35 34 13 Perthenoctssus quinquefolia 8 9 9 3 14 1 4 31 g 2 3 1 3 1 3 Rhus radicans 11 2 5 7 7 6 3 4
$taphylea trifolta 2 5 6 9 8 4 19 23 1 3 Celtis occidentalls 10 1 2 2 3 5 2 8 15 Rubus occidentalis Populus deltoides 2 1
Frasinus pennsylvanica ver. subintegerrina 1 1 3 2 10 6 4 Ribes americanum 1 1 4 3 1 . Gymocladus diofca 2 2 1 Vitts sp. 31 10 10 35
$ milan sp.
3 1 81editsfa triacanthos 2 Acer negundo 4 1 Crataegus sp.
- 3 Rosa sp.
8 23 62 96 40 86 106 95 18 24 8 17 TOTAL
- Je0RTAact v4wr5 Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall String 'all 80 75 75 76 76 77 78 78 79 79 80 74 SPfCIE5 .
4.25 5.79 8.00 6.65 3.97
. Prunus virginiana 11.75 4.77 17.82 25.90 Parthenocissus minguefolia 40.93 32.26 45.77 29.11 47.52 27.10 33.80 32.50 29.03 28.50 15.16 Rhus radicans 10.01 8.76 14.35 18.63 13.71 13.67 14.45 2.91 7.65 15.10 6.32 20.16 11.91 33.73 12.00 5.25 7.25 8.26 14.82 5taphylea trifolta 7.23 8.14 32.04 25.16 17.40 16.60 20.85 6.65 16.47 23.at Celtfs occfdentalls 9.87 15.21 34.10 13.67 7.20 3.41 18.10 14.58 13.57 Rubus occidentails Populus deltoides 8.93 6.01 13,71 Freatnus pennsylvanica var. subinte9errina 11.43 8.60 3.41 10.20 5.38 4.94 Ribes americanus 9.70 3.95 2.75 9.40 7.06 6 p ladus diofca 4.25 3.41 2.75 Vitis sp.
23.30 8.05 7.28 21.23 Snitaa sp. 3.95 2.75 Sleditste triacanthos 3.41 Acer negundo 7.65 2.75 Cretaegus sp.
- 6.10 Rosa sp.
TOTAL 99.95 95.99 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.02 99.20 99.99 100.00 100.05 100.13 100.12 7) (
%.) -
Note: Totals de not always equal 1005 hecause of rounding off individust values. h
Table 8.A. Tree data for the Cooling Tower Itoods outained in 1974 and 1980. FULTON 50!L TOLIDO SOIL TOTAL W0005 Total Stees Total Basal Area importance Total Stems Total Basal Area importance Total 5tems Total Basal Area hoortance per Hectare Value per Hectare per Hectare Value per Hectare per Hectare 9elve per Hectare 1980 1974 1980 1974 1980 1974 1980 1974 1980 1974 1980 1974 Inst 0 1974 1980 SPEC!ts 1974 1980 1974 416 882 6283.1 9977.38 23.56 33.85 414 651 4577.1 6495.06 21.72 29.39 Acer negundo 382 882 5645.24 9977.38 23.06 29.72 311 379 7533.2 7947.86 21.36 20.14* 137 106 1688.8 1730.37 11.66 10.50 Celtis occidental 1s 308 379 5463.69 7947.86 20.35 19.30 Crataegus sp. 311 270 2890.41 2939.42 16.92 14.16 299 270 4046.f. 2939.42 17.10 13.57 369 291 3432.1 3166.11 20.44 17.30 183 85 2275.71 1354.35 12.92 11.22 123 85 1419.9 1354.35 9.83 9.31 280 243 3255.2 3887.17 17.73 16.82* Ulmus rubra 47 45 9665.9 11258.14 13.22 14.16 32 39 17914.2 18502.14 22.25 21.52* Gleditsia triacanthos 51 45 9098.37 11258.14 14.42 18.32 80 2400.8 2744.90 4.98 5.05* 6 6 60.7 91.20 0.48 0.52 Gymnoclaous diotca 44 80 1279.95 2744.90 3.22 2.85 75 12.14 2.95 1.84 82.0 12.14 2.22 1.75 63 20 126.0 33.63 3.32 2.33 Cornus druanondl 46 9 110.24 34 9 2.2 - 0.35 - Horus alba 15 9 317.79 324.17 1,41 0.51 24 9 611.8 324.17 2.19 0.97* 3 - Robfala pseudoacacia 2 1 1061.-14 501.57 1.37 0.52 2 - 1168.5 - 1.61 - - - - Prunus serottna 7 3 247.93 40.15 0.73 0.18 13 3 486.5 40.15 1.19 0.37 - - - Popolos deltotdes 1 - 210.79 - 0.40 - 3 - 401.6 - 0.76 - - - - Rhus typhina 7 - 43.53 - 0.36 - 14 - 85.8 - 0.71 - - - - 404.02 0.65 0.69 3 3 .215.7 276.57 0.57 0.63 Jugland nigra '5 3 318.56 404.62 0.94 0 81 3 3 297.3 3.3 13.55 0.40 0.17 11 6 45.y 96.03 1.13 1.09 Frasinus pennsylvanica 4 1 11.97 13.55 0.31 0.45 4 1 var. subintegerrina ~ 0.22 - 3 - 5.1 - Prunus virginiana 3 - 10.26 - 0.22 0.10 3 - 7.0 - Actr rubrum 1 - 224.43 - 0.35 - - 1370 1767 29209.91 37518.25 99.93 99.98 1317 1766 34493.2 37 016.58 100.00100.3 1321 1355 31323.6 34278.28 100.0 100.10 TOTALS
*5ignificant difference at 0.05 level 9 O e
t
- O ;
4 6 (
-n
-D I'
~
l -
-c
-. j a
l ,
-:: 3 0$
1 f -2
-c ,I
- i
-o I
-R
-g
-s ;
-e 1
\ -n
=
c l -g 1 -c i i
\ ..
\ ! _E l
\ . i a
e
&&&4A 6As&A 64464 Figure A-1. Weekly soil moisture levels in Fulton soils of the Cooling Tower Woods at 10, 20, and '/ ^\
50 cm depths in the period of March 22, 1980 V to October 10, 1980. Figures are in percent saturation.
1 O
~6
-A
-n
~* i
-e ?,
4
-n
, 4 a
-s
- :: j-
-R
-c [
-o '
-8 1:
-. 2 4
-e R
i ; s
; as g&itd sis 42 68888 Figure A-2. Weekly soil moisture levels in Toledo soils of the Cooling Tower Woods at 10, 20, and 50 cm depths in the period of March 22, 1980 to October 10, 1980. Figures are in percent saturation.
O
-9 ;
-e, 6
-2 1
-c *i.
-e
! -2
-u h
-g
*4
-4
-n
-s ,_
-c i l -e 1
i -a i
-s I .-. I l --n L
' ' -n l l 3,
-y 4,
t i t , i n' I $5kii $;iiii $$$ik i Figure A-3. Weekly soil moisture levels in Hackberry II ! Community at 10, 20, and 50 cm depths in the i p x._/ period of March .22,1980 to October 10, 1980. Figures are in' percent saturation.
O 2
-2 .:
-n f
-2
-n
-Q g
-. a
-2
-g
-t
-= -. f 7 -n
-n
( -? . I ni i k -.
-2 I
8 j g 3 ' j -gl b&bbb
?**EN 66 $ $' $ $ k
~ ee e < n Figure A-4. Weekly soil moisture levels in Hackberry-Box-Elder Community at 10, 20, and 50 cm depths in the period of March 22, 1980 to October 10, 1980.
Figures are in percent saturation.
O
/
i
-n :
-c Y
e t 4
/ _g
-C
- I
-C l
-2
-:- i tv r
-y 4 s
-e 4
-C
-2
-. 1
+
l l .: l 'i l
-c <
l l _g E N i \ S e
.r. j s a 8 dhk h8I$A $ $ $'d $
Figure A-5. Weekly soil moisture levels in Toledo soils O of the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge at
'v' 10, 20, and 50 cm depths in the period of ,
March 22, 1980 to October 10. 1980. Figures are.in percent saturation.
,- , ..--,y . - _. _
,m., s . . - , . , , _ . _ , _ _ _ _ _ , . - - , _
O
-9
-ci o
-3 1
-q
-c .x
-e
-R
(
\ e
-e .
-n
-?
.r-
-:: 4
-2
-= .
i
-cI
-e 1 -R l
~? -
-a 1
-n
. .g
-s .
-uE
-e
-2 j f j -0d i . . .
hEES2 y32?2 Ig. a?g ) l Figure A-6. Weekly soil moisture levels in Fulton soils of the Ottawa National Wild 11fe Refuge at 10, 20, and 50 cm depths in the period of March 22, 1980 to October 10, 1980. Figures are in percent saturation.
O 4 .:
.n 0
-n 4
4 ':
-i
-2
*4
- .g 4
a .
"I J
- -e
-8 4
*E
.a N
' \ _a t
- - _g j i j , ,,,,
$ -~N gis3A , .
$88S2 !8882 Figure A-7. Weekly soil moisture levels in Hackberry I (7
'v' Connunity at 10, 20, and 50 cm depths in 1
the period'of March 22, 1980 to October 10, 1980. Figures are in percent saturation.
ANNUAL REPORT
,Q v DAVIS-BESSE TERRESTRIAL MONITORING JANUARY 1981
- 8. Soil Environments Arthur Limbird Department of Geography The monitoring of the soil environments follows the procedures described in previous reports. Soil temperatures have been monitor-ed on a weekly or continuous basis at the three peninsula sites, the two' Cooling Tower Woods sites, and the two Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge control sites. Soil moisture values were monitored on a weekly basis at the same sites. Soil samples were secured from each of the sites
~
s in spring, summer, and fall during this reporting period and chemi-
~
cally analyzed as in-previous reports. In addition to previous re-ports, precipitation was collected from the standard rain gauges located in each site on a weekly basis beginning in summer 1980 and analyzed for pH values. Soil temperature data are reported for the
-weeks of December 24, 1979 to October 27,'1980, while soil moisture data are reported' for the period from the week of March 24, 1980 to October 27, 1980. Thus, moisture data cover the important growing season plus pre- and post-season periods.
Soil Moisture Soil moisture was recorded on a weekly basis at the five mon-itoring locations.at the Davis-Besse property and at the two control locations from the week of March 24 to the week of October 27, 1980.
. .g C
e . - - . . . - _ - , y . .m-r. ..- y ._, , ,_.. . _,
B-2 Soil moisture levels were very similar to 1979, making the reporting period a " moderately wet" one when compared to the other years of the ongoing study. In order to compare the three study areas in terms of patterns of moisture availability, the Sumac community of the Peninsula, the Fulton soil area of the Cooling Toser Woods, and the Fulton soil area of the Ottawa site are summarized in detail (Table B-2). At the beginning of the data period, the Sumac community showed the results of high fall and winter moisture levels in late 1979 and early 1980 (partly discussed in January 1980 Annual Report). Li ttle or no spring recharge was needed in 1980 to bring the soil moisture levels to field capacity (100% moisture available). Soil moisture at the Peninsula site allowed for, and even favored, seed germina-tion and seedling growth in the spring (see Section A). Evenly spaced precipitation during the summer of 1980 was similar to the O summer of 1979 and maintained moisture levels at all three soil depths at or near field capacity levels. Only a slight reduction of near-surface moisture levels occurred during mid-July due to increased evapotranspiration rates and some capillary rise of soil water at this time. As a result, the minor period of slight mois-ture reduction did not harm seedlings or mature plants. The soil at the Peninsula site did not dry out at all during the growing sea-son, and high moisture availability favored the success of fall seed germination and seedling growth. Moisture levels remained high to the end of the reporting period. Near-optimum soil moisture levels were maintained in the Penin-sula area during 1980 due to uniformly distributed precipitation over
B-3 the year as in 1979 (see also discussion on Soil Moisture, January V 1980 Annual Report). In contrast, short periods of dryness in 1978 may have hampered plant growth somewhat. Overall, the moisture levels were somewhat lower than 1977, but higher than 1978 and 1979 (Table B-3). Precipitation was well dispersed over plant germina-tion, growth, and reproduction stages in the Peninsula area;and, thus, 1980 can,be considered an optimum moisture year for plants, as was 1979 (see Section A). There was abundant available moisture in both years (see Figure B-4).
.At the beginning of the data period, the Fulton soil area of the Cooling Tower Woods showed the results of the fall recharge of 1979 (see January 1980 Annual Report) and the melting of the winter 1980 snow cover. Moisture levels were similar to the spring of 1979, b) reaching near field capacity by mid-April. High moisture availability V
for most of the plant types considered important in the Cooling Tower Woods continued during the spring germination and early seedling-growth period (see Section A). An evenly dispersed pattern of precipitation, as.in 1979, kept the Fulton soil mo dt through most of July and August.
~
Brief periods of lower moisture availability occurred in later July and in early August, but these short reductions in moisture were not severe enough in amount or duration to flann mature plants or seedlings. The Fulton soil began to dry more thoroughly in early September, earlier than in 1979; and the unavailability of moisture continued until the end of the data reporting-period. Unlike 1979, the reduction-of available moisture in 1980 may have occurred at a time that would be critical for the fall genninating plants (see Section A). The lack
~
N_)
of moisture during September and October may have reduced the num-ber of successful seedling cypes and the total successful seedlings; the fall was a period of severe moisture stress in the Cooling Tower e Woods. In contrast to the Petiinsula area, the moisture level in the Cooling Tower Woods was lower than in 1979 because of the earlier dry fall in 1980. Overall, moisture levels in the Cooling Tower Woods were similar in 1980 to the " moderate" years of 1975, 1976, and 1978. The important difference in 1980 was the unifonnly higher moisture availability through the summer plant growth period, rather than the " peaks" of moisture and dry spells which occurred in these other years (see Figure B-13). Moisture availability in the Fulton soil at the Ottawa control site was generally similar to that of the Cooling Tower Woods. The Ottawa site recharged to a higher moisture availability level than the Cooling Tower Woods in the spring of 1980 and remained near field capacity through J:;ne due to the uniform precipitation pattern. The Ottawa Fulton so- experienced a short dry spell from late July to early August; the drier period did not seem to affect plant seedling growth because the near surface depth (10 cm) remained moist. Re-charge of moisture was complete by the cnd of August, so that the Ottawa soil did not dry out as soon or as completely in September and October as the Cooling Tower Woods soil (Table B-2). Thus, fall seed germination at 0ttawa probably was less stressed by the lack of moisture than in the Cooling Tower Woods. O
B-5 Some Moisture Trends: There appears to have been a general increase p in moisture availability, especially during critical gennination and growth periods from 1974 through 1980. The consequences are less severe periods of moisture stress; conditions are more optimal for plant growth (see Section A). In terms of soil moisture, 1977 was a'" pivotal" year where more moisture was available through the summer than was generally available for other years (Table B-3). During 1975 and 1976 both the Cooling Tower Woods and the Peninsula areas appear _ to have been recovering from the dry year of 1974. The whole year of 1977 was wet, which reversed the effects of 1974. Since 1977, moisture conditions have been more moderate than that year, but mois-ture availability has been more unifonnly dispersed over the plant growth _ period in each ensuing year; 1979 and 1980 were better than
/3 1978, which was better than 1975 and 1976. The results of the "im-O proved" moisture conditions have been better survival and growth of plants in the Cooling Tower Woods and the Peninsula areas, while the Ottawa site is now experiencing the results of the high water levels of 1977 (see Section A).
