|
|
| Line 18: |
Line 18: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:JAFP-06-0167 Docket No. 50-333 Attachment 1 James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal Application | | {{#Wiki_filter:}} |
| -Amendment 1 License Renewal Commitment List -Revision 0 JAF List of Regulatory Commitments The following table identifies those actions committed to by Entergy in this document.
| |
| Any other statements in this submittal are provided for information purposes and are not considered to be regulatory commitments.
| |
| This list will be revised as necessary in subsequent amendments to reflect changes resulting from audit questions and RAI responses.
| |
| # COMMITMENT IMPLEMENTATION SOURCE Related SCHEDULE LRA Section No./Comments Implement the Buried Piping and Tanks Inspection October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.1 Program as described in LRA Section B.1.1. 0109 I B.1.1 2 Enhance the BWR CRD Return Line Nozzle Program to October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.2 examine the CRDRL nozzle-to-vessel weld and the 0109 CRDRL nozzle inside radius section per Section Xl Table IWB-2500-1 Category B-D Items B3.10 and B3.20.3 Enhance the Diesel Fuel Monitoring Program to include October 17, 2014 JAFP A. 2.1.9 periodic draining, cleaning, visual inspections, and 0109 ultrasonic measurement of the bottom surfaces of the B.1.9 fire pump diesel fuel oil tanks, EDG day tanks, and EDG fuel oil storage tanks to ensure that significant degradation is not occurring.
| |
| Enhance the Diesel Fuel Monitoring Program to specify acceptance criteria for UT measurements of diesel generator fuel storage tanks within the scope of this I program.4 Enhance the External Surfaces Monitoring Program to October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.11 include periodic inspections of systems in scope and 0109 subject to aging management review for license B.1.11 renewal in accordance with 10 CFR 54.4(a)(1) and (a)(3). Inspections shall include areas surrounding the subject systems to identify hazards to those systems.Inspections of nearby systems that could impact the subject systems will include SSCs that are in scope and subject to aging management review for license renewal in accordance with 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2).
| |
| 5 Enhance the Fire Protection Program to inspect October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.13 accessible fire barrier walls, ceilings, and floors at least 0109 B.1.13.1 once every refueling outage. Inspection results will be acceptable if there are no visual indications of degradation such as cracks, holes, spalling, or gouges.Enhance the Fire Protection Program to inspect at least one seal of each type every 24 months. I I I Attachment 1 Page 1 of 5 JAFP-06-0167 COMMITMENT IMPLEMENTATION SOURCE Related SCHEDULE LRA Section No./Comments 6 Enhance the Fire Water System Program to include October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.14 inspection of hose reels for corrosion.
| |
| Acceptance 0109 B.1.13.2 criteria will be enhanced to verify no significant corrosion.
| |
| Enhance Fire Water System Program to include visual inspection of spray and sprinkler system internals for evidence of corrosion.
| |
| Acceptance criteria will be enhanced to verify no significant corrosion.
| |
| Enhance Fire Water System Program to include that a sample of sprinkler heads will be inspected using guidance of NFPA 25 (2002 Edition) Section 5.3.1.1.1.
| |
| NFPA 25 also contains guidance to repeat sampling every 10 years after initial field service testing.Enhance Fire Water System Program to include that wall thickness evaluations of fire water piping will be performed on system components using non-intrusive techniques to identify evidence of loss of material due to corrosion.
| |
| These inspections will be performed before the end of the current operating term and at intervals thereafter during the period of extended operation.
| |
| Results of the initial evaluations will be used to determine the appropriate inspection interval to ensure aging effects are identified prior to loss of intended function.7 Implement the Heat Exchanger Monitoring Program as October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.16 described in LRA Section B.1.15. 0109________________________________________
| |
| B.1.15 8 Implement the Metal-Enclosed Bus Inspection Program October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.19 as described in LRA Section B.1.17. B.1.17 9 Implement the Non-EQ Instrumentation Circuits Test October 17, 2 0 1 4 JAFP A.2.1.20 Review Program as described in LRA Section B.1.18. 0109 B.1.18 10 Implement the Non-EQ Insulated Cables and October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.21 Connections Program as described in LRA Section 0109 B.1.19. B.1.19 Attachment 1 Page 2 of 5 JAFP-06-0167
| |
| # COMMITMENT IMPLEMENTATION SOURCE Related SCHEDULE LRA Section No./Comments 11 Enhance the Oil Analysis Program to periodically October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.22 sample the oil in the underground oil-filled cable, the 0109 security generator, and the fire pump diesel.Enhance the Oil Analysis Program to include viscosity and neutralization number determination of oil samples from components that do not have regular oil changes.Enhance the Oil Analysis Program to include particulate and water content for oil replaced periodically.
| |
| 12 Implement the One-Time Inspection Program as Will be JAFP A.2.1.23 described in LRA Section B.1.21. implemented B.1.21 within the 10 years prior to October 17, 2014 13 Enhance the Periodic Surveillance and Preventive October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.24 Maintenance Program as necessary to assure that the 0109 effects of aging will be managed as described in LRA Section B.1.22.14 Enhance the Reactor Vessel Surveillance Program to October 17, 2014 JAFP A. 2.1.26 include the data analysis, acceptance criteria, and 0109 corrective actions described in LRA Section B.1.24. B.1.24 15 Implement the Selective Leaching Program as October 17, 2 0 1 4 AFP A.2.1.27 described in LRA Section B.1.25. 0109__________________________________________________
| |
| B.1.25 Attachment 1 Page 3 of 5 JAFP-06-0167
| |
| # COMMITMENT IMPLEMENTATION SOURCE Related SCHEDULE LRA Section No./Comments 16 Enhance the Structures Monitoring Program procedure to specify that manholes, duct banks, underground fuel oil tank foundations, manway seals and gaskets, hatch seals and gaskets, underwater concrete in the intake structure, and crane rails and girders are included in the program.Enhance the Structures Monitoring Program procedure to include guidance for performing structural examinations of elastomers and rubber components to identify cracking and change in material properties.
| |
| Enhance the Structures Monitoring Program procedure to include guidance for performing periodic inspections to confirm the absence of aging effects for lubrite surfaces in the torus radial beam seats and for lubrite surfaces in the torus support saddles.(Note: This is a change to the LRA Appendix B enhancement that states the Containment ISI Program will include inspection of the lubrite surfaces of the torus support saddles. The corresponding change to LRA Appendix B will be provided in a later amendment.)
| |
| Enhance the Structures Monitoring Program to perform an engineering evaluation on a periodic basis (at least once every five years) of groundwater samples to assess aggressiveness (pH < 5.5, chloride > 500 ppm and Sulfate > 1500) of groundwater to concrete.Enhance the Structures Monitoring Program to inspect any inaccessible concrete areas that may be exposed by excavation for any reason, or any inaccessible area where observed conditions in accessible areas, which are exposed to the same environment, show that siqnificant concrete degradation is occurrinq.
| |
| October 17, 2014 JAFP-06-0109 A.2.1.30 B.1.27.2 Audit Item 201 Audit Item 207 17 Implement the Thermal Aging and Neutron Irradiation October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.31 Embrittlement of Cast Austenitic Stainless Steel (CASS) 0109 B.1.28 Program as described in LRA Section B.1.28.18 Enhance the Water Chemistry Control -Auxiliary October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.32 Systems Program to include guidance for sampling the 0109 B.1.29.1 control room and relay room chilled water, decay heat removal cooling water, and the security generator jacket cooling water.Attachment 1 Page 4 of 5 JAFP-06-0167
| |
| # COMMITMENT IMPLEMENTATION SOURCE Related SCHEDULE LRA Section No./Comments 19 Enhance the Bolting Integrity Program to include October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.35 guidance from EPRI NP-5769 and EPRI TR-104213.
| |
| 0109 B.1.30 Enhance the Bolting Integrity Program to clarify that actual yield strength is used in selecting materials for low susceptibility to SCC and to clarify the prohibition on use of lubricants containing MoS 2 for bolting.20 Prior to entering the period of extended operation, for October 17, 2014 JAFP 4.3.3/audit each location that may exceed a CUF of 1.0 when 0167 item 317 considering environmental effects, JAFNPP will implement one or more of the following:
| |
| (1) further refinement of the fatigue analyses to lower the predicted CUFs to less than 1.0 using an NRC-approved method;(2) management of fatigue at the affected locations by an inspection program that has been reviewed and approved by the NRC (e.g., periodic non-destructive examination of the affected locations at inspection intervals to be determined by a method acceptable to the NRC);(3) repair or replacement of the affected locations.
| |
| Should JAFNPP select the option to manage October 17, 2012 environmentally assisted fatigue during the period of extended operation, details of the aging management program such as scope, qualification, method, and frequency will be submitted to the NRC prior to the period of extended operation.
| |
| 21 Enhance the BWR Vessel Internals Program to perform October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.7 and inspections of the core plate rim hold down bolts in 0167 B.1.7/audit accordance with ASME Section XI Table IWB-2500-1, item 252 Examination Category B-N-2 or in accordance with a future NRC-approved revision of BWRVIP-25 that provides a feasible method of inspection.
| |
| _22 Enhance the BWR Vessel Internals Program to ensure October 17, 2014 JAFP A.2.1.7 and the effects of aging on the steam dryer are managed in 0167 B.1.7/audit accordance with the guidelines of BWRVIP-139 as item 245 approved by the NRC and accepted by the BWRVIP Executive Committee.
| |
| Attachment 1 Page 5 of 5 JAFP-06-0167 JAFP-06-0167 Docket No. 50-333 Attachment 2 James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal Application
| |
| -Amendment 1 Response to Requests for Additional Information James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP)Response to Requests for Additional Information Part I Questions RAI E-1-a Aquatic Ecology Additional information required pursuant to 51.41, 51.45(c), 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(B), 51.53(c)(3)(iii), 51.70(b).
| |
| Provide drawings and a detailed description of the circulating water intake structure (both the offshore and onshore structures) showing a plan view and an elevation view of the front of the structure with the intake bars and their spacing, a cross-section of the intake structure and the location of the fish deterrent system transducers.
| |
| RAI E-l-a Response: Section 3.2.2.3 of the JAFNPP LRA Environmental Report provides the circulating water intake structure information required pursuant to 51.41, 51.45(c), 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(B), 51.53(c)(3)(iii), 51.70(b).
| |
| See ER Section 3.2.2.3 for a detailed description of the intake structure.
| |
| See attached Figure E-1-a-1 for reference (see Attachment 4).RAI E-1-b Aquatic Ecology, Provide drawings and a detailed description of the circulating water intake tunnel providing distances and direction from the plant.RAI E-l-b Response: ER Section 3.2.2.4 provides a detailed description of the circulating water intake tunnel.See attached Figure E-1-b-1 for reference (see Attachment 4).RAI E-1 -c Aquatic Ecology, Provide drawings and a detailed description of the circulating water intake traveling screens and collection buckets' and their spacing.RAI E-l-c Response: The traveling water screens are furnished by Jeffrey Manufacturing Company of Columbus, Ohio. Three 12 foot wide traveling screens, fabricated from No. 10 gauge 304 stainless steel wire with 3/8 inch clear openings, are situated between the trash racks and the pump intake sluice gates. See attached Figure E-1-c-1 in Attachment 4 for reference.
| |
| Each screen has a design capacity of 125,000 gpm, is 12'-0" wide and 43'-4" high, and has a design approach velocity of 1.2 fps. Screen rotation speed ranges from 10 fpm to 20 fpm. The traveling screens retain debris -3/8 inches and dump it into a collection trough. The steel trash trough has flanged ends for each screen section designed so that the ends will mate for bolting when the screens are installed in place to form one continuous pitched trash trough mated to a trough extension.
| |
| The bottom flange of each panel forms a trash shelf extending the entire width of the panel. The shelf design includes a substantial dredging leaf rake extending the width of each panel at the panel midpoint for refuse removal and is designed for minimum reduction of free area. This rake has tines to engage and raise moss and other lake vegetation.
| |
| The carrying ledge portion of the lip is able to retain fish and is perforated to drain water. The panels are constructed and attached to the chain so that there is no opening larger than Attachment 2 Page 1 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 the screen cloth opening for debris to get through at the line of articulation along the sides or bottom when they are stationary or moving.Two 100% capacity (1 running, 1 standby) screen wash pumps take suction from the SW discharge header to provide backwash spray water for the traveling screens. The spray system utilizes non-clogging, wear resistant deflector type nozzles, designed to project overlapping fan shaped jets of spray water across the width of the screen so that all material picked up on the screen, trash shelf, and the special dredging leaf rake will be jetted off when the panels are ascending.
| |
| Debris is jetted in a direction opposite the direction of flow of water in the intake channel. The design screen wash pumps spray flow rate is 720 gpm/screen at a minimum of 80 psi gauge pressure.
| |
| Water is sprayed on all screens simultaneously from two screen wash headers whenever the traveling screens are rotating.The traveling screens and screen wash pumps are equipped with an automatic differential level control to limit debris loading and can be operated manually or in automatic mode. When in the automatic mode, the pumps will start when either of two conditions occur: 1. High screen differential level, 4 inches W.C., as sensed by level detectors across the screens, or 2. 10-minute exercise timer is initiated.
| |
| The traveling screens start when pump discharge pressure is > 100 psig.Design debris loading conditions for the traveling screens correspond to 1.6 inches differential W.C. clean, up to 6 inches differential W.C. fully loaded. The traveling screens will automatically stop if the screen differential level is <2 inches W.C, for 10 minutes. An adjustable timer is included to ensure that the screen will run for at least 1-1/3 revolutions after minimum level differential is attained to assure that debris is completely removed and not just lifted out of the water and allowed to dry on the panels.If any of the screens runs continuously for 30 minutes or if the differential level across the screens reaches 6 inches W.C., an alarm is sounded in the main control room. The traveling screens are operated at least once per shift, either in "automatic" mode, or manually in "continuous" mode.RAI E-1 -d Aquatic Ecology, Provide drawings and a detailed description of the circulating water discharge structure showing a plan view as well as an elevation view of the front of the structure.
| |
| RAI E-1-d Response: ER Section 3.2.2.5 provides a detailed description of the discharge structure.
| |
| See attached figures, Figure E-1-b-1 and Figures E-1-d-1, for reference (see Attachment 4).Attachment 2 Page 2 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 RAI E-1-e Aquatic Ecology, Provide drawings and a detailed description of the circulating water discharge tunnel distances and relative direction from the plant.RAI E-1-e Response: ER Section 3.2.2.5 provides a detailed description of the circulating water discharge tunnel distances.
| |
| See attached figure E-1-b-1 for reference (see Attachment 4).RAI E-1 -f Aquatic Ecology, Provide a detailed description of the characteristics and operation of the Fish Deterrent System.RAI E-1-f Response: The fish deterrent system (FDS) was specifically designed to repel alewives (Alosa pseudoharengus) from the vicinity of the intake structure using high frequency sound (122-128 kHz) at a source level (in decibels [dB] in reference to 1pPa) of 190 dB. The system, installed in the mid-1 990's, consists of nine integrated projector assemblies (IPAs) located around the perimeter of the intake structure.
| |
| The IPAs are configured such that their sonified zones overlap, thereby completely enveloping the intake structure.
| |
| The FDS computer is located in the screenwell at the 255' elevation.
| |
| The computer communicates with each IPA independently and allows users to start and stop the system and to test IPAs individually or the system as a whole.Per the site SPDES permit, the system is installed (dewinterized) by the first week of April each year and is removed from service (winterized) each October, except for years with an October refueling outage when the system can be removed from service in September.
| |
| Upon installation each April, all nine IPAs must be fully operational (communicating with the FDS computer and producing at least 190 dB/pPa at 1 meter from the source). Because computer modeling showed sufficient sonified zone overlap, the SPDES permit mid-cycle operational criteria are that at least five of the nine IPAs must be operational, with no two adjacent IPAs out of service.The current SPDES permit fact sheet states that "... a reduction in impingement of onshore-migrant alewives of between 80 and 87% can be achieved.
| |
| Based in part on the demonstrated performance of the fish deterrent system with alewives, and the fact that such a large percentage of the fish impinged here are alewives, the fish deterrent system was determined to be the Best Technology Available to mitigate fish impacts at this intake." Since the FDS was installed there have been no significant alewife impingement events at JAFNPP.Attachment 2 Page 3 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 RAI E-1-g Aquatic Ecology, Provide a description of when intake flow reduction occurs and explain its impact on entrainment.
| |
| The application states that in a-ddition to acoustic FDS, JAFNPP "also utilizes additional operational measures and technological design features to further minimize already small entrainment impacts".
| |
| Measures include: intake flow reductions resulting from pump differentials, maintenance outages, and recirculation of heated condenser flow to temper incoming winter water; and the design of the intake structure.
| |
| RAI E-1-g Response: JAFNPP has a maximum total raw water withdrawal flow rate from Lake Ontario of 596.16 million gallons per day ("mgd") through the cooling water intake structure, representing the combined 518.4 mgd of cooling water flow (three circulating water pumps each operating at a design capacity of 120,000 gallons per minute, "gpm") and 77.76 mgd of service water flow (three service water pumps each operating at a design capacity of 18,000 gpm). The actual JAFNPP raw water intake flow rates in each month throughout the year based on 2001 through 2005 historical data, range from an average of 4.4% below the maximum withdrawal rate in November to 35.1% below the maximum withdrawal rate in October (Figures E-1-g-1 and E-1-g-2 in Reference for RAI E-1-g-1).JAFNPP schedules refueling outages during October once every 24 months and these outages typically last for most of the month. Scheduling outages in October reduces the actual average total intake flow by an average of 35.1% for October over the 2001 through 2005 period of available historical data (Figures E-1-g-1 and E-1-g-2 in Attachment E-1-g-1).
| |
| During the January through March period of cold weather in each year, when inlet water temperature is below approximately 45 0 F, warm discharge water is recirculated via a tempering gate to obtain proper temperature of the circulating and service inlet water. This flow path delivers some of the water in the discharge tunnel to the intake bay, upstream of the traveling screens. The tempering gate can be controlled from 0%-100% open from the main control room. The JAFNPP raw water intake from Lake Ontario has been effectively reduced by 16% to 18% from the maximum intake flow during the months of January through March when the plant is using this tempering mode of operation, based on 2001 through 2005 historical data (Figures E-1-g-1 and E-1-g-2 in Attachment E-1-g-1).
| |
| Flow reductions in the remaining months typically occur by running one or two instead of three service water pumps.Total entrainment abundance is directly proportional to both the density of ichthyoplankton eggs and larvae in the nearfield source water and to the raw water intake flow during the period of consideration.
| |
| Therefore, the monthly flow reductions described in the previous paragraph will reduce total entrainment in each month because total entrainment is the product of nearfield density (numbers of eggs or larvae per unit volume) and the volume of water withdrawn.
| |
| Historical data suggests that the temporal distribution of eggs and larvae in the Nine Mile Point nearfield area is characterized by two basic spawning groups: species typically spawning in the winter and early spring (e.g. burbot, Coregonus spp., rainbow smelt, yellow perch), and late spring and summer spawning species (e.g. alewife, white perch, carp; TI 1979). Eggs Attachment 2 Page 4 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 and larvae of the first group are most abundant during April through early June and larvae of the second group are most abundant in July and August.To demonstrate compliance with federal 316(b) regulations, JAFNPP is presently conducting a year-long entrainment sampling program to determine the abundance of entrained fish eggs and larvae by sampling the intake flow in the JAFNPP cooling water intake structure.
| |
| Sampling began in April 2006 and continued weekly through October 2006 for a total of 30 sampling weeks. Sampling will then continue twice per month during November 2006 through March 2007 for an additional 10 sampling weeks. Once completed, this data along with additional lake impingement and entrainment data will be submitted to NYSDEC in the form of a Comprehensive Demonstration Study (CDS).The CDS must be submitted by January 7, 2008.
| |
| | |
| ==Reference:==
| |
| | |
| Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI). 1979. 1978 Nine Mile Point Aquatic Ecology Studies. Report provided for Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Syracuse, NY and the Power Authority of the State of New York. (see attached Reference for RAI E-1-g-2)RAI E-1-h Aquatic Ecology, Provide drawings and a description of seasonal lake currents in the vicinity of the station and how these currents affect the cumulative impingement and thermal impacts of JAFNPP and Nine Mile Point.RAI E-1-h Response: There are two sources of information that can be used to address this request for additional information; first, literature describing the Lake Ontario water circulation patterns at a gross (whole-lake) scale, and second the results of a site-specific three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model of the JAFNPP intake structure operating in these Lake Ontario water circulation currents which defined the hydraulic zone of influence (HZOI) of the intake structure.
| |
| These independent sources reveal no cumulative impingement or cumulative thermal impacts of JAFNPP and Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station (NMPNS).Entergy considers "cumulative impacts" to occur when there is evidence that the impact of two facilities is more than the sum of the individual impacts, more than additive.
