ML16126A314

Submittal of 2015 Radioactive Effluent Release Report, 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report, and 2015 Annual Environmental Operating Report (Non-Radiological). Part 2 of 2

ML16126A314
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	04/28/2016
From:	FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-16-125, RTL A9.690E
Download: ML16126A314 (98)

Text

Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 2 -ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM I. Estimates of Radiation Dose to Man 1. Pathways to Man -Calculation Models RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 The radiation doses to man as a result of BVPS operations were calculated for both gaseous and liquid effluent pathways using computer codes for the ARERAS/MIDAS computer system. These computer codes are equivalent to NRC computer codes XOQDOQ2, GASPAR , and LADT AP. Dose factors listed in the ODCM are used to calculate doses from radioactive noble gases in discharge plumes. BVPS effluent data, based on sample analysis were used as the radionuclide activity input. All liquid and gaseous effluent radionuclides listed in the Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report were used as input source terms to the computer codes. All batch and continuous gaseous effluent releases were included in the dose assessment calculations.

The release activities are based on laboratory analysis.

Meteorological data collected by the BVPS Meteorology System was also used as input to the computer codes. The usage factors were obtained from the BVPS Final Environmental Statements or Regulatory Guide 1.109 , except when more recent or specific data was available.

All radioactive liquid effluents are released by batch mode after analysis by gamma spectrometry. Each batch is diluted by cooling tower blowdown water prior to discharge into the Ohio River via the main outfall (River Mile 35.0). The actual data from these analyses are tabulated and used as the radionuclide source term input to the computer code. The usage factors were obtained from the BVPS Final Environmental Statements or Regulatory Guide 1.109 , except when more recent or specific data was available. The total population doses were evaluated for all liquid and gaseous effluent pathways up to 50 miles. For these evaluations, a total population of approximately 4 million people was used. An estimate of the populations are listed in the BVPS-2 UFSAR Section 2.1.3.1 for 0-10 miles and Section 2.1.3.2 for I 0-50 miles. 2. Results of Calculated Population Dose to Man -Liquid Effluent Releases During the report period , the calculated dose to the entire population within 50 miles of the plant is presented in Table 2-4 for BVPS liquid effluent releases. Also shown in the Table 2-6 is a comparison to natural radiation exposure.

3. Results of Calculated Population Dose to Man -Gaseous Effluent Releases During the report period , the calculated dose to the entire population within 50 miles of the plant is presented in Table 2-5 for BVPS airborne effluent releases.

Also shown in the Table 2-6 is a comparison to natural radiation exposure. The doses include the contribution of all pathways. 2-64 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 2 -ENVIRONMENT AL MONITORING PROGRAM 4. Conclusions RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 Bas e d upon the e s tim a ted dose to individuals from the natural background radiation exposur e in Tables 2-4 and 2-5 , the incremental increase in total body dose to the 50-mile population from the operation of BVPS -Unit 1 and 2 , is less than 0.0000025%

of the annual background dose. The calculated doses to the public from the operation of BVPS -Unit 1 and 2 , are below ODCM annual limits and resulted in only a small incremental dose to that which area residents already received as a result of natural background.

The doses constituted no meaningful risk to the public. 2-65 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 2 -ENVIRONMENT AL MONITORING PROGRAM Table 2-4: Calculated Population Dose to Man Liquid Effluent Releases 0-50 mile Population Dose from BVPS Liquid Effluent Releases Man-millirem Largest Isotope Contributor Total Dose 141 Tritium Average Dose 0.0000351 Tritium (per Individual)

Comparison of Individual Dose BVPS Liquid Effluent Releases Versus Natural and Medical Radiation Exposure Milli rem BVPS Liquid Effluent Release Dose 0.0000351 Radiation Exposure 620 Table 2-5: Calculated Population Dose to Man Gaseous Effluent Releases RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 0-50 mile Population Dose from BVPS Gaseous Effluent Releases Man-millirem Largest Isotope Contributor Total Dose 41 Tritium Average Dose 0.0000103 Tritium (per Individual)

Comparison of Individual Dose BVPS Gaseous Effluent Releases Versus Natural and Medical Radiation Exposure Milli rem BVPS Gaseous Effluent Release Dose 0.0000103 Radiation Exposure 620 2-66 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 SECTION 2 -ENVIRONMENT AL MONITORING PROGRAM Table 2-6: Natural and Medical Radiation Exposures TYPICAL DOSE TO INDIVIDUALS FROM RADIATION EXPOSURE (a) Ubiquitous background Internal, inhalation Internal, ingestion External, space External , terrestrial Medical CT Nuclear medicine Interventional tluoroscopy Conventional radiography Consumer Industrial, security , educational, research Occupational Average Individual (Total from all sources shown above) 311 millirem I year 228 millirem I year 29 millirem I year 33 millirem I year 21 millirem I year 300 millirem I year 147 millirem I year 77 millirem I year 43 millirem I year 33 millirem I year 13 millirem I year 0.3 millirem I yea r 0.5 millirem I year 620 millirem I year (a) NCRP Report No. 160: Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States." Journal of Radiological Protection J Radio/. Prat. 29.3 (2009) 2-67 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 3 -LAND USE CENSUS RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 A. Land Use Census Overview:

A Land Use Census was conducted June I through September I , 2015 to comply with:

• Offsite Dose Calculation Manual procedure l/2-0DC-3.03, "C ontrols for RETS and REMP Programs", Attachment R , Control 3.12.2 , and Surveillance Requirement 4.12.2.1

• BVPS REMP procedure l/2-ENV-04.02 , " Milch Animal Sampling Location Determination

& ODCM Procedure 112-0DC-J 03 , Control 3.12.2 Action Statements a and b Compliance Determination" The Land Use Census indicated that no changes were required in the current sampling locations , and no changes were required to the methodology used for determination of offsite dose from plant releases. A numerical summary of the Land Use Census results are provided in Table 3-1. The following information is also provided to clarify the Land Use Census as documented in letter NPD3NRE: 1125 , dated December 23 , 2015: B. Nearest Residence:

The location has not changed since the previous census. The nearest inhabited residence is at 209 Ferry Hill Road, Shippingport, PA (0.4 miles, E). C. Nearest Garden >500 sgft: The location has not changed since the previous census. The closest garden location is at the Pringle Residence, 1221 Virginia Ave., Mid land , PA ( 1.0 miles , in the NW Sector). The previous sampling location at the Cox Residence, 238 State Route 168 , Hookstown , PA (0.760 miles , in the SSW Sector) was available for sampling cabbage this year but does not meet all the requirements of NUREG-130 I Ref (h) D. Nearest Dairv Cow: The location has changed since the previous census. Searight Dairy, 948 McCleary Road , RD I , Hookstown , PA (2.097 miles , SSW) closed in 2014. Therefore , the closest milking cow location is Brunton Dairy , 3681 Ridge Road , Aliquippa , PA (6.158 miles , SE). E. Nearest Doe Goat: The location has not changed since the previous census.

The closest location is the Covert Residence, 930 Pine Street, Hookstown, PA (1.900 miles , SW). 3-1 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 3 -LAND USE CENSUS RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 F. Projection for 2015 Dairy Cow Sampling Locations:

Using a linear regression anal y sis of deposition parameters (D/Q), Dairy Cow sampling location s were determined to remain at the s ame locations used in 2015: Brunton Dairy , 3681 Ridge Road , Aliquippa, PA (6.158 miles SE) Windsheimer Dairy , 20 Windsheimer Lane , Burgettstown, PA (10.476 miles SSW) G. Projection for 2015 Doe Goat Sampling Locations:

The linear regression analysis also indicated that there will be a Doe Goat sampling location in 2015. The Doe Goat sampling locat i on for 2015 may be as follows if Goat Milk continues to be available from this site: Covert Residence , 930 Pine Street , Hookstown PA (1.900 miles , SW) H. D/Q for Milch Animal Locations:

None of the 2015 milch animal sampling locations experienced a >20% increase in D/Q. Therefore , a Special Report per ODCM procedure 1/2-0DC-3.03 , Attachment R , Control 3.12.2 Action " a" and/or Action " b" was not required. I. D/Q for Offsite Dose Determination:

There was no adverse effect on the current ODCM methodology used for offsite dose determination from effluent releases.

Specifically , the analysis of D/Q did not yield any valid locations where the offsite dose could have increased

>20% of the offsite dose previously calculated using current ODCM methodology.

Therefore, a Special Report per ODCM Control 3.12.2 Action " a" and/or Action " b" is not required.

J. D/Q Historical Comparison:

There is no adverse trend in D/Q when comparing 2000 to 2015 data to the ODCM default D/Q values. This validates that there is no adverse effect on the current ODCM methodology used for offsite dose determination from effluent releases. Specifically , the analysis of D/Q did not yield any valid locations where the offsite dose could have increased

>20% of the offsite dose previously calculated using current ODCM methodology. Therefore , a change in ODCM receptor location and/or a change to meteorology at the current ODCM receptor location are not required.

3-2 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 3 -LAND USE CENSUS Table 3-1 RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 Location of Nearest Residences, Gardens, Dairy Cows and Doe Goats DAIRY SECTOR RESIDENCES GARDENS cows DOE GOATS 0 to 5 miles 0 to 5 miles 0 to 5 miles 0 to 5 miles (miles) (miles) (miles) (miles) N 1.584 1.584 None None NNE 1.661 1.8 None None NE 0.4 3.3 None None ENE 0.603 1.047 None None E 0.4 b 2.1 None 3.402 ESE 0.850 1.713 None None SE 1.583 1.3 None a None SSE 1.102 None None None s 1.399 1.5 None None SSW 0.760 2.215 b None None SW 1.453 1.453 None 1.900 WSW 1.394 2.5 None None w 2.204 None None None WNW 2.742 2.8 None None NW 0.885 1.0 None None NNW 0.902 2.4 2.442 None a Although there are no Dairy Cows within 5 miles in this sector, a large local dairy located at 6.158 miles is included in the milk sampling program. b Distances shown in Bold print are the nearest location for that receptor.

3-3 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 A. Split Sample Program (Inter-Laboratory Comparison, Part 1 of 2): BVPS participates in a split s ample program with the Penns y lvania Department of E nvironmental Protection (PADEP) in support of their nuclear power plant monitoring program.

• BVPS provided split samples to PADEP throughout the report period. The shared media and number of locations were typically comprised of milk (1), surface water (3), sediment ( 1 ), fish ( 1 ), and food crops (2).

• PADEP has co-located continuous air particulate

& air iodine sample stations with four (4) of the BVPS locations.

• PADEP has co-located TLDs with twenty-four (24) of the BVPS TLDs. B. Spike Sample Program (Inter-Laboratory Comparison, Part 2 of 2): BVPS participates in a spike sample program with an Independent Laboratory.

This program i s used to independently verify sample analyses performed by the BVPS Contractor Laboratory.

• Acceptance Criteria:

The NRC criteria listed in NRC Inspection Procedure 84750 , 03/15/94 , Inspection Guidance 84750-03 is used as acceptance criteria for comparisons of results of spiked samples between the Contractor Lab and the Independent Lab. These comparisons are performed by dividing the comparison standard (Independent Lab result) by its associated uncertainty to obtain the resolution. The comparison standard value is multiplied by the ratio values obtained from the following table to find the acceptance band for the result to be compared.

However , in such cases in which the counting precision of the standard yields a resolution of Jess than 4 , a valid comparison is not practical, and therefore , not performed.

NRC Criteria Resolution Ratio <4 --4-7 0.50 -2.00 8 -15 0.60 -1.66 16 -50 0.75 -1.33 51 -200 0.80 -1.25 > 200 0.85 -1.18 4-1 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 Participation in an Inter-Laboratory Comparison Program is required by BVPS Unit 1 and 2 Offsite Dose Calculation Manual procedure l/2-0DC-3.03 Attachment S Control 3.12.3. For the report period, the requirement was met by the Contractor Lab analyzing NIST traceable spiked samples supplied by an Independent Lab. During the report period , BVPS used (Environmental, Inc., Midwest Laboratory

-Northbrook, IL) as the Contractor Laboratory , and (Eckert & Ziegler Analytics

-Atlanta , GA) as the Independent Laboratory. The spiked samples included air particulate filter papers, charcoal cartridges, water samples, and milk samples. The samples were submitted by the Independent Laboratory to the Contractor Laboratory for analysis. The " spiked to" values were used for calculating comparison Acceptance Criteria.

• Spiked Milk & Water Samples: The spiked sample results (i.e. the BVPS criteria) for each calendar quarter are reported in Table 4-1 through Table 4-4 , respectively.

The following summary is provided:

A total of forty-eight ( 48) gamma spectrometry radionuclide analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on four (4) milk samples. A total of forty-eight ( 48) gamma spectrometry radionuclide analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on four (4) water samples. A total of four (4) chemical analyses for 1-131 were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on four (4) milk samples. A total of four (4) I-131 analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on four (4) water samples. A total of four ( 4) tritium analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on four (4) water samples. Comparison of results of the spiked milk and water samples showed acceptable agreement with the NRC acceptance criteria.

All one hundred eight (I 08) analyses met the NRC acceptance criteria. 4-2 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3

• Spiked Filter Paper and Charcoal Cartridge Samples: Th e spiked sample result s for each calendar quarter are reported in Table 4-1 through Table 4-4 , respectively. The following summary is provided:

Gross Beta (cesium-137) analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on two (2) filter paper samples. Iodine-131 analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on two (2) charcoal cartridge samples. Comparison of results of the spiked filter paper and charcoal cartridge samples showed acceptable agreement with the NRC acceptance criteria.

One sample , I st quarter for filter paper , gross beta ( cesium-13 7), failed the acceptance criteria.

The vendor laboratory was immediately notified of the failure and asked to re-preform the analyses, if necessary.

The vendor re-analyzed the sample and the result was within the acceptable criteria. The vendor provided a corrected report and the analysis met the acceptance criteria. This issue was documented in Condition Report 2015-06857.

All four (4) analyses performed by the Contractor Laboratory met the NRC acceptance criteria. C. Conclusions

• Results of Split Sample Program: The split sample program is coordinated by the state, and the results are not included in this report.

• Results of Spike Sample Program: Based on the Inter-Laboratory comparison data , BVPS considers all analyses provided throughout the report period by the Contractor Laboratory to be acceptable with respect to both accuracy and measurement.

A comparison of the data is provided in the following tables. All analyses for the 2015 report period were within the NRC Acceptance Criteria.

4-3 Bea v er V all ey P o w er S tation 2015 Annual Radiolo g ical E n v ironmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPL I T SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATOR Y COMPARISON PROGRAM Table 4-1 Inter-Laboratory Comparison Program Spiked Samples -1*1 Quarter Sample Date, Type and Resolution Resolution Required Ratio Env Inc: Identification No. Ratio Band Analytics Sr-89 60 0.8 0 -1.25 0.91 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.96 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.94 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.98 03/19/15 Ce-141 60 0.8 0 -1.25 0.98 Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 1.04 Water Cs-1 34 60 0.80 -1.25 0.94 Ind Lab: E11167 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 Con. Lab: SPW-1133 Co-58 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 0.88 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 0.98 03/19/15 Water Ind. Lab: E11165 H-3 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 Con. Lab: SPW-1137 Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.87 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.88 1-1 3 1 60 0.80 -1.25 0.88 1-1 31 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 03/19/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 1.10 Milk Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 Ind. Lab: E11166 Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.98 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 C on. Lab: SPMl-1134 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Co-58 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.08 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 03/19/15 Filter Paper Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1 09 Ind. Lab: E11168 (Gross Beta) Con. Lab: SPAP-1135 03/19/15 Charcoal Cartridge 60 0.80 -1.25 0.95 Ind. Lab: E11169 1-131 Con. Lab: SPCH-1136 4-4 R TL A9.6 90 E E ncl os ur e 3 Comparison AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM Table 4-2 Inter-Laboratory Comparison Program Spiked Samples -2nd Quarter Sample Date, Type and Resolution Resolution Required Ratio Env Inc: Identification No. Ratio Band Analytics Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.92 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.98 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.92 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 06/11/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 LLD* Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 1 02 Water Cs-134 60 0.80-1.25 0.93 Ind Lab: E11225 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Con. Lab SPW-2941 Co-58 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.07 Fe-59 60 0.80-1.25 1.10 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 06/11/15 Water H-3 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 Ind. Lab: E 11224 Con. Lab: SPW-2939 Sr-89 60 0.80-1.25 0.87 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.83 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.96 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 1 03 06/11/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 LLD* Milk Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 Ind. Lab: E11226 Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.92 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.04 Con. Lab: SPMl-2940 60 0.80 -1.25 Co-58 1.01 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 *LLD: Lower Limit of Detection 4-5 RTL A9.690 E E nclosure 3 Comparison AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM Table 4-3 Inter-Laboratory Comparison Program Spiked Samples -3r11 Quarter Sample Date, Type and Resolution Resolution Required Ratio Env Inc: Identification No. Ratio Band Analytics Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.88 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.94 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 09/10/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 Water Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.90 Ind Lab: E11323 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 Con. Lab: SPW-4979 Co-58 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Mn-54 60 0.80-1.25 1.05 Fe-59 60 0.80-1.25 1.07 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 09/10/15 Water H-3 Ind. Lab: E11322 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 Con. Lab: SPW-4978 Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.84 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.90 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.91 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 09/10/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 Milk Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 1.08 Ind. Lab: E11324 Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.91 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 Con. Lab: SPMl-4980 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Co-58 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.04 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 09/10/15 Filter Paper Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1 05 Ind. Lab: E11325A (Gross Beta) Con. Lab: SPAP-4981 09/10/15 Charcoal Cartridge 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 Ind. Lab: E11326 1-131 Con. Lab: SPCH-4982 4-6 RTL A9.690 E E nclosure 3 Comparison AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM Table 4-4 Inter-L aboratory Comparison Program Spiked Samples -4th Quarter Sample Date, Type and Resolution Resolution Required Ratio Env Inc: Identification No. Ratio Band Analytics Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.87 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.85 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.95 12103/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 0.98 Water Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.93 Ind Lab: E11388 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Con. Lab: SPW-6781 Co-58 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.04 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 12/03/15 Water H-3 60 0.80 -1.25 0.96 Ind. Lab: E11387 Con. Lab: SPW-6780 Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.82 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.91 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.84 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 12/03/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 Milk Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.93 Ind. Lab: E11389 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Con. Lab: SPMl-6782 Co-58 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.04 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.07 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 4-7 RTL A9.690E E nclosur e 3 Comparison AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 SECTION 5 -CORRECTIONS TO PREVIOUS RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERA TING REPORT(S)

Corrections to Previous Radiological Environmental Operating Report(s): There are no corrections to previous reports at this time. 5-1 Enclosure B L-16-125 2015 Annual Environmental Operating Report (Non-Radiological) (Report follows)

FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION 2015 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT NON-RADIOLOGICAL UNITS N0.1AND2 LICENSES DPR-66 AND NPF-73 RTL# A9.630F

/ r BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION ENVIRONMENTAL

& CHEMISTRY SECTION Technical Report Approval 2015 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT (Non-Radiological)

UNITS NO. 1 AND 2 LICENSES DPR-66 AND NPF-73 Prepared by: Cameron L. Lange a E-mail) Date: 2-26-16 Reviewed by: Courtney F. Casto -f -&, -/{,, Reviewed by: Robert R.

'-/-la -I {p 4-b-\(o TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

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

1

1.1 INTRODUCTION

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

1 1.2

SUMMARY

& CONCLUSIONS

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

2 1.3 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE ....................

.2 1.4 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

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

.2 2.0 ENVIRONMENT AL PROTECTION PLAN NON-COMPLIANCES

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

.4 3.0 CHANGES INVOLVING UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENT AL QUESTIONS

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

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

5.1 SITE DESCIPTION

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

5 5.2 STUDY AREA .....................................................................................................

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

,. ........................

6 5.3.l Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring

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

? 5.J.2 Fish Monitoring

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

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

? 5.3.3. Corbicula/Zebra Mussel Density Determinations

........ , ...........................

& 5.3.4 Corbicula Juvenile Monitoring

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

9 5 .3 .5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring

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

.10 5.3.6 Reports ...................................................... .............................................

11 5.4 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM AND RESULTS ...............................

11 5.4.l Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Program ...................................

.11 5.4.2 Fish Sampling Program ...........................................................................

15 5.4.3 Corbicula Monitoring Program .............................................................

.18 5.4.4 Corbicula Juvenile Monitoring

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

.19 5.4.5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program .........................................................

19 6.0 ZEBRA MUSSEL AND CORBICULA CONTROL ACTIVITIES

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

21

7.0 REFERENCES

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

22 8.0 TABLES 9.0 FIGURES 10.0 PERMITS APPENDIX A. SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2015 BVPS 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)

LIST OFT ABLES 5.1 Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) Sampling Dates For 2015. 5.2 Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 through 2015 in the Ohio River near BVPS (6 sheets). 5.3 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Counts for Triplicate Samples Taken at Each Sample Station by Sample for May and September 2015. 5.4 Mean Number of Macroinvertebrates (Number/m 2) and Percent Composition of Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms, 2015, BVPS. 5.5 Mean Number of Macroinvertebrates (Number/m 2) and Percent Composition of Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms for the Control Station (1) and the Average for Non-control Stations (2Bl, 2B2, and 2B3), 2015, BVPS. 5 .6 Shannon-Weiner Diversity, Evenness and Richness Indices for Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in the Ohio River, 2015. 5.7 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities (Number/m 2) for Station 1 (Control) and Station 2B (Non-Control)

During Preoperational and Operational Years through 2015 BVPS. 5.8 Total Fish Catch, Electrofishing and Seine Net Combined During the BVPS 2015 Fisheries Survey. 5.9 Comparison of Control vs. Non-Control Electrofishing Catches, During the BVPS 2015 Fisheries Survey. 5.10 Comparison of Control vs. Non-Control Seine Catches, During the BVPS 2015 Fisheries Survey. 5.11 Fish Species Collected During the May 2015 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity ofBVPS. 5.12 Fish Species Collected During the July 2015 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity ofBVPS. 5 .13 Fish Species Collected During the September 2015 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity ofBVPS. 5.14 Fish Species Collected During the November 2015 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS .. 5 .15 Estimated Number of Fish O,bserved During Electrofishing Operations, 2015. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) ii LIST OFT ABLES 5.16 Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season during . the BVPS 2012 Fisheries Survey. 5 .17 Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electroflshing Minute) by Season during the BVPS 2013 Fisheries Survey. 5.18 Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season during the BVPS 2014 Fisheries Survey. 5 .19 Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season during the BVPS 2015 Fisheries Survey. 5.20 Unit 1 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 2015 from BVPS. 5.21 Unit 2 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 2015 from BVPS. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) iii LIST OF FIGURES 5.1 Location Map for the 2015 Beaver Valley Power Station Aquatic Monitoring Program Sampling Control and Non-Control Sampling Stations .. 5.2 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Benthic Organism Survey Sampling Sites for the 2015 Study . . 5.3 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Fish Population Survey Fish Sampling Sites for the 2015 Study. 5.4 Location of Study Area, Beaver Valley Power _Station Shippingport, Pennsylvania BVPS. 5.5 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among BVPS Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2015. 5.6 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2015 .. 5.7 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Intake Structure Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2015. 5.8 Water Temperature and River Elevation Recorded on the Ohio River at the BVPS Intake Structure, Monthly Sampling Dates, 2015. 5.9 Density of Zebra Mussel VeJigers (#/m 3) Collected at Beaver Valley Power Station; Intake Structure, Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, 2015. 5.10 Density of Zebra Mussel Veligers (#/m 3) Collected at Beaver Valley Power Station; Barge Slip; Splash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2015. 5.11 Density (#/m 2) of Settled Zebra Mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station; Intake Structure, Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, 2015. 5.12 Density (#/m 2) of Settled Zebra Mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station; Barge Slip, Splash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2015. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) iv

1.1 INTRODUCTION

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

Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) is operated by FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC). The Objectives of the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) are to:

• Verify that the facility is operated in an environmentally acceptable manner, as established by the Final Environmental Statement-Operating License Stage (FES-OL) and other Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) environmental impact assessments,

• Keep plant operations personnel appraised of changes in environmental conditions that may affect the facility,.

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

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

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

Waste is regulated under EPA Identification No. PAR000040485.

Attachment 10.1 contains a listing of permits and certificates for environmental compliance.

The BVPS programs and procedures include pre-work and pre-project environmental evaluations, operating procedures, pollution prevention and response programs procedures and plans, process improvement and corrective action programs, and human performance programs.

Technical and managerial monitoring of tasks, operations, and other activities are performed.

Any identified challenges, concerns, or questions are captured in the FENOC Problem Identification and Resolution Program with a Condition Report. Condition Reports include investigations, cause determinations, and corrective actions. During 2015, BVPS continued an Aquatic Monitoring Program to evaluate its potential impact on the New Cumberland Pool of the Ohio River and to provide information on potential impacts to BVPS operation from macrofoulers such as Asian clams and zebra mussels. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 1.2

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS There were no significant environmental events during 2015. During 2015, no significant changes to operations that could affect the environment were made at Beaver Valley Power Station. As in previous years, results of the BVPS environmental programs did not indicate any adverse environmental impacts from station operation.

1.3 ANALYSIS

OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENT AL CHANGE During 2015, no significant changes were made at BVPS to cause significant negative affect on the environment.

1.4 AQUATIC

MONITORING PROGRAM The 2015 Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) Units 1 and 2 Non-Radiological Monitoring Program consisted of an Aquatic Program that included surveillance and field sampling of the Ohio River's aquatic life in the vicinity of the station. The Aquatic Program is an annual program conducted to provide baseline aquatic resources data, to assess the impact of the operation of BVPS on the aquatic ecosystem of the Ohio River, and to monitor for potential impacts ofbiofouling organisms (Corbicula and zebra mussels) on BVPS operations.

This is the 40 1 h year of operational environmental monitoring for Unit 1 and the 29th year for Unit 2. As in previous years, the results of the program did not indicate any adverse environmental impact to the aquatic life in the Ohio River associated with the operation of BVPS. The results of the 2015 benthic macro invertebrate survey conducted in May and September indicated a normal community structure exists in the Ohio River both upstream and downstream of the BVPS. These benthic surveys are a continuation of a Fate and Effects Study conducted from 1990 through 1992 for the PADEP to assess the ecosystem impacts of molluscicides including Betz Clamtrol CT-1, CT-2, and Nalco Hl50M that have been used to control biofouling organisms at BVPS. To date the results of the benthic studies have not indicated any impacts of operation at the BVPS including the use these biocides on the benthic community below the BVPS discharge.

Substrate was probably the most important factor influencing the distribution and abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. The generally soft muck-type substrate along the shoreline found in 2015 and previous years was conducive to segmented worm (oligochaete) and midge fly larvae (chironomid) proliferation.

Increased water clarity due at least in part to the establishment of zebra mussels was noted during 2015. This has increased the amount of submerged aquatic vegetation at Stations 1, 2B and 3. The presence of submerged aquatic vegetation can increase the number of species of macroinvertebrates, especially chironomids (midge flies) that use them as a primary food source and a place to avoid predators.

Sixty-one (61) macroinvertebrate taxa were identified during the 2015 monitoring program. In 2015, no new taxa were added to the cumulative list of macro invertebrates collected near BVPS (Table 5.2). Also, no state or Federal threatened or endangered macroinvertebrate species were collected durillg 2015. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 2 In May and in September oligochaetes were the most frequently collected group of macroinvertebrates.

There were no major differences in the community structure between control and non-control stations that could be attributed to operation of B VPS. The overall community structure has changed little since pre-operational years, and program results did not indicate that BVPS operations were affecting the benthic community of the Ohio River. The fish community of the Ohio River near the BVPS was sampled in May (spring), July (summer), September (fall) and November (winter) of 2015 with electrofishing and seining. Since monitoring began in the early l 970's, the number of identified fish taxa has increased from 43 to 78 for the New Cumberland Pool. In 2015, 435 fish representing 20 taxa were collected (i.e., handled) during BVPS surveys by electrofishing and seining. This was 245 more fish but the same number of taxa that were collected in 2014. This increase was due largely to the large number of juvenile gizzard shad that were collected in fall and winter by electrofishing.

All taxa collected in 2015 were previously encountered at BVPS. A total, of 419 fish, representing 17 taxa, was collected by electrofishing in 2015 compared to 186 fish representing 17 taxa in 2014. The number of fish collected in 2015 was considerably more than the total number collected in 2011 (151 fish), the last time electrofishing was collected at night. The number of species collected was, however, fewer than in 2011 when 22 species were encountered.

A total of 16 fish representing five (5) taxa was collected by seines in 2015 (Table 5.10) compared to 48 fish representing eight (8) taxa in 2014. Benthivores (bottom feeders including suckers and buffalo) and forage species (e.g. gizzard shad and emerald shiners) were generally collected in the highest numbers in 2015. The numbers of forage fish were much greater in 2015, due to the large number of juvenile gizzard shad collected in the fall and winter. Variations in annual catch were probably attributable to normal fluctuations in the population size of the forage species and the predator populations that rely on them. Forage species, such as gizzard shad and emerald shiner with high reproductive potentials, frequently respond to changes in natural environmental factors (competition, food availability, cover, and water quality) with large fluctuations in population size. This, in tum, influences their appearance in the sample populations during annual surveys. Spawning/rearing success due to abiotic factors is usually the determining factor of the size and composition of a fish community.

The annual catch rate in 2015 (2.56 fish per minute) was higher than any of the previous three years, when catch rates were 0.86 fish per minute in 2014, 0.53 in 2013 and 0.59 in 2012. The greater electrofishing rate in 2015 was due to the relatively large number of juvenile gizzard shad "' that were in fall and winter. Gizzard shad are schooling fish so multiple individuals are generally collected when present. They display high year to year fluctuations in abundance due to spawning success and over winter mortality.