In addition to the direct effects on plants, soil moisture levels have had the effects of moderating soil temperatures (as discussed in this and previous soil _ reports) and helping to alter somewhat the soil chemistry, especially in the Cooling Tower Woods (as discussed below in this report). Overall, soil moisture seems to be the most critical factor being monitored, because it hinges on both the atmosphere and the soils and has ancillary effects on other soil properties and on the plant communities being monitored. Soil moisture is the cause; '() other factors seem to be the result.
B-6 Soil Temperature Weekly air and soil temperature averages were used as in pre-vious reports to summarize daily temperature changes and to help illustrate seasonal trends which have occurred at the monitoring sites. The changes in the air and at 10, 20, and 50 cm depths are evaluated for the same three monitoring sites as for soil moisture -- the Sumac community of the Peninsula, the Fulton soil area in the Cooling Tower Woods, and the Fulton soil area in the Ottawa control area. Continuous soil temperature records for the weeks of December 24, 1979 to October 27, 1980 represent a continuation of the data presented in the previous report. Soil temperatures generally respond to air temperature changes, with a lag time for heat and cold dispersal and with a buffering effect in the soil which increases with increasing depth in the soil (Table B-1). Thus, the changes in soil temperatures and ;he ranges in weekly soil temperatures generally decrease with depth, except as discussed for each site (Figures B-1, B-2, and B-3). Peninsula Area: Soil temperatures in the Sumac c.ommunity of the Pen-insula area were about the same .uring the winter of 1980 as during the winter of 1979. Lowest temperatures of the winter varied with soil depth and were delayed responses to air temperatures,which over-all were not as cold as in 1979. Spring warmup occurred somewhat earlier in 1980 than in 1979, and fall cool-down occurred somewhat later than in 1979. The net effect was to expand the growing sea-son and perhaps enhance growth of individual plants and survival of seedlings in numbers. The earlier wannup in the spring was attri-buted to a combination of somewhat warmer air temperatures than in
B-7 1979 during late March and April, heat dispersal during snow melt, and relatively wam rain showers. The delayed cooling in the fall was attributed to the slower heat loss from the moist soil and the insulative effect of a more lush ground cover than in previous years. Perhaps the increased ground cover of plants will enhance warmer fall temperatures in years to come. At the 10 cm depth soil temperatures remained below freezing
~ until early March and then wamed to above 40 F by the first full week in April, somewhat sooner than in 1979 and sooner than in 1978 (see also January 1980 Annual Report). Temperatures essentially paralleled those of 1978 and 1979 during the rest of the spring and sumer. High temperatures were reached at the 10 cm depth in mid-August compared to early August in 1979. Temperatures decreased in fall 1980 more
() L ,' slowly than 1979, reaching levels below 60 F at the end of September, compared to the end of August,and levels below 50 F at the end of the reporting period (week of-0ctober 27), compared to early October in 1979. The ranges of soil temperatures at the 10 cm depth indicate the effects of precipitation and soil moisture availability. Unlike 1979, there was no peak in temperature ranges during the spring melt and wamup period. Instead,during 1980, peak temperature ranges were delayed.until early May and remained unusually high throughout the rest of the reporting period, probably due to evenly distributed pre-cipitation and alternating sun and cloud cover, which warmed and cooled the surface soil, and to the moisture, which was available
' for heat dispersal during evaporation from the soil surface.
The ' average temperature at the 20 cm depth in the Sumac com-o (,) -- munity reached the lowest level in late February but wamed rapidly v +c - - er =--- ,,.,w
B-8 during March and reached the 40 F level in the first full week in April. Temperatures warmed somewhat slower than at the 10 cm depth and at about the same rate as in 1979. The peak temperature level at the 20 cm depth occurred during the first week of August 1980, similar to 1979. Summer temperatures at the 20 cm depth were slightly warmer than in 1979 and thus warmer than 1978. The temp-erature cooled more slowly than in 1979, reaching below 60 F during two weekly intervals in September, compared to the last week in August. Temperatures cooled to below 50"F during the week of October 20 in 1980, compared to the week of October 5 in 1979. The slower cooling at the 20 cm depth was attributed to soil moisture and increased plant cover insulating the surface. The range of temperatures at the 20 cm depth did not show the usual peak in the spring warmup period present in previbus years. Temperature ranges remained somewhat higher in 1980 than in 1979 dur-
>ing the late spring and summer. This higher level of temperature ranges at the 20 cm depth was related to relatively frequent light rainfall events throughout the period, which contributed cooling and warming events at the soil surface; and these cooling and warming cycles were dispersed as far as the 20 cm depth.
The average soil temperatures at the 50 cm depth in the Sumac community generally responded less to air temperature changes than at the 10 and 20 cm depths. The soil froze only briefly during late February and then wamed to above the 40 F level by mid-April, simi-lar to 1979. During spring and summer temperatures increased slowly, but proportionally, to the rate of increases at the shallower depths, reaching the peak during the week of August 25, compared to the week of August 19 in 1979. The soil at the 50 cm depth cooled somewhat
r B-9 more slowly than at the 20 cm depth, decreasing to below 60 F during O D the week of September 15, compared to the week of September 8 for the shallower depth and to below 50 F during the week of October 20. Generally, temperatures at the 50 cm depth were cooler during late spring and early summer than in 1979, and thus cooler than in 1978. However, temperatures wamed more in August 1980_ than in 1978 or 1979. The range of temperatures at the 50 cm depth did not respond to the spring warmup period, a situation similar to the previous years. Overall, temperature ranges at 50 cm in 1980 were similar to those of 1979 and thus were somewhat higher than in previous years. The higher temperature ranges were attributed to uniform moisture levels, wh'ile surface heating and cooling occurred with rain shower activity over the growing season. Cooling Tower Woods: The average air temperatures in the Cooling Tower Woods generally were somewhat warmer than the Peninsula area during the early spring, but by mid-May air temperatures were cooler in the Cooling Tower Woods. Air temperatures- remained lower in the Cooling Tower Woods than the Peninsula until near the end of the reporting period. These cooler air temperatures,in part, account for slower warming of.the Cooling Tower Woods soils after April and lower overall soil temperatures. The ranges of air. temperatures in 1980 were similar in general- to 1979. The peak range occurred in June as in 1979, rather than during the spring wamup period as in other years. Air temperature ranges had secondary peaks in May and July, and there
,was no secondary peak in the fall as would have been expected. Uni- - [') fom precipitation distribution in 1980, similar to 1979, helped to 'A./
l
B-10 explain the more subdued spring temperature ranges and the general series of peaks over the summer rather than lower ranges in the warmer temperature period. Average soil temperatures at 10 cm in the Cooling Tower Woods were coldest at the start of this reporting period and warmed to above freezing in January because of the insulative snow cover. Lower air temperatures in later January and February accounted for a re-freezing of the soil at 10 cm from late January to a thaw in early March, compared to a thaw in late March 1979. Temperatures wamed more rapidly in 1980, reaching the 40 F level by the week of March 31, compared to the week of April 20 in 1979. However, once temperatures reached the mid 40s in early April, further waming was generally slower than the Peninsula area at the 10 cm depth. Tne peak temperature occurred during the week of July 21, compared to the week of August 3 in 1979 and nearly one month before the Pen-insula area in 1980. After the peak temperature week, temperatures at 10 cm in the Cooling Tower Woods generally remained cooler than the Peninsula area. However, the soil at the 10 cm depth cooled much slower in 1980 than in 1979, reaching below 60 F during the week of September 29, compared to the week of August 26,and below 50 F during the week of October 20, compared to the week of October 5. The delayed cooling was attributed to a more insulative ground cover of plants and a heavier leaf fall in 1980 than in 1979. In 1980 the temperature range did not have a pronounced peak, as it had in previous years at the 10 cm depth in the Cooling Tower Woods. A peak range was reached in the week of May 5, but higher than expected ranges occurred from early March to the end of October.
B-11
/T Weekly ranges of 5.0 to 6.5 degrees were common in 1980, compared V- to a spring peak range of about 5.0 degrees in 1979. The higher temperature ranges in 1980 were attributed to frequent rain shower activity throughout the spring and summer of 1980.
The average soil temperatures at 20 cm varied in a pattern similar to the 10 cm depth. The soil at the 20 cm depth in the Cooling Tower Woods froze during the week of February 4 in response to late January cold' air temperatures. The soil thawed again in mid-February and remained warmer than the 10 cm depth until the end of March when spring warmup began. The soil at 20 cm reached 40 F in the week of April 7, compared to the week of April 20 in 1979. The temperature remained cooler than at the 10 cm depth, in general, until the end of September.when surface cooling occurred. The peak - A
/ temperature at 20 cm occurred during the week of August 18, compared \ _/)
to the week of August 10 in 1979. During the-summer of 1980 tempera-tures at 20 cm in the Cooling Tower Woods were warmer than in 1979
- and similar to those~ of -1978. The temperature decreased to below 50*F in the'last week of October compared to mid-October in 1979.
.The ranges of temperatures at the 20 cm depth had somewhat of
- a. peak in the last week of April 1980. Temperature ranges at the
- 20 cm depth .in the Cooling Tower Woods were considerably higher than in 1979, _ reaching weekly ranges of 2 to 4 degrees regularly, compared to a peak of 2.5 degrees in 1979. The higher ranges in 1980 mainly were att'ributed to _ rain shower activity and its accompanying cooling effect on the soil surface. .Thus, alternating heating and cooling occurred regularly over. the sumer.
(l
-. ,m- r n g- g.a - -- a
B-12 The soil temperatures at the 50 cm depth did not reach as low as the freezing point in the winter of 1980, similar to the winter of 1979. Temperatures generally remained warmer than at the same depth in the Peninsula area but did not respond as quickly to the initial soil warming,which occurred in mid-March. However, once greater waming of the air occurred in late Ma ch, the soil tempera-ture at the 50 cm depth responded to waming sooner than in 1979. The soil temperature reached 40*F in the week of April 7, compared to the week of April 27 in 1979. The peak temperature occurred in the week of August 25, similar to 1978 and three weeks later than 1979. Also, the peak in 1980 was 2 degrees cooler than the peak in 1979. Temperatures at the 50 cm depth cooled from the peak somewhat more slowly than at the shallower depths but decreased to below 50 F dur-ing the same week as the 10 cm depth because of the lower overall temperatures at the 50 cm depth. The range of temperatures at the 50 cm depth had a peak period from early June to mid-July when ranges reached or exceeded 2 degrees. Otherwise, temperature ranges at the 50 cm depth of the Cooling Tower Woods were similar to other years and quite small. Ottawa Control Area: The average air temperatures at Ottawa were comparable to the air temperatures at the Peninsula and Cooling Tower Woods sites during 1980. At times air temperatures at Ottawa were warmer and at other times they were cooler due to the distances be-tween the control area and the Davis-Besse property sites. The soil temperatures at the 10 cm depth at the Ottawa site generally were colder than at the same depth in the Cooling Tower Woods O
B-13
, q during the winter of 1980. The soil was frozen at the start of this O reporting period and remained frozen, e(cept for one week in mid-Jan-uary, until the week of March 24, compared to the week of March 10 in the Cooling Tower Woods. However, once the spring wamup began, the soil at the 10 cm depth at Ottawa responded well, reaching 40 F in the week of April 7, two weeks ahead of 1979. The soil at the 10 cm depth at Ottawa remained cooler through the summer than the Cooling Tower Woods, with a peak temperature occurring in the week of July 28 and again in the week of September 1. The peak was 3 degrses lower than the peak at the same depth in the Cooling Tower Woods. The Ottawa soil cooled somewhat faster than the Cooling Tower Woods soil at the 10 cm depth, reaching below 60*F temperatures one week sooner in September. Then, temperatures decreased more O
V slowly at Ottawa to the end of October. The Ottawa soil was some-what cooler at 10 cm in 1980 than in 1979,which was attributed to overall higher and more even moisture levels in 1980. The earlier of the two temperature peaks was associated with a brief dry period when moisture availability decreased. The range of temperatures at the 10 cm depth at Ottawa was greater overall than in 1979. Peaks in temperature ranges occurred in late April to early May and again in late September to early October, but ranges greater than 4 degrees were "nomal" in 1980 compared to " normal" ranges of less than two degrees in 1979. The greater ranges, especially during the sumer, were attributed to heating and cooling associated with regularly spaced rain shower activity and
. interspersed sun and clouds.
