Revision as of 12:01, 23 February 2020

Text

Annual Environ Operating Rept (Nonradiological) for 1980.
	ML18086B023
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	06/12/1981
From:	; Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	;
Shared Package
ML18086B022	List: ML18086B021; ML18086B023;
References
	NUDOCS 8111130487
	Download: ML18086B023 (54)
	v • d • e

I I 1980 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT.

(NON-RADIOLOGICAL)

I January 1 through December 31, 1980 I

I I SALEM NUCLEAR.GENERATING STATION

1 UNIT NOS. 1 AND *2 Docket Nos. 50-272, 50-311 I Operating License Nos. DPR-70, DPR-75 I

I I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY 80 Park Place I Newark, New Jersey June 12, 1981 I

I I

M PBO 50 01 I ----~-:-~-;-:;-;;;r\~ia1 a 1 o612 2 r, ~l~ inonoicK os00027 PoR 1

pOR A

\ R .

I

I SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT (N~N-RADIOLOGICAL) 1: TABLE OF CONTENTS I SECTION 1.0 TITLE GENERAL. * *. * * * * * . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

PAGE 1

I 1.1

1. 2.

1. 3 INTRODUCTION. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

SUMMARY

CONCLUSIONS **.************************ ** * * * *

1 2

3 I 2.0 2.1 ABIOTIC MONITORING AND SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS THERMAL * ****************************** o *** ~

4 4

2.1.1 Thermal-Characteristics of Cooling Water 4 I 2. i. 2 2.2 Di~charge ************* ~******************

Rate of Change of Discharg~ Temperature **

CHEMICAL ************************ *-*........... 11 5

2.2.1 Chlorine . .......................... ,* .. _.. . . 11 I 2.2.2 2.2.3 Suspended Solids *********** ~************* 12 pH. . * * * * . * * . . . . * . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

13 2.2.4 Dissolved Oxygen ******************** ~ **** 13 I 2.2.5 2.2.6 River Water Survey ********** ************** 14 Chemical Releases ************************ 18 I 3.0 3.1 J3.l.l BIOTIC MONITORING AND SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS ** 41 DIAMONDBACK TERRAPIN NESTING STUDY.......... 41 Study Area........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 3.1.2 Materials and Methods ***** ~ ************** 42 I 3 .1. 3 3.1.4 Data Reduction ************************** ***' .42 Results and Discuss ion ************** ******

43 3.2 OSPREY AND BALD EAGLE SURVEY *************** 44 I 3.2.l 3.2.2 Study Area ******************************* 45 Materials and Methods ******************** 45 OSPREY SURVEY - 1980 *********************** 45 Results and Discussion ******************* 45 I 3.4 3.5 LITERATURE CITED ********** *.* *******_******** 47 TABLES AND FIGURES *************** *-* * * * * * * *

4 7 I

I I

I M P80 50 01 i I

I

I ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I This report was prepared by.Public Service Electric and Gas Company, Newark, New Jersey. Data were collected at the Salem Nuclear Generating Station and in the Delaware Estuary I by the staff of Salem Station, the PSE&G Research and Test~.

ing laboratory and Ichthyological Associates (IA) of Middle-town, Delaware. Data analysis and report preparation were performed by the PSE&G Licensing and Environment Department

'I and the IA staff.

I I

I.

I I

I.

I I

M PBO 50 01 ii I

I *- - *-**--- *--* - .....:...._

I SECTION 1.0 I GENERAL I

1.1 INTRODUCTION

I This report is required by the Environmental Technical Spec.-

if ications (Appendix B to Operating License DPR-70 and DPR-75) for Salem Nuclear Generating Station. It includes the results of analyses carried out under the non-radiolog-I ical environmental monitoring requirements described in the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS). The reporting

.requirements. within Appendix B to Operating License. DPR-70 I became effective on December 11, 1976, and to Operating License DPR-75 on August 2, 1980, when the units involved achieved initial criticality.

I The.* station is located at the southern end of Artificial Is-land in Lower Alloways Creek Township, Salem County, New Jersey. The island, actually a manmade peninsula, projects I from the eastern shore of the Delaware River estuary which is approximately.2.5 miles wide at this location *. The pro-grams presented in this report cover both in-plant and sur-I veillance monitoring external to the station.

Information from December 11 through December 31, 1976 is reported for all required moni taring programs in the 19.76

.I Annual Environmental Operating Report (Non-radiological),

April 1977. Results of the first three full years of Salem Unit l operation were reported in the 1977, 1978, and 1979

I Annual Environmental Operating Reports (Non-radiological),

March 31, 1978, March 30, 1979, and June 13, 1980. This* re-port covers essentially the same information for the period January 1, 1980 through December 31, 1980, and incorporates I information for Unit 2 as well.

I I

I M P80 50 01 I I -*~ ..

1.2

SUMMARY

I During 1980 Salem Unit 1 generated 2,413,999 meg~w~tt-hour~

of electrical energy. rhe unit was shut down for refueling I from September 20, *1980 until December 26, 1980. Unit 2 achieved initial criticality on August 2, 1980, but did no~

exceed 5%.of rated power for the 1980 period.

I In accordance with the requirements of Section 5.3 of the Unit No. 2 Environmental Technical Specification (ETS), the Licensing and Environment Department evaluated 228 design I change requests for potential environmental impact in 1980.

I None of these *involved an unreviewed environmental question and only one would .require a change to the ETS, if implemented.

I This potential design change would add a dedicated radiation monitoring system to the plant vent, but a fiqal decision to implement the change has.not been mat;)e.

I The requirements for non-radiological environmental monitor-ing have been divided into two general monitoring and sur-I veillance programs: abiotic and biotic. The abiotic pro-gram covers field (estuary) and station monitoring efforts, including plant temperature information and plant and field chemical surveys. Section 2.0 of this report discusses the I abiotic program. Meteorological information for 1980 are presented in two 1980 Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Re-lease Reports (RERR-8 and RERR-91) for Salem.

I The biotic studies include the terrestrial programs and ~he results are presented in Section 3.0.

I.

I I

I I M P80 50 01 I I

1.3 CONCLUSION

S

I In 1980, no significant environmental impacts att~ibutable to the operation of Salem Nuclear Generating Station*were*

observed.

I Heat dissipation through the condensers was generally re- .

lated to reactor power level. The Unit 1 circulating water I system sometimes operated with fewer than six pumps but no thermal related environmental impact was detected in the Delaware River estuary.

I Plant chemical discharges.were made in accordance with the Environmental Technical Specification provisions, and chemi-cal usage was compared with predicted waste discharge con-I centrations. No unusual or significant water quality im-pacts or.chemical ~oncentrations were not~d.

I The required biotic monitoring, which covered diamondback terrapin and bird studies, was conducted in accordance with the provisions of the ETS. No significant changes in the terrestrial ecology of the area in the vicinity of Salem I Nuclear Generating Station were observed.

I I

I M PBO 50 01 I I

I SECTION 2.o*

I ABIOTIC MONITORING AND SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS I 2.1 THERMAL (ETS Section 2.1)

Waste heat is removed in the Salem condensers by once-I through cooling water taken from and returned to the Delaware River.

I The thermal monitoring system utilizes probes called resis-tor temperature detectors (RTD's). These RTD's are inter-faced with the station computer which records the cooling water temperature readings on an hourly basis. The data are I processed to produce delta T and maximum discharge tempera-ture information per .condenser shell. The discharge-intake temperature difference and the net rate of addition of heat I to the Delaware River were .monitored according to the re-quirements of the NPDES permit.

I During 1980, Salem Unit*1 was in commercial operation as a baseload electric generating station. Daily average elec-tric production varied from 0 to 1127 MWe and daily average temperature changes of the cooling water (delta T) ranged I from O to 11~0°C (19.8°F). Salem Unit 2 achieved initial criticality on August and successfully completed the testing programs. Power level and delta T are presented in Figures 2 .1-1 through 2 .1-4.

These figures demonstrate the close correlation between power level and delta T.

I The results of the temperature monitoring program are sum-marized in Table 2.1-1. Presented are the average intake, discha.rge *and delta temperatures for the Unit 1 and 2 con-densers. No data are reported for October and November be-I cause of the refueling outage of Unit 1.

2.1.1 Thermal Characteristics of Coolin Water Dischar e I (ETS Section Heat rejected through the condensers varied in* response to plant operating conditions and power level. Problems were I encountered with the circulating water system, the most com-mon being plugging of condenser tubing. Corrective actions such as power reductions for water box cleaning were gener-I ally employed to reduce the delta T.

I I M-P80 50 01 I I

.~ . -.------*-*...---. --*- .... ~--~-~------*-**. . ----------- - .. . .... ---*-------,---*-*----.-- -- -- *- -- . - -. ~- *- -- - -

I In 1980, Salem Unit l violated the NPDES maximum delta T I limitation of 15.3°C (27.5°F)*, 14 times in February and March. The violations.were reported in the NPDES.Discharge Monitoring Reports.

I The average delta T for all three condenser shells corre- .

spending to these occurrences never exceeded l5.3°C I (27.5°F). The net rate of addition ~f heat to the riv9r did not exceed the limitation of 4.12xl0 kcal/hr (16.3xl0 BTU/hr) and the discharge temperature never exceeded 46°C (ll5°F).

I 2.l.2 *Rate of Change of Discharge Temperature (ETS.Section 2.l.3) .

I In 1980, as Salem Unit l was being shut down for refueling~

the rate of change of *the discharge temperature did not ex-I ceed 8°F per hour and the plant power *reduction rate was less than 25% of full power per hour.