The gizzard shad collected in fall and winter likely were spawned in spring and early summer 2015 and became large enough to be collected by electrofishing.

Little difference in the species composition of the catch was observed between the control (Station 1) and non-control (Stations 2A, 2B and 3) stations.

Habitat preference and availability 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 3 were probably the most important factors affecting where and when fish were collected.

Results from the 2015 fish surveys indicated that a normal community structure for the Ohio River exists near BVPS based on species composition and relative abundance.

In 2015, there was no indication of negative impact to the fish community in the Ohio River from the operation of BVPS. . The monthly reservoir Ponar samples collected in Units 1 and 2 cooling towers and the four samples collected at the intake during 2015 indicated that Corbicula were present in the Ohio River and entering the station. In 2015, 13 settled live Corbicula were collected from the Unit l cooling tower reservoir during monthly reservoir ponar sampling.

In 2015, nine (9) live settled Corbicula was collected from the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir.

The overall low numbers of live Corbicula collected in the sample collected outside the intake and cooling towers in 2015, compared to levels in the 1980's, likely reflects a natural decrease in the density of Corbicula in the Ohio River near BVPS, although an increased density of live settled individuals and juveniles collected in the cooling towers may indicate that the population is beginning to increase again. Continued monitoring of Corbicula densities is recommended.

In 1995, live zebra mussels were collected for the first time by divers in the BVPS main intake and auxiliary intake structures during scheduled cleanings.

They have found in the BVPS every year since. Overall, both the number of observations and densities of settled mussels in 2015 were consistent to those recorded in 2008-2014, and much higher than the preceding five years. Although densities of settled mussels are low compared to other populations such as the Lower Great Lakes, densities comparable to those in the Ohio River are more than sufficient to cause problems in the operation of untreated cooling water intake systems.

Whether the population of zebra mussels in this reach of the Ohio River will remain the same or increase cannot be determined.

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

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION PLAN NON-COMPLIANCES There were no Environmental Protection Plan non-compliances identified in 2015. 3.0 CHANGES INVOLVING UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS No Unreviewed Environmental Questions were identified in 2015. Therefore, there were no changes involving an Unreviewed Environmental Question.

4.0 NON-ROUTINE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT There were no non-routine environmental reports in 2015. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 4

5.0 AQUATIC

MONITORING PROGRAM This section of the report summarizes the Non-Radiological Environmental Program conducted for the BVPS Units 1 and 2; Operating License Numbers DPR-66 and NPF-73. This is a mandatory program, because on February 26, 1980, the NRC granted BVPS's request to delete all of the Aquatic Monitoring Program, with the exception of the fish impingement program (Amendment No. 25), from the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS). In 1983, BVPS was permitted to also delete the fish impingement studies from the ETS program of required sampling along with non-radiological water quality requirements.

However, in the interest of providing an uninterrupted database, BVPS has continued the Aquatic Monitoring Program. The objectives of the 2015 environmental program were:

• To monitor for any possible environmental impact of BVPS operation on the benthic macroinvertebrate and fish communities in the Ohio River;

• To evaluate the presence, growth, and reproduction of macrofouling Corbicula sp. (Asiatic clam) and zebra mussels (Dreissena spp.) at BVPS;

• To provide a low level sampling program to continue an uninterrupted environmental database for the Ohio River near BVPS, pre-operational to present; and

• Keep plant operations appraised of any of changes in environmental conditions that may affect the facility.

These objectives have assisted facility personnel in the past. For instance, in the facility's Significant Operating Experience Report (SOER 07-2, October 2008) relative to "Intake Cooling Water Blockage" this Aquatic Monitoring Program was credited as a means of addressing "Changing Environmental Conditions" by looking "for changes in quantity of clam and mussel activity by monitoring the veliger (commonly known as larvae) density in the river and mussel settlement density."

• 5.1 SITE DESCRIPTION BVPS is located on an approximately 453-acre tract of land on the south bank of the Ohio River in the Borough of Shippingport, Beaver County, Pennsylvania.

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

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

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

40° 36' 18"; Longitude:

80° 26' 02") at a location on the New Cumberland Pool that is 3.1 river miles (5.3 km) downstream from Montgomery Lock and Dam and 19 .6 miles (31.2 km) upstream from New Cumberland Lock 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 5 and Dam. The Pennsylvania-Ohio-West Virginia border is 5.2 river miles (8.4 km) downstream from the site. The river flow is regulated by a series of dams and reservoirs on the Beaver, Allegheny, Monongahela, and Ohio Rivers and their tributaries.

The study site lies along the Ohio River in a valley, which has a gradual slope that extends from the river at an elevation of 665 ft. (203 m) above mean sea level; to an elevation of 1, 160 ft. (354 m) along a ridge south of BVPS. The plant entrance elevation at the station is approximately 735 ft. (224 m) above mean sea level. BVPS Units 1 and 2 have a thermal rating of 2,900 megawatts (MW). Units 1 & 2 have a design electrical rating of 974 MW and 1,009 MW, respectively.

The circulating water systems for each unit are considered a closed cycle system with continuous overflow, using a cooling tower to minimize heat released to the Ohio River. Commercial operation of BVPS Unit 1 began in 1976 and Unit 2 began operation in 1987. 5.2 STUDY AREA The environmental study area was established to assess potential impacts and consists of four sampling stations, each having a north and south shore (Figure 5.1). Station 1 is located at River Mile (RM) 34.5, approximately

0.3 miles

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

0.5 miles

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

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

Significant erosion of Phillis Island has occurred over the past four years, which has affected sampling Stations 2A and 2B. Also evident at all locations has been the establishment of submerged aquatic vegetation due to increased water clarity, likely caused by the establishment of the zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) in the Ohio River system. 5.3 METHODS CB&I Environmental

& Infrastructure, Incorporated (CB&I), formally known as Shaw Environmental, Incorporated, was contracted to perform the 2015 Aquatic Monitoring Program as specified in BVBP-ENV-001-Aquatic Monitoring (procedural guide). This procedural guide references and describes in detail the field and laboratory procedures used in the various monitoring programs, as well as the data analysis and reporting requirements.

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

Sampling was conducted according to the schedule presented in Table 5.1. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 6 5 .3 .1 Benthic Macro invertebrate Monitoring The benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring program consisted of river bottom sampling using a Ponar grab sampler at four stations on the Ohio River. Prior to 1996, duplicate sampling occurred at Stations 1, 2A, and 3, while triplicate sampling occurred at Station 2B (i.e., one sample at each shoreline and mid-channel) (Figures 5.1 and 5.2). In 1996, a review of the sampling design indicated that sampling should be performed in triplicate at each station to conform to standardized EPA procedures.

Therefore, starting in 1996, triplicate samples were taken at Stations 1, 2A, and 3, as in 1995, with triplicate samples also collected at each shore and mid-channel location at Station 2B. A petite Ponar dredge was used to collect these samples, replacing the standard Ponar dredge used in prior studies. In 2015, benthic macro invertebrate sampling was conducted as scheduled in May and September.

For each 2015-field effort, 18 benthjc samples were collected and processed in the laboratory.

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

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

Four indices used to describe the benthic community were calculated: Weiner diversity index, evenness (Pielou, 1969), species richness, and the number of taxa. These estimates an indication of the relative quality of the macroinvertebrate community.

5.3.2 Fish Monitoring Fish sampling was conducted in 2015 to provide a continuous baseline of data and to detect possible changes that may have occurred in the fish populations in the Ohio River near BVPS. Fish population surveys have been conducted in the Ohio River near BVPS annually from 1970 through 2015. These surveys have resulted in the collection of 73 fish species and five different hybrids. Adult fish surveys were successfully conducted as scheduled in May, July, September, and November 2015. During each survey, fish were scheduled to be sampled at four stations (Stations 1, 2A, 2B and 3) (Figure 5.3). Prior to 2011, all electrofishing was conducted at night. From 2011 to present, due to damage to the onsite boat launch, the crew was required to launch the boat from the Lock 57 Community Park Boat Launch located near Glasgow Pennsylvania.

The launch was only open until one hour after dark, so it was necessary to conduct electrofishing efforts during the day. Electrofishing was completed at all stations and months. Seining was scheduled to be performed at Station 1 (north shore) and Station 2B (south shore of Phillis Island) to sample species that are generally under-represented in electrofishing catches (e.g., young-of-the-year fish and small cyprinids).

In 2014, severe erosion to the shoreline at Station 2B required relocating the seining location about 200 meters west. This habitat at the new 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 7 location was comparable to the former site, prior to the erosion. The new location is also influenced by the BVPS discharge, so is a comparable non-control site. This site was also used in 2015, although further erosion was evident. All seining efforts were successfully completed.

Electrofishing was conducted using a boat-mounted electroshocker.

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

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

This was done in an effort to expedite sample processing and cover a larger area during the timed electrofishing run. Regardless of the number of individuals, all game fish were boated when observed.

Fish seining was performed during the day at Station 1 (control) .and Station 2B (non-control) (Figure 5.3) during each of the four 2015 BVPS fishery surveys. A 30-ft long bag seine made of 1/4-inch nylon mesh netting was used to collect fish located close to shore in 1 to 4 ft. of water. Three seine hauls were performed at both Station 1 (north shore) and Station 2B (south shore of Phillis Island) during each survey. Fish collected during electrofishing and seining efforts were processed according to standardized procedures.

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

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

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

Any threatened or endangered species (if collected) would be photographed and released.

5 .3 .3 Corbicula Density Determinations for Cooling Tower Reservoirs The Corbicula Monitoring Program at BVPS includes sampling the circulating river water a11:d the service water systems of the BVPS (intake structure and cooling towers). The objectives of the ongoing Monitoring Program are to evaluate the presence of Corbicula at BVPS, and to evaluate the potential for and timing of infestation of the BVPS. This program is conducted in conjunction with a program to monitor for the presence of macrofouling zebra mussels (see Section 5.3.5).

• 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 8 /'

Corbicula enter the BVPS from the Ohio River by 'passing through the water intakes, and eventually settle in low flow areas including the lower reservoirs of the Units 1 and 2 cooling towers. The density and growth of these Corbicula were monitored by collecting monthly samples from the lower reservoir sidewalls and sediments.

The sampler used ort the sidewalls consisted of a D-frame net behind a 24-inch long metal scraping edge. This device was connected to a pole long enough to allow the sampler to extend down into the reservoir area from the outside wall of the cooling tower. Sediments were sampled with a petite Ponar dredge. , Cooling tower reservoir sampling was historically conducted once per month. Beginning in December 1997, it was decided to forego sampling in cold water months since buildup of Corbicula does not oc'cur then. Monthly sampling has been maintained throughout the warmer water months of the year. In 2015, sampling began in March and ended in November.

In 2015, once each month (March through November), a single petite Ponar grab sample was scheduled to be taken in the reservoir of each cooling tower to obtain density and growth information on Corbicula present in the bottom sediment.

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

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

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

A scraping sample of about 12 square feet was also c;oilected at each cooling tower during each monthly sampling effort. This sample was processed in a manner consistent with the petit Ponar samples. All samples were successfully except in Cooling Tower 2 in October due to a unit outage. 5.3.4 Corbicula Juvenile Monitoring The Corbicula juvenile study was designed to collect data on Corbicula spawning activities and growth of individuals' entering the intake from the Ohio River. From 1988 through 1998, clam cages were deployed in the intake forebay to monitor for Corbicula that entered the BVPS. Observational-based concerns that the clam cages would quickly clog with sediment during high sediment.

periods and, as a result, would not effectively sample for Corbicula, led to an evaluation of an alternate sampling technique.

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

Results of the study confirmed this hypothesis.

During the 1998 sampling season, at the request of BVPS personnel, all clam *cages were 2015 Annual Environmental Report FEN.OC (BVPS) 9 removed after the May collection.

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

Samples were processed in the same manner as Cooling Tower samples (Section 5.3.3).

• From 2002 to present, because of site access restrictions, sampling with the petite ponar has been moved to the Ohio River directly in front of the Intake Structure Building.

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

During each sampling month two Ponar grabs are taken approximately 20 feet offshore of the intake building.

These grab samples are processed in the same manner as when they were collected from within the Intake Structure Building.

5.3.5 Zebra

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

Beginning in December 1997, it was decided to forego sampling in the colder water months of each year, since buildup of zebra mussels and growth of the individuals that are . present, does not occur then. Monthly sampling has been maintained throughout the balance of the year. In 2015, sampling from March through November.

A pump sample for zebra mussel veligers was collected at the barge slip location monthly from April through October in 1996 and 1997. The scope of the sampling was expanded in 1998 to also include the intake structure.

In June 1998, the Emergency Outfall and Emergency Outfall Impact Basin locations were also added. Additional pump samples were collected from the cooling towers of Unit 1 and Unit 2 in October 1998. In 2015 veliger sampling began in April and was conducted monthly through October. At the Intake Structure and Barge Slip the following surveillance techniques were used:

• Wall scraper sample collections on a monthly basis (March through November) from the barge slip and the riprap near the intake structure to detect attached adults; and 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 10

• Pump sample collections from the barge slip and outside the intake structure, to detect the planktonic early life forms (April through October).

At each of the cooling towers the following techniques were used: *

• Monthly reservoir scraper sample collections in each cooling tower (March through November);

and

• Pump samples in April through October to detect planktonic life forms. At the Emergency Outfall and the Splash Pool the following techniques were used:

• Monthly scraper sample collections in each (March through November);

and

• Pump samples in each from April through October to detect planktonic life forms. 5.3.6

• Reports Each month, activity reports that summarized the activities that took place the previous month were prepared and submitted.

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

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

5.4 RESULTS

OF THE AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM The following sections summarize the* findings for each of the program elements.

Sampling dates for each of the program elements are presented in Table 5.1. 5.4.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Program Benthic surveys were performed in May and in September 2015. Benthic samples were successfully collected using a petite ponar grab sampler at Stations 1, 2A, 2B, and 3 (Figure.5.2).

Triplicate samples were taken off the south shore at Stations 1, 2A, and 3. Sampling at Station 2B, in the back channel of Phillis Island, consisted of triplicate petite Ponar grabs *at the south side, middle, and north side of the channel (i.e., Sample Stations 2B 1, 2B2, and 2B3, respectively). , Substrate type is an important factor in determining the composition of the benthic community.

2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 11 The habitats in the vicinity of BVPS are the result of damming, channelization, and river traffic. Shoreline habitats at the majority of sampling locations were generally in depositional areas that consisted of soft substrates composed of mixes of sand, silt, and detritus.

One exception was along the north shoreline of Phillis Island at Station 2A where hard-pan clay overlain with a thin layer of fine sand dominated.

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

In general, the substrates found at each sampling location have been consistent from year to year. Increased water clarity due at least in part to the establishment of zebra mussels was noted during 2015. This has increased the amount of submerged aquatic vegetation at Stations 1, 2B and 3. The presence of submerged aquatic vegetation can increase the number of species of macroinvertebrates, especially chironomids (midge flies) that use them as a primary food source. Also zebra mussel filtering moves much of the available nutrients from the water column to the bottom, which also can affect the type and density of macroinvertebrates present in the project area. Sixty-one (61) macroinvertebrate taxa were identified during the 2015 monitoring program (Tables 5.2 and 5.3), which was one more than was identified in 2014. A mean density of 1,037 macroinvertebrates/m 2 was collected in May and 3,902/m 2 in September (Table 5.4). As in previous years, the macro invertebrate assemblage during 2015 was dominated by burrowing organisms typical of soft unconsolidated substrates.

Oligochaetes (segmented worms), mollusks (clams and snails) and chironomid (midge fly) larvae*were abundant (Table 5.4). Nineteen (19) taxa of chironomids and 19 taxa of oligochaetes were collected.

This is the two more chironomid taxa, but five (5) fewer oligochaete taxa than collected in 2014. Eleven (11) taxa of mollusks were also collected in 2015; two more than in 2014. As was the case in 2014, the total mean density of organisms was higher in September than in May. Thirty-two (32) taxa were present in the May 2015 samples. Fifty-three (53) taxa were present in the September samples (Table 5.3.l and 5.3.2). Twenty-four (24) of the 61 taxa were present in both May and September.

As in 2014, immature tubificid worms were numerically the most abundant organism in both May and September 2015. The macrofouling Asiatic clam (Corbicula) has been observed in the Ohio River near BVPS from 1974 to present. Macrofouling zebra mussels were first collected in the BVPS benthic samples in 1998. Adult zebra mussels, however, were detected in 1995 and 1996 by divers in the BVPS main and auxiliary intake structures during scheduled cleaning operations.

Zebra mussel veligers, adults and juveniles were collected during the 1997-2015 sampling programs (see Sections 5.4.5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program).

Both live adult Corbicula and adult zebra mussels were collected in benthic macro invertebrate samples in 2015. Corbicula and zebra mussels were collected in both May and September samples. Zebra mussels were the third most abundant taxa collected in the September samples. No new taxa of macroinvertebrates were collected near BVPS in 2015 (Table 5.2). Also no state or Federal threatened or endangered macroinvertebrate species were collected during 2015. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 12 In the May 2015 samples, oligochaetes accounted for the highest mean *density of macroinvertebrates (518/m 2 or 50 percent of the total density) (Table 5.4). Oligochaetes also were the dominant taxon in May 2014. Chironomids were the second most abundant species in May (399/m 2 or 38 percent of the total density).

Mollusks (74/m 2 or seven percent of the total) and organisms other than oligochaetes, chironomids and mollusks ("others") ( 46/m 2 or four percent) were both present in May. In September 2015 samples, oligochaetes also accounted for the highest mean density of macroinvertebrates (l ,656/m 2 or 42 percent of the total density) (Table 5.4). Chironomids had

• the next highest mean density in September 2015 (1,362/m 2 or 35 percent of the total density), followed by mollusks (714/m 2 or 18 percent) and the "others" category (170/m 2 or four percent).

J In May 2015, the highest density of macroinvertebrates (l,935/m 2) occurred at Station 3. Oligochaetes were over twice as abundant at Station 3 as any other location.

In the highest density of macroinvertebrates 0 occurred at Station 2Bl (7,267/m 2). This was due' to a high density of mollusks, principally zebra mussels that were collected (2,322/m 2) at this location.

In May the lowest mean density of organisms was 272/m 2 , which occurred at Station 2B3. In September, the lowest mean density of organisms occurred at Station 2B2 (1, 118/m 2). For a comparison of the control to non-control stations, Station 1 was designated the control station, because it is always out of the influence of the BVPS discharge and Station 2B (mean density of Station 2B 1, 2B2, and 2B3) was designated as the non-control station, since it is the station most regularly subjected to BVPS's discharge.

Stations 3 and 2A may be under the influence of the plume under certain conditions, but it is unlikely that they are regularly influenced by BVPS. The mean density of macroinvertebrates in the non-control station was approximately 50 percent higher (979/m 2) than that of the control station (673/m 2) in May (Table 5.5). The relatively higher densities of chironomids and mollusks, at the non-control station, contributed to the majority of this difference.

A similar difference occurred in 2014. Similarly, in September the density of macroinvertebrates present at the non-control station (4,343/m 2) was approximately 50 percent higher than at the control station (2,924/m 2). As in May, the relatively higher densities of chironomids and mollusks at the non-control station contributed to the majority of this difference.

Differences were within the expected range of variation for natural populations of macroinvertebrates and likely not due to any impact of plant operation.

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

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

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

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

2015. Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 13 The Shannon-Weiner diversity indices in May 2015 collections ranged from 0.56 at Station 1 to 0.93 at Stations 2Bl and 2B2 (Table 5.6). In May, evenness ranged from 0.64 at Station 3 to 0.88 at Station 2B3. Richness greatest at Station 3 (3.67) and lowest at Station 1 (1.30). In general, the indices were higher in May 2015 than in 2014. This is due in part to the relatively lower density of immature tubificids present in 2015 and the greater density of tubificids that were mature enough to identify.

In 2014, 65 percent of the individuals collected in May were immature tubificids while in 2015 they contributed to only 30 percent of the May total. This in a greater number of taxa present in 2015. This difference in maturation rate of oligochaetes was likely due to natural annual differences and not related to any effect of plant operations.

The Shannon-Weiner diversity of the macroinvertebrate community (0.70 to 1.05), evenness (0.58 to 0.76) and richness (3.76 to 5.71) in ,September 2015 were generally higher than in May. There was also an increase in the number of taxa present at each station in September compared to that station in May. Relatively h_igh numbers of taxa are frequently present in early fall due to the increased numbers of aquatic stages of insects, especially chironomids, as well as the ability to identify many of the tubificids that are lumped together when immature to lower taxonomic levels. A comparable increase in indices values in September compared to May was also observed in each year from 2010 through 2015. _,1 In May 2015, the number of taxa was lower in the control station (Station 1) than in the control stations (2Bl, 2B2, 2B3) (6 1 in the control versus 8, 16 and 15 in the non-controls).

The diversity, evenness and richness indices were also lower at the control station than the controls (Table 5.6). In September 2015 the indices at the control stations were, in general, comparable to the non-control stations.

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

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

Substrate was probably the most important factor controlling the distribution and abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. Soft substrates that generally existed along the shoreline ar,e conducive to oligochaete, chironomid, and mollusk and limit species of macro_invertebrates that require a more stable bottom. There was an apparent change in the chironomid community throughout the study zone, as evidenced by their increased densities and the type of species, present. This is likely due to an increase in the submerged vegetation noted along the shoreline.

Vegetation provides an ideal habitat for many chironomid species that use it for grazing on the surficial phytoplankton and a place to avoid predators.

This change in the chironomid community is not caused by BVPS operations.

The density of macroinvertebrates in May and September 2015 fell within the range of densities of macroinvertebrates collected at BVPS in previous years (Table 5.7). Although the species of chironomids and their relative densities may have increased slightly due to increased light penetration caused by zebra mussels and 'the subsequent increase in submerged aquatic vegetation in the nearshore area, the overall macroinvertebrate community structure has changed little since pre-operational years. Any changes have occurred at both control and non-control sites, so the available evidence does not indicate that BVPS operations have 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 14 affected the benthic community of the Ohio River. 5.4.2 Fish Sampling Program In 2015, 435 fish representing 20 taxa were collected (i.e., handled) during BVPS surveys by electrofishing and seining (Table 5.8). This was 245 more fish, but the same number of taxa as collected in 2014. All taxa collected in 2015 were previously encountered at BVPS. By far the most common species in the 2015 BVPS surveys that were collected by electrofishing and seining combined were gizzard shad (81.6% of the total catch), followed by smallmouth buffalo (4.6%) emerald shiner (2.8%), longnose gar (2.5%), golden redhorse sucker (1.6%)

and smallmouth bass (1.6%). None of the remaining 15 species contributed to more than one percent of total handled catch. The most frequently observed, but not handled fish in 2015 juvenile gizzard shad (Table 5.15). Game fish collected in 2015 included channel catfish, bluegill, smallmouth bass, walleye, spotted bass, pumpkinseed, rock bass, and flathead catfish. Game fish represented 4.1 % of the total handled catch. A total of 419 fish, representing 17 taxa, was collected by electrofishing in 2015 (Table 5.9) compared to 186 fish representing 17 species in 2014. The number of fish collected in 2015 was considerably more than the total number collected in 2011 (151 fish), the last time electrofishing was conducted at night. The number of species collected was, however, fewer than in 2011 when 22 species were encountered.

The increased catch was due to the large number of gizzard shad juveniles that were collected during the fall and winter electrofishing efforts. In general electrofishing at night has been demonstrated to be more productive than during the day in riverine systems. Movements of many species of fish into shallower water at night to feed, makes them more susceptible to the electrofishing technique.

This may have contributed to the fewer number of species collected in 2014. Gizzard shad (84.7% of the total) was by far the most abundant species in the electrofishing catch. Smallmouth buffalo (4.8%), longnose gar (2.6%), golden redhorse sucker (1.8%) and smallmouth bass (1.4%) were the only other species that contributed to greater than one percent of the catch. Fish observed and not collected in the 2015 electrofishing study are presented in Table 5.15. A total of 16 fish representing five ( 5) taxa was collected by seines in 2015 (Table 5 .10) compared to 48 fish representing eight (8) taxa in 2014. The most abundant taxa collected in 2015 were emerald shiner, representing 75% of the total catch'. The other four species were each represented by single individual.

One bluegill and one juvenile smallmouth bass the only game species collected during seining efforts. A total of 30 fish representing 13 species was captured during the May (spring) 2015 sampling event (Table 5.11 ). All of them were collected during electrofishing.

Golden redhorse sucker was the most abundant species and represented 23.3% of the electrofishing catch, followed in abundance by longnose gar (representing 20.0% of the total catch), freshwater drum (10.0%), smallmouth bass (10.0%), shorthead redhorse sucker (6.7%), and smallmouth buffalo (6.7%). No other species contributed to more than five (5) percent of the May electrofishing catCh. No fish were collected in the seines. Flathead catfish, rock bass, smallmouth bass, spotted bass and 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 15 walleye were the game species collected in May. A total of 15 fish representing six (6) species was captured during the July (summer) 2015 sampling event (Table 5.12). All of the fish were collected during electrofishing efforts. Gizzard shad and longnose gar were the most abundant species and represented 60.0% and 13.3% of the catch, respectively.

Every other fish species was represented by a single individual.

No fish were collected in the seines. Smallmouth bass, pumpkinseed and flathead catfish were the only game species collected in July. During the September (fall) 2015 *sampling event, 291 fish representing four (4) taxa were collected.

All of the fish were collected during electrofishing efforts (Table 5.13). Gizzard shad were the most abundant species and contributed to 98.3 percent on the total. Two pumpkinseed, two longnose gar and one bluegill were the only other fish collected.

During the November (winter) 2015 sampling event, 99 fish representing 11 taxa were collected.

A total of 83 fish representing seven (7) species was collected during electrofishing efforts (Table 5.13). Gizzard shad and smallmouth buffalo were the most abundant species collected by electrofishing and contributed to 72.3% and 20.5% of the total catch, respectively.

Smallmouth bass (2.4% of the total) was the only other species that more than one individual was collected.

A total of 16 fish representing five (5) species were the only fish collected by seining. Emerald shiners (75% of the seine catch were the only species that more than one individual was collected.

November was the only month that seining efforts collected any fish. Game species collected in November included bluegill, channel catfish and smallmouth bass. Electrofishing catch rates are presented in Tables 5 .16, 5 .17, 5 .18, and 5 .19 for fish that were boated and handled during the 2012 through 2015 surveys by season (FENOC 2013, 2014 and 2015). In 2015, the annual catch rate was 2.56 fish per minute. In 2015, the greatest seasonal catch rate occurred in fall (September) when the catch rate was 7.11 fish per minute. Gizzard shad were collected at a rate of 6.99 fish per minute in fall, so were the reason for this atypically high catch rate. The lowest catch rate occurred in summer (July) with a rate of 0.37 fish per electrofishing minute. The annual catch rate in 2015 (2.56 fish per minute) was higher any of the previous three years, when catch rates were 0.86 fish per minute in 2014, 0.53 in 2013 and 0.59 in 2012. The greater electrofishing rate in 2015 was due to the relatively large number of juvenile gizzard shad that were in fall and winter. Gizzard shad are schooling fish, so multiple individuals are generally collected when present. They display high year to year fluctuations in abundance due to spawning success and the extent of over winter mortality.

The gizzard shad collected in fall and winter likely were spawned in spring and early summer 2015 and became large enough to be collected by electrofishing.

Large numbers of small gizzard shad were also noted during the summer electrofishing effort, but were too small to be netted. The 2015 catch rates in fall and winter were the highest of the four years. The highest spring and catch rates over the four years occurred in 2014. Over the four years, the highest seasonal catch rate occurred in fall 2015 (7 .11 fish per minute), which was due to the large number of juvenile gizzard shad present. The results of the electrofishing sampling effort in 2015 (Table 5.9) did not indicate any major 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 16 differences in species composition between the control station (1) and the non-control Stations 2A, 2B, and 3. In both, gizzard shad was the most abundant species. A greater number of fish representing more species was captured at nori-control stations than control station. This was most likely due to the extra effort expended at non-control stations versus control station. There are three non-control stations and only one control station so there was three times the effort a,t . the non-control stations.

In 2015, there was 5.5 times as many fish collected at the non-control stations with three times the effort. In 201, similar numbers of individuals and species were collected by seines at the control station compared to the non-control station, where sampling effort is equal (Table 5.10). In 2015, species composition remained comparable among stations.

Common taxa collected in the 2015 surveys by all methods induded gizzard shad, redhorse.

sucker. species, smallmouth buffalo, and smallmouth bass. Little difference in the species composition of the catch and relative composition was observed between the control (1) and non-control stations (2A, 2B and 3). Habitat preference and availability were probably the most important factors affecting where and when different species of fish are collected.

The results of the 2015 fish surveys indicated that there is a normal community structure in the Ohio River in the vicinity of BVPS based on species composition and relative abundance of fish observed during the surveys. Benthivores (bottom feeders including suckers and buffalo) and forage species (e.g. gizzard shad and emerald shiners) were generally collected in the highest numbers. The numbers of forage fish were greater than those present in the previous three years, due largely to the large number of juvenile gizzard shad collected.

Variations in annual catch were probably attributable to normal fluctuations in the population size of the forage species and the predator populations that rely on them. Forage species, such as gizzard shad, minnow species and shiner species that have high reproductive potentials, frequently respond to changes in natural environmental factors (competition, food availability, cover, and water quality) with large fluctuations in population size. This, in tum, influences their appearance in the sampled populations during annual surveys. Spawning/rearing success due to abiotic factors is usually the determining factor of the size and composition of a fish community.