| |
| If the impingement losses from JAFNPP and NMPNS are represented by the sum of the impingement losses at each plant, there is no cumulative impact. Otherwise, the sum of impingement losses of any two power plants on the same body of water (even one as large as Lake Ontario where the plants may be separated by more than one hundred miles) could be considered to be a cumulative impact. For example, if JAFNPP impinges 100 fish per year and NMPNS impinges 100 fish per year, then the combined impingement losses for the two stations is 200 fish per year, representing an additive effect. A cumulative impact would occur if there is an interaction between the stations due to their close proximity, such that NMPNS's operation increased the likelihood of Attachment 2 Page 5 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 impingement at the JAFNPP intake. For example, if JAFNPP impinges 200 fish per year and NMPNS impinges 100 fish per year, when both are expected to impinge 100 fish per year based on the density of fish exposed to impingement in HZOI, then the combined impingement losses for the two stations is 300 fish per year and the cumulative impact is 100 fish impinged above the expected number. The cumulative impingement impact in this example could occur if free swimming fish become stunned after encountering the thermal plume of NMPNS and are carried in this stunned condition by lake currents into the HZOI of JAFNPP where they are more likely to be impinged then if swimming freely without the influence of NMPNS's thermal plume.Lake Ontario currents are likely to have little effect on impingement because the juvenile and adult fish of the size subjected to impingement are capable of freely swimming independently of the relatively weak lake currents.
| |
| However, fish eggs and larvae have no (eggs) or weak (larvae) swimming ability and are likely to be directionally dispersed by lake currents from the spawning habitat. Therefore, this response explores the relationship between seasonal lake currents and both entrainment and impingement.
| |
| The interaction of seasonal lake currents with the cooling water withdrawal and discharge at JAFNPP is dependent on the intake and discharge locations for both JAFNPP and NMPNS. JAFNPP and NMPNS are located on adjacent properties on a small promontory of land projection out into Lake Ontario along its southeastern shore called Nine Mile Point (see attached Reference for RAI E-1-h-1).
| |
| Proceeding from west to east along the Nine Mile Point shoreline you first encounter the offshore, mid-water discharge and intake structures for NMPNS Unit 1, then the discharge and intake structures for NMPNS Unit 2, then the offshore mid-water intake structure for JAFNPP, followed by the diffuser discharge pipe for JAFNPP. The thermal discharges are located to minimize recirculation of heated effluent back into the intakes, and they discharge below the surface in the middle of the water column. The JAFNPP intake is located about 3000 feet to the east of the nearest NMPNS discharge (see attached Reference for RAI E-1-h-1).Lake Ontario Water Circulation Patterns Water currents typically move in an eastward direction along the south shore of Lake Ontario in a relatively narrow band. Inflow from the Niagara River causes the water level at the western end of Lake Ontario to be higher than the eastern. The resulting flow down gradient is held against the lake's south shore by the Coriolis Effect. Wind stress averaged over the year tends to further accelerate the flow to the east due to the prevailing west-northwest winds.Long-term circulation in the Great Lakes is driven primarily by wind stress and surface heat flux which causes density-driven currents.
| |
| Winter circulation patterns are simpler than summer due to the absence of temperature stratification (generally from November to April). Therefore winter currents are almost entirely wind driven. Winter circulation is stronger than summer because of the stronger winds in winter. Southeastern Lake Ontario has some of the strongest mean winter currents (up to 9.5 cm/sec) observed in the Great Lakes, Mean circulation in winter consists of a two-gyre pattern, with counter-Attachment 2 Page 6 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 clockwise flow in the south-eastern part of the Lake and net surface flow is eastward. (TI 1979)Lake Ontario circulation patterns in the summer are more complex, due to variations in depth caused by stratification (generally from May-October).
| |
| The mean summer circulation consists of a combination of a large cyclonic gyre where current speed reaches a maximum of 2.5 cm/sec. and a smaller anti-cyclonic gyre in the western part of the Lake (Figure E-1-h-2 in Reference for RAI E-1-h-2).Patterns described above are long term, lake-wide patterns.
| |
| Local currents at any given time are more complex and strongly influenced by transient wind. Sometimes a major wind shift can alter the currents in a matter of hours. Preoperational studies at JAFNPP measured currents off Nine Mile Point from May to October 1969 and from July to October 1970 (TI 1979). This data clearly illustrated a correlation between summer currents and wind speed (TI 1979). The predominant direction of currents was alongshore, on those occasions when onshore or offshore currents were observed, their magnitudes were substantially less than alongshore currents.
| |
| During the summer, alongshore currents from either the west or east were equally frequent about 33% of the time. Onshore and offshore currents each accounted for nearly 5 % of the observations; the remaining 30% of the observations were below the flowmeter threshold of 2.5 cm/sec. Mid-water current measurements at the 46 foot depth contour had a mean onshore current speed of 3.0 cm/sec, mean offshore current speed was 6.0 cm/sec, and alongshore currents from the west and east averaged 9.0 cm/sec. Lake currents measured in the vicinity of the Oswego Steam Station (about 6 miles west of Nine Mile Point) for 5 days between 12 October and 19 November 1970 also found.surface currents to be primarily alongshore, with speeds ranging from < 2.5 cm/sec to 15.0 cm/sec (TI 1979).Impingement and Entrainment With respect to entrainment and impingement exposure, the prevailing west to east currents along the Lake Ontario shore in the vicinity of JAFNPP suggest that the source of fish exposed to entrainment and impingement is more likely to be from the west of the intake, particularly for passively transported eggs and larvae subjected to entrainment.
| |
| Organisms carried in these west to east Lake Ontario currents may originate from the lake itself or from the Oswego River which discharges into Lake Ontario about six miles to the west of Nine Mile Point. Since most of the fish taxa found in Lake Ontario in the nearshore habitat in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point have demersal, adhesive eggs, larvae represents the pelagic dispersal stage that is most subjected to entrainment.
| |
| Historical sampling for entrainment at JAFNPP from 1973-1979 (TI 1979) revealed that eggs from two nearshore spawning fishes (alewife and rainbow smelt) consistently dominated the collections.
| |
| Larvae of these two species were also most abundant in the entrainment samples, however larvae of Morone spp. (white perch and white bass), yellow perch, Cottus spp. (mottled and slimy sculpins) and carp and tessellated darter were also abundant among the 22 taxa of fish larvae found in the entrainment samples (TI 1979).Enrichment of the larval fauna diversity exposed to entrainment may result from the transport of pelagic larvae from fish species spawning offshore in deeper water which Attachment 2 Page 7 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 may be transported to the near-shore intakes at JAFNPP and at NMPNS by local wind driven currents.
| |
| Fish species that utilize deepwater as well as nearshore spawning habitat like burbot (Lota Iota), slimy and mottled sculpins and lake herring (Coregonus artedii) may be more exposed to entrainment at the JAFNPP intake than would be assumed when you consider the near-shore location of the intake.Since the NMPNS offshore intake is nearby but west of the JAFNPP offshore intake by about 3000 feet (Figure E-1-h-1), organisms carried in the predominantly west to east currents along the Lake Ontario shoreline would potentially be exposed to entrainment first at NMPNS and subsequently at JAFNPP. However, the percentage of water withdrawal is diminishingly small relative to the volume carried in these currents such that no difference in density of exposure was observed in the waters sampled by towed ichthyoplankton nets in the vicinity of either intake. Analyses of fish egg and larval catches in the thermally influenced and control areas along the 20 ft and 40 foot depth contours along four transects arranged east to west of the NMPNS and JAFNPP intake structures did not reveal any consistent temporal or spatial density patterns during the 1973-1979 period (TI 1979). Similar results were observed sampling juvenile and adult fish with gill nets and trawls representing the source population of impingement.
| |
| No consistent trend in catch per unit effort, length-frequency, age and growth, fecundity, or diet analysis with respect to experimental and control areas along the east-west gradient in the Nine Mile Point vicinity from 1969-1979 was observed (TI 1979). Therefore, based on the sampling results from the 1970's, there is unlikely to be a measurable cumulative effect of entrainment or impingement on the fish community in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point.The prevailing west to east currents along the Nine Mile Point shoreline suggest that the thermal discharge from both the NMPNS and JAFNPP offshore diffusers will be distributed from the diffuser ports in a predominantly easterly direction.
| |
| The theoretical possibility exists of an interaction between the NMPNS thermal discharges from Unit 2, which is west of the JAFNPP intake by about 3000 feet (Figure E-1-h-1), and the JAFNPP thermal discharge such that the two plumes may converge to make one large surface plume. However, the closest NMPNS Unit 2 discharge is from a unit that relies on a cooling tower for primary condenser cooling and therefore contributes only a small thermal discharge.
| |
| The once-through NMPNS Unit 1 thermal discharge is located about 400 feet offshore and more than 4000 feet west of the JAFNPP intake, which is 900 feet offshore (Figure E-1-h-1), making it unlikely that the two thermal plumes converge by the west to east currents before the thermal effluent is cooled by dilution to ambient conditions.
| |
| Therefore, there is no evidence of cumulative thermal impacts due to interaction of the non-contact cooling water discharged from these two adjacent generating stations.Hydraulic Zone Of Influence (HZOI)A comprehensive Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis was performed to estimate the HZOI for the JAFNPP with its CWIS (cooling water intake structure) located 900 feet offshore along the 25 foot depth contour in Lake Ontario (Entergy 2006). The objective was to delimit the HZOI so that ichthyoplankton and juvenile fish sampling Attachment 2 Page 8 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 efforts near the offshore intake structure would sample the water mass subjected to the direct influence of flow vectors established near the intake due to the cooling water withdrawal.
| |
| Sampling in the HZOI compared to nearshore (10 foot contour) will be used to evaluate the difference in fish abundance between a calculation baseline established for a hypothetical shoreline bulkhead intake compared to the existing offshore, mid-water, remote intake location as part of the plant's efforts to comply with the U.S. EPA's Clean Water Act, Section 316b Phase II Regulations.
| |
| In general, the HZOI is affected by overall flow patterns in the source water body, lake bottom topography, CWlS geometry, and CWlS intake flow rates. In the context of the 316(b) regulations, the primary reason for determining an intake's HZOI is to establish where water entering the intake comes from and to use this information to improve the design of biological sampling procedures meant to assess the impact of the intake's operation on organisms found in the surrounding areas. For example, CFD predicts local velocities in the vicinity of the CWIS subject to all of variables listed above, and establishes the three-dimensional shape of the intake influence.
| |
| These predicted velocities can, in turn, be compared to sustained and burst swimming speed for organisms living near the CWIS to evaluate the likelihood for the entrainment into the CWIS. The HZOI boundary for entrainment of fish eggs and larvae was operationally defined in this work as the calculated Lake Ontario 5% current greater than the ambient lake currents due to the influence of water withdrawal activities into the JAF CWIS. Also, the HZOI boundary for impingement of juvenile and older fish was defined as a calculated nearfield velocity of 0.5 feet per second (fps) or more compared to the ambient lake currents.Results from the HZOI modeling of the JAFNPP CWIS revealed that the overall flow patterns for the lake from west to east had a dominant effect. The predicted HZOI was asymmetric around the CWIS and aligned along a southwest vector originating at the intake with a maximum extent of about 600 feet (Figure E-1-h-3 in Reference for RAI E-1-h-3; reproduced from Entergy 2006, Figure 4.8.11). Given the separation of the intake and discharge structures for NMPNS and JAFNPP of 3000 feet or more, and the assumption that the NMPNS HZOI exhibits a similar shape and extent as the HZOI for JAFNPP, there is no evidence that the two HZOI's interact to produce cumulative effects on entrainment or impingement.
| |
| | |
| ==References:==
| |
| | |
| Entergy Nuclear FitzPatrick, LLC. (Entergy).
| |
| March 2006. Hydraulic zone of influence (estimated calculation) supporting the sampling plan included within the Proposal for Information Collection Clean Water Act §316(b) Phase II Regulations James A.Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant (SPDES Permit No. NY 0020109).
| |
| Lycoming, New York. (see attached Reference for RAI E-1-h-4)Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI). 1979. 1978 Nine Mile Point Aquatic Ecology Studies. Report provided for Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Syracuse, NY and the Power Authority of the State of New York. (see attached Reference for RAI E-1-g-2)Attachment 2 Page 9 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 RAI E-1-i Aquatic Ecology, Provide a copy of the current Clean Water Act 316(b)and 316(a) determinations and data appendices.
| |
| RAI E-1-i Response: A copy of the current Clean Water Act 316(a) determination and data appendices is included in Reference for RAI E-1-i-1. The 316(a) demonstration was submitted to the EPA approximately 1976. However, the cover letter transmitting this demonstration could not be located. NYSDEC's approval of alternative effluent limitations pursuant to Section 316(a) of the Clean Water Act is described in Additional Requirements, Item 8 of JAFNPP SPDES Permit NY-0020109, which is included in ER Attachment C.RAI E-1-j Aquatic Ecology, Provide a general summary of the aquatic and terrestrial monitoring programs at JAFNPP.RAI E-1-j Response: Other than terrestrial monitoring associated with the JAFNPP radiological environmental monitoring program described in Section 2.7.3 of the JAFNPP FSAR, there are no other terrestrial monitoring programs conducted at the site.Current aquatic monitoring programs at the JAFNPP site consist of impingement, zebra mussel, and activities associated with 316(b) performance standards as discussed below.Impingement Monitoring Program The aquatic monitoring program is required by a condition outlined in Additional Requirements, Item 10 of JAFNPP SPDES Permit NY-0020109, which involves conducting a one year impingement monitoring program to determine the numbers and total weights by species of aquatic organisms impinged on all intake traveling screens.This program must be completed before the end of the fourth year of the permit.Additional details regarding this program are discussed in Additional Requirements, Item 10 in JAFNPP SPDES Permit NY-0020109.
| |
| Reference for RAI E-1-j-1 contains a copy of the most recent impingement report submitted to NYSDEC.Collections are made 78 days each year monitoring is required, provided that the circulating water system is in operation.
| |
| When scheduled collection days coincide with zero water circulation, collection is not necessary.
| |
| Table E-1-j-2 lists the number of collections required per month.Attachment 2 Page 10 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 Table E-1 -j-2 Impingement Sampling Regime Month Number of Collections January 4 February 4 March 4 April 16 May 20 June 4 July 4 August 6 September 4 October 4 November 4 December 4 Note: Days assigned each month is selected by contractor using a random methodology.
| |
| Impingement sampling is conducted for a minimum of 24 hours beginning on each randomly selected day. Impingement data is collected and reported on a 24-hour basis, with impinged fish/organisms or subsamples identified and enumerated.
| |
| For each month, the following data is obtained: " Gross power output (MWe) per hour and 24-hour average* Number of circulating water pumps running per 24-hour period and average daily volume (gallons) for all days of the month." Number of service water pumps running per 24-hour period and average daily volume (gallons) for all days of the month." Daily average intake and discharge water temperature (from plant computer printouts when the circulating pumps are operational).
| |
| * Percent tempering for all days of the month (average value).Before sample collection, the traveling screens are rotated and washed for a minimum of 15 minutes, after which the collection basket, with a 9.5-mm (3/8-in.)
| |
| stretch mesh liner, is positioned at the end of the sluiceway.
| |
| The collection basket remains in place for a minimum of 24 hours, unless high impingement or debris loads require that it be emptied; in which case it is removed, emptied and repositioned.
| |
| A subsampling routine is utilized for occasions when high impingement rates or high debris loads are encountered.
| |
| The subsampling technique is based on volume, and the total 24-hour catch is estimated using the following formula: Estimated No. of Fish in Total Sample = Volume of Total Sample x No. of Fish in Aliquot Volume of Subsample Attachment 2 Page 11 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 The volume of the total sample is determined by repeatedly filling a volumetrically graduated container, recording the values, and adding them. The total volume is thoroughly mixed by hand or with a shovel and spread out evenly over a flat surface. An aliquot(s) of the total sample is randomly selected, and this portion of the sample is removed and measured to determine its volume.An extrapolation routine may be employed on occasions when one of the three rotating screens that are initially cycled at the onset of the sample becomes immobilized due to maintenance or other reason before the completion of the sample. The total numbers of impinged organisms are extrapolated for the remaining screen using the following formula: Estimated No. = Number of Fish in Sample x Number of Screens Rotated at Start of Sample of Fish in Total Sample Number of Screens Rotated at End of Sample Each impingement sample is returned to the laboratory where all organismsare sorted, identified, and enumerated.
| |
| Identification is made to the lowest possible taxonomic level, in most cases, down to species.A maximum of 25 individuals of the following species are weighed and measured:
| |
| white perch, alewife, and rainbow smelt. All individuals collected of yellow perch, smallmouth bass, and salmonids are individually weighed and measured.
| |
| Other fish are enumerated and weighed to obtain a total count and total weight for each species or taxonomic group. Total lengths are measured to the nearest millimeter (mm). Age analysis is not a requirement except in a general sense. Data on species of special interest attain a total length between 65 and 102 mm at the end of the first year growth. Young-of-year (YOY)are considered those individuals of species of special interest whose lengths are less than 100 mm and which are generally collected from late summer through winter.Young fish collected in spring impingement samples are considered yearlings, even if they have not attained a length greater than 100 mm, they have completed a full year of growth and are not classified as YOY.Weights are recorded to the nearest 0.1 g for specimens weighing <1,000 g, 1 g for specimens weighing between 1,000 g and 2,000 g, and 5 g for specimens weighing greater than 2,000 g. Specimens with any unusual conditions, abnormalities, or presence of fish tags are noted on data sheets. Zebra mussel volumes for each sample are also noted on the data sheets.A report of the impingement monitoring program is submitted to the NYSDEC within six months from the calendar year of collection (see Reference for RAI E-1-j-1).
| |
| This report includes monthly totals of impingement by species and grand total over all species and a comparison of previous impingement levels with levels obtained during the permit period.As required by correspondence from JAFNPP to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, all impingement samples are also checked for the presence of the Asiatic clam (Corbicula sp.).Attachment 2 Page 12 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program Circulating water is monitored for the presence and abundance of veligers during the growth and reproduction period of each year (spring through fall). Veliger abundance is typically determined by weekly water sampling when lake temperature is >50 0 F. Settling racks may be used to evaluate settling density and growth rates. In addition, monitoring of susceptible components for the presence and abundance of zebra mussels are performed periodically when they are opened for scheduled maintenance.
| |
| When visual inspection results are unexpected or severe, samples are obtained to determine abundance of mussels, and corrective actions taken as necessary.
| |
| To minimize the build-up of zebra mussels in plant components needed to support plant operation, chlorination with hypochlorite is used as a routine preventive chemical control for service water, RHR service water, emergency service water, fire protection and raw water makeup. Molluscide treatment is also available as a preventive chemical control on the circulating water system and components, if needed. Mechanical/physical cleaning of the circulating water inlet system, and other susceptible components (i.e., intake and forebay), are also implemented as needed to prevent excessive accumulation of mussels.316(b) Performance Standards Since JAFNPP is located on a Great Lake, the facility must address both the impingement and entrainment 316(b) standards of the Clean Water Act at existing electricity-generating stations (the "Phase II Regulations").
| |
| The Phase II regulations establish performance standards for the reduction of impingement mortality by 80 to 95 percent and, under certain circumstances, for the reduction of entrainment by 60 to 90 percent. The applicability of these performance standards is determined by several factors, including the type of water body from which a plant withdraws cooling water and the plant's capacity utilization factor. Under the Phase II Regulations, applicable performance standards can be met by design and construction technologies, operational measures, restoration measures, or some combination of these compliance alternatives.
| |
| Monitoring in response to the Phase II regulations is in the early stages and is described in Section 8.0 of the Proposal for Information Collection to Address Compliance with the Clean Water Act, §316(b) Phase II Regulations at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (see attached Reference for RAI E-1-j-3).RAI E-2-a Cultural Resources, Additional information required pursuant to 51.41, 51.45(c), 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(K), 51.70(b).
| |
| If available, provide copies of aerial photos of the site prior to, during, and post construction.
| |
| RAI E-2-a Response: Regulations in 51.41, 51.45(c), 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(K), 51.53(c)(3)(iii), 51.70(b) do not specifically require the requested aerial photos, however, available photos are attached.See attached Reference for RAI E-2-a-1.Attachment 2 Page 13 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 RAI E-2-b Cultural Resources, If available, provide copies of any old maps and any description relating to prior use of the site and any structures onsite prior to plant construction.
| |
| RAI E-2-b Response: Prior to the construction of JAFNPP, the area surrounding the plant was used as an artillery range and as farmland.
| |
| See attached map (Reference for RAI E-2-b-1) showing prior land owners.RAI E-2-c Cultural Resources, If available, provide a copy of any readable map showing ground disturbances as a result of initial construction and subsequent operation activities.
| |
| RAI E-2-c Response: Refer to attached Reference for RAI E-2-c-1.RAI E-2-d Cultural Resources, If available, provide copies of any previous archaeological surveys of the JAFNPP site.RAI E-2-d Response: There were no archaeological surveys conducted prior to construction of the plant based on agency discussions in Appendix I of the JAFNPP Final Environmental Statement.
| |
| In addition, based on discussions with plant personnel, there have been no surveys conducted during the operational period. However, surveys have been conducted by third parties that involve portions of the site as discussed below. JAFNPP is attempting to obtain copies of these archaeological assessments.
| |
| In 1977, Pratt & Pratt Archaeological Consultants, Inc. performed a Phase I investigation (literature search) of the Nine Mile 2 -Volney 765 kV transmission line, which included a small portion of the JAFNPP area. This project was revisited and reviewed again by Pratt & Pratt Associates in 1983 for construction of the Scriba substation, which involved a new transmission line 10 miles in length to the Scriba substation.
| |
| A second Phase IA literature review and archaeological sensitivity assessment was conducted by Hartgen Archaeological Associates (HAA), Inc. in 2003, involving new water lines for the Town of Scriba and which included a portion of the JAFNPP property.A more comprehensive literature review and sensitivity assessment of the plant property is being conducted by JAFNPP in order to provide better information for land management purposes.Attachment 2 Page 14 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 RAI E-2-e Cultural Resources, Provide copies of all procedures (including stop work procedures) related to the protection of historic and archaeological resources, for sites and structures.