Unplanned power reductio.ns at a more rapid rate did occur I because of the need to protect plant equipment or when, for certain reactor safeguard operations, the plant decreased reactor power level rapidly. No cold shock or other en-I vironmental impact attributable to shutdown was observed.

I I

I I

I

Each of the three* condenser shells discharges to the river via a separate discharge pipe. Each pipe is regarded as a I separate discharge by the NPDES permit. An excessive

delta T in one discharge is considered an NPDES permit violation.

I I M PBO 50 01 -s-I I

I I TABLE 2.1-1 UNIT 1 CONDENSER* TEMPERATURES - 1980*

I Date In take: Temp.

Average °C ( o F)

Discharge Temp.

Average 0 c (OF)

Delta T Average oc (OF)

I January February March 3.2 0.9 4.4 (37.7)

( 3 3. 7)

(39.9) 10.3 7.6 13.1 (50.5)

(45. 7)

(55.6)

6. 6, (11.8) 6.7 8.7

( 12. 0)

(15.7)

April 12 .. 5 (54.6) 21. 2 (70.1) 8.3 ( 15. 0)

I May June 18.2 22.2

( 6 4*. 8)

(72.0) 25.8 29.2 (78.5)

(84.5) 7.7 6.9 (13.8)

( 12. 5)

July 26.8 (80.2) 35.0 (95.1) a.o (14.4)

I August September 27.1 24.6 (80.8)

(76.3) 34.3 27.8

( 93. 7)

(82.0) 7.2 ( 12. 9) 3.1 (5.5)

October**

I November**

December*** o.o ( 3 2. 0) .4.7 ( 4 o. 5) 4.7 (8.5)

I *Average of Condenser Circuits 11, 12 and 13.

I **No power generated.

- - Temperatures calculated from available data due to equipment m~lfunction

I ./

UNIT 2 CONDENSER* TEMPERATURES - 1980 I In take Te mp. Discharge Temp. Delta T Date*~ Average °C ( °F) Average °C (°F) Average °C (°F)

I August September 81.5 (27.5) 82.9 (28.3) 82.4 (28.0) 83.8 (28.8) a.a co.s) 0.9 (0.5)

I *Average of Condenser Circuit 21.

- Unit 2 was operated only on August and September.

I I

I I M *PBO 50 01 I I

I JANUARY FEBRUARY LmEND LmEND

I D - 11E:GAWFITTS D - 11E:GflWFITTS

DELTfl T lfl A

OCLTfl T If!

I I

ii ii.

I I

~.

!'~'II.

t-,

I ,,.

,-t :\ ; ...., \ :\

I ).

I A

1\

I\ I

\I ll I

,' ~

I I

I

,t I

/'""'.I

\! \

I

I

I I

I

\: \

I I\

I I ... :

'i r 'l 1 \

'\ SI*

I I

I 0 Ill lD D.l.Y 0

Ill DAY 11 m

ID I

MARCH LmEND APRIL LmEND D - llCGFIWFITTS a-~rrs

DEl.Tfl T If! I *

DEL.Tfl T If'!

I I I I

I I

,...\

a

. .s.

I \

....."'\ ..,.. "

,. *I ~ ..

I ,.....

i *l

\ ,i

\

- ' '4,\ ,',*~

' \

\ /

r J 'aA, I

J 'i ii~

I I , '

\/ Q I

~

II

~

I

I I

I 0 0 Ill Ill .

ID 0

0 I Ill m

I DAY UNIT NO. 1 I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Daily Average Reactor Power Level And Condenser Uelta Temperature SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Figure 2 .1-1 I

..... *-***----**--~** -...------***-- -------- ..

I MAY LmEND JUNE a

Mf:GRHRTTS

..

Df:LTR T !fl ~ I ~

1 a § a I . ;

I I

Ii i

~ ;

II I i a I

......... :' '*. a E' .t...

"\

E' ...*"'* ..... .......... 4

,....... \

,.r4.

\

."' sS '

ir** .....,,....'

/. ...

...,... sS I

,~ ~ 4' '....... ~

~i '*~i ':!C"" ~§

lr -,.. .. \ '""

aa ;~

I

~-

. s

\ ....

I§ I Cl Cl

iii '

I I I 8 I SI

§ I '

I I

I

§ I

I I'

'\

I f I I I I .. *

§ I I § I I 0 ID D4Y Ill Ill

:Ill 0

0 I ID D4Y Ill ..

I JULY "U&END AUGUST LmEND a-~ATTS* a

Mf:GAWATTS K ., *DELTA T IFJ * *DELTA T IF'l I *

I ; i - .:#'-

i I I II I i: f e1

~-

I I

§ I I I

I § I Ill Ill m

0 I Ill Ill I

DAY DAY UNIT NO. 1 I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Daily Average Reactor Power Level And Condenser Delta Temperature SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Figure 2.1-2 I

SEPTEMBER LmEND OCTOBER LmEND I

D - MEGAMf!TTS a I a

MEGAWATTS a

I

DEi.TA T CFl * *DE:l.TA T IFl I II § II a

I I I

a 11 I

a Ii I I a I :

e* s--

r;;-

... e* s::'

9 ......

I ~*

~§ aa !'C i::i

!1 s

=-.

~g I §

- -4 .... \

I 4

ll I

ll

\ I I

\- :! =

I I

' I I

I I

!I

! :I I :I f

I Cl

Ill a DJ.Y Ill

Ill

0 II Ill IA Im' m

I

-NOVEMBER DECEMBER I I D -

LmDm IEl:flWflTTS

- DELTA T IF! a I D -

LmEND MEGAWATTS

DEl.TA T IFI a I II I

I I i I i I I I I Ii

I Ii II I e* ......

s.!::. Ea .s...

~I SI ,c; s

=-1 -~ g s

=-.

ii&ig I I

!I

§ 9

I I I

I I

I !I :I- I *~*.:*~.

I 0 Ill DJ.Y IA Ill 0

0

Ill IA DAY Ill

- Ill 0

I UNIT NO. 1 I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Daily Average Reactor Power Level And Condenser Delta Temperature SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Figure 2 .1- 3 I

- AUGUST LmEND SEPTEMBER LmEND

> = ME:GAHATTS o = ME:GAHATTS

~ A= DELTA T (f) ~ R .a= DELTA T Cf) ~

~ &I ~ &I

.H ; ~ a

§ § lil a

~ ~

E~ s- R E~ se -

~§ fo4

~§ E--4 t!)

~~A ;~

$1 § ~§ Q 2 2 g §

~ ~

§

I n

II

§ II 11 IO

§ I I I I § .

I I

. I I

~ I I I I

§ I

I I

I :I §

¥~"tI

,,A'"........,.-.... ~'

~ :I I 1

I

'lr-. I \ I I

,~-*-*

0 0

' II 10 IG DAY I

111!1

\ I

'1 I

I 1:1 30 0

0 UNIT .NO. 2 Daily Average Reactor Power Level PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY And Condenser Delta Temperature SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Figure 2.1-4 2.2 CHEMICAL (ETS Sections 2.2 and 3.1.l)

I In accordance with the requirements of the ETS, ambient river water and plant discharges were monitored to assess I the chemical impact of station operation and detect changes in Delaware River water quality.

I Three river locations shown in Figure 2.2 were sampled once each month. Station 1 was located near the circulating water system discharge at a depth of 10 feet. Station 2 was next to the Circulating Water System intake at a depth of 8 I feet, and Station 3 was o*utside and downstream of the mixing

zone at a depth of 5 feet. The location of Station 3 varied depending on the tidal stage and direction of flow in the I vicinity of Artificial Island. On incoming and high slack tides, the sampling point was adjacent to buoy N4R, approxi-

mately 2.5 miles north of the discharge *. On outgoing and low slack .tides, the sampling point was next to buoy R8L, I about 2 miles south of the discharge. Preoperational data were*available from. three sampling locations: one near the present intake, one. opposite the Station in the ~iver chan-I nel, and one near Sunken* Ship Cove (Figure 2.2).

In-plant studies included the monitoring of well water and I of d~scharges from the Non-radioactive Liquid Waste Basin.

Since the start of the River Water Survey many changes have occured with a number of parameters added and deleted to the I monthly surveys. Amendment No. 23 to Operating License DPR-70, which became effective December 13, 1979 deleted ambient river *chlorine monitoring program from Section I 3.1.1.1 of the Unit 1 ETS. However, the following chlorine parameters from ETS Table 3.1-1 were not deleted.

I Chlorine Chlorine Chlorine Demand, 30 Sec.

Demand, 3 Min.

Residual, Free Chlorine Residual, Combined I Table 3.1-1 lists total dissolved ~olids but ETS Section 3.1.1.3 requires that "dissolved solids shall not be moni-I tored." Therefore, TDS is not reported.

The chlorine parameters and TDS will be recommended for de-letion from Table 3.1~1 in a forthcoming*ETS change I request.

2.2.1 Chlorine (ETS Sections 2.2.1 and 3.1.1.1)

I In 1980 th*e chlorination sy.stem was operated manually most of the time as a result of several technical problems.

I I M. PBO 50 01 I

I The circulating and service water systems of Unit 1 and 2.

I were chlorinated from April until December (Table 2.2.1-1)

During the chlorination periods, the analyses of free chlo-rine residual indicated values between <O.l-0.5 mg/liter at I the condenser outlets. Consequently, because of the addi-tional dilution from the unchlorinated condenser shell and the additional chlorine demand from that water, the concen-tration at the discharge to the river was less than I O.l mg/liter.

