L-03-066, Annual Environmental Report, Non-Radiological
| ML031210457 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 04/25/2003 |
| From: | Bezilla M FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| L-03-066 | |
| Download: ML031210457 (116) | |
Text
FENOC Beaver Valley Power Station Route 168 PO Box4 FirstEnergy NuclearOperating Company Shippingport, PA 15077-0004 AMark B. Bezilla 724-682-5234 Site Vice President Fax 724-643-8069 April 25, 2003 L-03-066 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001
Subject:
Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 and No. 2 BV-1 Docket No. 50-334, License No. DPR-66 BV-2 Docket No. 50-412, License No. NPF-73 Beaver Valley Power Station Annual Environmental Report, Non-Radiological The 2002 Annual Environmental Report, Non-Radiological for Beaver Valley Power Station Units 1 and 2 is being forwarded, as required by Appendix B of our Unit 2 Operating License Section 5.4.1.
There are no regulatory commitments identified in this document. If there are any questions concerning this report, please contact Mr. Larry R. Freeland, Manager, Regulatory Affairs/Performance Improvement at 724-682-5284.
Sincerely, Mark B. Bezilla Enclosure c: Mr. T. G. Colburn, NRR Senior Project Manager Mr. D. M. Kern, NRC Sr. Resident Inspector Mr. H. J. Miller, NRC Region I Administrator
'I-
FENO C FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company' 2002 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT NON-RADIOLOGICAL BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION UNITS NO. 1 AND 2 LICENSES DPR-66 AND NPF-73
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
................................................................ 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION
.................................................... 1 1.2
SUMMARY
& CONCLUSIONS ................. .................................. 2 1.3 ANALYSIS OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE ........... .......... 2 1.4 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
................ 2 1.5 PLANT COMMUNITY CHARACTERIZATION STUDY ................................ 4 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN NON-COMPLIANCES ..................... 4 3.0 CHANGES INVOLVING UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION .....4 4.0 NONROUTINE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS ..................................................... 4 4.1
SUMMARY
....... 4 4.1.1 January 30. 2002 Oil Spill .................................... 4 4.1.1.1 Probable Cause .................................... 4 4.1.1.2 Corrective Actions ..................................... 5 4.1.1.3 Actions Taken to Prevent Recurrence ..................................... 5 4.1.1.4 Agencies Notified .................................... 5 4.1.2 September 27, 2002 Sewage Hold Tank Overflow .................................. 5 4.1.2.1 Probable Cause .................................... 5 4.1.2.2 Corrective Actions ..................................... 5 4.1.2.3 Actions Taken to Prevent Recurrence ..................................... 5 4.1.2.4 Agencies Notified ..................................... 5 4.1.3 October 30, 2002 Oil Spill .................................... 5 4.1.3.1 Probable Cause .................................... 5 4.1.3.2 Corrective Actions ..................................... 5 4.1.3.3 Actions Taken to Prevent Recurrence ..................................... 5 4.1.3.4 Agencies Notified .................................... 6 5.0 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM ........................ . . . . 6
5.1 INTRODUCTION
................................................ 6 5.1.1 Obiectives of the Program ................................................ 6 5.1.2 Scope of Services ................................................. 6 5.1.3 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring....................................................6 5.1.4 Fish Monitoring........................................................................................7 5.1.5 Larval Cages/Zebra Mussel Scraper/Bridal Veil Samplers Pump/Biobox Sampling ............. ................................... 7 5.1.6 Corbicula/Zebra Mussel Density Determinations .................................... 8 5.1.7 Monthly Activity Reports ................................................ 8 5.1.8 Site Description ................................................. 8 5.2 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM AND RESULTS ................................ . 9 5.2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Program ..................................... 9 5.2.1.1 Objectives ................................................ 9 5.2.1.2 Methods ................................................. 9 2002 Annual Environmental Report i Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 5.2.1.3 Habitats ........................................... 10 5.2.1.4 Results ............................................ l 10 5.2.1.5 Community Structure and Spatial Distribution ....................... 10 5.2.1.6 Comparison of Control and Non-Control Stations .................. 11 5.2.1.7 Seasonal Comparison ........................................... 12 5.2.1.8 Discussion ........................................... 12 5.3 FISH ............................................ 12 12 5.3.1 Objectives 5.3.2 Methods ..
........... 12 i 12 5.3.3 Results .. 13 5.3.4 Comparison of Control and Non-Control Stations .15 5.3.5 Discussion .15 5.4 CORBICULA MONITORING PROGRAM . .16 5.4.1 Introduction .16 5.4.2 M onitoring..............................................................................................16 5.4.2.1 Objectives .. 16 j 5.4.2.2 Methods .. 16 5.4.2.3 Results .. 17 5.4.2.4 Discussion ... 18 5.4.2.5 Corbicula Juvenile Study .. 18 (1) Objectives . 18 (2) Methods .18 (3) Results .19 1
(4) Discussion . 1 19 5.5 ZEBRA MUSSEL MONITORING PROGRAM .20 5.5.1 Introduction .20 5.5.2 Monitoring..............................................................................................20 5.5.2.1 Objectives.
5.5.2.2 Methods ..
20 20 i
5.5.2.2.1 Intake Structure and Barge Slip . 20 5.5.2.2.2 Cooling Towers .21 5.5.2.2.3 Emergency Outfall .21 5.5.2.2.4 Splash Pool .21 5.5.3 Results .2 21 5.5.4 Discussion .22 5.5.5 Zebra Mussel and Corbicula Control Activities Discussion .23
5.6 REFERENCES
A 2002 Annual Environmental Report ii Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
LIST OF TABLES 5.1 BVPS Sampling Dates for 2002 5.2 Systematic List of Macroinvertebrates Collected From 1973 through 2002 in the Ohio River Near BVPS (6 sheets) 5.3.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrates Counts for Triplicate Samples Taken at Each Sample Station by Sample Date for 2002 (2 sheets) 5.3.2 Benthic Macroinvertebrates Counts for Triplicate Samples Taken at Each Sample Station by Sample Date for 2002 (2 sheets) 5.4 Mean Number of Macroinvertebrates (Number/m2 ) and Percent Composition of Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms, 2002 - BVPS 5.5 Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Mollusca and Other Organisms for the Control Station (1) and the Average for Non-Control Stations (2B1, 2B2, and 2B3), 2002 BVPS 5.6 Shannon-Weiner Diversity, Evenness and Richness Indices for Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected in the Ohio River, 2002 5.7 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Densities (Number/M2 ) for Station 1 (Control) and Station 2B (Non-Control) During Preoperational and Operational Years Through 2002 BVPS (3 sheets) 5.8 Scientific and Common Name of Fish Collected in the New Cumberland Pool of the Ohio River, 1970 Through 2002, BVPS (3 sheets) 5.9 Comparison of Control vs. Non-Control Electrofishing Catches During the BVPS 2002 Fisheries Survey 5.10 Comparison of Control vs. Non-Control Seine Catches During the BVPS 2002 Fisheries Survey 5.11 Fish Species Collected During the May 2002 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 5.12 Fish Species Collected During the July 2002 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 5.13 Fish Species Collected During the September 2002 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 5.14 Fish Species Collected During the November 2002 Sampling of the Ohio River in the Vicinity of BVPS 2002 Annual Environmental Report iii Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
LIST OF TABLES 5.15 Estimated Number of Fish Observed During Electrofishing Operations 5.16 Catch Per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season During the BVPS 2000 Fisheries Survey (2 sheets) 5.17 Catch Per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season During the BVPS 2002 Fisheries Survey 5.18 Catch Per Unit of Effort (CPUE as Fish/Electrofishing Minute) by Season During the BVPS 2002 Fisheries Survey (2 sheets) 5.19 Unit 1 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 2002 from BVPS 5.20 Unit 2 Cooling Reservoir Monthly Sampling Corbicula Density Data for 2002 from BVPS 5.21 Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir Outage Sampling, Corbicula Density Data For September 25, 2000 Sample From BVPS 2u0s Annual Environmental Report iv Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
BVPS2002RPT
LIST OF FIGURES 5.1 Location Map for the 2000 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 2002 Study 5.3 Location Map for Beaver Valley Power Station Fish Population Survey Fish Sampling Sites for the 2002 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, 2002.
5.6 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir Sample Events, for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2002.
5.7 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Intake Structure Sample Events, for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2002.
5.8 Water Temperature and River Elevation Recorded at the Ohio River at BVPS Intake Structure During the 2002 Monthly Sampling.
5.9 Density of zebra mussel veligers (#1m 3 ) collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, Intake Structure, Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, 2002.
5.10 Density of zebra mussel veligers (#/m3 ) collected at Beaver Valley Power Station, Barge Slip, Splash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2002.
5.11 Density (#/m2) of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station Intake Structure, Unit 1 Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, 2002.
5.12 Density (#/m 2 ) of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station, Barge Slip, Splash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2002.
6.0 ATTACHMENTS 6.1 Attachment 1: Environmental Permits & Certificates 6.2 Attachment 2: Plant Community Characterization Study 2002 Annual Environmental Report v Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
1.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
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 (Non-Radiological). Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) is operated by FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC). The Objectives of the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) are:
- Verify that the facility is operated in an environmentally acceptable manner, as established by the Final Environmental Statement-Operating License Stage (FES-OL) and other NRC environmental impact assessments.
- Coordinate NRC requirements and maintain consistency with other Federal, State, and local requirements for environmental protection.
- Keep NRC informed of the environmental effects of facility construction and operation and of actions taken to control those effects.
To achieve the objectives of the EPP FirstEnergy Corporation, FENOC, and BVPS, have written programs and procedures to comply with the EPP, protect the environment, and comply with governmental requirements- primarily including the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP). 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 1 contains a listing of permits and registrations 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 Process Improvement Program with a Condition Report. Condition Reports include investigations, cause determinations, and corrective actions to fix and prevent recurrence.
During 2002 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.
A site Plant Community Characterization Study was also performed to evaluate current conditions relative to those described in the Final Environmental Statements-Operating License Stage (FES-OL).
2002 Annual Environmental Report I Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
1.2
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS There were no significant environmental events during 2002. Three spills occurred that, though regulatory reportable, caused no measurable impact to the environment, and are detailed in Section 4.0 of this report. Corrective actions were identified for each through the FENOC Process Improvement Program.
During 2002, 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 ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE During 2002, no significant changes to were made at BVPS to cause significant negative affect on the environment.
1.4 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM The 2002 Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) Units 1 and 2 Non-Radiological Monitoring Program consisted of an Aquatic Program that included surveillance and field sampling of the Ohio River's aquatic life in the vicinity of the station. The Aquatic Program is an annual program conducted to provide baseline aquatic resources data, to assess the impact of the operation of BVPS on the aquatic ecosystem of the Ohio River, and to monitor for potential impacts of biofouling organisms (Corbicula and zebra mussels) on BVPS operations. This is the 2 7 th year of operational environmental monitoring for Unit 1 and the 16th 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 2002 benthic macroinvertebrate surveys conducted in May and September did not indicate an abnormal community structure in the Ohio River either upstream or downstream of the BVPS. These benthic surveys are also a continuation of a Fate and Effects Study conducted from 1990 through 1992 for PA DEP to assess the ecosystem impacts of the molluscicides Betz Clamtrol CT-1, CT-2, and Powerline 3627 that are used to control biofouling organisms at BVPS. To date the results of the benthic studies have not indicated any impacts of operation at the BVPS including the use these biocides on the benthic community below the BVPS discharge.
Substrate was probably the most important factor influencing the distribution and abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS. Soft muck-type substrate along the shoreline found in 2002 and previous years was conducive to segmented worm (oligochaete) and midge (chironomid) proliferation. In 2002, 53 macroinvertebrate taxa were identified. Eight new taxa were added to the cumulative list of benthic macroinvertebratescollected near BVPS.
Oligochaetes were the most frequently collected groups in both sampling months at the control and non-control stations. There were no major differences in the community structure between control and non-control stations that could be attributed to operation of BVPS. The overall community structure has changed little since pre-operationalyears, and program results did 2002 Annual Environmental Report 2 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
not indicatethat BVPS operations were affecting the benthic community of the Ohio River.
The fish community of the Ohio River in the vicinity of the BVPS was sampled in May, July, September and November of 2002 with night electrofishing and daytime seining. Results from i
the 2002 fish surveys indicated that a normal community structure for the Ohio River existed near BVPS based on species composition and relative abundance. Since monitoring began in the early 1970's, the number of identified fish taxa has increased from 43 to 77 for the New i
Cumberland Pool. A During the survey, forage species were collected in the highest numbers, principally gizzard shad and emerald shiner. This indicated a healthy fish community, since game species rely on the availability of abundant forage for survival. Young sauger were also commonly collected in A
2002. Variations in the annual catch were probably attributable to normal fluctuations in the population size of the forage species and the predator populations that depend on them. Forage species, such as gizzard shad and emerald shiners, which have high reproductive potential,
.1 frequently respond to changes in the environment with large fluctuations in population size. This in turn influences the population of predator species.
In 2002, species composition remained comparable among control and non-control stations.
Common taxa collected included gizzard shad, emerald shiner, sauger, and golden redhorse sucker. The catch per unit effort (number of fish per minute) for electrofishing sampling in 2002 i
was 1.98 fish. This compared favorably with results of the previous year when electrofishing resulted in 1.23 fish collected per minute. These differences may have been the result of population changes, differences in sampling schedule, or caused by environmental conditions (e.g. turbidity, waves, water temperature, flow) on specific electrofishing sampling dates that affected fish distribution or collection gear efficiency.
Little difference in the species composition of the catch was observed between the control (Station 1) and non-control (Stations 2A, 2B and 3) collections. Habitat preference and availability were probably the most important factors affecting where and when fish were collected. In 2002, there again 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 intake during 2002 indicated that Corbicula were entering and colonizing the reservoirs. Overall, the numbers of Corbicula collected in the samples were comparatively low, which continued the trend over the past few years of fewer Corbicula and reflected a water-body-wide trend observed in the Ohio River.
Since 1991, zebra mussels have progressively moved upstream in the Ohio River. In 1993, zebra mussels were identified 50 miles downstream of BVPS. 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. Densities were generally low. During 1997, zebra mussel veligers, juveniles and adults were observed for the first time in sample collections. Densities of zebra mussels in samples increased significantly in 1998 and 1999.
A 2002 Annual Environmental Report 3 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Overall, both the number of observations of settled mussels and the densities of veligers at BVPS in 2002 were similar to that found in 2001. If trends continue and the number of zebra mussels in the Ohio River remain high in 2003, BVPS should maintain their diligent zebra mussel monitoring and control program.
1.5 PLANT COMMUNITY CHARACTERIZATION STUDY BVPS conducted a Plant Community Characterization Study in 2002 (Attachment 2). The study included a Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Index search for potential threatened and endangered species. The observations and descriptions in the 2002 study were consistent with the descriptions of the FES-OL indicating that there is no evidence of negative impact to the plant communities from the operation of BVPS.
As in previous years, results of the BVPS environmental programs did not indicate any adverse environmental impactsfrom station operation.
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN NON-COMPLIANCES There were no Environmental Protection Plan non-compliances identified in 2002.
3.0 CHANGES INVOLVING UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS No Unreviewed Environmental Questions were identified in 2002. Therefore, there were no changes involving an Unreviewed Environmental Question.
4.0 NONROUTINE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS 4.1
SUMMARY
During 2002, BVPS made three non-routine environmental reports to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) for two oil, and one sewage spill incidents.
Copies of these reports were submitted to the NRC.
NOTE: Routine reporting requirements under the NPDES Permit monthly Discharge Monitoring Reporting program are not included in this section.
4.1.1 January 30, 2002 Oil Spill: Approximately 100 gallons of diesel fuel was released from the fuel tank of a vehicle delivering materials to the Unit 2 Cooling Tower. The truck was backed up over a stand that ripped the tank causing the spill. The oil flowed into the stormwater system, followed by Peggs Run, then the Ohio River. Some oil was observable on Peggs Run and the Ohio River. Booms were placed on both water bodies to collect as much oil as possible.
The event was reportable.
4.1.1.1 Probable Cause: Human Performance- inattention to detail.
2002 Annual Environmental Report 4 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
4.1.1.2 Corrective Action: Booms were placed on Peggs Run and the Ohio River. Condition Report 02-00782 was written to investigate the incident, and identify actions to prevent recurrence. ii 4.1.1.3 Actions Taken to Prevent Recurrence: The BVPS spill prevention and response procedure (1/2-ADM-0602) was revised to require attendant personnel to ask delivery drivers to, Get Out And Look" (GOAL) prior to backing up.
4.1.1.4 Agencies Notified: Agencies notified included the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Midland, PA and East Liverpool Ohio municipal water companies, the National Response Center, the Beaver County Emergency Services Agency, and the Three Rivers Pollution Response Council (mutual aide organization), in accordance with site procedures.
4.1.2 September 27, 2002 Sewage Hold Tank Overflow: Approximately 200 gallons of sewage was released from a hold tank due to loss of power from a short in a list pump. The material flowed into the stormwater system that leads to Peggs Run. The event was reportable.
4.1.2.1 Probable Cause: A short in a lift pump caused multiple failures. i 4.1.2.2 Corrective Action: Booms and drain-blockers were placed over stormwater drains.
Material was cleaned up. Condition Report 02-08413 was written to investigate the incident, and identify actions to prevent recurrence.
¶ 4.1.2.3 Actions Taken to Prevent Recurrence: Repairs were made to equipment identified in the Condition Report.
4.1.2.4 notified.
Agency Notified: The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection was 11 4.1.3 October 30, 2002 Oil Spill: Approximately 75 gallons of oil was spilled during filling the Unit 2 Emergency Diesel Generator 2-2 tank. An undetermined quantity entered the stormwater i
system. No oil was observed on the Ohio River, and the stormwater system was pumped out shortly after the spill. The event was reportable.
4.1.3.1 Probable Cause: Human Performance- The delivery vehicle was hooked up to a full tank causing the spill.
4.1.3.2 Corrective Action: Booms and drain-blockers were placed over stormwater drains.
Material was cleaned up from surfaces, and oil was pumped from the stormwater system.
Condition Report 02-09734 was written to investigate the incident, and identify actions to prevent recurrence.
4.1.3.3 Actions Taken to Prevent Recurrence: Reviews and verifications of filling procedures were performed. A number of changes were implemented to prevent recurrence via the Process l Improvement Program identified in the Condition Report.
2002 Annual Environmental Report 5 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
4.1.3.4 Agency Notified: The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection was notified.
5.0 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM
5.1 INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the Non-Radiological Environmental Program conducted by the Beaver Valley Power Station 1 (BVPS) Units 1 and 2; Operating License Numbers DPR-66 and NPF-73.
This is a non-mandatory program, because on February 26, 1980, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) 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.
5.1.1 Obiectives of the Program The objectives of the 2002 environmental program were:
(1) To monitor for any possible environmental impact of BVPS operation on the benthic macroinvertebrate and fish communities in the Ohio River; (2) To provide a minimal sampling program to continue an uninterrupted environmental database for the Ohio River near BVPS, pre-operational to present; and (3) To evaluate the presence, growth, and reproduction of macrofouling Corbicula(Asiatic clam) and zebra mussels (Dreissenaspp.) at BVPS.