l
B-14 The soil temperatures at 20 cm at the Ottawa site-were below freezing at the start of the reporting period and, except for a brief thaw in mid-January, remained below freezing until the thaw during the week of March 24. The soil at 20 cm warmed more slowly than at 10 cm, reaching 40 F two weeks later than the shallower depth and the 20 cm depth in the Cooling Tower Woods. Once the soil at the 20 cm depth began to warm, it continued to warm until early September, when a peak temperature higher than at the 10 cm depth occurred. Temperatures at the 20 cm depth in 1960 were higher than in 1979 at the same depth from the end of June to late September. The higher temperatures were explained in part by higher air temperatures in 1980 and perhaps by higher temperature ranges in 1980. Temperature ranges at the 20 cm depth at Ottawa exceeded four degrees in several weeks of 1980, compared to only once in 1979. There appeared to be no peak period of temperature ranges in 1980, unlike 1979. In addition, relatively high temperature ranges per-sisted through the sunmer of 1980. These higher ranges were attri-buted to precipitation and evaporation of soil moisture and were likened to the somewhat erratic temperature ranges of 1977 at the 20 cm depth at Ottawa. The average soil temperature at the 50 cm depth did not reach as low as the shallower depths and thus could wam to 40 F at the same time as the 10 cm depth and sooner than the 20 cm depth, even though the soil wamed more slowly at 'the greater depth. The soil remained cooler at the 50 cm depth than at the 10 and 20 cm depths until mid-October,when cooling was slower than at the shallower depths. O
B-15 The maximum temperature at the 50 cm depth was reached in early Sept-p ember and was similar to 1978 and warmer than 1979. The range of temperatures at the 50 cm depth at Ottawa were more similar to 1979'than were the ranges at the 10 and 20 cedepths. Un-like 1979, there were no real peaks in the weekly ranges, but average ranges of 1.0 to 1.5 degrees were comon in both years at this depth. The relatively high ranges for this depth, compared to the Cooling Tower Woods, were attributed to a more open canopy at Ottawa and to higher evaporation rates from the more exposed soil surface (see Section A for discussion on canopy). Soil Chemical Analyses Soil samples were collected for the spring, summer, and fall from each of the five monitoring locations on the Davis-Besse property and
/3 i j f rom the two sites at the Ottawa control area at the 10, 20, and 50 cm depths. All samples were analyzed as in previous years, and results are sumarized -in Table B-4. Data for themonitoring period 1974-1980 are graphically-presented in Figures B-4 to B-14 to illustrate seasonal trends and more general changes which may have occurred over the moni-toring period.-
Peninsula Area: The soils of all three sample sites show the recent nature of the beach deposit environment of the Peninsula area. The cation exchange complex continued to be saturated with bases, as indi-
- ;cated by base saturation levels near 100 percent in each season of the year _ at all three depths and at all three sites being monitored. Cation exchange capacity (CEC) is low in the Sumac comunity because of the dependence of the CEC on the organic matter content of these sandy
{, ] soils. The CEC changes somewhat near the surface as new organic matter is supplied by the decomposition and incorporation of leaf litter. r
u-lo In contrast, the CEC changed dramatically in the Hackberry 11 com-munity in response to the seasonal supply of organic matter in the soil. A large change came between summer and fall, as the previous litter-humus had been dispersed and the new litter fall had not yet been incorporated into the soil profile. An even greater change came from spring to sumer when the previous litter-humus became available for cation exchange. The changes in CEC in the Hackberry-Box-Elder community were the result of a somewhat different pattern of litter decomposition and humus availability; more decomposed humus was incorporated in fall 1980 compared to an earlier incorporation in 1979. The overall CEC levels for 1980 further demonstrate the most mature profile in the Hackberry II comunity and the least mature profile in the Sumac comunity. Organic matter in the soils of the peninsula area in 1980 gen-erally had patterns similar to previous years with concentrations near the surface. The depth of concentration generally increases from the Sumac community to the Hackberry-Box-Elder community to the Hackberry II community. The increased depths of organic matter are associated both with increased levels of CEC from comunity to com-munity. Changes in organic matter levels in the three communities closely paralleled changes in CEC in 1980. Relatively dramatic changes in both organic matter content and corresponding CEC occurred from spring to summer to fall at 20 and 50 cm in the Hackberry II I comunity and from summer to fall at 10 and 20 cm in the Hackberry-Box-Elder comunity. The changes in organic matter content are mainly due to seasonal variability in the rate of incorporation of O
B-17 p organic matter into the soil profile, its subsequent dispersal as part of soil development, and its uneven distribution and concen-tration near the surface over each site. The pH values of thel Peninsula soils remained in the neutral to slightly alkaline range, as in previous fears. The tendency for pH to increase from sumer to fall was attributed to increased re-lease of bases from the fallen litter and from high moisture avail-ability levels which would tend to allow for abundant bases in solu-tion in the soil. The pH values of the Peninsula soils seem to be unaffected by low pH precipitation, because pH levels were as high in-1980 as at the start of monitoring in 1974. The levels of sulfates (ppm) remained very low in the Peninsula area soils in 1980. The levels for sumer 1980 are similar to the sumer values for 1979. Changes occurred such that levels were higher in 1980 at the 10 and 20 cm depths of the Hackberry Il coa-munity than in 1979. Levels were lower in 1980 than in 1979 at the
~o ther depth (s) of each site. Thus, changes in-sulfates did not occur in any particular pattern. Levels for sumer 1980 were generally much lower than levels of sulfates for fall 1979 with the exceptions of the 20 cm depth _of the Sumac comunity and the 20 cm depth of .the Hackberry II comunity.
-As' discussed in the previous annual report (see page B-3, Janu-
~
ary.1980 Annual Report), nitrates (NO3 ) may have contributed to the high CEC values in the Hackberry 11 comunity. .In 1980 suarner nitrate values were 109 ppm at_10 cm. These highly soluble nitrates may have contributed somewhat to the higher sumer CEC values compared to spring ( and fall. L
~
B-18 The decline in the level of ppm calcium continued through 1980 lowering the seven-year average to 2045 ppm at the 10 cm depth, to 1570 ppm at the 20 cm depth, and to 1030 at the 50 cm depth in the Sumac community. Values below average occurred at all three depths in the Sumac comunity. However, a large increase in ppm calcium occurred in the Hackberry 11 comunity, reversing the decline in that comunity. Magnesium values were higher in 1980 than in 1979, especially at the 10 cm depth of the Hackberry II comunity. The current year values raised the seven-year averages to 285 ppm at 10 cm,169 ppm at 20 cm, and 83 ppm at 50 cm in the Sumac comunity. Potassium values increased from 1979 to 1980, the increase further supporting the evidence that potassium is substituting for other bases in the soil exchange complex. In 1980, potassium substituted mainly for calcium. The seven-year potassium values were 40 ppm at 10 cm, 27 ppm at 20 cm, and 19 ppm at 50 cm depths. The changes in the ppm values for the various basic ions were not accompanied by changes in the percent base saturation. Cooling Tower Woods: The Fulton and Toledo soils of the Cooling Tower Woods are mature soils with a well defined clay-humus complex, especially compared to the soils of the Peninsula area. In both of the soils of the Cooling Tower Woods, the CEC results from the clay lattice structure in the subsoil, the form of the organic matter .present, and the pattern and amount of litter deposition on the sofi surface. The CEC remained very constant through 1980 with no parti-cular pattern of changes from season to season. The CEC increased O
B-19 from spring to sumer in the Fulton soil at 10 cm but decreased at all three depths of the Toledo soil and in the Fulton soil at 20 cm. Thus, the general trend seems to be a sumer decline due to a lack of further litter to be decomposed. The CEC increased from sumer to fall in the Toledo soil in response to the greater decomposition of organic matter over the sumer.
'Important decreases in.the percent base saturation in the Cool-ing Tower Woods soils continued during 1980, the Fulton soil having lower values than in 1979 and the Toledo soil havir.0 the lowest values of the seven-year study in the fall of 1980 at the 10 and 20 cm depths.
Base saturation in the Fulton soil increased from winter 1980 (see January 1980 Annual Report) to spring 1980 due to the available bases present in snowmelt water. Base saturation decreased dramatically hJ from spring to sumer, especially at the 20 cm depth. The change was accompanied by an increase in organic matter content at the 20 cm depth and a decrease in pH (both discussed below),which may be attri-buted in part to organic acids in humus formation but more to abun- I dant moisture available to remove soluble bases at a time when a i fresh litter supply is absent. The base saturation increased at both the 10 and 20 cm depths as organic matter decreased from summer to fall. Base saturation in the Toledo soil decreased from winter 1980 (see January 1980 Annual Report) to spring 1980 at the 10 and 20 cm depths as moisture removed bases to the 50 cm depth where the base saturation. increased in the same period. The level of base satura-
. tion increased dramatically from spring to sumer, especially at_ the d 20 cm depth,where there was a substantial increase in organic matter
B-20 content. The base saturation decreased dramatically from summer to fall in the Toledo soil, especially at the 10 and 20 cm depths. The decrease in base saturation was accompanied by decreases in organic matter content and in pH values. The sudden changes in base satura-tion are unlike the changes in other years and cannot be fully ex-plained by the associated changes in other soil properties. A general trend of lowered pH values continued in the two Cool-ing Tower Woods soils in 1980. The values were about the same over-all as in 1979 but changed from season to season at the different depths in direct relationship to changes in base saturation. In the Fulton soil, pH went down from spring to sumer at the 20 and 50 cm depths and from sumer to fall at the 10 and 20 cm depths. Thus, the most noticeable change in pH was the decline at the 20 cm oepth over the year. While the pH in fall 1980 was only 0.1 lower than spring 1979, the base saturation was 3.1% lower, indicating the com-plexity of the clay-humus CEC. In the Toledo soil, pH went up from spring to sumer at all three depths and down from summer to fall at all three depths. The most dramatic change was at the 20 cm depth, where the pH changed 1.0 and the base saturation changed 34% in one season. Such a change is difficult to explain with the data avail-able. A partial explanation is the steady decrease in calcium levels in the Cooling Tower Woods since 1976. The decrease is closely re-lated to the increased moisture availability and reliability beginning in 1977 (as discussed above in Soil Moisture). The decrease may also be related to a lowered pH of the precipitation over.the general north-west Ohio area. O
B-21 o Beginning in the summer of 1980 pH measurements were made on a weekly basis of the rainfall collected in tRe standard rainfall col-lectors at each site. The values of pH are extremely erratic, rang-ing from about 3.8 to about 6.8 and varying from site to site, even for the same week. Thus the values seem somewhat less than completely reliable. However, the average values (Table B-5) for the Fulton soil area of the Cooling Tower Woods seem to relate well with the soil pH levels and the base saturation levels near the surface. The lower precipitation pH level for summer corresponds especially with the lower base saturation values at 10 and 20 cm depths. The or,e-what higher precipitation pH level for fall corresponds especially with the somewhat higher base saturation values at the same two depths. While the measurement of precipitation pH values has only begun, there seem to be some useful relationships apparent. Organic matter is well distributed through the upper part of the profiles of the Toledo and Fulton soils in well-defined A horizons. There was a general increase in organic matter content in both soils from spring to summer and a general decrease in organic matter con-tent in both soils from summer to fall, especially at the 10 and 20 cm depths. The decrease in organic matter from summer to fall occurred because the previous litter fall had been incorporated into the soil, and the new litter supply was not yet available. The increase from spring to suniner was the incorporation process in action. The changes in organic matter content are cyclical ar help to contribute to changes in the CEC. The levels of sulfates in the Cooling Tower Woods continued to be low in 1980, as in the previous years. The only level of sulfates