| |
| RAI E-2-e Response: A copy of Entergy Nuclear procedures related to the protection of potential historic and archaeological resources on site are included in attached Reference for RAI E-2-e-1.RAI E-3 Transportation of Spent Fuel, Additional information required pursuant to Table B-1 Appendix B Subpart A of Part 51, 51.41, 51.45(c), 51.70(b).Provide information to support the applicability of Table B-1 for transportation of spent fuel, specifically provide the maximum fuel enrichment level and the peak rod average burn-up level at JAFNPP.RAI E-3 Response: Fuel enrichment will not exceed 5 percent uranium-235 by weight and the average burnup of the peak rod (burnup averaged over the length of the rod) will not exceed 60,000 MWD/MTU.RAI E-4 Zoning Regulations, Additional information required pursuant to 51.41, 51.45(c), 51.45(d), 51.70(b).
| |
| Provide information regarding the status of compliance with applicable zoning and land-use regulations imposed by state or local agencies.
| |
| Specifically, identify how the site and areas immediately surrounding the site are zoned and the restrictions or requirements associated with this zoning.RAI E-4 Response: See ER Section 2.8.1 which discusses zoning in Scriba, NY. Also, Section 2.2.2 of the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants Regarding Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (NUREG-1437, Supplement
| |
| : 24) Final Report.Comment E-5 Severe Accident Mitigation Altematives Additional information required pursuant to 51.41, 51.45(c), 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(L), 51.70(b).The staff continues to have concerns with the level of information Entergy is submitting for the Severe Accident Mitigation Alternatives (SAMA) portion of the ER. After performing the acceptance review of the application, the NRC staff has concluded that RAIs similar to RAIs issued for other Entergy applications are warranted.
| |
| It is evident from the SAMA section that the SAMA review guidance developed by NEI and endorsed by the NRC has not been consistently followed, and no lessons learned from previous SAMA reviews were incorporated in the FitzPatrick Environmental Report.-The staff expects to issue RAIs related to the FitzPatrick SAMA analysis through separate correspondence by December 2006.Attachment 2 Page 15 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 Comment E-5 Response: The JAFNPP LRA Environmental Report provides the SAMA information required pursuant to 51.41, 51.45(c), 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(L), 51.53(c)(3)(iii), 51.70(b).
| |
| The VYNPS and PNPS SAMA analyses and ERs were completed before NRC comments were incorporated in NEI 05-01, "Severe Accident Mitigation Alternative (SAMA) Analysis Guidance Document".
| |
| Therefore, some of the RAIs on these analyses stemmed from changes made to the guidance after the analyses were completed.
| |
| Although the JAFNPP LRA was not submitted until July 31, 2006, the JAFNPP SAMA analysis was also completed before NRC comments were incorporated in the guidance document.
| |
| The VYNPS and PNPS RAIs were reviewed and those items that applied to JAFNPP and could be resolved during the ER review process were resolved before the ER was submitted.
| |
| The lessons learned with the highest potential of altering the conclusions of the SAMA analysis were incorporated in the ER before it was submitted for NRC review. Attachment 3 provides a list of changes incorporating lessons learned before ER submittal and supplemental information to address the remaining lessons learned.Attachment 2 Page 16 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP)Response to Requests for Additional Information Part 2 Questions RAI Appendix A-1 SRP-LR states that the reviewer should confirm that the applicant has identified and committed in the LRA to any future aging management activities, including enhancements and commitments, to be completed before entering into the period of extended operation.
| |
| The Nuclear Energy Institute letter dated Feb. 26, 2006, in response to NRC letter dated Dec. 16, 2002, the industry has agreed to identify the high level future commitments in their updated final safety report supplement (Appendix A of the LRA).JAF LRA did not include a "Commitment List"; therefore, descriptions of any proposed new aging management programs (AMPs) and AMP "enhancements" are incomplete.
| |
| The staff requests the applicant to provide a commitment list to show all regulatory commitments.
| |
| In addition, for each commitment that is placed on the application in either the original version or subsequent revisions of the commitment list, the staff requests that the applicant amend the applicable UFSAR Supplement summary description section in the JAF LRA Appendix A for each of the respective AMP or TLAA.This will provide the appropriate reference for each of the specific commitment that has been placed on the LRA for the AMP or TLAA under review.RAI Appendix A-1 Response LRA Appendix A is revised as follows to identify commitments associated with new and enhanced programs.Section A.2.1.1, Buried Piping and Tanks Inspection Program, add"This program will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.2, BWR CRD Return Line Nozzle Program, add"This program will be enhanced to examine the CRDRL nozzle-to-vessel weld and the CRDRL nozzle inside radius section per Section Xl Table IWB-2500-1 category B-D items B3.10 and B3.20. This enhancement will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.7, BWR Vessel Internals Program, add"This program will be enhanced to perform inspections of the core plate rim hold down bolts in accordance with ASME Section Xl Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-N-2 or in accordance with a NRC approved revision of BWRVIP-25 that provides a feasible method of inspection.
| |
| This program will be enhanced to ensure the effects of aging on the steam dryers are managed in accordance with the guidelines of BWRVIP-139 as approved by the NRC and accepted by the BWRVIP Executive Committee.
| |
| These enhancements will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Attachment 2 Page 17 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 Section A.2.1.9, Diesel Fuel Monitoring Program, add"This program will be enhanced to include periodic draining, cleaning, visual inspections, and ultrasonic measurement of the bottom surfaces of the fire pump diesel fuel oil tanks, EDG day tanks, and EDG fuel oil storage tanks. Also, this program will be enhanced to specify acceptance criteria for UT measurements of diesel generator fuel storage tanks within the scope of this program. These enhancements will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.11, External Surfaces Monitoring Program, add"This program will be enhanced to include periodic inspections of systems in scope and subject to aging management review in accordance with 10 CFR 54.4(a)(1) and (a)(3). Inspections shall include areas surrounding the subject systems to identify hazards to those systems. Inspections of nearby systems that could impact the subject systems will include SSCs that are in scope and subject to aging management review for license renewal in accordance with 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2).
| |
| These enhancements will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.13, Fire Protection Program, add"This program will be enhanced to inspect fire barrier walls, ceilings, and floors at least once every refueling outage. Inspection results will be acceptable if there are no visual indications of degradation such as cracks, holes, spalling, or gouges. This program will be enhanced to inspect at least one randomly selected seal of each type every 24 months. These enhancements will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.14, Fire Water System Program, add"This program will be enhanced to include inspection of hose reels and spray and sprinkler systems internals for evidence of corrosion.
| |
| The acceptance criteria will be enhanced to verify no unacceptable signs of degradation.
| |
| A sample of sprinkler heads will be inspected using guidance of NFPA 25 (2002 Edition)Section 5.3.1.1.1.
| |
| This program will also be enhanced to include wall thickness evaluations of fire protection piping using non-intrusive techniques (e.g., volumetric testing) to identify evidence of loss of material due to corrosion.
| |
| Wall thickness inspections will be. performed before the end of the current operating term and at intervals thereafter during the period of extended operation.
| |
| Results of the initial wall thickness evaluations will be used to determine the appropriate inspection interval to ensure aging effects are identified prior to loss of intended function.These enhancements will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.16, Heat Exchanger Monitoring Program, add"This program will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.19, Metal-Enclosed Bus Inspection Program, add"This program will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.20, Non-EQ Instrumentation Circuits Test Review Program, add Attachment 2 Page 18 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 "This program will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.21, Non-EQ Insulated Cables and Connections Program, add"This program will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.22, Oil Analysis Program, add"This program will be enhanced to periodically sample oil in the oil-filled cable system, the security generator, and the fire pump diesel. This program will be enhanced to include viscosity and neutralization number determination of oil samples from components that do not have regular oil changes. This program will be enhanced to include particulate and water content for oil replaced periodically.
| |
| These enhancements will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.23, One-Time Inspection Program, add"The inspections will be performed within the 10 years prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.24, Periodic Surveillance and Preventive Maintenance Program, add"This program will be enhanced as necessary to assure that the effects of aging will be managed such that applicable components will continue to perform their intended functions consistent with the current licensing basis. These enhancements will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.26, Reactor Vessel Surveillance Program, add"This program will be enhanced to proceduralize the data analysis, acceptance criteria, and corrective actions to meet the requirements of the ISP as found in BWRVIP-86-A, 102, 116, and 135. This enhancement will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.27, Selective Leaching Program, add"This program will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.30, Structures Monitoring
| |
| -Structures Monitoring Program, add"This program will be enhanced to specify that manholes, duct banks, underground fuel oil tank foundations, manway seals and gaskets, hatch seals and gaskets, underwater concrete in the intake structure, and crane rails and girders are included.This program will be enhanced to provide guidance for performing structural examinations of elastomers and rubber components to identify cracking and change in material properties.
| |
| This program will be enhanced to provide guidance for performing periodic inspections to confirm the absence of aging effects for lubrite surfaces in the torus radial beam seats and for lubrite surfaces in the torus support saddles.This program will be enhanced to perform an engineering evaluation on a periodic basis of groundwater samples to assess aggressiveness of groundwater to concrete.
| |
| This program will be enhanced to inspect any inaccessible concrete areas that may be exposed by excavation for any reason, or any inaccessible area where observed conditions in accessible areas, which are exposed to the same environment, show that significant concrete degradation is occurring.
| |
| Attachment 2 Page 19 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 These enhancements will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.31, Thermal Aging and Neutron Irradiation Embrittlement of Cast Austenitic Stainless Steel (CASS) Program, add"This program will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.32, Water Chemistry Control -Auxiliary Systems Program, add"This program will be enhanced to provide guidance for sampling the control room and relay room chilled water, decay heat removal cooling water, and security generator jacket cooling water. This enhancement will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." Section A.2.1.35, Bolting Integrity Program, add"This program will be enhanced to include guidance from EPRI NP-5769 and EPRI TR-1 04213. This program will be enhanced to clarify that actual yield strength is used in selecting materials for low susceptibility to SCC and to clarify the prohibition on use of lubricants containing MoS 2 for bolting. These enhancements will be implemented prior to the period of extended operation." A JAF "Commitment List" is provided with this letter.RAI B.1.16.2-1 The "scope of program" attribute for AMP B. 1.16.2 states that the program implements applicable requirements of ASME Section Xl, Subsections IWA, IWB, IWC, IWD and IWF, and other requirements specified in 10 CFR 50.55a with NRC approved relief requests.The staff notes that there is no regulatory basis to include previously granted inservice inspection (ISI) relief requests within the scope of a license renewal application because the NRC's approval of the relief requests does not extend beyond the scope of the current operating period and because these requests are not subject to processing under the requirements of 10 CFR Part 54. The same holds true for alternative programs that have previously been granted on applicable ASME Section Xl inservice testing (IST)requirements.
| |
| The staff therefore requests that the applicant either amend the LRA to delete any and all references to relief requests for ASME ISI or IST requirements or amend the LRA to provide a commitment that any new or renewed relief requests that are sought for during the period of extended operation will be processed through the NRC's 10 CFR 50.55a relief request provisions after the operating license for the facility has been renewed.RAI B.1.16.2-1 Response Since ASME code relief requests have their own process under 10 CFR 50.55a, reference to relief requests in the LRA is unnecessary.
| |
| The following changes are made to the LRA to remove reference to relief requests.* Table of Contents, Page xx, replace "Relief' with "Exemption" in the title of Section 4.2.5.Attachment 2 Page 20 of 26 JAFP-06-0167
| |
| " Table 4.1-1, Page 4.1-3, replace "relief" with "exemption" in the row for section 4.2.5, first column." Section 4.2.5, Page 4.2-8, replace "Relief" with "Exemption" in the title. Also replace the words "relief' and "relief request" with "exemption" in the text." Table 4.2-4, Page 4.2-9, revise the second Plant / Parameter Description as follows (strike-outs deleted).Neutron fluence at the end of the e&if period, n/cm2* Section 4.2.6, Page 4.2-10, replace the word "relief" with "exemption" in the text.* Section 4.7.3.5, Page 4.7-3, replace the word "relief" with "exemption" in text of item (4).* Appendix A Table of Contents, Page A-ii, replace "Relief" with "Exemption" in the title of Section A.2.2.1.5.
| |
| * Section A.2.2.1.5, Page A-22, replace "Relief" with "Exemption" in the title. Also replace the words "relief" and "relief request" with "exemption" in the text.* Section A.2.2.1.6, Page A-23, replace the word "relief" with "exemption."* Section B. 1.6, Page B-26, in exception Note 1, delete the last sentence.* Section B.1.7, Page B-29, in exception Note 3, delete the last sentence.* Section B.1.16.2, page B-58, first paragraph in Scope of Program is revised as shown below (strike-outs deleted).The ISI Program manages cracking, loss of material, and reduction of fracture toughness of reactor coolant system piping, components, and supports.
| |
| The program implements applicable requirements of ASME Section XI, Subsections IWA, IWB, IWC, IWD and IWF, and other requirements specified in 10 CFR 50.55a with-ap.ed altoRnati.es and relief .Every 10 years the IS[ Program is updated to the latest ASME Section Xl code edition and addendum approved by the NRC in 10 CFR 50.55a.RAI 3.6.1-4-1 In JAFNPP LRA Table 3.6.1-4, the applicant states that aging effects defined in NUREG 1801 are not applicable to the inaccessible medium-voltage cables which are not subject to 10 CFR 50.49 EQ requirements.
| |
| The staff requests the applicant to provide the following information:
| |
| : a. A detailed explanation of how the review was conducted and the criteria used to determine that JAFNPP has no inaccessible medium-voltage cables requiring aging management.
| |
| Provide a list of cables considered for the review.b. If medium-voltage safety-related cable such as residual heat removal service water pump is inaccessible, provide a technical justification of why an AMP is not required or provide an AMP that contains the required ten elements.Attachment 2 Page 21 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 RAI 3.6.1-4-1 Response a. The cables that are susceptible to water treeing are those exposed to significant moisture and subject to significant voltage (energized at least 25% of the time at 2kV to 35kV). In Section 2.5 of the LRA, inaccessible medium-voltage cables were excluded from aging management review based on the statement, "JAFNPP does not have any inaccessible underground medium volt cables that perform a license renewal intended function." The method used for identifying medium-voltage cables was to review the electrical cable and raceway information system for all "H" level cables. At JAFNPP, the "H" designation is for 2kV to 35kV insulated cables. A review of JAFNPP drawings and cable information system identified inaccessible medium voltage cables. The medium-voltage cables were then screened for exposure to moisture (was the routing underground), and type of service (was the cable energized
| |
| > 25%). The core spray pump motor cables and the residual heat removal pump motor cables are the only inaccessible medium-voltage cables that have a license renewal intended function, are potentially exposed to moisture, and are energized greater than 25% of the time. These cables are in the EQ program and therefore, are replaced based on qualified life and are not subject to aging management review.JAFNPP has no non-EQ inaccessible medium voltage cables that support an intended function.b. The RHR service water pump motor cables are not exposed to moisture;therefore, they were screened out. As stated previously, the only cables that met the criteria for inaccessible medium-voltage cables are subject to 10 CFR 50.49 EQ requirements.
| |
| EQ cables are replaced based on qualified life, therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR 54.21 (a)(1)(ii), they are not subject to aging management review.RAI 3.6.2-1 In JAFNPP LRA Table 3.6.2-1, the applicant states that 115 KV oil-filled cable (passive electrical for station blackout) has no aging effect requiring management for meeting the component's electrical intended function.
| |
| The staff requests the applicant to provide a technical justification of why an AMP is not required or provide a plant-specific AMP that contains the required ten elements to manage the aging effects due to aging mechanisms such as insulation degradation, moisture intrusion, elevated operating temperature, and galvanic corrosion.
| |
| In addition, explain what periodic tests are planned prior to and during the extended period of operation.
| |
| RAI 3.6.2-1 Response The JAFNPP aging management review determined there were no aging effects requiring management for the oil-filled cables for the "provide electrical connection" function.The underground oil-filled cable environment is constant temperature soil, ambient temperature, and moisture.
| |
| The underground oil-filled cables are 350 MCM hollow core Attachment 2 Page 22 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 copper, oil with impregnated paper / copper wall / intercalated with paper tape / copper bearing lead wall and a polyethylene protective jacket. The underground oil-filled cables use a lead sheath to prevent effects of moisture on the cables. This cable is designed with a thick layer of lead over the cable insulation and an overall jacket over the lead and insulation.
| |
| Lead sheath cables are designed for submergence for extended periods.Operating experience was reviewed by searching JAF condition reports and interviewing knowledgeable plant staff. No failures were identified.
| |
| This is consistent with the industry operating experience for this type of cable system.The mechanisms
| |
| / stressor identified in this question are not an issue for this type of cable. A lead-sheathed cable is not susceptible to moisture intrusion.
| |
| There are no environment issues associated with degradation of the paper insulation.
| |
| This is supported by plant and industry OE. Elevated operating temperature is not an issue since the cables are designed for the load and do not operate in an area of elevated temperatures.
| |
| There are no dissimilar metal connections, so galvanic corrosion is not an issue. Since the cable is lead-sheathed, the insulation material is protected from moisture Since there are no aging effects requiring management, an aging management program is not required.
| |
| This is consistent with the position accepted by the staff for the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, which is documented in Section 3.6.2.3.5 of NUREG-1825.
| |
| The staff agreed that no AMP for the electrical connection function of the oil-static cables at Farley is required since plant-specific and industry operating experience reviews identified no cases where failure of the oil impregnated paper insulation system occurred and since the connections between the oil filled cables and the switchyard conductors were subject to aging management review as part of the switchyard bus component type. Since JAFNPP has experienced no failures of the oil-filled cable insulation, since the industry operating experience cited by Farley is also applicable to JAFNPP, and since the connections at JAFNPP are subject to aging management review as part of the switchyard bus component type, this conclusion is also applicable to JAFNPP.RAI Appendix B-1 In JAF LRA Section B.0.6, "Correlation with NUREG- 1801 Aging Management Programs", the applicant states that the following NUREG AMPs are not applicable to JAFNPP: 1. XI.S7 -Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.127 Water Control Structures
| |
| : 2. XI.S8 -Protective Coating 3. XI.M23 -Inspection of Overhead Heavy Load and Light Load Handling Systems 1. Degradation of water-control structures has been detected, through RG 1.127 programs, at a number of nuclear power plants, and in some cases, required remedial actions. The staff requests the applicant to provide an AMP that contains the required ten elements or provide a technical justification of why an AMP is not required.2. NRC Generic Letter 98-04 and RG 1.54, Rev. 1 describe industry experience pertaining to coatings degradation inside containment and the consequential Attachment 2 Page 23 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 clogging of sump strainers.
| |
| Monitoring and maintenance of Service Level I coatings conducted in accordance with Regulatory Position C4 is expected to be an effective program for managing degradation of Service Level I coatings, and consequently an effective means to manage loss of material due to corrosion of carbon steel structural elements inside containment.
| |
| The staff requests the applicant to provide a technical justification of why an AMP is not required or provide an AMP that contains the required ten elements.3. Explain how the effects of general corrosion on the crane and trolley structural components for those cranes that are within the scope of 10 CFR 54.4, and the effects of wear on the rails in the rail system are managed at JAFNPP. The staff requests the applicant to provide a technical justification of why an AMP is not required or provide an AMP that contains the required ten elements.RAI Appendix B-I Response 1 .The AMP that addresses water-control structures is the Structures Monitoring Program (SMP). The water-control structures at JAFNPP are the intake structure, intake canal, and discharge canal. The intake structure, intake canal, and discharge canal are not an earthen structures, but comprise typical structural elements and commodities that are the same as those included in the Structures Monitoring Program. The attributes of the NUREG-1801 XI.S7 AMP applicable to the intake structure, intake canal, and discharge canal structural elements and commodities are included in the Structures Monitoring Program, Section B.1.27.2 of Appendix B. Attributes of the NUREG-1801 XI.S7 AMP that are not included in the Structures Monitoring Program apply to earthen structures and are not applicable to the intake structure, intake canal, and discharge canal.2: The Containment Inservice Inspection (LRA Section B.1.16.1) and Containment Leak Rate programs (LRA Section B.1.8) are credited for managing loss of material due to corrosion for the drywell steel shell and attachments.
| |
| Coatings are not credited for managing degradation of the drywell shell and preventive measures to protect the drywell shell are not dependent on coating condition.
| |
| However, JAFNPP coatings applications are controlled and inspected per site specification IS-M-01. Accordingly, drywell and torus interior coating (service level 1) are inspected under the IWE Program every refueling outage for signs of degradation such as flaking, peeling, cracking, blisters, and discoloration.
| |
| 3: Loss of material due to general corrosion on crane and trolley structural components for cranes that are within the scope of 10 CFR 54.4 and loss of material due to wear on the rails in the rail system are managed via visual inspection under the plant-specific Periodic Surveillance and Preventive Maintenance Program, LRA Section B.1.22 and the Structures Monitoring Program, LRA Section B. 1.27.2 enhancements..
| |
| For managing loss of material, the preventive maintenance task and structures monitoring are consistent with the program described in XI.M23, Inspection of Overhead Heavy Load and Light Load (Related to Refueling)
| |
| Handling Systems, which states that crane rails and structural components are visually inspected on a routine basis for degradation.