5.1.2 Scope of Services Stantec Consulting Inc. (Stantec), formerly Beak Consultants Incorporated, was contracted to perform the 2002 Aquatic Monitoring Program as specified in BVBP-ENV-001 - Aquatic Monitoring (procedural guide). The BVPS 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 below.
5.1.3 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring The benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring program consisted of benthic sampling using a Ponar grab sampler at four stations on the Ohio River. Prior to 1996, duplicate sampling occurred at Stations 1, 2A, and 3, while triplicate sampling occurred at Station 2B (i.e., one sample at each shoreline and mid-channel) (Figures 5.1 and 5.2). In 1996, a review of the sampling design indicated that sampling should be performed in triplicate at each station to conform to standardized U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) procedures. Therefore, starting in 2002 Annual Environmental Report 6 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
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 the samples, replacing the standard Ponar dredge used in prior studies. This L}
sampling was conducted in May and September 2002. For each 2002 field effort, 18 benthic samples were collected and processed in the laboratory. If 5.1.4 Fish Monitoring The fish monitoring program consisted of seasonal sampling (May, July, September, and November) using boat electrofishing and seining techniques. Boat electrofishing was conducted It at night along both shorelines at Stations 1, 2A, 2B, and 3 (Figure 5.3). Seining occurred at l}
Stations 1 and 2B during the day and generally was performed in late afternoon or early evening.
All field procedures and data analysis were conducted in accordance with the procedural guide.
5.1.5 Larval Cages/Zebra Mussel Scraper/Bridal Veil Samplers/Pump/Biobox Sampling Larval cages (two long term and two short term) were set in the project intake structure to sample for Corbicula beginning in 1996. The cages continued to be used to monitor for Corbicula through August 1997. Results from a study conducted from April through June 1997 to compare short-term larval cage and petite Ponar sample results indicated that Ponar sampling provided p comparable results to short-term larval cages for monthly sampling. In August 1997, Ponar sampling replaced short-term larval cage sampling. Long-term cages were used until May 1998 when all larval cages were removed. J Wall scraping samples were collected monthly from the Unit 1 cooling tower, the Unit 2 cooling tower, the barge slip, and the intake wall in 1996 and 1997. Wall scrapings were taken with a D-frame scraper, with five scrapes of approximately 2 ft each made per sample at the sampling I
locations. In 1998, two additional locations were added; the emergency outfall (June through November) and the emergency outfall impact basin (August through November). In 1999 through 2002, these added sites were sampled from March through November.
The intake sampling and wall scraping sampling was historically conducted once per month, yearlong. Beginning in December 1997, it was decided to forego sampling in December and I
January of each year, since buildup of the target organisms, Corbicula and zebra mussels, does not occur in these cold water months. Monthly sampling has been maintained throughout the balance of the year.
A pump sample for zebra mussel veligers was collected at the barge slip location monthly from l 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 tower of Unit 1 and Unit 2 in October 1998. At the request of BVPS, sampling was extended through November in 1998. In 2002, these additional locations were sampled from April through November.
In April 1998, a biobox was set up at the emergency outfall basin to monitor for settling zebra I 2002 Annual Environmental Report 7 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
mussels. The biobox was checked each month, and four substrate plates were removed and analyzed in November 1998. In 2001, the biobox set up at the emergency outfall basin was replaced with two more efficient aquarium style bioboxes. These bioboxes continued to be used at this location for much of 2002. The bioboxes were also used to determine the efficacy of the periodic treatments to control zebra mussel and Corbicula in the facility.
5.1.6 CorbiculalZebra Mussel Density Determinations During the scheduled shutdown period for each unit, each cooling tower reservoir bottom was sampled by petite Ponar at standardized locations within the reservoir. Counts of live and dead clams and determination of density were made.
During all Corbiculafzebramussel sampling activities, observations were made of the shoreline and other adjoining hard substrates for the presence of macrofouling species.
5.1.7 Monthly Activity Reports Each month activity reports that summarized the activities that took place the previous month were prepared. The 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.
5.1.8 Site Description BVPS is located on an approximately 501-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 5.4 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 site lies along the Ohio River in a valley, which has a gradual slope that extends from the river (Elevation 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.
The station is situated on the Ohio River at River Mile 34.8 (Latitude: 400, 36', 18"; Longitude:
80°, 26', 02" at a location on the New Cumberland Pool that is 3.3 river miles (5.3 km) downstream from Montgomery Lock and Dam and 19.4 miles (31.2 km) upstream from New Cumberland Lock 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.
2002 Annual Environmental Report 8 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Ohio River water temperatures generally vary from 320 F to 84OF (0C to 29 0 C). Minimum and maximum temperatures generally occur in January and July/August, respectively. 11 BVPS Units 1 and 2 have a thermal rating of 2,660 megawatts (MW). Units 1 & 2 have a design electrical rating of 835 MW and 836 MW, respectively. The circulating water systems for each unit is considered to be 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. 1 5.2 AQUATIC MONITORING PROGRAM The environmental study area, established to assess potential impacts, consists of four sampling stations each having a north and south shore (Figure 5.1). Station 1 is located at River Mile (RM) i 34.5, approximately 0.3 mile (0.5 kmn) upstream of BVPS and is the control station. Station 2A is located approximately 0.5 mile (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 mile 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.
j Station 3 is located approximately two miles (3.2 km) downstream of BVPS.
Sampling dates for each of the program elements are presented in Table 5.1.
The following sections summarize the findings for each of the program elements.
5.2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Program 5.2.1.1 Objectives: The objectives of the benthic surveys were to characterize the benthic macroinvertebrates of the Ohio River near BVPS and to determine the impacts, if any, of BVPS I
operations.
5.2.1.2 Methods: Benthic surveys were scheduled and performed in May and September 2002. Benthic samples were collected at Stations 1, 2A, 2B, and 3 (Figure 5.2), using a petite Ponar grab sampler. Triplicate samples were taken off the south shore at Stations 1, 2A, and 3.
I 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).
I The contents of each grab were gently washed through a U.S. Standard No. 30 sieve and the l 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 densities (number/m2) for each taxon were calculated for each replicate. Four I
indices used to describe the benthic community were calculated: Shannon-Weiner diversity index, evenness (Pielou, 1969), species richness, and the number of taxa. These estimates provide an indication of the relative quality of the macroinvertebrate community.
2002 Annual Environmental Report 9 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
5.2.1.3 Habitats: Substrate type is an important factor in determining the composition of the benthic community. Two distinct benthic habitats exist in the Ohio River near BVPS. These habitats are the result of damming, channelization, and river traffic. During sampling, shoreline habitats were generally soft muck substrates composed of sand, silt, and detritus. An exception occurred along the north shoreline of Phillis Island at Station 2A where clay and sand dominated.
The other distinct habitat, hard substrate (gravel and cobble), was located in mid-channel of the back channel of Phillis Island. The hard substrate is probably the result of channelization and scouring by river currents.
5.2.1.4 Results: Fifty-three (53) macroinvertebrate taxa were identified during the 2002 monitoring program (Tables 5.2, 5.3A and 5.3B). A mean number of 1,290 macroinvertebrates/m2 was collected in May and 6,104/m2 in September (Table 5.4). As in previous years, the macroinvertebrate assemblage during 2002 was dominated by burrowing organisms typical of soft unconsolidated substrates. Oligochaetes (segmented worms) and chironomid (midge fly) larvae were abundant (Table 5.4).
Twenty-seven (27) taxa were present in the May samples, and forty-four (44) taxa in the September samples (Table 5.3A and 5.3B). Nineteen (19) of the 53 taxa were present in both May and September.
The Asiatic clam (Corbicula sp.) has been observed in the Ohio River near BVPS from 1974 to present. Zebra mussels were first collected in the BVPS benthic samples in 1998. Adult zebra mussels, however, were detected in 1995 and 1996 by divers in the BVPS main and auxiliary intake structures during scheduled cleaning operations. Zebra mussel veligers, adults and juveniles were collected during the 1997-2002 sampling program (see Sections 5.1.4 and 5.1.5, Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program). Adults were collected in the September 2002 benthic samples.
In 2002, eight taxa, (four oligochaetes, two mollusks, and two) others were added to the cumulative taxa list of macroinvertebrates collected near BVPS (Table 5.2). No state or Federal threatened or endangered macroinvertebrate species were collected during 2002.
5.2.1.5 Community Structure and Spatial Distribution: Oligochaetes accounted for the highest mean density of macroinvertebrates (Table 5.4) in May and September 2002 (638/m2 and 2,593/m2, respectively). Organisms other then Oligochaetes, chironomid and mollusca had the second highest mean density in May 2002 (265/m2) while mollusca had the second highest mean density in September 2002 (1648/m2).
In May, highest density of macroinvertebrates with a total of 1,935 organisms/m2 occurred at Station 3. In September, the highest density of macroinvertebrates occurred at Station 1 (8,632/
m2). Station 2A had the lowest mean density of organisms in May (86/m2), while the lowest density of macroinvertebrates in September occurred at Station 2B2 (2,752/m2).
2002 Annual Environmental Report 10 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
5.2.1.6 Comparison of Control and Non-Control Stations: For this analysis, Station I was designated the control station since it was always out of the influence of the BVPS discharge and Station 2B (mean density of Station 2B 1, 2B2, and 2B3) the non-control station, since it was the station subjected most 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.
Species composition between the control and non-control sample stations was comparable in May (Table 5.5). The density of macroinvertebrates found at the non-control station (1390/ m2) was comparable to the control station (1,548/ m2). The density of oligochaetes was about two D
times higher at the control station (1,118/m2) than at the non-control station (559/m3).
Oligochaetes were the dominant group at both locations although they contributed to 72 percent of the macroinvertebrates collected at the control station, and only 40 percent at the non-control A
station. Mollusks were present at higher densities at the non-control station (315/m2) than at the control station (129/m2), however, these minor differences probably reflected the natural differences in substrate and natural heterogeneous distributions of these organisms between stations rather than project-related impacts.
the A
In September, the density of macroinvertebrates present was about two times higher at the control (8,632/ m2) than at the non-control station (4,372/m2). Oligochaetes and chironomids occurred at about double the densities at the control than the non-control stations. Also, higher densities of mollusks were present at the control station than the non-control. As in May, the LI' differences observed between Station 1 (control) and Station 2B (non-control) were probably related to observed differences in habitat at each station. Differences were within the expected range of variation for natural populations of macroinvertebrates.
Indices were calculated to describe the relative diversity, evenness, and richness of the 1 macroinvertebrate population structure among stations and between control and non-control sites. The Shannon-Weiner diversity indices in May 2002 collections ranged from 0.57 at Station 2A to 1.67 at Station 3, a non-control station (Table 5.6). The diversity index at the control station (Station 1) was 1.60. Except for Station 2A, the indices for all of the non-control locations i
were similar to that found at the control station. A higher diversity index indicates a relatively better structured assemblage of organisms, while a lower index generally indicates a low quality or stressed community. Evenness is an index that estimates the relative contribution of each taxon to the community assemblage, the closer to one the more even the community. Evenness ranged from 0.41 at Station 1 to 0.56 at Station 2B3. The community richness, another estimate of the quality of the macroinvertebrate community, was greatest at control Station 1(3.38) and lowest at Station 2A (0.91). The low diversity and richness at Station 2A was influenced by two low numbers of organisms (three individuals) collected at this location.
In September, the diversity was generally higher than in May. Diversity ranged from 2.02 at Station 2B 1 to 2.34 at Station 1. Evenness ranged from 0.46 at Station 2A to 0.51 at non-control Station 2B3 and Station 3. Richness was greatest at Station 1 (3.95) and lowest at Station 2B2 (2.24). No impacts of the BVPS on the benthic community, as measured by differences, were evident in either May or September.
J 2002 Annual Environmental Report FENOC (BVPS) 11 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
BVPS2002RPT j
5.2.1.7 Seasonal Comparison: The density of benthic organisms observed was slightly lower in May 2002 as compared to September 2002 (Table 5.3A and 5.3B). Twenty-seven taxa were identified in May, and forty-four (44) in September. The greater number of taxa found in fall is common in temperate fresh waters and is due to maturation of immature oligochaetes and seasonal patterns of chironomid life cycles. Oligochaetes were the most commonly collected macroinvertebrates but chironomids and mollusks were also common in both the May and September samples.
5.2.1.8 Discussion: Substrate was probably the most important factor controlling the distribution and abundance of the benthic macroinvertebrates in the Ohio River near BVPS.
Soft, mucky substrates that existed along the shoreline are conducive to oligochaete, chironomid, and mollusk proliferation and limit species of macroinvertebrates that require a more stable bottom.
The density of macroinvertebrates in May and September 2002 fell well within the range of densities of macroinvertebrate collected at BVPS in previous years. The introduction of zebra mussels and Corbicula into the Ohio River may impact the benthic community structure.
However, the community structure has changed little since pre-operationalyears, and the available evidence does not indicate that BVPS operations have affected the benthic community of the Ohio River (Table 5.7).
5.3 FISH 5.3.1 Objectives Fish sampling was conducted 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.
5.3.2 Methods Adult fish surveys were scheduled and performed in May, July, September, and November 2002.
During each survey, fish were sampled by standardized electrofishing techniques at four stations (Stations 1, 2A, 2B and 3) (Figure 5.3). Seining was 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).
Night electrofishing was conducted using a boom electroshocker and floodlights mounted to the bow of the boat. A Coffelt variable voltage, pulsed-DC electrofishing unit powered by a 3.5-kW generator was used. The voltage selected depended on water conductivity and was adjusted based on the amperage of the current passing 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 species 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 2002 Annual Environmental Report 12 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
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 at Station 1 (control) and Station 2B (non-control) during each Al scheduled 2002 BVPS fishery survey. 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 'I 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, counted, measured for total length (nearest 1
1 mm), and weighed (nearest 1 g). 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 fish that had not previously been j
collected at BVPS was retained for the voucher collection. Any threatened or endangered species (if collected) would be photographed and released.
5.3.3 Results Fish population surveys have been conducted in the Ohio River near BVPS annually from 1970 through 2002. These surveys have resulted in the collection of 72 fish species and five different hybrids (Table 5.8). j In 2002, 504 fishes representing 26 taxa were collected (i.e., handled) during BVPS surveys by electrofishing and seining (Tables 5.9 and 5.10). An estimated additional 51 individuals were observed but not handled during electrofishing surveys (Table 5.15). In addition large schools of gizzard shad and emerald shiners were observed during the July and November sampling runs, respectively. The most common species in the 2002 BVPS surveys, collected by electrofishing and seining combined, were gizzard shad (26.2 percent of the total catch), bluegill (12.9 percent),
white bass (11.1 percent), and golden redhorse (8.7 percent). The remaining 27 species combined accounted for 41.1 percent of the total handled catch. The most frequently observed (handled and not handled combined) fish in 2002 were gizzard shad (Tables 5.9, 5.10, and 5.15).
Game fishes collected during 2002 included channel catfish, flathead catfish, white bass, bluegill, largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, rock bass, sauger, walleye, black crappie and spotted bass. Game fishes represented 35.1 percent of the total handled catch with 13.5 percent being A
bluegill. j A total of 321 fish, representing 26 taxa, was collected by electrofishing in 2002 (Table 5.9).
Gizzard shad and white bass accounted for the largest percentage (20.2 percent and 17.1 percent of the total catch respectively) of the electrofishing catch in 2002 followed by golden redhorse sucker (13.7 percent). None of the other species collected contributed to greater than six (6)
A 2002 Annual Environmental Report 13 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
percent of the total catch.
A total of 183 fishes representing 10 taxa was collected by seining in 2002 (Table 5.10). Fish taxa collected included gizzard shad (36.6 percent of the total catch), bluegill (35.5 percent),
emerald shiner (14.2 percent), and spotfin shiner (5.5 percent). Bluegill, pumpkinseed, smallmouth bass, and white bass were the game species collected during seining.
A total of 82 fish representing 16 species was captured during the May 2002 sample event (Table 5.11). A total of 82 fish was collected during electrofishing. Seine netting could not be safely done during May 2002, because of high river water conditions. Freshwater drum (17.1 percent of the total catch) was the most common species collected during electrofishing efforts in May.
A total of 55 fish representing 16 species was captured during the July 2002 sample event (Table 5.12). This was the lowest total catch during any sampling month. A total of 43 fish was collected during electrofishing and 12 during seining. Golden redhorse (34.9 percent of the total catch) was the most common species boated during the electrofishing effort. Spotfin shiner (75 percent of the total catch) was the most frequently collected species during the seining efforts. No fish were collected by seining at Station S-1.
During the September sample event, 262 fish representing 17 taxa were collected (Table 5.13). A total of 47 fish was collected during electrofishing and 215 during seining. Gizzard shad (27.7 percent of the total catch) and black buffalo (12.8 percent) were the most common species boated during the electrofishing effort. Gizzard shad (89.3 percent of the seine catch) was the most frequently collected species during the seining efforts in September. More fish were collected in September than in any other sampling month in 2002.
During the November sample event, 246 fish representing 16 taxa were captured (Table 5.14). A total of 149 fish were collected during electrofishing and 97 during seining. Gizzard shad (29.5 percent of the total catch) and golden redhorse (14.8 percent) were the most common species boated during the electrofishing effort. Bluegill (67.0 percent of the seine catch) was the most frequently collected species during the seining efforts in November.
At the request of the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC), electrofishing catch rates were calculated as fish per minute (i.e., power on time) of sampling for 2000 through 2002.
Electrofishing catch rates are presented in Tables 5.16, 5.17, and 5.18 for fish that were boated and handled during the 2000 through 2002 surveys by season. Note that because of security concerns after September 11, 2001 fisheries efforts were not completed in September and November 2001.
In 2002, the annual catch rate was 1.98 fish per minute. The greatest catch rate in 2002 occurred in November (winter)(3.63 fish/ electrofishing rminute). This was the highest seasonal catch rate of the three years that were compared. A large number of Gizzard Shad contributed to this total.
The lowest catch rate occurred in July (summer) with a rate of 1.08 fish/ electrofishing minute.
In 2001, the annual catch rate was 1.28 fish per electrofishing minute, however, this is not directly culpable to 2002 catch rates, since September and November were not sampled.. The 2002 Annual Envirornental Report 14 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
greatest electrofishing catch rate was in May (1.70 fish/electrofishing minute). The lowest catch rate was observed in July (0.85 fish/electrofishing minute). I In 2000 the annual catch rate was 2.31 fish per electrofishing minute. This was the highest annual catch rate of the three years that were compared. The greatest electrofishing catch rate was in May (2.52 fish/electrofishing minute). The lowest catch rate was observed in September Li (1.48 fish/electrofishing minute).
5.3.4 Comparison of Control and Non-Control Stations i The results of the electrofishing sampling effort (Table 5.9) did not indicate any major differences in species composition between the control station (1) and the non-control Stations 2A, 2B, and 3.
1 A greater number of fish representing more species was captured at non-control stations than control stations. This was most likely due to the extra effort expended at non-control stations 1
versus control stations (i.e., there are three non-control stations and only one control station).
The seine data for 2002 (Table 5.10) indicated no major differences in species composition between control and non-control stations. The total number of fish captured at the control station was larger than at the non-control station.