' In addition, differences in electrofishing catch rate can be attributed to environmental conditions that prevail during sampling efforts. High water, increased turbidity, waves, and swift currents that occur during electrofishing efforts in some years can affect the collection efficiency in any given month. In 2015, as in the previous three years, increased water clarity was apparent during all months sampled.

A direct result of the increased clarity was the abundance of rooted submerged aquatiC vegetation throughout the study reach. The amount of rooted vegetation ih 2015 was much more than in any other year sampled. This increase in vegetation is likely the

• result of an increased photic zone . due . to zebra mussels filtering organic. and inorganic partfoulates from the water and redistributing them to the benthic layer. The presence of rooted vegetation and increased water clarity can change the distribution of many of the fish species present in the study reach. Results from the 2015 fish surveys indicated that a normal community structure for the Ohio River ex!sts near BVPS based on species composition and relative abundance.

In 2015, there was no indication of negative impact to the fish community in the Ohio River from the 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 17 operation of BVPS. 5.4.3 Corbicula Monitoring Program In 2015, 13 settled live Corbicula were collected from the Unit 1 cooling tower reservoir during monthly reservoir ponar sampling (Table 5.20 and Figure 5.5). They ranged in size from 1.00 mm to greater than 9.50 mm. Eleven dead Corbicula that were between 2.00 mm and 9.49 mm were also collected.

The seasonal average density of settled live Corbicula was 62/m 2' which was about twice the density of Corbicula in the Unit 1 cooling tower in 2014. Settled live Corbicula were collected in all sampled months except April, October and November.

The highest density occurred in April when a density of 129 Corbiculalm 2 was present. No Corbicula were collected in the scraping samples. Corbicula juveniles were also collected in monthly pump samples collected in the Unit 1 cooling tower reservoir in June and August. In 2015, nine (9) live settled Corbicula were collected from the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir (Table 5.21 and Figure 5.6). They were between 1.00 mm to greater than 9.50 mm in size, which indicates that some settled prior to 2015. Three dead Corbicula were also collected during 2015. These were between 2.00 mm and 6.29 mm and likely represented a number of year classes. The season average density of settled live Corbicula was 48/m 2 that was slightly higher than in 2014. The highest density of settled Corbicula occurred in September when a density of 129 Corbicula/m 2 was present. No Corbicula were collected in the scraping samples. Corbicula juveniles were also collected in monthly pump samples collected in the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir in June, August and September.

In 2015, BVPS continued its Corbicula control program, which included the use of a molluscicide to prevent the proliferation of Corbicula within BVPS. BVPS was granted permission by the PADEP to use a molluscicide to target the Unit 1 river water system and the Unit 2 service water system. In 1990 through 1993, the molluscicide applications focused on reducing the Corbicula population throughout the entire river water system of each BVPS plant (Units 1 and 2). In 1994 and 1995, the applications targeted the internal water systems; therefore, the molluscicide concentrations in the cooling towers were reduced during applications.

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

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

Only 22 live and six dead settled Corbicula were collected in the cooling towers in 2015; however, their presence in the cooling tower pump samples indicates that they still are available for establishment in the cooling towers. The recent decrease of Corbicula at the BVPS returns densities to levels more consistent with densities in the Ohio River in the mid-1990's, but well below those present during the 1980's. Whether the relatively low density of Corbicula in 2015 is indicative of permanent lower levels in the environment or due to natural variability is 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 18 uncertain, however, continued monitoring of Corbicula densities is recommended.

5.4.4 Corbicula

Juvenile Monitoring Program Figure 5.7 presents the abundance and size distribution data for samples collected in the Ohio River near the intake structure by petite ponar dredge in 2015. Sixty ( 60) live individuals were collected 2015 compared to only 17 in 2014. They ranged in size from the 2.00 mm-3.34 mm size range that were spawned in late 2014 to greater than 9.50 mm that were spawned in prior years. A spring/early-summer spawning period typically occurs in the Ohio River near BVPS each year when preferred spawning temperatures (60-65° F) are reached (Figure 5.8). The offspring from this spawning event generally begin appearing in the sample collections in June. The settled clams generally increase in size throughout the year. The number of individuals collected in 2015 was three to five times greater than in each of the previous four years. This could indicate a slow increase in Corbicula numbers in the Ohio River or could be due to normal variability.

In any case the densities of Corbicula continue to be low relative what was present in the 1980's. The overall low numbers of live Corbicula collected in the sample collected outside the intake and cooling towers in 2015, compared to levels in the 1980's, likely reflects a natural decrease in the density of Corbicula in the Ohio River near BVPS, although an increased density of live settled individuals and juveniles collected in the cooling towers may indicate that the population is beginning to increase again. Continued monitoring of Corbicula densities is recommended.

5.4.5 Zebra

Mussel Monitoring Program Zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) are exotic freshwater mollusks that have ventrally flattened shells generally marked with alternating dark and lighter bands. They are believed to have been introduced into North America through the ballast water of ocean-going cargo vessels probably from Eastern Europe. They were first identified in Lake St. Clair in 1988 and rapidly spread to other Great Lakes and the Mississippi River drainage system, and have become increasingly abundant in the lower, middle, and upper Ohio River. They use strong adhesive byssal threads, collectively referred to as their byssus, to attach themselves to any hard surfaces (e.g., intake pipes, cooling water intake systems, and other mussels).

Responding to NRC Notice No. 89-76 (Biofouling Agent-Zebra Mussel, November 21, 1989), BVPS instituted a Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program in January 1990. Studies have been conducted each year since then. Zebra mussels were detected in both the pump samples (Figures 5.9 and 5.10) and the substrate samples (Figure 5.11 and 5.12) in 2015. Zebra mussel veliger pump samples were collected from May through October 2015 after not being collected in April. Veligers were collected at all of the six sites that were sampled in 2015. The lack ofveligers in April can be attributed to the much colder than usual late winter and early spring that occurred in 2015. Spawning begins as water temperature reach approximately 14 ° C and peaks at water temperatures of 21° C. Veliger densities usually peak about two weeks after the optimum water temperature for spawning is 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 19 reached. Veliger densities then fall off as veligers mature and settle, although female mussels broadcast mature eggs throughout the season. River water temperature in April was 9.4° C, which is well below the spawning threshold.

Veligers were present at all sampled sites from May through October. A peak in zebra mussel veligers occurred at most sample locations in May. The majority of these veligers were D-form and very recently spawned. This spike was likely due to a large number of mussels spawning at the same time after a delay in spawning due to colder than normal water temperatures.

The percentage of mussels capable of setting increased though the rest of the sampling season. Mussel densities in October were very lower which indicated that the majority of mussel have settled and no more veligers were being produce. This is supported by a river water temperature rapidly decreasing between the September and October sampling events. The greatest density of veligers was present in the sample collected from the Cooling Tower 2 reservoir sample in May (3o,:;oo/m 3). This was less than half of the peak density of veligers collected in 2014. It was, however greater than the peak density in 2013 (17,808/m 3) and consistent with that in 2012 (34,628/m 3). The 2015 density is high for the Ohio River. In 2015, settled zebra mussels were collected only in scrape samples at the Cooling Tower 1 reservoir, the barge slip and the intake structure (Figures 5.11 and 5.12). Those in the Cooling Tower 1 reservoir were on collected in low densities in April. The highest density of settled mussels in any sample collected was at the barge slip (61 mussels/m 2) in August. The mussels collected at the barge slip and intake structure included individuals that were capable of reproducing.

The density of collected adult zebra mussels in 2015 was somewhat higher than the densities that occurred in 2014 Overall, both the number of observations and densities of settled mussels in 2015 were consistent to those recorded in 2008-2014, and much higher than the preceding 5 years. Although densities of settled mussels are low compared to other populations such as the Lower Great Lakes, densities comparable to those in the Ohio River are sufficient to cause problems in the operation of untreated cooling water intake systems. Whether the population of zebra mussels in this reach of the Ohio River will remain the same or increase cannot be determined.

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

2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 20

6.0 ZEBRA

MUSSEL AND CORBICULA CONTROL ACTIVITIES In 2015, BVPS continued its Corbicula and zebra mussel control program (26th year), which included the use of a molluscicide to prevent the proliferation of Corbicula and zebra mussels within BVPS. BVPS was granted permission by the PADEP to use a molluscicide to target the Unit 1 river water system and the Unit 2 service water system. In 1990 through 1993, the molluscicide applications (CT-1) focused on reducing the Corbicula population throughout the entire river water system of each BVPS plant (Units 1 and 2). In 1994 through 2006, the CT-1 or CT-2 (reformulated CT-1) applications targeted zebra mussels and Corbicula in the internal water systems; therefore the molluscicide concentrations in the cooling towers were reduced during CT-1 or CT-2 applications.

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

Reservoir sediment samples taken after CT-1 or CT-2 applications represented mortality of Corbicula in the cooling tower only and do not reflect mortality in BVPS internal water systems. In 2007 BVPS began using Nalco H150M as the molluscicide.

This product, which has the same active ingredients as the CT-2 and CT-2, was applied in the same manner. In addition to clamicide treatments, preventive measures were taken that included quarterly cleaning of the Intake Bays. The bay cleanings are intended to minimize the accumulation and growth of mussels within the bays. This practice prevents creating an uncontrolled internal colonization habitat. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 21

7.0 REFERENCES

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

Published by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission.

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

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

NUREGLCR.

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

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

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

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

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp. FENOC, 2005. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

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

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

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

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

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp. FENOC, 2010. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp. FENOC, 2011. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp FENOC, 2012. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp FENOC, 2013. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp FENOC, 2014. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 22 FENOC, 2015. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 83 pp Hutchinson, G. E., 1967. A treatise on limnology.

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

John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York. 1115 pp. Hynes, H.B. N., 1970. The ecology of running waters. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto. NRC, IE Bulletin 81-03: Flow Blockage of Cooling Tower to Safety System Components by Corbicula sp. (Asiatic Clam) and Mytilus sp. (Mussel).

Pielou, E. C., 1969. An introduction to mathematical ecology. Wiley Interscience, Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Robins, C.R., R. M. Bailey, C. E. Bond, J. R. Brooker, E. A. Lachner, R. N. Lea, and W. B. Scott, 1991. Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States and Canada (fifth edition).

American Fisheries Society Special Publication No. 20:1-183.

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

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

In: B. A. Whitton, ed. River ecology. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. 155-169 pp. ( 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) -23 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 8.0 TABLES 24 TABLES.I BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION (BVPS) SAMPLING DATES FOR 2015 Study Jan *Feb Mar Apr May* Ji.in Jul Aug Benthic Mactoinvertebrate Fish ,. .* Corbicula .and z.ebra Mussel

• Mussel Ve!iger 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 30 21 21 \. 28 28 30 28 23 30 28 28 23 30 28 25 Sep . Oct Nov Dec 17 17 5 17 14 5 17 14 Table 5.2 Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From *1973 Through 2015 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum I Class Family Sub-Famil Porifera I Cnidaria IHvdrozoa Clavidae Hvdridae Platyhelminthes ITricladida IRhabdocoela Nemertea Nematoda Entoprocta F.ctoprocta Annelida Oli2ochaeta Aeolosomatidae Enchvtraeidae Naididae -' 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus and Species Sf)on1Zilla traf!i/is CordvlofJhora lacustris Crasf)edacusta sowerbii Hydra sp. Urnatella 1Zracilis Fredericella sp. Paludicella articulata Pectinatella SP. Plumatella sp. Allonais vectinata AmfJhichaeta levdi!Zi Amvhichaeta so. Arcteonais lomondi Aulovhorus so. Chaetof(aster diaphanus C. diastroohus Dero diJZitata Dero flabel!iJZer D. nivea Dero sp. Nais barbata N. behninf(i N. bretscheri N. communis N. elinf!uis N. f)ardalis N. f)seudobtusa N. simfJlex N. variabilis Nais so. 0fJhidonais seroentina Paranais.fi"ici Paranais litoralis Paranais sp. Pif!uetiella michi1Zanensis Pristina idrensis Pristina /onf!isoma Pristina /onf!iseta P. osborni Pristina sp. Pristinella sp. 26 Previous Collected in New in Collections 2015 2015 x x / x x x x x x x / x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x

x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Table 5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2015 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum Class I Family Sub-Family Annelida Oli!rnchaeta Naididae Tubificida Tubificidae Lumbriculidae Hirudinae Gloss iohoniidae IEmobdellidae Haplotaxidae Lumbricina Lumbricidae 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus and Species Pristine/la ienkinae Pristine/la idrensis Pristine/la sima Pristina osborni Rioistes oarasita Slavina aooendiculata Soecaria iosinae Steohensoniana trivandrana Stvlaria fossularis S. lacustris Uncinais uncinata Ve;dovskyel/a coma/a Ve;dovskvella intermedia Ve;dovskvella sp. Aulodrilus limnobius A. vigueti A. oluriseta Aulodrilus so. Bothrioneurum veidovskvanum Branchiura sowerbyi Jlyodrilus temvletoni Limnodrilus cervix L. cervix (variant)

L. clavaredianus L. hoffineisteri L. maumeensis L. vrofundicla L. sviralis L. udekemianus Limnodrilus sv. Peloscolex multisetosus longidentus P. m. multisetosus Potamothrix moldaviensis Potamothrix sp. P. vejdovskyi Psammorvctides curvisetosus Tubifex tubifex Unidentified immature forms: with hair chaetae without hair chaetae He!Obdella elongata H.

Helobdella sp. Ervobdella sp. Mooreobdella microstoma Sty/odrilus sp. 27 Previous Collected in New in Collections 2015 2015 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Table 5.2 (continued) 4':u<:fpm<>fiP I

of M<>P ,.; *h-*a.: C'oll1>Pf1>.-I From 1973 Thronah 7.fll <:; 'n Th .. Ohi1 N .. , 1r RVPS: Phylum Class Family Sub-Familvl Arthroooda Acarina Ostracoda lsonn<lll Arthrolllll1>t Amphinodit Talitridae Garnmaridae Pontoporeiidae Corophididae IJecaoooa Lollemoora Enhemeroptera Heptageniidae Epherneridae Baetidae Caenidae Tricorvthidae Me2aloptera I Odonata I Gonmhidae Lestidae Libellulidae , Plecoptera Trichoptera I Hydropsychidae Hvdroptilidae Leptoceridae Polycentropodidae IPolvcentropomdae 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus andSpecies Oxus SP. Ase/lus sp. Hvalella azteca Cran[{onyx vseudof!:racilis Cran[{onyx so. Gammarusfasciatus Gammarus sp. Monovoreia affinis Stenacron sp. Stenonema sp. Evhemerd SP. Hexaf!:enia SP. Evhron sp. Baetis sp. Caenis sp. Sera/tel/a sp. Tricorvthodes sp. Sia/is sp. Arf!:ia sp. Dromo[{omohus svoliatus sp. Gomphus sp. I Les/es SP. Libe/lula sp. Cheumatovsvche sp. Hvdromroche SP. Paramroche SP. lHvdroptila so. Orthotrichia sp. Oxyethira sp. Ceraclea sp. Oecetis sp. Cvrnellus SP iro1ycentropus sp. 28 Previous Collected in New in C'nll. *-"'---.,ou: .,ou: x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Table 5.2 (continued)

T .id nf **foh .... tP<: rnne .. tMf From 1973 Iii "'" 7'11 !\ "n The Ohi* D.iver Ne: 1r RVPS Phylum I Class Family Sub-Familyl Coleoptera Hvdrophilidae Coleoptera Elmidae Psephenidae Diotera Psvchodidae Chaoboridae Simuliidae Chironomidae Chironominae

' TanvDodinae 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus and Species Ancvronvx variezatus Dubiraphia sp. Helichus sp. Optioserus sp. Stene/mis sp. Unidentified Diptera Pericoma sp. Psychoda sp. Telmatoscopus sp. Unidentified Psychodidae mmae Chaoborus sp. Similium sp. Tanvtarsini nuna Chironominae 0000 Axarus sp. Chironomus sp. Cladovelma sp. Cladotanvtarsus SP. Crvntochironomus SP. CrvvtotendiTJes sv. Dicrotendives nervosus Dicrotendives SP. GlvTJtotendipes sp. Harnischia sp. Microchironomus sp. Micropsectra sp. Microtendipes sp. Parachironomus sp. Paracladope/ma sp. Paratanvtarsus sp. Para/endives SP. Phaenopsectra sp. Polvvedilum Cs .s. l convictum tvDe P. ( s.s.J s imulans type Po/vnedilum SD. Pseudochironomis STJ. Rheotanvtarsus SD. Stempel/ina sp. Stenochironomus sp. Stictochironomus sp. Tanvtarsus cottmani Tanvtarsus sp. Tribe/as SP. Xenochironomus SP. 11 anypodmae pupae Ablabesmyia sp. Clinotanypus sp. Coe/otanvvus scapu/aris Coe/otanvvus sp. Dialmabatista TJulcher Dialmabatista SP. Proc/adius SP. 1anypus sp. 29 Previous Collected in New in rnl**-"nno

?Ill<; ?Ill<; x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Table 5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2015 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum I Class Family Sub-Family Diptera Tanypodinae Orthocladiinae Diamesinae Ceratopogonidae Dolichopodidae Emoididae Ephydridae Muscidae Rhagionidae Tipulidae Strationwidae Svrohidae Lellidootera Hydracarinidia Mollusca Gastronoda Hydrobiidae Anmicolinae Bithvnidae

'* Physacea Pleuroceridae ( Phvsidae 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus and Species Thienemannimvia group Zavrelimvia sp. Orthocladiinae pupae Cricotovus bicinctus C. (s.s.) trifascia Cricotovus

(!socladius)-svlvestris Group C. (lsocladius) sp. Cricotovus (s.s.) SP. Eukiefferiella sp. Hvdrobaenus SP. Limnovhves sp. Nanocladius (s.s.) distinctus Nanocladius SP. Orthocladius sp. Parametriocnemus sp. Paraphaenocladius sp. Psectrocladius SP. Pseudorthocladius SP. Pseudosmillia sp. Smillia sp. Theinemannimvia sp. Diamesa so. Pollhastia sp. Probezzia SP. Bezzia SP. Culicoides sp. Clinocera SP. Wiedemannia sp. Oxus sp. Amnicola SP. Aminicola binnevana Amnicola limosa StaRnicola elodes Bithvnia SP. Pleurocera acuta Goniobasis SP. Physa sp. Physa ancillaria Physa in/ef!m 30 Previous Collected in New in Collections 2015 2015 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Table 5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2015 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum I Class Family Sub-Famil Mollusca Phvsacea Ancylidae Planorbidae Valvatidae Pelecvnoda IS ohaeriacea Corbiculidae Sohaeriidae Dreissenidae Unionidae 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus and Species Ferrissia sp. Gillia atilis Gvraulus so. Valvata oerdeoressa Valvata piscinalis Valvata sincera Valvata sp. Corbicula Huminea Corbicula so. Pisidium ventricosum Pisidium sp. Sphaerium sp. Unidentified immature Sphaeriidae I Dreissena pofvmorpha Anodonta zrandis Anodonta (irrnnature)

Elliptio sp. Ouadrula pustulosa Unidentified immature Unionidae 31 Prelious Collected in New in Collections 2015 2015 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Scientific name 1 Ab/abesmyia sp. 0 Amnicola sp. 0 Amnico/a limosa 0 Arcteonais

/omondi 0 Argia sp. (Odonata) 0 Au/odrilus sp 0 Branchiura sowerbyi 0 Chironomid pupae 0 Chironomidae 0 Chironomus sp. 0 C/adopelma sp 0 Coelotanypus sp. 0 Corbicula sp. 0 Cl}'ptochironomus sp. 0 Dicrotentipides sp. 0 Diptera. 0 Dreissena polymorpha 0 Dubiraphia sp. 0 Fenissia sp. 0 Gammarus sp. 0 Gilliaatilis 0 Hexagenia sp. 0 Hirudinea 0 Hydrobiidae 0 Immature tubificid without 21 Limnodri/us hoffmeisteri 11 Limnodri/us maumeensis 1 Limnodri/us prolimdico/a 1 Lumbriculidae 0 Microtendipes sp. 0 Naididae 0 Nais pardalis 0 Nais variabilis 0 Nematoda 12 Ocetis sp. 0 Oligochaeta 0 Optioservus sp. 0 Orthoc/adius sp. 0 Oxus sp. (Hydracarina) 0 Phaenopsectra sp. 0 Physa sp. 0 Pisidium sp. 0 P/eurocera acuta 0 Plecoptera 0 Po/ypedi/uin sp. 1 Pristina osbomi 0 Piistinella jenkinae 0 Pristine/la sima 0 Probezzia sp. 0 Procladius sp. 0 Psec/oc/adius , sp. 0 Pseudochironomis sp. 0 Rheotanyta1Sus sp. 0 Specaria josinae 0 Sphaerium sp. 0 Stempellina sp. 0 Sty/aria latusbis 0 Tanypus sp. 0 Tanyta1Sus sp. 0 Trichoptera 0 Valvata sincera 0 Total 47 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) TABLE5.3 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRA TECOUNfS FOR TRIPLICATESAMPUS TAKEN AT FACH SAMPLE STATION FOR MAY AND SEPTIMBER 2015 May Sept Location May Location 2A 2Bl 2B2 2B3 3 Total 1 2A 2Bl 2B2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 4 8 0 5 1 0 4 0 *o 2 6 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 37 14 3 28 86 4 8 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 9 1 0 0 1 1 5 7 6 1 5 1 6 2 2 0 5 15 2 30 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 9 4 24 86 46 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 58 1 0 0 1 1 -2 4 0 2 28 *o 0 0 0 0-0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 29 11 7 63 133 75 92. 116 11 0 6 4 2 9 32 13 0 4 *O 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 13 3 1 1 34 .0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 15 0 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 *o 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 5 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 2 0 0 1 3 9 2 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 7 9 57 3 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 11 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 2 0 4 9 28 1 60 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 13 2 1 2 0 18 4 30 67 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 47 132 54 19 135 434 204 288 507 78 32 Sept 2015 2B3 3 Total Total 0 0 2 3 0 4 4 4 1 0 1 1 5 0 11 11 1 0 2 2 0 1 5 5 4 4 22 26 2 1 9 15 1 0 1 1 3 .9 36 122 -0 0 2 2 7 0 27 27 2 1 16 23 7 4 49 64 1 0 7 7 0 1 1 1 3 5 168 177 1 0 3 4 1 5 68 68 2 _3 35 39 2 0 4 4 1 0 3 3 0 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 113 131 538 671 7 18 42 74 0 4 5 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 5 0 0 1 35 /* 1 0 1 1 1 2 17 32 2 0 6 6 4 0 5 5 0 0 0 1 3 0 3 3 0 0 1 1 0 1 23 28 -0 2 7 7 6 1 21 24 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 3 20 94 101 4 1 21 23 16 6 23 24 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 25 2 120 129 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 7 5 0 5 5 7 0 17 17 0 0 0 19 81 5 190 208 0 0 0 1 1 0 7 7 324 232 1633 2067 May 1 (Control)

1. Jnt % Oligochaetes 487 72 Chironomids 14 2 Mollusks 0 0 Others 172 26 Total 673 ,. 100 September I (Control)

1. lnl-% Oligochaetes 1763 60 Chironomids 817 28 Mollusks 301 10 Others 43 1 Total 2924 ,. 100 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) TABLES.4 ME<\N NUMBm OFM\CROJNVmTEBRATFS (NUMBER/tW)

AND PFB.aNT COMPOSmON OFOLIGOCHAEJ.W, CIHRONOMIDS, MOLLUSKS, AND OTHER ORGANISMS, 2015 BVPS Station 2A 2Bl (Non-control) 2B2 (Non-control) 2B3 (Non-control)

1. lnl-% #lnl-% #/mz. %_ #lnl-% #lnl-258 38 774 41 '272 35 172 63 1147 401 60 1004 53 272 35 72 26 631 0 0 100 5 172 22 14 5 100 14 2 14 I 58 7 14 5 57 673 ... 100 1892 ,. 100 774 ,. 100 272 ,. 100 1935 Station 2A 2Bl (Non-control) 2B2 (Non-control) 2B3 (Non-control)

1. /mz % #!nl-% #Jnt % #lnl-% #Jnt 1362 33 1949 27 186 17 2322 50 2365 2136 52 2451 34 186 17 1993 43 602 459 11 2322 32 703 63 229 5 258 172 4 545 7 43 4 100 2 100 4129 ,. 100 7267 ,. 100 lll8 ,. 100 4644 .. 100 3325 33 3 Total Mean % #lnl-% 59 518 50 33 399 38 5 74 7 3 46 4 .. 100 1037 100 3 Total Mean % #/mz % 71 1656 42 18 1362 35 8 714 18 3 170 4 \ ,. 100 3902 100 TABLE 5.5 MEAN NUMBER OF MACROINVERTEBRATES (NUMBER/M 2) AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF OLIGOCHAETA, CHIRONOMIDAE, MOLLUSCA, AND OTHER ORGANISMS FOR THE CONTROL STATION (1) AND THE AVERAGE FOR NON-CONTROL STATIONS ( 2B1, 2B2, _AND 2B3), 2015 BVPS May Control Station (Mean) #/mz % Oligochaeta 487 72 Chironomidae 14 2 Mollusca 0 0 Others 172 26 TOTAL 673 100 September Control Station (Mean) #/mz Oligochaeta 1763 Chironomidae 817 Mollusca 301 Others 43 TOTAL 2924 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) % 60 28 10 1 ,. *100 Non-Control Station (Mean) #/mz. % 406 41 449 46 95 10 29 3 979 100 Non-Control Station (Mean) #/mz % 1486 34 1543 36 1085 25 229 5 4343 100 34 TABLES.6 SHANNON-WEINER DNERSITY, EVENNESS AND RICHNESS INDICES FOR BENTIIlC MACROINVERTEBRATES

<;:OLLECTED IN THEOIIlO RNER, 2015 ' ' . . ,* ',-R,

.**: ,_.* ..

einer ir!dex * * *;T. :, *: , ,,. * * .. *

• Rfchiiesr

... *1 6 0.56 0.72 1.30 . * .. ** '/},!\. 8 0.74 0.82 1.82 . ** .. *.". '. *": ,.

... *, . ,iBl** .. '2B2.

• 2B3; ,, 16 15 8 0.93 0.93 0.80 0.77 0.79 0.88 3.07 3.51 2.38 ... , St<itiOn ... t--Seritenlber'

• • * . ' . . : . . . L::; . .. . 21\ ., << "*2Bl ': .* ' ..... 2B2 ... *: . W3. J\ro; Of'.f;am '.. * ':. >: * -* . ,..,,.

,., : * * . .*.. * *. 21 1.00 0.76 3.76 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 19 0.89 0.70 . 3.18 32 16 34 1.05 0.70 0.99 0.70 0.58 0.65 4.98 3.44 5.71 35 ., .. "3,'.;,, *. 19 0.82 0.64 3.67 ,-,. '* ' . 24 0.80 0.58 4.22 *-

Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations 1 (Control) and 28 (Noncontrol), BVPS, 1973-2015.

1973 1 28 May 248 508 August 99 244 Mean 173 376 " 1976 1 28 May 927 3660 August 851 785 Mean 889 2223 1979 1 '. ,. 28 May 1004 Aug/Sept 1185 Mean 1095 1982 1 May 3490 September 2958 Mean 3223 1985 1 May 2256 September 1024 Mean 1640 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 840 588 714 28 3026 3364 3195 28 867 913 890 Pre ope rational 1974 1975 1 28 1 28 1116 2197 143 541 1017 1124 630 1369 1017 1124 . Operational 1977 '1978 1* 28 1. 20: ,'._ 674 848 351 126 591 3474 601 1896 633 2161 476 1011 Operational

• : 1980 1981 ' .. 1* 28' 1* 28* 1041 747 209 456 1523 448 2185 912 1282 598 1197 684 *.Operational*

.. ' ' .. 1983 1984 1 28 .. 1 .. 28* ... 3590 1314 2741 621 4172 4213 1341 828 3881 2764 2041 725

• Ooerati.onai

• ,. 1986 1987 -'1 *. 28 .. *1 28' 601 969 1971 2649 849 943 2910 2780 725 956 2440 2714 36

/ ', Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations 1 (Control) and 28 (Noncontrol), BVPS, 1973-2015 (Continued).

May September Mean '-May September Mean May September Mean May September Mean ',,-;,, , : (;)peratl<>nal

.* . .. . .. 1988 1989 1 . ,28. ' : 1 2B '* " 1804 1775 3459 2335 1420 1514 1560 4707 1612 1645 2510 3274 .. * . .. 1991 .. '1992 ... :.t .

• 26 ' ;

' *.28 7760 6355 7314 10560 3588 2605 2723 4707 5808 4480 5019 7634 . 1994 ' . 1995 . . . 6980 2349 8083 9283 1371 4176 2930 2640 1669 4876 3873 6578 1997 1998' 1411 2520 '6980 2349 1944 2774 1371 2930 1678 2647 4176 2640 , .. ,. ,, Ooeratfonal

• , .. .. ,. ,, __ 2000 2001 *1 . 28 .:*r .. *28 .. .. ... .: ,. .. May 2987 2881 3139 5232. September 3092 Mean 3040 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 2742 2812 3139 5232 37 ,._,., ; . ' " ,. . .. . . 1990 t .. 2B *. 15135 5796 5550* 1118 10343 3457 ** . r ... **" ,_, 1993 . 1 -... ;: ; ..