TABLE 2.2.1-1 I SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE SYSTEM

1980 OPERATING

SUMMARY

I . Sodium Hypo-chlorite System I Water Unit In Out of Days of Free Ch Residu System No. Service Service Chlorination (mg/li I Circulating l* --- --- --- ---

2 Nov. 9 Dec. 10 22 0.2-0 I l Apr. 22 Aug. 15 18 <O.l-0 Service

1 2 Apr. 24 Nov. 4 19 <O.l-0 I *No chlorination was conducted in 1980 2.2.2 Suspended Solids (ETS Section 2.2.2)

I The non-radioactive liquid waste basin processes make-up de-mineralizer and condensate polishing demineralizer regen-I erant wastes and steam generator blowdown, permitting solids settling before discharging to the*river.

In 1980, 24-hr composite samples for suspended solids (TSS)

I were taken from the basin discharge pipe monthly and analy-ses were performed using the filtration/gravimetric method which is recognized by EPA.

I I

I M*P80 50- 01 I I

I Amendment No. 23 referred to above requires that the station I shall conduct monitoring for suspended solids as described by the NPDES Permit No. NJ0005622. This permit limits the average and maximum daily concentration to 30 mg/liter and I 100 mg/liter, respectively.

The 1980 average TSS concentration in the discharge from the non-radioactive waste basin was calculated to be 10.4 mg/

I liter, and the maximum was 87.5 mg/liter, which met both discharge limitations.

I TSS concentrations in th~ river were highly variable {Figure

2.2.5-3) throughout the year, ranging from 34 to 344 mg/

liter and averaging 107 mg/liter at the intake and 105 mg/

I liter at the discharge. The preoperational data show a larger variation, 5 to SSO_mg/liter. The April 1980 concen-tration exceeded the preoperational April maximum at the discharge, but the suspended solids concentrations from the I non-radioactive waste basin reported for that month was o.o mg/liter. This indicates that the station had no*effect on river TSS concentrations.

I 2.2.3 .E!! {ETS Section 2.2.3)

ETS Amendment No. 23 removed the pH monitoring requirement I from the basin discharge and imposed the NPDES requirements of sampling the water discharges.

I During 1980 the pH of all discharges were between 6.0 and 9.0.

I The ecological and water quality monitoring programs on the Delaware River near the station indicated no influence from the operation of the non-radioactive liquid chemical w~ste basin (see Section 2.2.5).

I 2.2.4 Dissolved Oxygen (ETS Section 3.1.1.2)

I Station operation did not affect dissolved oxygen concentra-tions (D.O.) in the river.

In 1980, dissolved oxygen concentrations in the river were I usually higher than the averages in the preoperational data. The lowest concentrations occurred in August (Figure 2.2.5-17).

I A 5.7 mg/liter o.o. concentration was observed at the dis-charge location and a minimum of 4.4 mg/liter at the intake I

I M P80 50 01 . I I

1 location on August 19, 1980. Additional sampling on I August 20, 1980 near the intake and discharge indicated values of about 6.0 mg/liter. USGS data for Delaware River at Reedy Island .indicated low D.O. values for the month of I August (mean= 5.9.mg/liter, min. = 4.6 mg/liter).

A Wilcoxon's signed rank test was used to check the intake versus discharge concentrations of D.O. No significant dif*

I ference was detected.

All these indicate very clearly that the station did not I affect the o.o~ concentra~ion in the river during that

~~riod when low values were measured.

I 2.2.5 River Water* Survey (~TS Section 3.1.1.4)

The Delawara River.ne~r Art~ficial Islan~ exhibits substan-tial tidal mixing. This leads to limited vertical stratifi-I cation of salinity and a spectrum of salinity-related chemi-cal concentrations depending on season, fresh water flow, and tidal stage. In 1989, high salinity values were re-I corded during the fall (18-20 ppt) due to seyere drought conditions.

I A typically wide range of values for the following chemic.al parameters was observed in 1980.

The pH of the Delaware River in the vicinity of Artificial

.1. Island is well buffered as a result of. the influence of sea-water in the estuary. The pH as a result has always been between 6.0 and 9.0 for all of the monitoring years.

I pH varied from 6.2 to 7.*6 in 1980 (Figure 2.2.5-1). The preoperational minimums were exceeded five times. This

variation does not*seem to be linked to station operation I because the intake and discharge values varied together.

Conductivity followed its usual seasonal pattern (Figure I 2.2.5-2). Values for 1980 ranged from 1070 umhos to 26,000 umhos. The highest values were during late summer and f a.11 as a result of drought. Preoperational values were exce~ded I sixteen times, but the intake and discharge values were very close for all of 1980, indicating no plant-related effects (Wilcoxon's signed rank test).

I Turbidity is.measured at Salem as nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) which nare considered comparable to the previ-ously reported *** Jackson turbidity units (JTU)" (USEPA, I

I M PSO 50 01 I I

I Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, 1974),

I since the traditional Jackson Candle turbidimeter is diffi-cult to use at low turbidity levels.

I The highest turbidity ranges were observed at the discharge area for preoperational data, 10 to 480 NTU (Figure

.2.2.5-4). The 1980 data for all three locations varied from 5 to 96 NTU. The 1980 data did not exceed the preoperat-I ional maximums but new minimum values were established twelve times.

I Chloride concentrations, *expressed as CaC03, varied from 477 mg/liter to 12,800 mg/liter, (Figure 2.2.5-5). As a result of drought conditions, the monthly preoperational maximums I were exceeded in twenty samples. Higher concentrations oc-curred during the summer and fall when reduced river flows caused the saline waters to penetrate further upstream.* The intake and discharge concentrations were very close with I neither location having a consistently higher concentration (Wilcoxon's signed rank test).

I (Note - for chloride as 'NaCl, multiply values given by 1.17.)

I Sulfate values followed chloride in its seasonal pattern and were between 111 and 1312 mg/liter as CaC03 with the highest recordings in the summer and fall (Figure 2.2.5-6). As a result of the drought conditions twenty-three of the 1980 I values were greater than the preoperational maximums *..

A Wilcoxon's signed rank test was performed to check the in-I take versus discharge to determine if there was any effect from station operation. No significant difference was *ae-tected for the 1980 data.

I Ammonia. as. NH3 was very low* in 1980. The preoperational range was from 0.0 to 3.8 mg/liter while the 1980 data only ranged from 0.024 to 1.45 mg/liter (Figure 2.2.5-7). The I preoperational data had a late winter/early spring peak while the minimum concentrations were found during the sum-mer/fall period.

I Preoperational maximums were not exceeded, but new minimums were established fifteen times.

I The intake and discharge concentrations were similar with neither locations being predominantly greater. Therefore, the Station did not appear to affect the ammonia levels in I the river.

I M P80 50 01 I I

I Nitrate measured as N03 for 1980 was lower than the preoper-I at1onal data (Figure 2.2.5-8). The preoperational values ranged from a.as to 22.0 mg/liter, while the 1980 data ranged from 1.17 to 10.45 mg/liter. Nineteen times the 1980 I values were below the preoperational minimums. The intake and discharge values were similar and indicate that the Sta-tion did .not change the N03 content of the river in any appreciable manner.

I Kjeldahl Nitrogen is a measure of free ammonia and most organic nitrogen componds. The preoperational data are I limited to the sampling location near Sunken Ship Cove. The high preoperational value during June seems exceptional and should be ignored (Figur~ 2.2.5-9). Normally, the range is I between O and 10 mg/liter and the 1980 data all fall within this range. Since the discharge concentrations are close to the intake values, anq agricultural practices are dominant in influencing the Kjeldahl nitrogen in the river, the Sta-I tion did not significantly affect the Kjeldahl nitrogen level sin the river~

I Total Phosphorus as P04 {Phosphate) in 1980 ranged from o.12 mg/liter to 0.92 mg/liter while the preoperational data ranged from 0.0 to 4.0 mg/liter (Figure 2.2.5-10). Preoper~

ational maximums were exceeded three times but the intake I and discharge concentrations were similar.

Therefore, the station did not affect the phosphorus concen-I trations in the river.

Calcium levels in 1980 ranged from 54 to 1455 mg/liter as I CaC03 with the highest values occurring in the summer (August) (Figure 2.2.5-11). Compared to the preoperational range of 30 to 750 mg/lite~ most of the 1980 values were**

above the preoperational average. In August, all three I locations were much higher than *the preoperational maximum values, indicating drought-related river fluctuations near the station.

I. The intake and discharge values were almost identical.

sequently, the Station's effect on the river's calcium Con-levels appears to be negligible.

I Magnesium values, measured as CaC03 ranged from 120 to 2400 mg/liter (Figure 2.2.5-12). The peak is beyond the preoper-I ational range of 20 to 2,045 mg/liter. Values greater than the preoperational maximum values were recorded during sum-mer and late fall and correspond to the drought conditions.

I I M P80 50 01 I I

I The intake and discharge values were similar for all

I months. Therefore, the Station had no effect on river mag-nesium levels.

1* Sodium and Potassium concentrations as CaC03 were measured since October 1972 only at one station, near Sunken Ship Cove, during the preoperational program. During 1980 both I parameters were measured at all three locations (Figures 2.2.5-13 and 2.2.5-14).