| |
| Attachment 2 Page 24 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 RAI B.1.16-1 The staff notes that the "operating experience" attribute for containment inservice inspection aging management program (LRA AMP B.1.16.1) did not identify the recent operating experience related to torus cracking identified in 2005 at JAFNPP. The staff requests the applicant to provide a detailed discussion of the plant-specific operating experience and its impact on the aging management of the torus in LRA.RAI B.1.16-1 Response The root cause of the cracking leading to the torus leak identified at JAFNPP on June 27, 2005, was the design of the torus in the area of the HPCI exhaust line.The physical cause of the torus crack initiation was a localized stress, high cycle fatigue from pressure pulses due to rapid condensation of HPCI turbine exhaust (condensation oscillation) during HPCI operation in combination with a high stress concentration at the torus ring girder gusset weld and increased mean stress levels from residual welding stress in the weld heat-affected zone. Fatigue occurred in the torus shell area immediately adjacent to large, highly restrained attachment welds on the inner and outer diameter of the torus shell. Once crack initiation began, crack propagation was mainly due to continuing condensation oscillation loads during HPCI operation.
| |
| The lack of an end return for the torus ring girder gusset welds, which created a stress riser due to the discontinuity at this location, was identified as a contributing cause.Corrective actions included the following.
| |
| * Forensic analysis and NDE were completed for this location and other areas considered potentially susceptible.
| |
| 0 The fatigued portion of the torus shell was repaired, tested, and inspected.
| |
| * A steam exhaust sparger assembly was added to the end of the HPCI exhaust line, and a modification was made in the area of the ring girder gusset attachment.
| |
| A latent root cause was inadequate information transfer to JAFNPP from General Electric and other nuclear facilities due to a lack of formality in sharing operating experience prior to the advent of General Electric Service Information Letters (SILs) and the JAFNPP operating experience (OE) program. Ten of the thirteen stations having Mark I containments and HPCI systems had already installed condensing spargers to prevent this problem. Since these stations had four different architect-engineering firms, there is an implication that the information leading to sparger installation was obtained from General Electric although no documentation was found that confirms this.Corrective actions included the following:
| |
| -An organizational and programmatic evaluation was performed.
| |
| The results indicated that no additional corrective actions were required as the error relates to inadequate organizational interface prior to establishing SILS and the JAFNPP OE program.Attachment 2 Page 25 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 Industry containment inspection programs (such as ASME Section Xl, IWE for Class MC Components), which rely on visual examinations without identification of areas subject to fatigue due to high local stresses for augmented inspections, were identified as a contributing cause of this failure.Corrective actions included the following:
| |
| 0 The Containment ISI program was revised to incorporate augmented inspections of the torus based on the results of this failure analysis.* Other nuclear stations were notified of the results of this JAFNPP investigation by a report issued to the EPRI Risk Informed ISI Project Manager, a Licensee Event Report, and an updated Industry Operating Experience message.Attachment 2 Page 26 of 26 JAFP-06-0167 JAFP-06-0167 Docket No. 50-333 Attachment 2 James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal Application
| |
| -Amendment 1 Reference for RAI E-1-g-1 Figure E-1-g-1 700 600 o 500 400 U- 300 ,. 200 100 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure E-1 -g-1. Actual average monthly total intake water withdrawal flow rate (millions of gallons per day) at JAFNPP (red bars) compared to the maximum permitted total intake water withdrawal flow rate (blue line) for the period 2001-2005.
| |
| Figure E-1-g-2 40.0%35.0%30.0%25.0%20.0%15.0%10.0%5.0%0.0%Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure E-1 -g-2. Percent flow reduction for the actual average monthly total intake water withdrawal at JAFNPP compared to the maximum permitted total intake water withdrawal for the period 2001-2005.
| |
| JAFP-06-0167 Docket No. 50-333 Attachment 2 James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal-Application-Amendment 1 Reference for.RAI E-l-g-2 NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK I -F 1978 NINE MILE POINT AQUATIC ECOLOGY STODIES MAY 1979).1 TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED ECOLOGICAL SERVICES P.O. Box 225621 Dallas, Texas 75265..1 FORM Loa3 R 1-51 Tro IU L MOHAWK DISTRICT Syracuse J. M. Toennies Mr. R. C. Clancy'- '.--June 5, 1979 g OATE.___FlILE CODE SUBJECT 1978 Nine Mile Point Aquatic Ecology Studies _The attached report entitled, "1978 Nine Mile Point Aquatic Ecology Studies," was submitted to the NRC on May 31, 1979 in accordance with the Environmental Technical Specifications for Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and the Jarr.,s A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant.4 It Q 6'CAB/mal Attachment cc: Messrs. W. C. Hiestand J. L.,Hilke T.- J. Perkins M. Hedrick (2)Leonard B. Gorman(2)Public Relations Energy Information Center Engineering Library U.idea;I7,.44
| |
| ý I .1978 NINE MILE POINT AQUATIC ECOLOGY STUDIES Prepared for NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION Syracuse, N.Y.and POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK New York, N.Y.1~~~I-i-i Li Vi hi Ii ii i-i Li Ii[I[1 Prepared by TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED Ecological Services P.O. Box 225621 Dallas, Texas 75265 May 1979 science services division i'FOREWORD This 1978 Annual Report presents the results of aquatic ecology studies conducted in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point on Lake Ontario (Oswego County, New York) during 1978. Nine Mile Point is the site of the 610-MWe Nine Mile Point Unit I and 821-MWe James A. FitzPatrick If? nuclear power stations.
| |
| The studies were conducted by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NMPC) and the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY) and represent a continuation of ecological studies that 3 were initiated as the stations were being constructed (Nine Mile Point began producing power in 1969; FitzPatrick in 1975). The sampling pro-* gram included surveys in Lake Ontario in the vicinity of the Nine Mile Point promontory from April through December and impingement and entrain-ment studies at both power stations during the entire year. The ecolog-ical studies were conducted in accordance with the Environmental Tech-nical Specifications prepared by the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
| |
| The objective of this report is to sumarize the results of the 1978 program, presenting data on the major biotic components in the lake.in the vicinity of the plant, including phytoplankton, zooplankton, periw phyton, benthic invertebrates, and fish (including eggs and larvae). Em-phasis in this report is placed on descriptions of the composition of each biotic component and the distribution of these biotic groups with respect J to time and space. Comparisons are made among samples from the discharge plume areas, from areas of the lake that are outside the immediate influ-* ence of the discharges, and from within the plants. Conclusions are presented regarding the effects of power plant operation on the temporal and spatial distribution of the biota and on water quality in the area.The data base for the 1978 studies has been presented previous-ly in tabulated form (1978 Data Report, Texas Instruments Incorporated 1979) and provides supportive information for this report.iii science services division TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page FOREWORD iii ISUMARY I-i A.
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| OF LAKE ONTARIO STUDIES I-i 1. Phytoplankton I-i 2. Microzooplankton 1-2 3. Macrozooplankton 1-2 4. Periphyton 1-3 5. Benthic Invertebrates 1-3 6. Ichthyoplankton 1-4 7. Fish 1-5 8. Water Quality 1-6 B.
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| OF IMPINGEMENT AND ENTRAINMENT STUDIES 1-6 1. Impingement
| |
| -Nine Mile Point Unit 1 1-6 2. Impingement
| |
| -James A. FitzPatrick 1-7 3. Entrainment
| |
| -Nine Mile Point Unit 1 1-7 4. Entrainment and Viability
| |
| -James A. FitzPatrick 1-8 II INTRODUCTION II-1 A. STUDY OBJECTIVES II-i B. NINE MILE POINT AND JAMES A. FITZPATRICK POWER STATIONS 11-2 C. LAKE ONTARIO 11-6 1. Physical and Limnological Characteristics 11-6 2. General Lake Currents 11-9 3. Local Currents II-ii D. PREVIOUS STUDIES 11-12 1. Phytoplankton 11-13 2. Zooplankton 11-15 3. Benthic Invertebrates 11-17 4. Ichthyoplankton 11-18 5. Fish 11-20 III METHODS AND MATERIALS 1II-i A. LAKE ONTARIO STUDIES III-i 1. Phytoplankton 111-4 2. Zooplankton III-10 3. Periphyton 111-12 4. Benthic Invertebrates 111-14 5.. Ichthyoplankton 111-15 6. Fisheries 111-16 7. Water Quality and Thermal Profiles 111-22 V science services division TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTD)Section Title Page III B. IN-PLANT STUDIES 111-26 1. Impingement 111-28 2. Entrainment/Viability 111-31 IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
| |
| -LAKE ONTARIO STUDIES IV-l A. PHYTOPLANKTON IV-2 1. Phytoplankton Densities IV-2 2. Chlorophyll a and Phaeophytin a IV-6 3. Primary Production IV-7 4. Overview of Year-to-Year Results IV-8 B. ZOOPLANKTON IV-9 1. Microzooplankton IV-9 2. Macrozooplankton IV-13 3. Overview of Year-to-Year Results IV-17 C. PERIPHYTON IV-19 1. Bottom Periphyton IV-19 2. Suspended Periphyton IV-24 3. Overview of Year-to-Year Results IV-29 D. BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES IV-29 1. Species Composition IV-29 2. Temporal Distribution IV-32 3. Spatial Distribution IV-32 4. Description of Bottom Sediment IV-36 5. Overview of Year-to-Year Results IV-37 E. ICHTHYOPLANKTON IV-38 1. Species Composition IV-38 2. Temporal Distribution IV-38 3. Spatial Distribution IV-42 4. Overview of Year-to-Year Results IV-48 F. FISHERIES IV-49 1. Species Composition IV-49 2. Temporal and Spatial Distribution IV-51 3. Selected Species Studies IV-58 4. Overview of Year-to-Year Results IV-77 G. WATER QUALITY IV-79 1. Lake Ontario Thermal Profiles IV-79 2. Temporal and Spatial Distribution of Selectea IV-81 Parameters, Including Radiological Data 3. Overview of Year-to-Year Results IV-86 vi.science services division TBEOF CONTENTS (CONTD)Section Title Page V RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
| |
| -IN-PLANT STUDIES V-i A. INTRODUCTION V-I B. IMPINGEMENT V-3 1. Nine Mile Point Unit 1 V-3 2. James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Station V-7 C. ENTRAINMENT/VIABILITY V-17 1. Nine Mile Point Unit I V-17 2. James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Station V-19 3. Overview of Year-to-Year Results V-34 Vi CITED REFERENCES VI-1 APPENDIXES Appendix Title A PHYTOPLANKTON B ZOOPLANKTON C PERIPHYTON D BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES E ICHTHYOPLANKTON F FISHERIES G WATER QUALITY.H IMPINGEMENT J ENTRAINMENT AND VIABILITY Vii science services division ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Description Page II-i Sampling Area for Nine Mile Point Aquatic Ecology Studies 11-4 Showing Location of Sampling Transects and Intake and Discharge Structures III-1 Sampling Locations for Lake Ontario Ecological Studies 111-2 near Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick Power Plants, 1978 111-2 Serial'Dilution Sequence Used To Simulate Temperature 111-33 Reduction in Thermal Plume from Discharge Outlet to 2*F Isotherm.IV-1 Temporal Distribution in Abundance of Benthic Invertebrate IV-34 Groups Collected in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 2 IV-2 Temporal Distribution in Biomass of Benthic Invertebrate IV-35 Groups Collected in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 IV-3 Daytime Temporal Distribution of Larvae in Vicinity of IV-43 Nine Mile Point, Lake Ontario, April-September 1978 IV-4 Distribution of Total.Prolarvae Densities in Vicinity of IV-45 Nine Mile Point, June through Mid-September 1978 IV-5 Distribution of Total Postlarvae Densities in Vicinity of IV-45 Nine Mile Point, June through Mid-September 1978 IV-6 Spatial Distribution of Prolarvae in Vicinity of Nine Mile IV-46 Point, June through Mid-September 1978 IV-7 Spatial Distribution of Postlarvae in Vicinity of Nine Mile IV-47 Point, June through Mid-September 1978 IV-8 Monthly Occurrence of Fish Collected by All Gear, Nine IV-51 :1 Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 UV-9 Temporal Abundance of Fish Collected by Gill Net, Nine Mile IV-52 -Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-10 Day and Night Catch Rates for Total Fish Collected by Gill Net, IV-54 Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-l1 Spatial Distribution of Total Fish Collected by Gill Net, IV-55 Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-12 Analysis of Stomach Contents of White Perch Collected by IV-67 Gill Net at Control and Experimental Transects, Nine Mile Vicinity, 1978 viii science services division ILLUSTRATIONS (CONTD)!i Figure Description Page IV-13 Analysis of Stomach Contents of Yellow Perch Collected by IV-72 Gill Net at Control and Experimental Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-14 Analysis of Stomach Contents of Smallmouth Bass Collected IV-76 by Gill Net at Control and Experimental Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 i., IV-15 Seasonal Variation in Water Temperatures at Surface and IV-80 it Bottom Strata along the 100-Foot Depth Contour S .V' Seasonal Variation in Impingement Rates at Nine Mile Point V-6 q Unit 1, January-December 1978'-.I V-2 Diel Variation in Impingement Rates at Nine Mile Point V-7 Unit 1 during 1978 V-3 Seasonal Variation in Impingement Rates at James A. V-10 FitzPatrick Nuclear-Station, January-December 1978 V-4 Diel Variation in Impingement Rates at James A. FitzPatrick V-11 Nuclear Station during 1978 V-5 Temporal Distribution of Total Zooplankton Density in Day V-26 and Night Entrainment Samples and in Lake Ontario Samples from the 20-Foot Depth Contour, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 V-6 Percent Mortality of Total Zooplankton Due to Plant V-31 Entrainment at James A. FitzPatrick Power Station, 1978-1 TABLES i.1-Table Title Page 1I-i Operating and Structural Characteristics of Nine Mile Point 11-2 Unit 1 and James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Stations 11-2 Record of Outages during 1978 at the Two Power Stations 11-5-. Located on the Nine Mile Point Promontory 11-3 Water Quality Values Characteristic of Offshore Waters of 11-9 Lake Ontario under Mixed Conditions-II-I Sampling Schedule for Aquatic Ecology Studies in Lake Ontario 111-3 near Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick Power Plants, 1978 ix science services division TABLES (CONTD)Table Title Page I 111-2 Recommended Sampling and Preservative Methods and Analysis 111-23 Locations for Water Quality Samples Collected in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point on Lake Ontario 111-3 Analytical Methods and Detection Limits for Selected 111-24 Physicochemical Parameters 111-4 Schedule for Impingement and Entrainment/Viability Studies. 111-27 at Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick Power-Plants., Lake Ontario, 1978 IV-l Monthly Occurrence and Relative Abundance of the More IV-3 Abundant Phytoplankton Collected in Whole Water Samples in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, April-December 1978 IV-2 Mean Density and Relative Abundance of Major Phytoplankton IV-5 Groups Collected in Surface Samples, and Associated Chlorophyll a Concentrations and Primary Production Rates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, April-December, 1978 IV-3 Monthly Occurrence and Relative Abundance of Microzooplankton IV-11 from Wisconsin Net Oblique Tows, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-4 Percent Relative Abundance of Major Microzooplankton Groups IV-13 and Total Density of Microzooplankton from Wisconsin Net Oblique Tows, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 -1 IV-5 Total Microzooplankton Abundance, Wisconsin Net Oblique Tows, IV-14 Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 H IV-6 Monthly Occurrence and Relative Abundance of Macrozooplankton IV-15 Collected in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 IV-7 Percent Relative Abundance of Major Macrozooplankton Groups IV-16 I and Total Density of Macrozooplankton Collected from Composited Hensen Net Tows in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 IV-8 Abundance of Macrozooplankton from Composited Hensen Net IV-18 Tows, Nine Mile.Point Vicinity, 1978 i IV-9 Percent Relative Abundance of Major Bottom Periphyton Groups IV-20 Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-10 Monthly Occurrence and Relative Abundance of Bottom IV-21 Periphyton Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 X science services division TABLES (CONTD)Table Title Page I IV-11 Abundance of Total Bottom Periphyton Collected on Artificial IV-22 Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-12 Ash-Free Dry Weight of Total Bottom Periphyton Collected on IV-23 Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-13 Percent Relative Abundance of Major Suspended Periphyton IV-25 Groups Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978* IV-14 Monthly Occurrences and Relative.Abundance of Suspended IV-26 Periphyton Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile 2 Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-15 Abundance of Total Suspended Periphyton on Artificial IV-27 Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-16 Ash-Free Dry Weight of Total Suspended Periphyton Collected IV-28 on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 I IV-17 Seasonal Occurrence and Relative Abundance of Benthos IV-30 Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-18 Percent Composition of Benthic Invertebrate Groups and IV-31 Total Density of Benthic Organisms Collected by SuctionSampler in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 IV-19 Percent Composition of Benthic Invertebrate Groups and IV-33 1I Total Biomass of Benthic Organisms Collected by Suction j Sampler in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 IV-20 Composition of Bottom Sediment Determined by Visual IV-37 Examination at Benthic Sampling Stations in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 IV-21 Seasonal Occurrence of Fish Eggs and Larvae Collected in IV-39-. Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, Lake Ontario, April-December 1978 IV-22 Temporal Distribution in Density of Fish Eggs Collected in IV-40 Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, Lake Ontario, April-December 1978 I IV-23 Relative Numerical Abundance of 11 Most Abundant Prolarvae IV-41 and Postlarvae Collected in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, Lake Ontario, April-December 1978 IV-24 Numbers and Percent Composition of Fish Collected by Each IV-50 Sampling Gear, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978-xi science services division TABLES (CONTD) 1 Table Title Page IV-25 Temporal Distribution of Fish Collected by Bottom Trawl, IV-56 Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-26 Temporal Distribution of Fish in Beach Seines, Nine Mile IV-57 11 Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-27 Length-Weight Relationships and Condition Factors for IV-65 1 White Perch Collected by Gill Net at Control and Experimental Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-28 Length-Weight Relationships and Condition Factors for Yellow IV-71 Perch Collected at Control and Experimental Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-29 Length-Weight Relationships and Condition .Factors for IV-75 Smallmouth Bass Collected at Control and Experimental ri Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-30 Monthly Variation in Selected Water Quality Parameters IV-82 Collected in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 IV-31 Spatial Distribution of Selected Water Quality Parameters IV-83 Collected from Experimental and Control Areas, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 1 V-1 Number and Weight of Fish Collected during Impingement V-4 Sampling and Estimated Annual Impingement, Nine Mile Point Unit 1, 1978 V-2 Number and Weight of Fish Collected during Impingement V-9 Sampling and the Estimated Annual Impingement, James A.FitzPatrick Nuclear Station, 1978 V-3 Occurrence of Fish Eggs and Larvae in Entrainment Samples V-18 from the Cooling-Water Intakes of the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Stations, Lake Ontario, 1978 V-4 Density of Eggs and Larvae Entrained at the Nine Mile Point V-19 Nuclear Station, Lake Ontario, 1978 V-5 Percent of Zooplankton Dead in the Zooplankton Collections V-28 Taken at the Intake and Discharge, or Subject to Thermal Plume Simulation, James A. FitzPatrick Plant, 1978 V-6 Percent Mortality of Major Zooplankton Groups Due to Plant V-30 Passage, James A. FitzPatrick Plant, 1978 V-7 Densities of Eggs and Larvae Entrained at James A. FitzPatrick V-32 Nuclear Station, Lake Ontario, 1978 xii science services division iJ SECTION I
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| A.