B-22 considered to be high was the 50 cm depth of the Toledo soil where sulfates seem to be accumulating due to bacterial and fungal activities in the soil and to the reduction conditions at this depth resulting from abundant moisture and the nearness to the water table. It is possible that low pH precipitation may enhance the buildup of sulfates, but any such low pH precipitation is unrelated to the operation of the Davis-Besse Cooling Tower. Sodium values in the Fulton soil of the Cooling Tower Woods re-mained about at the seven-year average at all three soil depths moni-tored (Table B-5). Values in summer 1980 were lower than for succer 1979 at both the 10 and 20 cm depths. At this time, there arpear to be no trends in the ppm sodium in the soil. It certainly does not appear that sodium, which may be a part of the cooling tower plume fall-out, is producing any effect in the soil. The pattern of seasonal changes in ppm of calcium, magnesium, and potassium continued in 1980, as over the previous years of the seven-year study period. There has been an overall decline in the ppm calcium values since 1977,which closely follows the decline in pH over the same period. The values in 1980 were below the seven-year average, reducing the averages to 3677 ppm at the 10 cm depth, 3334 at the 20 cm depth, and 3131 at the 50 cm depth (Table B-5). In 1980 there was an increase in ppm of calcium from spring to summer and then a decline to fall at the 10 m depth, as in 1978 and 1979. At the 20 and 50 cm depths there were declines through the year. In contrast to the general decrease in the calcium values since 1977, the ppm magnesium values were above the seven-year averages in 1980 and thus increased the averages to 569 ppm at the 10 cm depth,
B-23 p 581 ppm at the 20 cm depth, and 708 ppm at the 50 cm depth. The ppm V magnesium values in 1980 were well above the average at all three depths in spring, declined in the summer, and then increased in fall, as in 1979. In general, magnesium is replacing calcium in the cation exchange complex and generally offsetting losses of calcium and main-taining base saturation levels from further decline. SOME GENERAL TRENDS The general trends for seven years in the analyses of the soils in the study sites were sumarized in graph form for the Sumac com-munity of the Peninsula area and for the Fulton soil of the Cooling
' Tower Woods (Figures B-4 to B-14). These summaries reflect natural seasonal changes or ongoing changes which can be expected in the two areas. Most of.the trends in specific comunities were discussed in b previous reports (see especially pp 21-23 part B, January 1979 Report and pp 8-10 part B, January 1980 Report). Thus, only two significant aspects need to be restated here. First, moisture appears to be the r
key to the changes occurring in all sites. The availability of mois-ture has decreased the stress conditions for plants and has improved l seedling chances for survival. Moisture has contributed to the decom-position of organic matter, the dissolution and movement of soluble bases, the lowering of some pH levels, and the reduction of some base saturation levels. Second, the soils of the Cooling Terer Woods are l the most affected by the changes in soil properties, while the Pen-insula soils are young and more completely base saturated. The Ottawa l soils seem to be quite stable with few changes occurring. j(] The reduction in the Fulton soils of pH accompanied by the re-t q,' duction in calcium content, increase in magnesium content, and the
B-24 substitution of this ion in the exchange complex may be related to severai factors. With decreased construction activity near the Cool-ing Tot ,*, fewer trucks travel on the gravel roads, resulting in less dust and less frequent " liming" from dust blowing into the Cooling Tower Woods. In addition, the incidence of low pH precipitation may have increased. O l i l i l l )
V Table 8-1. Summary of weekly evera9e soll and air temperatures ('F). Peninsula. Coolin9 Tower Woods, and Ottawa sites. weeks of December 24. 1979 to October 27. 1980, peninsufa Cooling Tower Woods Ottawa Week of 10cm 20cm 55cm Air 10cm 20cm 50cm Air 10cm 20cm50cm Air 1979 Dec. 24 31.7 31.7 35.9 32.7 27.9 33.4 36.7 33.1 31.0 29.9 37.3 33.6 Dec. 31 27.6 31.4 35.? 25.9 33.0 34.1 38.3 27.7 29.6 30.3 38.4 26.0 1980 Jan. 1 29.6 30.9 36.0 25.8 33.5 34.6 38.3 30.3 29.1 29.4 38.0 25.3 Jan.14 30.7 31.4 35.9 34.0 34.1 35.0 38.4 35.3 32.6 31.0 38.1 33.9 Jan. 21 30.9 30.1 35.6 22.0 32.7 34.6 38.0 21.0 30.1 33.3 38.3 21.3 Jan. 28 28.3 28.3 35.0 15.3 31.0 32.6 38.0 15.9 31.3 31.4 37.6 15.1 Feb. 4 29.0 28.3 34.1 20.9 29.1 31.1 38.0 20.0 31.0 30.5 37.1 21.6 Feb. 11 29.3 30.0 33.1 22.6 30.9 31.0 38.0 21.4 29.7 29.4 37.9 23.1 Feb. 18 31.9 33.3 32.3 32.1 32.9 32.1 38.7 32.7 31.1 28.4 37.1 33.1 Feb. 25 29.3 26.7 31.4 17.4 30.3 32.3 37.9 19.4 30.1 29.4 37.3 18.3 Mar. 3 30.9 28.0 32.0 28.9 30.3 32.7 36.7 29.6 31.4 29.4 36.0 29.1 Ma r.10 33.1 31.0 35.0 32.4 33.7 34.4 36.3 31.6 31.3 29.1 35.6 33.4 Mar.17 34.0 38.6 38.9 37.4 36.6 37.1 37.3 38.4 30.9 29.3 35.6 36.7 Mar. 24 33.4 37.1 38.4 35.7 36.7 39.1 38.0 37.7 34.7 32.9 36.4 37.3 Mar. 31 37.4 37.9 37.7 42.1 40.7 39.4 39.4 43.0 37.0 33.1 39.1 43.4 Apr. 7 44.9 40.0 39.3 45.4 45.7 42.0 41.7 47.0 42.4 36.6 40.9 46.7 Apr.14 45.9 41.6 40.7 46.3 45.0 42.6 43.3 46.9 43.9 37.9 41.9 43.6 Apr. 21 46.9 43.9 43.3 $1.1 46.9 44.6 44.9 52.3 47.7 41.6 42.3 $1.0 Apr. 28 50.4 47.1 43.7 57.0 50.4 48.4 43.9 57.1 48.0 45.4 44.7 56.0 May 5 52.9 49.0 46.0 55.1 $1.7 49.4 47.2 56.0 48.9 45.6 44.9 55.9 51.6 51.3 56.7 49.7 48.3 48.3 58.0 Q May 12 54.9 51.4 47.4 50.6 57.7 64.4 53.9 55.9 56.4 53.4 62.3 56.6 $4.4 51.1 63.1 May 19 57.7 52.9 May 26 58.9 53.1 52.7 68.9 60.6 60.4 55.7 65.7 !6.3 56.1 55.7 65.7 June 2 58.8 56.8 52.4 $7.3 57.7 56.6 52.4 56.3 56.3 54.7 53.1 59.1 June 9 57.0 54.1 52.7 59.1 59.0 58.7 54.0 60.0 55.7 54.6 53.6 60.7 June 16 60,1 58.1 53.0 62.3 59.9 58.4 55.1 61.9 58.3 56.9 56.4 62.6 June 23 60.1 61.7 53.9 72.4 61.1 59.9 55.0 72.6 61.0 58.9 56.9 72.3 June 30 61.7 62.6 54.6 72.4 60.3 58.1 56.0 68.0 60.6 58.3 57.3 67.1 July 7 62.6 64.4 55.9 74.6 61.4 57.4 55.3 72.0 62.0 61.9 57.7 70.3 July 14 64.1 65.9 56.7 82.3 64.7 59.7 57.0 79.3 63.0 62.0 61.6 78.7 l July 21 67.0 63.0 57.4 75.3 66.1 62.0 58.3 71.3 62.7 63.6 62.4 69.0 l July 28 64.6 62.6 60.0 75.6 63.6 62.0 58.6 72.1 63.1 62.9 60.9 71.1 Aug. 4 56.1 66.2 62.3 77.4 64.9 61.9 58.6 73.1 62.9 62.0 61.6 73.9 Aug. 11 66.3 63.4 63.6 68.0 62.4 63.0 57.7 67.7 62.7 63.0 62.5 67.7 Aug. 18 68.3 65.3 65.0 73.9 '64.0 64.9 58.0 68.9 62.9 63.7 61.6 70.1 Aug. 25 67.1 65.1 64.0 77.7 64.9 64.1 58.9 73.1 62.1 65.1 61.0 - 17.7 Sept. 1 63.7 61.9 64.9 70.9 65.4 62.9 57.9 70.7 63.1 64.7 62.7 68.6 Sept. 8 61.3 59.4 61.1 68.0 62.4 62.7 $8.1 66.9 62.1 65.7 62.4 65.1 Sept.15 64.1 61.0 58.0 67.1 61.7 62.0 57.1 65.6 61.9 61.3 59.4 65.0 " Sept.22 83.7 57.9 59.1 61.4 62.4 61.9 55.1 60.0 59.1 60.7 59.1 57.3 Sept.29 59.9 60.4 58.6 56.4 57.0 60.6 65.1 54.7 57.0 59.3 57.1 51.4 56.3 57.1 54.7 "' Oct. 6 55.4 55.0 57.3 54.3 56.1 57.4 54.6 52.7 Oct.13 52.4 50.1 52.7 51.3 53.9 56.3 52.9 51.0 54.1 $2.6 54.4 Oct. 20 50.7 49.0 48.1 45.6 48.2 51.0 49.1 45.7 50.7 50.6 53.7 ( l Oct. 27 47.1 45.9 48.0 39.0 46.9 49.0 49.4 40.0 47.5 47.9 48.7 37.7 O j
\
- v l
i ?
fable 8 2. Weekly sett acittu re variation ar.4 preef attati:m weets of December 24, 1979 to Octoter 27, 1960. P(41n50tA C00t1*G 70%f t 60005 OffA.a Precipitation cm cepth Precipi ta tion cmcTita F recipi ta tion cw te m Week of (* 1 weet) 10 to 50 (* 1 weet) 10 20 50 [* I weet) 10 2) 'M 1979 Dec. 24 0.39 - - - 1.29 - - - 1.18 - - - Dec. 31 0.25 - - - 0.17 - - - 0,16 - - - 1980 Jan. ? 0.00 - - - 0.00 - - - 0.36 - - - Jan. 14 0.00 - - - 0.00 - - - 0.00 - - - Jan. 21 0.12 - - - 0.09 - - - 0.08 - - - Jan. 28 0.03 - - - 0.02 - - - 0.04 - - - Feb. 4 0.02 - - - 0.02 - - - 0.08 - - - Feb. 11 0.21 - - - 0.32 - - - 0.12 - - - Feb. 18 0.56 - - - 0.28 - - - 0.38 - - - Fet . 25 0.11 - - - 0.10 - - - 0.12 - - - Nr. 3 0.74 - - - 0.b7 - - - 0.65 - - - Mar. 10 0.83 - - - 1.04 - - - 1.02 - - - N r.17 0.46 - - - 0.16 - - - 0.M - - . Mar. 24 0.75 90 84 90 0.b6 81 90 92 0.59 93 92 99 N r. 31 0.31 92 85 90 0.47 88 94 100 0.35 95 96 100 Apr. 7 1.33 95 85 91 0.97 87 9C 100 1.17 97 99 1 03 Apr. 14 0.17 97 91 93 0.27 93 90 100 0.16 100 100 1 00 Apr. 21 0.71 95 92 95 0.63 91 95 100 0.32 103 100 1 03 Apr. 28 0.42 100 98 97 0.07 90 78 94 0.43 100 100 100 Ny 5 0.34 100 100 100 0.33 94 17 94 0.26 100 ICC 1 00 Ny 12 1.72. 100 100 100 1.09 80 96 97 1.18 100 1Cc 100 Ny 19 0.30 93 100 100 0.17 76 90 96 0.02 100 100 100 May 26 0.74 100 100 100 0.84 90 100 100 0.85 1C3 100 1 00 June 2 1.31 95 100 100 0.43 68 80 96 0.40 100 93 100 June 9 0.63 93 100 103 0.58 95 100 100 0.56 100 100 1:c June 16 0.57 90 100 100 0.40 84 95 97 0.52 100 79 100 June 23 0.68 94 100 100 0.65 91 92 98 0.04 100 87 100 June M 0.42 99 100 100 0.22 99 95 100 0.45 100 74 100 July 7 0.30 81 100 100 0.18 56 81 80 0.32 68 43 8, July 14 0.16 83 100 100 0.22 55 70 56 0.45 100 28 43 July 21 0.91 74 78 100 0.84 5 28 22 0.67 60 6 6 July 28 1.82 92 100 100 1.00 84 92 28 0.89 90 4 4 Asg. 4 1.05 98 100 100 1.29 8 28 10 1.01 46 37 11 As9 11 0.87 100 100 100 0.63 95 15 68 0.47 100 80 22 Aug. 18 0.80 100 100 100 0.18 95 90 60 0.57 100 80 20 Aug. 25 0.40 100 100 100 0.07 100 98 28 0.40 100 100 10c Sept. 1 0.28 100 100 100 0.16 20 26 10 0.45 100 100 100 Sept. 8 0.23 100 100 100 0.02 5 10 27 0.28 100 100 5! 5ept.15 1.05 100 100 100 0.79 0 0 0 0.84 30 0 20 Sept.22 0.66 100 100 100 0.38 58 0 0 0.73 78 41 7 Sept.29 0.39 100 100 100 0.14 57 0 0 0.40 78 to 10 Oct. 6 0.22 100 100 100 0.02 0 0 0 0.03 31 20 7 Oct. 13 0.27 100 100 100' O.00 0 0 0 0.11 10 10 10 Oct. 20 0.28 - - - 0.60 - - - 0.26 - - - Oct. 27 0.34 - - - 0.00 - - - 0.29 - - - O
j i
\
t I
! Table B-3. Precipitation totals (inches), growing seasons 1974-1980, Cooling Tower Woods - i
' and Peninsula Site,s.
Year i Cooling Tower Woods Peninsula 1974 5.34 9.36 . l
- 1975 11.85 15.93 1 '
9.36 15.37 t !. 1976 I 1977 27.12 28.56
- 1978 11.06 12.59 i 1979 15.23* 12.80 a
j 1980 10.54 15.66 i O 4 l-5 . r l
- recording error of 7.8 inches subtracted from calculated total.
I 4 I L i
, . , . _ . - . . . . . . . _ , _ . . _ . . _ . , . _ . ~ . , _ . _ _ . , _ . , _ _ . _ _ . . . _ . _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ . . . . . _ . _ . . _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ , , . . _ _ _ _ . . . _ . ~ ,
Table 8-4. Soll Chemical Analyses, spring, sumer, and fall 1980. Peninsula, Cooling Tower Woods, and Ottawa sites. Catton Exchange Capacity 1 Base Saturation 1 Organic Matter pH Value Sulfates ppm Site Depth Sp So F Sp Su F Sp Su F Sp Su F Sp So F Peninsula Area Sumac Community 10 cm 12 9 6 100.0 98.7 99.6 3.1 4.5 2.6 7.4 7.3 7.7 - 13 - 20 cm 6 7 4 100.0 98.0 100.0 1.8 2.9 1.0 7.7 7.3 7.8 - 16 - 50 cm 3 5 3 99.6 98.7 99.7 1.7 0.9 0.3 7.9 7.7 7.9 - 9 - Hackberry- 10 cm 14 10 17 100.0 98.2 99.5 4.1 3.4 7.6 7.4 7.7 7.6 - 5 - Box Elder 20 cm 8 6 13 100.0 99.0 100.0 2.5 1.2 4.2 7.3 7.4 7.7 - 12 - 50 cm 4 7 8 100.0 99.0 100.0 1.0 1.3 1.0 7.6 7.8 8.0 - 6 - Hackberry II 10 cm 15 37 25 100.0 99.5 100.0 11.3 12.6 9.0 7.6 7.0 7.5 - 27 - 20 cm 9 31 9 99.4 99.3 99.4 4.8 9.3 4.0 7.8 7.4 7.8 - 20 - 50 cm 5 19 9 99.5 99.2 99.3 1.0 3.3 1.5 7.6 7.8 8.0 - 11 - Cooling Towei Woods Fulton Soil 10 cm 24 26 21 80.3 71.6 80.3 7.1 10.9 5.1 6.2 6.3 6.2 - 12 - 20 cm 24 23 24 84.4 67.8 70.1 4.8 9.8 3.9 6.4 6.0 5.8 - 30 - 50 cm 22 22 20 100.0 99.3 94.3 1.1 3.4 1.8 6.8 6.5 6.5 - 19 - Toledo Soll 10 cm 27 24 28 74.0 81.1 64.7 6.1 9.3 7.7 6.1 6.3 5.8 - 29 - 20 cm 29 26 27 70.9 98.9 64.8 4.0 7.3 4.5 5.6 6.6 5.5 - 15 - 50 cm 27 24 27 90.9 99.3 86.9 1.0 3.4 1.5 6.2 6.7 6.0 - 72 - Ottawa Refuge Fulton foil 10 cm 25 25 27 95.1 99.6 99.6 8.2 7. 8 12.4 7.1 7.1 7.6 - 19 - 20 cm 25 22 25 90.9 99.7 94.9 4.1 4.6 7.7 6.9 7.1 7.2 50 cm 23 19 22 100.0 99.3 100.0 2.8 3.3 2.6 7.1 7.1 7.1 - 22 - Toledo Soll 10 cm 28 22 26 90.6 99.8 95.0 5.0 8.2 8.6 6.8 6.8 7.0 - 16 - 20 cm 27 17 2R 95.6 99.4 95.4 4.0 3.1 5.5 6.8 7.0 6.8 - 9 - 50 cm 30 15 25 100.0 99.1 100.0 1.4 2.2 2.6 7.2 7.2 7.0 - 23 - O O O
Table B-5. Summary of Chemical Analyses, Fulton Soil, Cooling Tower Woods and pH levels of precipitation for 1980. Calcium Magnesium Sodium
% of total -
carbonates ppm ppm ppm Fulton Soil Spring 10 cm 50.0 2380 785 - 20 cm 52.0 2460 860 - 50 cm 57.0 2560 1090 - Summer 10 cm 53.0 2700 500 51 20 cm 46.0 2000 530 28 50 cm 66.0 2500 680 33 Fall 10 cm 53.0 2270 580 - 20 cm 44.0 2090 680 - 50 cm 55.0 2250 900 -
. 7-Year Average
- 10 cm 74.6 3677 569 51.2
'20 cm 73.5 3334 581 31.3 50 cm 74.5 3131 708 31.2 Spring Summer Fall Average pH values of - 4.58 4.98 precipitation, rain '
gauge, Cooling Tower Woods (1980)** s
- Based on 17 values for Ca and Mg (seasonal) and 10 values for Na (seasonal).
** Based on 8 measurements for each season.
9 O e
O s
- s 4 .
/ . -
s *
) .
- s pt
, ; 29 T
) '.
I :
\ .'
1 ; g
-Aug-
.; 25
's > -
/
t : *
\ *
/ l 5
(s .
- -julv
_ 21 N : s -
, t'/ se O .I -
;f N ..,
.' -3...
-- q '. .
16
/
/ : -
~,
T :
,e .-
12
<'~s>! .
s
..... . .x ,, .
~, 7
~, -
*' ~
?
(s _ g ..
/ -
s ' . a e ,. _ g I ~ s
-3 . .
/ :: . 28
/
} .
/'/
~ j.*
,N . -
a e
, 5 o
s h i N
, i e '
, .s o 24 o.c.
N N # " Figure B-1. Peninsula Site (Beach) - Temperature Ranges at 10, 20, and 50 cm depths and in air, weeks of December 24, 1979 to October 27, 1980,
s . O
/
> l-
\ :
N -
> .. .S ep t-s/ <
29 N . N '.-
\ '
\ s .
~
/> :*
\'\ .