As with the previous chemicals, due to ~rought conditions I high potassium and sodi.um values were recorded during 1980 at all three locations~

I A Wilcoxon's signed rank test was used to check the intake versus discharge concentrations of sodium and no significant difference was noted despite the Station's use of sodium I hydroxide (NaOH}.

Iron preoperational concentrations varied from 0.0 to 11.0 mg/liter. The 1980 data varied from 0. 33 to 10 *. 5 mg/liter I (Figure 2.2.5-15). The :variation during 1980 appears to be due to large natural variations or discharges from sites up-stream of the Station. The highest 1980 value of 10.S mg/

I liter was at the discharge during April, and the value at the intake was 9.8 mg/liter. November showed a high concen-tration at the intake (7.4 mg/liter}, but low concentrations were present at the discharge (4.9 mg/liter), and downstream I of the discharge (4.4 mg/liter}. These wide* fluctuations

.between locations indicate that "slugs" of iron rich water ***'

may be passing downstream. The releases from the station *

I were small and relatively consant over the year. Therefore, it is concluded that the station did not significantly *a-1 ter river iron concentrations.

I Copper levels for preoperational data varied from near 0.0 to 6.5 mg/liter. The 1980 data ranged only from near 0.01 to 0.092 mg/liter (Figure 2.2.5-16). The intake and dis-I charge concentrations were similar with neither location having predominantly greater values, and since the only sta-tion source of copper is small amounts arising from corro-I sion, no station impact is indicated.

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD} data were recorded prior to 1977 only at a sampling station near Sunken Ship Cove.

I In 1980 BOD was measured at all three locations (Figure 2.2.5-18). All the BOD levels were below the preoperational I

I M P80 50 01 I I

averages and no significant difference was noted between in-take and discharge concentrations. The levels encountered are reasonable for unpolluted water such as the lower reach of the Delaware River.

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) in preoperational data ranged from 0 to 650 mg/liter (Figure 2.2.5-19). The 1980 data ranged from 8 to 361 mg/liter and four times exceeded the preoperational monthly maximum. No significant difference between intake and discharge values was noted, so it can be concluded that the station had no detrimental effect on COD I levels.

It should be noted that in saline waters with chloride (Cl)

I concentrations above 1000 mg/liter (1410 mg/liter as CaC03) and COD values below 250 mg/liter, COD values are highly questionable becau~e of the high chloride interference.

I Since most of the 1980 and preoperational data fall into this range, COD data have little meaning.

2.2.6 Chemical Releases (ETS Section 3.1.1.5)

I An inventory of chemicals used during 1980 was made and the quantities discharged were estimated. Since production I wells were used to supply certain systems which ultimately discharge to the river, well water chemical constituents

were taken into account in making estimates of the chemicals

,.I presented in Table 2.2.6-1.

The only source of many of the reported chemical parameters, is the water withdrawn from the production wells. These I parameters have been shown not to affect the river water quality. An ETS change *request will be submitted to request approval to delete reporting the following parameters:

I 1.

2.

Calcium Magnesium s.

6.

Nitrate Silica

3. Potassium 7. Phosphate I 4. Copper I

I I

I M PBO 50 01 I I

I I TABLE 2.,2. 6-1 CHEMICAL RELEASE ESTIMATES - 1980

1. PREDICTED AVERAGE 1980 ESTIMATED NET AMOUNT AVERAGE NET I CHEMICAL CONSTITUENT DISCHARGED (lbs/day)

DISCHARGED

( lbs/daJ::)

I Chlorine as Cl2 "calcium as Ca 870 135 1168 842 ( 1 )

.I Magnesium as Mg 56 607 ( 1 )

Sodium as Na 600 2761 (la)

I, __ Potassium as K 55 53 Copper as Cu 0.03 (2)

I Sulfate as S04 1590 4476 1: Chloride as Cl 138 1120 ( 1)

Nitrate as N03 2.4 26 ( 1 )

I Silica as Si02 46 91 Phosphate as P04 11 5 I Volatile-Amines 4.2 49 ( 3)

I Hydrazine Suspended Solids <1000 0.04 24 ( 4) 8 I

I I

I

_ M P80 50 01 I

NOTES

I (1) Chemical analyses of the production wells yielded higher contents of calcium, magnesium, sodium, copper,

1. chloride and nitrate. than anticipated. The river water survey indicates no environmental impact associated with these discharges.

I

,. ( l. a) The total sodium discharged in the circulating water discharge produced an increase less than 0.3 mg/liter compared to 2000 mg/liter which is the natural concentration of sodium in water.

Therefore, there was no environmental impact *

.I* (:2) Attributable to average copper concentrations in the production wells. This represents a discharge concen-tration of 3 x lo-6 mg/liter, much lower than 0.082 mg/liter, which is the natural copper concentration in I the river. It is concluded that the Station did not adversely influence th~ ambient copper concentration in the river.

I

,. (3) Ammonium hydroxide is used for pH" control in the secondary condensate feedwater system~ This represents a discharge concentration of 0.005 mg/liter, much lower than 0.32 mg/liter which is the natural ammonia concen-tration in the river.

1 It is concluded that the Station did not influence the amqient ammonia concentration in the river.

I (4) Hydrazine was used for oxygen scavenging for Unit l and reacted with dissolved oxygen in the steam systems to form nitrogen and water. 24 lb/day of hydrazine were u.sed at the station. All the hydrazine reacts and de-I composes in the system and very little or no hydrazine is actually discharged.

1_

I I

I I M P80 SQ, 01 *1

I

'I

,, I I I I I I NOTE: Underlined lo.cations denote preoperational sampling stations. Station 2 did not change.

I I I Postoperational station 3 varies I I I I according to tide. See text *

./ I I I I I I I I I II I I

/ /3 I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I

I I

I I I l I lI 'l I l I 'I lI I I I )

I t l ~

l t *~HOPE CREEK GE1JERATING STATION I I .~SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING I I t 1 4' 1"'..

I STATIC:*

I ,' ' '

l I 'l'

..:;)

- ,._-s-~-I I ',, '

'\

1. '\

' ' ',' ' ' I..

,, 1****'*'**'0 I I ', ',

SCALE l N MILES 3

I '

'I IWLJC SIJMCZ £1..ECTJtlC AHO CU.S COMNNT Sa.::ipling St&t1ons IAl.!M MJQ.UJt GEM:RATING STATION Figure 2.2 I

PH AT LOCATION 1 PH AT LOCATION 2

..a ..

!ii

1 -.!,.:..

U\

!.: I I

c :c

.I ..* II

.. II

.. II I

I ... __________________ _________

JAN FEB /1Alt APR Mfl't .JUH Jll. AtJa St:P ocr NOV DEC

.JIN FEB 1Wt Pl'R MAY .LIN* .U. llUG SEP OCT NOV O£C I

I ..s PH AT LOCATION 3 I ... LEGEND l'llEOl'lllATIONAL. llAXIMUM 0

I ..

r

! l'lllOl'lllATIOIW. AVERAGE I ."'

IHQ OATA l'llEOl'f;llATIONAI. lllNlllUM f

.. ~

LOCATION I

OISCHAllGf:

LocATION Z

INTAl<f:

... II LOCATION )

OUTSIDE ANO OOWNSTllEAM Of TH!:

MIXING ZONE I ..----------..---.--...--.--.---.---...---.--.-_,.--1 JAN FEB l'lftR APR MAY .lJN JlA. AIJQ Sp> OCT NOY DEC I

PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY pH as pH SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION l"lgure i::'.. i::'.. :;>-1 I - ~<:::-

I

1 'bo

'i i;j CONOIJCTIVITY AT LOCATION l

'ba

-;i;i CONDUCTIVITY AT LOCATION 2 h

Q h

D D

Q a Cl

!! D I ~.~

..!J D

~~

. D D

I ... ..

.JAN FEB MR APR M't .lJN .Ai. RUG St:I' OCT ICIV D£C .flH FEB l1flR fll'R M't .JUH .AA. RtJa SEP OCT NOV O£C I

CONDUCTIVITY AT LOCATION. 3 LEGEND D PllE01'£11ATION&L llAJUMUll I a a

llTT-71 OATA PllE01'£11ATIONAL AllEllAGE I D a

11110 DATA PAEOPEllATIONAL lllNlllUll I .* LOCATION I

DISCHAllGE a

LllC&TION LOCATION Z

I

INTAKE OUTllDE ANO* DOWllSTllEAll l:W THE lllXING ZONll:

I

..0-1----....~---:r-_,..--op...-..,-._...__,.~.--...---~

JAN FC8 llflR fll'R llAl' ..AJN ..U. fllS S£P OCT *NOV O£C I

PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Conductivity as UMHOS SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION' .I! igure <:'..~.?--Z I

I TSS AT LOCATION 1 TSS AT LOCATION 2

-1.

I l I 1 l a

l

! I II l!

I!

l. l i D I

I I I

I

! tl Jf't"'iY'tiiH I I

1 §

.. *l I l

I I

l

I 0

I i l 1 t I "

Iii a

t l l I

l" I JAN rEB MAR flPft llAY JUN JUI. AUG SEP ocr NOV O£:C a'**~----~--~---.-._.~-~------

.JIN F't8 llM lll'R llflY JUN JUI. AU; SEP OCT NJV Df:C I

'I . TSS AT LOCATION 3

..*~----~----------~-----------. LEGEND I Ii I 1111*79 DATA l'llEOl'EllATIONAI. AvtllAG&

I 1190 DATA PllEOl't:llATI~ lllNlllUM

'I* LOCATION I *, DllQWIGI:

I LOC:ATIOll* 2

INTAKE LOCATION I

DllTSIOE ANO OOWllSTllEAll f l THE lllXING ZONE I

I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Suspended* Solids as TSS SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION I Fi~ure 2.2.5-3

I TURBIDITY AT LOCATION TURBIDITY AT LOCATION 2 I

., §-.-~~--------~--------------~~-,

a i

r I

.I 0

I !!