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| OF LAKE ONTARIO STUDIES 1. Phytoplankton During the 1978 study, 223 phytoplankton taxa were observed in the I vicinity of Nine Mile Point, but only 51 accounted for 2 percent or more of the number of organisms collected during any one sampling period. Blue-green and green algae and diatoms represented 78 percent of the taxa observed.
| |
| Dia-*- toms dominated the phytoplankton community during the months of April, May, ij June, and December, while blue-green algae dominated from July through Novem-ber. The second most abundant groups were green algae in July-October and phytoflagellates in April and November.Total phytoplankton cell densities were lowest in April and highest, 17 in November.
| |
| A late-spring peak in cell densities occurred in May and June.No spatial trends in abundance with respect to stations or control and experimental areas in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point were observed for total phytoplankton or major groups, although, based on annual contour means for total phytoplankton, *there was a slight decreasing density gradient from the 10- to the 60-foot contour. Wind-induced turbulence tends to prevent significant monthly differences in spatial distribution.
| |
| iiJ Examination of the temporal distribution of chlorophyll a revealed peak concentrations in May and June (coinciding with spring cell density J peaks) and lowest concentrations in September when phytoplankton densities were low. There were no spatial distribution trends among stations or between control and experimental areas. Based on annual contour means, chlorophyll a concentrations slightly decreased from the 10- to the 60-foot depth contour.Primary production rates were highest in June and lowest in Septem-ber, generally exhibiting trends similar to those of phytoplankton cell dens--Jities. There were no monthly spatial differences among stations, but annual I-I science services division mean primary production values along depth contours indicated that the 60-foot depth contour had the lowest and the 20-foot depth contour the highest.The phytoplankton study during 1978 revealed no appreciable influ-ence by power-plant operations in the Nine Mile Point vicinity on the number of taxa, temporal or spatial distribution, chlorophyll a concentrations, or primary production.
| |
| : 2. Microzooplankton, During 1978 sampling, 47 microzooplankton taxa were collected with rotifers dominating the samples. Number of organisms peaked in July following gradual monthly increases from the initiation of sampling in April. Rotifers A were typically more abundant in samples from the shallower depth contours (10-and 20-foot) than from the deeper ones (40- and 60-foot) and, at those shallower i contours, higher numbers of total microzooplankton also were observed during July and August.No differences between transects or experimental (NMPP and FITZ) and 7 control (NMPW and NMPE) areas were observed, indicating that operations of the power plants had no effect on the microzooplankton community.
| |
| : 3. Macrozooplankton
| |
| .Cladocerans were the dominant group of macrozooplankton collected during the 1978. sampling regime. However, calanoid copepods represented vir- .1 tually 100 percent of the organisms collected during April and May.Macrozooplankton densities peaked three times: April, dominated by calanoid copepods; June, with a mixed dominance of copepods and cladocerans; and September, dominated by cladocerans.
| |
| Densities of copepods were.slightly 1*greater at the. 60-, 80-, and 100-foot contours than at the 20- and 40-foot contours, but no onshore-offshore trends were discerned for total macrozoo-plankton.
| |
| The differences noted between transects were transient, probably representing natural variation in local populations and nearshore current I effects. There were no differences between experimental and control areas.indicating little or no power-plant impact on the macrozooplankton populations.
| |
| 1-2 science services division 3I% 4. Periphyton In both bottom and suspended periphyton samples, green algae were the.most diverse (greatest number of taxa), while the blue-greens were numerically dominant.
| |
| In both bottom and suspended samples a blue-green, Lyngbya sp., was the numerically dominant taxon, often representing more than 90 percent of the total density. Suspended periphyton densities were greatest in June, while bottom periphyton densities were greatest in August and October. Biomass was greatest during August (suspended) and May (bottom) sampling.Density and biomass for both bottom and suspended periphyton gener-ally decreased with depth and the concomitant loss of light for photosynthetic activity.
| |
| Although suspended periphyton density and biomass were slightly greater at experimental than at control transects, no differences between control and experimental areas were found for bottom periphyton.
| |
| Although the thermal plume may stimulate growth of suspended peri-iphyton, this probably has little biological consequence in the natural lake ecosystem because suspended periphyton is an artificial situation (i.e., the J sampling technique provides substrates within the water column where none exist-naturally).
| |
| Also, bottom periphyton are not affected by power-plant discharges because light is limited at the discharge (20-foot) contour and the plume mixes*efficiently and moves upward to the surface.5. Benthic Invertebrates The 1978 benthic invertebrate samples were numerically dominated by amphipods (scuds) and oligochaetes (aquatic earthworms).
| |
| The scud, Gammarus fasciatus comprised 40 percent of the total number of benthic organisms col-lected and was most numerous at the experimental transects.
| |
| Total annual biomass appeared to be dominated by Bryozoa; however, this resulted from collection of a large mass of colonies in a single June sample. Without the influence of this single sample, scuds represented the greatest biomass.scienOe services division 1-3 In general, numbers and biomass per sample increased from May through September and decreased with increasing water depth. Experimental and control areas showed no real differences in total benthic densities.
| |
| Taxonomic composi-tion differences between transects apparently resulted from differences in substrate type.6. Ichthyoplankton rl The eggs of five fish taxa were collected in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point from early May through mid-August.
| |
| Alewife eggs dominated the col-lections, peaking in density in mid-July and exhibiting consistently more abundance at night. No consistent trend was observed in egg distribution at stations along the 20- and 40-foot depth contours, suggesting no apparent in-fluence of thermal discharges from the two power stations.
| |
| .The larvae of 20 taxa were collected from April through November.Alewives dominated larval catches. Densities were greatest during July and 4 August, but two minor peaks occurred prior to July: the first, in mid-May, was due primarily to an increase in yellow perch; the second, in mid-June, was the result of increasing densities of rainbow smelt and Morone spp. The number of larvae decreased rapidly during late August, and densities were low after mid-September.
| |
| Larval densities were greatest at night. Younger larvae generally decreased in density as distance from shore increased (i.e., at deeper depth contours), whereas older larvae were more uniformly distributed with respect to depth contours.
| |
| A similar onshore- offshore distribution of younger larvae was observed in previous years at Nine Mile Point. Prolarvae and postlarvae distribution along the 20- and 40-foot depth contours was rela-tively uniform and exhibited no consistent trend, suggesting no distributional 1 trend with respect to the thermal plumes from the two power stations.Species composition and temporal and spatial distribution patterns suggested that operation of the two power stations had no detrimental effect on fish eggs and larvae in the area. .¶ l 1-4 science services division II'1 I.?'1 I*1 LI C ~I Fl'j 7. Fish Gill net, trawl, beach seine, and box trap caught 37 species in the Nine Mile Point vicinity during the 1978 study. Relative to frequency of occurrence, ten species were present in the area during every month of sam-pling, and five other species occurred during at least seven of the nine months. The species that dominated were alewife, spottail shiner, rainbow smelt, white perch, and yellow perch.Temporal distribution varied according to gear. Gill-net catches;dominated by alewives,, rainbow smelt, spottail shiners, white perch, and yellow perch were largest during May-July and October-November, and were significantly larger at night than during the day. Largest trawl catches were in May, when threespine stickleback comprised the majority of the catch, and in August and September, when young-of-the-year alewives and rainbow smelt dominated; night catches were usually larger than day catches. Beach-seine catches were small from April through July and increased markedly in August and September as young-of-the-year alewives became vulnerable to the gear.Young-of-the-year and adult spottail shiners were abundant in seine hauls during August and September, and threespine stickleback and brown trout were relatively abundant in May and June. The temporal distribution patterns were typical for fish populations in eastern Lake Ontario: large catches during spring and the first part of summer; small catches during mid-summer; and sec-ondary peaks in abundance during late summer and fall when young-of-the-year grew to catchable size.Spatial distribution based on gill-net catches indicated that fish were most abundant along the 15-foot depth contour and least abundant along the 60-foot contour. Catches along the 15-foot depth contour were usually smallest at the westernmost station (NMPW). Catches at the four stations along the 30- and 40-foot contours displayed no distinct abundance trends during spring and summer, although catches were usually larger at the eastern-most stations (FITZ and NMPE) during fall. Catches along the 60-foot depth contour were largest at FITZ during eight of the nine months of the study but varied from month to month, displaying no consistent temporal trend. Overall, spatial distribution of gill-netted fish displayed no consistent trends with respect to the experimental and control areas. Trawl catches along the 20-foot'A 1-5 science services division contour were generally larger at stations NMPW and NMPPIFITZ during May-August and at stations NMPW/FITZ and NMPE during September.
| |
| Along the 40-foot con-tour, abundances were greater at stations NMPW and NMPP/FITZ during April- 1 September, and along the 60-foot contour, they were largest at experimental transect NMPP/FITZ during May-July and September and were equally large at control transects NMPW and NMPE in August. After September, trawl catches at all depth contours were small and sporadic.
| |
| Beach-seine annual mean catch rates were highest at experimental station NMPP, primarily because of an ex-tremely large catch of alewife during September.
| |
| During May, June and August when seine catches were also relatively large, the catch was larger at control transect NMPE than at the other three seining locations.
| |
| : 8. Water Quality Evaluation of temperature and water quality data revealed that values were well within normal ranges for the Nine Mile Point area specif-ically and Lake Ontario generally.
| |
| Neither the thermal cycle nor the physi- 1 cochemical conditions appeared to be disrupted by operation of the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick power plants. No consistent differences in thermal or physicochemical conditions existed between control and experimental transects.
| |
| Thermal effects were observed at the experimental transects on a j minority of sampling dates, indicating that the thermal plume influenced only a relatively small zone which commonly did not impact the fixed sampling sta-tions. 4 Although not specifically determined, the greatest influences in the Nine Mile Point area appeared to come from the Oswego River, the west-to-east longshore currents, and the upwelling and inshore movement of colder hypolim-netic waters.B.
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| OF IMPINGEMENT AND ENTRAINMENT STUDIES 1. Impingement
| |
| -Nine Mile Point Unit I There were 41 taxa in impingement samples collected at the Nine Mile Point power plant during 1978. Estimated annual impingement was approximately 267,000 fish weighing approximately 4,350 kilograms, and compared with previous 1-6 science services division years this estimated total impingement was low. No threatened or endangered species were collected during 1978.Numerically, threespine sticklebacks, alewives, or rainbow smelt dominated the catch during each month. In terms of biomass, however, gizzard shad, alewives, and rainbow smelt were dominant.
| |
| Impingement rates were high-est in spring (April) and winter (January and December).
| |
| Length-frequency dis-tribution showed that primarily adults and subadults were impinged in winter and spring while impingement samples were primarily young-of-the-year in summer and fall. Impingement was usually greater at night than during the day.2. Impingement
| |
| -James A. FitzPatrick f At the James A. FitzPatrick power plant during 1978 an estimated 424,000 fish of 45 taxa weighing approximately 6,400 kilograms were impinged.As at Nine Mile Point, impingement at James A. FitzPatrick during 1978 was low compared with most of the previous years and no threatened or endangered spe-cies were collected.
| |
| Numerically, threespine sticklebacks, rainbow smelt, and alewives dominated impingement sampling; gizzard shad and alewives comprised approxi-mately 65 percent of the total biomass. Impingement rates were highest during spring and lowest during late summer. Most fish impinged during winter and spring were adults and subadults; during summer and fall, most were young-of-the-year.
| |
| Impingement was greater at night than during the day.3. Entrainment
| |
| -Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Compared with the variety of fish egg and larval species observed in Lake Ontario samples, few were collected in entrainment samples taken at Nine Mile Point. Low numbers of eggs were collected in entrainment samples from late June through early August, and 0 a fe and unidentified eggs were represented.
| |
| Larvae were entrained from May through August, but samples contained only four taxa: alewife, rainbow smelt, yellow perch, and tessel-lated darter.1-7 science services division
| |
| : 4. Entrainment and Viability
| |
| -James A. FitzPatrick
| |
| : a. Phytoplankton Chlorophyll a concentrations of intake samples for the 7-hour incu-bation period ranged from a high of 13.72 micrograms per liter in May to lows of 0.47 and 0.61 micrograms per liter in February and September respectively.
| |
| Lake chlorophyll a concentrations reflected a similar temporal trend. The samples incubated for 24, 48, and 72 hours exhibited temporal trends similar to the 7-hour incubation-period samples. No consistent differences in chloro-phyll a concentrations among day and night samples were observed.Chlorophyll a discharge/intake ratios (a measure of the effects of plant entrainment) for the 7-, 24-, and 48-hour incubation periods revealed a small reduction in concentrations at the discharge during approximately 60 percent of the sampling periods, indicating that chlorophyll a within the phytoplankton community was reduced somewhat due to entrainment through the plant. The plume simulation/intake ratios, suggested that entrainment into the thermal plume in the lake had no effect on chlorophyll a.Primary production values for intake samples were low during January-March'and early September.
| |
| Production peaked during April-August.
| |
| Lake sam-ples exhibited a similar temporal trend for primary production.
| |
| When day and night primary production data at the intake were compared, 60 to 79 percent of the day samples had higher production than night samples.Discharge/intake ratios indicated a slight decrease in primary pro-duction values in the discharge when compared with the intake, suggesting some impact during plant entrainment.
| |
| Plume simulation/intake ratios indicated that plume entrainment decreased primary production slightly.b. Zooplankton Rotifers, copepods, cladocerans, and protozoans were the dominant groups of organisms found in entrainment samples taken in 1978 at the James A. FitzPatrick intake. A total of 70 taxa were identified.
| |
| Density estimates 1-8 science services division 3 exhibited temporal trends similar to those observed in Lake Ontario microzoo-plankton samples from the 20-foot depth contour (approximate area where intake cooling water is taken).Entrained organisms are subject to mortality as a result of thermal'J and mechanical stresses.
| |
| For only a portion of the 1978 sampling season was there a direct relationship between plant operations (water volume, AT, and discharge temperature) and zooplankton mortality.
| |
| Changes in modes of plant operation confounded results of the viability studies. No consistent rela-tionships were observed between AT and percent mortality.
| |
| However, high dis-charge temperatures, especially in some summer samples, coincided with high-percent mortality of zooplankton.
| |
| 3 c. Ichthyoplankton Fish eggs, including those of alewife, tessellated darter, and white perch, were collected from the James A. FitzPatrick intake or discharge during July and August. Nine taxa of larvae were observed in entrainment samples, but only alewife and rainbow smelt larvae were present during more than two sampling periods..
| |
| Eggs and larvae were generally observed in entrainment samples when they:were most abundant in the. lake. Average larval densities in entrainment
| |
| .1 samples were lower than in Lake Ontario and represented fewer taxa (9 versus S"20).-"Viability sampling yielded primarily alewife and rainbow smelt. The low numbers of eggs and larvae in viability samples precluded any conclusions with respect to mortality or survivability following entrainment.1-9 science services division SECTION II INTRODUCTION 4'A. STUDY OBJECTIVES
| |
| * Ecological studies in the vicinity of the Nine Mile Point promontory during 1978 represent continuing efforts begun in the late 1960s by the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY) and*Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NMPC) to evaluate the potential effects of existing power station operations at Nine Mile Point on the near-field aquatic ecosystem of Lake Ontario.Two nuclear electric generating stations are located on the Nine Mile Point promontory on the south shore of Lake Ontario: Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1, which has been operating since December 1969; and James A.FitzPatrick Nuclear Station, which began operating in July 1975. A third nuclear station (Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2) is under construction at this site.This annual report fulfills the utility's commitment to assess changes, K'if any, in the aquatic ecosystem caused by power plant operations.
| |
| The studies fulfill monitoring requirements imposed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in licenses issued to the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and James A. FitzPatrick plants. Other aspects of these studies fulfill the requirements of a Stipulation Agreement between the utilities and the Aquatic Advisory Committee for the Nine Mile Point site.In addition to the requirements noted above, the program is designed to provide the following information:
| |
| .Postoperational data relating to aquatic ecology in the vicinity of the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and James A.FitzPatrick plants* Analyses to support future recommendations for more cost-effective monitoring of the aquatic environment that would still assure protection of the ecosystem over the life of! Ithe stations II-i science services division i)B. NINE MILE POINT AND JAMES A. FITZPATRICK POWER STATIONS Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1 uses a boiling water reactor to provide 610 MWe (net) of electrical power capacity.
| |
| The maximum cooling water flow of 597 cubic feet per second (cfs) for this unit is taken from the lake through a submerged intake approximately 850 feet offshore of the site (Table II-1). This flow is returned to the lake through a submerged discharge at tem-peratures up to 17.3°C (31.2°F) higher than the intake temperature.
| |
| Table II-1 Operating and Structural Characteristics of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Stations*ii Nine Mile Point UNIT I James A. FitzPatrick Operating Characteristics Generating capacity (MWe)Cooling water flow (gpm)Condenser (all pumps)Service water/pump Heat rejection (BTU/hr)Cooling water temperature rise ('F)Structural Characteristics Length of main tunnel from ,existing shoreline Number of openings Size of opening Other dimensions Velocity through openings Tunnel velocity Tunnel Cross-section-Water velocity at screens Water depth at structure 610 821 250,000 18,000 4.0 x 109 352,300 17,900 57x Y09 31.2 31.5 Intake Discharge 850 ft 6 5.5 ft high x 10.3 ft wide 3-ft sill 6-in. roof 1.8 fps 8 fps 78 ft 2 0.85 fps 24.5 ft (LWD)335 ft 6 3.5 ft high x 7.3 ft wide 3-ft sill 2-ft roof 4 fps 8 fps 78 ft 2 17 ft (LWD)Intake 900 ft 4 8 ft high x 17.7 ft wide 3-ft sill 6-in. roof 1.2 fps 1.4 fps (maximum)117 ft 2 1.4 fps 24 ft (LWD)Discharge 1260 ft 12 2.5 ft (inside diameter)5-6 ft above lake bed Double ports at 150-ft spacing 14 fps 4.7 fps 117 ft 2 30 ft (LWD)(aver.):1 n I I~1*1 of structure Total flow 15.3 ft (LWD)268,000 gpm (597 cfs)10.0 ft (LWO)268,000 gpm (597 cfs)10 ft (LWD) 23 ft (LWD)(aver.)370,200 gpm 370,200 gpm (825 cfs) (825 cfs)*Based on L14S (1975a)11-2 science services division Ih The James A. FitzPatrick plant uses a boiling water reactor to provide 821 MWe (net) of electrical power capacity.
| |
| The maximum cooling water flow of 825 cfs for this unit is taken from the lake approximately 900 feet offshore of the site (Table II-1). This flow is returned to the lake through a high-speed, submerged diffuser-type discharge at temperatures up to 17.5°C (31.5°F) higher than the intake temperature.
| |
| The James A. FitzPatrick plant intake is in approximately 24 feet of water. The intake openings face toward shore. The Nine Mile Point Unit i in-take is in approximately 25 feet of water about 0.5-mile to the west of the FitzPatrick intake and discharge.
| |
| The Nine Mile Point Unit 1 intake withdraws water from 3600 in the horizontal plane. The Nine Mile Point discharge design is for a lower velocity than the FitzPatrick design and subsequently achieves less initial dilution of the discharge waters. The'FitzPatrick discharge is designed with submerged jets to achieve rapid dilution of the discharge waters with ambient lake water. The locations of the intakes and discharges of the two plants are such that the main influence of plant operations would be at the 20- and 40-foot depth contours in the lake at the NMPP and FITZ transects (Fig-ure 11-1). The 316(a) Demonstrations for these two power stations (NMPC 1975, LMS 1976b) describe plant facilities in detail.The James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Station achieved criticality in Novem-ber 1974 and began commercial operation on 28 July 1975. Table 11-2 summarizes the plant generation outages for 1978. The average daily power output during 1978 for the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Station is given in Appendix Table H-2.. Since commercial operation began, the plant has almost always operated above 500 MWe (gross output) when the unit was on line.Nine Mile Point Unit 1 began commercial operation on 14 December 1969.Table 11-2 summarizes the plant generation outages for 1978 and Appendix Table H-1 gives the average daily power output during 1978 for Unit 1. When the plant is on line, power generation usually exceeds 500 MWe and, like the FitzPatrick station, at least one circulating water pump (278 cfs) is usually running when-ever power production is off.11-3 science services division NMPP/FITZ NMPP FITZ rHOW NMPW H H p a i.a S S 0*1 4 a 0 p a.I 0.......ICHTHYOPLANKTON AND MACROZOOPLANKTON STATIONS 0 112 N INTAKE STATUTE MILES 0 DISCHARGE Figure II.-i.Sampling'Area for Nine Mile Point Aquatic Ecology Studies Showing Location of Sampling Transects and Intake and Discharge Structures
| |
| --~ -~r -~---~
| |
| f-j 0 Table 11-2 Record of Outages during 1978 at the Two Power Stations Located on the Nine Mile Point Promontory I n~, .1 Nine Mile Point Unit I James A. FitzPatrick Start Date Duration Generator Off*(days)Start Date Duration Generator Off*(days)Jan 20 3 Feb 24 7 Feb 6 2 Mar 17 2 May 16 2 Apr 18 4 20 7 26 6 Aug 3 2 Jun 21 2 Sep 30 7 Sep 8 1 16 85 Dec 17 2 24 3*Dates are inclusive in the outage duration.
| |
| An outage could span two consecutive dates but have a total dura-tion ranging from less than 2 hours to more than 47 hours.The incident on 20 January, for example, could be 1 com-plete day plus a few hours on the first and third days, or nearly 3 complete days.Figure II-i is a map of the area showing the general location of the two nuclear power stations, their submerged intakes and discharges, and sampling transects.
| |
| The exact sampling locations and methods for each task of this study are presented in Section III of this report. For the purpose of this study, the"vicinity'.'
| |
| of Nine Mile Point is defined as the area within a 3-mile radius of the generating stations.11-5 science services division C. LAKE ONTARIO II 1. Physical and Limnological Characteristics V.Lake Ontario, the easternmost of the five Great Lakes, is roughly oval, 193 miles long, and 53 miles (maximum) wide. The maximum reported depth is approximately 840 feet, and average depth is around 300 feet. Lake Ontario has a surface area of 7,340 square miles and a volume of 390 cubic miles (U.S. Atomic Energy Commission 1973). Jj Approximately 80 percent of the water supplied to Lake Ontario enters through its natural inlet, the Niagara River, which discharges approximately 200,000 cfs into the lake. The outflow from the lake into the St. Lawrence River averages about 239,000 cfs. Presently, Lake Ontario has a consumptive use near 300 cfs.The levels and outflows of Lake Ontario are regulated by control structures on the St. Lawrence River under the supervision of the St. Lawrence .River Board of Control. The mean monthly water levels of. Lake Ontario are main-tained between a minimum elevation of 243.06 feet above mean sea level and a maximum elevation of 248.04 feet.Lake level data for 1978 showed minimum and maximum elevations of 243.7 and 246.6 feet respectively.
| |
| The average elevation of Lake Ontario during 1900-1977 was 244.0 feet above mean sea level (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1979).The temperature of Lake Ontario varies from about 0°C to 24°C and has 7.a mean value of 7°C. During winter, the temperature of the lake is usually above "7j O°C. Normally, the lake freezes only along the shore and in sheltered bays; the center of the lake remains open and maintains a temperature near 4°C. The lake begins to warm by May, reaching highest summer temperatures in late July or early August. The temperature declines during the fall, reaching winter levels in middle to late December.Lake Ontario was formed about 10,000 years ago during periods of severe glaciation and today is underlain by marine sedimentary rock-strata composed largely of shale and limestone.
| |
| The shoreline is eroding at a relatively rapid rate, contributing a source of unconsolidated sands, clays, and gravels, which, 11-6 science services division with other sources, has deposited a sediment layer that is as thick as 35 feet in the deeper regions of the lake but is generally thinner elsewhere.