I 5.3.5 Discussion I The results of the 2002 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. Forage species were collected in the highest numbers.
Variations in annual catch were probably attributable to normal fluctuations in the population I
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 I
large fluctuations in population size, which could be the reason for the large numbers of emerald shiners and gizzard shad observed in 2002. This, in turn, influences their appearance in the sample populations during annual surveys. Spawning/rearing success due to abiotic factors is usually the determining factor of the size and composition of a fish community. A Also, differences in electrofishing catch rate can be attributed to environmental conditions that prevail during sampling efforts. High water, increased turbidity, and swift currents that occur during electrofishing efforts in some years can decrease the collection efficiency of this gear.
In 2002, species composition remained comparable among stations. Common taxa collected in the 2002 surveys by all methods included gizzard shad, emerald shiner, redhorse sucker species, sauger, quillback, and smallmouth bass. Little difference in the species composition of the catch was observed between the control (1) and non-control stations (2A, 2B and 3). Habitat preference and availability were probably the most important factors affecting where and when different species of fish are collected.
2002 Annual Environmental Report 15 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
5.4 CORBICULA MONITORING PROGRAM 5.4.1 Introduction The introduced Asiatic clam (Corbiculafluminea)was first detected in the United States in 1938 in the Columbia River near Knappton, Washington (Burch 1944). It has since spread throughout most of the country, inhabiting any suitable freshwater habitat. Information from prior aquatic surveys has demonstrated the presence of Corbicula in the Ohio River in the vicinity of the BVPS, and the plant is listed in NUREG/CR-4233 (Counts 1985).
One adult Asiatic clam is capable of producing many thousands of young called early juveniles.
These early juveniles are very small (approximately 0.2 mm) and will easily pass through the water passages of a power plant. Once the juveniles settle on the substrate, rapid growth occurs.
If Corbicula develop within a power plant's water passages, they can impede the flow of water through the plant, especially through blockage of condenser tubes and small service water piping.
Reduction of flow may be so severe that a plant shutdown is necessary. Corbicula are of particular concern when they develop undetected in emergency systems where the flow of water is not constant (NRC, IE Bulletin 81-03).
The Corbicula Monitoring Program at BVPS includes sampling the circulating river water and the service water systems of the BVPS (intake structure and cooling towers). This report describes this Monitoring Program and the results of the field and plant surveys conducted in 2002.
5.4.2 Monitoring 5.4.2.1 Objectives: The objectives of the ongoing Monitoring Program are to evaluate the presence of Corbiculaat BVPS, and to evaluate the potential for and timing of infestation of the BVPS. This program is also used to monitor for the presence of macrofouling zebra mussels (see Sections 5.15 and 5.1.6).
5.4.2.2 Methods: Cooling Towers - Monthly Reservoir Sampling 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 I and 2 cooling towers. The density and growth of these Corbicula were monitored by collecting monthly samples from the lower reservoir side-walls and sediments. The sampler used on the side-walls consisted of a D-frame net attached behind a 24-inch long metal scraping edge. This device was connected to a pole long enough to allow the sampler to extend down into the reservoir area from the outside wall of the cooling tower. Sediments were sampled with a petite ponar.
In 2002, each month (April 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 any Corbiculain the bottom sediment. Due to security concerns, no samples were collected from Unit 1 or Unit 2 in February and March. The samples collected from each cooling tower were returned to the laboratory and processed. Samples were individually washed, and any Corbicula 2002 Annual Environmental Report 16 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
removed and rinsed through a series of stacked U.S. Standard sieves that ranged in mesh size from 16.0 mm to 0.6 mm. Live and dead clams on each sieve were counted and the numbers were recorded. The size distribution data obtained using the sieves reflected clam width, rather than length. Samples containing a small number of Corbiculawere not sieved; individuals were i
measured and placed in their respective size categories. J Cooling Towers - Corbicula Density Determination Population surveys of both BVPS cooling tower reservoirs have been conducted during scheduled outages (1986 through 2001) in order to estimate the number of Corbicula present in these structures. In 2002 neither cooling tower was sampled to estimate the Corbicula population.. The Unit 2 Cooling Tower did not contain enough silt (very clean) to sample. Unit I
1 did not require sampling because it did not have an outage and was not drained during the year.
5.4.2.3 Results:
Unit 1 Cooling Tower - Monthly Reservoir Sampling jJ In 2002, a total of 66 Corbicula (15.2 percent alive) was collected from the Unit 1 cooling tower basin during monthly reservoir sampling. The largest live Corbicula collected measured 15.0 mm in length (Table 5.19 and Figure 5.7). The greatest numbers of Corbicula were collected in August (29 individuals). Corbicula were collected in lower numbers in the other months sampled. Scheduled collections were not made in February and March because of security concerns.
1 Unit 2 Cooling Tower - Monthly Reservoir Sampling J In 2002, 30 Corbicula (33 percent alive) were collected from the Unit 2 cooling tower reservoir during monthly sampling. The largest Corbicula collected was dead and measured 2.1 mm in length (Table 5.20 and Figure 2.7). Individuals were collected from April through November.
No collections were made in February and March because of security concerns.
In 2002, BVPS continued its Corbicula control program (year 13), which included the use of a molluscicide (CT-1) to prevent the proliferation of Corbicula within BVPS. BVPS was granted permission by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to use CT-1 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 and 1995, the CT-1 applications targeted the internal water systems; therefore the CT-1 concentrations in the cooling towers were reduced during CT-1 applications. Consequently, adult and juvenile Corbicula in the cooling towers often survived the CT-1 applications.
A Reservoir sediment samples taken after CT-1 applications represent mortality of Corbiculain the cooling tower only and do not reflect mortality in BVPS internal water systems. CT-1 applications occurred during February 2002 for Unit 2, no samples were available for density estimations. j 2002 Annual Environmental Report 17 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Cooling Towers - Corbicula Density Determination Population surveys of both BVPS cooling tower reservoirs as scheduled to be conducted during scheduled outages (1986 through 2002) to estimate the number of Corbicula present in these structures. In 2002 neither Unit 1 or Unit 2 was sampled since no outages were scheduled.
5.4.2.4 Discussion: The monthly reservoir sediment samples collected in Units 1 and 2 cooling towers during 2002 demonstrated that Corbicula were entering and colonizing the reservoirs. Overall densities in Units 1 and 2 were less than in 2000 and 2001. The maximum monthly density of Corbicula in Unit 1 was 1,221/rn 2 , which occurred in August. The maximum density of clams in Unit 2 was 430/m2, which occurred in August. The lower density of Corbiculain Unit 2 compared to Unit 1 was consistent with previous years results. 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.
5.4.2.5 Corbicula Juvenile Study:
(1) Objective The Corbiculajuvenile study was designed to collect data on Corbicula spawning activities and growth of individuals entering the intake from the Ohio River.
(2) Methods Specially constructed clam cages were initially utilized for this study. Each cage was constructed of a 1 ft durable plastic frame with fiberglass screening (1 mm mesh) secured to cover all open areas. Each cage contained approximately 10 lbs of industrial glass beads (3/8-inch diameter) to provide ballast and a uniform substrate for the clams. The clam cage mesh size permitted only very small clams to enter and colonize the cage.
In 1988 through 1994, the cages were left in place for five months following initial placement.
Changes in procedure were made to better define the time period when Corbiculawere spawning in the Ohio River and releasing larvae that could enter BVPS through the intake structure.
Larval cages were maintained in the BVPS intake structure in 1995 according to the following procedure. Each month, two empty clam cages were placed in the intake structure bays. Each cage was left in place for two months, after which time it was removed and examined for clams.
Four clam cages were maintained in the intake structure bays each month throughout 1995-1996.
In February 1996, it was decided to modify the sampling regime so that two of the four cages in the forebay were long-term samplers and the other two were monthly short-term samplers. Each month, the two long-term samplers were pulled; the fine sediment was carefully washed from the cage and any Corbicula present were measured. The cages were immediately redeployed along with any identified Corbicula. The two short-term cages were pulled monthly and the contents removed for laboratory analyses. New short-term cages were then deployed.
2002 Annual Environmental Report 18 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Each short-term clam cage removed after the one or two-month colonization period was returned to the laboratory where it was processed to determine the number of clams that had colonized the cage. Corbicula obtained from each cage were rinsed through a series of stacked U.S. Standard sieves ranging in mesh size from 9.5 mm to 0.6 mm. Live and dead clams on each sieve were i
counted and the numbers were recorded. The largest and smallest clams were measured to establish a length range for the sample. The size distribution data obtained using the sieves 3
reflected clam width, rather than length.
Observational-based concerns that the clam cages could quickly clog with sediment during high sediment periods and, as a result, not sample effectively, 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 A
confined space entry to conduct the sampling. 1 During the 1998 sampling season, at the request of BVPS personnel, all clam cages were removed after the May 18, 1998 collection. Monthly petite ponar grabs from the forebay in the intake building continued thereafter.
In 2002, the sampling with petite ponar was moved to the Ohio River basin directly in front of the Intake Structure Building. Collections were made in conjunction with the fisheries sampling (May, July, September, and November). During each sampling month two ponar grabs were 3
taken approximately 20 feet off shore of the intake building. These grab samples were processed in the same manner as when they were collected from within the Intake Structure Building.
(3) Results Figure 5.7 presents the abundance and size distribution data for samples collected in the Ohio River near the intake structure by petite ponar in 2002. Corbicula were collected during all four collections (May, July, September, and November). The presence of small individuals (1.00-1.99 and 2.00-3.34) of Corbicula indicated that successful spawning had occurred. The number of A
individuals collected was comparable to 2001 (14 in 2001 vs. 25 in 2002.
(4) Discussion 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 1
this spawning event generally begin appearing in the sample collections in late-April (Figure 5.7). The settled clams generally increase in size throughout the year. The overall low numbers of Corbicula collected in the intake and cooling towers in 2002 towers, compared to levels in l
the 1980's, likely reflects a naturaldecrease in the density of Corbicula in the Ohio River near BVPS.
2002 Annual Environmental Report 19 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
5.5 ZEBRA MUSSEL MONITORING PROGRAM 5.5.1 Introduction 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, becoming increasingly abundant in the lower, middle, and upperOhio River in recent years.
Adult zebra mussels can live up to five years and grow to 2 inches in length. North American research suggests that each female may be capable of producing over one million microscopic (veliger larvae) offspring per year, which can easily pass through water intake screens. They use strong adhesive byssal threads, collectively referred to as the byssus, to attach themselves to any hard surfaces (e.g., boat hulls, intake pipes and other mussels). Transport of these organisms between water bodies is accomplished in part by boats that have adult mussels attached to their hulls or larvae in their live wells and/or bilges. In anticipation of zebra mussel infestation and responding to NRC Notice No. 89-76 (Biofouling Agent-Zebra Mussel, November 21, 1989),
BVPS instituted a Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program in January 1990.
The Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program included the Ohio River and the circulating river water system of the BVPS (intake structure and cooling towers). This section describes this Monitoring Program and the results obtained during Ohio River and BVPS surveys conducted through 2000.
5.5.2 Monitoring 5.5.2.1 Objectives: 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 for these mussels to reach the size and density that could impact the plant.
5.5.2.2 Methods:
5.5.2.2.1 Intake Structure and Barge Slip: The surveillance techniques used on site were:
- Wall scraper sample collections on a monthly basis (February through November) from the barge slip and the riprap near the intake structure to detect attached adults; 2002 Annual Environmental Report 20 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
- Pump sample collections from the barge slip and outside the intake structure, to detect the planktonic early life forms (March through November); and l
- Sampling of substrate plates used for detection of settled stages in the impact basin below the Emergency outfall (April through November).
- Sampling of one artificial substrate (bridal veil material) suspended in the Ohio River the Barge Slip (May through November).
from D
5.5.2.2.2 Cooling Towers: The techniques used in the Unit 1 and Unit 2 cooling tower locations were: J
- Monthly reservoir scraper sample collections in each cooling tower (February through November); and l
- Pump samples in March through November to detect planktonic life forms.
5.5.2.2.3 Emergency Outfall: D
- Monthly scraper sample collections in the emergency outfall impact basin (February through November); and i
- Pump samples in March through November to detect planktonic life forms. i 5.5.2.2.4 Splash Pool:
- Monthly scraper sample collections in the Splash Pool (February through November); and i
- Pump samples in March through November to detect planktonic life forms. I 5.5.3 Results Zebra mussels were detected in both pump samples (Figures 5.9 and 5.10) and substrate samples (Figure 5.11 and 5.12) in 2002.
Zebra mussel veligers were present in pump samples collected from June through September (Figures 5.9 and 5.10). Densities of veligers generally peaked in July and August. The greatest 3
density of veligers was present in the sample collected at the Barge Slip in August (10,693/mi3
).
Veligers were present in all samples collected in June through August in 2002.
Overall, veliger densities were lower in 2002 than in 2001. In 2001, the greatest density collected 3 . Whether was 117,900m/M this was due to an overall reduction in numbers of veligers in the Ohio River or due to the limited number of samples and the propensity of veligers to be non-uniformly distributed in the water is uncertain.
In 2002, attached zebra mussels were collected in scrape samples taken from the Barge Slip and the outside wall of the Intake Structure (Figures 5.11 and 5.12), None were collected at either 3
2002 Annual Environmental Report 21 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
cooling tower, the Splash Pool, or the Emergency Outfall Impact Basin. Attached zebra mussels were collected at the Barge Slip in June and August. The highest density collected from the Barge Slip was 27/M2 in August. Zebra mussels were collected from scraping samples from the Intake Structure beginning in June; mussels were also collected in July and August. The same density was collected in each month (2/M2 .) The mussels collected at the intake and Barge Slip were adult mussels capable of reproducing with the largest being 19 mm. Compared with 2000 and 2001 collection of adult zebra mussels was similar to 2001 and lower than 2002. Densities however remained high compared to past years.
5.5.4 Discussion From 1991 through 1993, based on reports, zebra mussels moved progressively upstream from the lower to upper Ohio River. In 1994, there were confirmed zebra mussel sightings at locations both upstream and downstream from BVPS, including the Allegheny River. The July 1995 sighting of zebra mussels at Maxwell Locks and Dam on the Monongahela River established the presence of these organisms within the Allegheny, Monongahela and Ohio Rivers in Western Pennsylvania.
In 1995, live zebra mussels were found by divers in the BVPS main intake structure and auxiliary intake structure during scheduled cleaning operations. The 1996 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program at BVPS did not collect any live zebra mussels at BVPS. During the first quarter 1996 (January and February) intake bay cleaning, divers observed an undetermined number of zebra mussels in the intake bays. During the second quarter 1996 cleaning, no mussels were reported.
During the third and fourth quarter 1996 intake bay cleanings, about one dozen mussels were observed each time in Bay C only. None were collected by the divers for confirmation.
During 1997, zebra mussel veligers were observed in June. Juvenile zebra mussels appeared in the clam cage and ponar dredge samples. In November 1997, adult zebra mussels were found in the intake ponar dredge samples.
During the 1998 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program at BVPS, zebra mussel veligers, juveniles, and an adult were observed in sample collections. A moderate density of zebra mussel veligers was observed during the August through November 1998 samples, indicating that spawning occurred sometime during the late summer. Juvenile zebra mussels appeared during March sampling. These mussels were 3.5, 3.5, and 4.5 mm in length, which indicates that they were probably young-of-the-year in 1997. Young-of-the-year zebra mussels appeared in September through November. This observation confirms successful zebra mussel spawning in the area around BVPS.
During 1998, zebra mussels were also found on the walls of the main intake structure during each of the quarterly inspections that took place. During the first quarter, greater than 100 zebra mussels/ft2 were present in Bay B, although fewer were present in the other bays. Less than 5 mussels/ft2 were observed during the second quarter inspection that took place in April. Only Bays A and B were inspected, however. A few small zebra mussels were observed during the third quarter inspection; however, any recently settled mussels would be easily missed during a 2002 Annual Environmental Report 22 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
visual inspection. Few (>10Ot2 ) mussels were also observed during the fourth quarter inspection.
Corbicula were also present in the main intake structure during each quarterly inspection. Zebra mussels were also observed in the alternate intake structure during the last three quarters of 1998, however, densities were low.
In 1999, the number of both veligers and settled zebra mussel increased significantly in the Ohio River near the BVPS. For the first time, the settled zebra mussels were collected in groups rather i
than as individuals. The density of veligers exceeded 1000/M3 on many occasions for the first time in 1999.
Overall both the number of observations of settled mussels and the densities of veligers were less in 2001 and 2002 than in 2000.Densities, however, remain high compared to past years. Zebra L
mussels densities in other water systems display significant annual variations due to environmental variables including water temperature and flow conditions. Whether the population of zebra mussels in this reach of the Ohio River is plateauing cannot be L
determined. In any case, the densities of mussels that presently exist are more than sufficient to impact the BVPS, if continuedprudent monitoring and control activities are not conduced.
5.5.5 Zebra Mussel and Corbicula Control Activities In 2002, BVPS continued its Corbicula and zebra mussel control program (Twelfth year), which included the use of a molluscicide (CT-1) to prevent the proliferation of Corbiculawithin BVPS.
BVPS was granted permission by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to use CT-I to target the Unit 1 river water system and the Unit 2 service water system.
In 1990 through 1993, the molluscicide applications (CT-1) focused on reducing the Corbicula population throughout the entire river water system of each BVPS plant (Units 1 and 2). In 1994 1
through 2002, the CT-1 or 2 applications targeted zebra mussels and Corbicula in the internal water systems; therefore the molluscicide concentrations in the cooling towers were reduced during CT-1 or 2 applications. Consequently, adult and juvenile Corbicula in the cooling towers a
often survived the applications. Reservoir sediment samples taken after CT-1 or 2 applications represented mortality of Corbicula in the cooling tower only and do not reflect mortality BVPS internal water systems.
in A In 2002, control treatments occurred in April, July, and October. In addition to clamicide treatments, proactive 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.
2002 Annual Environmental Report 23 Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
5.6 REFERENCES
Burch, J. Q., 1944. Checklist of West American Mollusks. Minutes, Conchology Club of Southern California 38:18.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1994. Pennsylvania's Endangered Fishes, Reptiles and Amphibians. Published by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission.
Counts, C. C. m, 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.
DLC, 1976. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological Volume #1. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station. 132 pp.
DLC, 1977. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological Volume #1. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station. 123 pp.
DLC, 1979. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological Volume #1. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station. 149 pp.
DLC, 1980. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1. 160 pp.
DLC, 1981. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1. 105 pp. + Appendices.
DLC, 1982. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1. 126 pp.
DLC, 1983. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1. 124 pp. + Appendix.
DLC, 1984. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1. 139 pp.
DLC, 1985. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 106 pp.
DLC, 1986. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 152 pp.
DLC, 1987. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 145 pp.
DLC, 1988. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 161 pp.
DLC, 1989. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 145 pp. j DLC, 1990. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 181 pp.
DLC, 1991. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 165 pp. IJ DLC, 1992. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 16 4 pp.
DLC, 1993. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 90 pp. j DLC, 1994. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 78 pp.
DLC, 1995. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 77 pp.