8435 2152 .4693 2143 6564 2148 1996 1987 1333 1649 2413 1814 1873

• 1999** ' .; 1

• 879 302 591 ' 'f 1548 8632 5090 2002 .. 1002 402 702 ."28. 2795 14663 8729 Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations 1 (Control) and 28 (Noncontrol), BVPS, 1973-2015 (Continued).

2003 1 2B May 7095 10750 September 2193 Mean 4644 .. . -' 2006 1 May 143 September 229 Mean 186 2009 1 May 71 September 903 Mean 487 . . _ . 2012 : -1. May 71 September 903 Mean 487 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 6464 8607 2B 1242 2199 1721 2B

• 1462 1902 1682 .213 1462 1902 1682 -Operational . -2004 2005 .1 2B 1 2B 2752 4558 516 1146 10062 7604 4773 6435 6407 6181 2645 3791 .Ooeratioriaf

• . --' . 2007 2008 1 -213 . 1 :2B . ' 559 912 158 1252 560 3794 1161 2150 560 2353 660 1701 ()perational

.-. ., . 2010 2011 1 .. 28. .. 1 :*28 1763 2527 115 1700 1720 1256 874 1233 1742 1892 495 1467 * *

• Operational

.. ., --2013 2014 1 2B 1 .-.2e 2107 903 1634 3149 373 1731 3526 7310 1240 1317 2580 5230 38 Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations 1 (Control) and 28 (Noncontrol), BVPS, 1973-2015 (Continued) . 2015 1 . ' May 673 September 979 Mean 826 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) . Oo.erational

.. . 28 , "* .... 2924 4343 3634 39 TABLE5.8 TOTAL FISH CATCH; ELECTROFISIDNG AND SEINE NET COMBINED DURING THE BVPS 2015 FISHERIES SURVEY Common Name Scientific Name Smallmouth buffalo Ictiobus bubalus Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Carp Cyprinis carpio Channel catfJSh Jctalurus punctatus Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides Flathead catfJSh PylOdictis olivaris Freshwater drum Aplodinotus wunniens Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum Goldfish Carassius auratus Golden redhorse sucker Moxostoma erythrurum Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus Mimic shiner Notropis volucellus Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Quillback Carpiodes cyprinus Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Shorthead redhorse sucker Moxostoma macrolepidotum Smallmouth bass Spotfm shiner Spotted bass Walleye !Total Fish Collected in 2015 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Micropterus dolomieu Notropis spilopterus Micropterus punctulatus Sander vitreum 40 Number I Percent 20 4.60 2 0.46 1 0.23 1 0.23 12 2.76 2 0.46 4 0.92 355 81.61 1 0.23 7 1.61 11 2.53 1 o.:p 3 0.69 1 0.23 1 0.23 3 0.69 7 1.61 1 0.23 1 0.23 1 0.23 I 435 I 100.00 I I I I TABLE5.9 COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL ELECTROFISIDNG CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 2015 FISHERIES SURVEY Common Name Control Smalhnouth buffalo Blue!rill Carp Chmmel catfish Flathead catfish Freshwater drum Gizzard shad Goldfish Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Pwnpkinseed Quillback Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Spotted bass Walleye Total 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 3 3 45 4 4 1 1 1 2 64 O/o 4.69 4.69 70.31 6.25 6.25 1.56 1.56 1.56 3.13 ioo.oo Non-control

% Total fish O/o 17 4.8 20 4.77 1 0.3 1 0.24 1 0.3 1 0.24 1 0.3 1 0.24 2 0.6 2 0.48 1 0.3 4 0.95 310 87.3 355 84.73 1 0.3 1 0.24 3 0.8 7 1.67 7 2.0 11 2.63 2 0.6 3 0.72 1 0.3 1 0.24 1 0.24 2 0.6 3 0.72 4 1.1 6 1.43 1 0.3 1 0.24 1 0.3 1 0.24 355 100.0 419 100.00 41 TABLES.10 COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL SEINE CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 2015 FISHERIES SURVEY Common Name Control Bluegill Emerald shiner Mimic shiner Smallmouth bass S otfin shiner Total 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 1 6 1 1 0 % 11.11 0 0.00 66.67 6 85.71 11.11 0 0.00 11.11 0 0.00 0.00 1 14.29 100.00 7 100.00 42 otal fish 1 12 1 1 % 6.25 75.00 6.25 6.25 TABLE 5.11 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE MAY2015 (SPRING) SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Ele ctrofJS bing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B Smalhnouth buffulo 1 1 Bluegill Carp 1 Chann'e! catfish Emerald shiner Flathead catfish 1 Freshwater drum 3 Gizzard shad Goldfish 1 Golden redhorse sucker 4 2 1 Longnose gar 1 3 2 Mimic shiner Plllllpkinseed Quillback 1 Rock bass 1 Shorthead redhorse sucker 2 Smalhnouth bass 1 1 Spotfin shiner Spotted bass I Walleye 1 Total 0 0 11 12 6

• Gear= (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 43 E-3 Total % Total % 0 -2 6.67 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 3.33 0 -0 0.00 I 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 3.33 0 -3 10.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 3.33 0 -7 23.33 0 -6 20.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 3.33 0 -1 3.33 0 -2 6.67 1 0 -3 10.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 3.33 0 -1 3.33 1 0 -30 100.00 TABLES.12 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE JULY (SUMMER) 2015 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Electro fishing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B Smalhnouth buffalo 1 Bluegill Carp Channel catfish Emerald shiner Flathead catfISh 1

• Freshwater drum Gizzard shad 9 GoldfISh Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar 2 Mimic shiner Pumpkinseed Quillback Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Spotfm shiner Spotted bass Walleye j Total 0 0 3 9 1

• Gear= (E) Fish captured by electro fishing; (S) captured by seining 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 44 E-3 I I 2 Total % Total % 0 -1 6.67 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -I 6.67 0 -0 0.00 0 -60.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 .. 0 -2 13.33 0 -0 0.00 0 -I 6.67 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -I 6.67 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -15 100.00

' TABLES.13 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE SEPTEMBER (FALL) 2015 SAMPLING OF THE omo RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B Smalhnouth buffalo Bluegill 1 Carp Channel catfish Emerald shiner Flathead catfJSh . Freshwater druni Gizzard shad 45 30 43 Goldfish Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar 1 Mimic shiner Pumpkinseed 1 1 Quillback Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Spotfm shiner Spotted bass Walleve Total 0 0 47 31 44

• Gear= (E) Fish captured by electro fishing; (S) captured by seining 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 45 Seine Ele ctrofis bing E-3 Total % Total O/o 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 0.34 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 168 ,, 0 286 98.28 0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 1 7-0 -2 0.69 0 -0 0.00 ... 0 -2 0.69 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 169 0 -291 10 I FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE NOVEMBER (WINTER) 2015 SAMPLING OF THE omo RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B Smalhnouth buffalo 1 1 15 Bluegill 1 Carp Channel catf1Sh 1 Emerald shiner 6 6 Flathead catf!Sh Freshwater drum 1 Gizzard shad 55 1 ' Goldf!Sh Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Mimic shiner 1 1. Pumpkinseed I Quillback Rock bass I Shorthead redhorse sucker 1 Smalhnouth bass 1 1 1 Spotfm shiner 1 Spotted bass I Walleye I Total 9 7 3 56 19

• Gear= (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 46 E-3 4 1 5 Seine Electro fishing Total % Total % 0 0.00 17 20.48 1 6.25 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 ' 0 0.00 1 1.20 12 75.00 ,. 0 0.00 0 0.00 b 0.00 . 0 0.00 1 1.20 0 0.00 60 72.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 I 1.20 1 6.25 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 11' 0 0.00 1 1.20 ,. I 6.25 2 2.41 ,. I 6.25 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 16 100.00 83 100.00 TABLE5.15 ESTIMATED NUMBER OF FISH OBSERVED*

DURING ELECTROFISHING OPERATIONS, 2015 Common Name Bluegill Freshwater drum Smalhnouth buffitlo Longnose gar Unidentified suckers Unidentified black bass Gizzard shad Total * =Not boated or handled 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) May 1 1 2 4 Julv Sept Nov 1 1 1 I I I 200+ 3 1 200+ 47 Total 1 1 1 2 3 2 200+ 210+

I , Table 5.16 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISIDNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2012 FISHERIES SURVEY Se?.son Effort (min) Common Name Spring 40.l Smallmouth buffalo Channel catfish Common carp Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Smallmouth bass Season Total Season Effort (min) Common Naµie Summer 40.l Smalhnouth buffalo Common carp Gizzard shad Largemouth bass Smallmouth bass Season Total 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 48 Number CPUE (fIShlmin)

Collected 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 5 0.1247 5 0.1247 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 5 0.1247 3 0.0748 23 0.5736 Number CPUE (fISh/min)

Collected*

5 0.1247 , 1 0.0249 8 0.1995 1 0.0249 3 0.0748 18 0.4489 Table 5.16 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2012 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (miµ) Common Name. Fall 40.1 Smalhnouth buffitlo Black crappie ' Common carp Freshwater drwn -Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Largemouth bass Quillback Rock bass Sauger Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Spotted bass White bass Season Total Season Effort (filin) Common Name Winter 30 Smalhnouth buffitlo Freshwater drwn Golden shiner Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Walleye White bass Season Total 2012 150.3 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Number CPUE (fJSh/min)

Collected 4 0.0998 1 0.0249 2 0.0499 1 0.0249 10 0.2494 3 0.0748 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 3 0.0748 2 0.0499 1 0.0249 6 0.1496 37 0.9227 Number CPUE*(fJSh/min)

Collected 1 0.0333 1 0.0333 1 0.0333 3 0.1000 2 0.0667 1 0.0333 1 0.0333 10 0.3333 88 . 0.58550 49 Table 5.17 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISIDNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2013 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Common Name Spring 40.4 Smallmouth buffulo Black crappie Bluegill Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Pumpkinseed Quillback River carpsubker Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Season Effort (min) Summer 40.0 / 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Smallmouth bass Spotted bass Season Total Common Name Smallmouth buffulo Black crappie Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Sauger s*mallmouth bass Season Total 50 Number CPUE (fish/min)

Collected I 0.0248 1 0.0248 1 0.0248 1 0.0248 8 0.1980 2 0.0495 1 0.0248 2 0.0495 2 0.0495 I 0.0248 10 0.2475 7 0.1733 2 0.0495 39 0.9653 Number, CPUE {fish/min)

Collected 3 0.0750 I 0.0250 I 0.0250 3 0.0750 1 0.0250 2 0.0500 11 0.2750 I I i I I Table 5.17 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISHIELECTROFISIDNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2013 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Efforf(min)

Common Name -Nnniber CPUE (fish/min)

Fall 40.4 Bluegill 2 0.0495 Channel catfish 1 0.0248 Flathead catfish 1 0.0248 Freshwater drum 1 0.0248 Gizzard shad 1 0.0248 Golden redhorse sucker 2 0.0495 Longnose gar 1 0.0248 River carpsucker 1 0.0248 Smalhnouth bass 1 0.0248 Spotted bass 1 0.0248 Walleye 1 0.0248 Season Total 13 0.3218 Number .-I Season Effort (min) -Comnion Name Collected CPU£ (fish/min)

Winter 40.1 Bluegill 1 0.0249 Channel catfish-1 0.0249 Freshwater drum 1 0.0249 Golden redhorse sucker 6 0.1496 Rock bass 3 0.0748 Shorthead redhorse sucker 7 0.1746 Smalhnouth 2 0.0499 Yellow perch 1 0.0249 Season Total 22 0.5486 11 2013 I 160.9 I 1-85 -I 0.52828 . 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 51 I Table 5.18 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISIIlNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2014 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Spring 40.4 Season Effort (ritin) Summer 40.l 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Common Name Smalhnouth buffitlo Carp Channel catfish Freshwater drum Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar River carpsucker Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Spotted bass Walleye Season Total Common Name Smallmouth buffitlo Carp Gizzard shad Longnose gar Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Season Total 52 Number CPUE (fish/min)

Collected 3 0.0743 2 0.0495 2 0.0495 2 0.0495 12 0.2970 3 0.0743 4 0.0990' 1 0.0248 4 0.0990 4 0.0990 2 0.0495 5 0.1238 44 1.0891 Number CPUE (fish/min)

Collected 6 0.1496 1 0.0249 14 0.3491 1 0.0249 3 0.0748 1 0.0249 26 0.6484 Table 5.18 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISlllNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2014 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Fall 40.0 Season Effort (min) Winter 40.0 ' 2014 160.5 20 15 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Common Name Carp Gizzard shad Largemouth bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Yellow perch Season Total Common Name Smallmouth buffalo Bluegill Carp Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Shorthead redhorse sucker

• Smallmouth bass Season Total 53 Number CPUE (fish/min)

Collected 4 0.1000 26 0.6500 1 0.0250 2 0.0500 1 0.0250 34 0.8500 Number CPUE (fish/min)

Collected

'4 0.1000 1 0.0250 6 0.1500 13 0.3250 4 0.1000 4 0.1000 1 0.0250 1 0.0250 34 0.8500 138 0.85981 Table 5.19 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISIDNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2015 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Common Name Spring 41.5 Smalhnouth buffalo Caro Flathead catfish Freshwater drum Goldfish Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Quillback Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Season Effort (min) Swnmer 40.7 -2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Smalhnouth bass Spotted bass Walleye Season Total Common Name Smalhnouth buffalo Flathead catfish Gizzard shad Lommose Emr Pumnkinseed Smalhnouth bass Season Total 54 Number CPUE Collected ff IS hf min) 2 0.0482 1 0.0241 1 0.0241 3 0.0723 1 0.0241 7 0.1687 6 0.1446 1 0.0241 1 0.0241 2 0.0482 3 0.0723 1 0.0241 1 0.0241 30 0.7229 Number CPUE Collected (fIShfmin) 1 0.0246 1 0.0246 9 0.2211 2 0.0491 1 0.0246 1 0.0246 15 0.3686 Table 5.19 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2015 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Common Name Fall 40.9 Bluegill Gizzard shad Longnose gar Pumpkinseed Season Total Season Effort (min) Common Name Winter 40.6 Smalhnouth buffalo Channel catfish Freshwater dnnn Gizzard shad Longnose gar Shorthead redhorse sucker I 2015 I '163.7 I 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Smalhnouth bass Season Total 55 Number CPU:E Collected (fish/min) 1 0.0244 286 6.9927 2 0.0489 2 0.0489 291 7.1149 Number CPUE Collected I j'j., -17 0.4187 1 0.0246 1 0.0246 60 1.4778 1 0.0246 1 0.0246 2 0.0493 83 2.0443 I 419 I 2.55956 I TABLES.20 UNIT 1 COOLING RESERVOIR MONTHLY SAMPLING CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR 2015 FROM BVPS Area Collection Sampled Live or Date (sq ft) 3/30/2015 0.25 4/21/2015 0.25 5/28/2015 0.25 6/23/2015 0.25 7/30/2015 0.25 8/28/2015 0.25 9/17/2015 0.25 10114/2015 0.25 11/5/2015 0.25 Unit summary 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Dead Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Maximum Length Count Ran2e (mm) 1 2.00-3.34 3 2.00-3.34 0 --0 --2 4.75-6.29 2 3.35-4.74 1 2.00-3.34 2 3.35-4.74 2 2.00-3.34 2 4.75-6.29 2 6.30-9.94 3 >9.50 3 6.30-9.94 1 3.35-4.74 0 --0 ---0 --0 --11 6.30-9.94 13 >9.50 56 Minimum Estimated Length Number Ran2e(mm) (oer sq m) 2.00-3.34 43 1.00-1.99 129 ---0 ---0 3.35-4.74 86 2.00-3.34 86 2.00-3.34 43 2.00-3.34 86 2.00-3.34 86 2.00-3.34 86 6.30-9.94 86 4.75-6.29 129 4.75-6.29 129 3.35-4.74 43 --0 ---0 ---0 ---0 2.00-3.34 53 1.00-1.99 62 TABLES.21 UNIT 2 COOLING RESERVOIR MONTHLY SAMPLING CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR 2015 FROM BVPS Area Collection Sampled Live or Date (SQ ft) Dead 3/30/2015 0.25 Dead Live 4/21/2015 0.25 Dead Live ' 5/28/2015 0.25 Dead Live 6/23/2015 0.25 Dead Live Dead 7/30/2015 0.25 Live 8/28/2015 0.25 Dead Live 9/17/2015 0.25 Dead Live Dead 10/14/2015*

---Live 11/5/2015 0.25 Dead Live Unit summary Dead Live *Not sampled due to outage 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Maximum Length Range Count (mm) 1 1.00-1.99 2 3.35-4.74 0 0 -1 2.00-3.34 1 2.00-3.34 1 3.35-4.74 0 _\ 0 2 >9.50 1 6.30-9.94 3 4.75-6.29

---

0 3 4.75-6.29 9 >9.50 57 Minimum Estimated Length Number Ran!!e(mm) (per sqm) 1.00-1.99 43 2.00-3.34 86 --0 --0 --0 2.00-3.34 43 2.00-3.34 43 3.35-4.74 43 --0 -0 2.00-3.34 86 6.30-9.94 43 2.00-3.34 129 -----------0 --0 2.00-3.34 16 1.00-1.99 48 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 9.0 FIGURES 58

'OOOMlet e u t-----1 Figure 5.1 2015 Beaver Valley Power Station Aquatic Monitoring Program Sampling Control and Non-Control Sampling Stations 2015 Annual Enviro n me n ta l Report FENOC (BVPS) 59 LEGEND jBcnthic sample site --*----* .. -.;_ .s111pp1ngpo11 Mag HOO Thu.,.,, 15 10: 23 1997 Scale 1 : 31 , 250 (at ctnl.,I 2000FHt r---,__1ooo_Met_er* -* .. ---*-Figure 5.2 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Benthic Organism Survey Sampling Sites for the 2015 Study 2015 Annual Env ironmental Report 60 FENOC (BVPS)

LEGEND D site " Seine site *Shippingport Mag 14.00 Thu Jan 18 10:1-4 1997 Sc.-.1: 31 , 250(A& unlet) 2000 Fttl >----* ,, *I fOOOMerC!ra r--*. --.. -*I Figure 5.3 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Fish Population Survey Fish Sampling Sites for the 2015 Study 2015 Annual Environmenta l Report FENOC (BVPS) 61 Figure 5.4 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Meg1.f.OO Mon Mw 17 12: "511197 Scale 1 :62,500 (ol cent<<) 1Mllw 2 l<M O 199S OcUinno Location of Study Area , Beaver Valley Power Station Shippingport , Pennsylvania BVPS 62 Comparison of live Corbicula clam density estimates among 2015 BVPS Unit 1 cooling tower reservoir events, for various clam shell groups. 500 °" 450 w ti; 400 ::: "' w 350 a. i 300 250 200 u.. 0 "' 150 w "' :; 100 ::::> z 50 0 3130 9 0.01-0.99 mm a 1.00-1.99 mm *2.00-3.34 mm 3. 35-4. 7 4 mm 6.30-9.49 mm a>9.50mm TOTAL #lm2 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 0 86 43 0 0 0 0 129 ..,.,, 5128 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 86 .&:::;' .&:::;' c::7 ,..., ..,.,, ..,.,, ,..., ,..., ..,.,, 6123 7130 8128 9117 10114 1115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 86 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 43 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Figure 5.5 0 0 43 0 0 0 86 86 86 43 0 0 63 SIZE RANGE Comparison of live Corbicula clam density estimates among 2015 BVPS Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir events, for various clam shell groups. ct: :ii 500 a: w Q. 450 < ...J 400 ::i u 350 iii a: 0 300 u u. 250 0 a: 200 w Ill 150 :ii ::i z 100 50 0 .., .., 4121 MB

• 0.01-0. 99 mm 0 0 c 1.00-1.99mm 0 0 0 11 2.00-3. 34 mm 43 0 43 3.35-4. 7 4 mm 43 0 0 *4.75-6.29mm 0 0 0 6.30-9.49 mm 0 0 0 c>9.50mm 0 0 0 TOTAL #An2 86 0 43 *No sample; Unit 2 Offline in October 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 0 0 43 0 0 0 43 TO T AL* m.2 .c::::7 .c::::7 C=:7 .., .., .., .., SIZE RANGE .., ,.., ,.., ,.., ,.., C=:7 C=:7 ,.., .., .., .., .., 7/JO 8128 9117 10/14" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 43 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 86 129 0 0 Figure 5.6 64 Comparison of live Corbicula clam density estimates among 2015 BVPS Intake Structure sample events, for various clam shell groups. <( ...I :::> 0 iii 0:: 0 0 IL. 0 0:: w al ::!: :::> z 2 0 0.01-0.99 mm 01.00-1.99 mm *2.00-3.34 mm a 3.35-4.74 mm *4.75-6.29 mm 06.30-9.4 9 mm *>9.50mm oTOTAL 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 7 1 30 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 6 7 16 9 26 17 65 SIZE RANGE 9 1 11 / 17 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 I n take structure bottom samples are 1 3 co ll ected from the Ohio River at the Intake Build i ng 3 2 5 11 6 Figure 5.7 Water Temperature and River Elevation Recorded at the Ohio River at BVPS Intake Structure During 2015 on Monthly Sample Dates. 80 70 !!:. e ., a. 60 ... ., 50 40 30 3/18 Figure 5.8 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 4121 5128 676 674 672 670 668 600 --------temp -elevation 664 6/23 7130 8/2 8 9/17 10/14 11/5 2015 Monthly Sample Datea 66 m < g 35000 30000 250 00 20000 !'l 5 :tt 15000 10000 5000 0 In iake Structure Open \Vater 1!14 1 21 0 0 5: 28 :!7000 0 6/23 960 *7 1 30 429 08 1 28 650 *9*17 ::0100 010 14 105 l:nit 1 Cooling To wer Rese1Yoir 0 15850 300 6561 4198 120 1462 Sample location l:nit 2 Coolin2 Tower 0 30500 300 6691 12702 5025 0 Figure 5.9. Density of zebra mussel veligers collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2015. *Unit 2 Cooling Tower not sampled in October due to outage 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 67 18000 16000 14000 12000 .... 10000 s '.it 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Bar ge Slip* 0 05/28 495 06/23 1220 *7 1 30 1728 0 8/28 5290 *9 1 17 7125 D 10/14 0 Splash Pool 0 8015 1710 8820 5415 1440 13 Sample location Emergency Outfall Facility** 0 15600 720 2835 3625 12250 18 Figure 5.10. Density of zebra mussel veligers collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2015. *Barge Slip not sampled in October due to Access Restrictions

• • EOB not sampled in April due to Access Restrictions 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 68 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 N 5 6.0 '.it 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 B3/30 05/2 8 06/2 3 0 7/30 08/2 8 11 9/I 7

• 10 114

• 11/5 Intake Structure/Open Water 1.3 2.7 2.7 0.4 3.1 7.6 10.8 0.9 2.2 Unit 1 Cooling To w er Reser v oir 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reser v oir* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Figure 5.11. Density of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2015. *Unit 2 Cooling tower not sampled in October due to outage 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 69 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 M 35.00 = 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 Emergency Outfall Barge Slip** Splash Pool Facility* 1:123 1 30 8.52 0.00 0.00 04/21 8.52 0.00 0.00 05/28 17.04 0.00 0.00 *6 1 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 *7 1 30 26.46 0.00 0.00 *8 1 28 60.99 0.00 0.00 *9 1 1 7 17.04 0.00 0.00 Cl 10/14 0.00 0.00 0.00 D 11/5 14.80 0.00 0.00 Figure 5.12. Density of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2015. *The EOF was not sampled in March due to Access Restrictions

• • The Barge Slip was not sampled in October due to Access Restrictions 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 70 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 10.0 PERMITS 71 Attachment 10.1: PERMITS & CERTIFICATES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE Registration Number Regulator/Description Expiration BVPS EPA generator identification Resource Conservation

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

Also used by PA DEP Indefinite P AR000040485 to monitor regulated waste activity under the Pennsylvania Solid Waste Management Act (SWMA). 04-02474 BVPS EPA Facility Identification Number for CERCLA/EPCRA/SARA.

Used for Indefinite SARA Tier II reporting and emergency planning.

FE Long Term Distribution Center/Warehouse (22) EPA Facility Identification 02475 Number for CERCLAIEPCRA/SARA.

Used for SARA Tier II reporting and Indefinite emergency planning.

12/27/2006 Continued PA0025615 BVPS NPDES Permit number under US EPA and PA DEP. pending approval of renewal application.

04-13281 BVPS Unit I PA DEP Facility Identification

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

& certificate number for regulated Indefinite storage tanks. OP-04-00086 PA DEP State Only Synthetic Minor Permit for emergency auxiliary boilers, 04/28/2020 emergency diesel generators, paint shop and other miscellaneous sources. NIA PA DEP Open Burning Permit for operation of the BVPS Fire School-annual 01101/2017 application and renewal 042009 450 002RT US Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Registration 06/30/2018 200100242 US Army Permit for maintenance dredging (With Encroachment/Submerged Lands 12/31/2021 Agreement

1. 0477705, this allows maintenance dredging.), Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for construction and 0477705 maintenance of current barge slip. (With US Army Permit #200100242, this allows Indefinite maintenance dredging.)

06786A Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for transmission line over Ohio Indefinite River (a2 Mile 34.5 18737 Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for Unit 1 intake and discharge Indefinite (main combined intake and outfall structures) 0475711 Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for construction and Indefinite maintenance of Unit 2 auxiliary intake -End Table-APPENDIX A SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME 1 OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2015 BVPS 1 Nomenclature follows Robins, et al. (1991)

Appendix A SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME 1 OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2015 BVPS Family and Scientific Name Common Name Lepisosteidae (gars) Lepisosteus osseus Longnose gar Hiodontidae (mooneyes)

Hiodon a/osoides Goldeye H. tergisus Moon eye Clupeidae (herrings)

Alosa chrysoch/oris Skipjack herring A.pseudoharengus Alewife Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard shad Cyprinidae (carps and minnows) Campostoma anomalum Central stoneroller Carassius auratus Goldfish Ctenopharyngodon idel/a Grass carp Notropis spilopterus Spotfin shiner Cyprinus carpio Common carp C. carpio x C. auratus Carp-goldfish hybrid Luxilus chrysocepha/us Striped shiner Macrhybopsis storeriana Silver chub Nocomis micropogon River chub Notemigonus crysoleucas Golden shiner Notropis atherinoides Emerald shiner N. buccatus Silverjaw minnow N. hudsonius Spottail shiner N. rubellus Rosyface shiner N. stramineus Sand shiner N. vo/ucel/us Mimic shiner Pimepha/es notatus Bluntnose minnow P. promelas Fathead minnow Rhinichthys atratulus Blacknose dace Semotifus atromaculatus -Creek chub Catostomidae (suckers)

Carpiodes carpio River carpsucker C. cyprinus Quillback C. velifer Highfin carpsucker Catostomus commersonii White sucker Hypentelium nigricans Northern hogsucker

/ctiobus buba/us Smallmouth buffalo I. niger Black buffalo Minytrema melanops Spotted sucker Page 1 of3 Family and Scientific Name Moxostoma anisurum M. carinatum M. duquesnei M. erythrurum M. macrolepidotum lctaluridae (bullhead catfishes)

Ameiurus catus A. furcatus A. me/as A. natalis A. nebulosus

/ctalurus punctatus Noturus f/avus Py/odictis o/ivaris Esocidae (pikes) Esox /ucius E. masquinongy E. /ucius x E. masquinongy Salmonidae (trouts) Oncorhynchus mykiss Percopsidae (trout-perches)

Percopsis omiscomaycus Cyprinodontidae (killifishes)

Fundu/us diaphanus Atherinidae (silversides)

Labidesthes siccu/us Percichthyidae (temperate basses) Marone chrysops M. saxatilis M. saxatilis x M. chrysops Centrarchidae (sunfishes)

Ambloplites rupestris Lepomis cyanellus L. gibbosus L. macrochirus L. microlophus L. gibbosus x L. micro/ophus Appendix A (Continued)

Common Name Silver redhorse River redborse Black redhorse Golden redhorse Shorthead redhorse White catfish Blue catfish Black bullhead Yellow bullhead Brown bullhead Channel catfish Stonecat Flathead catfish Northern pike Muskellunge Tiger muskellunge Rainbow trout Trout-perch Banded killifish Brook silverside White bass Striped bass Striped bass hybrid Rock bass Green sunfish Pumpkinseed Bluegill Redearsunfish Pumpkinseed-redear sunfish hybrid Page 2 of3 Family and Scientific Name Micropterus do/omieu M. punctulatus M. sa/moides Pomoxis annularis P. nigromacu/atus Percidae (perches)

Etheostoma blennioides E. nigrum E. zona/e Perea f/avescens Percina caprodes P. copelandi Sandercanadense S. vitreum S. canadense x S. vitreum Sciaenidae (drums) Aplodinotus grunniens 1 Nomenclature follows Robins, et al. (1991) Appendix A (Continued)

Common Name Smallmouth bass Spotted bass Largemouth bass White crappie Black crappie Greenside darter Johnny darter Banded darter Yellow perch Log perch Channel darter Sauger Walleye Saugeye Freshwater drum Page 3 of 3 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 2 -ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM I. Estimates of Radiation Dose to Man 1. Pathways to Man -Calculation Models RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 The radiation doses to man as a result of BVPS operations were calculated for both gaseous and liquid effluent pathways using computer codes for the ARERAS/MIDAS computer system. These computer codes are equivalent to NRC computer codes XOQDOQ2, GASPAR , and LADT AP. Dose factors listed in the ODCM are used to calculate doses from radioactive noble gases in discharge plumes. BVPS effluent data, based on sample analysis were used as the radionuclide activity input. All liquid and gaseous effluent radionuclides listed in the Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report were used as input source terms to the computer codes. All batch and continuous gaseous effluent releases were included in the dose assessment calculations.