| |
| There is very little sediment deposition along the New York shoreline near Nine Mile Point, especially in areas where water depth is less than 40 feet. Bottom sub-trates within the study area are composed primarily of bedrock overlain with** large boulders or rubble (see Section IV, Table IV-20). Some sand and gravel deposits exist at the 40- and 60-foot depth contours.The large area of Lake Ontario and its heat capacity provide periodic onshore and offshore breezes due to the heat differential of land and water sur-faces. 'The exposure of the surrounding area to Lake Ontario and the flatness of the terrain allow wind speeds to be higher near the lake than in most inland areas [International Joint Commission (IJC) 1969].Major cities on Lake Ontario include Toronto and Hamilton in the north-western region and Rochester and Oswego in the southeastern region.The major source of most pollutants in Lake Ontario is Lake Erie and its watershed via the Niagara River. The Oswego River, which empties into Lake Ontario about 6 miles west of the Nine Mile Point area, is also a major point source of several pollutants.
| |
| The Oswego River drains some 5,100 square miles and receives municipal wastes equivalent to that of some 500,000 people (IJC 1969).The water quality of Lake Ontario is dependent upon the interaction of numerous factors, including geomorphology and hydrology, hydrodynamics, meteorology, and man-made inputs. Intensive interest in Lake Ontario water* quality has been a fairly recent phenomenon.
| |
| Studies of Lake Ontario were completed around 1915 and again in 1947, but truly comprehensive studies-were
| |
| 'not undertaken until the early 1960s. A number of studies were executed through-out the 1960s, and studies are continuing.
| |
| Lake Ontario generally has the high-Jiest concentration of inorganic pollutants of all of the Great Lakes; this is because inorganic pollutant concentrations in the other Great Lakes have been increasing steadily since about.1910, and much of this flows through the lakes into Lake Ontario.11-7 science services division Because of its great depth and dilution capacity, adverse eutrophica-tion effects have been minimal in Lake Ontario compared with those for parts of Lake Erie. Oxygen saturation is usually above 80 percent in the hypolimnion during the summer and averages over 90-percent in the epilimnion throughout the year. Epilimnion values may exceed 120 percent, suggesting high primary produc-tivity or wind-induced mixing (most probably the latter). During thermal strat-ification, significant chemical stratification may occur, but at relatively low mean values of nutrients.
| |
| This chemical stratification is a result of seasonal variation in productivity and chemical composition.
| |
| Nutrients such as ortho-phosphate, nitrate, and silica generally increase from surface to bottom, re- I flecting uptake by phytoplankton in the photosynthetic zone and perhaps release from the bottom sediments.
| |
| During spring and fall overturns, the lake becomes homogeneous.
| |
| Based on an assessment of oxygen saturation, transparency, nutrient* concentrations, nutrient loadings, morphometry, and biological populations, Lake Ontario has been estimated to be between oligotrophic and mesotrophic (IJC 1969).Data from many studies have been analyzed and are presented in Table 11-4 as values representative of offshore waters of Lake Ontario under mixed conditions (QLM 1974). As discussed above, some of the nutrient values vary J.temporally and vertically.
| |
| The major ionic species vary little, but the trace elements and compounds may vary greatly. For example,.copper was found to range between 5 and 177 micrograms per liter during 1968 (Weiler and Chawla 1969) and between 0 and 2,200 micrograms per liter during 1967 (IJC 1969).Water quality of nearshore stations has been found to vary from that of offshore stations in an irregular manner, affected by local sources of pollu-tion, increased productivity of shallow waters, and the vagaries of currents.Nevertheless, water quality of stations several hundred to several thousand feet from shore and several thousand feet from pollutant sources would be expected to be similar to that presented in Table 11-4. Contamination of certain game and nongame fish in Lake Ontario by Mirex and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) has led New York to closely monitor the levels of these chemicals in fish. Neither.Mirex nor PCB levels have been found in concentrations that would make.Lake-Ontario waters unsafe for consumption or recreation.
| |
| IU-1l science services division j~ *1 A I 1* J I II I Table 11-3 Water Quality Values Characteristic of Offshore Waters of Lake Ontario under Mixed Conditions*
| |
| Parameter Calcium Magnesium Sodium Potassium Chloride Sulfate Bicarbonate pH Total dissolved solids Specific conductance Orthophosphate phosphorus Total phosphate phosphorus Ammonia nitrogen Nitrate nitrogen Nitrite nitrogen Total Kjeldahl nitrogen Silicon dioxide Turbidity Total suspended solids Phenol Total coliform Cadmium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Lithium Manganese Nickel Strontium Zinc.Concentration (mg/l unless shown otherwise) 40 8 12 1.5 28 30 115 8.0 (units)200 300 (Gimhos/cm) 0.015 0.025 0.03 0.20 0.002 0.2 0.5 2(JTU)3 0.002<l (counts per 100 ml)0.0001 0.001 0.0001 0.01 0.01 0.003 0.002 0.001 0.002 0.18 0.01 Based on QLM (1974).2. General Lake Currents**
| |
| In its simplest form, the large-scale general circulation of Lake Ontario is counterclockwise (cyclonic flow) with flow to the east along the south shore in a relatively narrow band and a somewhat less pronounced flow to the west along the north shore. The conceptual model that explains this average circulation is presented here with a minimum of detail.Most of this material is extrapolated from PASNY (1977).11-9 science services division
| |
| : a. Summer Circulation A cool mound of water extends from surface to bottom in spring and from below the thermocline to the bottom in summer and fall (Sweers 1969). The baroclinic flow resulting from the horizontal temperature differences is ini-tially directed outward from midlake toward shore. Although the flow is turned clockwise by the Coriolis effect, it is diminished due to bottom friction.
| |
| This outward flow brings water inshore, where it begins to pile up. A surface slope (higher inshore than in midlake) develops into a barotropic current initially directed lakeward.
| |
| The barotropic current is bent clockwise because of the Coriolis effect. The result is that the Coriolis effect and the barrier effect of the coastline trap the flow against the shoreline.
| |
| Generally, the flow con-tinues along the shoreline in an easterly direction as long as the surface slope is maintained.
| |
| Inflow from the Niagara River causes the water level at the western end of the lake to be higher than it is at the eastern end (on the average).The resulting flow down the gradient is held against the lake's south shore by the Coriolis effect, thereby enhancing the already existing barotropic flow along the south shore. Wind stress averaged over the year tends further to accelerate the flow to the east and decelerate the flow to the west.11 b. Winter Circulation The general circulation in winter is less well-documented.
| |
| In late fall after overturn has occurred, the lake is essentially isothermal, thereby permitting a free exchange of water from surface to bottom. Average wind di-rection in winter is primarily from the west-northwest.
| |
| The net surface flow that results is eastward, with westward return flow developing below the sur- 4 face. The surface layer in the western end is advected to the east and is re-placed by subsurface water (Sweers 1969). This large-scale upwelling at the upwind end of the lake and downwelling at the downwind end mix the surface and subsurface water on a scale that is not likely to occur during the rest of the year.Pollutants that are limited to the upper layer during the time of a well-developed thermocline are diluted when the hypolimnetic water is made available for mixing. In spring, with the development of the thermocline, the bottom water is again partially insulated from the surface layer.II-lO science services division U c. Transient Response The general circulation just described is documented by observations collected over long periods (months).
| |
| The circulation patterns that are observed at any given time, however, are more complex as a result of the transient wind distribution and the lake's response to the nonsteady wind. Sometimes, a major wind shift can alter the currents in a matter of hours; at other times, some features of the current pattern continue, even with an opposing wind (Csanady 1972). The response time of the currents to a shift in wind distribution is partially related to the scale of the current: large features such as the coastal jet respond more sluggishly, whereas the response nearer to shore is more rapid -6 hours or less. Additionally, the deeper the current, the more slowly it responds.
| |
| A shift in the currents as a result of wind shifts eventually changes the lake surface slope and the temperature field, forcing an alteration Lt in much of the lake's circulation pattern.713. Local Currents In the course of preoperational studies for the James A. FitzPatrick plant, currents off the Nine Mile Point promontory were measured from May to October 1969 and from July to October 1970 (Gunwaldson et al 1970, PASNY 1971).-The field data clearly illustrated a correlation between summer currents and wind speed. The correlation, an accepted principle of hydrodynamics, was theo-F rized by Ekman (1928) and subsequently has been verified by numerous oceanog-raphers (e.g., Neumann and Pierson 1966). Measurements of wind currents at light-ships (Haight 1942) have been analyzed to determine the ratio of current speed to wind speed; reported values, commonly called the "wind factor," range between.* 0.005 and 0.030.Wind-speed frequency data averaged over a 6-hour period indicate that winds exceeding 32 kilometers per hour (20 miles per hour) occurred 21.6 percent of the time over the year. For the summer months (June through September), winds exceeding 32 km/hr (20 mph) occurred 13.9 percent of the time. The current speed of 6-hour duration that was exceeded with comparable frequency in 14 meters (46* feet) of water was about 15 centimeters per second (0.5 feet per second). For a persistence of 24 hours, the current speed that was exceeded 13.9 percent of the time was 13.7 cm/sec (0.45 fps).II-ii science services division The predominant direction of currents in the studies previously de- i scribed was alongshore, as dictated by continuity.
| |
| On those occasions when onshore or offshore currents were observed, their magnitudes were substantially less than those of alongshore currents.
| |
| During the summer, alongshore currents from both the west or east were equally frequent about 33 percent of the time.Onshore and offshore currents each accounted for nearly 5 percent of the ob-servations; the remaining 30 percent of the observations were below the flow-meter threshold, 0.05 knots (2.5 cm/sec, 0.09 fps). At the 6.4-meter (21-foot)depth in 14.0 meters (46 feet) of water, the mean onshore cgrrent speed was 3.0 cm/sec (0.09 fps).and the mean offshore current speed was 6.0 cm/sec (0.2 fps).On the other hand, alongshore currents from the west and east averaged 9 cm/sec (0..3 fps).Lake currents were measured at selected locations in the immediate vicinity of the Oswego Steam Station (about 6 miles west of Nine Mile Point)for 5 days between 12 October and 19 November 1970. These surface current ve-locities were mostly alongshore, with speeds ranging from less than 2.5 cm/sec (0.08 fps) to 15 cm/sec (0.50 fps). These data were consistent with measure-ments at Nine Mile Point and with wind current frequencies reported by Palmer and Izatt (1970) for Ontario waters of similar depth near Toronto, Canada.D. PREVIOUS STUDIES In order to assess the effects of an electric generating station on I the aquatic communities of a water body, the water quality of the area and the abundance, species composition, and distribution of the biota in relation to power plant operation must be delineated.
| |
| This section provides background information for the Nine Mile-Point area based on studies there as well as at other areas of Lake Ontario. Previous studies dealing with the major bio-logical groups present in the study area are considered.
| |
| Prior to 1971, ecological investigations in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point were conducted by Dr. J.F. Storr under contract to Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (Storr 1973). Dr. Storr collected data concerning the basic current flow patterns and the plankton, benthos, and fish populations observed in the area from 1963 to the early 1970s. In addition, Dr. Storr has continued to conduct extensive fish movement (tagging) studies in the area (Storr 1977).science services division 11-12 Lawler, Matusky, and Skelly (LMS) conducted investigations of the aquatic ecosystem in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point from 1972 through early 1977. These studies were associated with Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation's fossil-fueled Oswego Steam Station as well as the two nuclear stations at Nine Mile Point. Because the generating stations at Oswego and Nine Mile Point are in close proximity (Oswego is approximately 6 miles to the west), ecological data from both sites are utilized to establish ecological conditions in the Inearshore area.t96a The programs conducted by LMS (QLM 1973a, 1973b, and 1974; LMS 1975a, 1976a, and 1977a) at Nine Mile Point consisted of surveys of plankton (phyto-plankton, zooplankton, and ichthyoplankton), benthos, and fish populations during spring through fall at various depths and transect locations.
| |
| Impingement and.entrainment of nektonic and planktonic populations were also monitored at the Li stations' intakes. Water quality was investigated by LMS through 1976 in the TI vicinity of Nine Mile Point, including monthly determinations of inorganic nu-trients, metals, dissolved oxygen (DO), temperature, pH, and BOD concentrations.
| |
| Other studies in the immediate vicinity of the study area have been conducted by the Lake Ontario Environmental Laboratory (LOTEL) for Rochester Gas and Electric (RGE 1974) and by McNaught and Fenlon (1972) and McNaught and Buzzard (1973). The latter studies were concerned with the effects of plant operation on phytoplankton productivity and zooplankton populations.
| |
| : 1. Phytoplankton There is a limited amount of information available on the phytoplankton community of the Great Lakes, especially Lake Ontario. Some of the more-recent studies have been listed in literature reviews or previous environmental reports by Davis (1966, 1969), QLM (1972, 1974), and LMS (1975a). These studies showed that all phytoplankton divisions are present in Lake Ontario. Diatoms make up as much as 80 percent of the nearshore phytoplankton during the winter and spring. Summer phytoplankton consists of green and blue-green algae and a few diatoms. Over the entire yearly cycle, the most important constituents of the phytoplankton are the diatoms, phytoflagellates, and green algae. Previous taxonomic studies indicate that more than 300 phytoplankton taxa exist in Lake 11-13 science services division Ontario, the majority being green algae (Munawar and Nauwerck 1971). Primary production (1 4 C) and chlorophyll a estimates place Lake Ontario in a state between oligotrophy and mesotrophy (Wetzel 1975).Several investigators have described seasonal patterns of phytoplank-ton occurrence in Lake Ontario (Davis 1966; Nalewajko 1966, 1967; Munawar and Nauwerck 1971; QLM 1972, 1974). The seasonal patterns are correlated closely I with natural changes in physical conditions, i.e., water temperature and light intensity, and with the supply of dissolved inorganic nutrients.
| |
| Although there is some phytoplankton growth throughout the year, the annual cycle is usually characterized by two periods of rapid and unusually intense phytoplankton growth, termed "pulses" or "blooms." One pulse occurs during the spring and is dominated
| |
| }by diatoms; the other pulse occurs during the fall and is usually dominated by green and/or blue-green algae. }The seasonal patterns of phytoplankton observed in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point reflect those previously reported in Lake Ontario. The diatom community during winter and spring is composed principally of Asterionella spp., Fragilaria spp., Cyclotella spp., Melosira spp., and Tabellaria spp. During the summer and fall, blue-green algae such as Oscillatoria spp. and Microcystis spp. and green algae such as Scenedesmus spp., Pediastrum spp., and Ankistro-desmus spp. are the major taxa of the community.
| |
| Cryptomonas spp. and Rhodo-monas spp., both phytoflagellates, app-ear as members of the community throughout the year exhibiting their greatest density during winter.During previous years, the larger aquatic vegetation in Lake Ontario at Nine Mile Point has been dominated by Cladophora glomerata (IJC 1975). Clado-phera is a long filamentous alga attached by a holdfast to rocks and other sub-merged substrates.
| |
| Colonization and propagation of Cladophora extends out to a depth of about 20 feet, and the long, growing strands of Cladophora in water 5 feet deep or less are constantly being broken off by wave activity.
| |
| Maximum growth usually occurs in water about 10-15 feet deep, but this will vary, de-pending upon turbidity (Wezernak et al 1974). Cladophora grows at water tem-peratures ranging from 53*F to 77'F, but has an optimum growing temperature of 64'F. Growth of Cladophora begins in late May, reaches a peak in late June or early July, and declines during the warmer summer period of late July and early 11-14 science services division LJ August (Storr and Sweeney 1971). As temperatures drop, a secondary peak may occur in late August. Growth ceases in September due to decreasing light and i} temperature.
| |
| 11 2. Zooplankton Classifications according to size are widely used for distinguishing smaller and larger members of the zooplankton community.
| |
| For the purposes of surveys in the Nine Mile Point vicinity, the term "macrozooplankton" is defined ff1 as those invertebrate zooplankton retained in a 571-micrometer mesh plankton iJ net. Microzooplankton are functionally defined as the zooplankton ranging in size from 76 to 571 micrometers.
| |
| However, invertebrate crustaceans of the same A species may be found in both the macrozooplankton and microzooplankton collec-tions due to the wide range of sizes encompassed by the developmental stages of these organisms.
| |
| 1 Eleven major macrozooplankton taxa have been identified from collec-; .tions made in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point and Oswego (QLM 1974; LMS 1975a,.1 9 7 6a). The dominant macrozooplankton groups are cladocerans, copepods, and 1 Iamphipods; and the macrozooplankton community is frequently dominated by thecladoceran Leptodora-kindtii.
| |
| The amphipod Gammarus fasciatus is also abundant.4 Nematodes, hydroids, insect larvae (mainly Diptera), gastropods, and isopods are observed occasionally in macrozooplankton samples. Two macrozooplankton,!!1 Pontoporeia affinis and Mysis oculata relicta, which are cold-water glacial relict species, are observed primarily during periods of cold-water upwellings.
| |
| Some macrozooplankton typically exhibit diel vertical migrations.
| |
| For* example, Gammarus fasciatus and Leptodora kindtii move into the water column I during the night, but are found mostly in an epibenthic habitat (LMS 1977a) dur-ing the day. A decrease in the relative abundance of Leptodora kindtii and Gam-mar-us fasciatus during 1977-78 in comparison to 1973-76 data was related to changes in the field program (for example, night collections were discontinued in 1977)..The microzooplankton component of the total zooplankton community in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point is typically composed of four major taxonomic* groups: rotifers, cladocerans, copepods, and protozoans (LMS 1975a, 1975b, 1976a, 1976b, 1977a, 1977b; Storr 1973)..' ! .science services division 11-15 Rotifers geherally contribute the greatest percentage of microzooplank-ton abundance.
| |
| Members of this group exhibit a bimodal pattern of seasonal abundance, with the first and normally largest pulse occurring during July and a second pulse in early fall. Sampling conducted by both Storr (1973) and QLM (1974) indicated that the dominant rotifer was Keratella spp. i Cladocerans generally form the second highest percentage of the total }microzooplankton population (QLM 1974). The seasonal pattern of cladoceran abun-dance is bimodal: the first peak occurs during July; the second and usually greater Jýpeak during October or November.
| |
| Storr (1973) found Bosmina longirostris to be the dominant cladoceran, its abundance peaking in late summer/early fall; and Daphnia spp. to be the most abundant spring cladoceran.
| |
| The Oswego River may influence biotic communities along Nine Mile Point, especially the western end of the study area. Differences have been noted in species composition and seasonal trends be-tween the Oswego and Nine Mile Point areas, and were most likely the result of Oswego River influence on the lake biota (Storr 1973).Copepods in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point exhibit a seasonal cycle V similar to cladocerans, with nauplii typically abundant during the spring and adults in late summer (LMS 1976a).Protozoan abundance has been found to be highly variable; however, the general trend is for abundance to be lowest during winter and highest during summer (LMS 1975a). The dominant protozoans identified belong to the family Vorticellidae.i-Glooschenko et al (1972) found a bimodal pattern in the seasonal abun-dance of zooplankton at a station in eastern Lake Ontario. The occurrence of two peaks of abundance was similar to that observed by LMS in the vicinity of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, but the number of organisms found by Glooschenko et al was about an order of magnitude less than the number of or-ganisms found in the vicinity of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station (QLM 1972, 1974).i1 science services division 11-16
| |
| : 3. Benthic Invertebrates f] Studies of the benthic community in Lake Ontario show that several organisms exhibit distinct distributional patterns.
| |
| Brinkhurst (1969, 1970)reported that the general distribution of benthos in Lake Ontario followed the distribution of benthos in temperate oligotrophic water bodies having some in-shore areas supporting eutrophic forms. Historically, benthic studies have been 11 concentrated in the eastern portion of Lake Ontario (Johnson and Matheson 1968;Johnson and Brinkhurst 1971a, 1971b). Hiltunen (1969) and Kinney (1972) sam-pled the entire lake, including some stations in the Nine Mile Point area, while* other studies concentrated entirely in and around Oswego (Judd and Gemmel 1971, Storr 1973, QLM 1972).* The species composition and abundance of benthic macroinvertebrates in Lake Ontario have been shown to vary with depth. For example, benthic fauna was reported to increase in abundance and diversity with increasing depth (Judd I and Gemmel 1971), and Brinkhurst (1969) reported the presence of eutrophic species in the inshore area of the lake.*- In the deeper portions of Lake Ontario, benthic populations are dom-nated primarily by the amphipod Pontoporeia affinis and oligochaetes (Cook and Johnson 1974). In the nearshore zone, the natural assemblage apparently con-sists of Pontoporeia affinis, Stylodrilus spp., Limnodrilus spp., Tubifex spp., plus a variety of chironomids and sphaeriids.
| |
| Species of seven phyla (Nematoda, Mollusca, Platyhelminthes,.
| |
| Arthropoda, I Annelida, Coelenterata, and Nemertea) constitute the benthic community in the Nine Mile Point vicinity (LMS 1977a). These phyla include approximately 85 genera.Phylum Arthropoda, represented by 45 species, includes the most abun-dant organisms in the area; for example, Gammarus fasciatus is frequently the dominant species collected.
| |
| Members of the class Oligochaeta are relatively abundant throughout the year, and tubificid worms (Family Tubificidae) are abun-dant in all seasons and at most transects.
| |
| The majority of the organisms.
| |
| col-* -lected represent species associated primarily with the surface of the substrate, i.e., epibenthic species such as Gammarus fasciatus.
| |
| However, several infaunal forms, including members of the class Nematoda, have been collected..