DLC, 1996. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 67 pp.
DLC, 1997. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 68 pp.
DLC, 1998. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. Duquesne Light Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. I & 2. 63 pp.
FENCO, 1999. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. First Energy Nuclear Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 76 pp.
FENCO, 2000. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. First Energy Nuclear Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 76 pp.
FENCO, 2001. Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological. First Energy Nuclear Operating Company, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 & 2. 76 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 Corbiculasp. (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, Berkely and Los Angeles. 155-169 pp.
TABLES
( 1 -- I -- f I ( I -- 1 '- - I I I I1 I I I TABLE 5.1 BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION (BVPS)
SAMPLING DATES FOR 2002 Study Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Benthic Macroinvertebrate _ 20 25 Fish 20-21 16 25 13 Corbicula and Zebra Mussel 17 20 25 16 20 25 22 13 Corbicula CT Density 17 20 25 16 20 25 22 13 Zebra Mussel Veliger 17 20 25 16 20 25 22 13
TABLE 5.2 SYSTEMATIC LIST OF MACROINVERTEBRATES COLLECTED FROM 1973 THROUGH 2002 IN THE OHIO RIVER NEAR I
BVPS l Collected in Collected in New in Taxa Previous Years 2002 2002 Porifera Spongilla fragilis X 1 Cnidaria Hydrozoa Clavidae Cordylophora lacustris X Hydridae Craspedacusta sowerbii X Hydra sp. X Platyhelminthes Tricladida X Rhabdocoela X Nemertea Nematoda X
X X D
Entoprocta Umatella gracilis X i Ectoprocta Fredericella sp. X Paludicella articulata X Pectinatella sp. X 11 Plumatella s p. X Annelida.
Oligochaeta X X Aeolosomatidae X Tubificida X Enchytraeidae X X Naididae X Allonais pectinata X Amphichaeta leydigi Amphichaeta sp.
X X
A Arcteonais lomondi X Aulophorus sp. X Chaetogaster diaphanus X 13 C. diastrophus X Dero digitata X Dero flabelliger X D. nivea X Dero sp. X Nais barbata X N. behningi X j N. bretscheri X N. communms X N. elinguis X N. pardalis X X
TABLE 5.2 (Cont'd)
Collected in Collected in New in Taxa Previous Years 2002 2002 N. pseudobtusa X N. simplex X N. variabilis X X Nais sp. X X Ophidonais serpentina X Paranais frici X Paranais litoralis X X Paranais sp. X Piguetiella michiganensis X Pristina idrensis X Pristina longisoma X Pristina longiseta X P. osbomi X X P. sima X X Pristina sp. X X Pristinella sp. X X Pristinella jenkinae X X Pristinella idrensis X X Pristinella osborni X X Ripistes parasita X Slavina appendiculata X Specaria josinae Stephensoniana trivandrana X Stylaria fossularis X S. lacustris X Uncinais uncinata X Vejdovskyella comata X Veidovskyella intermedia X Veidovskyella sp. X Tubificidae X Aulodrilus limnobius X A. pigueti X A. pluriseta X Aulodrilus sp. X Bothrioneurum veidovskyanum X Branchiura sowerbyi X X llyodrilus templetoni X Limnodrilus cervix X L. cervix (variant) X L. claparedianus X L. hoffmeisteri X X L. maumeensis X X L. profundicla X L. spiralhs X L. udekemianus X Limnodrilus sp. X Peloscolex multisetosus longidentus X P. m. multisetosus X Potamothrix moldaviensis X Potamothrix sp. X X P. veidovskyi X X Psammoryctides curvisetosus X Tubifex tubifex X Unidentified immature forms: X
TABLE 5.2 (Cont'd)
A Collected in Collected in New in Taxa Previous Years 2002 2002 with hair chaetae without hair chaetae X
X X i
Lumbriculidae X X Hirudinae X '
Glossiphoniidae X Helobdella elongata X H. stagnalis X Helobdella sp.
Erpobdellidae X j Erpobdella sp. X Mooreobdella microstoma X Haplotaxidae Stylodrilus heringianus X Lumbricina X X Lumbricidae X Arthropoda Acarina X Ostracoda X Isopoda Asellus sp. X Amphipoda Talitridae 11 Hyalella azteca X Gammaridae Crangonyx pseudogracilis Crangonyxsp.
X X
ii Gammarus fasciatus X Gammarus sp.
Pontoporeiidae X X jJ Monoporeia affinis X Decapoda X Collembola X Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae X Stenacron sp. X Stenonema sp. X Ephemeridae Ephemera sp. X Hexagenia sp. X X Ephron sp. X Baetidae Baetis sp.
X i Caenidae Caenis sp. X X Serattella sp. X Potamanthidae Potamanthus sp.
Tricorythidae Tricorythodes sp. X J
Megaloptera Sialis sp. X X
TABLE 5.2 (Cont'd)
Collected in Collected in New in Taxa Previous Years 2002 2002 Odonata Gomphidae Argia sp. X Dromogomphus spoliatus X Dromogomphus sp. X Gomphus sp. X Libellulidae Libellula sp. X Trichoptera X X Hydropsychidae X Cheumatopsyche sp. X Hydropsyche sp. X Parapsyche sp. X Psychomyiidae Psychomyla sp.
Hydroptilidae Hydroptila sp. X Orthotrichia sp.
Oxyethira sp. X Leptoceridae X Ceraclea sp. X Leptocerus sp. X Oecetis sp. X Polycentropodidae Cymellus sp.
Polycentropus sp. X Coleoptera X Hydrophilidae X Elmidae Ancyronyx variegatus X Dubiraphia sp. X Helichus sp. X Stenelmis sp. X Psephenidae X Diptera X Unidentified Diptera X Probezzia X X Psychodidae X Pericoma sp. X Psychoda sp. X Telmatoscopus sp. X Unidentified Psychodidae pupae X Chaoboridae Chaoborus sp. X X Simuliidae Simillum sp. X Chironomidae X Chironominae X Tanytarsini pupa X Chironominae pupa X Axarus sp. X
TABLE 5.2 (Cont'd)
Collecter in Collected in New in Taxa Previous Years 2002 2002 Chironomus sp. X X Cladopelma sp. X Cladotanytarsus sp.
Cryptochironomus sp. X X Dicrotendipes nervosus X Dicrotendipes sp. X X Glyptotendipes sp. X Harnischia sp.
Microchironomus sp.
X X
A Micropsectra sp. X Microtendipessp. X Parachironomus sp. X Paracladopelma sp. X Paratanytarsus sp. X Paratendipes albimanus Phaenopsectra sp.
X X
11 Polypedilum (s.s.) convictum type X P. (s.s.) simulans type X Polypedilum sp. X X Rheotanytarsus sp. X Stenochironomus sp. X Stictochironomus sp. X IJ Tanytarsus coffmani X Tanytarsus sp. X X Tnbelos sp.
Xenochironomus sp.
X J X
Tanypodinae X Tanypodinae pupae Ablabesmyia sp.
Clinotanypus sp.
X X
X X Ii Coelotanypus scapularis X Coelotanypus sp. X X Djalmabatista pulcher X Djalmabatista sp. X Procladius sp.
Tanypus sp.
Thienemannimyia group X
X X
X X A Zavrelimyia sp. X Orthocladiinae X Orthocladiinae pupae X Cricotopus bicinctus X C. (s.s.) tnfascia X Cncotopus (Isocladius)-
-sylvestris Group X C. (Isocladius) sp. X Cricotopus (s.s.) sp. X Eukiefferiella sp. X Hydrobaenus sp. X Limnophyes sp. X Nanocladius (s.s.) distinctus X Nanocladius sp. X Orthocladius sp. X Parametriocnemus sp. X Paraphaenocladiussp. X ii
TABLE 5.2 (Cont'd)
Collecte in Collected in New in Taxa Previous Years 2002 2002 Psectrocladius sp. X Psectrotanypus sp.
Pseudorthocladiussp. X Pseudosmittia sp. X Smittia sp. X Theinemannimyia sp. X Diamesinae Diamesa sp. X Potthastia sp. X Ceratopogonidae X X Bezzia sp. X Culicoides sp. X Dolichopodidae X Empididae X Clinocera sp. X Wiedemannia sp. X Ephydridae X Muscidae X Limnphora sp. X X Rhagionidae X Tipulidae X Stratiomyidae X Syrphidae X Lepidoptera X Hydrachnidia X Mollusca Gastropoda x Hydrobiidae X X Amnicolhnae Amnicola sp. X X Amnicola limosa X X Physacea X Physidae X Physa sp. X Physa ancillaria X X Ancylidae X Ferrissia sp. X Planorbidae X Valvatidae X Valvata perdepressa X Valvata piscinalis X Valvata sincera sincera X X Valvata sp. X X Pelecypoda X Sphaeriacea X Corbiculidae Corbicula fluminea X X Corbicula sp. X X Sphaeriidae X Pisidium ventricosum X
IU TABLE 5.3.1 ~1 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COUNTS FOR TRIPLICATE SAMPLES TAKEN AT EACH SAMPLE STATION FOR MAY 2002 May Scienhfic name Location May Brachlonussp I 2A 2B1 2B2 2B3 3 Total 0
I Nematoda 1 1 Potamothixsp 0 Oligochaeta Enchytraeidae 0 Naididae I 1 N. pardabs 2 N vanabiis 00 ~1 Nats sp 1 Paranaisbtorahs 0 Pnstinaidrensis 2 2 P. osbomi 0 P. sima 0
Pnstinellasp.
0 Pnsthnellajenkinae Pnsthnella osbomi Branchiura sowerbyt 90 L hoffmeisten 3 10 3 4 5 L maumeensis 7 9 P veldovskyt 3 14 45 without hair chaetae 9 4 14 19 60 Lumbnculidae 1 Lumbncina Gammarus sp Hexagenra sp 3
16 1
13 4
29 1
.1 Caenms sp 0 Stahs sp Tnchoptera Leptocendae I 1
-U Diptera 1 1 Probezzia Chaoborus sp Chironomus sp 0
0 3
2 IU Ctyptochironomus sp Dicrotendipes sp 1 2 3
0 Polypeddlum sp 2 9 2 IU 1 14 Tanytarsus sp. 1 1 Ablabesmyia sp. 1 3 2
Coelotanypus sp 3 2
Procladius sp 2 2 Ceratopogonidae Muscidae Limnphora sp 2
1 2
0 1
IU Hydrobiidae 0
Amnicola sp.
Amnicola bmosa Physa sp 1
0 1
0 IU Valvata smncera sIncera IU 0
Corbicula flummea 1 1 7 9 Corbicula sp 2 2 Pisindum sp. 1 4 10 3 18 Oreissena polymorpha Tanypus sp Monthly Total 37 1 3 1 34 1 30 1 35 1 46 0
0 1185
-U I
TABLE 5.3.2 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COUNTS FOR TRIPLICATE SAMPLES TAKEN AT EACH SAMPLE STATION FOR SEPTEMBER 2002 September Sclentific name Location Spternber 2002 1 2A 2B1 2B2 2B3 3 Total Total Brachionus sp. I Nematoda I 1 2 Potamothix sp 2 2 2 Oligochaeta 1 1 1 31 3 Enchytraeidae 0 1 Naididae 0
N pardahs I 1 N. variabilis 4 2 6 6 Nats sp 1 0
Paranarshtorahs 1 1 Pnstina idrensis 1 0 2 P. osbomi I I 3 3
P. sima I 1 3 3 Pristinellasp 1 Pnstinelajenkinae 3 3 3
Pristinella osbomi 2 1 2 5 5 Branchiurasowerbyz 3 2 2 7 7 L. hofimeisteri 12 18 7 10 8 6 61 71 L. maumeensis 4 1 1 1 7 16 P. vejdovskyi 13 17 4 4 13 7 58 63 without hair chaetae 69 42 19 75 23 48 276 336 Lumbnculidae 0 1 Lumbricina I 1 2 Gammarus sp. 1 1 2 5 9 Hexagenta sp 10 1 3 10 24 53 Caenis sp. 2 7 1 4 14 14 Sialas sp 0 1 Tnchoptera 1 1 1 3 3 Leptocendae 1 2 6 9 9 Diptera 1 1 2 Probezzia 4 4 4
Chaoborus sp. 2 2 2 Chironomus sp. 4 8 2 15 15 Cryptochironomus sp 6 1 3 1 3 23 25 9
Dicrotendipes sp. 1 Polypedilum sp. 11 8 2 22 36 Tanytarsus sp 36 8 1 2 2 49 50 Ablabesmyia sp 6 2 4 12 15 Coelotanypus sp 1 30 6 39 40 117 120 Procladius sp 1 5 5 1 12 14 Ceratopogonidae 3 3 5 Muscidae 0 Limnphora sp. 0 1 Hydrobiidae 1 1 Amnicola sp 1 1 1 Amnicola limosa 2 14 8 1 6 32 33 Physa sp. 1 1 Valvata sincera sincera 1 1 Corbicula fluminea 0 9 Corbicula sp. 26 26 23 16 46 72 209 211 PAsidium sp 9 7 6 2 3 28 46 Dreissena polymorpha 2 2 2 Tanypus sp. I 1 1 Monthly Total 215 1 196 1 101 1 176 1 170 1 174 t 1031 1217
I -- I -- f r-f S - X -_ f ' F--- (- F
^-_ F_- f- r_ z- -- -f-- (- X f - I TABLE 5.4 MEAN NUMBER OF MACROINVERTEBRATES (NUMBER/M 2 ) AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF OLIGOCHAETA, CHIRONOMIDAE, MOLLUSCA, AND OTHER ORGANISMS, 2002 BVPS May 20 Station 1 (Control) 2A 2B1 (Non-control) 2B2 (Non-control) 2B3 (Non-control) 3
- /M2 % # % I#/m2 % #/m2 % #/m 2 % #/m2 %
Oligochaeta 1118 72 0 0 860 61 172 13 645 44 1032 53 Chironomidae 215 14 0 0 430 30 172 13 43 3 215 11 Mollusca 86 6 86 100 0 0 215 17 731 50 129 7 Others 129 8 0 0 129 9 731 57 43 3 559 29 Total 1548 100 86 100 1419 100 1290 100 1462 100 1935 100 September 25 Station 1 (Control) 2A 2B1 (Non-control) 2B2 (Non-control) 2B3 (Non-control) 3 g/M2 % #ImZ #ImZ % #Im 2 % #/m2 % #ImZ %
Oligochaeta 4117 48 3397 41 1462 40 1978 71 1935 29 2666 40 Chironomidae 2494 29 2666 32 817 23 602 22 2236 33 516 8 Mollusca 1806 21 1462 18 1247 35 129 5 2107 31 3139 48 Others 215 2 774 9 86 2 43 2 473 7 258 4 Total 8632 100 8299 100 3612 100 2752 100 6751 100 6579 100
J 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 I
NON-CONTROL STATIONS (22B1, 2B2, AND 283), 2002 BVPS May 20 ii Control Station (Mean)
W#Im %
Non-Control Station (Mean)
- m_ % I Oligochaeta 1118 72 559 40 Chironomidae 215 14 215 15 Mollusca 86 6 315 23 Others 129 8 301 22 TOTAL 1548 100 1390 100 I
September 25 Control Station (Mean) l Non-Control Station (Mean)
- 0 m % #/ML %
Oligochaeta Chironomidae 4117 2494 48 29 1792 1218 41 28 I
Mollusca 1806 21 1161 27 Others TOTAL 215 8632 2
100 201 4372 5
100 I
D I
Il Ii A
I j
TABLE 5.6 SHANNON-WEINER DIVERSITY, EVENNESS AND RICHNESS INDICES FOR BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES COLLECTED IN THE OHIO RIVER, 2002 Station 1 2A 2B1 2B2 2B3 3 Date: May 20 No. of Taxa 15 2 9 8 7 9 Shannon-Weiner Index 1.60 0.57 1.55 1.50 1.56 1.67 Evenness 0.41 0.57 0.49 0.50 0.56 0.53 Richness 3.38 0.91 2.27 2.06 1.69 2.09 Station 1.00 2A 2B1 2B2 2B3 3.00 Date: September 25 No. of Taxa 25 21 19 20 21 21 Shannon-Weiner Index 2.34 2.04 2.02 2.25 2.24 2.25 Evenness 0.50 0.46 0.48 0.52 0.51 0.51 Richness 3.95 3.35 3.39 3.24 3.43 3.41
TABLE 5.7 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE DENSITIES (NUMBER/M 2) FOR STATION 1 (CONTROL) AND STATION 2B (NON-CONTROL) DURING PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL YEARS THROUGH 2002 BVPS Month Preoperational Years Operational Years 1973 1974 1975 1976 l 1977 1978 1 l 2B 1 l 2B 1 l 2B 1 2B 1 2B 1 2B May 248 508 1,116 2,197 927 3,660 674 848 351 126 August 99 244 143 541 1,017 1,124 851 785 591 3,474 601 1,896
[Mean 173 l 376 630 1 1,369 1,017 1,124 889 l 2,223 j 633 l 2,161 476 l 1,011 4 Month Operational Years 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1 l 2B 1 28 1 l 2B 1 28 1 J 2B 1 j 2B May 1,004 840 1,041 747 209 456 3,490 3,026 3,590 1,314 2,741 621 August 1,185 588 l l l l l l l l l l September 1,523 448 2,185 912 l 2,958 3,364 4,172 4,213 1,341 828 Mean 1,095 714 1,282 598 1,197 684 3,223 3,195 3,881 2,764 2,041 725 L =. l_ I i L, i
FV _ ( __ r _f F_ F _I -- F F-r-- C( - [- - -- V - i I TABLE 5.7 (Cont'd)
BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE DENSITIES (NUMBER/M 2) FOR STATION 1 (CONTROL) AND STATION 2B (NON-CONTROL) DURING PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL YEARS THROUGH 2002 BVPS Month Operational Years 1985 1986 1987 l 1988 1989 1990 1 2B 1 12B 1 J 2B 1 j 1 1 2B 1 12B l May 2,256 867 601 969 1,971 2,649 1,1804 1,775 3,459 2,335 15,135 5
-September 1,024 913 849 943 2,910 2,780 1,420 1,514 1,560 _4,707 5,550 1,118 IMean 1,640 l 890 725 956 2,440 2,714 j 1,612 1,645 l 2,510 3,274 [ 10,343 ,457 Month l 1
1991 1 2B 1 1992 j 2B Operatlonal Years 1
1993 j 2B 1
1994 1 2B 1 1995 22B
{ 1996 llMav l 7,760l 6,355 7,314 10,560 8,435 2,152 6,980 2,349 8,083 9,283 1,987 1,333 eptember 3,855 2,605 ! 2,723 ! 4,707 4,693 ! 2,143 1,371 2,930 1,669 3,873 1649 2,413 Mean 5,808 4,480 5,019 j 7,634 6,564 j 2,148 l 4,176 2,640 4,876 j 6,578 1,814 3,7746
- Mean of 2B1, 2B2, 2B3
TABLE 5.7 (Cont'd)
BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE DENSITIES (NUMBER/M 2) FOR STATION 1 (CONTROL) AND STATION 2B (NON-CONTROL) DURING PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL YEARS THROUGH 2002 BVPS Month Operational Years 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1 1 2B* 1 2B 1 12B* 1 2BJ 1 l
l 2B* 1 j 2B*
J
_ _ =
May 1,411 2,520 6,980 2,349 879 1,002 2,987 2,881 l 3,139 5,232 1,548 2,795 September 1,944 2,774 1,371 2,930 302 402 J 3,092 2,742 8,632 14,663 Mean 1,678 2,647 4,176 l 2,640 j 591 l 702 3,040 l 2,812 l 3,139 5,232 5,090 8,7291 Mean of 2B1, 282, 2B3 L - -- _ __ II L_ _ z- L - __ - . 'r-- z- L
TABLE 5.8 SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAME1 OF FISH COLLECTED IN THE NEW CUMBERLAND POOL OF THE OHIO RIVER, 1970 THROUGH 2002 BVPS Page 1 of 3 Family and Scientific Name Common Name Lepisosteidae (gars)
Lepisosteus osseus Longnose gar Hiodontidae (mooneyes)
Hiodon alosoides Goldeye H. teraisus Mooneye Clupeidae (herrings)
Alosa chrvsochloris Skipjack herring A. oseudoharenous Alewife Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard shad Cyprinidae (carps and minnows)
Campostoma anomalum Central stoneroller Carassius auratus Goldfish Ctenopharvnqodon idella Grass carp Cvprinella spiloptera Spotfin shiner CyPrinus campio Common carp C. carpio x C. auratus Carp-goldfish hybrid Luxilus chrvsocephalus Striped shiner Macrhvbopsis storeriana Silver chub Nocomis micropooon River chub Notemiqonus crvsoleucas Golden shiner Notropis atherinoides Emerald shiner N. buccatus Silverjaw minnow N. hudsonius Spottail shiner N. rubellus Rosyface shiner N. stramineus Sand shiner N. volucellus Mimic shiner Pimephales notatus Bluntnose minnow P. promelas Fathead minnow Rhinichthvs atratulus Blacknose dace Semotilus atromaculatus Creek chub Catostomidae (suckers)
Carpiodes carmio River carpsucker C. cvPrinus Quillback C. velifer Highfin carpsucker Catostomus commersoni White sucker Hvpenteltum niqricans Northern hogsucker Ictiobus bubalus Smallmouth buffalo
!.nime e Black buffalo Minytrema melanops Spotted sucker
A TABLE 5.8 (Continued) A Family and Scientific Name Common Name Page 2 of 3 Il Moxostoma anisurum Silver redhorse M. carinatum M. duquesnei River redhorse Black redhorse D
M. erythrurum Golden redhorse M. macrolepidotum Shorthead redhorse Ictaluridae (bullhead catfishes)
Ameiurus catus White catfish A. melas A. natalis A. nebulosus Black bullhead Yellow bullhead J
Brown bullhead Ictalurus punctatus Channel catfish Noturus flavus Stonecat Pylodictis olivaris Flathead catfish Esocidae (pikes)
Esox lucius E. masquinongy Northern pike Muskellunge it E. lucius x E. masauinongv Tiger muskellunge Salmonidae (trouts)
Oncorhynchus mvkiss Rainbow trout Percopsidae (trout-perches)
Percopsis omiscomavcus Trout-perch Il Cyprinodontidae (killifishes)
Fundulus diaphanus Banded killifish Ii Atherinidae (silversides)