The release activities are based on laboratory analysis.

Meteorological data collected by the BVPS Meteorology System was also used as input to the computer codes. The usage factors were obtained from the BVPS Final Environmental Statements or Regulatory Guide 1.109 , except when more recent or specific data was available.

All radioactive liquid effluents are released by batch mode after analysis by gamma spectrometry. Each batch is diluted by cooling tower blowdown water prior to discharge into the Ohio River via the main outfall (River Mile 35.0). The actual data from these analyses are tabulated and used as the radionuclide source term input to the computer code. The usage factors were obtained from the BVPS Final Environmental Statements or Regulatory Guide 1.109 , except when more recent or specific data was available. The total population doses were evaluated for all liquid and gaseous effluent pathways up to 50 miles. For these evaluations, a total population of approximately 4 million people was used. An estimate of the populations are listed in the BVPS-2 UFSAR Section 2.1.3.1 for 0-10 miles and Section 2.1.3.2 for I 0-50 miles. 2. Results of Calculated Population Dose to Man -Liquid Effluent Releases During the report period , the calculated dose to the entire population within 50 miles of the plant is presented in Table 2-4 for BVPS liquid effluent releases. Also shown in the Table 2-6 is a comparison to natural radiation exposure.

3. Results of Calculated Population Dose to Man -Gaseous Effluent Releases During the report period , the calculated dose to the entire population within 50 miles of the plant is presented in Table 2-5 for BVPS airborne effluent releases.

Also shown in the Table 2-6 is a comparison to natural radiation exposure. The doses include the contribution of all pathways. 2-64 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 2 -ENVIRONMENT AL MONITORING PROGRAM 4. Conclusions RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 Bas e d upon the e s tim a ted dose to individuals from the natural background radiation exposur e in Tables 2-4 and 2-5 , the incremental increase in total body dose to the 50-mile population from the operation of BVPS -Unit 1 and 2 , is less than 0.0000025%

of the annual background dose. The calculated doses to the public from the operation of BVPS -Unit 1 and 2 , are below ODCM annual limits and resulted in only a small incremental dose to that which area residents already received as a result of natural background.

The doses constituted no meaningful risk to the public. 2-65 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 2 -ENVIRONMENT AL MONITORING PROGRAM Table 2-4: Calculated Population Dose to Man Liquid Effluent Releases 0-50 mile Population Dose from BVPS Liquid Effluent Releases Man-millirem Largest Isotope Contributor Total Dose 141 Tritium Average Dose 0.0000351 Tritium (per Individual)

Comparison of Individual Dose BVPS Liquid Effluent Releases Versus Natural and Medical Radiation Exposure Milli rem BVPS Liquid Effluent Release Dose 0.0000351 Radiation Exposure 620 Table 2-5: Calculated Population Dose to Man Gaseous Effluent Releases RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 0-50 mile Population Dose from BVPS Gaseous Effluent Releases Man-millirem Largest Isotope Contributor Total Dose 41 Tritium Average Dose 0.0000103 Tritium (per Individual)

Comparison of Individual Dose BVPS Gaseous Effluent Releases Versus Natural and Medical Radiation Exposure Milli rem BVPS Gaseous Effluent Release Dose 0.0000103 Radiation Exposure 620 2-66 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 SECTION 2 -ENVIRONMENT AL MONITORING PROGRAM Table 2-6: Natural and Medical Radiation Exposures TYPICAL DOSE TO INDIVIDUALS FROM RADIATION EXPOSURE (a) Ubiquitous background Internal, inhalation Internal, ingestion External, space External , terrestrial Medical CT Nuclear medicine Interventional tluoroscopy Conventional radiography Consumer Industrial, security , educational, research Occupational Average Individual (Total from all sources shown above) 311 millirem I year 228 millirem I year 29 millirem I year 33 millirem I year 21 millirem I year 300 millirem I year 147 millirem I year 77 millirem I year 43 millirem I year 33 millirem I year 13 millirem I year 0.3 millirem I yea r 0.5 millirem I year 620 millirem I year (a) NCRP Report No. 160: Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States." Journal of Radiological Protection J Radio/. Prat. 29.3 (2009) 2-67 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 3 -LAND USE CENSUS RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 A. Land Use Census Overview:

A Land Use Census was conducted June I through September I , 2015 to comply with:

• Offsite Dose Calculation Manual procedure l/2-0DC-3.03, "C ontrols for RETS and REMP Programs", Attachment R , Control 3.12.2 , and Surveillance Requirement 4.12.2.1

• BVPS REMP procedure l/2-ENV-04.02 , " Milch Animal Sampling Location Determination

& ODCM Procedure 112-0DC-J 03 , Control 3.12.2 Action Statements a and b Compliance Determination" The Land Use Census indicated that no changes were required in the current sampling locations , and no changes were required to the methodology used for determination of offsite dose from plant releases. A numerical summary of the Land Use Census results are provided in Table 3-1. The following information is also provided to clarify the Land Use Census as documented in letter NPD3NRE: 1125 , dated December 23 , 2015: B. Nearest Residence:

The location has not changed since the previous census. The nearest inhabited residence is at 209 Ferry Hill Road, Shippingport, PA (0.4 miles, E). C. Nearest Garden >500 sgft: The location has not changed since the previous census. The closest garden location is at the Pringle Residence, 1221 Virginia Ave., Mid land , PA ( 1.0 miles , in the NW Sector). The previous sampling location at the Cox Residence, 238 State Route 168 , Hookstown , PA (0.760 miles , in the SSW Sector) was available for sampling cabbage this year but does not meet all the requirements of NUREG-130 I Ref (h) D. Nearest Dairv Cow: The location has changed since the previous census. Searight Dairy, 948 McCleary Road , RD I , Hookstown , PA (2.097 miles , SSW) closed in 2014. Therefore , the closest milking cow location is Brunton Dairy , 3681 Ridge Road , Aliquippa , PA (6.158 miles , SE). E. Nearest Doe Goat: The location has not changed since the previous census.

The closest location is the Covert Residence, 930 Pine Street, Hookstown, PA (1.900 miles , SW). 3-1 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 3 -LAND USE CENSUS RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 F. Projection for 2015 Dairy Cow Sampling Locations:

Using a linear regression anal y sis of deposition parameters (D/Q), Dairy Cow sampling location s were determined to remain at the s ame locations used in 2015: Brunton Dairy , 3681 Ridge Road , Aliquippa, PA (6.158 miles SE) Windsheimer Dairy , 20 Windsheimer Lane , Burgettstown, PA (10.476 miles SSW) G. Projection for 2015 Doe Goat Sampling Locations:

The linear regression analysis also indicated that there will be a Doe Goat sampling location in 2015. The Doe Goat sampling locat i on for 2015 may be as follows if Goat Milk continues to be available from this site: Covert Residence , 930 Pine Street , Hookstown PA (1.900 miles , SW) H. D/Q for Milch Animal Locations:

None of the 2015 milch animal sampling locations experienced a >20% increase in D/Q. Therefore , a Special Report per ODCM procedure 1/2-0DC-3.03 , Attachment R , Control 3.12.2 Action " a" and/or Action " b" was not required. I. D/Q for Offsite Dose Determination:

There was no adverse effect on the current ODCM methodology used for offsite dose determination from effluent releases.

Specifically , the analysis of D/Q did not yield any valid locations where the offsite dose could have increased

>20% of the offsite dose previously calculated using current ODCM methodology.

Therefore, a Special Report per ODCM Control 3.12.2 Action " a" and/or Action " b" is not required.

J. D/Q Historical Comparison:

There is no adverse trend in D/Q when comparing 2000 to 2015 data to the ODCM default D/Q values. This validates that there is no adverse effect on the current ODCM methodology used for offsite dose determination from effluent releases. Specifically , the analysis of D/Q did not yield any valid locations where the offsite dose could have increased

>20% of the offsite dose previously calculated using current ODCM methodology. Therefore , a change in ODCM receptor location and/or a change to meteorology at the current ODCM receptor location are not required.

3-2 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 3 -LAND USE CENSUS Table 3-1 RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 Location of Nearest Residences, Gardens, Dairy Cows and Doe Goats DAIRY SECTOR RESIDENCES GARDENS cows DOE GOATS 0 to 5 miles 0 to 5 miles 0 to 5 miles 0 to 5 miles (miles) (miles) (miles) (miles) N 1.584 1.584 None None NNE 1.661 1.8 None None NE 0.4 3.3 None None ENE 0.603 1.047 None None E 0.4 b 2.1 None 3.402 ESE 0.850 1.713 None None SE 1.583 1.3 None a None SSE 1.102 None None None s 1.399 1.5 None None SSW 0.760 2.215 b None None SW 1.453 1.453 None 1.900 WSW 1.394 2.5 None None w 2.204 None None None WNW 2.742 2.8 None None NW 0.885 1.0 None None NNW 0.902 2.4 2.442 None a Although there are no Dairy Cows within 5 miles in this sector, a large local dairy located at 6.158 miles is included in the milk sampling program. b Distances shown in Bold print are the nearest location for that receptor.

3-3 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 A. Split Sample Program (Inter-Laboratory Comparison, Part 1 of 2): BVPS participates in a split s ample program with the Penns y lvania Department of E nvironmental Protection (PADEP) in support of their nuclear power plant monitoring program.

• BVPS provided split samples to PADEP throughout the report period. The shared media and number of locations were typically comprised of milk (1), surface water (3), sediment ( 1 ), fish ( 1 ), and food crops (2).

• PADEP has co-located continuous air particulate

& air iodine sample stations with four (4) of the BVPS locations.

• PADEP has co-located TLDs with twenty-four (24) of the BVPS TLDs. B. Spike Sample Program (Inter-Laboratory Comparison, Part 2 of 2): BVPS participates in a spike sample program with an Independent Laboratory.

This program i s used to independently verify sample analyses performed by the BVPS Contractor Laboratory.

• Acceptance Criteria:

The NRC criteria listed in NRC Inspection Procedure 84750 , 03/15/94 , Inspection Guidance 84750-03 is used as acceptance criteria for comparisons of results of spiked samples between the Contractor Lab and the Independent Lab. These comparisons are performed by dividing the comparison standard (Independent Lab result) by its associated uncertainty to obtain the resolution. The comparison standard value is multiplied by the ratio values obtained from the following table to find the acceptance band for the result to be compared.

However , in such cases in which the counting precision of the standard yields a resolution of Jess than 4 , a valid comparison is not practical, and therefore , not performed.

NRC Criteria Resolution Ratio <4 --4-7 0.50 -2.00 8 -15 0.60 -1.66 16 -50 0.75 -1.33 51 -200 0.80 -1.25 > 200 0.85 -1.18 4-1 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 Participation in an Inter-Laboratory Comparison Program is required by BVPS Unit 1 and 2 Offsite Dose Calculation Manual procedure l/2-0DC-3.03 Attachment S Control 3.12.3. For the report period, the requirement was met by the Contractor Lab analyzing NIST traceable spiked samples supplied by an Independent Lab. During the report period , BVPS used (Environmental, Inc., Midwest Laboratory

-Northbrook, IL) as the Contractor Laboratory , and (Eckert & Ziegler Analytics

-Atlanta , GA) as the Independent Laboratory. The spiked samples included air particulate filter papers, charcoal cartridges, water samples, and milk samples. The samples were submitted by the Independent Laboratory to the Contractor Laboratory for analysis. The " spiked to" values were used for calculating comparison Acceptance Criteria.

• Spiked Milk & Water Samples: The spiked sample results (i.e. the BVPS criteria) for each calendar quarter are reported in Table 4-1 through Table 4-4 , respectively.

The following summary is provided:

A total of forty-eight ( 48) gamma spectrometry radionuclide analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on four (4) milk samples. A total of forty-eight ( 48) gamma spectrometry radionuclide analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on four (4) water samples. A total of four (4) chemical analyses for 1-131 were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on four (4) milk samples. A total of four (4) I-131 analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on four (4) water samples. A total of four ( 4) tritium analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on four (4) water samples. Comparison of results of the spiked milk and water samples showed acceptable agreement with the NRC acceptance criteria.

All one hundred eight (I 08) analyses met the NRC acceptance criteria. 4-2 Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3

• Spiked Filter Paper and Charcoal Cartridge Samples: Th e spiked sample result s for each calendar quarter are reported in Table 4-1 through Table 4-4 , respectively. The following summary is provided:

Gross Beta (cesium-137) analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on two (2) filter paper samples. Iodine-131 analyses were performed by the Contractor Laboratory on two (2) charcoal cartridge samples. Comparison of results of the spiked filter paper and charcoal cartridge samples showed acceptable agreement with the NRC acceptance criteria.

One sample , I st quarter for filter paper , gross beta ( cesium-13 7), failed the acceptance criteria.

The vendor laboratory was immediately notified of the failure and asked to re-preform the analyses, if necessary.

The vendor re-analyzed the sample and the result was within the acceptable criteria. The vendor provided a corrected report and the analysis met the acceptance criteria. This issue was documented in Condition Report 2015-06857.

All four (4) analyses performed by the Contractor Laboratory met the NRC acceptance criteria. C. Conclusions

• Results of Split Sample Program: The split sample program is coordinated by the state, and the results are not included in this report.

• Results of Spike Sample Program: Based on the Inter-Laboratory comparison data , BVPS considers all analyses provided throughout the report period by the Contractor Laboratory to be acceptable with respect to both accuracy and measurement.

A comparison of the data is provided in the following tables. All analyses for the 2015 report period were within the NRC Acceptance Criteria.

4-3 Bea v er V all ey P o w er S tation 2015 Annual Radiolo g ical E n v ironmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPL I T SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATOR Y COMPARISON PROGRAM Table 4-1 Inter-Laboratory Comparison Program Spiked Samples -1*1 Quarter Sample Date, Type and Resolution Resolution Required Ratio Env Inc: Identification No. Ratio Band Analytics Sr-89 60 0.8 0 -1.25 0.91 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.96 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.94 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.98 03/19/15 Ce-141 60 0.8 0 -1.25 0.98 Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 1.04 Water Cs-1 34 60 0.80 -1.25 0.94 Ind Lab: E11167 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 Con. Lab: SPW-1133 Co-58 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 0.88 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 0.98 03/19/15 Water Ind. Lab: E11165 H-3 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 Con. Lab: SPW-1137 Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.87 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.88 1-1 3 1 60 0.80 -1.25 0.88 1-1 31 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 03/19/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 1.10 Milk Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 Ind. Lab: E11166 Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.98 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 C on. Lab: SPMl-1134 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Co-58 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.08 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 03/19/15 Filter Paper Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1 09 Ind. Lab: E11168 (Gross Beta) Con. Lab: SPAP-1135 03/19/15 Charcoal Cartridge 60 0.80 -1.25 0.95 Ind. Lab: E11169 1-131 Con. Lab: SPCH-1136 4-4 R TL A9.6 90 E E ncl os ur e 3 Comparison AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM Table 4-2 Inter-Laboratory Comparison Program Spiked Samples -2nd Quarter Sample Date, Type and Resolution Resolution Required Ratio Env Inc: Identification No. Ratio Band Analytics Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.92 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.98 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.92 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 06/11/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 LLD* Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 1 02 Water Cs-134 60 0.80-1.25 0.93 Ind Lab: E11225 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Con. Lab SPW-2941 Co-58 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.07 Fe-59 60 0.80-1.25 1.10 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 06/11/15 Water H-3 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 Ind. Lab: E 11224 Con. Lab: SPW-2939 Sr-89 60 0.80-1.25 0.87 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.83 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.96 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 1 03 06/11/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 LLD* Milk Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 Ind. Lab: E11226 Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.92 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.04 Con. Lab: SPMl-2940 60 0.80 -1.25 Co-58 1.01 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 *LLD: Lower Limit of Detection 4-5 RTL A9.690 E E nclosure 3 Comparison AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM Table 4-3 Inter-Laboratory Comparison Program Spiked Samples -3r11 Quarter Sample Date, Type and Resolution Resolution Required Ratio Env Inc: Identification No. Ratio Band Analytics Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.88 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.94 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 09/10/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 Water Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.90 Ind Lab: E11323 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 Con. Lab: SPW-4979 Co-58 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Mn-54 60 0.80-1.25 1.05 Fe-59 60 0.80-1.25 1.07 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 1.02 09/10/15 Water H-3 Ind. Lab: E11322 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 Con. Lab: SPW-4978 Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.84 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.90 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.91 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 09/10/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 Milk Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 1.08 Ind. Lab: E11324 Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.91 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 Con. Lab: SPMl-4980 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Co-58 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.04 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 1.03 09/10/15 Filter Paper Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1 05 Ind. Lab: E11325A (Gross Beta) Con. Lab: SPAP-4981 09/10/15 Charcoal Cartridge 60 0.80 -1.25 0.97 Ind. Lab: E11326 1-131 Con. Lab: SPCH-4982 4-6 RTL A9.690 E E nclosure 3 Comparison AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report SECTION 4 -SPLIT SAMPLE PROGRAM and SPIKE SAMPLE INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM Table 4-4 Inter-L aboratory Comparison Program Spiked Samples -4th Quarter Sample Date, Type and Resolution Resolution Required Ratio Env Inc: Identification No. Ratio Band Analytics Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.87 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.85 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.95 12103/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 0.98 Water Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.93 Ind Lab: E11388 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Con. Lab: SPW-6781 Co-58 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.04 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.06 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 12/03/15 Water H-3 60 0.80 -1.25 0.96 Ind. Lab: E11387 Con. Lab: SPW-6780 Sr-89 60 0.80 -1.25 0.82 Sr-90 60 0.80 -1.25 0.91 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 0.84 1-131 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 12/03/15 Ce-141 60 0.80 -1.25 1.01 Cr-51 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 Milk Cs-134 60 0.80 -1.25 0.93 Ind. Lab: E11389 Cs-137 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Con. Lab: SPMl-6782 Co-58 60 0.80 -1.25 1.00 Mn-54 60 0.80 -1.25 1.04 Fe-59 60 0.80 -1.25 1.07 Zn-65 60 0.80 -1.25 1.05 Co-60 60 0.80 -1.25 0.99 4-7 RTL A9.690E E nclosur e 3 Comparison AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT Beaver Valley Power Station 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report RTL A9.690E Enclosure 3 SECTION 5 -CORRECTIONS TO PREVIOUS RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERA TING REPORT(S)

Corrections to Previous Radiological Environmental Operating Report(s): There are no corrections to previous reports at this time. 5-1 Enclosure B L-16-125 2015 Annual Environmental Operating Report (Non-Radiological) (Report follows)

FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION 2015 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT NON-RADIOLOGICAL UNITS N0.1AND2 LICENSES DPR-66 AND NPF-73 RTL# A9.630F

/ r BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION ENVIRONMENTAL

& CHEMISTRY SECTION Technical Report Approval 2015 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT (Non-Radiological)

UNITS NO. 1 AND 2 LICENSES DPR-66 AND NPF-73 Prepared by: Cameron L. Lange a E-mail) Date: 2-26-16 Reviewed by: Courtney F. Casto -f -&, -/{,, Reviewed by: Robert R.

'-/-la -I {p 4-b-\(o TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

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

1

1.1 INTRODUCTION

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

1 1.2

SUMMARY

& CONCLUSIONS

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

2 1.3 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE ....................

.2 1.4 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

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

.2 2.0 ENVIRONMENT AL PROTECTION PLAN NON-COMPLIANCES

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

.4 3.0 CHANGES INVOLVING UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENT AL QUESTIONS

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

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

5.1 SITE DESCIPTION

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

5 5.2 STUDY AREA .....................................................................................................

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

,. ........................

6 5.3.l Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring

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

? 5.J.2 Fish Monitoring

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

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

? 5.3.3. Corbicula/Zebra Mussel Density Determinations

........ , ...........................

& 5.3.4 Corbicula Juvenile Monitoring

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

9 5 .3 .5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring

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

.10 5.3.6 Reports ...................................................... .............................................

11 5.4 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM AND RESULTS ...............................

11 5.4.l Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Program ...................................

.11 5.4.2 Fish Sampling Program ...........................................................................

15 5.4.3 Corbicula Monitoring Program .............................................................

.18 5.4.4 Corbicula Juvenile Monitoring

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

.19 5.4.5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program .........................................................

19 6.0 ZEBRA MUSSEL AND CORBICULA CONTROL ACTIVITIES

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

21

7.0 REFERENCES

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

22 8.0 TABLES 9.0 FIGURES 10.0 PERMITS APPENDIX A. SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2015 BVPS 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS)

LIST OFT ABLES 5.1 Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) Sampling Dates For 2015. 5.2 Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 through 2015 in the Ohio River near BVPS (6 sheets). 5.3 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Counts for Triplicate Samples Taken at Each Sample Station by Sample for May and September 2015. 5.4 Mean Number of Macroinvertebrates (Number/m 2) and Percent Composition of Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms, 2015, BVPS. 5.5 Mean Number of Macroinvertebrates (Number/m 2) and Percent Composition of Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms for the Control Station (1) and the Average for Non-control Stations (2Bl, 2B2, and 2B3), 2015, BVPS. 5 .6 Shannon-Weiner Diversity, Evenness and Richness Indices for Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in the Ohio River, 2015. 5.7 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities (Number/m 2) for Station 1 (Control) and Station 2B (Non-Control)

During Preoperational and Operational Years through 2015 BVPS. 5.8 Total Fish Catch, Electrofishing and Seine Net Combined During the BVPS 2015 Fisheries Survey. 5.9 Comparison of Control vs. Non-Control Electrofishing Catches, During the BVPS 2015 Fisheries Survey. 5.10 Comparison of Control vs. Non-Control Seine Catches, During the BVPS 2015 Fisheries Survey. 5.11 Fish Species Collected During the May 2015 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity ofBVPS. 5.12 Fish Species Collected During the July 2015 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity ofBVPS. 5 .13 Fish Species Collected During the September 2015 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity ofBVPS. 5.14 Fish Species Collected During the November 2015 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS .. 5 .15 Estimated Number of Fish O,bserved During Electrofishing Operations, 2015. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) ii LIST OFT ABLES 5.16 Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season during . the BVPS 2012 Fisheries Survey. 5 .17 Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electroflshing Minute) by Season during the BVPS 2013 Fisheries Survey. 5.18 Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season during the BVPS 2014 Fisheries Survey. 5 .19 Catch per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season during the BVPS 2015 Fisheries Survey. 5.20 Unit 1 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 2015 from BVPS. 5.21 Unit 2 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 2015 from BVPS. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) iii LIST OF FIGURES 5.1 Location Map for the 2015 Beaver Valley Power Station Aquatic Monitoring Program Sampling Control and Non-Control Sampling Stations .. 5.2 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Benthic Organism Survey Sampling Sites for the 2015 Study . . 5.3 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Fish Population Survey Fish Sampling Sites for the 2015 Study. 5.4 Location of Study Area, Beaver Valley Power _Station Shippingport, Pennsylvania BVPS. 5.5 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among BVPS Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2015. 5.6 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2015 .. 5.7 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Intake Structure Sample Events for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2015. 5.8 Water Temperature and River Elevation Recorded on the Ohio River at the BVPS Intake Structure, Monthly Sampling Dates, 2015. 5.9 Density of Zebra Mussel VeJigers (#/m 3) Collected at Beaver Valley Power Station; Intake Structure, Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, 2015. 5.10 Density of Zebra Mussel Veligers (#/m 3) Collected at Beaver Valley Power Station; Barge Slip; Splash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2015. 5.11 Density (#/m 2) of Settled Zebra Mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station; Intake Structure, Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, 2015. 5.12 Density (#/m 2) of Settled Zebra Mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station; Barge Slip, Splash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2015. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) iv

1.1 INTRODUCTION

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

Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) is operated by FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC). The Objectives of the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) are to:

• Verify that the facility is operated in an environmentally acceptable manner, as established by the Final Environmental Statement-Operating License Stage (FES-OL) and other Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) environmental impact assessments,

• Keep plant operations personnel appraised of changes in environmental conditions that may affect the facility,.

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

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

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

Waste is regulated under EPA Identification No. PAR000040485.

Attachment 10.1 contains a listing of permits and certificates for environmental compliance.

The BVPS programs and procedures include pre-work and pre-project environmental evaluations, operating procedures, pollution prevention and response programs procedures and plans, process improvement and corrective action programs, and human performance programs.

Technical and managerial monitoring of tasks, operations, and other activities are performed.

Any identified challenges, concerns, or questions are captured in the FENOC Problem Identification and Resolution Program with a Condition Report. Condition Reports include investigations, cause determinations, and corrective actions. During 2015, BVPS continued an Aquatic Monitoring Program to evaluate its potential impact on the New Cumberland Pool of the Ohio River and to provide information on potential impacts to BVPS operation from macrofoulers such as Asian clams and zebra mussels. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 1.2

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS There were no significant environmental events during 2015. During 2015, no significant changes to operations that could affect the environment were made at Beaver Valley Power Station. As in previous years, results of the BVPS environmental programs did not indicate any adverse environmental impacts from station operation.

1.3 ANALYSIS

OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENT AL CHANGE During 2015, no significant changes were made at BVPS to cause significant negative affect on the environment.

1.4 AQUATIC

MONITORING PROGRAM The 2015 Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) Units 1 and 2 Non-Radiological Monitoring Program consisted of an Aquatic Program that included surveillance and field sampling of the Ohio River's aquatic life in the vicinity of the station. The Aquatic Program is an annual program conducted to provide baseline aquatic resources data, to assess the impact of the operation of BVPS on the aquatic ecosystem of the Ohio River, and to monitor for potential impacts ofbiofouling organisms (Corbicula and zebra mussels) on BVPS operations.

This is the 40 1 h year of operational environmental monitoring for Unit 1 and the 29th year for Unit 2. As in previous years, the results of the program did not indicate any adverse environmental impact to the aquatic life in the Ohio River associated with the operation of BVPS. The results of the 2015 benthic macro invertebrate survey conducted in May and September indicated a normal community structure exists in the Ohio River both upstream and downstream of the BVPS. These benthic surveys are a continuation of a Fate and Effects Study conducted from 1990 through 1992 for the PADEP to assess the ecosystem impacts of molluscicides including Betz Clamtrol CT-1, CT-2, and Nalco Hl50M that have been used to control biofouling organisms at BVPS. To date the results of the benthic studies have not indicated any impacts of operation at the BVPS including the use these biocides on the benthic community below the BVPS discharge.

Substrate was probably the most important factor influencing the distribution and abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. The generally soft muck-type substrate along the shoreline found in 2015 and previous years was conducive to segmented worm (oligochaete) and midge fly larvae (chironomid) proliferation.

Increased water clarity due at least in part to the establishment of zebra mussels was noted during 2015. This has increased the amount of submerged aquatic vegetation at Stations 1, 2B and 3. The presence of submerged aquatic vegetation can increase the number of species of macroinvertebrates, especially chironomids (midge flies) that use them as a primary food source and a place to avoid predators.

Sixty-one (61) macroinvertebrate taxa were identified during the 2015 monitoring program. In 2015, no new taxa were added to the cumulative list of macro invertebrates collected near BVPS (Table 5.2). Also, no state or Federal threatened or endangered macroinvertebrate species were collected durillg 2015. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 2 In May and in September oligochaetes were the most frequently collected group of macroinvertebrates.

There were no major differences in the community structure between control and non-control stations that could be attributed to operation of B VPS. The overall community structure has changed little since pre-operational years, and program results did not indicate that BVPS operations were affecting the benthic community of the Ohio River. The fish community of the Ohio River near the BVPS was sampled in May (spring), July (summer), September (fall) and November (winter) of 2015 with electrofishing and seining. Since monitoring began in the early l 970's, the number of identified fish taxa has increased from 43 to 78 for the New Cumberland Pool. In 2015, 435 fish representing 20 taxa were collected (i.e., handled) during BVPS surveys by electrofishing and seining. This was 245 more fish but the same number of taxa that were collected in 2014. This increase was due largely to the large number of juvenile gizzard shad that were collected in fall and winter by electrofishing.

All taxa collected in 2015 were previously encountered at BVPS. A total, of 419 fish, representing 17 taxa, was collected by electrofishing in 2015 compared to 186 fish representing 17 taxa in 2014. The number of fish collected in 2015 was considerably more than the total number collected in 2011 (151 fish), the last time electrofishing was collected at night. The number of species collected was, however, fewer than in 2011 when 22 species were encountered.

A total of 16 fish representing five (5) taxa was collected by seines in 2015 (Table 5.10) compared to 48 fish representing eight (8) taxa in 2014. Benthivores (bottom feeders including suckers and buffalo) and forage species (e.g. gizzard shad and emerald shiners) were generally collected in the highest numbers in 2015. The numbers of forage fish were much greater in 2015, due to the large number of juvenile gizzard shad collected in the fall and winter. Variations in annual catch were probably attributable to normal fluctuations in the population size of the forage species and the predator populations that rely on them. Forage species, such as gizzard shad and emerald shiner with high reproductive potentials, frequently respond to changes in natural environmental factors (competition, food availability, cover, and water quality) with large fluctuations in population size. This, in tum, influences their appearance in the sample populations during annual surveys. Spawning/rearing success due to abiotic factors is usually the determining factor of the size and composition of a fish community.

The annual catch rate in 2015 (2.56 fish per minute) was higher than any of the previous three years, when catch rates were 0.86 fish per minute in 2014, 0.53 in 2013 and 0.59 in 2012. The greater electrofishing rate in 2015 was due to the relatively large number of juvenile gizzard shad "' that were in fall and winter. Gizzard shad are schooling fish so multiple individuals are generally collected when present. They display high year to year fluctuations in abundance due to spawning success and over winter mortality.