0 Iii 0

oi 0 0 01--.--.----'r--...--.----.~..---.--+-.,~..---.--1 o+-...,....--.~;;-..,..._,..__,,.......,.......,..........~........,.......---1 JAN ffll llftft RPR 111!Y .JUN JUL RUG SCP OCT NOV DEC JflN f"Efl MM APR nftr ..uN JUL RUG SCP OCT NOV DCC TURBIDITY AT LOCATION 3 a

§...-~~~--~~~~~~~~~ .......

LEGEND 0

8 P11£0PEllATION&I. llHlllUll I 11110 DATA P11£0l'£11ATION&I. lllNlllUll

.. 1.0C&TION I

DISCH&llG£ l.OC&TION LOCATION Z

S

INT&K£ OUTSIDI: AND IJOWllSTllEAN OI' TH£

.ii lllllNG ZON£

..o+-....-.......--il--...--T---.~..--.--+~.-- ......-.-~

.1W f1ll 11RR APR ttRr .U. .U. RUQ St:1' OCT NOV DEC PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Turbidity as NTU SALEM NUCLEAR 'GENERATING STATION Figure 2.2.5-4 I

I CHLORIDE AT LOCATION CHLORIDE AT LOCATION 2 I

'b "!

Q

!:i

°bD

..d

"!:i "

." ..g I a:

_, a* "

" a

-~"!

_, . a a a

1. ....

l5

" .~.:.

l5 " a en.: 0 r:

a:

~ Zi

-c

-a a

" :l

c c I ::l ,.;

I ..

0*-1--...~..-+- ...........,...-.........,..__,,......,........,..__,...._,_.....

.JflN FEB l'IAR APR 1111r JUN .U. AUQ St:P OCT NOV 0£C Q a o*-1-....,..__,................,..__,_.+-_,.......,,......,.........~...-...-....

JAN FEB MR Rl'R MAY .JUH .JlA. flUQ SEP OCT NOV ll£C

- I

-CHLORIDE AT LOCATION 3

'b"!

.!:! LEGEND

!:i a l'llEDPERATIONAt. llAXlllUM g

a 1977* 79 DATA l'llEOl'£11ATIONAL AVltllAGE

~"!

I -*

_, IHO DATA a:

l.J a

a

a PllEOP£11ATIONAt. lllNlllUll

~

Zi c

.... LOCATION I

DISCHAllGE LOCATION Z

INTAKE

,.; LOCATION S

OUTSIDE AND DOWNSTllEAll 0# THE MIXING ZONE I ..

0 0-t-......--...-............--...-...........--...-.............--...-............

JAN FEB MllR RPR Mfl'l JUN .AA. llUlil SEP OCT NOV DEC I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Chloride as CaC03 SALEM N~CLEAR GENERATING STATION *Figure 2. 2. 5- 5 -

-21b.-

I SULFATE AT LOCATION 1 .* SULFATE AT LOCATION 2 I 0

~*

0

~ a I D 0

~

.. D D a

~ D D

D 15 0 a 5§ D D

D 15 0 I a.."!

~Ii!

!! "! D a

a D

l ~

c I 0 6

0 I ~.

0 D a I 0 0

..w.1 PCB l1flR APR MAr .AJN .U. AUQ SEP OCT NOV Ot:C .JflH PCB l1RR APR MAr ~ .U. AUG SEP OCT NOV 0£C

,, SULFATE AT LOCATION 3 LEGEND I a 1'11£0P£RATIONA&. llAXlllUll 1177-71 DATA 1'11£01'£11ATIDNAI. AVEllAG£ I a a a a

a 1110, DATA l'llEOPt:llATIOllA&. lllNlllUll LOCATION I

DISQWIC s

0 LOCATION Z

INTAKE LOCATION I

OUTSIDE AND OOWNGTll[All °' TNE lllXINI ZOii£ 0 *

~

I ..

o+--.--..~...-- ...........,.--..--.,.-....,........~~..............~

JRN PCB Mllft APR MAr JUN JUL RUG 5£1', OCT NOV Ot:C PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Sulfate as CaC03 SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Fi.gure 2.2.5-6 I

AMMONIA AT LOCATION 1 AMMONIA AT LOCATION 2 I ... ..

I .

Cl I

I I ..

I JAN f'E:a MflR APR IVIY .lJN .U. AUG St:f' OCT NOV D£C

'"'-+--....--.~..---~--IJ--Jl-.............~......-+-......--1 JflN f'E:a MR APR 11AY .AJN ..U. AUlil S&P OCT NOV D£C I

I AMMONIA AT LOCATION 3 LEGEND I ..

Cl PU01'£11ATIONAL llAlllllUM I .

1917-19 DAT&

l'R£01'!RATION&L AVEllAGE I 11110 DATA P11£Cl'£11ATIONAL lllNlllual LOCATION I

DISCHAll<<it LOCATION l

INTAll£ I .

L.Dc:ATION ll

DUTSlll£ AND OOWNITllE&ll Of' THE lllXINI ZONE

.; a a

......_.--1,__.._...........

Cl

'"+-----~....-----~,__4"-

JFIN f'£B l'IRR APR Mr .Ali .AA. M SEP OCT NOV D£C PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS. COMPANY Ammonia as NH3 SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING . STATION Figure 2.2.5-7 I

NITRATE AT LOCATION 1 NITRATE AT LOCATION 2 I 0 lei

..Ii

~

..Ii I Q Ii Q

R I

~ !::

5

..J-Q

...:5 ...

l~

5 .. ~ .

I a..

~*!:i

~Q id

la ~~

c I .. c Q

Q a a a a a

.... a 8

.i a

a a+--.---.~..--...,......,..__,,..-...-..,........,.~..-~-.--4

~

a

.llN f"ES

MAR Af'R MAY .A.IN .U. llUQ St:I' OCT NOV DEC JllN. f"ES MAR APR MY .AJN JIL flUQ 5£1' OCT NOV DEC I Q IQ NITRATE AT LOCATION 3 LEGEND

.A I Q

'llEQ11£11ATIONAL llAXlllUll Ii I .

~

197T*Tt OATA

5 Q

"'£0P£11ATIONAL AY£JIAGE I ..J-

~.

"'!?

~

IHO Dr.TA P11£0l'[llATIONAL lllNlllUll

~

~~.

c LOCATIOll I

DISCIWIGE

LOCATION Z

INTAll£ I Q

a

a*

a.

a a

LOCATION S

OUTSIDE AND OOWlllTllUll 0# THE lllXING ZONE

~

I 0 a

..JflN FCB 11AR llPR MAY a

~ ..lJ1. RUG stP OCT NOV D£C I

I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Nitrate as N03 SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION l<'ig.ure 2.2.5-b I -----*---- ....... .

I KJELDAHL NITROGEN AT LOCATION KJELDAHL NITROGEN AT LOCATION 2

-I .

~-.-..-..-~..-..-..-..-..-~~..-..-..-~..-..-~

TRU£ VR!.Uf: IS 330 MG/L I

Q

'1-Q '

~

// \\

\ a '

Q Q

.i I

\\ /

/\

'\ ,,,.,lh...... .. -1'1

/

.. ai a \ / ........ a a I d-i-......-...~.............--'1--+--+-.....-..................--+-....

..J/lN fE8 MR APR MllY JUN .JlJ.. flUQ SEP OCT NOV DEC a ,'a acaa,fj'a d;-l--+-....--...--....-....---.--+-....--...-......-....--...-~

.JIM 1'£8 MAR lll'R MllY .AJN ..U. flUg SD' OCT liOV D£C I

KJELDAHL NITROGEN AT LOCATION 3 LEGEND I PllE01'£11ATIONAL 11.HIMUll I 1977- 79 DATA PAEOPEllATIONAL AVUAGI I l'illO llATA PREOPEllATIOllAL lllNtllUll LOCATION I

DISCIWIG£ I

LOCATION Z

INTAKE LOCATION ll

OUTlllll AND OOWNSTllEAll Cl' THE IUXIN8 ZONE I .JflN fEB t1RR APR tlflY JUN JUl. ~ S&P OCT NOV CCC 1-I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Kjeldahl Nitrogen as N SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - Figure 2.2.5-9 I

I PHOSPHATE AT LOCATION 1 PHOSPHATE AT LOCATION 2

..Iii I .~ ..

I .. ...

I ~~

j*

15 I *1: *

-:::l*.

c I ... A*

I ~

I I

I .2 PHOSPHATE AT LOCATION 3 LEGEND I ....

I ..

11n-n DATA s~

.I j*

1110 DATA

~ ..

E'"

-Ii:J .*

I c I ... LllCAlllMI I

GUTlllll AND -.Tll&&M OI TIC

11111. . ZGllC I

I I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Phosphate as P04 SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION F_igure 2.2.5-10 I

I CALCIUM AT LOCATION CALCIUM AT LOCATION 2

I g j...-~~~~---~~~~~~~~~--.

g I

I ~"!

I

~"!

I I ~"! ~ .