Labidesthes sicculus Brook silverside I Percichthyidae (temperate basses)
Morone chrvsops White bass M. saxatilis Striped bass M. saxatilis x M. chrysops Striped bass hybrid Centrarchidae (sunfishes)
Ambloplites rupestris Rock bass D
Lepomis cvanellus Green sunfish L. gibbosus L. macrochirus L. microlophus Pumpkinseed Bluegill Redear sunfish J
L. aibbosus x L. microlophus Pumpkinseed-redear sunfish hybrid Micropterus dolomieu Smallmouth bass M. punctulatus Spotted bass M. salmoides Largemouth bass Pomoxis annularis White crappie P. niqromaculatus Black crappie
-I I
TABLE 5.8 (Continued)
Page 3 of 3 Family and Scientific Name Common Name Percidae (perches)
Etheostoma blennioides Greenside darter E. niqrum Johnny darter E. zonale Banded darter Perca flavescens Yellow perch Percina caprodes Logperch P. copelandi Channel darter Stizostedion canadense Sauger S. vitreum Walleye S. canadense x S. vitreum Saugeye Sciaenidae (drums)
Aplodinotus grunniens Freshwater drum
'Nomenclature follows Robins, et al. (1991)
TABLE 5.9 COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL ELECTROFISHING CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 2002 FISHERIES SURVEY j Common Name l Sclentific Name I Control I % lNon-controll % I Total fish]l %
Black buffalo Ictiobus niger 3 3.4 12 5.2 15 4.7 Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus 1 1.1 1 0.4 2 0.6 Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus 3 1.3 3 0.9 Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus 1 1.1 7 3.0 8 2.5 Common carp Cyprinus carpio 4 4.5 1 0.4 5 1.6 Emerald shiner Notropis atheriniodes 3 3.4 2 0.9 5 1.6 Flathead catfish Pylodlctus olivoris 3 1.3 3 0.9 Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunnlens 5 5.7 12 5.2 17 5.3 Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum 28 31.8 37 15.9 65 20.2 Golden redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum 12 13.6 32 13.7 44 13.7 Highfin carpsucker Carpoides velifer 11 4.7 11 3.4 Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans 1 1.1 1 0.3 Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus 1 0.4 1 0.3 Mooneye Hiodon tergius 4 1.7 4 1.2 Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus 3 1.3 3 0.9 Quillback Carpoides cyprinus 2 2.3 12 5.2 14 4.4 River Redhorse Moxostoma carinatum 1 1.1 2 0.9 3 0.9 Sauger Stizostedion conadense 2 2.3 9 3.9 11 3.4 Shorthead redhorse sucker oxostoma macrolepidotu 1 1.1 14 6.0 15 4.7 Silver redhorse Moxostoma anisurum 2 2.3 10 4.3 12 3.7 Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomeiu 3 3.4 3 1.3 6 1.9 Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius 4 4.5 4 1.2 Spotted bass Micropterus punctulatus 3 3.4 5 2.1 8 2.5 Walleye Stizostedion vitreum 2 2.3 3 1.3 5 1.6 White bass Morone chrysops 9 10.2 46 19.7 55 17.1 White catfish Ameriurus catus 1 1.1 1 0.3 Electrofishing Gear Total: 88 100 233 100 321 100 L- L_ _ I-
'. - i, U &=-=- ,-L- _ L:- L - __ I'~ L__ ~_LI
I ( -- r __ ( -- r -- C -- ( __ i.-- ( -__ r ___ ( ___ ( -, f - ( __ r-__ (---, ( _,__ ( , (
TABLE 5.10 COMPARISON OF CONTROL VS. NON-CONTROL SEINE CATCHES DURING THE BVPS 2002 FISHERIES SURVEY
[Common Name Scientific Name Control [ % lNon-controll % I Total fish [ %
Black buffalo Ictiobus niger 0.0 5 7.8 5 2.7 Bluegill Lepomls macrochirus 50 42.0 15 23.4 65 35.5 luntnose minnow Pimephales notatus 3 2.5 2 3.1 5 2.7 Emerald shiner Notropis atherlnoides 24 20.2 2 3.1 26 14.2 Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedlanum 38 31.9 29 45.3 67 36.6 Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus 0.0 1 1.6 1 0.5 Smallmouth bass Mlcropterus dolomeiul 1 0.8 0.0 1 0.5 Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spilopterus 3 2.5 7 10.9 10 5.5 Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius 0.0 2 3.1 2 1.1 White bass Morone chrysops 0.0 1 1.6 1 0.5 Seine GearTotal: 119 100 64 100 183 100 Seine and 1 Electrofishing Year Total 207 12 297 __ 504
TABLE 5.11 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE MAY 2002 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations
- Seine Electrofishing Common Name Scientific Name S-1** S-2**1 E-1 I E-2A I E-2B E-3I Total I% j Total %_
Channel calfish Ictalurus punctatus 3 1 2 6 7.3 Common carp Cyprinus carpio I 1 1.2 Flathead catfish Pylodictis ofivoris I 1 1.2 Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunnlens 5 1 1 7 14 17.1 Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum 2 2 4 4.9 Golden redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum 4 4 4.9 Highfin carpsucker Carpolodes velifer I 10 11 13.4 Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus 1 1 1.2 Mooneye Hlodon tergius 1 1 2 2.4 Quillback Ccirpoides cyprinus 6 6 7.3 River redhorse Moxostoma carinatum 1 2 3 3.7 Sauger Stizostedion canadense 2 1 3 3.7 Shorthead redhorse sucker Moxostoma 1 1 5 7 8.5 Silver rcdhorse Moxostoma anisurum 2 9 11 13.4 Walleye Stizostedion vitreum 2 2 2.4 White bass Morone chrysops _ 5 1 6 2L..
Total [ l 0ofo0116 5 32 29 0 0 82 100
- Gear = (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining
- Seine netting could not be safely done because of high river water conditions I--- L--- " --- L-,-
IV-- ( -- FV - f--
1, ---- f ---
(- r-'
r- - (- r- - . f - ( ( - ( -- ( ,
TABLE 5.12 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE JULY 2002 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations
- Seine Electrofishing Common Name Scientific Name S-l1 S-2 j E-1 J E-2A l E-2B j E-3 Total J % Total J %
Black buffalo Ictiobus niger I 1 2.3 Common carp Cyprinus carpio I 1 2 4.7 Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens I 1 2.3 Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum . I 1 2 4 9.3 Golden redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum 8 5 2 15 34.9 Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus I I 1 8.3 1 2.3 Quillback Carpoides velifer 2 2 4.7 Sauger Stizostedion canadense I 1 2.3 Shorthead redhorse sucker Moxostoma macrolepidotumn I 1 2.3 Silver redhorse Moxostoma anisurum I 1 2.3 Smallmouth bass Micropterusdolomeiui 2 2 16.7 Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spilopterus 9 9 75.0 Spottail shiner Nlotropis hudsonius 4 4 9.3 Spotted bass Micropteruspunctulatus 4 4 9.3 Walleye Stizostedion vitreum 1 2 3 7.0 White bass Morone chyrsops I1 1 3 7.0 JTotal [ 0 12 14 [ 11 10 8 12 1 100 1 43 l 100
- Gear = (E) Fish captured by clectrofishing; (S) captured by seining
TABLE 5.13 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE SEPTEMBER 2002 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS Sample locations
- Seine Electrofishing Common Name Black buffalo
- Scientific Name ktiobus niger S- Il S-2l E-l l E-2A l E-2B E-3_ Toa__ Total l % j 5 6 5 2.3 6 12.8 Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus I 1 2.1 Channel catfish Ictaluruspunctatus I 1 2 4.3 Common carp Cyprinus carpio 2 2 4.3 Emerald shiner Notropis atheriniodes 10 I 11 5.1 Flathead catfish Pylodictus olivarts 2 2 4.3 Gizzard shad Dorosoina cepedianum 38 154 6 3 4 192 89.3 13 27.7 Golden redhorse Moxostoina erythrurumn 3 3 6.4 Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans I 1 2.1 Pumpkinseed Lepoinis gibbosus I I 1 1 0.5 2 4.3 Quillback Carpoidescyprinus 2 2 4.3 Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomeiui I 1 2 1 1 0.5 4 8.5 Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spilopterus 1 3 4 1.9 Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius I I 05 Spotted bass Micropteruspunctulatus 3 1 4 8.5 White bass Morone chrysops I 1 2 4 8.5 White catfish Ameriurus catus I _ 1 2.1 Total ll50 165 18l 14 J 8 7 215 100 47 100
- Gear = (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining L ,~ ~ .L-- L-- -. L-- ~L-- -- L ;- - L LZ- ~ ~ k-
I---- ( -- (---- f-- r.-- --- r- r--- ( r- f --- (-- ( --- ( - ( -
TABLE 5.14 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED DURING THE NOVEMBER 2002 SAMPLING OF THE OHIO RIVER IN THE VICINITY OF BVPS I Sample locations
- Seine Electroflshing lCommon Namc Scientific Name S-I1 S-2 E-1 E-2A E-2B l E-3 Total % Total l %
Black buffalo Ictiobus niger 3 4 1 8 5.4 Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus I 1 0.7 Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus 50 15 1 1 1 65 67.0 3 2.0 Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus 3 2 5 5.2 Emerald shiner Notropis atheriniodes 14 1 3 2 15 15.5 5 3.4 Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens I 1 0.7 Gizzard shad Dorosomacepedianum 4 19 13 8 4 4 4.1 44 29.5 Golden redhorse Moxostomna erythrurum 4 3 6 9 22 14.8 Mooneye Hiodon tergius I 1 2 1.3 Quillback Carpoidescyprinus 1 2 1 4 2.7 Sauger Stizostedion canadense 4 3 7 4.7 Shorthead redhorse sucker Moxostoma macrolepidotum 1 2 5 8 5.4 Smallmouth bass Micropterusdolomeiui 2 2 4 4 12 8.1 Spotrin shiner Cyprinellaspilopterus 2 4 6 6.2 Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius 1 1 1.0 White bass Morone chrysops 1 8 2 6 16 I 1.0 32 21.5 ITotal .69 28 140 1 32 1 36 41 1 97 1 100 1 149 100
- Gear = (E) Fish captured by electrofishing; (S) captured by seining
TABLE 5.15 ESTIMATED NUMBER OF FISH OBSERVED DURING ELECTROFISHING OPERATIONS I
Common Name Scientific Name May July Sept Nov Total Emerald shiner Notropis atheriniodes 1000's IGizzard shad Total l Dorosoma cepedianum 1000's
___I1000"s J 51 51 I000's 51 511 Jj
= Not boated or handled 1
Table 5.16 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISHIELECTROFISHING MINUTE)
BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2000 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Common Name Count of species CPUE (fish/min)
Spring 40 Buffalo sp. 4 0.1000 Bullheads/Catfishes 2 0.0500 Channel catfish 11 0.2750 Common carp 3 0.0750 Flathead catfish 2 0.0500 Freshwater drum 1 0.0250 Gizzard shad 22 0.5500 Golden redhorse 12 0.3000 Quillback 8 0.2000 River redhorse 4 0.1000 Rock bass 1 0.0250 Sauger 26 0.6500 Shorthead redhorse sucker 8 0.2000 Silver redhorse 9 0.2250 Smallmouth bass 3 0.0750 Striped bass 12 0.3000 Walleye 13 0.3250 l Season Total 141 2.5250 FSeasonj Effort (min) Common Name Count of species CPUE (fish/min)
Summer 40 Black buffalo 1 0.0250 Channel catfish 1 0.0250 Common carp 4 0.1000 Emerald shiner 5 0.1250 Flathead catfish 2 0.0500 Gizzard shad 22 0.5500 Golden redhorse 12 0.3000 Highfin carpsucker 1 0.0250 Largemouth bass 2 0.0500 Quillback 4 0.1000 River redhorse 3 0.0750 Sauger 18 0.4500 Shorthead redhorse sucker 5 0.1250 Silver redhorse 5 0.1250 Smallmouth bass 3 0.0750 Smallmouth buffalo 3 0 0750 Spotted bass 2 0.0500 White bass 3 0.0750 Season Total 96 2.4000
.1 ii Table 5.16 (Cont'd)
A CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE) A BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2000 FISHERIES SURVEY A
Se rt (mi) Common Name Count of species CPUE (fish/mm)
Fall 40 Bluegill 3 0.0750 Channel catfish 3 0.0750 Common carp 1 0.0250 Freshwater drum 3 0.0750 Gizzard shad Golden redhorse 10 8
0.2500 0.2000 Ii Longnose gar 5 0.1250 Northern hogsucker 1 0.0250 A
Quillback 1 0.0250 Sauger 8 0.2000 Shorthead redhorse sucker 1 0.0250 Silver redhorse Smallmouth bass Walleye 2
5 2
0.0500 0.1250 0 0500 A
White bass 6 0.1500
_ . Season Total 59 1.4750 l Season Winter j Effort (min) lCommon Name l Count of species l CPUE (fish/min)
J 40 Bluegill 4 0.1000 Channel catfish 1 0.0250 Emerald shiner 1 0.0250 Freshwater drum 2 0.0500 Gizzard shad 19 0.4750 Golden redhorse Sauger Shorthead redhorse sucker 10 21 1
0.2500 0.5250 0.0250 J
Silver redhorse 2 0.0500 Smallmouth bass 3 0.0750 Smallmouth buffalo 6 0.1500 Spotted bass 1 Walleye White bass 2 1
0.0250 0.0250 0.0500 2
-Season Total [ 74 1.8500 Year 160 1 370 2.3125 I
I1
Table 5.17 CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISHIELECTROFISHING MINUTE)
BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2002 FISHERIES SURVEY Season jEffort (mi) Common Name Count of species CPUE (fish/min)
Spring 40 Channel catfish 2 0.050 Freshwater drum 2 0.050 Gizzard shad 14 0.350 Golden redhorse 17 0 425 Quillback 1 0.025 River carp sucker 3 0.075 Sauger 2 0.050 Shorthead redhorse sucker 10 0.250 Silver redhorse 7 0.175 Smallmouth bass 5 0.125 Smallmouth buffalo 4 0.100 Walleye 1 0.025 Season Total l 68 1.700 ]
Season Summer I Effort (min) 40 Common Name Black buffalo Count of species 2
I CPUE (fish/min) 0.0500 Bluegill 2 0.0500 Common carp 1 0.0250 Emerald shiner 2 0.0500 Flathead catfish 2 0.0500 Freshwater drum 2 0.0500 Golden redhorse 6 0.1500 Sauger 8 0.2000 Shorthead redhorse sucker 2 0.0500 Silver redhorse 3 0.0750 Smallmouth bass 3 0.0750 Spotted bass 1 0.0250 l a Season Total J 34 J 0.8500 Year 80 102 1.2750
ii Table 5.18 J CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)
BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2002 FISHERIES SURVEY A 1
Season Effort (min) Common Name Count of species CPUE (fish/mm)
Spring 40 06 Channel catfish 6 0 1498 Common carp I 0 0250 Flathead catfish I 0 0250 Freshwater drum 15 0.3744 Gizzard shad Golden redhorse High fin carpsucker 4
4 11 0 0999 0 0999 0.2746 A
Longnose gar I 0 0250 Quillback 6 0.1498 Mooneye 2 0.0499 River redhorse 3 I
0 0749 Sauger 3 0 0749 Shorthead redhorse 6 0 1498 Silver redhorse I1 0.2746 Walleye 2 0 0499 W hite bass 6 0.1498 SSeason Total 82 2.0469 Season Effort (min) lCommon Name Count of species CPUE (fish/mm)
A Summer 40 Black buffalo I 0 0250 Common carp Freshwater drum Gizzard shad 4 2
1 0.0500 0.0250 0.1000 I
Golden redhorse 15 0.3750 Quillback Pumpkinseed 2
I 0 0500 0 0250 I
Sauger 1 0.0250 Shorthead redhorse 1 0.0250 Silver redhorse I 0 0250 1'
Spottail shiner 4 0.1000 Spotted bass Walleye White bass 4
3 3
0.1000 0 0750 0.0750 J
Season Total 43 1 0750 I
3 I
Table 5.18 (Cont'd)
CATCH PER UNIT EFFORT (CPUE AS FISH/ELECTROFISHING MINUTE)
BY SEASON DURING THE BVPS 2002 FISHERIES SURVEY Season Effort (min) Common Name Count of species CPUE (fishlmi)
Fall 41.1 Black buffalo 5 0.1217 Black crappie 1 0.0243 Channel catfish 2 0.0487 Common Carp 2 0.0487 Flathead catfish 2 0.0487 Gizzard shad 14 0.3406 Golden redhorse 3 0.0730 Northern Hog sucker 1 0.0243 Pumpkinseed 2 0.0487 Quillback 2 0.0487 Smallmouth bass 4 0.0973 Spotted bass 4 0.0973 White bass 4 0.0973 White catfish I 0 0243 I _Season Total [ 47 1.1436 Season Effort (nmn) jCommon Name Count of species CPUE (fish/min)
Winter 41 Black buffalo 8 0.1951 Black crappie 1 0.0250 Bluegill 3 0.0749 Emerald shiner 5 0.1248 Freshwater drum I 0 0250 Gizzard shad 44 1.0984 Golden redhorse 22 0.5492 Quillback 4 0.0999 Mooneye 2 0.0499 Sauger 7 0.1747 Shorthead redhorse 8 0.1997 Smallmouth bass 12 0.2996 White bass 32 0.7988 IseasonTotal S 149 ! 36341 3
Year 162 16 1 1 321 1.9795
A TABLE 5.19 Ii UNIT 1 COOLING RESERVOIR MONTHLY SAMPLING CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR I
2002 FROM BVPS Area Mean Maximum Minimum Estimated Collection A
sampled Live or Length Length Length number Date (sq ft) Dead Count (mm) (mm) (mm) (per sq m) 4/17/02 0.25 Dead 1 3.80 43 Live 1 1.10 43 5/20/02 0.25 Dead Live 3
0 3.03 5.0 10 129 0
I 6/25/02 0.25 Dead 0 0 Live 0 0 7/16/02 8/20/02 0.25 0.25 Dead Live Dead 5
3 26 3.46 4.80 3.88 3.8 6.2 2.8 2.2 210 129 A
10.0 1.5 1092 Live 3 8.00 15.0 4.5 129 9/25/02 0.25 Dead 3 2.67 3.0 2.0 129 Live 0 0 10/22/02 0.25 Dead 9 6.33 11.0 3.0 278 Live 3 8.00 100 60 129 11/13/02 0.25 Dead 9 7.00 10.0 20 278 Live 0 0 Unit summary Dead 56 2159 Live 10 430 I
1 I1
TABLE 5.20 UNIT 2 COOLING RESERVOIR MONTHLY SAMPLING CORBICULA DENSITY DATA FOR 2002 FROM BVPS Area Mean Maximum Minimum Estimated Collection sampled Live or Length Length length number Date (sq ft) Dead Count (mm) (mm) (mm) (per sq m) 4/17/02 0.25 Dead 0 0 l Live 0 0 5/20/02 0.25 Dead 0 0 l Live 0 0 6125102 0.25 Dead 0 0 Live 0 0 7/16/02 0.25 Dead 0 0 Live 1 1.20 43 8/20/02 0.25 Dead 9 1.67 2.1 1.0 387 Live 1 2.00 43 9/25/02 0.25 Dead 11 1.18 1.4 0.6 11 Live 8 1.08 1.2 1.1 8 10/22/02 0.25 Dead 0 0 Live 0 0 11/13/02 0.25 Dead 0 0 Live 0 0 Unit summary Dead 20 398 Live 10 94
A TABLE 5.21 A ZEBRA MUSSEL SUBSTRATE SETTLEMENT RESULTS FROM BVPS, 2002 J
Tile location Date set Number/mr2 EOB Biobox AS 1-Substrate April 17 Date retrieved A
May 20 0 EOB Biobox AS2-Substrate April 17 May 20 0 EOB Biobox BSI-Substrate April 17 May 20 0 EOB Biobox BS2-Substrate April 17 May 20 0 EOB Biobox AS 1-Substrate May 20 June 25 0 EOB Biobox AS2-Substrate EOB Biobox BS1-Substrate May 20 May 20 June June 25 25 0
0 ii EOB Biobox BS2-Substrate May 20 June 25 0 Barge Slip-Briadal Veil April 17 June 25 It EOB Biobox AS 1-Substrate June 25 July 16 0 EOB Biobox BSI-Substrate June 25 July 16 0 Barge Slip-Briadal Veil June 25 July 16 294 EOB Biobox AS3-Substrate July 16 August 20 0 A
EOB Biobox AS4-Substrate July 16 August 20 0 Barge Slip-Briadal Veil July 16 August 20 84 A Barge Slip-Briadal Veil August 20 September 25 42 Barge Slip-Briadal Veil September 25 October 22 0 Barge Slip-Briadal Veil October 22 November 13 0 j
J I
FIGURES 1-_ F - FFr - rFF r - n-F_ r -- f-- r - I I-I_ (_--- f-' ( -- rF
~
SlnjanA-Nn-c,~o hu Jan 16 10,4019g?