| |
| 11-17i science services division 111 Differences observed in the distribution and species abundance of benthic invertebrates among stations and transects are attributed to animal/substrate relationships.
| |
| For example, Gammarus and Manayunkia are associated with bedrock substrate, while the nematode Dorylaimus, tubificids, and the dip-teran Cryptochironomus are abundant where substrates are mostly sand and silt.Benthic invertebrates in the Nine Mile Point vicinity have a seasonal 1 growth and reproduction pattern similar to that reported by Fretwell (1972) and Odum (1971) for temperate zones. Seasonally, the abundance of benthic macro- T invertebrates may exhibit the following typical sequence:
| |
| polychaetes and gastropods dominate in the spring, while oligochaetes and ostracods are abun-dant in early summer. The amphipod Gammarus fasciatus is frequently the domi-ant organism during late summer and through the fall (October-December), but polychaetes and oligochaetes also may be common in the fall.The trend of greater benthic invertebrate abundance during spring and fall may be due in part to the presence of actively growing Cladophora, a fila-mentous green alga which provides food and refuge for many invertebrate popula-tions, but is most probably the result of life-stage changes with seasons and the subsequent abundance of adults and larger immatures.
| |
| During 1974 and 1975,* Cladophora exhibited a maximum seasonal abundance in June (LMS 1976a). Clado-phora biomass decreased rapidly with depth and was either scarce or nonexistent at depths of 30 and 40 feet. This was previously noted by Neil and Owen (1964).Christie (1974) attributes the increased productivity observed in Lake Ontario during recent years to the growth of Cladophora and its associated fauna. H*I 4. Ichthyoplankton a ,Fish eggs and larvae are most abundant in the Nine Mile Point area of Lake Ontario from April through September; however, some eggs have been collected as early as February and larvae have been collected in December.
| |
| Published data I on the abundance and distribution of ichthyoplankton in the eastern end of Lake Ontario are limited primarily to annual reports of aquatic ecology studies in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point (QLM 1974; LMS 1975a, 1976a, and 1977a) and studies related to the effects of entrainment and thermal discharges at the T-: three existing power stations in the Oswego-Nine Mile Point area (NMPC 1975, 11-18 science services division F1 0 I J 1976b, 1976c, and 1976d; LMS 1976b, 1977b). However, information on distribu-tion of ichthyoplankton near Mexico Bay just east of Nine Mile Point has re-cently been published by NYSEG (1978). Additional information on fish eggs and larvae in the Great Lakes includes studies on Lake Michigan (Norden 1968, Jude et al 1975, Jude 1976, TI 1976, Consumers Power 1975 and 1976, Detroit Edison 1976, and Cole et al 1978), Lake Erie (Nelson and Cole 1975; TI 1977a, 1977b, 1977c; Wolfert et al 1977), Lake Huron (O'Gorman 1975) and Lake St.Clair (Detroit-Edison 1977).Over the last 5 years, annual surveys have reported between 15 and 22 taxa of eggs and larvae in the Nine Mile Point area. Alewife has consistently dominated the ichthyoplankton community (LMS 1977a, 1977b). Other relatively abundant species in the area are rainbow smelt, white perch, sculpin, and johnny (tessellated) darter. The temporal distribution of eggs and larvae in the Nine Mile Point area is characterized by two basic spawning groups: species typi-cally spawning in the winter and early spring, e.g., burbot, Coregonus spp., rainbow smelt, and yellow perch; and late spring and summer spawning species, e.g., alewife, white perch, and carp. Eggs and larvae of the first group are most abundance during April, May, and early June. The larvae of the species in the second group are most abundant in July and August.Eggs and young larvae are apparently more abundant at the 20-foot than the 40-foot depth contour near Nine Mile Point.(LMS 1975a), but larvae tendto move offshore into deeper water as they mature. A similar onshore-offshore distribution for larvae was observed during an ecological study in-Lake Erie (NMPC 1976a).Eggand larvae densities in the Nine Mile Point area are relatively low except for alewives.
| |
| During a review of Nine Mile Point studies, Williams et al (1975) indicated that the area does not contain desirable spawning and nursery sites because of nearshore wave action, bedrock/rubble substrate, and sometimes extensive beds of Cladophora.
| |
| I[ ?11-19 science services division----
| |
| : 5. Fish (Nekton)The Great Lakes contain an extensive fish fauna which includes repre-sentatives of most of the important families of North American freshwater fishes.Hubbs and Lagler (1958) list 173 species of native and introduced fish in 28 families for the Great Lakes and their tributaries.
| |
| Lake Ontario has one of the most diverse fish communities of the five Laurentian Great Lakes consisting of 112 species in 25 families (Ryder 1972).Historically, the offshore fish community in Lake Ontario was composed princi- i pally of oligotrophic or cold-water fish such as Coregonus spp. (whitefish, ciscos, and chubs), lake trout, and burbot, while the nearshore waters con- ij tained a more diverse fish fauna composed of many varieties of basically warm-water fish (Christie 1974). However, the combined effects of commercial fishing, modification of the drainage basin through construction of dams and canals, in-vasion of marine species such as the alewife and sea lamprey, cultural eutrophi-cation (Smith 1972a, 1972b), and possibly other factors changed the Lake Ontario fish community so that it is dominated now by alewife, rainbow smelt, white perch, and yellow perch (Christie 1973, 1974). Associated with this shift in species composition was a corresponding change'in the use of Lake Ontario by the present fish community.
| |
| Whereas the historically prominent fish species were wide-ranging piscivores (feed on fish) and pelagic (open water) plankton feeders that utilized the entire area of the lake, the present fish community j has definite patterns of movement that vacate areas of the lake during certain seasons. During spring, alewife and rainbow smelt migrate extensively from the depths of the lake to spawn in nearshore areas or in tributaries and small streams. After spawning, these species migrate out into the lake and occupy varying strata of water during summer. During fall,, alewives migrate to the deeper waters to overwinter while rainbow smelt migrate to and overwinter in nearshore areas.The fish community in the Nine.Mile Point area of Lake Ontario was intensively sampled from March 1973 through December 1978 by trawling, gill netting, and seining (QLM 1974; LMS 1975a, 1976a, 1977a; TI 1978b, 1979). Prior to 1973, fish were collected intermittently by Storr (1973) using gill nets and 11-20 science services division trap nets. Approximately 50 species were identified in samples taken during this period (1969-1978), and alewife was the dominant species collected.
| |
| Other abun-dant species were rainbow smelt, spottail shiner, yellow perch, and white perch.Seasonal abundance of fish in the Nine Mile Point vicinity is typical of that observed for the Lake Ontario fish community.
| |
| The greatest abundance of fish is usually observed during the spring months, corresponding with the 1] spawning of rainbow smelt and the shoreward spawning migration of alewives.Abundance and diversity are lowest during the warm summer months and then in-crease, especially diversity, during the fall. Lower abundance and diversity during summer are due, in part, to postspawning migrations from the area by adults and selectivity of the sampling gear in relation to collecting the smaller Sjuvenile fish.Studies concerning fish impingement at power stations prior to 1970 are limited, but substantial data on this subject have become available in recent years. .Edsall and Yocum (1972) provided a fairly complete summary of the earlier industry-related fish impingement studies on the Great Lakes, and Sharma and Freeman (1977) presented a more recent review. Impingement of fish has been documented in Lake Huron (Edsall and Yocum 1972), Lake Erie (TI 1977b, 1977c), Lake Michigan (TI 1976), and at various locations in Lake Ontario (LMS 1977b).Impingement monitoring studies in the Nine.Mile Point area of Lake Ontario were initiated in 1972 at the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station and in 1975 at the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Station and have continued to the present (QPM 1973b, 1974; LMS 1975b, 1976b, 1977a, 1977b; TI 1978b, 1979). Ap-Li proximately 60 species have been identified from samples taken at the two nuclear plants during this period. Alewife, rainbow smelt, and, in later years, three" L] spine stickleback have been the dominant species collected.
| |
| Other relatively abundant species have been gizzard shad, emerald shiner, spottail shiner, and sculpin. The total number of fish impinged has ranged from less than 0.5 to 5 million fish annually at the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station and was approxi-mately 4 million fish during the first complete year 1976) of sampling at the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Station.11-21 science services division i~7 5X Impingement rates are usually highest during spring, coinciding with the spawning of rainbow smelt and the inshore spawning migration of alewives.Impingement rates are lowest during summer, probably reflecting postspawning migrations by adults to deeper water. Fall rates usually show a secondary peak I]in impingement rates as the young-of-the-year fish become large enough to be impinged.
| |
| V Murarka (1976) recommended gathering additional fisheries data on Lake Ontario populations for properly determining the ecological significance of fish impingement in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point on the Lake Ontario fishery. However, in a report evaluating the potential impact of impingement at the James A. FitzPatrick station, LMS (1977b) indicated that current im-pingement losses attributable to power plants on Lake Ontario, including both Nine Mile Point and James A FitzPatrick, have no measurable direct or indirect impact on the present sport or commercial fisheries.
| |
| U a "-ii science services division 11-22 SECTION III METHODS AND MATERIALS A. LAKE ONTARIO STUDIES The sampling design and methods described in this section represent a program that has evolved during several years of ecological studies on Lake Ontario in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point. Two nuclear power stations, Nine Mile Point Unit 1 (NMP) and James A. FitzPatrick (JAF), which began operation in December 1969 and July 1975, respectively, are located on the Nine Mile Point promontory.
| |
| Biological surveysbegan in this area of Lake Ontario in the mid-1960s, and intensive ecological studies that employed methods similar} to those.described in this section have been conducted since the early 1970s.Most sampling for the 1978 program was conducted along four tran-sects extending perpendicular from the Lake Ontario shoreline (Figure III-1 and Table ;TII-l). The transects
| |
| -NMPP (Nine Mile Point Plant) and FITZ (J.A. Fitz-Patrick Plant) -represent a zone in the lake near the two plants' submerged intake and discharge structures..
| |
| This zone can be influenced by the removal of J. cooling water and by subsequent thermal discharges and has been referred to as the experimental area. The transect to the west of the power stations, NMPW (Nine Mile Point West), is upcurrent of the experimental area most of the time with respect to the prevailing currents and thus represents a zone considered outside the influence of the intakes and thermal discharges; this area has been referred to- as a control area. The NNPE (Nine Mile Point East) transect is usually downcurrent from the discharge structures with respect to the prevailing currents and represents an area that might be influenced by the thermal dis-charges; .this zone has been referred to as the farfield or control area. A transect called NMPP/FITZ is intermediate between the two experimental-zone transects (Figure III-1); it represents the trawling stations in the experimen-tal zone, since trawling was conducted along depth contours and normally began near the FITZ transect and terminated near the NNPP transect.
| |
| Also, along the NMPP/FITZ transect, some water quality samples were collected.
| |
| 111 -i science services division NMPP/FITZ N TORONTO LAKE ONTARiO' _C OSHEGST ROCHESTER FITZ NMPP NMPW I-'a C i 0 S 0 S S S I a 0 0 1J2 1 1...... ICHTHYOPLANKTON AND MACROZOOPLANKTON STATIONS W I 0 INTAKE STATUTE MILES 0 DISCHARGE Figure III-I.Sampling Locations for Lake Ontario Ecological Studies near Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick Power Plants, 1978~2 IS IS -. -.... .....--s ~
| |
| ELI. py ~ ~-w' r~z:z~uc" ~ ~ .-~ -~ -.Table III-1 Sampling Schedule for Aquatic Ecology Studies in Lake Ontario near Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick Power Plants, 1978 (9;1 I-H#0 0 6 U a 0m Depth Contour Samples Tasi Frequency-Season ft) Transect Depth per Year-v Comments Phytop]ankton Densities Monthly (0) Apr-Dec 10,20.40.60 IMPW,NWPP,FITZ,NMPE Surface and 342 -At the 40-ft contour on the NMPE transect, phytoplankton, chloro-Chlorophyll a Monthly (0) Apr-Dec 10,20,40,60 NMPW,NW4P,FITZ,NMPE light levels 342 phyll a, and 14C samples are collected at the SD, 25, and I percent Pr r plight Transmittance levels in addition to surface samples.Primary production Monthly (0) Apr-Dee 10,20,40,60 NMPWNPP,FITZNMPE.
| |
| 513 Primary production sampling involves a larger number of samples per year (14C) because there are two light and one dark bottle per sampling location.Zooplankton Microzooplankton Monthly (D) Apr-Dec I0.20,40,60 NMPW,NMPP,FITZ,NMPE Oblique tows 288 Macrozooplankton Monthly (0) Apr-Dec 20,40,60,80,100 0.5-, 1-, 3-mi radii Composite of 135 There are six sampling stations along both the 20- and 40-ft contours surface mid- within areas bounded by 0.5-, 1-, and 3-mile radii and sinqle stations depth; bottom at the 60-, 80-, and 100-ft contours along NMPP (Figure 111-1).tows Periphyton Bottom substrates Monthly (0) Apr-Dec 5,10,20,30,40 NWW,N*P,FITZ,NMPE Bottom 640 Artificial substrates are set in April and retrieved for the first time in May.Suspended substrates Monthly (D) May-Sep 40 NMPW,,NPE,FITZ 2, 7 l2, 17 ft 120 The NMPP/FITZ transaect is located midway between the two transects from surface extending offshore from the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick Power Plants (Figure 111-1).Benthic Invertebrates Bimonthlyt (0) Apr-Dec 10,20,30,40,60 NMPWNMPP.FITZ,MPE Bottom 200 lchthyoplankton Weekly (0) Apr-Noe (0) 20,40.60,80,100.
| |
| 0.5, 1-, 3-mi radii Surface, mid- 2340 See Figure Ill-I for transact locations.
| |
| Weekly (N) Jun to mid-Sep (N) depth, bottom Semimonthly CD) Dec tows Fisheries Trawls Semimonthly (D/N) Apr-Dec 20,40.60 NMPW,NMIPE,N.PP/FIM Bottom 324 "Trawl tows far the NMPP/FITZ transect begin near the FITZ transect and end near the NMPP transect.Gill net Semimlonthly (D/N) Apr-Dec 15,20,30.40.60 NMPW,NMPP.FITZ,NMPE Bottom 1260 Along the 20-ft contour, the NMPP transect is not sampled. Each gill net sample is approximately 12 hr long, representing the time between sunrise and sunset or between sunset and sunrise.:Beach seine Semimonthly (D) Apr-Dec Shoreline NMPW,NMPP,FITZ,N1>PE Bottom 72: Trap net .Semimonthly (N) Apr-Dec 20 NMPW,NWP,FITZ,NMPE Bottom -72 Water Quality 11 parameters (Group 1) Monthly (0) Apr-Dec 20,40 NMPW,FITZNMPE Surface 54 17 parameters (Group I) Semimonthly (0) Apr-Dec 20,60 NMPW,NMPP,NKPiE Surface 108 48 parameters (GroupIlOB)
| |
| Monthly (D) Apr-Dec 25,45 NMPP/FITZ Surface,bottom 36 Temperature Profiles Weekly (0) Apr-Dec 100 NMPW,FITZ,NMPE At I-m intervals 317 from surface to bottom u*o *D dey nanmnllna r (NJ( = nlight Samipling"tDetails on sampling requirements (number of replicates, samples per month, etc) are presented in Section II of the SOP for the Nine Mile Point Ecological Monitoring Program. .tBimonthly is defined as every other month; semimonthly as twice per month.
| |
| *1 Ichthyoplankton (fish eggs and larvae) samples were collected at 15 stations shown in Figure III-i. Along the 20- and 40-foot contours, tows were made both to the east and west within zones located approximately 0.5, 1, and ]3 miles from the Nine Mile Point station. Directly north of the Nine Mile Point station, ichthyoplankton tows were made at the 60-, 80-, and 100-foot contours on the NMPP transect.
| |
| Macrozooplankton were sampled at the same locations used for ichthyoplankton (Table III-1). ]The periphyton community and planktonic components of the aquatic ecosystem except ichthyoplankton were sampled monthly (Table III-1). To monitor life stages that may be in the area for only a few weeks, ichthyoplankton were sampled weekly except in December.
| |
| The fish community was sampled twice per 1 month; the relatively sedentary benthic invertebrate community every other month.Various water quality parameters were measured monthly or twice per month, and temperature profiles were obtained weekly at three stations on the 100-foot con-tour to determine the temperature structure offshore of the power plants and document the extent of stratification.
| |
| : 1. Phytoplankton Vj Phytoplankton are primary producers, forming the base of the food chain in most aquatic ecosystems.
| |
| They are usually microscopic and suspended 4 in the water column. In this study, the phytoplankton community was character-ized by determining cell densities, chlorophyll a concentrations, and primary production rates in the control and experimental areas.a. Field Sampling 1 Replicate whole-water samples were collected with a Van Dorn water bottle from I meter below the surface along the four principal transects at the 10-, 20-, 40-, and 60-foot depth contours (Figure III-1 and Table III-1).In addition, on the 40-foot contour of the NMPE transect, samples were collected at the 50-, 25-, and 1-percent light-transmittance levels determined with a Kahlsico Model 268WA310 submarine photometer.
| |
| Water temperatures were measuredlJ in situ at all phytoplankton sampling locations.
| |
| The two replicate samples at each location were composited before sub-samples were removed. For phytoplankton densities, two 3.8-liter subsampies 111-4 science services division were withdrawn and preserved with acid Lugol's (1:100 concentration) solution.Two 2-liter subsamples were withdrawn for chlorophyll a analysis and were placed on ice in the dark. For primary productivity, one dark and two light BOD bottles (300 milliliters) were filled from each composite sample and allowed to overflow at least once. The water was passed through a 300-micrometer mesh net to ex-clude larger zooplankton and detritus.
| |
| The capped BOD bottles were placed on ice in the dark to reduce productivity and respiration of phytoplankton until lab processing could begin. A 100-milliliter water sample was collected at each location for alkalinity determinations required for productivity analyses, and two 300-milliliter water samples used for primary productivity background analy-sis were collected at each of the 20-foot contour locations.
| |
| The alkalinity and 71. background samples were placed on ice in the dark.i i b. Laboratory Processing
| |
| : 1) Phytoplankton Density TI At the field laboratory, the phytoplankton density samplis, each con-sisting of about 2 liters of thoroughly mixed sample placed in an individual chamber with one drop of dishwashing detergent, were settled in aluminum-covered glass settling chambers (Weber 1973). After each sample had settled for 48 to 72 hours, approximately 1800 milliliters of the cell-free water was drawn off with a vacuum pump and the remaining 200 milliliters centrifuged at 2000 rpm for 12 minutes until a small pellet of organisms remained.
| |
| All except 10 milli-liters of the centrifuged -sample was drawn off, leaving the pellet intact. The-pellet was then resuspended into the remaining volume and emptied into an 8-dram J} glass vial. Then, 3 to 4 milliliters of a solution of three parts 95 percent! *..ethanol and one part formalin was added as a final preservative.
| |
| Phytoplankton identification and enumeration were performed at 400X magnification using a Palmer cell (APHA 1976) and 20 randomly picked fields.(10 fields per subsample).
| |
| : 2) Chlorophyll a Concentration Filtration of water samples to determine the chlorophyll a concen-tration was.initiated immediately after return from the field. Between 500 and 2000 milliliters was filtered through a Whatman GF/A glass-fiber filter 111-5 science services division at approximately 15 pounds per square inch. Before the last 50 milliliters 11 of the sample were filtered,.l milliliter of magnesium carbonate suspension (1.0 gram in 100 milliliters of distilled water) was added. The filter was folded carefully with the plankton to the inside, placed into an 8-dram glass vial, and frozen at -189C (0 0 F). -Chlorophyll was extracted from the phytoplankton cells using 90.per-cent acetone and a tissue grinder to break up the cells. Samples were placed ii in a darkened refrigerator at 4-8*C for 24 hours, then centrifuged to remove any filter fragments from the extract. The extracted chlorophyll was then placed SI into a Beckman Model 26 spectrophotometer using a 5-centimeter path-length spec-trophotometer cell, and extinction values were measured at 665 and 750 nanometers Next, two drops of 50 percent hydrochloric acid were added to the cell, the con-tents agitated, and extinction values measured again at 665 and 750 nanometers for the degradation product, phaeophytin
| |
| : a. The mathematical conversion of ex-ltinction values to chlorophyll a concentrations is presented in the discussion on. data redhction that follows (subsection c). I.3) Primary Productivity As soon as they had been returned to the field laboratory, all light and dark bottles were inoculated with 5 microcuries of radioactive carbon (1 4 C) }in the form of sodium bicarbonate.
| |
| After the radioactive material was added, the bottles were inverted several times and placed in an incubator at ambient H lake surface temperature under a fluorescent light at approximately 200 foot-candles for 4 hours, then fixed with 1 milliliter of neutral full-strength f7 formalin to stop all production.
| |
| Each sample was filtered slowly through a i Gelman membrane filter composed of a blend of nitrocellulose and cellulose T acetate. After all excess liquid had been drawn through the filter, the sample was removed using forceps and placed into a scintillation vial to dry for 4-6 hours at 20-25*C. After drying, 10 milliliters of Aquasol (New England Nuclear) was added to the vial, which was shaken until the filter pad broke into small pieces;2 milliliters of water was immediately added, forming a gel, with the broken I filter pad in suspension.