1: i!

j§ ::jl I 2

.i

i:

i *

. g g*

i Cl

~

JAN FEB MAR RPR MY .lJlf .Al. llUa SEP OCT NOY DCC JllN f"EB lllft APR llflr ,AJN Jl1. RIJQ SEP OCT NOV O£C I

CALCIUM AT LOCATION 3

~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~--

g LEGEND I "'IOP!llATIONAL llAXIMUY I 1117*79 DATA PlllOP£11ATIONAL AVEllAGE I IHO DATA l'lllCJll£11ATIONAL lllNIYUlll I . LOCATION I

DISCIWIGE i *

.I LOCATION Z

lllTAll!

1.0CATIOll S

OUTSIDE ANO DOWNSTREAM Of TH£ lllXING ZONE I .

ci-t--.--.---.~.--...--.-

.MW flll l1flR Rf'R

......~..-......-.--.-_,.--

mr ...... ..tL flUQ SEP OCT NOY O£C I

PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Calcium a.s CaC03 SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Figure 2. 2. 5-11 I

I MAGNESIUM AT LOCATJON MAGNESIUM AT LOCATION 2 Q

I a

~---~~~~~~~~~~~~

i 11*

a a I a a i a a

I II 8

a I

I I

I o'-1-----.~.,...._._ ......--1,__...-..........,.~..--......-...""""4 JflN n:a ~* f!PR MAr .AJH ..u. flLG SEP OCT NOV D£C JllN F't:B MM f!PR MAr ~ .AL ftU& SC' OCT HOV DCC I

MAGNESIUM AT LOCATION 3 i LEGEND i II I i a

. II 197? 79 DATA I

0

~ P'llEOPt:llATIONAL AVEllAGI:

a f5 ~

!:: Iii

....1-

..... IHO DATA I ~~

le a::

CD"'

PllE:DPEJIATIOll&L WIN1WUll j§ I ;:-

~

LOCATION I

DtSCH&llG[

. Loc:&TION 2

INTAKE I § 0

LOCATION I

OUTSIDE AND DOWNITllEAW OI THI llllllNG ZON I

~

I ..

Q

.JflN Fill l1flR APR MAr JUN JUI. llUG S£P OCT NOV D£C I

PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Magnesium as CaC03 SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. Figure 2.2.5-12 I -33.-

I SODIUM AT LOCATION 1 SODIUM AT LOCATION 2 I

II I " " c

" 0

!§"

..J I "

I "

I Q

.. 0 I

Q 0"1--...~,..-""T"'--.,..-..,........~.,....""T"'......,,.._.,...-,..~--~ "d,-1-.....~------~............~......-.---....--.---~..--1 JAN ff:B MAR APR MftY JUN JUl. fllJG SCP OCT NOV O£C JAN f!:B MAR APR MllY JI.ti JUI. AUG S£P OCT NOV DEC I

I -" ..-

'b<!

SODIUM AT.LOCATION 3 LEGEND I

Q 17 PllEOPERATIONAL llAllMUll

I :

(I>

1911*79 OAT&

PREOl'EllATIONAL AVEll&GE j§ <! " " ,,

I ::i*

IS

.. l l

,lg"'..

" lb 11110 OAT&

If . a

'. ~

l'llEOl'EllATIOllAI. lllNlllUlol I

CD

l-'

.t .

i: a :

, \

LOCATION I

OISCIWIGE LOCATION 2

INTAKE I .." /"\ "

,I \ I

,'~\

i i

. LOCATION s* OUTSIDE ANO DOWNSTllEAll Of THE llllllNG ZONE i \/ \ !

I .

~ a ':

',/

JflN ff:B MllR APR MAY ~ .AL AUG SCP OCT NOV O£C

~

I I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Sodium as CaC03 SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Figure 2.2.5-13

- - -*--------*-*--*-* *--*-----*-~---~------* .- -* -*----~--~.

I POTASSIUM AT LOCATION 1 POTASSIUM AT LOCATION 2

"~-y-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "

d--~~----------~--~~~~----.

a I a a

a a a

I D *

~,

/~""

\

a a

\

I Cl / ......... ' \

I D* I l "....

I' I\ . .t' I * .---~....

\ i

.i I

\

'\ I I

a **

I Q D

d-+--.---.--......-.---.,............-,..-.....--..,..._,..---,.--......-1 JAN F'E:B MllR APR Mft't ..UH JU!. AUG SEP OCT NOV O£C I

I "

POTASSIUM AT LOCATION 3

~----~--------------------------- LEGEND I D ,7 PllEOl'EllATIOllAL lolAlllllUll

(~ 1177* 7t DATA PllEOPEllATIOllAI.. AVEllAGl D

'~

I D D a

D IO 111ao DUA l'llEOPEllATIDllAL lllNlllUll

~

I a D

D D

LOCATION I

DISOWl&E Q LOCATION 2

INTAKE

~

LOCATION* I

OUTllDE ANO OOWNITll[All CW THE MIXING ZOllE I Q d-t--,..--....-......-...-.....--....-......- - . -............--.--.--c JAN F'E:B l1RR APR MflY .JUH .U. AUG SE:I' OCT NOV O£C I

I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Potassium as CaC03 SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Figure 2.2.5-14 I

I TOTAL IRON AT LOCATION 1 TOTAL IRON AT LOCATION 2 I ~

Q I ~ ~

I "::!

Q a i§

~

'.:j.,

!ii ~!ii a I *" .. i.,

~- a

~

I Q lC" ll v ~

Q v ~v ~

I\ v v

~

I ..Jflll n:s MflR APR 1111r JUN JUI. RUG St:P OCT NOV O£C JAN fEB l1ftR APR Mflr JUN JUI. AUG SEP OCT NOV D£C I

I TOTAL IRON AT LOCATION 3 LEGEND I

Q PREOP£A&TIOllAL ll&lllMUll 11171-79 DAT&

I PREOPEA&TIOll&I. AVERAGE I

11180 OAT&

PREOPEll&TION&L lllNlllUll I L.OC&TION I

DISCHARGE

.. a LOCATION 2

INTAKE I . I

/

v~ I/

LOC&TION ll

OUTSIDE AND DOWNSTllEAll CW THE lllXING ZONE Q

I I I~ Ii

/

JAN fl:B l1flR APR nRr .llH ..U. AUG SO' OCT NOV DEC I

I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Total Iron as Fe SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Figure 2.2.5-15 I . ~ . *..* .

I TOTAL COPPER AT LOCATION 1 TOTAL COPPER AT LOCATION 2 I

I I

I I ." ...

I I

0

'"+--.----r~....- ....................--......-T---.~.--.......-;;..-4 '"-+--.---.~ ......-.-.......__,--+--.--,,~.--.......~--I JRN F£8 l1AA RPR nRr JUH ..AJI. AlJlil SE!' OCT NOV O£C JAN F£8 MR llPft Mr .lJN ..u. HUG S£P OCT ~v O£C I

TOTAL COPPER AT LOCATION 3 LEGEND I ... l'lll01'£RATIONAL llAltlMUlll I ... 1177*79 DATA l'tlt:Ol'£11ATIONM. AVEllAGE I IHD DATA PllEOl'EllATIDNAL llllNllllUlll I

.LOCATION I

DISDWIGE LOCATION 2

INTAKE I LOCATIOll :S

OUTSIDE AHO DQllNITllUlll C# THt:*

llllltlNli ZDNt:

I 0

'"-+--.--,.............._,,_....,..__,,........,...-T-....,........--.,....-;;.,--i JRN F£8 MflR RPR MAr .JUN JUL. RU/; S£P OCT NOV D£C I

I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Total Copper as Cu SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Figure 2.2.5-16 I

I DISSOLVED OXYGEN AT LOCATION DISSOLVED OXYGEN AT LOCATION 2 I ; ..

Ii I 0 I

a el

....1*

0

_..

~"!

....1-I 15 G..o en

~

2

~o I!!

CD

!* 3~

I c Cl-c I ...-

D I g,..,.._...,........,......,__..,_...,.......,..__,.....-..-...........,..--.--.,.._j

...wtN FCB MAR APR MAY JUN JUI. llUG S£P OCT NOV Dt:C JAN fl:B l'lflR fll'R MY .I.ff ..U. AIJQ SEI' OCT NOV D£C I

I DISSOLVED OXYGE:N AT LOCATION 3 LEGEND I . PllEOl'[llATIOJIAL llAJllMUll I ~

llTT

79 DATA PllEOPEllATIONAL AVEllAGI:

IS.,

I :i !:

~ ..

1110 DATA E!! PllEOP£11ATION&L lllNlllUM I ""

Ul

-a c

a U>C&TIOll I

OISQWIGE.

I l LOCATION Z

lllTAKE a LDCATIOll I

OUTSIDE &HD DOWNITllEAll 01 THE MIXING ZONE I

a

."'g,..,.._...,........,.__,__..,_...,.......,..__,.....-..................,..__......-,.._j

.J'IH ff:B l1flR APR ~y .1M ..U. AUG Sfl' OCT NOV D£C I

I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Dissolved 'Oxygen as 02 I SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING ~ATION Figure 2.2.5-17

I BOD AT LOCATION 1 BOD AT LOCATION 2 I a

~

..d

.d I ~

I ~"!

...I 2

~ .

I ~h ra

-a

...I

i:.

I : ..

a I

0 a a a a a a a I a 04-.....--...--....-........