L ~Scale 131,250 (adcerterq
- 2000 FMnal Station tigure 5 o-ati- Non-C -- o Figure 5.1: Location Map for the Beaver Valley Power Station Aquatic Monitoring Program Control and Non-Control Sampling Locations
Figure 5.2: Location Map for the Beaver Valley Power Station Benthic Organism Sampling Sites L-- L - -= LI L-- L-W L-- L;-. WZ.- L-- -- ;-- -- ;.-
I- C C - Fr [~-- f r -- f f .I I I C- - I- - I '- ( --- - '- I' -
'RiIAj Ru4 SPhppbVpodt 0
I x
z;i!
Mao 14 a)
LEGEND ThuJan 18 I014 1997 C U iectrofishing site scat, 1 31,250 (at center) lStution 2A e Scineste 2000 Feet 0
lw aten to tefets -4 I__ . __ I I Sltlion on2B Figure 5.3: Location Map for the Beaver Valley Power Station Fish Population Sampling Sites
I'A ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT A
.1 A
if ii I
If JI
-I if if Figure 5.4: Study Area Location, Beaver Valley Power Station, Shippingport, PA if if
r - r--- r-- r-- r-- r--- r- r I-. r- r-- r I (' I ( I ( r
- 500X 4503 UJ ma. 400-350-O r4 300-ow 250-0 w
200-1504
_fD 9'30-950 L~~
S u mm 49mm i 75Z29 mm SIZ 'E RANGE 100- 1 73 35 4 74 mm z 200334 i 0-9 mm mn O0t-099mm 014/17 15/20 1 625 Il/Kz I It/to 30 01-0.99 mm 0 j 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 U 1.00-1.99 mm 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 00-3 34 mm 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 13 35-4 74 mm 0 0 0 0 86 0 0 0 U 4 75-6 29 mm 0 0 0 86 0 0 43 0 O 6 30-949 mm 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0>950 mm 0 0 0 0 43 0 43 0 TOTAL Vm2 43 0 0 129 129 0 129 0 TOTAL 628 0 0 1883 1883 0 1883 0 Figure 5.5 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among BVPS Unit I Cooling Tower Reservoir Sample Events, for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2002.
w 500 -X UJ Ir 450-DZ a., 400-350-L) 300- "'I'll COl mr 0UJ m1 w
CC 150-U- SIZE RANGE 100-I i,,/ Wiv cwzo a I 8/2U 9/25 10/22 11/13 1;10 01-0 99 mm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 1 00-1.99 mm 0 0 0 43 0 344 0 0 13J2.00-3 34 mm 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 3 3 35-4 74 mm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 75-6 29 mm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 30-9 49 mm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
>950 mm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL #/m2 0 0 0 43 43 344 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 550 550 4403 0 0 Figure 5.6 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir Sample Events, for Various Shell Size Groups, 2002.
- L-- L " L-- L-- LW--- L--- L. L--- I-- 6--- I-- f--- L;;-.-- L;-.-- -- --- - -- --
F r- r -- -- r-- r--- r---- 1v-- r- [ r I- F ( I f [* I 14 IL < 12 O.J 10 a:
8 -111TOTAL.
m M M I 6
- I4 - I n.
5/20 l7116 Z C. 4 335-474 SIZ 2 .34 - SIZE RANGE 0
.9/25 11/13 E0.01-0.99mm 0 0 0 0 3 1.00-1.99 mm 0 12 1 0 0 2.00-3.34 mm 0 6 1 0 0 3.35-4.74 mm 0 2 0 0 Intake structure bottom samples are being E 4.75-6.29 mm 0 0 0 0 collected from the Ohio River at the Intake 0 6.30-9.49 mm 0 0 Building because of security concerns.
0 0 0 >9.50mm 1 1 0 1 TnTAI I 21 12 _L Figure 5.7 Comparison of Live Corbicula Clam Density Estimates Among Intake Structure Sample Events, for Various Clam Shell Size Groups, 2002.
90 671 80 A - 670 669 70 0
I- 668 M 0 60 _.
0 667 '
50 666 40
-a-temp + elevation -
665 30 664 4/17 5/20 6/25 7/16 8/20 9/25 10/22 11/13 2002 Monthly Sample Dates Figure 5.8 Water Temperature and River Elevation Recorded at the Ohio River at BVPS Intake Structure During the 2002 Monthly Sampling Dates.
L - L- L ~ L- -- L-- -- -- L-~ L - ;.- I- ;- - - L 1L -- L-- ;
6000 l 5000 *1 4000 3000 C- L 1I4 2000 1X4 1a7 1tfi 1000 0 I Intake Structure/Open Water r-x
'Z Unit I Cooling Tower Reservoir l
r-Unit 2 Coohng Tower Reservoir 14/117 0 0 0 05/20 0 0 0 06/25 260 320 200 07/16 4270 3133 5360
- 8/20 2000 2620 2950 09/25 100 460 2860
- 10122 0 0 0 011/13 0 0 0 Sample location Figure 5.9 Density of zebra mussels veligers (#/m3 ) collected at Beaver Valley Power Station Intake Structure, Unit I Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir.
12000 10000 -
8000 -
. 6000--'
4000 -~1 2000 -
Barge Slip Splash Pool 94/17 0 0 Emergency Outfall Basin 0 J 06/25 870 750 320 07/16 1238 4500 3448 j]
- 8/20 10693 1880 1370 09/25 0 30 0 311/13 0 0 0 Sample location j Figure 5.10 Density of zebra mussels veligers (#/m3 ) collected at Beaver Valley Power Station _
Barge Slip, Slpash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2002.
30 I 25 i I 20 15 10 5
0 Intake Structure/Open Water Unit I Cooling Tower Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir Reservoir 64/17 0 0 0 05/20 10 0 0 0 625 12 0 0
- 7/16 0 0 0
- 8/20 27 0 0
- 9/25 0 0 0 010122 0 0 0 311/13 0 0 0 Figure 5.11 Density (#/m 2 ) of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station Intake Structure, Unit I Cooling Tower Reservoir and Unit 2 Cooling Tower Reservoir, 2002
jJ A
ii A
ii Il Il J
Figure 5.12 Density (#/m2) of settled zebra mussels at Beaver Valley Power Station Barge Slip, Splash Pool and Emergency Outfall Basin, 2002. IU
- Samples could not be collected from the Barge Slip because of high river water conditions.
IU
-U IU IU
ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1: ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS & CERTIFICATES Registration Number Regulator/Description Expiration BVPS EPA RCRA Identification number for regulated waste PAR000040485 activity. Also used by PA DEP to monitor regulated waste Indefinite activity.
04-02474 BVPS EPA Facility Identification Number for CERCLA/EPCRA/SARA. Used for SARA Tier II reporting and Indefinite emergency planning.
04-02475 BVPS Offsite Warehouse (22) EPA Facility Identification Number for CERCLA/EPCRA/SARA. Used for SARA Tier II Indefinite reporting and emergency planning.
PA0025615 BVPS NPDES Permit number under PA DEP and US EPA.
12/27/2006 04-13281 BVPS Unit 1 PA DEP Facility Identification number for regulated storage tanks. Indefinite 04-13361 BVPS Unit 2 PA DEP Facility Identification number for regulated storage tanks. Indefinite 04-302-055, Indefinite 04-309-004, PA DEP Air operating permits currently under application for 04-399-006 state-only permit for emergency diesel generators and auxiliary 04-399-005A boilers.
OP-04-00086 200100242 US Army Permit for maintenance dredging 12/31/2011 N/A PA DEP Open Burning Permit for operation of the BVPS Fire School- annual application and renewal 12/31/2003 061301003010J US Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Registration renewed annually 06/30/2003
ATTACHMENT 2 PLANT COMMUNITY CHARACTERIZATION STUDY for the BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION SITE SHIPPINGPORT, PENNSYLVANIA October 2002 First Energy Nuclear Operating Company Shippingport, Pennsylvania Preparedby:
Beak Consultants Incorporated 140 Rotech Drive Lancaster, New York 14086-9755 Tel: (716) 759-1200 Fax: (716) 759-1489 Environmental Specialists , ),J k (gccCONSULTANTS BEAK iINCORPORATED
1.0 INTRODUCTION
First Energy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) retained Beak Consultants Incorporated (Beak) to complete a Plant Community Characterization Study of the Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS)
Site in Shippingport, Pennsylvania. The field investigation was completed on July 16 & 17,2002.
The objectives of the study were to define and characterize the natural communities present within the BVPS Site and immediately downstream of the Site along the Ohio River (see Figure 1, Appendix A). In general, the aquatic and riparian communities associated with the Ohio River were defined and characterized in greater detail than communities located further away from the Ohio River.
Beak completed this study by reviewing Section 2.2 of the 1983 Environmental Report for the BVPS Site (Ohsson et al. 1984), examining the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Index (PNDI) database search results for potentially significant ecological resources (including threatened and endangered species) that may be associated with the BVPS Site, conducting a field survey of the natural communities present within and adjacent to the Site, and updating existing information about natural communities and wildlife, as presented in the 1983 Environmental Report. The field survey covered most of the BVPS Site, as well as an off-site area adjacent to the Ohio River (including Phillis Island). The survey area is shown in Figure 1.
This report describes Beak's methods for completing the Plant Community Characterization Study, describes the natural communities that are present within the BVPS Site, and identifies wildlife that may occur within the Site.
Plant Community Charactenzanon Study 2 Beak Consultants Incorporated FENOC Beaver Valley Power Station C \LacRenEnv\Plant Study\BVPSYeg-Report2.doc
2.0 METHODS The Plant Community Characterization Study was conducted to update existing information available for natural communities and wildlife associated with the BVPS Site (i.e., data from Section 2.2 of the 1983 Environmental Report). It also included a more detailed examination of the aquatic and riparian communities associated with the Ohio River, including areas outside the FENOC property that were not evaluated in the 1983 Environmental Report.
Beak's field survey of the BVPS Site was conducted on July 16 & 17, 2002. The Site was visited to define and characterize the natural communities present on the property. Plant community boundaries were identified and drawn on September 18, 1990 color infrared aerial photos of the Site.
Representative areas within each community were traversed to qualitatively characterize the community. Distinguishing characteristics included plant species composition, successional stage, edaphic conditions, and land use.
Wildlife occurrence within each community was noted during the field surveys. Wildlife occurrence was determined by direct observations, as well as vocalizations, tracks, and other evidence (e.g.,
nests, burrows, scat). Wildlife observations were compared against species lists presented in Tables 2.2-6, 2.2-10, 2.2-15, and 2.2-16 of the 1983 Environmental Report. Those lists were developed using geographic ranges and habitat requirements, as well as fairly extensive field surveys.
Beak carefully inventoried dry woodland communities within the BVPS Site to determine presence/absence of tall tick-trefoil (Desmodium glabellum), a state-listed plant that was identified by the PNDI as potentially occurring within the Site (see Appendix B). Tall tick-trefoil is listed by the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (PDCNR) as "Tentatively Undetermined" (TU), which is defined as "a classification of plant species believed to be in danger of population decline, but which cannot presently be included within another classification due to taxonomic uncertainties, limited evidence within historical records, or insufficient data (PDCNR 2002)."
Plant Community Characterization Study 3 Beak Consultants Incorporated FENOC Beaver Valley Power Station C.LjcRenEnv\Plant Study\BVPSYeg-Report2 doc
3.0 RESULTS The BVPS Site is a 500+ acre property that consists primarily of undeveloped land (approximately two-thirds of the Site). Most of the undeveloped land supports upland forest communities. The remainder of the Site is heavily developed with buildings and paved surfaces associated with the power plant (Figure 1). The following sections describe the natural communities present within the BVPS Site and the species of wildlife that may occur within the Site.
3.1 Natural Communities Beak identified 13 communities within the BVPS Site. The distribution of these communities is shown in Figure 1. Plant species lists for the communities are provided in Table 1 (Appendix C).
Dominant plant species are identified with asterisks. General descriptions of the communities are presented below.
Aquatic Communities Three aquatic communities are present within or adjacent to the BVPS Site: Ohio River (Community No. 1), Open Water Lagoon (Community No. 8), and Peggs Run (Community No. 12).
The Ohio River borders the BVPS Facility to the north, providing a large expanse of open water habitat. The river is approximately 1,000 ft. wide in this area. The riparian habitats bordering the river vary from heavily developed to undisturbed forest.
The Open Water Lagoon community encompasses two small coves located at the downstream end of the developed portion of the Site. These lagoons have permanent connections with the Ohio River and are therefore inundated on a long-term basis and are influenced directly by river water levels.
Peggs Run consists of a 15+ ft. wide concrete sluice through most of the developed portion of the BVPS Site. It is a shallow (3-4 inches of water at the time of the field survey), slow-flowing stream which discharges directly into the Ohio River, just downstream of the Route 168 Bridge (Figure 1).
Very few trees or shrubs occur along the banks of Peggs Run in this area. A segment of Peggs Run, located just above its confluence with the Ohio River, may be influenced by Ohio River water levels due to the low gradient in this section. It is important to note, however, that this study was not Plant Community Charactenzation Study 4 Beak Consultants Incorporated FENOC Beaver Valley Power Station C.licRenEnvAPant Study\BVPSVegReport2 doc
intended to determine the zone of influence. jj Above the developed portion of the Site, Peggs Run is a natural channel that consists of a series of A shallow pool, riffle, and run habitats. The substrate is predominantly cobble intermixed with boulders, gravel, and sand. Upland forest communities border Peggs Run in this area, providing A shoreline habitat and overhanging vegetation. The invert elevation of this segment of Peggs Run is high enough above the surface water elevation of the Ohio River that this segment is uninfluenced .]
by water levels in the river.
Terrestrial Communities Influenced by Ohio River Water Levels Three communities within or adjacent to the BVPS Site are influenced, at least occasionally, by A water levels in the Ohio River. These include the following: Beach and Embankment (Community No. 3), Willow Scrub (Community No. 6), and Silver Maple Floodplain Forest (Community No. 7).