-A u g -
-25 1 ..
t .
\
E o 1 s! v-o/ g o: -July e, ^' 21
\ *
\ '
1 . N ., .
< o e s,.-
.s June
. 16 1
- ) :, -
- / ..
\ .
\ ,
-MOV
\ .
12
'7 g
s i -A p r. 1 s 7 s . s/ -
/
/ : .
L.s 7 * .
.go r.
4
~3 s -
N:
$ ~
/
/ :
/
- 8
( . - jon. I ._2B = q .- i
,s .-
s-/ i e , pee. 6 1 s . 5 ' 5 , i i ( ,* d O < 0 24 N ^' " Figure B-2. Cooling Tower Woods Site - Temperature Ranges at 10,;20 and 50 cm depths and in air, weeks
, e . ., - M _
\
)
\
i O
-S e pr.
g% *
..' 29 N -
\ .
) : -
i *
- ~
/ * -Aug.
tk% , 25
~
s
- f . -
t .- I ,
* ~ July f) . 21
\ -
1 E t . u N . l o - P c% ' 3 . . E-u -June
\ : O .1g
\
J
- 1.
- N .,
E y
/
6 o ./ * 'May
~ #
12 r .'* I .- - s .
' s/
< ,N 1 -A p r.
/
N - l 7 s> .. I# ! (N . N *
'Ma r.
\ 3
\ i
~
1 *: I _ l : i . . 1
- 'J a n,
/ i i
- '28 ,
s s- .'* ~ N 4 . s '
,\ '
~ D e e,
, e s o 4 v O 24 Figure B-3. Ottawa Site - Temperature Ranges at 10, 20, and 50 cm depths and in air, weeks of December 24, 1979 to October 27, 1980.
7 p'80
- s. 4 f ~BO'
((-S e'@ '.\ .5,80 1: *
\* -5, S0 g- 4,30 l
80
.[ -W'80 j ,* -F '79 , 79
\ . f-4979
} -59 79 *
\
g,- ~5p'79 f -5p'79
- l. -
I' * - 1
.w 79 l, .
*I S.. -f'78 *l%- -f78 la ,
s l *.
- g. -5v'78 s
> ,,,,,,,,- 5, 73
/
p
/
/ *.*
\ *k -
( 5,*78 g: - t
.: -W'78
\ *.
l
\i -r71 -f77
\;
- \ '. .
l,- -5277-l 5in 1 ,, E d
....,g o l *-
k ,, - _5, 77 V I; 5 - 9E pgi - -W '77
? ,. .- '
I.. . l * . s/
\' :
, -f'76 *
**,>*-y_. .
-, 76
\.- -5e' 76 ~
's,,, ..
-Sa'76
\.
~..
I -5p'76
-5,*76 (* ,
\. %.
) -W76 s
.W76
\
/
{ -f'IS :/ % -f *75 f(. s , t-, 4='75 'N ' -5 / 75
\; /
/
V.- s
/
g
' 5,*75 %- -Sp*15 g
\- 'N
=%
i -W'7'i
- l* - .W 75 i ..
i * ( l . . . -. ,
,_-f'74 .y*74
. f. .
3 :; y~g l ._5ay -T- ' $=*74 o f' gi k, o o e E i 6 k. 9 7, t 5
. Figure B-4. Peninsula Area: . Sumac Connunity, % Organic Matter - 10, 20, and 50.cm depths and %
Available Motsture - 10, 20, and 50 cm ~
-~ depths. Summer 1974 - Fall 1980.
/
O f,
-F '80
/ **
( -S '80
\
/- -5,*8 0 I '
(- w'80
\' -
-F '79
, l.
I* -So 79 l- -
- I * -Sp'79 l
I. s .I- - I; .- - F '70 1~
- j. ~ 5 '78 I-
- g. -
)*
I*
- I
, - F '77 f
,/ .
-s o'77 l .
1 . -
! 5/ 5-
? RI S- -
/
/
s . -F '7G
\ .
\
g ,
-s o '76
\ .
\ .
\ .
i i \ _ l \' y
- f. - F '75
/.
-s 75 l .
\ .
\
i / .' ~W '75 l /. [ -
- F '74 go \
dU i i r'f', s *74 i El 2 # 9 a o Figure B-5. Peninsula Area: Sumac Comunity - Cation Exchange Capacity - 10, 20, and 50 cm depths. Sumer 1974 - Fali 1980.
. - . - _~ _ = ~ _ . . _ _ _ . - . _ - . - - . ._ . ._ . - _ . -
F '80 5
-S u'80
-5p'80 I
-W'80
-F '79 l
- Su'79
-Sp* 79
-F '78
-S u '78
~
I -F '77 4
) - S a '7 7 O
@= E
$E $E o
-F'76 j :.
3 i _f. U h 58'76 1 E 2 ~
- F '75
~
l l
-Su '75
~
l 4
-w.75 f\ . .
D. , 2 2. J
-r'74 I I, I I I l Su '74 h l l-
, g O 82 e O O
. j *a S .
Figure B-6.. Peninsula Area: Sumac Consnunity - % Bases, 10 cm depth, _ . _ -_. -.._. .-. - _ _ . _ _.. _ ._' Summer 1974 ._ Fall 1980.. _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ . _
f'80
.5 '80
-5,*80 .
=w'80 l -F 79
-Su'79
- 5p'7 9
, -F '78
, -5='70 q -F '77
-5 *77 8 81 @ 1 $ -F'76
=c E
& 3 5= k 2 3 =
E
- 3 0 -Sa'76
? e 2
i - F '75
- S u '75
-w 7s
\) - f ' 74
, ,5 j 'd ,i i
, .-Sa'74
; i 6
y
# 5m8,- m
- S i
i Figure B-7. P ninsula Area s ac Comunity, % Bases, 3 ,e 3974 - Fall 1980.
i F10 5.*80 5p'80
-W'80 I, -F'79
-su' 79 i
i - 5 p'79 1 i
- F'78
-5 7a
-F '77
- 5.*77 N
T ae a' at e E E E - F *76 2 *
-1 2 i : 8 2 u. g j 5.'76 x
I i -Frys
-s.7s
- W '75
- F '74
.O.*
,3 d}> -T ., .. '- , , , , , ,
- s. 74 atj g- g g-s g o- o Figure B-8. Peninsula Area: Sumac Comunity,-% Bases,
' 50 cm depth, Summer 19741- Fall 1980.
, + sv ,'. ru.
; s' -
- 5='80 [s .', Su'80 12 .
5p'80 g ',. - 5p'80
. g -
, -W'80
{- -W'80
% l-p - F '79 f, -F' 79
/.' /-
-So*79 f f - S u' 79
/
- I :
\ .
-5p* 79 g ,
-5 p '79 s
\ -
\., -
\ '. -
* \* ,
s,.
- F '78 1
f- -
- F'78
\*' /
/. -5= '78 g ,' -5 '78
/- g .
/.' -
3
/. I
/- .
/,'
~
l ,
/- i .
!* - F '77 I - F '77 g, .
N*. I.
- s. t-
/
. -S u'77 ). - 5.*7 7
/ .
/.
/ '
/ .
/, _
l .' E E
/ - 6 l o.
5 / .' - 6i* - 9 /5 .. r 9 I : N g - F '76 ( - F '76 7s * . f. , s s . g
- Sa'76 *
. . 5.*76 I .
l . t - I .
~
}
l =
. l .
I- - l ' I ,' '
- l. *
., - F '75 - F '75
\ *. i
- s -
1
. - Sa '75 .
-5 *15
- \ .
t / \ . 1 ,' g. - I' g.
\-
)I -W '75 / -W'75
/ ,* [ ,*
. - F '74 L
, -F'74
-ug -g\: i s *.
\
U' i i f i i , , Su'74 :5 5. 74 ES 8 g g o di g, 1 q ae -Figure B-9. Cooling Tower Woods: Fulton Soil, Cation Exchange Capacity and % Organic Matter,10, 20, and 50 cm depths, Sumer 1974 - Fall 1980.
l -
. .F 'es
-S u '80 p - 5 p '80
-W'80
-F'79
-So
- 79
-Sp'79
-F'78
-su '7a
-F '77
\ l -S u '77
# M N N 3 -F '76 4,
5 5 ! 3 i '5 3 0 [o ' j -S u '76 I
- F '75
-Su '75
-W '75 l - F '74
"' a Ji i
\i i i i i l , su'74
, 3$ 2 S S 2 o Figure B-10. Cooling Tower Woods: Fulton Soil, % Bases, 10 cm depth, Sumer 1974 - Fall 1980.
- F '80
-su 'so
[ -5p'80 f
-W'80
-F'79
-Su'79
- sp' 79
- F '78
-s. 7a
-F '77 l
\ >
-s.'77
$ #
- at
$ 1
.I I .5
$ -F '76 ii E
r 7, z
- s. 're
-F '75
-s. 75
/.
-W '75
- F 74 jj, ' ' i . , '
- i
-s.74 A o o dj8 "
" S 9 $
Figure B-11. Cooling Tower Woods: Fulton Soil, % Bases, 20 cm depth, Sumer 1974 - Fall 1980.
F '80
/. 5 u '80 5p'80
> -W'80
-f *79
-Su'79
-Sp'79
, -F '76
-Su '78
~
d I -F '77
-S u '7 7
$. p $ $
$ g E E -F'76 E
l
-4 i. $.
3 0 I 2 -Su '76 i x l I -r '75 ,
-Su '75 l _
- I -W '75 ex
\
(Q -
-r ta sa /
l ' Ai i i i-'N . . . . . i , -Su'74
#3 $ S S S 2 ,
i Figure B-12. Cooling Tower Woods: Fulton Soil, % Bases, 50 cm depth, Suunner 1974 - Fall 1980.
m .g 'go
. .~r n r
~ *
- s s",,,','............****
-Su '80
*Sp to
.* .N
*N
*N.
* 'h "W'80 O
~****%
%* b *= * -r 79 5*
gn,. . 7,y.i
'Sv'79
'Sp'79 s.
% N s
'W'79 N
s ,'+.,*..* ~ F*78
# , s, , , , .
; w* :, . .
...**s ~ ~Su'78 w
$w .\
-5p 73
$.* N ,
s -W
- 78 y ~ F *17 s' .
. s' ~5u'77
. % s *%
g
$ v s E '~ Sp *7 7
. O o s o
.m "kY s
#. .s 'W'77
.,/
,/.
~F*76
% s '.. s' ..'.,**.,,.
=
. 3u,76
. . . .y-
'5 0*76
.\
*\.'*.*..**.
*s
- s. s.*N . .
~W '76
. % -. s, N ~F*75 s.*
. . . . . %* s : 1
- _s,,7, m a.w.4,. wese.
-Sp*75 S '
.N
** N
. \. . , -W'75 D . g. .. . ' % - .,, ,' %
*** . F
- 7,g 2*
SJ . . . . * = * * , . ,.N/
' , 5.*74
?) o 42 e I E a e i O
I o i i o
- 9 9 4 a Figure B-13. Cooling Tower Woods: Fulton Soil, % Available Moisture,10, 20, and 50 cm depths, Suniner 1974 - Winter 1980.
a O
/ ~ F '80 E
o t.. /
* *' / -
su '80 O
'. . ( -
3 E o
- s P'80
'I.* s
-w '80
-F'79
% . . * *'N ., "s h -su'79
. \ - s p,'79
/
/ -
.* /
g'o /
/ - F '78
/
M' . .N# .*'s -s u ' 78
.** N -sP'78
, /
*, / ~
O S 5 '.] o f
-F '77
.. /
. /
-su '77
.' I .
/
- F '76
[ t
-s u'76 a, \
. \ -
's \ - F '75
**-b.,s
* -su75 I
n.4N s,$**,7e *
-w '75
- F 74 1
r \ em ., , W* s i su,74 '. m . A
- m 3
I S Changes in pH values, Fulton soil, Cooling g Figure B-14. Tower Woods, 1974-1980,10, 20, and 50 cm depths. L
_____m --a.2-m,.u_se-a--- --" , , ..32 aa,.a- -- * -A e a-.a - -- - ..-nu--u- -.4 =a_s_ _a,_--2 a-_a n_.__ _ ., _...a na - i ll 6 f i i l i e! , i f t P I h Y l-t ( l O: l 1 O'
s b ANNUAL REPORT DAVIS-BESSE TERRESTRIAL MONITORING DECEMBER 1980 D. Atmospheric Environment Glen R. Frey Department of Geography Introduction The network of climatological stations monitoring the atmos-pheric environment near the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station has been in operation since April 1974. The format and procedures for the systematic observations were originally outlin9d in Section D, g Semi-Annual Report, June 1974. Three standard stations had been established: at the base of the microwave / meteorological tower, within the cooling tower woods, and on an exposed, former beach ridge. For comparison purposes, stations also had been established at'the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge and on the University campus. At these sites were recording rain gauges, hygrothermographs, evaporimeters, and soil thermographs. Non-recording solar radiation
- and soil moisture devices and ' simple rain collectors also were used.
Because of the intermittent plant operation during the year, there are' no complete months of continuous operation-for statisti-cal. analysis. Even though such extended sequences of climatic data during plant operations have not been'obtained, the information collected during the. year can still be used to determine possible
. environmental impact.
("I x._/
0-2 There is no doubt that the vapor plume generated by the cooling tower can change the atmospheric conditions at a giver instant. In close proximity to the tower, mist can add to the precipitation 9 totals and change their acidic parameter. When the vapor plume comes in contact with the ground, relative humidities and dew points are increased. A temperature decrease occurs when the plume shades a station under strong sunshine. Similarly, the plume could blanket an area at night, causing temperatures to be wanner than expected. The frequency of these occurrences is not large with a tall cool-ing tower and variable wind patterns. These short-term occurrences should not be taken as atmospheric factors that will significantly change conditions unless they are frequent and persistent. To this end climatological fluctuations over a long period are the key to atmospheric environmental change. It is expected that climatic conditions normally will vary considerably from year to year, season to season, and location to location. Each station has a unique climatic setting with varia-tions that make it different from all others, no matter how similar the overall climatic conditions. Our purpose is to identify the changes in these variation patterns for and between stations during cooling tower operations. This is the key to any possible environmentally induced changes. Instruments and Measurements Climatological stations are maintained at three prima.y locatinns on the Davis-Besse site. Station "T" is the base station at the microwave / meteorological tower and is set up according to weather service standards. It is located in a fenced-in area on a grass surface. Because of the great distance from any trees or
0-3 other obstructions and very level terrain, advection processes are 3 at a maximum. Station "A" is in the cooling tower woods and highly i V) influenced by a continuous and complete forest canopy. The fairly close proximity to open water and the generally open nature of the woods all influence climatological measurements. Station "B" is located in the woods on the sandy soil of a former beach ridge. The station, in a clearing, does not have a forest canopy but instead is surrounded by dense growth that limits advection. The sandy soil, which dries very rapidly, coupled with an almost complete lack of wind currents results in different climatic characteristics. Four supplemental locations on the Davis-Besse site are set up with non-recording rain gauges and read weekly to provide additional data on rainfall patterns. Station "0W" is the basic, off-site reference station located in the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge. This location was chosen because of its similar 4 vegetation cover, proximity to Lake Erie, and upwind position (in terms'of climatic normals). This station has a setting very similar to Station "A", on a margin of swamp area in _a woods with compkte forest canopy cover. Because of the greater extent and density of the woods, it is less influenced by the wind. Station "BG", the inland reference station, at Bowling Green State University is.slightly influenced by proximity to buildings.