JAN rEB MflR RPR nflY JUH .JIA.

llUQ SO' OCT NOV O£C

~

0 d,-4-....,.--.--....,-....,.--..--....,-....,.--..--.....--.---.--.....--t J/IN F£8 MM APR llRY ..u.1 .U. AUQ SO' OCT NOV DCC I

I BOD AT LOCATION 3 LEGEND I d

. PllEOl'£11ATIONAL. MAXiMUll

a I d 1177° 79 DATA I

\

1110 DATA l'fllEOP£11ATIONAL lllMllUM I ....

'\

\ t

.~

'I LOCATION I

DlllCHAllGE I ..

0

\.

I \.

....._.... , ,.,, ,,'\

,'* \ ,I '\\ . . .r LOCATIOll LOCATION Z

I

111 TAii£ OUTSlll£ - ~llUll ,,, THE lllXllll ZOllE a a a a \

', . ... ;a I

0 a a a ",'I"' ......a .......... ri.

0 04-.....--...,.-....-........-.....--....----------.....------~

.llN f£B nRR APR nflY JlJH .JU. flUG SEP OCT NOV DEC I

I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Biologica.l Oxygen Demand as BOD SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Figure 2.2.5-18 I

COO AT LOCATION 1 COO AT LOCATION 2 I "

~T.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "~....--~~~~~~~~~~~~~--.

I i

I I .D l

I I

D I "o-i-...--.---...-.----.--;....._.,....._-..____.._..--t JllN n:e l1llR RPR MAY JUH JIA. RUG; SEP OCT NOV O£C JflN f"t:8 MR Al'ft llA'f JUH .AL flUfil st:P OCT NOV 0£&

I I i COO AT LOCATION 3 LEGEND I D i

i PllEDHllATIONAI. llAXllllUll I

I 0 ! 1917*7' DATA i I I l'llEOHRATIONAL AV£JllAGE

~ I I

-o

~§ rn E.,

l I! i IHO O&TA l'RtoPl!:RATIONAI. lllNlllUll

~-

I :::;~

c

~ l I II l LOCATION I

OISCMAllGE II i LOCATION 2

INTAKE I LOCATION ll

OUTSIDE ANO llOWlllTllEAll ~ THE llllCING ZONE I o-i--.--.---.-__...___..,__

0 ! __________.._........

..AH fEB rl'tR APR llA'f AM .AL flUfil st:P OCT NOV D£C I

I PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY Chemical Oxygen Demand as COD SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Figure 2.2.5-19 I

I SECTION 3.0 I BIOTIC MONITORING AND SUREVEILLANCE PROGRAMS I 3.1 DIAMONDBACK TERRAPIN NESTING STUDY (ETS Section 3.1.2.1.2.1)

I Northern diamondback terrapin, Malaclemys terrapin terrapin, inhabit brackish water along the Atlantic coast from Cape Code to Cape Hatteras. Nesting begins in mid-June and con-I tinues through July. Burger and Monteveechi (1975) state that most nests occur above the high tide level in flat areas ori sand dunes or beaches that have about 20 percent I vegatative cover. - Generally, it takes the female less than an hour to select a site, dig a flask shaped hole, lay and cover her eggs, and :r;eturn to the water. Hatching usually begins in mid- to late August and may continue into Novem-I ber. Cold weather may cause the young to hibernate in or near the nest and emerge the following spring (Carr, 19~2; Lawler and Musick, 1972).

I Diamondback terrapin nesting was monitored at three beaches on the Delaware River within 4.8 km of Salem. Nesting was*

recorded from June 11 through late July. Activity, as I indicated by the number of observed turtles, was greatest at the onset of nesting at Liston Point and Sunken Ship Cove, while Hope Creek was most active in early July. The level I of nesting activity varied greatly between sites but remain-

-, ed within the range recorded since 1975. Number of females estimated to utilize each beach ranged from 10 to Sunken Ship Cove to 215 at Liston Point.

In 1980, 34 females were tagged; at Liston Point mean

.carapace ~ength was X=l8.8 cm and at Hope Creek, X=l7.8 cm; I none were tagged at Sunken Ship Cove. Age ranged from 9 years to well in excess of 22 years. Of three tagged

females recaptured in 1980, one had lost its tag. The two I others had been tagged one and four years previously and were recaptured at the original beach of tagging. Size of the turtle recaptured after four years had increased by 5.8%

of its original carapace length.

I Track evidence indicated the same predators as recorded in previous years, i.e., racoon, mink, Norway rat, crows, I gulls, and herons, with the addition of red fox. Hatching was observed to occur from mid-August through late October, and evidence of 146 hatchlings was noted.

I ..:-: ---** ..

M P81 125/l l 41 I

I I

I 3.1.1 Study Area I Monitoring in 1980 was at the same three nesting beaches.as in previous years. Observations were made from June 11 I ** through November 14, 1980 at Sunken Ship Cove and near the mouth of Hope Creek, New Jersey, and Liston Point, Delaware (Fig. 3.1-1). For a description of these locations see Volume 2 of the 1977 Annual Environmental Operating Report.

I 3.1.2 Materials and Methods I *The three sites were searched during daylight hours from June through November. Weekly searches for evidence of.

I nesting were initiated in early June. Once nesting activity was discovered, searches for nesting females, crawl tracks, and depredated nests were conducted three times per week through the end of nesting in late July. Weekly searches I for depredated nests and emerging hatchlings w.ere made in August and September, semi-monthly in October, and once in November. ~

I Effort was made to minimize disturbance of nesting terrapins during the course of the survey. Whenever possibl~, females were allowed to finish nesting before being examined, since I once disturbed they typically leave the area.

.. _ Nesting females were caught by hand, and the length and I width of the carapace and plastron were measured. Each turtle was marked with an individual binary code which

- consisted of holes *drilled inane or more* of the 10 post-I dorsal marginal laminae. These plates are so located to be easily drilled with little or no injury to the turtle. *A pre-numbered spaghetti tag (Floy Tag Co.) was also placed in one of the binary holes to enhance the reporting rate of I recaptured turtles. Tag information is used to record turtle movements and nesting beach fidelity. For further description of the study methods see Volume 2 of the 1977 I Annual Environmental Operating Report.

3.1.3 Data Reduction I The following formula was developed to provide a relative estimate of the number of nesting fe~ale~ (N) utilizing each I site:

(Ts+Tr-Ts)D I N 3V 2

M P81 125/l 2 42 I

I I **-----*--*--**----* -- ----

I where Ts is the number ot turtles slighted, Tr is the number I of tracks counted, D is the known number of days of nesting activity, 3 is the estimated mean number of nests laid per female during the nesting season, and V is the number of I times the study area was.visited over the study period.

I 3.1.4 Results and Discussion Nesting in 1980 was first observed on June 11 at Hope Creek and Liston Point beaches and on June 13 at Sunken Ship Cove I beach (Figures 3.1-2, 3.1-3 and 3.1-4). In previous years

nesting had typically begun on.or about June 10. Nesting was last observed on July 7, 14, and 22 at Sunken Ship Cove, I Hope Creek, and Liston Point beaches, respectively.

Nesting activity at each site appeared to have one primary peak (Figures 3.1-2 and 3.1-4). Liston Point and Sunken I Ship Cove were found to be most active at the time nesting began. The intensity of early nesting in 1980 suggests that a large portion of females were physiologically ready at the I onset of nesting, which.has been the case in only on~ (197~)

of the previous five years of study. At Hope Creek nesting activity was greatest later in the season in early July, I .which as the general pattern noted previously (Figure 3.1-3).

Daily and seasonal nesting activity varied greatly between sites but remained within the range recorded in previous I years (Tables 3.1-1, 3.1-2, and 3.1-3)..

The highest annual estimate of nesting terrapins was, again, I at Liston Point, with 215, followed by Hope Creek with 40, and Sunken Ship Cove with 10.

I The data collected on nesting activity at Sunken Ship Cove and Hope Creek are quite sparse. The beach at Sunken Ship Cove, locally a popular fishing spot, had fishermen present on over 40% (9 of 21 visits) of the survey dates in 1980.

I. This repeated disturbance probably deterred many turtles from nesting. Erosion and vegetative succession at the Hope Creek site in recent years has substantially reduced the amount of I open sand beach. The limited amount of open beach has made accurate counts of tracks and nests very difficult and has probably made the site less attr~ctive to nesting terrapins.

I A total of 4,339 eggs from 563 nests were recorded during 1980 (Tables 3.1-1, 3.1-2, and 3.1-3). Most were found at Liston Point; 3,527 eggs from 448 nests, while Hope Creek I accounted for 747 eggs fro~ 106 nests and Sunken~Ship Cove, 65 eggs from 9 nests.

I M PBl 125/l 3 43 I

I

I Of the total, depredated nests, which are much easier to de-I tect than viable nests, accounted for 95.8% at Liston Point, 91.5% at Hope Creek and 33.3% at Sunken Ship Cove.

I Track evidence in 1980 indicated the same predators as noted in previous years with the additions of red fox, Vulpes fulva; Raccoon, Procyon lotor; mink, Mustela vision; Norway rat, Rattus norvegicus, and red fox tracks were commonly I noted at Liston Point. Raccoon and Norway rat were common at Hope Creek and Norway rat was the primary nest predator at Sunken Ship Cove. The above predators also preyed on

I hatchlings, ad did gulls, Larus spp., crows, Corvus spp. and

.herons (Ardeidae).