The Beach and Embankment community is located along the northern shore of Phillis Island (Figure 1). It consists primarily of an un-vegetated shoreline that is alternately flooded and exposed, depending on the Ohio River water levels. A narrow and steep embankment is present above some portions of the beach. A Willow Scrub (Community No. 6) and Silver Maple Floodplain Forest (Community No. 7) border j1 the Ohio River and appear to be flooded on an intermittent basis (i.e., during flood events). The primary distinction between the two communities is the stage of succession, with the former consisting mostly of shrubs, saplings, and small trees and the latter being dominated by larger and older trees and exhibiting a mostly closed tree canopy. Otherwise, the plant species composition of the two communities is similar (see Table 1).
Terrestrial Communities Uninfluenced by Ohio River Water Levels The remaining seven communities are located above the influence of water levels in the Ohio River.
These include two communities on Phillis Island that appear to be rarely, if ever, flooded by the Ohio River: Black Locust - Hardwood Forest (Community No. 4) and Knotweed Stand (Community No.
- 5) (Figure 1). The Black Locust - Hardwood Forest (Community No. 4) supports a fair diversity of trees consisting mostly of early successional species (Table 1). This community also occurs as a Plant Community Charactenzation Study 5 Beak Consultants Incorporated FENOC Beaver Valley Power Station C \UcRenEnv\Plant Study\RVPS_Veg-Report2 doc
narrow riparian corridor bordering the southern shore of the Ohio River, downstream of the BVPS Site (Figure 1). The Knotweed Stand (Community No. 5) consists of a very dense growth of Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum), limited to the eastern end of Phillis Island (Figure 1).
Black Locust - Knotweed Scrub (Community No. 2) consists of a series of narrow strips of upland vegetation that separate developed portions of the Site from the Ohio River (Figure 1). These areas were recently cleared and treated with herbicide, killing most of the black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) trees and saplings and some of the Japanese knotweed. Successional Old Field (Community No. 9) occurs in two small areas outside the transmission corridors that are in an early stage of succession as a result of site disturbance. These areas are vegetated mostly by grasses and herbs, with scattered saplings and shrubs.
The 1983 Environmental Report for the BVPS Site (Ohsson et al. 1984) defined and mapped several distinct forest communities within the undeveloped portion of the Site. Beak chose to consolidate most of those communities into one forest cover type, Upland Mixed Hardwoods Forest (Community No. 10). Beak did so because species composition varies considerably across the forested portion of the Site, based primarily on aspect and steepness of slope, thus forming a complex patchwork of upland forest communities that would have been very labor intensive to accurately map and characterize.
Numerous transmission line corridors crisscross the BVPS Site. The maintained corridors that cut through wooded portions of the Site were identified as Community No. 11 (Figure 1). These corridors support a very dense growth of shrubs, saplings, woody vines, and herbs. The dominant species are tolerant of frequent disturbance.
Developed Land (Community No. 13) identifies the heavily developed area located in the northeastern third of the Site. This area supports numerous buildings and paved surfaces associated with the power plant (Figure 1). Very little plant growth occurs within this area, other than occasional landscape plantings.
Plant Community Characterization Study 6 Beak Consultants Incorporated FENOC Beaver Valley Power Station C:\LicRenEnv\Plant Study\BVPSVeg-Report2.doc
ii 3.2 Wildlife Associated with the BVPS Site Beak recorded species of wildlife observed during the July 16 & 17, 2002 field investigation and ii compared those species against comprehensive species lists presented in Tables 2.2-6, 2.2-10, 2.2-15, and 2.2-16 of the 1983 Environmental Report (see Appendix D). No additional species were noted during Beak's field investigation. It is important to note that the 1983 lists were developed based on geographic ranges and habitat requirements, as well as fairly extensive field surveys. ii 3.3 Threatened & Endangered Species j Beak searched dry woodland communities (i.e., Communities 4, 10, and 11) for tall tick-trefoil, a species listed as "Tentatively Undetermined" by the PDCNR. No specimens of tall tick-trefoil were observed.
ii j
jJ I'
-I I
7 Beak Consultants Incorporated
-I FENOC Beaver Valley Power Station C.\LicRenEnv\Plant Study\BVPSVegReport2 doc I
4.0 REFERENCES
Ohsson, Karl E., Arthur E. Robb, Jr., Robert L. Shema, Alan J. Hosmer, William R. Cody, J.W.
McIntire, and C.J. Touhill. 1984. 1983 Annual Environmental Report, Non-Radiological.
Duquesne Light Company. Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2. Volume I Environmental Report, Operating License Stage. Docket #50-334. Amendment 6, May 1984.
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. 2002. Element Ranking List -
Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory. State Rank Codes and Definitions.
http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/forestry/pndi/rank.htm.
Plant Community Charactenzanon Study 8 Beak Consultants Incorporated FENOC Beaver valley Power Station C \LcRenEnv\Plant Study\BVPSVegReport2.doc
Appendix A Figure 1 (Plant Community Map)
I-- I as I - X r - F- I-- r - --
F l- -- I- "I f I X BEAVER VALLEY POWER TRANSMISSIONUNE CORRIWR PLANT COMMUNITIES Figure 1
Appendix B Agency Correspondence (PNDI Database Search Results)
PNDI Intemnet Database Search Results PagelI of 2 PNDI Internet Database Search Results PNDI Search Number: N100082 Search Results For scherfel@co.beaver.pa.us Search Performed By: John paul scherfel On 5/31/02 2:15:22 PM Agency/Organization: Beaver County Conservation District Phone Number: 724-774-7090 Search Parameters: Quad - 408054; North Offset - 22.5; West Offset - 8; Acres - 100 Project location center (Latitude): 40.62353 Project location center (Longitude): 80.43260 Project Type: Utility Projects/Work on Existing Infrastructure Print this page using your Internet browser's print function and keep it as a record of your search.
Instructions for DCNR Bureau of Forestry personnel only:
When instructed below to contact the PA Fish and Boat Commission, the US Fish and Wildlife Service or the PA Game Commission, Bureau of Forestry personnel should instead contact Merlin Benner, who will coordinate resolution with those agencies.
When instructed to contact Jeanne Harris, they should do so.
DEP and Conservation Districts should follow the instructions below when potential conflicts are indicated.
When details are displayed as part of the search result, the element's Scientific Name, Common Name, State Status, Proposed State Status and Number of Occurrences within the Search Area are listed.
Due to the sensitive nature of certain endangered species, species names are not displayed for species under the jurisdiction of the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.
PNDI records indicate the following potential conflicts with ecological resources of special concern within the specified search area:
9 potential conflicts The Applicant should FAX a cover letter including a project narrative; acreage to be impacted, how construction/maintenance activity is to be accomplished, township/municipality where project resides, USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle with project boundary marked, and quad name on the map to:
Non-Game and Endangered Species Unit PA Fish and Boat Commission 450 Robinson Lane Bellefonte, PA 16823 FAX number: (814) 359-5153 1 potential Plant conflicts:
DESMODIUM GLABELLUM - TALL TICK-TREFOIL - TU - TU (1)
The person conducting this search should FAX this Receipt, Supplement #1 (if applicable), USGS Topo, and
'a project narrative to:
Jeanne Harris Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Bureau of Forestry P.O. Box 8552 Harrisburg, PA 17105-8552 FAX number: (717) 772-0271 httD:/LDndi.state.pa.us/PNrDI/ScriptsiDoSearch.asp 5/31/2002v
PNDI Internet Database Search Results Page 2 of 2 PNDI is a site specific information system, which describes significant natural resources of Pennsylvania. This system includes data descriptive of plant and animal species of special concern, exemplary natural communities and unique geological features. PNDI is a cooperative project of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, The Nature Conservancy and the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy. This response represents the most up-to-date summary of the PNDI data files and is valid for 1 year. An absence of recorded information does i
not necessarily imply actual conditions on-site. A field site survey may reveal previously unreported populations. J Legal authority for Pennsylvania's biological resources resides with three administrative agencies. The handout entitledPennsyiyania Biological ResourceMzanagem9nLt Aqecie, outlines which species groups are managed by.
these agencies. Feel free to contact our office if you have questions concerning this response or the PNDI system, and please refer to the PNDI Search Number at the top of this page in future correspondence concerning this project.
l
~,Nb.Seach-isinqinchii~~f~ui ~1 NDISeaichHome PN-at-.mPN;2s jJ 44 NM-e i!
-zD//d~sae- as/N~W T~DSeairch'siasait i<1ab ongnnu e ii
r rI' - rib_ -- r-- - J/J 11 Iuu/_ O
FENOC Beaver Vatley Power Starion Route 168 PO. Box 4 i FirstEergyeNuclear Operating Conafny Shippingport. PA 15077-0004 May 30, 2002 ND1LRE:0001 Beaver County Conservation District 1000 Third Street Beaver, PA 15009 - 2026 Pennsvlvani2 Natural Diversity Search WBS 12.3.8 To Whom It May Concern:
In accordance with Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) guidelines, please find the enclosed Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory Search Form. FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) is hereby requesting a screening for species of special concern listed in the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) for Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS).
BVPS is situated on approximately 520 acres on the south bank of the Ohio River, at mile mark 34.5, in Shippingport Boro, Beaver County. The plant itself sits at the northern edge of the Hookstown, PA United States Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle, and at the southern edge of the Midland, PA quadrangle. Attached to the PNDI form is a photcopy of the USGS maps areas-of-interest in accordance with the form's instructions. The area also includes Phillis Island If you have any questions or need more information, please feel free to contact me at 724-682-5874.
Michael D. Banko Iml Senior Nuclear Technologist MDB/tar Enclosure WBS# 12.3.8
-- .11 FOR OFFFICIAL USE ONLY A 293D-PM-WPIU10041 212001 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PNDI Screen iing BUREAU OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT Reviewer he i BUREAU OF WATERWAYS ENGINEERING Date 5-3i-i ~2l Phone No._ 'J2q-'7?14-'o110 SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 PENNSYLVANIA NATURAL DIVERSITY INVENTORY SEARCH FORM ii This form provides site information necessary to perform a computer screening for species of special concern listed unde ll the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the Wild Resource Conservation Act, the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Code or theJj PA Game and Wildlife Code. Records regarding species of special concern are maintained by PA DCNR in a computer data base called the 'Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory" (PNDI). Results from this search are not intended to be 2 conclusive compilation of all potential special concern resources located within a proposed project site. On-site biologica surveys may be recommended to provide a definitive statement on the presence or absence, or degree of natural integntyl of any project site. Results of this PNDI search are valid for one year.
Please complete the information below, attach an 8Ya2 x 11" photocopy (DO NOT REDUCE) of the portion of the U.S.G.S.]
Quadrangle Map that identifies the project location and outlines the approximate boundaries of the project and mail to the appropriate DEP regional office or delegated County Conservation District prior to completing a Chapter 105 environmental assessment or any other DEP permit application. (SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR LIST OF OFFICES ANDJl ADDRESSES)._1 NAME: FirstEnergV Nuclear Operating Company (Attn: M. Banko)
ADDRESS: Beaver Vallev Power Station SEB-2. P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippinaport, PA 15077 I PHONE: (724 ) -6825874 COUNTY: Beaver IU TWPJMUNICIPALITY: Shippingoort Boro U.S.G.S. 7'/2 Minute Quadrangle Ii Hookstown. PA & Midland, PA PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SIZE (Briefly describe entire area Ii relevant to your project, including acreage.)
Proiect is Beaver Valley Power Station. Total owned Dropertv is North (Up) 22 S (Hookstown) inches I
approximately 520 acres on the south bank of the Ohio River at - mile West (to the left) 8' (Hookstown) inches 34.5 in Shippingport, PA. Include review for Phyllis Island. NOTE:
The plant is located at the NORTHERN EDGE of the HOOKSTOWN INDICATE PROJECT LOCATION TO THE NEAREST ONE I QUADRANGLE, and the SOUTHERN EDGE of the MIDLAND TENTH INCH MEASURING FROM THE EDGE OF THE QUADRANGLE. MAP IMAGE FROM THE LOWER RIGHT CORNER.
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
- ' -- - file i - -
SCREENING RESULTS - Follow the directions of the checked block.
D1No potential conflicts were encountered during the PNDI inquiry. Include this form and the PNDI receipt with your Ii t I n L'nnSar S.JLII - me p-ii u ap i c t o sut m. si ons
_INII= --- daM :>-l l VmuhrHr-L.&IVIIt~id permitU application submissions. l Potential conflicts must be resolved by contacting the natural resource agencies listed on the PNDI receipt. Please J
provide a copy of this form and the PNDI receipt along with a bnef description of your project to the listed agency for consultation and recommendations. Include this form, the printed PNDI search results and the natural resource agency's written recommendation with your Chapter 105 environmental assessment or other DEP permit application _
submissions.
Appendix C Plant Community List
I' - - r I. (I -- r f_(__ f U_ _ f -- F_ ( - 1r v*-- v,_
Table 1. Plant Communities Present Within the Beaver Valley Power Station Study Area.
Dominant & Sub-dominant Plants Cover Type Cover Type Name Common Name Latin Name Stratum Vegetation Comments No. Density Permanently flooded open 1 Ohio River N/A N/A N/A N/A water community.
Scrub area recently cleared 2 Black Locust - Knotweed Scrub
- black locust Robinia pseudoacacia sapling/shrub moderate and treated with herbicide.
- Japanese knotweed Polygonum cuspidatum herb dense Unvegetated shoreline that is alternately flooded & exposed 3 Beach & Embankment N/A N/A N/A N/A from fluctuating water levels.
Upland forest community 4 Black Locust - Hardwood Forest
- silver maple Acer saccharinum tree dense covering most of Phillis Island.
Ohio buckeye Aesculus glabra tree-of-heaven Ailanthus altissima butternut Juglans cinerea black walnut Juglans nigra
- sycamore Platanus occidentalis eastern cottonwood Populus deltoides black cherry Prunus serotina
- black locust Robinia pseudoacacia spicebush Lindera benzoin sapling/shrub moderate black locust Robinia pseudoacacia sassafras Sassafras albidum multiflora rose Rosa multiflora woody vine scattered riverbank grape Vitis riparia BVPScovertypes.xls Page I
Dominant & Sub-dominant Plants wover Type Cover Type Name Common Name Latin Name Stratum Vegetation Comments No.
Density garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata herb moderate Indian hemp Apocynum cannabinum
- false nettle Boehmeria cylindrica
- woodland sedge Carex blanda Joe Pye weed Eupatorium purpureum Dame's rocket Hesperis matronalis American germander Teucrium canadense
- tall ironweed Vernonia altissima 5 Knotweed Stand Dense growth of knotweed at
- Japanese knotweed Polygonum cuspidaturn herb dense eastern end of Phillis Island.
6 Willow Scrub Intermittently flooded -
silver maple Acer saccharinum tree moderate bordering Ohio River sycamore Platanus occidentalis
- black willow Salix nigra box-elder Acer negundo sapling/shrub
- black willow Salix nigra
- false nettle Boehmeria cylindrica herb dense enchanter's nightshade Circaea lutetiana Japanese knotweed Polygonurn cuspidatum stinging nettle Urtica dioica white vervain Verbena urticifolia 7 Silver Maple Floodplain Forest Intermittently flooded -
- silver maple Acer saccharinum tree moderate bordering the Ohio River black willow Salix nigra L____ L___ L___ L, L-_ - L-
-3VPLertyL 1;=
=s= ge
r -- -- I-- r __ [__ I-__ f ___ F ( __ I _,_ f _,_ r __ I __ ( __ ( ---, r-- f__- f --
Dominant & Sub-dominant Plants
'over Type Cover Type Name Common Name Latin Name Stratum Vegetation Comments No. Density box-elder Acernegundo sapling/shrub scattered buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis swamp milkweed Asclepias incamata herb moderate
- false nettle Boehmeria cylindrica sensitive fern Onoclea sensibilis Japanese knotweed Polygonum cuspidatum smartweed Polygonum sp.
- American germander Teucrium canadense
- white vervain Verbena urticifolia Permanently flooded open water community connected to 8 Open Water Lagoon N/A NWA N/A N/A Ohio River Disturbed areas dominated by herbs & shrubs (outside the 9 Successional Old Field box-elder Acer negundo sapling/shrub scattered transmission corridors) staghorn sumac Rhus typhina nodding wild onion Allium cernuum common burdock Arctium minus common mugwort Artemisia vulgaris
- smooth brome grass Bromus inermis crown vetch Coronilla varia
- orchard grass Dactylis glomerata
- Queen Anne's lace Daucus carota teasel Dipsacus sylvestris English plantain Plantago lanceolata tall goldenrod Solidago altissima BVPScovertypes.xis Page 3
Dominant & Sub-dominant Plants Cover Type Cover Type Name Common Name Latin Name Stratum Vegetation Comments No. Density Species composition varies based on aspect and 10 Upland Mixed Hardwoods Forest
- sugar maple Acer saccharum tree dense steepness of slope black birch Betula nigra bitternut hickory Caiya cordiformis American beech Fagus grandifolia white ash Fraxinus americana tulip poplar Liriodendron tulipifera
- black cherry Prunus serotina chestnut oak Quercus prinus
- northern red oak Quercus rubra black oak Quercus velutina American basswood Tilia americana
- sugar maple Acer saccharum sapling/shrub moderate witch hazel Hamamelis virginiana
- spicebush Lindera benzoin eastern hophornbeam Ostrya virginiana sassafras Sassafras albidum poison ivy Toxicodendron radicans woody vine scattered riverbank grape Vitis riparia garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata herb moderate wild ginger Asarum canadense spinulose wood fern Dryopteris carthusiana marginal wood fern Dryopteris marginalis white snakeroot Eupatorium rugosum broad-leaved waterleaf Hydrophyllum canadense
- pale jewelweed Impatiens pallida
- May apple Podophyllum peltatum jumpseed Polygonum virginianum
- Christmas fern Polystichum acrostichoides BVPScovertypes.xls Page 4
-" " " L _ - L_ L_ _ - 6 L _ L=;
L_ =- - k - i
F- f ___ r --- r --- r -- [--- r ---- c-- r -.- F-fF_ C -- r (_.- { - F- - V-fFI r - fr _
Dominant & Sub-dominant Plants Cover Type Cover Type Name Common Name Latin Name Stratum Vegetation Comments No.
Density Dominated by shrubs, saplings, woody vines & herbs 11 Transmission Line Corridor red maple Acer rubrum sapling/shrub dense due to ROW maintenance.
- black cherry Prunus serotina
- staghorn sumac Rhus typhina black locust Robinia pseudoacacia
- blackberry Rubus allegheniensis woody vine dense black raspberry Rubus occidentalis poison ivy Toxicodendron radicans redtop Agrostis alba herb moderate
- marginal wood fern Dryopteris marginalis
- white snakeroot Eupatorium rugosum flat-top goldenrod Euthamia graminifolia
- pale jewelweed Impatiens pallida pokeweed Phytolacca americana May apple Podophyllum peltatum
- tall goldenrod Solidago altissima Perrenial stream with natural channel and concrete sluice 12 Peggs Run N/A N/A N/A N/A segments.
Mostly unvegetated area 13 Developed Land N/A N/A N/A N/A surrounding power station.