. Instrumentation in the climate shelters records temperature and relative humidity data continuously on paper strip charts which are.sumarized by day, . week, and month. Each period is analyzed slightly differently to stress inter-station fluctuations.
Recording evaporimeters were installed the end of April-and used
.I ) - until the end of October. The instrument uses-distilled water %) -
and cannot be used in freezing' weather.
D-4 All hygrothermographs were brought in for a cleaning and calibration check. No data were lost because the backup instru-ment was rotated between sites. While in the climate shelters, calibration of the hygrothermographs was verified by using the Assman Psychrometer and by rotating the backup unit between sites. Evaporatior instrumentation was caliorated primarily by rotating the backup evapometer between sites. Soil temperatures were checked by portable soil thermometers. Recording soil thermographs, which have had problems in maintaining calibration in the past, were monitored frequently. This resulted in reasonably good comparable series of records. The sensing elements and timing mechanisms are exposed to the fluctuations of weather and dcteriorate, causing measurements to drift and a loss of accuracy. The biggest problem was the occa-sional drying out of the wicks on evaporimeters. Most of these occurrences were detected within a week and did not cause a break in the continuity of the records. With increasing environmental concern over low pH precipita-tion, pH readings were taken from August through December. Measure-ments were made at all primary climate stations, reference climate stations, and supplemental rain gauges. Only the weeks where at least 0.25 of an inch of precipitation occurred were included, since this was the minimum amount of water needed to obtain an accurate pH on our meter. Presentation of Data The data reviewed in this report are based on the weekly periods December 24, 1979 through December 29, 1980 and the twelve months of 1980. Detailed files are maintained and analyzed by day, week, and month. Data are presented in three basic parts for this I
D-5 report. Part I: Figures 01 through 07 are monthly sumaries p of normals presented in graphic form. Part II: Figures 08 through b Dl4 are monthly variations from base Station "T". These first two parts replace the same nonnal and variation tabular data in previous reports. The change is made to better depict this year's data with reference to occurrences in past years. Part III: Figures 015 through D21 represent weekly interstation deviations, with fluctu-ations being graphed about the values for the base Station "T". Interpretation of Data Precipitation Acidity: The most distinguishing feature of 1980 was the influence of the cooling tower's vapor plume on the pH parameter. In the northeastern section of the country pH readings of 4.0 are common. This is well below normal precipitation, which has a pH of around 5.6. A major concern is the source of this Q increased acidity.. The vapor plume affects the rain in the local V area to the extent that the pH readings reflect less acidity than normal rainfall. The data base for precipitation pH is small. Readings were taken on a weekly basis, August through-December, for all locations with sufficient amounts of accumulated rain. The' stations located downwind from the operating cooling tower during the time of precipitation were separated for analysis purposes. These measure-ments were compared in three different ways with other pH readings, which. served as background reference levels. First, comparisons were made between stations on a . weekly basis. The downwind pH readings were higher (more alkaline) than the upwind and off-site locations. In a specific instance.one downwind station had a pH fn) v- 2.32 higher. The largest differences when comparing the groupings
~.
of stations upwind verses downwind on a weekly basis is 1.00 higher. _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ ~
0-6 All downwind readings were 0.83 higher than all upwind occurrences. The second method of analysis used readings taken at each station while under the vapor plume in comparison with all other readings made at the same stations. At most observation stations the pH was at least a full point higher when it was under the vapor plume than when the tower was not operating or in an upwind position. The one exception to this was Station "A", which was only slightly higher under the plume. This might be attributed to the close proximity of the service road and dust particles entering the rain gauge. The third component was the comparison of all observations under the plume with all other readings in the time period and throughout the region. The background pH value of 5.09 is not very acidic when compared to other regions in the Eastern United States, but it is significantly lower than 5.81 under the plume. The apparent reason for the relative elevation of pH in the precipitation is in the nature of the cooling tower water. The Great Lakes has a pH of approximately 8.0, which when used in the cooling tower would make the vapor plume alkaline. The pH of the cooling tower water frequently measures greater than 8. As precipitation fells through the plume, it changes characteristics. The degree in change of pH would depend on the size of drops and rate of fall but would definitely increase as it penetrates the vapor plume. Entire Period: The most distinguishing feature of 1980 was its high degree of similarity to preceding years. While the power plant did not operate constantly for an entire month, it was on line a high percentage of time for January, February, March, November, and December. Of this group of months, December is L
D-7 the one that has the greatest fluctuations from expected ,-T climatic conditions. ! I December had a relatively high interstation variability for most of the measured climatic elements (Figures D8 to D14). This condition existed in combination with the fact that the monthly averages were very similar to previous years (Figures 01 to 07). Specifically both the maximum temperature departures from Station "T" and minimum temperature departures from Station "T" are in the range of 8 - 10 F", which would be characteristic of summer but not December. Additionally, the temperature range and precipitation fluctuations were similar to the temperature characteristics. The average dew points were well within expected limits, but the interstation variations were larger than expected. The operational pattern of the power station prevents a strictly (~ } statistical comparable analysis with previous years, yet the x / variation component appears to be anomalously high. Such fluctuations in the average departure components cannot be attributed to the plant operation. The vapor plume had no effect on this component of the climatic environment because of the pattern of the departures. The weather of December was not typical of the region. A series of high pressure systems with a high degree of stability produced cold and dry conditions.- The resulting cold temperatures were not unusual, but the continuing stable conditions enhanced the differences normally experienced at each station. Thus the high variation in maximum and minimum temperatures occurred at the same time as there was low variation in temperature range. This same weather system produced the lower
~
i than normal precipitation.
D-8 For the remainder of the year the climatic data are well , within previously established limits, especially when considered in the light of the year's variable weather pattern. Below normal temperatures of February, March, and October were in sharp contrast to very warm readings in August. January, April, and November were also cooler than long-term normals. With only one month significantly above average, the year as a whole was rated as cool. Precipitation was near normal for the year. The individual months of October and November were drier, and August was wetter. Even including the climatological extremes of December, the patterns of fluctuation were similar to previous years. The complete set of graphs (Figures D1 through D21) illustrate the basic shift between winter and summer interstation variability. The typical interstation fluctuation is small in winter but is considerable in the warmer part of the year. The months of January and February had relatively small fluctuations. March had an abrupt shift to a high degree of interstation differences, which continued through September. After this point, interstation fluctuations gradually diminished until December when they increased markedly. The gradual change to the typical winter pattern is identical to previous years. The December increase, as pointed out previously, must ue considered anomalous. Maximum temperature departures from the base Station "T" are typical of shifts that occur from one season to another (Figure D15). During the first two months of the year interstation fluctuations were small. Throughout the sumer portion, both "BG" and "B" were wanner than Station "T". The University site was the warmest because of the distance from water, with "B"
D-9 slightly warmer because of sandy soils and greatly reduced advection. Statior.s "0W" and "A" were cooler because of the vegetation canopy. ' Conditions between stations had a greater degree of similarity in the spring than fall. Minimum temperatures, in terms of departures from Station "T", are an. excellent example of the chanages that occurred throughout this reporting interval (Figure D16). During January all station
-fluctuations were similar to Station "T"; most averaged warmer, while Station "BG" was slightly cooler. During the summer portion "BG" was cooler because of its inland location, receiving no moderating influence from Lake Erie. Also, the general shift in_ position between coastal and inland' stations was the same as in previous years. .However, the variation between stations was smaller than in the past.
_ Average temperature departures from Station "T" are a composite of conditions- described under maximum and minimum
-temperatures (Figure D17)- . Most-of the year interstation fluctu--
.ations were relatively small, but there was a general . shift of positions .with respect to the< base station. During- the first and last!part of the year _most stations had a low' degree of variability, and in the middle portion they exhibited relatively moderate
- fluctuations.
Temperature ra5on had thes same ' basic pattern throughout the Jcourse of the year,Las in. previous years (Figure D18).' : The greates_t
- departures were'during the warmer periods. In the cooler months,
~
the ra'nge of_ temperatures was -very similar. (Throughout the-year "BG" and "B'.' had greater ranges than~ "T", with' "A"'and ;"0W" b
- (_/
- smaller.
D-10 Precipitation had several distinct periods of high variability. During the sumer this was due to convectional storms passing over some stations and not others (Figure D19). The higher fluctuations in the sumer normally occur because of high frequency of convective storms. Humidity is given both in the terms of relative humidity (Figure D20) and dew point (Figure D21). Generally there was e high degree of week-to-week fluctuation. Many factors affected the humidity, including evaporation, proximity to water, wind currents, and vegetation growth. The degree of interstation variability is the same as the other elements throughout the v sod and is similar to previous years. January was one o' the cold months, averaging below long-term normals. In addition to being colder, the month received average precipitation. All monthly temperature characteristics between stations were quite similar (Figure D8). The greatest differences were in total precipitation and minimum temperature. The largest interstation variations were between "B" and "L 3". February was very cold. Cold temperatures were uniform, which resulted in a low degree of varf ability. Station "BG" was slightly colder than the others (Figure D15). The greatest discrepancies between stations were between "BG" and "0W". In these instances, the greatest monthly interstation variability was average air temperature. March again averaged almost 5 F below normal. "BG" was slightly cooler becauce of its inland location (Figure D16). The greatest interstation differences were between "B" and BG" based on variations in average air temperatures. The relatively low interstation variability continued throughout the entire month.
D-ll In April cool temperatures were the key distinguishing factors of the month, with an increase in interstation fluctuations (Figure D17). No one element was outstanding; however, maximum temperature and precipitation made "BG" and "B" different from other stations. iay conditions were similar to March and April (Figure D18). Cool temperatures and low variability were characteristic. Differences between stations were small compared to previous years.
"A" "B" and "T" "B" had the greatest differences.
June temperatures and precipitation were. normal for the month (Figure D16). Most elements had a low degree of variability. Precipitation had the highest amount; overall this month was the start of more diverse summer conditions. In July temperatures throughout the region were similar and normal (Figure D16). Interstation variations were moderate and Q
%.i well within the normal range.
August rainfall was well above normal and highly variable between stations. : Temperatures averaged also well above normal and led to higher variability between stations (Figure D17). The
' greatest differences occurred between Stations "BG" and "B". The specific. element- that~ led to this difference was total precipita-
~ tion.
Precipitation ~and temperatures for September were normal _(Figure D18). Variability was less than August with Stations "T" "0W" having the most significant differences. Specific elements l tha't ranked highest were evaporation and precipitation. October was' cold. Precipitation was normal at all stations l-E
-(Figured 19)..Thedifferencesbetweenlocationsweresmallerthan Lfm the_ preceding summer months. Greatest differences were-between l()
Stations'"B" and "0W". L1
D-12 Below normal temperatures and precipitation were characteristic in November (Figure D20). Differences between stations were very small. The most significant fluctuations were between Stations "0W" and "A". Temperature and temperature range were the most important elements leading to that difference. In December temperatures and precipitation were normal (Figure 021), but most elements were very high in their fluctuation patterns, in sharp contrast to November. Conclusion The vapor plume from a natural-draft cooling tower can influence the surrounding atmcspheric environment. Specifically, during the operational period in November and December the cooling tower plume (derived from high pH Lake Erie water) apparently increased the pH of precipitation in the inmediately surrounding region. Fluctuations of other atmospheric factors (temperature, relative humidity, dew point, precipitation) that have been monitored are within expected ranges, and no other climatic occurrence can be attributed to the power station operation. O L_
f} LIST OF FIGURES Section D Part I: Based on monthly averages from all stations compared with previous years. D1 Maximum Temperature D2 Minimum Temperature D3 Average Temperature D4 Temperature Range D5 Precipitation 06 Relative Humidity D7 Dew Point Part II: Based on monthly averages from all stations as difference from Station "T" compared with previous years. D8 Maximum Temperature-Average Departures From Station T _ _ D9 Minimum Temperature-Average Departures From Station T D10 Average Temperature-Average Departures From Station T /~] (j Dll Temperature Range -Average Departures From Station T D12 Precipitation -Average Departures From Station T D13 Relative Humidity -Average Departures From Station T D14 Dew Point -Average Departures From Station T Part III: Based on weekly averages given as difference from Station "T" representing fluctuations within the year. D15 Maximum Temperature-Departures From Station T D16 Minimum Temperature-Departures From Station T D17 Average Temperature-Departures From Station T D18 Temperature. Range -Departures From Station T , D19 . Precipitation .
-Dapartures From Station T D20- Rel_ative Humidity- -Departures From Station T D21 Dew Point -Departures From Station T J5
r-MAXIMUM TEMPERATURES 80 - -- 70 - _ ~
. - ?
60 ; ;
- + ; .,
4 0 < :j - . t 3 , .
, , , , i t <
50 ., . . t F* ' 4
~ '
40 - < I : 1 t' ;
; g-t
; y -
7. 30 j j f g , , i . 3 l t i [
, 4
[ l ,
- 20 -
~
! [. , - '
i i + g 4 il 10 I ' 3 :. O ' l JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC Figure 01 Maximum temperatures by months of the five network stations for 1980 i compared against the maximum temperature by months for the previous five years of the study. O O -
MINIMUM TEMPERATURES 70
^ -
- I 60 .
m
. er
~
50 ~ i ,' ! _,
~' '
' -i .
40 , , ,
~ ~ <
30 ~
- l ; _
$ l-
~ '
I i , 20 ; g l _ i > i '
> q[8
' ~
< k .
JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE Figure D2 Minimum temperatures by months of the five network stations for 1980 compared against the minimum temperature by months for the previous five years of the study. I
AVERAGE TEMPERATURES 4 70 7
= _
60 __ ; _
. _ . o ;
- s 50 .. ', e 3 i ; - ; .
F* 40 r ,
~
30 D o ;
,_"h
- l
; ; i J. _- t :g t ,
20 g ; , j g i i, 4
.,F1
.g g'
~ *
!l 10 . I.
3.
' A
, ; i i t .
\ .
i e 0 5 '
- , l: i
. JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NO.V DEC 1
( Figure D3 Average temperatures by months of the five network stations for 1980 compared against the average temperature by months for the pre tious five years of the study O O O
o O (m ( - 4 TEFIPERATURE RANGE
~
~
18 s
=
16 - - - -
- ! i . - -
14 g , c .
, ; , y , .
p:. .