The gizzard shad collected in fall and winter likely were spawned in spring and early summer 2015 and became large enough to be collected by electrofishing.

Little difference in the species composition of the catch was observed between the control (Station 1) and non-control (Stations 2A, 2B and 3) stations.

Habitat preference and availability 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 3 were probably the most important factors affecting where and when fish were collected.

Results from the 2015 fish surveys indicated that a normal community structure for the Ohio River exists near BVPS based on species composition and relative abundance.

In 2015, there was no indication of negative impact to the fish community in the Ohio River from the operation of BVPS. . The monthly reservoir Ponar samples collected in Units 1 and 2 cooling towers and the four samples collected at the intake during 2015 indicated that Corbicula were present in the Ohio River and entering the station. In 2015, 13 settled live Corbicula were collected from the Unit l cooling tower reservoir during monthly reservoir ponar sampling.

In 2015, nine (9) live settled Corbicula was collected from the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir.

The overall low numbers of live Corbicula collected in the sample collected outside the intake and cooling towers in 2015, compared to levels in the 1980's, likely reflects a natural decrease in the density of Corbicula in the Ohio River near BVPS, although an increased density of live settled individuals and juveniles collected in the cooling towers may indicate that the population is beginning to increase again. Continued monitoring of Corbicula densities is recommended.

In 1995, live zebra mussels were collected for the first time by divers in the BVPS main intake and auxiliary intake structures during scheduled cleanings.

They have found in the BVPS every year since. Overall, both the number of observations and densities of settled mussels in 2015 were consistent to those recorded in 2008-2014, and much higher than the preceding five years. Although densities of settled mussels are low compared to other populations such as the Lower Great Lakes, densities comparable to those in the Ohio River are more than sufficient to cause problems in the operation of untreated cooling water intake systems.

Whether the population of zebra mussels in this reach of the Ohio River will remain the same or increase cannot be determined.

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

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION PLAN NON-COMPLIANCES There were no Environmental Protection Plan non-compliances identified in 2015. 3.0 CHANGES INVOLVING UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS No Unreviewed Environmental Questions were identified in 2015. Therefore, there were no changes involving an Unreviewed Environmental Question.

4.0 NON-ROUTINE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT There were no non-routine environmental reports in 2015. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 4

5.0 AQUATIC

MONITORING PROGRAM This section of the report summarizes the Non-Radiological Environmental Program conducted for the BVPS Units 1 and 2; Operating License Numbers DPR-66 and NPF-73. This is a mandatory program, because on February 26, 1980, the NRC granted BVPS's request to delete all of the Aquatic Monitoring Program, with the exception of the fish impingement program (Amendment No. 25), from the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS). In 1983, BVPS was permitted to also delete the fish impingement studies from the ETS program of required sampling along with non-radiological water quality requirements.

However, in the interest of providing an uninterrupted database, BVPS has continued the Aquatic Monitoring Program. The objectives of the 2015 environmental program were:

• To monitor for any possible environmental impact of BVPS operation on the benthic macroinvertebrate and fish communities in the Ohio River;

• To evaluate the presence, growth, and reproduction of macrofouling Corbicula sp. (Asiatic clam) and zebra mussels (Dreissena spp.) at BVPS;

• To provide a low level sampling program to continue an uninterrupted environmental database for the Ohio River near BVPS, pre-operational to present; and

• Keep plant operations appraised of any of changes in environmental conditions that may affect the facility.

These objectives have assisted facility personnel in the past. For instance, in the facility's Significant Operating Experience Report (SOER 07-2, October 2008) relative to "Intake Cooling Water Blockage" this Aquatic Monitoring Program was credited as a means of addressing "Changing Environmental Conditions" by looking "for changes in quantity of clam and mussel activity by monitoring the veliger (commonly known as larvae) density in the river and mussel settlement density."

• 5.1 SITE DESCRIPTION BVPS is located on an approximately 453-acre tract of land on the south bank of the Ohio River in the Borough of Shippingport, Beaver County, Pennsylvania.

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

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

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

40° 36' 18"; Longitude:

80° 26' 02") at a location on the New Cumberland Pool that is 3.1 river miles (5.3 km) downstream from Montgomery Lock and Dam and 19 .6 miles (31.2 km) upstream from New Cumberland Lock 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 5 and Dam. The Pennsylvania-Ohio-West Virginia border is 5.2 river miles (8.4 km) downstream from the site. The river flow is regulated by a series of dams and reservoirs on the Beaver, Allegheny, Monongahela, and Ohio Rivers and their tributaries.

The study site lies along the Ohio River in a valley, which has a gradual slope that extends from the river at an elevation of 665 ft. (203 m) above mean sea level; to an elevation of 1, 160 ft. (354 m) along a ridge south of BVPS. The plant entrance elevation at the station is approximately 735 ft. (224 m) above mean sea level. BVPS Units 1 and 2 have a thermal rating of 2,900 megawatts (MW). Units 1 & 2 have a design electrical rating of 974 MW and 1,009 MW, respectively.

The circulating water systems for each unit are considered a closed cycle system with continuous overflow, using a cooling tower to minimize heat released to the Ohio River. Commercial operation of BVPS Unit 1 began in 1976 and Unit 2 began operation in 1987. 5.2 STUDY AREA The environmental study area was established to assess potential impacts and consists of four sampling stations, each having a north and south shore (Figure 5.1). Station 1 is located at River Mile (RM) 34.5, approximately

0.3 miles

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

0.5 miles

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

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

Significant erosion of Phillis Island has occurred over the past four years, which has affected sampling Stations 2A and 2B. Also evident at all locations has been the establishment of submerged aquatic vegetation due to increased water clarity, likely caused by the establishment of the zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) in the Ohio River system. 5.3 METHODS CB&I Environmental

& Infrastructure, Incorporated (CB&I), formally known as Shaw Environmental, Incorporated, was contracted to perform the 2015 Aquatic Monitoring Program as specified in BVBP-ENV-001-Aquatic Monitoring (procedural guide). This procedural guide references and describes in detail the field and laboratory procedures used in the various monitoring programs, as well as the data analysis and reporting requirements.

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

Sampling was conducted according to the schedule presented in Table 5.1. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 6 5 .3 .1 Benthic Macro invertebrate Monitoring The benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring program consisted of river bottom sampling using a Ponar grab sampler at four stations on the Ohio River. Prior to 1996, duplicate sampling occurred at Stations 1, 2A, and 3, while triplicate sampling occurred at Station 2B (i.e., one sample at each shoreline and mid-channel) (Figures 5.1 and 5.2). In 1996, a review of the sampling design indicated that sampling should be performed in triplicate at each station to conform to standardized EPA procedures.

Therefore, starting in 1996, triplicate samples were taken at Stations 1, 2A, and 3, as in 1995, with triplicate samples also collected at each shore and mid-channel location at Station 2B. A petite Ponar dredge was used to collect these samples, replacing the standard Ponar dredge used in prior studies. In 2015, benthic macro invertebrate sampling was conducted as scheduled in May and September.

For each 2015-field effort, 18 benthjc samples were collected and processed in the laboratory.

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

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

Four indices used to describe the benthic community were calculated: Weiner diversity index, evenness (Pielou, 1969), species richness, and the number of taxa. These estimates an indication of the relative quality of the macroinvertebrate community.

5.3.2 Fish Monitoring Fish sampling was conducted in 2015 to provide a continuous baseline of data and to detect possible changes that may have occurred in the fish populations in the Ohio River near BVPS. Fish population surveys have been conducted in the Ohio River near BVPS annually from 1970 through 2015. These surveys have resulted in the collection of 73 fish species and five different hybrids. Adult fish surveys were successfully conducted as scheduled in May, July, September, and November 2015. During each survey, fish were scheduled to be sampled at four stations (Stations 1, 2A, 2B and 3) (Figure 5.3). Prior to 2011, all electrofishing was conducted at night. From 2011 to present, due to damage to the onsite boat launch, the crew was required to launch the boat from the Lock 57 Community Park Boat Launch located near Glasgow Pennsylvania.

The launch was only open until one hour after dark, so it was necessary to conduct electrofishing efforts during the day. Electrofishing was completed at all stations and months. Seining was scheduled to be performed at Station 1 (north shore) and Station 2B (south shore of Phillis Island) to sample species that are generally under-represented in electrofishing catches (e.g., young-of-the-year fish and small cyprinids).

In 2014, severe erosion to the shoreline at Station 2B required relocating the seining location about 200 meters west. This habitat at the new 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 7 location was comparable to the former site, prior to the erosion. The new location is also influenced by the BVPS discharge, so is a comparable non-control site. This site was also used in 2015, although further erosion was evident. All seining efforts were successfully completed.

Electrofishing was conducted using a boat-mounted electroshocker.

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

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

This was done in an effort to expedite sample processing and cover a larger area during the timed electrofishing run. Regardless of the number of individuals, all game fish were boated when observed.

Fish seining was performed during the day at Station 1 (control) .and Station 2B (non-control) (Figure 5.3) during each of the four 2015 BVPS fishery surveys. A 30-ft long bag seine made of 1/4-inch nylon mesh netting was used to collect fish located close to shore in 1 to 4 ft. of water. Three seine hauls were performed at both Station 1 (north shore) and Station 2B (south shore of Phillis Island) during each survey. Fish collected during electrofishing and seining efforts were processed according to standardized procedures.

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

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

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

Any threatened or endangered species (if collected) would be photographed and released.

5 .3 .3 Corbicula Density Determinations for Cooling Tower Reservoirs The Corbicula Monitoring Program at BVPS includes sampling the circulating river water a11:d the service water systems of the BVPS (intake structure and cooling towers). The objectives of the ongoing Monitoring Program are to evaluate the presence of Corbicula at BVPS, and to evaluate the potential for and timing of infestation of the BVPS. This program is conducted in conjunction with a program to monitor for the presence of macrofouling zebra mussels (see Section 5.3.5).

• 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 8 /'

Corbicula enter the BVPS from the Ohio River by 'passing through the water intakes, and eventually settle in low flow areas including the lower reservoirs of the Units 1 and 2 cooling towers. The density and growth of these Corbicula were monitored by collecting monthly samples from the lower reservoir sidewalls and sediments.

The sampler used ort the sidewalls consisted of a D-frame net behind a 24-inch long metal scraping edge. This device was connected to a pole long enough to allow the sampler to extend down into the reservoir area from the outside wall of the cooling tower. Sediments were sampled with a petite Ponar dredge. , Cooling tower reservoir sampling was historically conducted once per month. Beginning in December 1997, it was decided to forego sampling in cold water months since buildup of Corbicula does not oc'cur then. Monthly sampling has been maintained throughout the warmer water months of the year. In 2015, sampling began in March and ended in November.

In 2015, once each month (March through November), a single petite Ponar grab sample was scheduled to be taken in the reservoir of each cooling tower to obtain density and growth information on Corbicula present in the bottom sediment.

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

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

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

A scraping sample of about 12 square feet was also c;oilected at each cooling tower during each monthly sampling effort. This sample was processed in a manner consistent with the petit Ponar samples. All samples were successfully except in Cooling Tower 2 in October due to a unit outage. 5.3.4 Corbicula Juvenile Monitoring The Corbicula juvenile study was designed to collect data on Corbicula spawning activities and growth of individuals' entering the intake from the Ohio River. From 1988 through 1998, clam cages were deployed in the intake forebay to monitor for Corbicula that entered the BVPS. Observational-based concerns that the clam cages would quickly clog with sediment during high sediment.

periods and, as a result, would not effectively sample for Corbicula, led to an evaluation of an alternate sampling technique.

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

Results of the study confirmed this hypothesis.

During the 1998 sampling season, at the request of BVPS personnel, all clam *cages were 2015 Annual Environmental Report FEN.OC (BVPS) 9 removed after the May collection.

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

Samples were processed in the same manner as Cooling Tower samples (Section 5.3.3).

• From 2002 to present, because of site access restrictions, sampling with the petite ponar has been moved to the Ohio River directly in front of the Intake Structure Building.

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

During each sampling month two Ponar grabs are taken approximately 20 feet offshore of the intake building.

These grab samples are processed in the same manner as when they were collected from within the Intake Structure Building.

5.3.5 Zebra

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

Beginning in December 1997, it was decided to forego sampling in the colder water months of each year, since buildup of zebra mussels and growth of the individuals that are . present, does not occur then. Monthly sampling has been maintained throughout the balance of the year. In 2015, sampling from March through November.

A pump sample for zebra mussel veligers was collected at the barge slip location monthly from April through October in 1996 and 1997. The scope of the sampling was expanded in 1998 to also include the intake structure.

In June 1998, the Emergency Outfall and Emergency Outfall Impact Basin locations were also added. Additional pump samples were collected from the cooling towers of Unit 1 and Unit 2 in October 1998. In 2015 veliger sampling began in April and was conducted monthly through October. At the Intake Structure and Barge Slip the following surveillance techniques were used:

• Wall scraper sample collections on a monthly basis (March through November) from the barge slip and the riprap near the intake structure to detect attached adults; and 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 10

• Pump sample collections from the barge slip and outside the intake structure, to detect the planktonic early life forms (April through October).

At each of the cooling towers the following techniques were used: *

• Monthly reservoir scraper sample collections in each cooling tower (March through November);

and

• Pump samples in April through October to detect planktonic life forms. At the Emergency Outfall and the Splash Pool the following techniques were used:

• Monthly scraper sample collections in each (March through November);

and

• Pump samples in each from April through October to detect planktonic life forms. 5.3.6

• Reports Each month, activity reports that summarized the activities that took place the previous month were prepared and submitted.

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

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

5.4 RESULTS

OF THE AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM The following sections summarize the* findings for each of the program elements.

Sampling dates for each of the program elements are presented in Table 5.1. 5.4.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Program Benthic surveys were performed in May and in September 2015. Benthic samples were successfully collected using a petite ponar grab sampler at Stations 1, 2A, 2B, and 3 (Figure.5.2).

Triplicate samples were taken off the south shore at Stations 1, 2A, and 3. Sampling at Station 2B, in the back channel of Phillis Island, consisted of triplicate petite Ponar grabs *at the south side, middle, and north side of the channel (i.e., Sample Stations 2B 1, 2B2, and 2B3, respectively). , Substrate type is an important factor in determining the composition of the benthic community.

2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 11 The habitats in the vicinity of BVPS are the result of damming, channelization, and river traffic. Shoreline habitats at the majority of sampling locations were generally in depositional areas that consisted of soft substrates composed of mixes of sand, silt, and detritus.

One exception was along the north shoreline of Phillis Island at Station 2A where hard-pan clay overlain with a thin layer of fine sand dominated.

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

In general, the substrates found at each sampling location have been consistent from year to year. Increased water clarity due at least in part to the establishment of zebra mussels was noted during 2015. This has increased the amount of submerged aquatic vegetation at Stations 1, 2B and 3. The presence of submerged aquatic vegetation can increase the number of species of macroinvertebrates, especially chironomids (midge flies) that use them as a primary food source. Also zebra mussel filtering moves much of the available nutrients from the water column to the bottom, which also can affect the type and density of macroinvertebrates present in the project area. Sixty-one (61) macroinvertebrate taxa were identified during the 2015 monitoring program (Tables 5.2 and 5.3), which was one more than was identified in 2014. A mean density of 1,037 macroinvertebrates/m 2 was collected in May and 3,902/m 2 in September (Table 5.4). As in previous years, the macro invertebrate assemblage during 2015 was dominated by burrowing organisms typical of soft unconsolidated substrates.

Oligochaetes (segmented worms), mollusks (clams and snails) and chironomid (midge fly) larvae*were abundant (Table 5.4). Nineteen (19) taxa of chironomids and 19 taxa of oligochaetes were collected.

This is the two more chironomid taxa, but five (5) fewer oligochaete taxa than collected in 2014. Eleven (11) taxa of mollusks were also collected in 2015; two more than in 2014. As was the case in 2014, the total mean density of organisms was higher in September than in May. Thirty-two (32) taxa were present in the May 2015 samples. Fifty-three (53) taxa were present in the September samples (Table 5.3.l and 5.3.2). Twenty-four (24) of the 61 taxa were present in both May and September.

As in 2014, immature tubificid worms were numerically the most abundant organism in both May and September 2015. The macrofouling Asiatic clam (Corbicula) has been observed in the Ohio River near BVPS from 1974 to present. Macrofouling zebra mussels were first collected in the BVPS benthic samples in 1998. Adult zebra mussels, however, were detected in 1995 and 1996 by divers in the BVPS main and auxiliary intake structures during scheduled cleaning operations.

Zebra mussel veligers, adults and juveniles were collected during the 1997-2015 sampling programs (see Sections 5.4.5 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program).

Both live adult Corbicula and adult zebra mussels were collected in benthic macro invertebrate samples in 2015. Corbicula and zebra mussels were collected in both May and September samples. Zebra mussels were the third most abundant taxa collected in the September samples. No new taxa of macroinvertebrates were collected near BVPS in 2015 (Table 5.2). Also no state or Federal threatened or endangered macroinvertebrate species were collected during 2015. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 12 In the May 2015 samples, oligochaetes accounted for the highest mean *density of macroinvertebrates (518/m 2 or 50 percent of the total density) (Table 5.4). Oligochaetes also were the dominant taxon in May 2014. Chironomids were the second most abundant species in May (399/m 2 or 38 percent of the total density).

Mollusks (74/m 2 or seven percent of the total) and organisms other than oligochaetes, chironomids and mollusks ("others") ( 46/m 2 or four percent) were both present in May. In September 2015 samples, oligochaetes also accounted for the highest mean density of macroinvertebrates (l ,656/m 2 or 42 percent of the total density) (Table 5.4). Chironomids had

• the next highest mean density in September 2015 (1,362/m 2 or 35 percent of the total density), followed by mollusks (714/m 2 or 18 percent) and the "others" category (170/m 2 or four percent).

J In May 2015, the highest density of macroinvertebrates (l,935/m 2) occurred at Station 3. Oligochaetes were over twice as abundant at Station 3 as any other location.

In the highest density of macroinvertebrates 0 occurred at Station 2Bl (7,267/m 2). This was due' to a high density of mollusks, principally zebra mussels that were collected (2,322/m 2) at this location.

In May the lowest mean density of organisms was 272/m 2 , which occurred at Station 2B3. In September, the lowest mean density of organisms occurred at Station 2B2 (1, 118/m 2). For a comparison of the control to non-control stations, Station 1 was designated the control station, because it is always out of the influence of the BVPS discharge and Station 2B (mean density of Station 2B 1, 2B2, and 2B3) was designated as the non-control station, since it is the station most regularly subjected to BVPS's discharge.

Stations 3 and 2A may be under the influence of the plume under certain conditions, but it is unlikely that they are regularly influenced by BVPS. The mean density of macroinvertebrates in the non-control station was approximately 50 percent higher (979/m 2) than that of the control station (673/m 2) in May (Table 5.5). The relatively higher densities of chironomids and mollusks, at the non-control station, contributed to the majority of this difference.

A similar difference occurred in 2014. Similarly, in September the density of macroinvertebrates present at the non-control station (4,343/m 2) was approximately 50 percent higher than at the control station (2,924/m 2). As in May, the relatively higher densities of chironomids and mollusks at the non-control station contributed to the majority of this difference.

Differences were within the expected range of variation for natural populations of macroinvertebrates and likely not due to any impact of plant operation.

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

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

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

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

2015. Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 13 The Shannon-Weiner diversity indices in May 2015 collections ranged from 0.56 at Station 1 to 0.93 at Stations 2Bl and 2B2 (Table 5.6). In May, evenness ranged from 0.64 at Station 3 to 0.88 at Station 2B3. Richness greatest at Station 3 (3.67) and lowest at Station 1 (1.30). In general, the indices were higher in May 2015 than in 2014. This is due in part to the relatively lower density of immature tubificids present in 2015 and the greater density of tubificids that were mature enough to identify.

In 2014, 65 percent of the individuals collected in May were immature tubificids while in 2015 they contributed to only 30 percent of the May total. This in a greater number of taxa present in 2015. This difference in maturation rate of oligochaetes was likely due to natural annual differences and not related to any effect of plant operations.

The Shannon-Weiner diversity of the macroinvertebrate community (0.70 to 1.05), evenness (0.58 to 0.76) and richness (3.76 to 5.71) in ,September 2015 were generally higher than in May. There was also an increase in the number of taxa present at each station in September compared to that station in May. Relatively h_igh numbers of taxa are frequently present in early fall due to the increased numbers of aquatic stages of insects, especially chironomids, as well as the ability to identify many of the tubificids that are lumped together when immature to lower taxonomic levels. A comparable increase in indices values in September compared to May was also observed in each year from 2010 through 2015. _,1 In May 2015, the number of taxa was lower in the control station (Station 1) than in the control stations (2Bl, 2B2, 2B3) (6 1 in the control versus 8, 16 and 15 in the non-controls).

The diversity, evenness and richness indices were also lower at the control station than the controls (Table 5.6). In September 2015 the indices at the control stations were, in general, comparable to the non-control stations.

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

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

Substrate was probably the most important factor controlling the distribution and abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. Soft substrates that generally existed along the shoreline ar,e conducive to oligochaete, chironomid, and mollusk and limit species of macro_invertebrates that require a more stable bottom. There was an apparent change in the chironomid community throughout the study zone, as evidenced by their increased densities and the type of species, present. This is likely due to an increase in the submerged vegetation noted along the shoreline.

Vegetation provides an ideal habitat for many chironomid species that use it for grazing on the surficial phytoplankton and a place to avoid predators.

This change in the chironomid community is not caused by BVPS operations.

The density of macroinvertebrates in May and September 2015 fell within the range of densities of macroinvertebrates collected at BVPS in previous years (Table 5.7). Although the species of chironomids and their relative densities may have increased slightly due to increased light penetration caused by zebra mussels and 'the subsequent increase in submerged aquatic vegetation in the nearshore area, the overall macroinvertebrate community structure has changed little since pre-operational years. Any changes have occurred at both control and non-control sites, so the available evidence does not indicate that BVPS operations have 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 14 affected the benthic community of the Ohio River. 5.4.2 Fish Sampling Program In 2015, 435 fish representing 20 taxa were collected (i.e., handled) during BVPS surveys by electrofishing and seining (Table 5.8). This was 245 more fish, but the same number of taxa as collected in 2014. All taxa collected in 2015 were previously encountered at BVPS. By far the most common species in the 2015 BVPS surveys that were collected by electrofishing and seining combined were gizzard shad (81.6% of the total catch), followed by smallmouth buffalo (4.6%) emerald shiner (2.8%), longnose gar (2.5%), golden redhorse sucker (1.6%)

and smallmouth bass (1.6%). None of the remaining 15 species contributed to more than one percent of total handled catch. The most frequently observed, but not handled fish in 2015 juvenile gizzard shad (Table 5.15). Game fish collected in 2015 included channel catfish, bluegill, smallmouth bass, walleye, spotted bass, pumpkinseed, rock bass, and flathead catfish. Game fish represented 4.1 % of the total handled catch. A total of 419 fish, representing 17 taxa, was collected by electrofishing in 2015 (Table 5.9) compared to 186 fish representing 17 species in 2014. The number of fish collected in 2015 was considerably more than the total number collected in 2011 (151 fish), the last time electrofishing was conducted at night. The number of species collected was, however, fewer than in 2011 when 22 species were encountered.

The increased catch was due to the large number of gizzard shad juveniles that were collected during the fall and winter electrofishing efforts. In general electrofishing at night has been demonstrated to be more productive than during the day in riverine systems. Movements of many species of fish into shallower water at night to feed, makes them more susceptible to the electrofishing technique.

This may have contributed to the fewer number of species collected in 2014. Gizzard shad (84.7% of the total) was by far the most abundant species in the electrofishing catch. Smallmouth buffalo (4.8%), longnose gar (2.6%), golden redhorse sucker (1.8%) and smallmouth bass (1.4%) were the only other species that contributed to greater than one percent of the catch. Fish observed and not collected in the 2015 electrofishing study are presented in Table 5.15. A total of 16 fish representing five ( 5) taxa was collected by seines in 2015 (Table 5 .10) compared to 48 fish representing eight (8) taxa in 2014. The most abundant taxa collected in 2015 were emerald shiner, representing 75% of the total catch'. The other four species were each represented by single individual.

One bluegill and one juvenile smallmouth bass the only game species collected during seining efforts. A total of 30 fish representing 13 species was captured during the May (spring) 2015 sampling event (Table 5.11 ). All of them were collected during electrofishing.

Golden redhorse sucker was the most abundant species and represented 23.3% of the electrofishing catch, followed in abundance by longnose gar (representing 20.0% of the total catch), freshwater drum (10.0%), smallmouth bass (10.0%), shorthead redhorse sucker (6.7%), and smallmouth buffalo (6.7%). No other species contributed to more than five (5) percent of the May electrofishing catCh. No fish were collected in the seines. Flathead catfish, rock bass, smallmouth bass, spotted bass and 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 15 walleye were the game species collected in May. A total of 15 fish representing six (6) species was captured during the July (summer) 2015 sampling event (Table 5.12). All of the fish were collected during electrofishing efforts. Gizzard shad and longnose gar were the most abundant species and represented 60.0% and 13.3% of the catch, respectively.

Every other fish species was represented by a single individual.

No fish were collected in the seines. Smallmouth bass, pumpkinseed and flathead catfish were the only game species collected in July. During the September (fall) 2015 *sampling event, 291 fish representing four (4) taxa were collected.

All of the fish were collected during electrofishing efforts (Table 5.13). Gizzard shad were the most abundant species and contributed to 98.3 percent on the total. Two pumpkinseed, two longnose gar and one bluegill were the only other fish collected.

During the November (winter) 2015 sampling event, 99 fish representing 11 taxa were collected.

A total of 83 fish representing seven (7) species was collected during electrofishing efforts (Table 5.13). Gizzard shad and smallmouth buffalo were the most abundant species collected by electrofishing and contributed to 72.3% and 20.5% of the total catch, respectively.

Smallmouth bass (2.4% of the total) was the only other species that more than one individual was collected.

A total of 16 fish representing five (5) species were the only fish collected by seining. Emerald shiners (75% of the seine catch were the only species that more than one individual was collected.

November was the only month that seining efforts collected any fish. Game species collected in November included bluegill, channel catfish and smallmouth bass. Electrofishing catch rates are presented in Tables 5 .16, 5 .17, 5 .18, and 5 .19 for fish that were boated and handled during the 2012 through 2015 surveys by season (FENOC 2013, 2014 and 2015). In 2015, the annual catch rate was 2.56 fish per minute. In 2015, the greatest seasonal catch rate occurred in fall (September) when the catch rate was 7.11 fish per minute. Gizzard shad were collected at a rate of 6.99 fish per minute in fall, so were the reason for this atypically high catch rate. The lowest catch rate occurred in summer (July) with a rate of 0.37 fish per electrofishing minute. The annual catch rate in 2015 (2.56 fish per minute) was higher any of the previous three years, when catch rates were 0.86 fish per minute in 2014, 0.53 in 2013 and 0.59 in 2012. The greater electrofishing rate in 2015 was due to the relatively large number of juvenile gizzard shad that were in fall and winter. Gizzard shad are schooling fish, so multiple individuals are generally collected when present. They display high year to year fluctuations in abundance due to spawning success and the extent of over winter mortality.

The gizzard shad collected in fall and winter likely were spawned in spring and early summer 2015 and became large enough to be collected by electrofishing.

Large numbers of small gizzard shad were also noted during the summer electrofishing effort, but were too small to be netted. The 2015 catch rates in fall and winter were the highest of the four years. The highest spring and catch rates over the four years occurred in 2014. Over the four years, the highest seasonal catch rate occurred in fall 2015 (7 .11 fish per minute), which was due to the large number of juvenile gizzard shad present. The results of the electrofishing sampling effort in 2015 (Table 5.9) did not indicate any major 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 16 differences in species composition between the control station (1) and the non-control Stations 2A, 2B, and 3. In both, gizzard shad was the most abundant species. A greater number of fish representing more species was captured at nori-control stations than control station. This was most likely due to the extra effort expended at non-control stations versus control station. There are three non-control stations and only one control station so there was three times the effort a,t . the non-control stations.

In 2015, there was 5.5 times as many fish collected at the non-control stations with three times the effort. In 201, similar numbers of individuals and species were collected by seines at the control station compared to the non-control station, where sampling effort is equal (Table 5.10). In 2015, species composition remained comparable among stations.

Common taxa collected in the 2015 surveys by all methods induded gizzard shad, redhorse.

sucker. species, smallmouth buffalo, and smallmouth bass. Little difference in the species composition of the catch and relative composition was observed between the control (1) and non-control stations (2A, 2B and 3). Habitat preference and availability were probably the most important factors affecting where and when different species of fish are collected.

The results of the 2015 fish surveys indicated that there is a normal community structure in the Ohio River in the vicinity of BVPS based on species composition and relative abundance of fish observed during the surveys. Benthivores (bottom feeders including suckers and buffalo) and forage species (e.g. gizzard shad and emerald shiners) were generally collected in the highest numbers. The numbers of forage fish were greater than those present in the previous three years, due largely to the large number of juvenile gizzard shad collected.

Variations in annual catch were probably attributable to normal fluctuations in the population size of the forage species and the predator populations that rely on them. Forage species, such as gizzard shad, minnow species and shiner species that have high reproductive potentials, frequently respond to changes in natural environmental factors (competition, food availability, cover, and water quality) with large fluctuations in population size. This, in tum, influences their appearance in the sampled populations during annual surveys. Spawning/rearing success due to abiotic factors is usually the determining factor of the size and composition of a fish community.