I A total of 34 terrapins were tagged during 1980; 22 at Liston Point and 12 at Hope Creek. None were captured at Sunken Ship Cove *. Three females previously tagged were re-captured, one of which had lost its original tag. The first I .recapture was taken on June 4, before nesting began, in a cr~b pot near Liston Point, its original point of tagging in 1979. The second recapture was taken at the Hope Creek site I on June 27, its original location of capture four years pre-viously. Its carapace had increased by 5.8% in length (from 19.0 cm to 2-0.l cm) and 11.4% in width (from 14.0 cm to 15.6 I cm).

Mean size of females captured at Liston Point was slightly greater than at Hope Creek. Mean plastron length and width I was 18.8 cm and 14.8 cm, respectively; at Liston Point, and 17.8 cm and 14.3 cm, at Hope Creek. Mean carapace length and width was 16.6 cm and 9.5 cm, respectively, at Liston I Point, and 16.2 cm and 9.3 cm at Hope Creek.

The youngest female captured on a nesting beach was approxi-mately 9 years old; the oldest appeared well in excess of 22 I years. Age determination of older specimens is difficult since the ridged annuli on the carapace scutes becomes less distinct with age. Eventually the shell becomes completely I smooth which may indicate age to prehaps 40+ years (Hilde-brand , 19"3 2 )

I A total of 146 sets of hatchling tracks were noted from August 14 to October 30; 84 at Sunken Ship Cove, 13 at Hope Creek, and 49 at Liston Point. Incubation period for marked nests at Liston Point averaged 67 days.

I 3.2 OSPREY AND BALD EAGLE SURVEY I (ETS Section 3.1.2.1.2.2)

The study objectives are to record the occurrence of osprey and bald eagle and to monitor nesting of osprey in the vici-I nity of Artificial Island. The southern bald eagle, M P81 125/l 4 44 I

I

I I Haliaeetus 1. leucoce)halus, is federally classified as "en-dangered" (USDI, 1979 ; and the North American osprey, Pan-dion haliaetus carolinensis, was formerly classified as ___

"status undetermined" (USDI, 1973}. The osprey has since I been deleted from the federal list but is still considered endangered by the State of New Jersey (NJDEP, 1979}.

I Osprey were observed in the study area from March 27 through September 4. Eighteen osprey nests were located by heli-copter in 1980. Ten were probably active (i.e., eggs laid),

I 5 of whic.h fledged 7 young.

No bald eagle was observed in the study area during 1980.

I 3.2.l Study Area I The study area extends 16.1 km north, 12.9 km south, and 8.0 km east and west from Salem. The northern boundary is near Finns Point, New Jersey and the sourthern boundary is just north of Woodland Beach, Delaware (Fig. 3.1-1) *.

I The area features bay, riverine, marsh, upland field, and wooded habitats. Pilings, range towers, and power1ine I towers are common.

I 3.2.2 Materials and Methods Known osprey nests were surveyed by helicopter monthly from March through August. During flights the area was surveyed I for any new osprey neting sites and bald eagle sightings.*

The number of adults and young in each nest were recorded.

To avoid undue stress on the birds, the helicopter remained I at a discrete distance (> so yds) from the nest and paused only momentarily to allow the nest to be viewed with bino-culars.

I Sightings of osprey (and, if ever seen, bald eagle) were also recorded in the course of other field work and are in-

1 cluded here.

OSPREY SURVEY - 1980 I Results and Discussion I Osprey were sighted in the area from March 27 through September 4, typically on *ar near nesting strucures. Most sightings (21} were in April; they decreased gradually I through August (13).

M P81 125/1 5 45 I

I

I Eighteen nests were located~ 10 were active, while the I remainder may have been constructed as housekeeping nests by sexually immature birds, or as secondary nests by adjacent breeding adults.

I Of the ten active nests,.it is conservatively estimated that 5 were auccessful and produced 7 young. An accurate count I of eggs and young in each nest was very difficult since the females remained on the nest to defend it while the helicopter was near. The same number of nests were active

-1 this year as in 1979 but produced less than half as many young. This can be partially attributed to the destruction

. of two of the active nests by high winds in June and July.

Overall, mQre nests were located this year than last, an I indication that tne Salem, N.J. area continues to be an important nesting location for osprey**

I I

I **--**,;-?-

I I

I M P81 125/l 6 46 I

I I --* __ ._ *-----*

I I 3.4 LITERATURE CITED Burger, J., and w. A. Monteveechi. 1975. Nest site selection in the terrapin Malaclemys terrapin. Copeia I 1975(1):113-119.

Carr, A. 1952. Handbook of turtles. Comstock Publishing I Assoc., Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca. 542 pp.

Hildebrand, s. F. 1932. Growth of diamondback terrapins, I size attained, sex ratios, and longevity. Zoologica 9(15) :551-563. .

Lawler, A. R., and J. A. Musick. 1972. Sand beach I hibernation by a northern diamondback terrapin, Malaclemys terrapin terrapin (Schoepff). Co.peia 1972 (3-):389-390.

I ~

NJDEP (New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection).

1979. Endangered, threatened, peripheral, and I undetermined wildlife species in New.Jersey.

Endangered and Nongame Species Project. 6pp.

USDI (United States Department of Interior). 1971.

I Threatened wildlife of the United States. Bur. Sport Fish. Wild. Resource Pub. 114. 289 pp.

1979. List of end~ngered and threatened wild- I

! I life and plants. Federal Register 44 (12).

I 3.5 TABLES AND FIGURES Table 3.1-1 Summary of nesting, depredation, and hatching I data for diamondback terrapin on Sunken Ship Cove Beach, New Jersey in 1980 *******************

Table 3.1-2 Summary of nesting, depredation, and hatching I data for diamondback terrapin on a beach near the mouth of Hope Creek, New Jersey in 1980~

I Table 3.1-3 Summary of nesting, depredation, and hatching data for diamondback terrapin on a beach north of Listori Point, Delaware in 1980 ********** ~

I Figure 3.1-1 Diamondback terrapin study sites, and osprey nests - 1980 *********************

I Figure 3.1-2 Nesting activity of diamondback._terrapin at Sunken Ship Cove - 1980 ***.********

I Figure 3.1-3 Nesting activity of diamondback terrapin at Hope Creek - 1980~ ***********

I Figure 3.1-4 Nesting activity of diamondback terrapin at Liston Point - 1980 ************

M P81 125/l 7 47 I

TABLE 3.1-1 Summary of nesting, depredation, and hatching data for dianondback terrapin on Sunken Ship Cove Beach, New Jersey in 1980.

No. No. of Non- No. of No. of Non- No. of No. of No. of of depredated depredated depredated depredated '!Urtles Tracks Activity Date Visits Nests Nests Fggs Fggs. In area OJ served Nesting Period June:

11-15 2 1 0 ;L2 0 1 17 16-30 6 1 1 9 6 1 26 July:

1-15 7 3 1 22 2 0 2 16-31 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 21 5 2 43 8 2 45 Hatching Period August:

1-15 3 0 1 0 5 l 26 16-31 2 1 0 9 Q 0 19 Septernbe r:.

1-15 2 0 0 'O 0 0 33 16-30 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 October: 2 0 0 0 0 0 Q Subtotal 11 1 1 9 5 1 84

'lbtal 3'2 6 3 52 13 3 129 M PB! 125/l 8.* 48

TABLE 3.1-2 Sununary of nesting, depredation, and hatching data for diarrondback terrapin on a beach near the nouth of Hq:>e Creek, New Jersey in 1980.

No. No. of Non- No. of No. of Non- No. of No. of No. of of depredated depredated depredated depredated 'Turtles Tracks Activity Date Visits Nests Nests Eggs f9gs. In area Cbserved Nesting Period June:

11-15 2 1 1 7 3 3 20 16-30 4 3 17 20 106 8 39 July:

1-15 6 3 45 11 336 6 45 16-31 5 0 25 0 187 0 0 Subtotal 17 7 88 38 632 17 104 Hatching Period August:

1-15 3 2 6 10 47 0 0 16-31 2 0 2 0 12 0 9 September:

i-15 2 0 l 0 8 0 4 16-30 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 October: 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 9 2 9 10 67 0 13

'lbtal 26 9 97 48 699 17 117 M P81 125/1 9 49

- ----------------- TABLE 3.1-3 Sumnary of nesting, depredation, and hatching data for dianondback terr~pin on a beach north of Liston Point, Delaware in 1980.

No. No. of Non- No. of No. of Non- No. of No. of No. of of depredated depredated depredated depredated 'nirtles Tracks Activity Date Visits Nests Nests fl)gs &;:!gs. In area Ch served Nesting Period June:

11-15 3 3 0 28 0 15 233 16-30 6 5 73 33 553 10 245 July:

1-15 7 8 299 *41 2397 13 164 16-31 6 2 34 17 294 0 21 Subtotal 22 18 406 119 3244 38 663 Hatching Pericrl August:

1-15 3 0 18 0 124 7 6 16-31 2 1 5 3 37 1 11 September:

1-15 2 0 0 0 0 0 16

!'6-30 l 0 0 0 0 0 11 October: 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 November: l 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 11 l 23 3 161 8 49

'lbtal 33 19 429 122 3405 46 712 M PB! 125/l 10 50

.. ~

. -~

1.*

I I

I I!

I I

I I*

I I

~ ~

ML18086B023: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:01, 23 February 2020

Contents

Text

SUMMARY

1.1 INTRODUCTION

SUMMARY

1.3 CONCLUSION

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

ML18086B023: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:01, 23 February 2020

Text

SUMMARY

1.1 INTRODUCTION

SUMMARY

1.3 CONCLUSION

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search