Asterisks denote dominant plant species BVPScovertypes.xls Paae 5
Appendix D Wildlife Species Lists (Source = 1983 Environmental Report)
07/17/2002 WED 14:00 FAI 724 682 5481 INFORILAXION SERVICES SVPS-2 ER-OLS TABLE 2.2-6 MAMMALS WHOSE GEOGRAPHIC RANGES INCLUDE THE SITE*
I Status/
Presence Common Name Scientific Name Verified Virginia opossum Didelphis virginiana Tracks
?iasked shrew Sorex cinereus Smoky shrew Sorex fumeus Captured Thompson's pygmy shrew tlicrosorex thompsoni Short-tailed shrew Blarina brevicauda Captured Least shrew Cryptotis parva Hairy-tailed mole Parascalops breweri Sign Star-nosed mole Condylutra cr.Lstata Little brown myotis !Vyotis lucfrugus Captured Xeen's myotis 1Ivotis keenii Indiana mvoris tiyois sodalis Endangered**,***
Small-footed myotis Nvotis leibii Endangered***
Silv'er-haircd bat Lasionvcteris noctivagans Eastern pipistrelle Pipistrellus subflavus Captured Big brown bat Eptesicus fuscus Red bat Lasiurus borealis Captured Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus Evening bat Nycticelus humeralis Eastern cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus Observed Nes England cottontail Sylvi-lagus transitionalis Eastern chipmunk Tamias striatus Captured Woodchuck t1armota monax Observed Gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis Observed Fox squirrel 5ciurus niger Observed Red squirrel lramiasciurus hudsonicus Observed Southern flying squirrel Glaucomys volans Captured Beaver Castor canadensis Sign Deer mouse Peromvscus maniculatus White-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopus Captured Eastern woodrat Neotoma floridana Endangered"#*
Ileadow vole Hicrotus pennsylvanicus Captured Woodland vole NMcrotus pmnetorum Captured
?Juskrat Ondatra zibethicus Tracks Southern bog lemming -Synaptomys cooperi Norway rat Rattus norvegicus House mouse flus musculus Headow jumping mouse Zapus hudsonius Captured Woodland jumping mouse Napaco:z't-s in-gnis Captured Red fox Vulpes vulpes Reported Grav fox Uroevon cinereo aro-nteus Reported Raccoon Ps-ocyon lotor Tracks Weasel tlustela nitalis Long-tailed weasel FIustela frenat a Captured Mink Fustela Vison Striped skunk Ffephitis mephitis Tracks Amendment 6 I of 2 May 1984
07/17/2002 WED 14:01 FAX 724 682 5481 INFORMATION SERVICES 1
I0J004 BVPS-2 ER-OLS TABLE 2.2-6 (Cont)
I Status/ I Presence Common Name Scientific Name Verified River otter Bobcat Lontra canadensis Lynx rufus Il White-tailed deer d-OCoileus virginianus Observed NOTES:
if
- Ranges from Burt, W.H. and Grossenheider 1964. Nomenclature Jones, J.C. et al 1975.
from 11
- US Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 1983.
- Pennsylvania Game Commission 1983.
i Ii if If if If If Amendment 6 2 of 2 May 1984 I 1L
r- I- F- r-F- r-- F- I __ I-- __ r ___ I-- F - I-__ - r___ r -- ( - - f __ f__ - I BVPS-2 ER-OLS rABLE 2.2-10 UIRDS WHOSE GEOGRAPHIC RANGES INCLUDE THE SITE "'
I
- Periods of Octurrence"'1 SpecIal Fall and Spec les "1 . " Slatus Summer . Winter SurInh Habitat Notes Common loon N4E PA DC River Horned grebe NIE PA DC iIver Pled-billed grebe PA VE DC Poor breeding habitat Double-crested cormorant Great blue heron NE NE NE RA RA VE Poor breeding habitat Little blue heron- lIE NE NE I Great egret IJE NE DC niver shore Cattle egret RA NE Green heron NE PA frr DC Poor breeding habitat Black-crowned nigh¶ heron NE NE RA Poor quality habitat American bittern Threatened "' RA NE PA Poor qualIty habitat Least bittern Vthitling swan Threatened "'
Game PA NE PA Poor quality habitat I 14E NE RA Rover Snow goose Canada goose NE NE Game 14E NE PA RSlver Drant NE NE NE Mallard Game RA VE OC Poor breeding habitat Ilack duck Game DC DC DC Poor breeding habitat Gadwall NE NE Come RA Ilver American wlgeon NE RA DC Game RIver Pintall NE R4, Gome DC River American green-winged tral Game liE OC Blue-winged teal RA River GCme RA NE DC Poor breeding habitat Shoveler Game NE PA Rlver Wood duch Game RA RA 0c River and river shore Redhead Game RA cc DC OC River Plng-necked duck Game NE RA A Iver Canvasback Game NE nA, DC River Leeser scaup NE PA OC River Greater scAup Game NE NE River Common golderwye Gaen Game NE DC 00 oc River nuflehend NE aA DC River Oldsquaw Genie Game NE River I White-winged scoter NE PA River Black scoler tIE NE PA River Ruddy duck Game Game Game PA DC Rivor Hooded merganser NE Game NE RA DC RIver Common merganser FIE DC DC River Amendment 6 I of 7 May 1904
HVPS-2 ER-OLS TABLE 2.2-10 (Cont)
Periods of Occurrence "'
Special FAll and SpecIe, "' II Status Sumner Winter Sprinq Habitat Notes Red-breasted merganser Game NE RA DC River Turkey vulture DC RA VE Black vulture NE NE NE Goshawk NE RA RA Sharp-shinned hawk Declining" DC OC OC Cooper's hawk Deal Inling "16 DC OC VE Red-tailed hawk VE VE VE Rough-legged hawk NE NE NE Red-shouldered hawk Dele 1Inng DC OC DC Poor quality habitat BroAd-winged hawk DC IJE DC Bald eagle Golden eagle Endangered " RA PA RA Poor quality habitat I NE NE NE Marsh hawk Dec)ining DC OC DC Poor quality habitat Osprey Dec ining "' NE NE RA River and river edge PeregrIne falcon Endangered" NE PA RA Poor quJalIly habital Merl In Dea Ining - NE PA RA American kestrel Decl Ining "' VE Tuykey OC VE Game NE NE NE Ruffed grouse Game VE VE VE Bobwhite Game DC OC DC Poor quality habi tat Ringed-necked pheasant Game Virginia rail DC OC DC Poor qualilty babi tot Game RA NE DC Poor quality habitat King rail Endangered"' NE NE NE Sora rail Game PA NE I
Common galliIrule DC Poor qualily habi tai Game RA NE OC Poor quality heb Itat American coot Game IA RA DC Poor quality hbb Itat Sat1ipalmated plover NE NE OC River shore Killdeer VE RA VE River shore Ulack-bellied plover NE Ruddy turnstone 1NE DC River shore NE NE OC River shore American woodcock Game DC PA DC Common snipe Gnme RA PA BC Poor breeding habitat Spotted sandpiper RA NE DC PoOr breeding habitat Solitary sandpiper NE Greater yallowlegs NE DC RIver shore NE NE DC River shore Lesser yellowlegs NE NE River shore Pectoral sandpiper OC NE NE River shore oaird' s sandpiper PA NE NE DC River shore Least sandpiper NE NE DC River shore Duniln NE NE DC River shore Amendment 6 2 oF 7 May 1984
r,--, f-*- r - - - r- Ir_ - r - F r-r--- r - F- r--r _ F---- Ir_ -- I_ ( --- r- - r - (- - r--
BVPS-2 ER-OLS TABLE 2.2-10 10ont)
Periods of occurrence,"
SpecIal Fall and SpecIes I. I Sta tus 5umrer Winter Sprinn Habitat Notes Semipalmated sandpiper NE NE DC River shore Sanderilng NE E RA River shore Dowltcher short-billed NE NE RA River shore I Herring gull RA DC DC RIver and shore Ring-billed gull PA OC VE. River and shore Bonaparte's gull NE OC DC River and shore Casplan tern NE NE N4E River and shore I Common tern RA NE DC River and shore Black tern Threatened RA NE DC Poor breeding habitat I Rock dove RA VE VE Mourning dove came VE VE VE Yellow-billed cuckoo VE NE VE Black-billed cuckoo VE NE VE Barn awl Dec ining PA PA RA Poor breeding habitat Screech owl VE VE VE Great horned owl DC DC DC Barred owl DC DC Long-eared owl RA PA RA Short-eared owl Endangered I ..
RA PA PA Poor quality habitat Snowy owl Saw-whet owl NE RA NE PA NE PA Poor quality habitat I
Whip-poor-will 0C NE DC Common nighthawk DC NE 9C Chimney SwIft VE NE Vf Ruby-throeled hummingbird VE NE VE Belted kingfisher VE VE VE River and shore Common flicker VE RA VE Plleoted woodpecker VE VE VE Red-bellled woodpecker VE VE VE Red-headed woodpecker DC DC DC Yellow-bellled sapsucker DC PA DC HaIry woodpecker VE VE VE Downy woodpecker VE VE VE Eastern kingbird DC NE DC Acadian flycatcher NE NE NE Great crested flycatcher VE NE VE I Eastern phoebe VE NE VE Yellow-bellled flycatcher VE NE OC American flyc9tcher VE NE VE Willow flycatcher VE NE DC Amendment 6 3 of 7 May 1984
CVPS-2 ER-OLS TABLE 2.2-10 (Cont)
Perlods of Occurrence "',
Special Fall and Specles "," 5talus Summer Winter SprInc Habitat Notes Least flycatcher VE NE DC Eastern wood pewee VE NE VE OlIve-sided flycatcher NE NE YE Horned lark DC NE ac Poor quallty habitat Tree swallo w DC NE DC River and shore Bank st-allow DC NE VE River and shore FOugh-wInged Swallow VE NiE DC Bern swallow ' DC NE OC Cliff swallow PA NE RA Purple martin DC NE OC Blue Jay VE VE VE Nor thern raven NE NE HE Comfmon crow I VE VE VE Black-capped chickadee NE VE DC CarolIna chickadee VE VE VE Tufted tilmouse VE VE VE White-breasted nuthatch VE VE VE Red-breasted nuthatch NE aA OC Brown creeper DC VE VE Poor breeding habilha llouse wren VE NE VE Winter wren PA VE VE Poor breeding habitat Marsh wren PA NE NE Sedge wren 1hreatened ", PA NE NE DewIck's wrnn Carolina wron ODcitning "' Endangered ` PA VE aA VE UA VE Poor quality habitat I Mockingbird RA RA VE Poor breeding habitat Gray catbird VE NE VE Brown thrasher OC UA VE American robin VE NE VE Wood thrush VE NE VE Herrwit thrush DC NE OC Poor breeding habitat SwaInson's thrush DC NE VE Gray-checked tIhrtsah IJE NE VE Veary DC NE VE Poor breeding habitat Eastern bluebird OC RA DC Poor breeding habitat Blue-gray gnatcatcher VE NE VE Coldden-crowned kinglet NE VC NE Ruby-crowned kinglet NE RA VE American (water) pipit NE NE DC Poor quallty habitat Cedar waxwing I NE VE VE Amendment 6 4 of 7 May 19E4 I L__ L__ L___ L__ L- , L- , L__ L__ L==z LZ-: L;_ _
I --- I -- -- -- r-I -- c --- (- - r- - ( -- ( --- r -- c f -- . r f F I--
OVPS-2 EII-OLtS TAE3LE 2.2-1o (Cont).
Periods of Occurrence" Special Fall and teI, Species Status Summer Wlnter Sprin Habitat Notee Loggerhead shrike Dec Iln ng " RA RA AA Starling VE NE YE White-eyed vireo PA NE RA Yallow-throated vireo VE NE . VE Solitary virqo OC NE YE Red-eyed vireo VE NE VE Philedelphia virao NE NE YE Warbling vireo DC NE Poor breeding habilat e Ick and white warbler VE YE DC NE VIE Poor breeding habitat Worm-eating warbler VE NE YE Golden-winged warbler NE DC Olue-wingod warbler VE NE YE Tennessee warbler ME NE Nashville warbler NE VE YE Northern parula ME ac NE YE Poor breeding habitat Yellow throated warbler ME NE VE I Yellow warbler YE NE YE MagnolIa warbler DC NE VE Poor breeding habitat Cape May warbler NE YE Black-throated blue warbler DC NE YE Poor breeding habitat Yellow-rumped wArbler NE VE YE Blnck-throated green warbler DC NE YE Poor breeding habitat Cerulean warbler VE NE VE Slackburnlan warbler OC NE YE Poor breeding habitat Chestnul-sided warbler DC NE YE Poor breeding habitat 8ay-breasted warbler NE NE YE Glackpoll warbler NE NE YE Pinn warbler NE NE VE Pralre warbler DC NE NE Poor quality habitat Palm warbler NE NE DC Ovenbird YE NE YE I
Northern waterthrush NE NE DC Louistana waterthrush DC NE YE Kentucky warbler VE NE VE Connecticut warbler NE NE YE Mourning warbler BC NE VE Common yel lowthroaI DC NE VE Poor breeding habitat Ye tlow-breasted chat YE NE VE Hooded warbler VE NE YE Wilson's warbler NE NE YE Amendment 6 5 of I May 1984
BVPS-2 ER-OLS TABLE 2.2-10 (Cant)
Perlods of Occurrencol"l Special Fall and Speclesag 2. 5tatus Sunimer l imier Sprlna Habitat Notes Canada warbler OC NE VE Poor breeding habitat American redstart VE NE VE House sparrow DC VE DC Eastern moedowlark DC Redwinged blackbird DC VE Poor quality habitat VE PA VE Orchard orlole RA NE RA Northern oriole VE 'NE VE Rusty blackbird NE RA DC
- Common grackle VE RA VE Brown-headed cowbird VE RA VE Scarlet tanager VE NE VE Summer tanager RA NE RA Cardinal VE VE VE Rose-brrasted grosbeak VE NE VE Indigo bunting VE NE VE Evening grosbeak ME OC OC Erratic Comnon redpoll NE RA NE House finch Purple finch Spreading RA NE RA DC RA DC Erratic I
Pine siskin NE OC DC Erratic American goldfinch VE VE VE Red crossbill NE OC DC Poor quality habitat WllI te-winged crossbill NE PA RA Rufous-sided towhee VE PA VE Savannah sparrow OC NE OC Poor qual l ly habitat Grasshopper sparrow DeclIning "' PA NE PA Poor qua Iity habitat Henslow's sparrow DocIlning " Threatened "I RA NE RA Poor qualIty habitat Vesper sparrow I OC NE DC Poor 4Uail I y habitat Lark sparrow PA NE PA Dark-eyed Junco OC VE DC Poor breeding habitat Tree sparrow NE VE VE Chipping sparrow DC NE VE Field sparrow VE VE VE White-crowned sparrow NE PA RA Whi1e-lhroated sparrow RA VE VE Poor breeding habitat Fox sparrow NE NE DC Lincoln's sparrow NE NE DC Swamp sparrow DC RA OC Poor quality habitat Song spArrow VE VE VE Snow bunting NE RA RA Poor quality habitat Amendment 6 6 of 7 May 1984
- " L== = L- t__--- l= . - L__
r --- f --- r- r--- r-- r -- I-- (--' I I--- 1-F- I -- I -- I I - t --- r-BVPS-2 ER-OLS table 2.2-10 (Cont)
MUTES:
- 1. NUS Corporation 1976n.
- 2. American Ornithologists' Union 1957.
- 3. American Ornithologists' Union 1973.
- 4. RA - Rare In regional habitats similar to those on the site:
NE
- Not expected:
OC
- Occurs In regional habitats similar to those on the site; VE
- Verifled on the site during this study. and
- 5. National Audubon Society 1973.
- 6. U.S. Department of Interior 1900.
- 7. Pennsylvania Game Commission 1903, Ammendment 6 7 of 7 May 1984
07/17/2002 WED 14:03 FAX 724 682 5481 INFORBUXION SERVICES la 012 1 BVPS-2 ER-OLS TABLE .:2-IS I AMPHIBIAN SPECIES WITH RANGES, IMCLUDING THE SITE*
I Common Name ScLentific Name Eastern he1lbender Cryptobronchus alleganiensis I I Nudpuppy Red-spotte.-4.newt al lecanensis Necturus maculosus maculosus tNo~oohthalnmtr viridescens I Jefferson salamander AmrDbvstoma jeffersonianum Silvery salamander .mbvstoma platineum Spotted salamander Marbled salamander Ambystoma maculatum Ambystoma opacum
-I Dusky salamanderx* Desmognathus fuscus Mountain salamander Desmognathus ocrophaeus Seal salamander Desmoonathus monticola Red-backed salamander Plethodon cinereus Slimy salamander**
Wehrle's salamander Ravinc salamander Spring salamander Plerhodon lutiniosus Plethodon wehrlei Pl~Thodon richmondi Gyrlnophilus porphvriticus I
Four-toed salamander Red salamander Long-tailed salamander Hemidactvlium scutatum Pseudotriton ruber VIrVia 1onc-icauda I
Two-lined salamander**
American toad**
Eurycea bislineata Bufo americanus I
Fowler's toad** Buro woodhousei Spring peeper**
Gray treefrog Western chorus frog Hvla crucifer Hvla versicolor Pseudacris triseriata
'I Mountain chorus frogk* Pseudacris brachyphona Green frog** Tana clamiwtans Pickerel frog Rana palustris Leopard frog** Rana pipiens Bullfrog WoodfrogAA Rana catesbeiana Rana sylvatica I
NOTES: I
'Ranges and nomenclature from Conant 195s.
wSObserved on the BVPS site. I I
Amendment 6 I of I Mlay 1984
07/17/2002 WED 14:03 FAX 724 682 5481 INTORKATION SERVICES BVPS-2 ER-OLS TABLE 2.2-16 REPTILE SPECIES WITH RANGES INCLUDING THE SITE*
Common Name Scientific Name Snapping turtle Chelydra serpentina Wood turtle .Clemmys insculpta Spotted turtle Clemmys guttata I S tLnpot Stetrnotherus odoratus Painted turtle Chrysemys picta Eastern box turtle** Terrapene carolina Smooth softshell Trionyx muticus Spiny softshell Trionyx spinifer Hap turtle Graptemys geographica I
Fence lizard Sceloporus undulatus Five-lined skink Eumeces fasciatus Red-bellied snake Storeria occipitomaculata Brown snake 5toreria dekayi Northern water snake Natrix sipedon Kirtland's water snake Natrix kirtlandi Queen snake Regina septemvittata Eastern garter snake** Thamnophis sirtalis Eastern ribbon snake Thamnophis sauritus Northern ribbon snake*** Thamnops i~sauritus septenirionolis I Eastern hognose snake Heterodon platyrhinos Ringneck snake** Diadophils punctatus Racer. Coluber constrictor Smooth green snake Opheodrys vernalis Rat snake** Elaphe obsoleta Northern milk snake Lampropeltis doliata Copperhead** Agkistrodon contortrix Massasauga Sistrurus catenatus Timber rattlesnake Crotalus horridus NOTES:
- Ranges and nomenclature from Conant 1958.
- ,Observed on the BVPS site.
- Ranges and nomenclature from Pennsylvania Game Commission 1983. I Amendment 6 I of I May 1984