' In addition, differences in electrofishing catch rate can be attributed to environmental conditions that prevail during sampling efforts. High water, increased turbidity, waves, and swift currents that occur during electrofishing efforts in some years can affect the collection efficiency in any given month. In 2015, as in the previous three years, increased water clarity was apparent during all months sampled.

A direct result of the increased clarity was the abundance of rooted submerged aquatiC vegetation throughout the study reach. The amount of rooted vegetation ih 2015 was much more than in any other year sampled. This increase in vegetation is likely the

• result of an increased photic zone . due . to zebra mussels filtering organic. and inorganic partfoulates from the water and redistributing them to the benthic layer. The presence of rooted vegetation and increased water clarity can change the distribution of many of the fish species present in the study reach. Results from the 2015 fish surveys indicated that a normal community structure for the Ohio River ex!sts near BVPS based on species composition and relative abundance.

In 2015, there was no indication of negative impact to the fish community in the Ohio River from the 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 17 operation of BVPS. 5.4.3 Corbicula Monitoring Program In 2015, 13 settled live Corbicula were collected from the Unit 1 cooling tower reservoir during monthly reservoir ponar sampling (Table 5.20 and Figure 5.5). They ranged in size from 1.00 mm to greater than 9.50 mm. Eleven dead Corbicula that were between 2.00 mm and 9.49 mm were also collected.

The seasonal average density of settled live Corbicula was 62/m 2' which was about twice the density of Corbicula in the Unit 1 cooling tower in 2014. Settled live Corbicula were collected in all sampled months except April, October and November.

The highest density occurred in April when a density of 129 Corbiculalm 2 was present. No Corbicula were collected in the scraping samples. Corbicula juveniles were also collected in monthly pump samples collected in the Unit 1 cooling tower reservoir in June and August. In 2015, nine (9) live settled Corbicula were collected from the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir (Table 5.21 and Figure 5.6). They were between 1.00 mm to greater than 9.50 mm in size, which indicates that some settled prior to 2015. Three dead Corbicula were also collected during 2015. These were between 2.00 mm and 6.29 mm and likely represented a number of year classes. The season average density of settled live Corbicula was 48/m 2 that was slightly higher than in 2014. The highest density of settled Corbicula occurred in September when a density of 129 Corbicula/m 2 was present. No Corbicula were collected in the scraping samples. Corbicula juveniles were also collected in monthly pump samples collected in the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir in June, August and September.

In 2015, BVPS continued its Corbicula control program, which included the use of a molluscicide to prevent the proliferation of Corbicula within BVPS. BVPS was granted permission by the PADEP to use a molluscicide to target the Unit 1 river water system and the Unit 2 service water system. In 1990 through 1993, the molluscicide applications focused on reducing the Corbicula population throughout the entire river water system of each BVPS plant (Units 1 and 2). In 1994 and 1995, the applications targeted the internal water systems; therefore, the molluscicide concentrations in the cooling towers were reduced during applications.

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

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

Only 22 live and six dead settled Corbicula were collected in the cooling towers in 2015; however, their presence in the cooling tower pump samples indicates that they still are available for establishment in the cooling towers. The recent decrease of Corbicula at the BVPS returns densities to levels more consistent with densities in the Ohio River in the mid-1990's, but well below those present during the 1980's. Whether the relatively low density of Corbicula in 2015 is indicative of permanent lower levels in the environment or due to natural variability is 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 18 uncertain, however, continued monitoring of Corbicula densities is recommended.

5.4.4 Corbicula

Juvenile Monitoring Program Figure 5.7 presents the abundance and size distribution data for samples collected in the Ohio River near the intake structure by petite ponar dredge in 2015. Sixty ( 60) live individuals were collected 2015 compared to only 17 in 2014. They ranged in size from the 2.00 mm-3.34 mm size range that were spawned in late 2014 to greater than 9.50 mm that were spawned in prior years. A spring/early-summer spawning period typically occurs in the Ohio River near BVPS each year when preferred spawning temperatures (60-65° F) are reached (Figure 5.8). The offspring from this spawning event generally begin appearing in the sample collections in June. The settled clams generally increase in size throughout the year. The number of individuals collected in 2015 was three to five times greater than in each of the previous four years. This could indicate a slow increase in Corbicula numbers in the Ohio River or could be due to normal variability.

In any case the densities of Corbicula continue to be low relative what was present in the 1980's. The overall low numbers of live Corbicula collected in the sample collected outside the intake and cooling towers in 2015, compared to levels in the 1980's, likely reflects a natural decrease in the density of Corbicula in the Ohio River near BVPS, although an increased density of live settled individuals and juveniles collected in the cooling towers may indicate that the population is beginning to increase again. Continued monitoring of Corbicula densities is recommended.

5.4.5 Zebra

Mussel Monitoring Program Zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) are exotic freshwater mollusks that have ventrally flattened shells generally marked with alternating dark and lighter bands. They are believed to have been introduced into North America through the ballast water of ocean-going cargo vessels probably from Eastern Europe. They were first identified in Lake St. Clair in 1988 and rapidly spread to other Great Lakes and the Mississippi River drainage system, and have become increasingly abundant in the lower, middle, and upper Ohio River. They use strong adhesive byssal threads, collectively referred to as their byssus, to attach themselves to any hard surfaces (e.g., intake pipes, cooling water intake systems, and other mussels).

Responding to NRC Notice No. 89-76 (Biofouling Agent-Zebra Mussel, November 21, 1989), BVPS instituted a Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program in January 1990. Studies have been conducted each year since then. Zebra mussels were detected in both the pump samples (Figures 5.9 and 5.10) and the substrate samples (Figure 5.11 and 5.12) in 2015. Zebra mussel veliger pump samples were collected from May through October 2015 after not being collected in April. Veligers were collected at all of the six sites that were sampled in 2015. The lack ofveligers in April can be attributed to the much colder than usual late winter and early spring that occurred in 2015. Spawning begins as water temperature reach approximately 14 ° C and peaks at water temperatures of 21° C. Veliger densities usually peak about two weeks after the optimum water temperature for spawning is 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 19 reached. Veliger densities then fall off as veligers mature and settle, although female mussels broadcast mature eggs throughout the season. River water temperature in April was 9.4° C, which is well below the spawning threshold.

Veligers were present at all sampled sites from May through October. A peak in zebra mussel veligers occurred at most sample locations in May. The majority of these veligers were D-form and very recently spawned. This spike was likely due to a large number of mussels spawning at the same time after a delay in spawning due to colder than normal water temperatures.

The percentage of mussels capable of setting increased though the rest of the sampling season. Mussel densities in October were very lower which indicated that the majority of mussel have settled and no more veligers were being produce. This is supported by a river water temperature rapidly decreasing between the September and October sampling events. The greatest density of veligers was present in the sample collected from the Cooling Tower 2 reservoir sample in May (3o,:;oo/m 3). This was less than half of the peak density of veligers collected in 2014. It was, however greater than the peak density in 2013 (17,808/m 3) and consistent with that in 2012 (34,628/m 3). The 2015 density is high for the Ohio River. In 2015, settled zebra mussels were collected only in scrape samples at the Cooling Tower 1 reservoir, the barge slip and the intake structure (Figures 5.11 and 5.12). Those in the Cooling Tower 1 reservoir were on collected in low densities in April. The highest density of settled mussels in any sample collected was at the barge slip (61 mussels/m 2) in August. The mussels collected at the barge slip and intake structure included individuals that were capable of reproducing.

The density of collected adult zebra mussels in 2015 was somewhat higher than the densities that occurred in 2014 Overall, both the number of observations and densities of settled mussels in 2015 were consistent to those recorded in 2008-2014, and much higher than the preceding 5 years. Although densities of settled mussels are low compared to other populations such as the Lower Great Lakes, densities comparable to those in the Ohio River are sufficient to cause problems in the operation of untreated cooling water intake systems. Whether the population of zebra mussels in this reach of the Ohio River will remain the same or increase cannot be determined.

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

2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 20

6.0 ZEBRA

MUSSEL AND CORBICULA CONTROL ACTIVITIES In 2015, BVPS continued its Corbicula and zebra mussel control program (26th year), which included the use of a molluscicide to prevent the proliferation of Corbicula and zebra mussels within BVPS. BVPS was granted permission by the PADEP to use a molluscicide to target the Unit 1 river water system and the Unit 2 service water system. In 1990 through 1993, the molluscicide applications (CT-1) focused on reducing the Corbicula population throughout the entire river water system of each BVPS plant (Units 1 and 2). In 1994 through 2006, the CT-1 or CT-2 (reformulated CT-1) applications targeted zebra mussels and Corbicula in the internal water systems; therefore the molluscicide concentrations in the cooling towers were reduced during CT-1 or CT-2 applications.

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

Reservoir sediment samples taken after CT-1 or CT-2 applications represented mortality of Corbicula in the cooling tower only and do not reflect mortality in BVPS internal water systems. In 2007 BVPS began using Nalco H150M as the molluscicide.

This product, which has the same active ingredients as the CT-2 and CT-2, was applied in the same manner. In addition to clamicide treatments, preventive measures were taken that included quarterly cleaning of the Intake Bays. The bay cleanings are intended to minimize the accumulation and growth of mussels within the bays. This practice prevents creating an uncontrolled internal colonization habitat. 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 21

7.0 REFERENCES

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

Published by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission.

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

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

NUREGLCR.

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

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

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

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

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp. FENOC, 2005. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

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

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

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

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

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp. FENOC, 2010. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp. FENOC, 2011. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp FENOC, 2012. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp FENOC, 2013. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp FENOC, 2014. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 82 pp 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 22 FENOC, 2015. Annual Environmental Operating Report, Non-radiological.

First Energy Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1&2. 83 pp Hutchinson, G. E., 1967. A treatise on limnology.

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

John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York. 1115 pp. Hynes, H.B. N., 1970. The ecology of running waters. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto. NRC, IE Bulletin 81-03: Flow Blockage of Cooling Tower to Safety System Components by Corbicula sp. (Asiatic Clam) and Mytilus sp. (Mussel).

Pielou, E. C., 1969. An introduction to mathematical ecology. Wiley Interscience, Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Robins, C.R., R. M. Bailey, C. E. Bond, J. R. Brooker, E. A. Lachner, R. N. Lea, and W. B. Scott, 1991. Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States and Canada (fifth edition).

American Fisheries Society Special Publication No. 20:1-183.

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

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

In: B. A. Whitton, ed. River ecology. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. 155-169 pp. ( 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) -23 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 8.0 TABLES 24 TABLES.I BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION (BVPS) SAMPLING DATES FOR 2015 Study Jan *Feb Mar Apr May* Ji.in Jul Aug Benthic Mactoinvertebrate Fish ,. .* Corbicula .and z.ebra Mussel

• Mussel Ve!iger 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 30 21 21 \. 28 28 30 28 23 30 28 28 23 30 28 25 Sep . Oct Nov Dec 17 17 5 17 14 5 17 14 Table 5.2 Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From *1973 Through 2015 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum I Class Family Sub-Famil Porifera I Cnidaria IHvdrozoa Clavidae Hvdridae Platyhelminthes ITricladida IRhabdocoela Nemertea Nematoda Entoprocta F.ctoprocta Annelida Oli2ochaeta Aeolosomatidae Enchvtraeidae Naididae -' 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus and Species Sf)on1Zilla traf!i/is CordvlofJhora lacustris Crasf)edacusta sowerbii Hydra sp. Urnatella 1Zracilis Fredericella sp. Paludicella articulata Pectinatella SP. Plumatella sp. Allonais vectinata AmfJhichaeta levdi!Zi Amvhichaeta so. Arcteonais lomondi Aulovhorus so. Chaetof(aster diaphanus C. diastroohus Dero diJZitata Dero flabel!iJZer D. nivea Dero sp. Nais barbata N. behninf(i N. bretscheri N. communis N. elinf!uis N. f)ardalis N. f)seudobtusa N. simfJlex N. variabilis Nais so. 0fJhidonais seroentina Paranais.fi"ici Paranais litoralis Paranais sp. Pif!uetiella michi1Zanensis Pristina idrensis Pristina /onf!isoma Pristina /onf!iseta P. osborni Pristina sp. Pristinella sp. 26 Previous Collected in New in Collections 2015 2015 x x / x x x x x x x / x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x

x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Table 5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2015 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum Class I Family Sub-Family Annelida Oli!rnchaeta Naididae Tubificida Tubificidae Lumbriculidae Hirudinae Gloss iohoniidae IEmobdellidae Haplotaxidae Lumbricina Lumbricidae 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus and Species Pristine/la ienkinae Pristine/la idrensis Pristine/la sima Pristina osborni Rioistes oarasita Slavina aooendiculata Soecaria iosinae Steohensoniana trivandrana Stvlaria fossularis S. lacustris Uncinais uncinata Ve;dovskyel/a coma/a Ve;dovskvella intermedia Ve;dovskvella sp. Aulodrilus limnobius A. vigueti A. oluriseta Aulodrilus so. Bothrioneurum veidovskvanum Branchiura sowerbyi Jlyodrilus temvletoni Limnodrilus cervix L. cervix (variant)

L. clavaredianus L. hoffineisteri L. maumeensis L. vrofundicla L. sviralis L. udekemianus Limnodrilus sv. Peloscolex multisetosus longidentus P. m. multisetosus Potamothrix moldaviensis Potamothrix sp. P. vejdovskyi Psammorvctides curvisetosus Tubifex tubifex Unidentified immature forms: with hair chaetae without hair chaetae He!Obdella elongata H.

Helobdella sp. Ervobdella sp. Mooreobdella microstoma Sty/odrilus sp. 27 Previous Collected in New in Collections 2015 2015 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Table 5.2 (continued) 4':u<:fpm<>fiP I

of M<>P ,.; *h-*a.: C'oll1>Pf1>.-I From 1973 Thronah 7.fll <:; 'n Th .. Ohi1 N .. , 1r RVPS: Phylum Class Family Sub-Familvl Arthroooda Acarina Ostracoda lsonn<lll Arthrolllll1>t Amphinodit Talitridae Garnmaridae Pontoporeiidae Corophididae IJecaoooa Lollemoora Enhemeroptera Heptageniidae Epherneridae Baetidae Caenidae Tricorvthidae Me2aloptera I Odonata I Gonmhidae Lestidae Libellulidae , Plecoptera Trichoptera I Hydropsychidae Hvdroptilidae Leptoceridae Polycentropodidae IPolvcentropomdae 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus andSpecies Oxus SP. Ase/lus sp. Hvalella azteca Cran[{onyx vseudof!:racilis Cran[{onyx so. Gammarusfasciatus Gammarus sp. Monovoreia affinis Stenacron sp. Stenonema sp. Evhemerd SP. Hexaf!:enia SP. Evhron sp. Baetis sp. Caenis sp. Sera/tel/a sp. Tricorvthodes sp. Sia/is sp. Arf!:ia sp. Dromo[{omohus svoliatus sp. Gomphus sp. I Les/es SP. Libe/lula sp. Cheumatovsvche sp. Hvdromroche SP. Paramroche SP. lHvdroptila so. Orthotrichia sp. Oxyethira sp. Ceraclea sp. Oecetis sp. Cvrnellus SP iro1ycentropus sp. 28 Previous Collected in New in C'nll. *-"'---.,ou: .,ou: x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Table 5.2 (continued)

T .id nf **foh .... tP<: rnne .. tMf From 1973 Iii "'" 7'11 !\ "n The Ohi* D.iver Ne: 1r RVPS Phylum I Class Family Sub-Familyl Coleoptera Hvdrophilidae Coleoptera Elmidae Psephenidae Diotera Psvchodidae Chaoboridae Simuliidae Chironomidae Chironominae

' TanvDodinae 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus and Species Ancvronvx variezatus Dubiraphia sp. Helichus sp. Optioserus sp. Stene/mis sp. Unidentified Diptera Pericoma sp. Psychoda sp. Telmatoscopus sp. Unidentified Psychodidae mmae Chaoborus sp. Similium sp. Tanvtarsini nuna Chironominae 0000 Axarus sp. Chironomus sp. Cladovelma sp. Cladotanvtarsus SP. Crvntochironomus SP. CrvvtotendiTJes sv. Dicrotendives nervosus Dicrotendives SP. GlvTJtotendipes sp. Harnischia sp. Microchironomus sp. Micropsectra sp. Microtendipes sp. Parachironomus sp. Paracladope/ma sp. Paratanvtarsus sp. Para/endives SP. Phaenopsectra sp. Polvvedilum Cs .s. l convictum tvDe P. ( s.s.J s imulans type Po/vnedilum SD. Pseudochironomis STJ. Rheotanvtarsus SD. Stempel/ina sp. Stenochironomus sp. Stictochironomus sp. Tanvtarsus cottmani Tanvtarsus sp. Tribe/as SP. Xenochironomus SP. 11 anypodmae pupae Ablabesmyia sp. Clinotanypus sp. Coe/otanvvus scapu/aris Coe/otanvvus sp. Dialmabatista TJulcher Dialmabatista SP. Proc/adius SP. 1anypus sp. 29 Previous Collected in New in rnl**-"nno

?Ill<; ?Ill<; x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Table 5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2015 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum I Class Family Sub-Family Diptera Tanypodinae Orthocladiinae Diamesinae Ceratopogonidae Dolichopodidae Emoididae Ephydridae Muscidae Rhagionidae Tipulidae Strationwidae Svrohidae Lellidootera Hydracarinidia Mollusca Gastronoda Hydrobiidae Anmicolinae Bithvnidae

'* Physacea Pleuroceridae ( Phvsidae 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus and Species Thienemannimvia group Zavrelimvia sp. Orthocladiinae pupae Cricotovus bicinctus C. (s.s.) trifascia Cricotovus

(!socladius)-svlvestris Group C. (lsocladius) sp. Cricotovus (s.s.) SP. Eukiefferiella sp. Hvdrobaenus SP. Limnovhves sp. Nanocladius (s.s.) distinctus Nanocladius SP. Orthocladius sp. Parametriocnemus sp. Paraphaenocladius sp. Psectrocladius SP. Pseudorthocladius SP. Pseudosmillia sp. Smillia sp. Theinemannimvia sp. Diamesa so. Pollhastia sp. Probezzia SP. Bezzia SP. Culicoides sp. Clinocera SP. Wiedemannia sp. Oxus sp. Amnicola SP. Aminicola binnevana Amnicola limosa StaRnicola elodes Bithvnia SP. Pleurocera acuta Goniobasis SP. Physa sp. Physa ancillaria Physa in/ef!m 30 Previous Collected in New in Collections 2015 2015 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Table 5.2 (continued)

Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 Through 2015 in The Ohio River Near BVPS Phylum I Class Family Sub-Famil Mollusca Phvsacea Ancylidae Planorbidae Valvatidae Pelecvnoda IS ohaeriacea Corbiculidae Sohaeriidae Dreissenidae Unionidae 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Genus and Species Ferrissia sp. Gillia atilis Gvraulus so. Valvata oerdeoressa Valvata piscinalis Valvata sincera Valvata sp. Corbicula Huminea Corbicula so. Pisidium ventricosum Pisidium sp. Sphaerium sp. Unidentified immature Sphaeriidae I Dreissena pofvmorpha Anodonta zrandis Anodonta (irrnnature)

Elliptio sp. Ouadrula pustulosa Unidentified immature Unionidae 31 Prelious Collected in New in Collections 2015 2015 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Scientific name 1 Ab/abesmyia sp. 0 Amnicola sp. 0 Amnico/a limosa 0 Arcteonais

/omondi 0 Argia sp. (Odonata) 0 Au/odrilus sp 0 Branchiura sowerbyi 0 Chironomid pupae 0 Chironomidae 0 Chironomus sp. 0 C/adopelma sp 0 Coelotanypus sp. 0 Corbicula sp. 0 Cl}'ptochironomus sp. 0 Dicrotentipides sp. 0 Diptera. 0 Dreissena polymorpha 0 Dubiraphia sp. 0 Fenissia sp. 0 Gammarus sp. 0 Gilliaatilis 0 Hexagenia sp. 0 Hirudinea 0 Hydrobiidae 0 Immature tubificid without 21 Limnodri/us hoffmeisteri 11 Limnodri/us maumeensis 1 Limnodri/us prolimdico/a 1 Lumbriculidae 0 Microtendipes sp. 0 Naididae 0 Nais pardalis 0 Nais variabilis 0 Nematoda 12 Ocetis sp. 0 Oligochaeta 0 Optioservus sp. 0 Orthoc/adius sp. 0 Oxus sp. (Hydracarina) 0 Phaenopsectra sp. 0 Physa sp. 0 Pisidium sp. 0 P/eurocera acuta 0 Plecoptera 0 Po/ypedi/uin sp. 1 Pristina osbomi 0 Piistinella jenkinae 0 Pristine/la sima 0 Probezzia sp. 0 Procladius sp. 0 Psec/oc/adius , sp. 0 Pseudochironomis sp. 0 Rheotanyta1Sus sp. 0 Specaria josinae 0 Sphaerium sp. 0 Stempellina sp. 0 Sty/aria latusbis 0 Tanypus sp. 0 Tanyta1Sus sp. 0 Trichoptera 0 Valvata sincera 0 Total 47 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) TABLE5.3 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRA TECOUNfS FOR TRIPLICATESAMPUS TAKEN AT FACH SAMPLE STATION FOR MAY AND SEPTIMBER 2015 May Sept Location May Location 2A 2Bl 2B2 2B3 3 Total 1 2A 2Bl 2B2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 4 8 0 5 1 0 4 0 *o 2 6 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 37 14 3 28 86 4 8 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 9 1 0 0 1 1 5 7 6 1 5 1 6 2 2 0 5 15 2 30 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 9 4 24 86 46 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 58 1 0 0 1 1 -2 4 0 2 28 *o 0 0 0 0-0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 29 11 7 63 133 75 92. 116 11 0 6 4 2 9 32 13 0 4 *O 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 13 3 1 1 34 .0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 15 0 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 *o 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 5 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 2 0 0 1 3 9 2 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 7 9 57 3 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 11 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 2 0 4 9 28 1 60 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 13 2 1 2 0 18 4 30 67 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 47 132 54 19 135 434 204 288 507 78 32 Sept 2015 2B3 3 Total Total 0 0 2 3 0 4 4 4 1 0 1 1 5 0 11 11 1 0 2 2 0 1 5 5 4 4 22 26 2 1 9 15 1 0 1 1 3 .9 36 122 -0 0 2 2 7 0 27 27 2 1 16 23 7 4 49 64 1 0 7 7 0 1 1 1 3 5 168 177 1 0 3 4 1 5 68 68 2 _3 35 39 2 0 4 4 1 0 3 3 0 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 113 131 538 671 7 18 42 74 0 4 5 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 5 0 0 1 35 /* 1 0 1 1 1 2 17 32 2 0 6 6 4 0 5 5 0 0 0 1 3 0 3 3 0 0 1 1 0 1 23 28 -0 2 7 7 6 1 21 24 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 3 20 94 101 4 1 21 23 16 6 23 24 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 25 2 120 129 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 7 5 0 5 5 7 0 17 17 0 0 0 19 81 5 190 208 0 0 0 1 1 0 7 7 324 232 1633 2067 May 1 (Control)

1. Jnt % Oligochaetes 487 72 Chironomids 14 2 Mollusks 0 0 Others 172 26 Total 673 ,. 100 September I (Control)

1. lnl-% Oligochaetes 1763 60 Chironomids 817 28 Mollusks 301 10 Others 43 1 Total 2924 ,. 100 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) TABLES.4 ME<\N NUMBm OFM\CROJNVmTEBRATFS (NUMBER/tW)

AND PFB.aNT COMPOSmON OFOLIGOCHAEJ.W, CIHRONOMIDS, MOLLUSKS, AND OTHER ORGANISMS, 2015 BVPS Station 2A 2Bl (Non-control) 2B2 (Non-control) 2B3 (Non-control)

1. lnl-% #lnl-% #/mz. %_ #lnl-% #lnl-258 38 774 41 '272 35 172 63 1147 401 60 1004 53 272 35 72 26 631 0 0 100 5 172 22 14 5 100 14 2 14 I 58 7 14 5 57 673 ... 100 1892 ,. 100 774 ,. 100 272 ,. 100 1935 Station 2A 2Bl (Non-control) 2B2 (Non-control) 2B3 (Non-control)

1. /mz % #!nl-% #Jnt % #lnl-% #Jnt 1362 33 1949 27 186 17 2322 50 2365 2136 52 2451 34 186 17 1993 43 602 459 11 2322 32 703 63 229 5 258 172 4 545 7 43 4 100 2 100 4129 ,. 100 7267 ,. 100 lll8 ,. 100 4644 .. 100 3325 33 3 Total Mean % #lnl-% 59 518 50 33 399 38 5 74 7 3 46 4 .. 100 1037 100 3 Total Mean % #/mz % 71 1656 42 18 1362 35 8 714 18 3 170 4 \ ,. 100 3902 100 TABLE 5.5 MEAN NUMBER OF MACROINVERTEBRATES (NUMBER/M 2) AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF OLIGOCHAETA, CHIRONOMIDAE, MOLLUSCA, AND OTHER ORGANISMS FOR THE CONTROL STATION (1) AND THE AVERAGE FOR NON-CONTROL STATIONS ( 2B1, 2B2, _AND 2B3), 2015 BVPS May Control Station (Mean) #/mz % Oligochaeta 487 72 Chironomidae 14 2 Mollusca 0 0 Others 172 26 TOTAL 673 100 September Control Station (Mean) #/mz Oligochaeta 1763 Chironomidae 817 Mollusca 301 Others 43 TOTAL 2924 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) % 60 28 10 1 ,. *100 Non-Control Station (Mean) #/mz. % 406 41 449 46 95 10 29 3 979 100 Non-Control Station (Mean) #/mz % 1486 34 1543 36 1085 25 229 5 4343 100 34 TABLES.6 SHANNON-WEINER DNERSITY, EVENNESS AND RICHNESS INDICES FOR BENTIIlC MACROINVERTEBRATES

<;:OLLECTED IN THEOIIlO RNER, 2015 ' ' . . ,* ',-R,

.**: ,_.* ..

einer ir!dex * * *;T. :, *: , ,,. * * .. *

• Rfchiiesr

... *1 6 0.56 0.72 1.30 . * .. ** '/},!\. 8 0.74 0.82 1.82 . ** .. *.". '. *": ,.

... *, . ,iBl** .. '2B2.

• 2B3; ,, 16 15 8 0.93 0.93 0.80 0.77 0.79 0.88 3.07 3.51 2.38 ... , St<itiOn ... t--Seritenlber'

• • * . ' . . : . . . L::; . .. . 21\ ., << "*2Bl ': .* ' ..... 2B2 ... *: . W3. J\ro; Of'.f;am '.. * ':. >: * -* . ,..,,.

,., : * * . .*.. * *. 21 1.00 0.76 3.76 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 19 0.89 0.70 . 3.18 32 16 34 1.05 0.70 0.99 0.70 0.58 0.65 4.98 3.44 5.71 35 ., .. "3,'.;,, *. 19 0.82 0.64 3.67 ,-,. '* ' . 24 0.80 0.58 4.22 *-

Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations 1 (Control) and 28 (Noncontrol), BVPS, 1973-2015.

1973 1 28 May 248 508 August 99 244 Mean 173 376 " 1976 1 28 May 927 3660 August 851 785 Mean 889 2223 1979 1 '. ,. 28 May 1004 Aug/Sept 1185 Mean 1095 1982 1 May 3490 September 2958 Mean 3223 1985 1 May 2256 September 1024 Mean 1640 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 840 588 714 28 3026 3364 3195 28 867 913 890 Pre ope rational 1974 1975 1 28 1 28 1116 2197 143 541 1017 1124 630 1369 1017 1124 . Operational 1977 '1978 1* 28 1. 20: ,'._ 674 848 351 126 591 3474 601 1896 633 2161 476 1011 Operational

• : 1980 1981 ' .. 1* 28' 1* 28* 1041 747 209 456 1523 448 2185 912 1282 598 1197 684 *.Operational*

.. ' ' .. 1983 1984 1 28 .. 1 .. 28* ... 3590 1314 2741 621 4172 4213 1341 828 3881 2764 2041 725

• Ooerati.onai

• ,. 1986 1987 -'1 *. 28 .. *1 28' 601 969 1971 2649 849 943 2910 2780 725 956 2440 2714 36

/ ', Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations 1 (Control) and 28 (Noncontrol), BVPS, 1973-2015 (Continued).

May September Mean '-May September Mean May September Mean May September Mean ',,-;,, , : (;)peratl<>nal

.* . .. . .. 1988 1989 1 . ,28. ' : 1 2B '* " 1804 1775 3459 2335 1420 1514 1560 4707 1612 1645 2510 3274 .. * . .. 1991 .. '1992 ... :.t .

• 26 ' ;

' *.28 7760 6355 7314 10560 3588 2605 2723 4707 5808 4480 5019 7634 . 1994 ' . 1995 . . . 6980 2349 8083 9283 1371 4176 2930 2640 1669 4876 3873 6578 1997 1998' 1411 2520 '6980 2349 1944 2774 1371 2930 1678 2647 4176 2640 , .. ,. ,, Ooeratfonal

• , .. .. ,. ,, __ 2000 2001 *1 . 28 .:*r .. *28 .. .. ... .: ,. .. May 2987 2881 3139 5232. September 3092 Mean 3040 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 2742 2812 3139 5232 37 ,._,., ; . ' " ,. . .. . . 1990 t .. 2B *. 15135 5796 5550* 1118 10343 3457 ** . r ... **" ,_, 1993 . 1 -... ;: ; ..