+ ,
u ; -
., ; 3
+
n 12 r, ; , _ ; ,* J , ,
; e ;
c 4 .: , , t
. . ; 3 5- .
p.
- s -
c._ e r -e i , 3 , ,
) 5 s * >
! t ~
~
I
,~
I 10 ' 2? s i ? J i - 2 ; i
+
^
t , I
, a ^
j
- 8 <
;. < j
, s
#
- t i
' < s g ;
t' 6 *
- v t -
' ^
+
~
! }
1 4 I
. 4
- t
< y 4' ) e -
g
> p e .
$. i y e.
- q. P.M f s 4-
, ; s s
s , ; L 4
*- s + "
.1 9 4 ; 3
, s g
i
- a
- s 3
3-
, ; '_ j
> 4 2 -
s . t
;q. :
s 3
- _ , J a
h 0 - JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC ,4 Figure D4 Temperature range by months of the five network stations for 1980 compared against the temperature range by months for the previous five years of the study. 4
- .gv
l L PRECIPITATION i l 8 7
.- 1 6
0 3
'~
5 IN c ; 4 , . m ' - D ; - .. [ 3 . ,
+
~
~
~ '
' ~
7
~
2 ER 5 ' - n- ~ 10 I JAN kl FEB j MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT l l [ l-l-OCT NOV DEC Figure D5 Precipitation by months of the five network stations for 1980 compared against the precipitation by months for the previous five years of the study. 9 O e
(,-,) [. C' v s ( RELATIVE HUMIDITY 90 - E - . s ~~ ~ -
~
h E ~ - -- - - 80 . : _ -
= . - . - -
4 p -
- n. . .
7e-s . . . , T ;#!
' " ~
! i - 5 -
' ?
70
" - . t
- i{j e
j
, * , , ; < t. g
~
, : t 4 , . 4 60 .'. .
e i : . 2 , t; , ', , r 4 4 ., 3 s ,
.g , ,
j
; I '
- 2 ,j
{ r c ; . 4 . i s . 2 50 i - -
..3 .
l- i f
}'
r , s .
. g!,
i ' I , t *
? ?
. +
+
'. n[-
3 i .'
' - . l 40 -
i *
< ,- ; .i-i <
- s , ;* , :
s
' Fd j .
< 1 a 4 a
64 s ; : : . .
-a 30 3
; j e .pa
.j;
,1
,, o 3
La
; , i : -- .
4 -
, : i .
L I t
-i F I ; %j 20' 1 -
. :- , s
': . 3 M
4
; l pj
].4 2
10 - > r s
- { ; -
+
s
>g.
N,, O
.:. - 12- 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC Figure 06 Relative humidity by months of,the five network stations for 1980 compared against the relative humidity by months for the previous five years of the study.
DEW POINT d 70 60 .
' ~
~ ~
~
~~ '
50 . i
~
- 5
~~
4
. 40 -
4 4 -
~~
i __ e ; r 4 30 .! t
- i F
l g - g
~
20 e E ; T l '
~i
- : E
; l l b .
; 4
( i , i l i 10 - . 1 0 >- i l
- JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT N0/ ' JEL Figure D7 Dew point by months of the five network stations for 1980 compared against the dew point by months for the previous five years of the study.
O O O
i
.}
'} .
- MAXIMUM TEMPERATURES - AVERAGE DEPARTURES FROM. STATION T i
t p 1 - 4 . 3 '
- i. .
2 4 r ' " ,
! T . . .. ,
y
;e , 4. ,
5 s T 1
- t .
y 3 i a i : . i " = JF "
- p. O '
# E '-
(, y E{,
+ -
%l;,
4 " ' L t . ~p 2
-l' L. j- '
[
-2 L
JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE
-3 Figura D8 Maximum temperature differences from the meteorological tower base Station "T" by months of the five network stations for 1980 compared against conditions for the previous five years of the study.
MINIMUM TEMPERATURES - AVERAGE DFPARTURES FROM STATION T l 4
~
3 2- "' g
, .. 1 4 1
4 , l 0 k - i _
.r .
- i. ,
! '1 r$ a I , ,
j ; (
. 1 3
ni i
-1 -
j -2 - JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE ULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
-3 -
Figure D9 Minimum temperature differences from the meteorological tower base Station "T" by months of the five network stations for 1980 compared against conditions for the previous five years of the study. i l i i O O O
i AVERAGE TEMPERATURES - AVERAGE DEPARTURES FROM STATION T 4 3 3
- ) .
g 2 1 ._
= .
d F' 1 I f k ! ] h f
~ '
" O m
~
'l J 11J O
.j.
E -
;_ E i ; l :1 .
J -
+
-1 -
i .. M
~ ~
- -2
(! t _Y AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE i i 4 9 ) l Figure D10 Average temperature differences from the meteorological tower base Station "T" by months of the five network stations for 1980 compared against conditions for the previous five years of the study. \ i
TEMPERATURE RANGE - AVERAGE DEPARTURES FROM STATION T 5 - 1 4 4 3 t 4 2 -
- p. j E ,
pk ' f g i
~
... , m - rf o "-
2:
; g : _
ts ci
> M
~ ~ ~
, -2' -
~
- JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
-3 i
1 Figure Dll Temperature range differences from the meteorological tower base Station "T" by months of the five ] network stations for 1980 compared against conditions for the previous five years of the study. h O e i
PRECIPITATION - AVERAGE DEPARTURES FROM STATION T i 2.00 . 1.50
- E 1.00 ;
I IN g- - i , ,
.50 . . ., ,
4
. + .
R 3 r r -
- F r- I f
0 t g u f j g { .
~
I
.50 _ ,
_I - _
-1.00 - -
, -1.50 OCT NOV DE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT l Figure D12 Precipitation differences from the meteorological tower base Station "T" by months of the five network stations for 1980 compared against conditions for the previous five years of the study. _ 1
RELATIVE HUMIDITY - AVERAGE DEPARTURES FROM STATION T 15 10
- ~ ~ "
5 : - -
. 7 ,
! *CR l 1 l 1 . 4 p ,
W_ ~ _ { 1 : . . . 1
~
U ?E a l'. l
- .R k
-5
- i
-10 JAN MAR APR fikY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
! -15 FEB i l t l Figure D13 Relativa humidity differences from the meteorological tower base Station "T" by months of the five network stations for 1980 compared against conditions for the previous five years of the study. A h - W W W
O O O DEW POINT - AVERAGE DEPARTURES FROM STATION T i 4 i 3 g . , l 2 ., p- , , j l . ; "
~
! i ,
i ,
'~
i 1 . R;' - s
% 0 -
T ' g - . [ g
, 3
]
l'
-1 - -
o L, ~
-2 ,
[ 4- .
-3
' ~
- -4 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
. Figure D14 Dew point differences from the meteorological tower base Station "T" by months of the five network i
stations for 1980 compared against conditions for the previous five years of the study. 1
m4. T1 m o i _, e, . - . o u, o m o e o 24 h R 31 _1 1/,'f_1 t i (m . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _R% i d c 14 7 _ I. a
- 7 .
N ,o i
- o. -n6 mx. R21 .; .p ..
- : pe, ,y I
-* n 28
. j ,u I, oc - - -
N, _L. - I ca m 4 ---. - ~ n nR ou 9 1118
-8 sip 2 * -
4, %,i l av
--i cwa o 25 .- s xo o9 dc: _n+W c s p.r. ..i
, = x 3 i a-r m, 'x- "
a x et w 10 ]<m~.e < El . A. %. . . . _ - c 17 _f_g_{ pfrr::r 7-] ' g 32 24 g -o u, u, ~. :. x._,
.o .c.
o -+. 31 @ 1 I' L. I
~ ~~ 1~ a C
E E' > 7 -
- n. 2 ;8 14 Nah --'
"R 21 VC T 5o n3 28 t m
m
-4, 5 j_g GB g< 12 x 32
.=
a
#. q:.3, >s-( ;
oa 39 .__ c g m ,, gg 26 ,Ji _s < s
- u. e 2 .
......1,, .
,,\ \ 1 i en L L
~~
'< s si 9 -- .
. 4. ' .' V 'r, i
j_J Eg m 16 -s. v. . -- i -
. p 1- w no
( E3 ym. y7 r-
!! "==CZC E{? 44j*-
I _. . Ll + \, ,,, 4- t A l 8_
?
K_' 5 G c
# 14 nn " I W l I O,. *, 2] ... i t-- m i
g g
. ,qm;.", ,i" l I.s,q> l in , yyx 28 _ __ s ._
n gg g 33 4 L,_._ ----- l -
,fpJ "t m o
m -t ' ..
<' 3
's I I l,
- tr 18 n' - -
t'i yi om w 25 +:. t: g , n co j aov, n, , -i i r+ r+ v, mo 8 3 i
. r, .a
' d ->
r I. --
.'-.I rp r -
l ; .r . I o g ef, --i15 _J_ ..q L.S c z gg 22 _p __ ___ _ _ J -
.d_gl .L__. . _ , ,. J_ __
H y- _-_g-
' I
- n. 29 -. - g 9__
I i N, o -i m = o 6 - t .. t n o 13 . I. ~ - T
.s ->3 T: i~
' ~ ~ ~ '- '
84 20 l~ er ox
,o 27 .
iJ g g3 _ [_ _ ___ _ __..4 48_ ._.. . _ _
,o q co ._ L _ _._..._ _ .
,,4.!p l g q_
M 24 i_ i
.._ _ _ . . . . __ __._ 4
-k-A., (4 4 _j .J ' .'. .E, _
oa i . . . o m g8 4 ._.__ _A r;,3 u,,_ . _ __ _ ;._
- g. .g,, _ g ,.; _
- v. 15 ._ .. __
.9 g:'.+- p ] -*
o 22 29 _.i__ . . -.- 3' _.. _ .
' ~.m_ -- -
}
4
,_%_,.q ___.gq }.._ ,. . .
7.
. q. .;_.
m l1ng
.p..!.,.<.n, ... .
-+--
. j __q .- g
_.4 _. ; d, s,,q- - - . y._ _.
) gp gg
_ .. q* ( . _.
.q_ .l j ..__
__ :4_ i
# ;; -jf.,,d__..
71
=
- - ~ -j J-- ----
*..[*,,t.'. [;,.+% ] 7"r
~-j 7 1-- 01 35 'G *.
l
$ h g &^^ 3 C:
- N
'_ _,0, ,,4 o'._. w ~ y o O "X u t
,4 _ , . o' O5 T
.] .. ' --
.o k
*., .. ., qqog-%- - 31 Q ce !,
7}_1- - n x po al 4~I o- 6 o ],- o
. _ . u._ _ _
# _ } . s o ,_ . .
gg 3
\. 7 .
I._ >j._ .e. m . y .
= e O C
@ ;g a- j- j-- -
51 4 Ca i
. s
_....g+}4 1 ~
,b, ,. -
g .i_- 3. .g g {d J.. py $ g _ ._ _ q '
~,;. ,, .w. .p 4. .J '__
rp t-o--
. .. g_. )
ey e l , 52 g
, l l 7 7.,, , 4.77 j- + 7 p -
81 11 >g .o
. ._1 -- _i, 3 ; j i i -
{_._ a } ,u
,'p._
.u.
o I 1.. 4 oN x _ _. __ a_
' 'l_ _ _ ', . -
. .;a i_ _
' .i _
r 17 .__LIo,- % ]. .. i i 82 o, 1' l -- --- O ^[ -~ fj - j7. b l
, j i 7,c1 -
12 G "{ oe 7 41 oc o;- C j
.' i .g n
f- I h - 7 [, ' ' i' i j f - " j-4- a
; 03
@ -j t-f f- c T
/ 32 oo
'C 5 - -
I ~~ i r d i j i,i - 1i
-- I- d .~2~~~l ~i . C~* ~
,+
61 N 9 c 8@ r o-
, t .As . i .*.i... i o m
, H..s"t~ ' IF ' i: : :i *i '2
' i" f.- i ' I n@
m ! ' - -l '
I ' 62 IE
-m j-a-C y
- -- m 1,
1 l-O4 -i - 91 21 <- gg { '~ i -l '4-- - F ]' *... Y. .- i f ~
; 7 5E 82 I ~ "S
?r T
,' . - 22
~
7 q' E. d -- 12 9 r -f-i.*
***f../.
1' 2-- {- ~ _
' e
- -+
41 $ E -E i-- I-JA . . _. q. 4.. _- _ __._ . . . . . 4.]_.1 7 ,O M 3 ' i , 4_ s c , . .
. . . . . . . ._ _. . ._3 _ _ . 3. . ,
t . 13 ' %o 3 1.. 3 i E -i, - -4 'l i f./ : r Il -- g 42 hC
~ H,, -f- - --t..i.%,_ ,-t -d * - t-' - I "
71 ,Cm 3 J- . i:- i i 01 o: l t- t ---j-t -l j r i .' d - ij! 1 3 g y
-i 4+1 4y ! -
;ihl H)l) ,r i
52 4$ b -l
- +
N* * - lI 81
- g. m
- , y
- 1) ? g ,- i I.
c/'./I.. , . 4
- j. ..
. , .. q. ! . .
I f. {. BC 82 4k-- p.
,i, ' */ '
)g. :::
.,E_ '5
. ,1 .
- e. am t i
. , :'v.'*- . .... .f. . *.k . 41 o>
< - - r-i
. , sj^ '
- {. i;j i e-j- , ,
.f
-.,,.,m.
t.
- e. , .
.ii f j i
t-4i-
!' N[2 !i4 n ;- ' 13 l
42 o N $ o m o m m, , a C
. e n- -
n- .,.
62 L l.'_ J._ 8
. __.._ Q .g1_ ,L
._j._L___ ._ L L 2_.j j LL y 22 gt g
{ }
. _ _ . .f_ 3 . . __
...g_
__._.._J_._ -. . ,_- ._ ._
, 4 ..._g ag m
._p_.._..., _ _ .
_._ g. _
,,t_. _ .L l a go pz 5 . ._ 2.. . _ ._.
i i 1 . g_p _ . _u. _' _ I 1 I 71.i. (( i
>m mr
..;,( l L.. L ot g g*
-;l
,,1- i , , ;
E
- 8u
; i t-z2 xg o._4.'-(.
I oz xe i. M' I T__ CtLi o
^8
=o r -
I i r ;,. cff', .g., i ! 9 t-o Z i , l
*I ' .-? '
- 62 22 cw os
.c o _
. .t o p p ! st t ij F-1 i e
, AL_h..
r A 8 m m u-m
. _f .-_%. - . .t e m ; ; . -
on
? ff f ,2
- 93 ".;
- r ; i i .
L-g ,
.:,y.... < 7-g -
8t g
.o ,
s - - it <a e u_ - g_L I .F_ o' m g _ g g._.; p - Lw__Lm _p.. _ p
, gg uL g
w _J ,_ ___ __ e a ._i i i i
, t, , . .'. ,'_ , ,
i _p.