8435 2152 .4693 2143 6564 2148 1996 1987 1333 1649 2413 1814 1873

• 1999** ' .; 1

• 879 302 591 ' 'f 1548 8632 5090 2002 .. 1002 402 702 ."28. 2795 14663 8729 Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations 1 (Control) and 28 (Noncontrol), BVPS, 1973-2015 (Continued).

2003 1 2B May 7095 10750 September 2193 Mean 4644 .. . -' 2006 1 May 143 September 229 Mean 186 2009 1 May 71 September 903 Mean 487 . . _ . 2012 : -1. May 71 September 903 Mean 487 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 6464 8607 2B 1242 2199 1721 2B

• 1462 1902 1682 .213 1462 1902 1682 -Operational . -2004 2005 .1 2B 1 2B 2752 4558 516 1146 10062 7604 4773 6435 6407 6181 2645 3791 .Ooeratioriaf

• . --' . 2007 2008 1 -213 . 1 :2B . ' 559 912 158 1252 560 3794 1161 2150 560 2353 660 1701 ()perational

.-. ., . 2010 2011 1 .. 28. .. 1 :*28 1763 2527 115 1700 1720 1256 874 1233 1742 1892 495 1467 * *

• Operational

.. ., --2013 2014 1 2B 1 .-.2e 2107 903 1634 3149 373 1731 3526 7310 1240 1317 2580 5230 38 Table 5.7. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities for Stations 1 (Control) and 28 (Noncontrol), BVPS, 1973-2015 (Continued) . 2015 1 . ' May 673 September 979 Mean 826 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) . Oo.erational

.. . 28 , "* .... 2924 4343 3634 39 TABLE5.8 TOTAL FISH CATCH; ELECTROFISIDNG AND SEINE NET COMBINED DURING THE BVPS 2015 FISHERIES SURVEY Common Name Scientific Name Smallmouth buffalo Ictiobus bubalus Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Carp Cyprinis carpio Channel catfJSh Jctalurus punctatus Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides Flathead catfJSh PylOdictis olivaris Freshwater drum Aplodinotus wunniens Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum Goldfish Carassius auratus Golden redhorse sucker Moxostoma erythrurum Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus Mimic shiner Notropis volucellus Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Quillback Carpiodes cyprinus Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Shorthead redhorse sucker Moxostoma macrolepidotum Smallmouth bass Spotfm shiner Spotted bass Walleye !Total Fish Collected in 2015 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Micropterus dolomieu Notropis spilopterus Micropterus punctulatus Sander vitreum 40 Number I Percent 20 4.60 2 0.46 1 0.23 1 0.23 12 2.76 2 0.46 4 0.92 355 81.61 1 0.23 7 1.61 11 2.53 1 o.:p 3 0.69 1 0.23 1 0.23 3 0.69 7 1.61 1 0.23 1 0.23 1 0.23 I 435 I 100.00 I I I I TABLE5.9 COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL ELECTROFISIDNG CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 2015 FISHERIES SURVEY Common Name Control Smalhnouth buffalo Blue!rill Carp Chmmel catfish Flathead catfish Freshwater drum Gizzard shad Goldfish Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Pwnpkinseed Quillback Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Spotted bass Walleye Total 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 3 3 45 4 4 1 1 1 2 64 O/o 4.69 4.69 70.31 6.25 6.25 1.56 1.56 1.56 3.13 ioo.oo Non-control

% Total fish O/o 17 4.8 20 4.77 1 0.3 1 0.24 1 0.3 1 0.24 1 0.3 1 0.24 2 0.6 2 0.48 1 0.3 4 0.95 310 87.3 355 84.73 1 0.3 1 0.24 3 0.8 7 1.67 7 2.0 11 2.63 2 0.6 3 0.72 1 0.3 1 0.24 1 0.24 2 0.6 3 0.72 4 1.1 6 1.43 1 0.3 1 0.24 1 0.3 1 0.24 355 100.0 419 100.00 41 TABLES.10 COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL SEINE CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 2015 FISHERIES SURVEY Common Name Control Bluegill Emerald shiner Mimic shiner Smallmouth bass S otfin shiner Total 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 1 6 1 1 0 % 11.11 0 0.00 66.67 6 85.71 11.11 0 0.00 11.11 0 0.00 0.00 1 14.29 100.00 7 100.00 42 otal fish 1 12 1 1 % 6.25 75.00 6.25 6.25 TABLE 5.11 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE MAY2015 (SPRING) SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Ele ctrofJS bing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B Smalhnouth buffulo 1 1 Bluegill Carp 1 Chann'e! catfish Emerald shiner Flathead catfish 1 Freshwater drum 3 Gizzard shad Goldfish 1 Golden redhorse sucker 4 2 1 Longnose gar 1 3 2 Mimic shiner Plllllpkinseed Quillback 1 Rock bass 1 Shorthead redhorse sucker 2 Smalhnouth bass 1 1 Spotfin shiner Spotted bass I Walleye 1 Total 0 0 11 12 6

• Gear= (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 43 E-3 Total % Total % 0 -2 6.67 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 3.33 0 -0 0.00 I 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 3.33 0 -3 10.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 3.33 0 -7 23.33 0 -6 20.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 3.33 0 -1 3.33 0 -2 6.67 1 0 -3 10.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 3.33 0 -1 3.33 1 0 -30 100.00 TABLES.12 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE JULY (SUMMER) 2015 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Seine Electro fishing Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B Smalhnouth buffalo 1 Bluegill Carp Channel catfish Emerald shiner Flathead catfISh 1

• Freshwater drum Gizzard shad 9 GoldfISh Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar 2 Mimic shiner Pumpkinseed Quillback Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Spotfm shiner Spotted bass Walleye j Total 0 0 3 9 1

• Gear= (E) Fish captured by electro fishing; (S) captured by seining 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 44 E-3 I I 2 Total % Total % 0 -1 6.67 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -I 6.67 0 -0 0.00 0 -60.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 .. 0 -2 13.33 0 -0 0.00 0 -I 6.67 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -I 6.67 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -15 100.00

' TABLES.13 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE SEPTEMBER (FALL) 2015 SAMPLING OF THE omo RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B Smalhnouth buffalo Bluegill 1 Carp Channel catfish Emerald shiner Flathead catfJSh . Freshwater druni Gizzard shad 45 30 43 Goldfish Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar 1 Mimic shiner Pumpkinseed 1 1 Quillback Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Spotfm shiner Spotted bass Walleve Total 0 0 47 31 44

• Gear= (E) Fish captured by electro fishing; (S) captured by seining 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 45 Seine Ele ctrofis bing E-3 Total % Total O/o 0 -0 0.00 0 -1 0.34 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 168 ,, 0 286 98.28 0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 1 7-0 -2 0.69 0 -0 0.00 ... 0 -2 0.69 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 0 -0 0.00 169 0 -291 10 I FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE NOVEMBER (WINTER) 2015 SAMPLING OF THE omo RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations

• Common Name S-1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B Smalhnouth buffalo 1 1 15 Bluegill 1 Carp Channel catf1Sh 1 Emerald shiner 6 6 Flathead catf!Sh Freshwater drum 1 Gizzard shad 55 1 ' Goldf!Sh Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Mimic shiner 1 1. Pumpkinseed I Quillback Rock bass I Shorthead redhorse sucker 1 Smalhnouth bass 1 1 1 Spotfm shiner 1 Spotted bass I Walleye I Total 9 7 3 56 19

• Gear= (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 46 E-3 4 1 5 Seine Electro fishing Total % Total % 0 0.00 17 20.48 1 6.25 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 ' 0 0.00 1 1.20 12 75.00 ,. 0 0.00 0 0.00 b 0.00 . 0 0.00 1 1.20 0 0.00 60 72.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 I 1.20 1 6.25 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 11' 0 0.00 1 1.20 ,. I 6.25 2 2.41 ,. I 6.25 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 16 100.00 83 100.00 TABLE5.15 ESTIMATED NUMBER OF FISH OBSERVED*

DURING ELECTROFISHING OPERATIONS, 2015 Common Name Bluegill Freshwater drum Smalhnouth buffitlo Longnose gar Unidentified suckers Unidentified black bass Gizzard shad Total * =Not boated or handled 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) May 1 1 2 4 Julv Sept Nov 1 1 1 I I I 200+ 3 1 200+ 47 Total 1 1 1 2 3 2 200+ 210+

I , Table 5.16 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISIDNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2012 FISHERIES SURVEY Se?.son Effort (min) Common Name Spring 40.l Smallmouth buffalo Channel catfish Common carp Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Smallmouth bass Season Total Season Effort (min) Common Naµie Summer 40.l Smalhnouth buffalo Common carp Gizzard shad Largemouth bass Smallmouth bass Season Total 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 48 Number CPUE (fIShlmin)

Collected 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 5 0.1247 5 0.1247 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 5 0.1247 3 0.0748 23 0.5736 Number CPUE (fISh/min)

Collected*

5 0.1247 , 1 0.0249 8 0.1995 1 0.0249 3 0.0748 18 0.4489 Table 5.16 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2012 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (miµ) Common Name. Fall 40.1 Smalhnouth buffitlo Black crappie ' Common carp Freshwater drwn -Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Largemouth bass Quillback Rock bass Sauger Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Spotted bass White bass Season Total Season Effort (filin) Common Name Winter 30 Smalhnouth buffitlo Freshwater drwn Golden shiner Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Walleye White bass Season Total 2012 150.3 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Number CPUE (fJSh/min)

Collected 4 0.0998 1 0.0249 2 0.0499 1 0.0249 10 0.2494 3 0.0748 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 1 0.0249 3 0.0748 2 0.0499 1 0.0249 6 0.1496 37 0.9227 Number CPUE*(fJSh/min)

Collected 1 0.0333 1 0.0333 1 0.0333 3 0.1000 2 0.0667 1 0.0333 1 0.0333 10 0.3333 88 . 0.58550 49 Table 5.17 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISIDNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2013 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Common Name Spring 40.4 Smallmouth buffulo Black crappie Bluegill Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Pumpkinseed Quillback River carpsubker Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Season Effort (min) Summer 40.0 / 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Smallmouth bass Spotted bass Season Total Common Name Smallmouth buffulo Black crappie Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Sauger s*mallmouth bass Season Total 50 Number CPUE (fish/min)

Collected I 0.0248 1 0.0248 1 0.0248 1 0.0248 8 0.1980 2 0.0495 1 0.0248 2 0.0495 2 0.0495 I 0.0248 10 0.2475 7 0.1733 2 0.0495 39 0.9653 Number, CPUE {fish/min)

Collected 3 0.0750 I 0.0250 I 0.0250 3 0.0750 1 0.0250 2 0.0500 11 0.2750 I I i I I Table 5.17 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISHIELECTROFISIDNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2013 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Efforf(min)

Common Name -Nnniber CPUE (fish/min)

Fall 40.4 Bluegill 2 0.0495 Channel catfish 1 0.0248 Flathead catfish 1 0.0248 Freshwater drum 1 0.0248 Gizzard shad 1 0.0248 Golden redhorse sucker 2 0.0495 Longnose gar 1 0.0248 River carpsucker 1 0.0248 Smalhnouth bass 1 0.0248 Spotted bass 1 0.0248 Walleye 1 0.0248 Season Total 13 0.3218 Number .-I Season Effort (min) -Comnion Name Collected CPU£ (fish/min)

Winter 40.1 Bluegill 1 0.0249 Channel catfish-1 0.0249 Freshwater drum 1 0.0249 Golden redhorse sucker 6 0.1496 Rock bass 3 0.0748 Shorthead redhorse sucker 7 0.1746 Smalhnouth 2 0.0499 Yellow perch 1 0.0249 Season Total 22 0.5486 11 2013 I 160.9 I 1-85 -I 0.52828 . 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 51 I Table 5.18 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISIIlNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2014 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Spring 40.4 Season Effort (ritin) Summer 40.l 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Common Name Smalhnouth buffitlo Carp Channel catfish Freshwater drum Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar River carpsucker Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Spotted bass Walleye Season Total Common Name Smallmouth buffitlo Carp Gizzard shad Longnose gar Shorthead redhorse sucker Smalhnouth bass Season Total 52 Number CPUE (fish/min)

Collected 3 0.0743 2 0.0495 2 0.0495 2 0.0495 12 0.2970 3 0.0743 4 0.0990' 1 0.0248 4 0.0990 4 0.0990 2 0.0495 5 0.1238 44 1.0891 Number CPUE (fish/min)

Collected 6 0.1496 1 0.0249 14 0.3491 1 0.0249 3 0.0748 1 0.0249 26 0.6484 Table 5.18 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISlllNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2014 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Fall 40.0 Season Effort (min) Winter 40.0 ' 2014 160.5 20 15 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Common Name Carp Gizzard shad Largemouth bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Yellow perch Season Total Common Name Smallmouth buffalo Bluegill Carp Gizzard shad Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Shorthead redhorse sucker

• Smallmouth bass Season Total 53 Number CPUE (fish/min)

Collected 4 0.1000 26 0.6500 1 0.0250 2 0.0500 1 0.0250 34 0.8500 Number CPUE (fish/min)

Collected

'4 0.1000 1 0.0250 6 0.1500 13 0.3250 4 0.1000 4 0.1000 1 0.0250 1 0.0250 34 0.8500 138 0.85981 Table 5.19 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISIDNG MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2015 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Common Name Spring 41.5 Smalhnouth buffalo Caro Flathead catfish Freshwater drum Goldfish Golden redhorse sucker Longnose gar Quillback Rock bass Shorthead redhorse sucker Season Effort (min) Swnmer 40.7 -2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Smalhnouth bass Spotted bass Walleye Season Total Common Name Smalhnouth buffalo Flathead catfish Gizzard shad Lommose Emr Pumnkinseed Smalhnouth bass Season Total 54 Number CPUE Collected ff IS hf min) 2 0.0482 1 0.0241 1 0.0241 3 0.0723 1 0.0241 7 0.1687 6 0.1446 1 0.0241 1 0.0241 2 0.0482 3 0.0723 1 0.0241 1 0.0241 30 0.7229 Number CPUE Collected (fIShfmin) 1 0.0246 1 0.0246 9 0.2211 2 0.0491 1 0.0246 1 0.0246 15 0.3686 Table 5.19 (continued)

CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE) BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2015 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Common Name Fall 40.9 Bluegill Gizzard shad Longnose gar Pumpkinseed Season Total Season Effort (min) Common Name Winter 40.6 Smalhnouth buffalo Channel catfish Freshwater dnnn Gizzard shad Longnose gar Shorthead redhorse sucker I 2015 I '163.7 I 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Smalhnouth bass Season Total 55 Number CPU:E Collected (fish/min) 1 0.0244 286 6.9927 2 0.0489 2 0.0489 291 7.1149 Number CPUE Collected I j'j., -17 0.4187 1 0.0246 1 0.0246 60 1.4778 1 0.0246 1 0.0246 2 0.0493 83 2.0443 I 419 I 2.55956 I TABLES.20 UNIT 1 COOLING RESERVOIR MONTHLY SAMPLING CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR 2015 FROM BVPS Area Collection Sampled Live or Date (sq ft) 3/30/2015 0.25 4/21/2015 0.25 5/28/2015 0.25 6/23/2015 0.25 7/30/2015 0.25 8/28/2015 0.25 9/17/2015 0.25 10114/2015 0.25 11/5/2015 0.25 Unit summary 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Dead Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Dead Live Maximum Length Count Ran2e (mm) 1 2.00-3.34 3 2.00-3.34 0 --0 --2 4.75-6.29 2 3.35-4.74 1 2.00-3.34 2 3.35-4.74 2 2.00-3.34 2 4.75-6.29 2 6.30-9.94 3 >9.50 3 6.30-9.94 1 3.35-4.74 0 --0 ---0 --0 --11 6.30-9.94 13 >9.50 56 Minimum Estimated Length Number Ran2e(mm) (oer sq m) 2.00-3.34 43 1.00-1.99 129 ---0 ---0 3.35-4.74 86 2.00-3.34 86 2.00-3.34 43 2.00-3.34 86 2.00-3.34 86 2.00-3.34 86 6.30-9.94 86 4.75-6.29 129 4.75-6.29 129 3.35-4.74 43 --0 ---0 ---0 ---0 2.00-3.34 53 1.00-1.99 62 TABLES.21 UNIT 2 COOLING RESERVOIR MONTHLY SAMPLING CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR 2015 FROM BVPS Area Collection Sampled Live or Date (SQ ft) Dead 3/30/2015 0.25 Dead Live 4/21/2015 0.25 Dead Live ' 5/28/2015 0.25 Dead Live 6/23/2015 0.25 Dead Live Dead 7/30/2015 0.25 Live 8/28/2015 0.25 Dead Live 9/17/2015 0.25 Dead Live Dead 10/14/2015*

---Live 11/5/2015 0.25 Dead Live Unit summary Dead Live *Not sampled due to outage 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Maximum Length Range Count (mm) 1 1.00-1.99 2 3.35-4.74 0 0 -1 2.00-3.34 1 2.00-3.34 1 3.35-4.74 0 _\ 0 2 >9.50 1 6.30-9.94 3 4.75-6.29

---

0 3 4.75-6.29 9 >9.50 57 Minimum Estimated Length Number Ran!!e(mm) (per sqm) 1.00-1.99 43 2.00-3.34 86 --0 --0 --0 2.00-3.34 43 2.00-3.34 43 3.35-4.74 43 --0 -0 2.00-3.34 86 6.30-9.94 43 2.00-3.34 129 -----------0 --0 2.00-3.34 16 1.00-1.99 48 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 9.0 FIGURES 58

'OOOMlet e u t-----1 Figure 5.1 2015 Beaver Valley Power Station Aquatic Monitoring Program Sampling Control and Non-Control Sampling Stations 2015 Annual Enviro n me n ta l Report FENOC (BVPS) 59 LEGEND jBcnthic sample site --*----* .. -.;_ .s111pp1ngpo11 Mag HOO Thu.,.,, 15 10: 23 1997 Scale 1 : 31 , 250 (at ctnl.,I 2000FHt r---,__1ooo_Met_er* -* .. ---*-Figure 5.2 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Benthic Organism Survey Sampling Sites for the 2015 Study 2015 Annual Env ironmental Report 60 FENOC (BVPS)

LEGEND D site " Seine site *Shippingport Mag 14.00 Thu Jan 18 10:1-4 1997 Sc.-.1: 31 , 250(A& unlet) 2000 Fttl >----* ,, *I fOOOMerC!ra r--*. --.. -*I Figure 5.3 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Fish Population Survey Fish Sampling Sites for the 2015 Study 2015 Annual Environmenta l Report FENOC (BVPS) 61 Figure 5.4 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) Meg1.f.OO Mon Mw 17 12: "511197 Scale 1 :62,500 (ol cent<<) 1Mllw 2 l<M O 199S OcUinno Location of Study Area , Beaver Valley Power Station Shippingport , Pennsylvania BVPS 62 Comparison of live Corbicula clam density estimates among 2015 BVPS Unit 1 cooling tower reservoir events, for various clam shell groups. 500 °" 450 w ti; 400 ::: "' w 350 a. i 300 250 200 u.. 0 "' 150 w "' :; 100 ::::> z 50 0 3130 9 0.01-0.99 mm a 1.00-1.99 mm *2.00-3.34 mm 3. 35-4. 7 4 mm 6.30-9.49 mm a>9.50mm TOTAL #lm2 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 0 86 43 0 0 0 0 129 ..,.,, 5128 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 86 .&:::;' .&:::;' c::7 ,..., ..,.,, ..,.,, ,..., ,..., ..,.,, 6123 7130 8128 9117 10114 1115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 86 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 43 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Figure 5.5 0 0 43 0 0 0 86 86 86 43 0 0 63 SIZE RANGE Comparison of live Corbicula clam density estimates among 2015 BVPS Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir events, for various clam shell groups. ct: :ii 500 a: w Q. 450 < ...J 400 ::i u 350 iii a: 0 300 u u. 250 0 a: 200 w Ill 150 :ii ::i z 100 50 0 .., .., 4121 MB

• 0.01-0. 99 mm 0 0 c 1.00-1.99mm 0 0 0 11 2.00-3. 34 mm 43 0 43 3.35-4. 7 4 mm 43 0 0 *4.75-6.29mm 0 0 0 6.30-9.49 mm 0 0 0 c>9.50mm 0 0 0 TOTAL #An2 86 0 43 *No sample; Unit 2 Offline in October 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 0 0 43 0 0 0 43 TO T AL* m.2 .c::::7 .c::::7 C=:7 .., .., .., .., SIZE RANGE .., ,.., ,.., ,.., ,.., C=:7 C=:7 ,.., .., .., .., .., 7/JO 8128 9117 10/14" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 43 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 86 129 0 0 Figure 5.6 64 Comparison of live Corbicula clam density estimates among 2015 BVPS Intake Structure sample events, for various clam shell groups. <( ...I :::> 0 iii 0:: 0 0 IL. 0 0:: w al ::!: :::> z 2 0 0.01-0.99 mm 01.00-1.99 mm *2.00-3.34 mm a 3.35-4.74 mm *4.75-6.29 mm 06.30-9.4 9 mm *>9.50mm oTOTAL 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 7 1 30 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 6 7 16 9 26 17 65 SIZE RANGE 9 1 11 / 17 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 I n take structure bottom samples are 1 3 co ll ected from the Ohio River at the Intake Build i ng 3 2 5 11 6 Figure 5.7 Water Temperature and River Elevation Recorded at the Ohio River at BVPS Intake Structure During 2015 on Monthly Sample Dates. 80 70 !!:. e ., a. 60 ... ., 50 40 30 3/18 Figure 5.8 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 4121 5128 676 674 672 670 668 600 --------temp -elevation 664 6/23 7130 8/2 8 9/17 10/14 11/5 2015 Monthly Sample Datea 66 m < g 35000 30000 250 00 20000 !'l 5 :tt 15000 10000 5000 0 In iake Structure Open \Vater 1!14 1 21 0 0 5: 28 :!7000 0 6/23 960 *7 1 30 429 08 1 28 650 *9*17 ::0100 010 14 105 l:nit 1 Cooling To wer Rese1Yoir 0 15850 300 6561 4198 120 1462 Sample location l:nit 2 Coolin2 Tower 0 30500 300 6691 12702 5025 0 Figure 5.9. Density of zebra mussel veligers collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2015. *Unit 2 Cooling Tower not sampled in October due to outage 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 67 18000 16000 14000 12000 .... 10000 s '.it 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Bar ge Slip* 0 05/28 495 06/23 1220 *7 1 30 1728 0 8/28 5290 *9 1 17 7125 D 10/14 0 Splash Pool 0 8015 1710 8820 5415 1440 13 Sample location Emergency Outfall Facility** 0 15600 720 2835 3625 12250 18 Figure 5.10. Density of zebra mussel veligers collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2015. *Barge Slip not sampled in October due to Access Restrictions

• • EOB not sampled in April due to Access Restrictions 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 68 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 N 5 6.0 '.it 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 B3/30 05/2 8 06/2 3 0 7/30 08/2 8 11 9/I 7

• 10 114

• 11/5 Intake Structure/Open Water 1.3 2.7 2.7 0.4 3.1 7.6 10.8 0.9 2.2 Unit 1 Cooling To w er Reser v oir 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reser v oir* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Figure 5.11. Density of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2015. *Unit 2 Cooling tower not sampled in October due to outage 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 69 65.00 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 M 35.00 = 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 Emergency Outfall Barge Slip** Splash Pool Facility* 1:123 1 30 8.52 0.00 0.00 04/21 8.52 0.00 0.00 05/28 17.04 0.00 0.00 *6 1 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 *7 1 30 26.46 0.00 0.00 *8 1 28 60.99 0.00 0.00 *9 1 1 7 17.04 0.00 0.00 Cl 10/14 0.00 0.00 0.00 D 11/5 14.80 0.00 0.00 Figure 5.12. Density of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station, 2015. *The EOF was not sampled in March due to Access Restrictions

• • The Barge Slip was not sampled in October due to Access Restrictions 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 70 2015 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 10.0 PERMITS 71 Attachment 10.1: PERMITS & CERTIFICATES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE Registration Number Regulator/Description Expiration BVPS EPA generator identification Resource Conservation

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

Also used by PA DEP Indefinite P AR000040485 to monitor regulated waste activity under the Pennsylvania Solid Waste Management Act (SWMA). 04-02474 BVPS EPA Facility Identification Number for CERCLA/EPCRA/SARA.

Used for Indefinite SARA Tier II reporting and emergency planning.

FE Long Term Distribution Center/Warehouse (22) EPA Facility Identification 02475 Number for CERCLAIEPCRA/SARA.

Used for SARA Tier II reporting and Indefinite emergency planning.

12/27/2006 Continued PA0025615 BVPS NPDES Permit number under US EPA and PA DEP. pending approval of renewal application.

04-13281 BVPS Unit I PA DEP Facility Identification

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

& certificate number for regulated Indefinite storage tanks. OP-04-00086 PA DEP State Only Synthetic Minor Permit for emergency auxiliary boilers, 04/28/2020 emergency diesel generators, paint shop and other miscellaneous sources. NIA PA DEP Open Burning Permit for operation of the BVPS Fire School-annual 01101/2017 application and renewal 042009 450 002RT US Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Registration 06/30/2018 200100242 US Army Permit for maintenance dredging (With Encroachment/Submerged Lands 12/31/2021 Agreement

1. 0477705, this allows maintenance dredging.), Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for construction and 0477705 maintenance of current barge slip. (With US Army Permit #200100242, this allows Indefinite maintenance dredging.)

06786A Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for transmission line over Ohio Indefinite River (a2 Mile 34.5 18737 Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for Unit 1 intake and discharge Indefinite (main combined intake and outfall structures) 0475711 Encroachment Permit/Submerged Lands Agreement for construction and Indefinite maintenance of Unit 2 auxiliary intake -End Table-APPENDIX A SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME 1 OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2015 BVPS 1 Nomenclature follows Robins, et al. (1991)

Appendix A SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME 1 OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2015 BVPS Family and Scientific Name Common Name Lepisosteidae (gars) Lepisosteus osseus Longnose gar Hiodontidae (mooneyes)

Hiodon a/osoides Goldeye H. tergisus Moon eye Clupeidae (herrings)

Alosa chrysoch/oris Skipjack herring A.pseudoharengus Alewife Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard shad Cyprinidae (carps and minnows) Campostoma anomalum Central stoneroller Carassius auratus Goldfish Ctenopharyngodon idel/a Grass carp Notropis spilopterus Spotfin shiner Cyprinus carpio Common carp C. carpio x C. auratus Carp-goldfish hybrid Luxilus chrysocepha/us Striped shiner Macrhybopsis storeriana Silver chub Nocomis micropogon River chub Notemigonus crysoleucas Golden shiner Notropis atherinoides Emerald shiner N. buccatus Silverjaw minnow N. hudsonius Spottail shiner N. rubellus Rosyface shiner N. stramineus Sand shiner N. vo/ucel/us Mimic shiner Pimepha/es notatus Bluntnose minnow P. promelas Fathead minnow Rhinichthys atratulus Blacknose dace Semotifus atromaculatus -Creek chub Catostomidae (suckers)

Carpiodes carpio River carpsucker C. cyprinus Quillback C. velifer Highfin carpsucker Catostomus commersonii White sucker Hypentelium nigricans Northern hogsucker

/ctiobus buba/us Smallmouth buffalo I. niger Black buffalo Minytrema melanops Spotted sucker Page 1 of3 Family and Scientific Name Moxostoma anisurum M. carinatum M. duquesnei M. erythrurum M. macrolepidotum lctaluridae (bullhead catfishes)

Ameiurus catus A. furcatus A. me/as A. natalis A. nebulosus

/ctalurus punctatus Noturus f/avus Py/odictis o/ivaris Esocidae (pikes) Esox /ucius E. masquinongy E. /ucius x E. masquinongy Salmonidae (trouts) Oncorhynchus mykiss Percopsidae (trout-perches)

Percopsis omiscomaycus Cyprinodontidae (killifishes)

Fundu/us diaphanus Atherinidae (silversides)

Labidesthes siccu/us Percichthyidae (temperate basses) Marone chrysops M. saxatilis M. saxatilis x M. chrysops Centrarchidae (sunfishes)

Ambloplites rupestris Lepomis cyanellus L. gibbosus L. macrochirus L. microlophus L. gibbosus x L. micro/ophus Appendix A (Continued)

Common Name Silver redhorse River redborse Black redhorse Golden redhorse Shorthead redhorse White catfish Blue catfish Black bullhead Yellow bullhead Brown bullhead Channel catfish Stonecat Flathead catfish Northern pike Muskellunge Tiger muskellunge Rainbow trout Trout-perch Banded killifish Brook silverside White bass Striped bass Striped bass hybrid Rock bass Green sunfish Pumpkinseed Bluegill Redearsunfish Pumpkinseed-redear sunfish hybrid Page 2 of3 Family and Scientific Name Micropterus do/omieu M. punctulatus M. sa/moides Pomoxis annularis P. nigromacu/atus Percidae (perches)

Etheostoma blennioides E. nigrum E. zona/e Perea f/avescens Percina caprodes P. copelandi Sandercanadense S. vitreum S. canadense x S. vitreum Sciaenidae (drums) Aplodinotus grunniens 1 Nomenclature follows Robins, et al. (1991) Appendix A (Continued)

Common Name Smallmouth bass Spotted bass Largemouth bass White crappie Black crappie Greenside darter Johnny darter Banded darter Yellow perch Log perch Channel darter Sauger Walleye Saugeye Freshwater drum Page 3 of 3