-- -_ .. __ 4 L2 e .
.i i
.. s- i,_..... .in i
,0 -.
ma l
)* )_. .p' t
Q y
.s l .
4
- . , '.,y ,. L _ L' J i
OC -, O O I -). .--
..\ -
A: v;- , s - Cz ?3
- Vr} -- L}.-}--;-- ;.~'
i ._ ! l!,}: , e 9t zm 8b ! v,...l J i l i o c. 6 e m
,m ex w _i i t >
1 n.. . . . . . ., g a'8 e i
.-. [ . .i..e , *i . .
.c u a i - .
92
& y. 1-__ -m g -~ g i
t ~ 6l g, w j-:;, g3 J^ - Ztg g5 Q w _-+--;
*y 7--
i 9 82
+
.a c
- r . ! '
L2 e 8 'I' c= i i 1 lv s F- -- It O- C "O q, - - - - g i y
,H_Ly<y
;y ,
tC (8 g ,_ v2 . l _. i~ Y; Mi@~ E" ll l ~T i i F~ __ _
-'I .i i-i O6 Ol y 3, l ,3 f
-.y _'_ Li4I i
2 2 ]..mu e2 -u ' ?i q! .6 '- - - -.. . .V nlm!_.8t _dcl31.- sa b9 i i .. at gaa., +-~~@ a g=L. ti S S" l ! Yd 8,,%8
> i i,
+
.- k."_MF
;4 t a1 jnI.. ._IT.
82 [ g <= m me
!'b L_ ..
7 f\ d ._j;_4 .L. r_ . . 7 pt , r
.- (u
, ! i ; i i s I I l ; .
-'~
*.{ .,rg j
; (C o g o o v2 " E o- m m, - n
- 8 m A A
O v O v O v - TEMPERATURE RANGE - DEPARTURES FROM STATION T l _ __. I I : _;._L _i__'_ J. L;4 4 _ l. . ' . . . + 4 _: J.j . L 4 e _;_4
-tt;-
Li 7- -H i l l p_p!. I ! L _j L.___;. - 10 :
- i. '
p_-.y_ ,. y , q __n _.- 3, , . _ _ .._4... ._, [_.y. .q..]p ]_.,q _4 1 _ . _ . _ . ._ __ . . _ . _ _ .. ,_ .
.. . ; .. . _p L.
i { j . {. p .. 7 L Il 3 / ____I_ ~!b ' lII j_ hM [ _.._4._pf.4.1,] ny_. 5 a hi .(r-it
.4
. n_ s y_." _,g".- . . _ _t .
_. f. _.j g,_._
-_{.
/_ .
_j _b _. Ll %-
<t1 x _.,_. .-
;1 .k. f/ s. ,)_
4
!1
- 3. :., v.l
_4 . hp4 _, J . q f- _{. l p_. _ .
. _hq(_f L:. ,h_A 4 _ _L
, / ,,_a, _.!_'._A<.i ..!_J:) !
- p. .
g
/_ L {,
o 4_ h_ _'u__,,/ "i , , . _ _XQ
..j.s / W
- l. i
_ p.._.L'. _ jp-4.
._ _f_ .[.,y 7 a.
!*.,LL. %,..f.__
/
_A_ epH .- { , ..
-t- -],r;,g;_gJ
<q.l ;..,--),. ,..;-
g- -. , . L,s... ,,, ,,
-,c- ,** f. . , . _ __ . , _ ,
,N g, l-i-- .L I -.,*.
-5 -
-f .
./ , N. . r, - L..b. r - 7 *_
I-L}'d - Iie" : i i i. t . _1.. : . _L
.j_.t_.
i*i ., - __1 - --*'.1. t.
. g * . r.
- l * ~
q._ 5* I' !
" !A . _ we_Ict_Mc od s i-
! . .g 4
$_7 *'C
__!B_ Be ach_ytods I q _ ._f .__.. _j.__;l ___ ._;_. ; .I_..L a If_.l.!_
- I_
. i -
[;_ _p _.{. .j. _ . _ I __ , _ . .
. ,. j_i_f _
0ttawa Woods _n
-8""-h0h
-10 . . _ . . _. _ _ . . ._. __
pj , qBG_ Jnf.yte q. . . sity . .. . .. . _. _ l ] _. q .. e-se Nm *~ N N
-m e-mr== mr-nNo sr= e- se- mm e- N m -NN N mo~eN e- N mem r= N m o s e--NN m e -mr m-m r- N mN -NN men -NN e s m os r= e - N - mmr=N NmN DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC Figure D18 Temperature range differences from the meteorological tower base Station "T" by weekly averages for the four network stations during the study period December 24, 1979 through December 29, 1980.
-- -- . - . . . _ . . - ~ . _ _ ._ ,
2 e = M C
~5 e
* " O " N a
o m 24 '
.L.
(3 G 31 ! _ - - - - l.- V -, , j .- y 4 _._.- __ .. ._ ____ . . _ 8a R 21 ~3 'i} i. 4 i1~ I
' C. 28
'T
'l :
6 l oo : F G* 4 j
- l-
- r. --{. RI rr _ - _ --_-
67,' A ll . _.w .o m R - My = 18 P~ s_ ,,' w 25
.. ?C n us
@O I
,' s na u o.
J - o ne
@. M A f( ..
C.3 3 10 84 rx J I 84 " 17 # J R T we 24
- o ra .6 '
2 _ _ < ..o m._ ,_._ y( _ n m an =a x cm 31* m
- 3. * >7 =:jD. O 3 -ei e -s mo l4 -
oa o 21 .s it, o, y li g 28 s m Qf , gn g 12 .s f_,V _ _ z Q S. " 19 _ M__ , g 26 _._
.g .,
a
- 2. o. .
o c 9
% ,. . , ,,, e . . _ _
m m 16 __ _ ._ _ _ _. . _ . . , . . > _. ' Q h EC 23 -- - - -
- - < ' - _-l - - --- . - -_ --- . - - . -
U @," 30 - -
--. . . ..- Q , ~.l - - . .
!E m
7
}_-
m
- IW 8 cr o -
i
@$ 8 14 g' c.,
C; 21 28 4.y_ .J_1_
.q_ L . .
_},-f.__ .{.__ .g. ;Q._ .q.._._ __ _t __ g o 3 gE J.-.f q_.m 'y"'4.m.-- --_ 4
=
4- . . - - - - 7 g g 11 _ g a 18 7_ Jo_., y H _ . 2:. c., . . . a_ _ _I I ! y E U. 25 ' __LI p' _L 28 1 8 r 2l' ! a _ v. -
-. L H 9
a 9 15 l 7-
>I g -'22 .
.7_
e., 29 . q. p g, _ _ _
- s:,
oa 6
@g 8 13 . _j ... }.-. . _ _._ . _ . _ _
.j.1 { ..
- .-. _ _. . _ _ __ j . !_._ _
20 g
,g. _._. c . _ . . .
mw m
.g 27 .i.t _._. j. ..; _
7...
,_ .__ ___ _ L j.
.e ., 2 10 3 .: _
y.p ,. y' .
. _ _ ._ . 'p .
g
.-I.,'_ .
. m 17 24
-4 ; ! 5'pa.. . ---- I
.q .;_... _ -l y' 1 i :_+_._._;<W 1., -
a 8 .. _ t 44....-
- g R is 22 M ,;. q'.m.;g -,
,_m p1 p +' . ,' _7__Ar ' R ' -{
29
o a 62
- x. . , m.3 u
-. . .. f . -. .
p _
.-.h.-. g e .. f
- L t _.q q;_;..;. a a., ___3,.1 .}
y f_p.p . .: g
.J
- 3. . .
st am o go
, e l , i ! - o a-i j-.
e a- f- .;. i (i . i , ,:,pf.i _y {7 ( g, a . . . i . 4 ,.t \aqit .
;yI i >2 -
- i I , i I : I tj , SN
~~
@, L
[ , _ q .y i l 4 q_. . .I ._l , ('j <,/ i_ l i4 i 7.. Ol E; JMj q_. _.' g; . _ _ _ _ . _
.__.j., , . . ..
. u{ . .p
_ . _ g e- g
.J a_. . g! ../_1._ ,?.._... .._ /g e- o
_ :__t _ t_ . __. _ _ 4_ 5, _. i - a _ - _;_o ._J _ i l_) >__._v 02 a __,i. _ . .._ ! . .,_. 4 _ g_1 _p -
._._ h_ . ; ! 1 l __ _
Cl g c5 g w . - . ,;. ' ' ' 9a oa 2- .- L_ _ . L- L.!__L. I L !. ..L- J_l _l- 62 NO S H _ . - . L _ .L _4_ l _h ('I/[/(,,1_l_ _i __L_[_lh*'\ *- _ _. _ ! 22 ]5
..q_ . _ . _
._. j _._
- 7. q _
._5. _.; ,, ._ _. ..
gi g aa s . . . _ _2_,__. 8 m " "* _ [. t. w - , , I~~ - Yt----d.;.4gj._'*._-' ' TN i t , g , - : .= _ ; i F _i T-
~
o e t - , t ; L -
- i c.q ._.' :s
, i
.l_L gl na o o es u_ _.{f > '
__ t i 7 l T ;- _i __ - . p 7.' . _ r.; _._ i p' i._ 4
.ji i 1. (t < r g' g __
j._ ___. _ _. p og e --
. y.-. ; __.. _ -
__fjf__4_-1g_ _4_
; ._. LL.-{ _ -_. . __
92 mo o _ _!_ ..g 71 p ,l .;. ,.9,,y,p,.Q__4_ j_[2{. _..p_,ja m -
. . . . , _ y t ,_, u .o i .i . x r -[. c.- oo O .-
gf-- .-_.._ . ._ i hq-_ ,,..}---
. (.t- OC La >
y c[ a . . _ . _ _ _ __ ; 3 <;_;-..,g_ . _ _L( _.
- oy
_ . . _.i_..._ .___ _ . . .. _ . . .J
, ji E2 ti L. ,
i _,[a_._ .t g._t ,- o. _ _ n .p _ , 7 h I.-. q_. _, _ __ . . _ . t.; 3: u
'~
"i~~[.~.. '* i
] y3::'-
2 5. a
- m. _.i ,2 - ,\ ,
.1 - l _:
, j 92 4c T _. s. - t
.--- + - - -
s- x. i ; _i -L
+
. . i._,
e 6L a o 2 ; _- ._. --- --
-( w
** * ]-*j.4)pj-T_
I ~-- w jL ,, f
%.l
~
m g. __L_ i-- 1 9 3( ( y .,9 o s.
~ ~
- -~
l \ . g 5 w i acs t i s/ vt m o us - g
,* g _ I L <_ :w l 'I,k, ;i.- .*.;-d.E I tC .U N LLJ fd " oo e 9 *ut ___ #2 -
< .- i 4 m m18 2 tu b
lI .!
- NNI Qn-
< , i i l ei, Ft..L..
i 4-,s O,- a g g ~o [%'i 4 I'brM -- 92 I t n y,.b. . . _g g gm .= ao i g.e . pw!/ m..i gi._3___ s . .-_ g S. %
;j
( ( 'LAJ
- f. ._.
qg8 .I ,{ _ -K m79pm. . _
, , . 1 . . --
m i __ i
.L 4-_
1 L1+
. m,< .I .
__w 41 , tg z a t.
- o W- --.I-!7__
i t . H / - 4 ' ..
*- f- l- I- <&
a Ig't <' l _ Li : L. __ .' ' ' i. *- -I.$_. ._ _---3. i .
.a,_ I_,'
t i i i i i .[ j.. ct os e
>, os
. ~ .
i . 9o <-- N a i
.L .i. t p .m .
- 1. h 62 e s-
_4.~. p , ., . , .i, i_ . _ . i wo
. ,r ,
_. .1. . ._ , ; .
,, ._ . _ _ ) .. . q .. gg 3o
_ J . . (_ ] . _ { j j. , *gN' _ 4 ._ . .L ,
. g[ g 3, $
r ...- i , - 1 I. ;, ,v .N .
, ;. _o .I_ eS og
=a z .1 q
l _p p_j
,,p' 7.,;
i p
._ _L-..,..
; tm s o -
-. s2 0,
- I ca
-_l_
} I- 8l 1 i i p .,1_ ;-. .._7 _.i .
_7_ '.4'. K'- (1 . v.--tY Jl _jli oo
' C <C.
j i '
*% a i t, - - - i- L l _s v .c p I r, - t- r.>.i,.{a.e, i l -_.._',.._'L y< , i mu u) 4 I I l .;
' ..,4
;;. . 4i < i y
m c3 g:- -+_- , i j: . _ . _ _ [~
. _ ,.. _._,i [.. gg s LL.
_.h, 4... .h. 1_. i i ( ,,, :
,s i _i g ______
{! __i__ L_ i [g p [ >_s .a m , _q * * * * ' h, ,/ @ I I._, !
- s. Z M._ . "" -
y) ! "[" 1. .i.__ _ . _. . h ~.4 ,1,_,,,, * * . - - OC E5-
-h- -
f_
- b --.-h _d .' I H..-~ "7 ~ Lc.-i- 38
- -) j. --.a ._ . .
; ' + c2 h . _. _ _ . . _
._ j.;j...,
.__..._t .- t-- *
._j_._1". f" #. .i~._ * , .1l g[ w , $
g 7.. l _ . _ . )r {.1 [ _ _ [._ __
._;__}-t. - 65 oE ra y - t t e i I . 4 .
7' o A [j$ L _"_ l/r Lli.M._..'..V**"b !-- 61 92 E>
- 11. __, g _ ['_.i..i 8 !
8E F.- .J.- .t_
-;..h ?
2Ly 8 *. W _L -- .LL. 4 . *yi.w.d 5 J _. .. . . _ !I SE y .,., au= o a. s
,1
. gr -
- p. .
t-.***_..a,.-.- p, . ii I i gg j r p. , _'4 y i ; w 4
, V. .
,. , vL o.e o A
l, w+
' p:.-*_
i L 4
$5 i "-
- d. .t.s i
[g s.
,yy + 03 pg c
,__ m N i- i o a s.
_.- .,.--%.lx t 1), eoo o _o u x - it e ua ev
'- -g: gq;;; 9g M j .
i .y% . . .. ' a - E oe
<7 w I~lo 7,jg ~; -
a gg + o ir- - i_ -
'o
- 11
. ~
W BL m u s kr -gl
- o ,%~T^~
(~g w 'l l 'W l*
..-YM. 1, i i i V P;m --
6 82 g i i t ,. _ . , -igt., o :, q a.g
. m._,i __ t, ___. _4
- LZ<r 29 4 1 1 1 ;! i l T- em
- l. , f )" +-- . + **+ > - p[ o ac f,,.
. )._ gg ...q ..- ,
;,, t. . . _ _ .
q_J_p.d [ttg s o e o m o via e 0 7 U3 _ . - .}}