| |
| Vials were sealed and labeled.Primary productivity samples were analyzed with liquid scintillation
| |
| -.techniques using a Beckman LS-100 scintillation counter. Counts per minute 1j III-6 sclence services division were used to calculate primary productivity values according to the formula presented in the data reduction discussion that follows. Sample disposal was I] according to established procedures for handling radioactive material.c. Data Reduction"1 1) Phytoplankton Density Densities (number per milliliter) of individual taxa and major summary groups (divisions) were calculated for each sample.I J Mean density of two replicate samples from the same location on the same date was calculated with the following estimators:
| |
| Density of sample = (1)1]f V where, x = number of organisms within the microscopic fields (or aliquot analyzed)f = total volume of the microscopic fields (or aliquot analyzed)s = volume of lab sample.V = total volume of lake water sampled and (dl+d 2+--... d)Mean density at specific location = (2)V " r x where d density of replicates
| |
| :. r = number of replicates The standard error of the means of replicate samples (Snedecor and Cochran 1967) was calculated to indicate variation between replicates using the following estimator:
| |
| S r eIDr-D2;iStandard error 1= 2 (3)2 111-7 science services division where Al D1 = density in replicate 1 D2 = density in replicate 2 To evaluate temporal and spatial distributions of the phytoplankton, the following estimator was used to calculate each taxon's mean density by individual sampling periods for the site (all stations combined), specific I contour, and area (experimental or control): n Mean density = i=l (4)where th L d. = density for i location n = number of locations sampled The variation among phytoplankton densities at the sampling locations was determined by calculating standard errors of the contour means, the control '1 and experimental area means, and the site means using the following estimator for each summary group: J Standard error = (5)n (n-1)(5 where* .th di = density for i location (or i replicate) n number of station locations sampled (or number j of replicates)
| |
| The formula assumed that selected stations, contours, and control and experimental areas were approximately equivalent to randomly selected stations, contours, and control and experimental areas.111-8 science services division
| |
| : 2) Chlorophyll a Concentration The concentration of chlorophyll a and phaeophytin a in each sample was derived using extinction values (spectrophotometer readings) for acidified and unacidified samples. Individual sample concentrations were calculated using equations provided by Strickland and Parsons (1972). Values were reported as micrograms per liter: 1ii 26.7 (665o_-665_a x V Chlorophyll a = V x a (6)26.7 (1.7[665 -665 ]) (7)]a 0 Phaeophytin a = Vx Z (7)where 665 = extinction at 665 nanometers after acidification a 665 = extinction at 665 nanometers before acidification i 0 V = volume of acetone used for extraction (milliliters)
| |
| V = volume of water filtered (liters)£ = cell path length (centimeters)Equations 2 and 3 were used to calculate the mean concentration and standard error, respectively, at each location.
| |
| Equations 4 and 5 were used to calculate the means and standard errors of the contours, control and experi-mental areas, and site.] 3) Primary Productivity Primary production was calculated using the following equation and I was reported as milligrams of carbon assimilated per cubic meter during the incubation period: (cpmLcpmD) volume of bottle\S(c( volume filtered Production.
| |
| (1000) (IC) (1.06) (8)Stock cpm where Production amount of carbon assimilated per cubic meter per unit time 4 cpmL = counts per minute of light bottle MI-9.science aervices division cpmD counts per minute of dark bottle H Stock cpm = counts per minute determined from stock solution IC = available carbon as determined using bicarbonate alkalinity values (micrograms per liter) 4j The 1.06 in Equation 8 represents the factor accounting for the isotopic effect of carbon.2. Zooplankton I Zooplankton, or invertebrate animal plankton, are at an intermediate stage in the food web; i.e., they feed upon phytoplankton or other zooplankton i]and are fed upon by larger organisms.
| |
| Most zooplankton, like phytoplankton, cannot sustain mobility against water currents.a. Field Sampling I;A 12-centimeter-diameter Wisconsin net with 76-micrometer mesh net and length-to-mouth diameter ratio of 3:1 was used to sample zooplankton.
| |
| An electronic flowmeter towed alongside the boat to determine towing speed was checked frequently via a readout in the boat cabin and was calibrated each month. }Duplicate microzooplankton samples were collected simultaneously by towing two nets obliquely for 2 to 4 minutes at a velocity of 1.0 to 1.5 meters I per second. Four depth contours along the NMPW, NMPP, FITZ, and NMPE transects were sampled monthly during the day (Figure III-1 and Table 11l-1), and surface and bottom temperatures were recorded at the end of each tow.Fifteen minutes after being fixed with a rose bengal stain/acid Lugol's solution, microzooplankton samples were preserved by adding buffered formalin to achieve a 10 percent formalin concentration.
| |
| 4 Larger zooplankton (macrozooplankton) were collected once per month during the day (usually the second week) in conjunction with ichthyoplankton
| |
| .sampling by horizontally towing a 1-meter-diameter Hensen net having a 571-micrometer mesh and a length:diameter ratio of 6:1. Two digital flowmeters mounted near the center of the net mouth provided volumetric data, and an elec-tronic flowmeter determined towing velocity.
| |
| The *tows (5 minutes at a velocity 111-10science services division III-1 of 1 meter per second) were at subsurface, mid-depth, and off-bottom at the locations indicated in Figure III-i and Table III-1. At each sampling location, surface and bottom water temperatures were taken; if the difference between the two was more than 2'C, a mid-depth temperature was also taken.b. Laboratory Processing The two microzooplankton samples from each location were composited prior to laboratory processing.
| |
| Two subsamples were removed from each composite j sample for density analysis.
| |
| The samples were mixed thoroughly.
| |
| An aliquot was withdrawn using a wide-bore pipette and was placed in a Sedgwick-Rafter cell.All microzooplankton within five strips of each chamber for three Sedgwick-Rafter chambers (cells) were identified to species level whenever practical and were enumerated at 10OX magnification.
| |
| Densities were reported as-number per cubic meter. Additional strips were counted if necessary to obtain a 200-organism minimum.Macrozooplankton densities were determined using ichthyoplankton sam-1pies. After the ichthyoplankton in subsurface, mid-depth, and off-bottom sam-pies had been analyzed, the three depth samples were composited into one sample for each location and the composited sample split in half using a modified Folsom splitter.
| |
| Each fraction was analyzed within a gridded petri dish. Macrozooplank-ton were identified to species level whenever practical and data recorded as organisms per 1000 cubic meters.I c. Data Reduction Individual taxon densities in each microzooplankton or macrozooplank-ton sample were calculated.
| |
| Equation 2 (subsection A.l.c) was used to calculate the mean density for the two replicate microzooplankton samples collected at each location.
| |
| Equation 3 (subsection A.l.c) was used to determine the standard error of the mean density of these replicates.
| |
| The densities of each major group were obtained from the sums of the mean densities of each taxon within the group, whiletotal densities (all taxa combined) were obtained by summing group densities.
| |
| Temporal and spatial distributions of zooplankton (either micro- or macrozooplankton) were determined by calculating contour, site, and experimental III-ll science services division and control area mean densities for individual sampling periods using Equation 4 (subsection A.l.c). To indicate variation among densities at these locations, standard errors were calculated using Equation 5 (subsection.A.l.c).
| |
| : 3. Periphyton For purposes of density estimation, periphyton were defined as the assemblage of algae growing on surfaces of submerged objects such as coloniza-tion slides. The species composition of this sessile community can provide important information relative to the quality of the aquatic environment.
| |
| For purposes of biomass determination, periphyton were defined as organisms, includ-ing algae and smaller invertebrates, present on the surface of colonization slides.a. Field Sampling Periphyton were collected monthly in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point on Lake Ontario using 51.6-square-centimeter plexiglass slides. Collections from the artificial substrates were used to determine seasonal patterns, commu-nity composition, and spatial distribution of periphyton.
| |
| Bottom samples were from five depth contours on the NMPW, NMPP, FITZ, and NMPE transects (Figure III-1 and Table III-1). In addition, samplers were suspended at depths of 2, 7, 12, and 17 feet along the 40-foot contour on the NMPW, NMPP, and FITZ tran-sects. Four plexiglass slides for bottom periphyton samples and two slides for suspended periphyton were placed into position at each location each month and harvested approximately 30 days later. Bottom periphyton samples were collected from May through December, while suspended periphyton samples were collected from May through September.
| |
| Periphyton samples were scraped from both sides of each substrate, placed in individual vials, fixed with 1 percent acid Lugol's solution, and preserved with 10 percent buffered formalin.b. Laboratory Processing Periphyton were identified and enumerated in a Sedgwick-Rafter cell at 200X magnification.
| |
| Sample vials were inverted several times to gently homogenize the samples just before their transfer to the Sedgwick-Rafter cell.Randomly chosen fields were analyzed until 200 organisms had been counted.Density was reported as number of cells per square millimeter of substrate surface.111-12 science services division To obtain biomass data, samples were dried at 105'C for 36 hours (or until a constant weight had been attained), then cooled in a desiccator for 2 hours before being weighed to the nearest 10-5 gram on an analytical balance. Then, the dried samples were heated for 0.5 hour in a muffle furnace[I at 500 0 C, cooled in a desiccator for 2 hours, and reweighed to the nearest 10-5 gram. The difference in weight represented the ash-free dry weight of Feriphy-ton (all species combined) per square decimeter.
| |
| : c. Data Reduction The density of each identified taxon was calculated using the following estimate: Density (No./cm) = (9)f a where x = number of specimens in each taxon LI within aliquot f = volume of aliquot enumerated s= volume of sample 2 a = area of slide surface (51.6 cm2)Total biomass was calculated using the following equation: Total biomass (mg/dmi2) (total ash-free dry weight .100 (10)area of slide (51.6 cm 2)Mean densities and mean total biomass for each location were cal" I culated using Equation 2 (subsection A.l.c). The density of each major group was obtained from the sums of the mean densities of the taxa within a group, I [and total density was obtained from the sums of the major groups.Equation 3 (subsection A.l.c) was used to estimate the standard error of the mean of replicate suspended periphyton samples. Equation 5 was used to estimate the standard error of bottom periphyton.
| |
| TTI-13 science services division Trends in temporal and spatial distribution were examined from the mean densities (using Equation 4) for specific contodrs, the entire site, and the experimental and control areas. The standard errors of these mean densi-ties were calculated using Equation 5.4. Benthic Invertebrates
| |
| : a. Field Sampling Benthic macroinvertebrates live part or all of their life cycle within or upon available substrates in the aquatic environment.
| |
| These consumers, like zooplankton, are at an intermediate stage in the food web.To sample benthos in the Nine Mile Point area, a scuba diver used a self-contained, 0.166-square-meter submersible suction sampler similar to that described by Gale and Thompson (1975).Duplicate benthic samples were collected every 2 months from the sub-strate present at 20 stations (Figure III-i and Table III-l), and attempts were made to sample the same substrate type from month to month. Bottom water tem-perature was taken at each station.Samples were washed in the field on a U.S. Standard No. 30 sieve (590-micrometer mesh) and preserved with buffered formalin.b. Laboratory Processing In the laboratory, samples were sieved through a U.S. Standard No. 35 (500-micrometer mesh) to supplement field sieving and wash off the formalin.
| |
| Then the benthic organisms were separated from the remaining debris and placed in vials of 70 percent ethanol. All benthic organisms were subsequently identified to the lowest practical taxon and enumerated using a dissecting microscope.
| |
| To obtain the wet-weight biomass, organisms were sorted by major group, blotted to remove excess alcohol, and weighed immediately to the nearest 0.1/milligram.
| |
| Biomass was reported in grams per square meter. A group of only a few individuals in a sample was combined with the same group from the replicate sample or with individuals from stations along the same depth contour if neces-sary to obtain a sufficient number for weight determination.
| |
| 111-14 science services division Since all benthic organisms within each sample were analyzed, the density or. biomass of benthic invertebrates in each sample was simply the num-ber (or weight) of organisms divided by the cross-sectional area of the sampler.The mean density or biomass and standard error at each station were.i' derived using Equations 2 and 3 respectively (subsection A.l.c). The density of each major group was obtained from the sums of the mean densities of the taxa within the group, and group densities were summed to obtain total densities (all taxa combined).
| |
| To determine temporal and spatial distributions of the benthic inver-tebrates, mean densities and associated standard errors were calculated by sam-ple periods for the entire site, various depth contours, and control and experi-mental areas using Equations 4 and 5 (subsection A.l.c).5. Ichthyoplankton 1 Ichthyoplankton are the early developmental stages'(eggs and larvae)* of fish. The larvae of most fish species are planktonic (drifting or suspended in water), whereas the eggs are either planktonic or demersal (heavier than water).a. Field Sampling Ichthyoplankton samples were collected from subsurface, mid-depth, and off-bottom strata using the same sampling techniques and 'locations (Figure-III-1 and Table III-1) described for macrozooplankton sampling (subsection 2).During each sampling period, one horizontal tow was made'at each depth strata'at all stations.
| |
| Day samples were collected weekly from April through November and night samples weekly from June through mid-September.
| |
| In December, samples were collected twice per month during the day.b.' Laboratory Processing Ichthyoplankton samples were strained with a 300-micrometer screen to remove silt and preservative.
| |
| The following definitions were established for life stages: Egg Prior to hatching Prolarvae From time of hatching until absorption of the yolk sac (yolk-sac larvae)111-15 science services division Postlarvae From time of yolk-sac absorption until acqui-sition of fin-ray complement, body form, and pigmentation of an adult (post yolk-sac larvae)If there were more than 400 specimens per sample, the sample was divided into two aliquots with a modified Folsom plankton splitter (Lewis and Garriott 1970). The larger debris was removed prior to splitting.
| |
| Splitting continued until about 200 fish eggs and larvae remained in each reduced portion.The whole sample or aliquot was examined and the ichthyoplankton separated by.life stage. Each life stage was identifed to species level when possible and enumerated.
| |
| Juveniles (the life stage following postlarvae) were not considered to be ichthyoplankton because- they are free-swimming organisms.
| |
| : c. Data Reduction The density of each species collected at each depth strata was calcu- j lated using Equation 1 (subsection A.l.c) and reported as number of eggs, pro-larvae, or postlarvae per 1000 cubic meters of water sampled. A mean density 1 for each sampling station (subsurface, mid-depth, and off-bottom depth strata combined) and a mean density for each depth strata along the 20- and 40-foot JJ depth contours were calculated using Equation 2. The station mean densities were averaged to obtain mean densities for the 20- and 40-foot depth contours 1 and a site density. Since there was only one station each at the 60-, 80-, and I 100-foot depth contours, the station mean density at these locations was equiva-lent to the contour mean density. I 6. Fisheries The fish population in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point includes .both primary and secondary consumers.
| |
| Fish represent the higher consumer levels in an aquatic ecosystem and provide a base for the sport and commercial fishing industries.
| |
| I a. Field Sampling To reduce the selectivity that is inherent in the use of only one gear, adult and juvenile fish populations in the Nine Mile Point study area were sampled with a variety of gear including experimental gill nets, bottom trawls, beach seines, and trap nets.111-16 science services division 0 I-V f--I~L. I ri The experimental gill nets were 8 feet deep and had six 25-foot-long panels. Mesh sizes of the panels ranged from 0.5 to 2.5 inches bar measure.Gill net sets were made twice monthly from April through December at 19 loca-tions. The nets were set parallel to shore around sunrise or sunset and re-trieved at approximately 12-hour intervals for 48 hours (Table III-1) except at the 20-foot depth contour where there were two 12-hour sets. As each net was retrieved, bottom water temperature was recorded.The otter trawl had 1-inch mesh wings and body and a 30-foot foot rope, a 27-foot head rope, and a vertical mouth opening of about 6 feet; the cod end was equipped with a 0.25-inch mesh liner. Trawl samples were taken twice per month during both day and night at nine sampling locations.
| |
| Day trawling began about sunrise; night trawling about sunset. Trawls were towed parallel to the shoreline along the respective depth contour at 1 meter per second for approxi-mately 15 minutes. Bottom water temperatures were taken with each sample.The 50-foot beach seine was 8 feet deep with a bag or pocket of 0.25-inch mesh nylon centered between wings of the same mesh. A brail attached to each end of the net maintained maximum separation between the lead and float lines during the seine haul. A small boat was used to deploy the beach seine parallel to and 100 feet offshore; then, the wings were hauled simultaneously toward shore with ropes, forcing the catch into the bag. Surface water tempera-ture was taken 100 feet offshore at each seine location.
| |
| Beach seining was done twice each month during daylight hours from April through December (Table III-I). Shoreline samples were taken at the following four locations:
| |
| * NMPW transect:
| |
| 10 yards west of a creek on-an open, gradually sloping beach" NMPP transect:
| |
| approximately 10 yards west of the storm-drain discharge pipe by the Nine Mile Point Visitors Center within a small bay-like area" FITZ transect:
| |
| on the small pebble beach by the James A. FitzPatrick power station" NMPE transect:
| |
| at the base of Shore Oaks Road on an open beach Trap nets were used in this study to supplement data collected with the gill nets, trawls, and seines. The box trap had 0.25-inch mesh nylon netting 111-17 science services division supported on a 3- x 3- x 6-foot aluminum pipe frame. The box trap had 25-foot A wings and a 50-foot center lead. The trap was deployed on the lake bottom at the 20-foot contour with the lead stretched perpendicular to the shoreline and the wings set at 450 angles to the lead. The trap nets were set twice monthly from April through December on transects NMPW, NMPP, FITZ, and NMPE (Table 4 III-1) around-sunset and were picked up shortly after sunrise.After being removed from the nets, the fish were placed in labeled A plastic bags and stored in a cooler for later processing.
| |
| During the expected spawning season of several select species (alewife, rainbow smelt, white perch, yellow perch, and smallmouth bass), there were checks to see if either milt or eggs could be stripped from the gonads to indicate that spawning was progressing.
| |
| All fish selected for analysis of stomach contents were injected with 10 percent formalin (through the body wall into the stomach and through the mouth into the pharynx) to abate gastric digestion.
| |
| U b. Laboratory Processing
| |
| : 1) General Analyses All fish were identified to the species level and enumerated.
| |
| Total lengths (millimeters) and total weights (grams) were determined for a maximum of 40 individuals per species per catch. Three key species (white perch, yellow perch, and smallmouth bass) were further processed to determine age, stomach con-tents, and coefficient of maturity.
| |
| Gonads from these key species as well as from.rainbow smelt and alewife were removed, placed in Gilson's fluid, and used to estimate fecundity.
| |
| 71 The sex and the stage of sexual maturity were determined for individ-uals of the three key species to supplement the age and coefficient-of-condition and maturity data.2) Coefficients of Condition and Maturity Coefficients of condition and maturity were calculated by sex for yellow perch, white perch, and smallmouth bass randomly subsampled from net catches. If available, 50 males and 50 females of each species were ob-tained each month from the experimental area (NMPP and FITZ) and from the con-trol area (NMPW and NMPE).science services division 111-18
| |
| *1 3) Fecundity During the spring spawning season (April through June), there was an attempt to collect gonads from 25 gravid females of five species (alewife, rain-bow smelt, yellow perch, white perch, and smallmouth bass) for estimating fecun-Adity. Females of several different sizes were used so results would not be biased toward larger or smaller fish.Fecundity, defined as the number of ripening ova in a female prior to spawning (Ricker 1971), was determined using a gravimetric procedure.
| |
| The eggs (both immature and mature for alewife and white perch) within a subsample were counted and this number then multiplied by a factor representing the ratio between subsample weight and total gonad weight to estimate the total number of eggs in both ovaries.Ova in the following size (diameter) classes were enumerated:
| |
| Alewife 0.5-0.8 mm (and 0.2-0.4 mm)White perch 0.5-0.9 mm (and 0.2-0.4 mm)Rainbow smelt 0.4-1.1 mm.Smallmouth bass 1.2-2.5 mm Yellow perch .0.6-1.5 mm The-percentage of the total number of ova in each of two size categories was determined by measuring the diameters of 75 randomly selected ova with an ocular micrometer.
| |
| : 4) Age',l Fish selected for age analysis were distributed over the size classes present in the Lake Ontario population.
| |
| Fifty fish were taken from samples collected in the area potentially affected by the thermal plumes of the two plants (transects NMPP and FITZ); while another 50 were from the transects farthest from the power stations (NMPW and NMPE). Scales were removed and analyzed.
| |
| Scales of yellow perch and smallmouth bass were removed from the left side below the lateral line at the distal tip of the depressed pectoral fin (Lagler 1956). Scales of white perch were removed from the left side above the lateral line and below the gap between the spinous and softrayed dorsal fins (Mansueti 1960).science services division III-19 To prepare the scales for analysis, wet mounts or cellulose acetate impressions were made. Annuli on the scales were identified and counted using a Tri-Simplex microprojector.
| |
| All fish were considered to have been born on 1 January; therefore, fish caught between 1 January and the current year's annulus formation were aged as the number of annuli plus 1 year. After annu-lus formation for the current year, the age of the fish was equal to the number of annuli.5) Stomach Contents Knowledge of the food habits of fish is important in determining food- Ll web interrelationships among the fish and forage components of the aquatic eco- ;system. Fifty fish of each key species (yellow perch, white perch, and small-mouth bass) were captured in gill nets during August 1978 at stations along the 15-foot contour for stomach-contents analysis.
| |
| As in the age studies, half of the fish were obtained from the area near the power stations (NMPP and FITZ) and the other half from the two outside transects (NMPW and NMPE).Stomach contents were teased out into a petri dish and the food items identified to the lowest practical taxon and enumerated.
| |
| Quantitative data were used to determine each taxon's frequency and percentage with respect to total number of organisms counted. Qualitative estimates of stomach fullness and de- 1 gree of digestion were also recorded for each fish examined.
| |
| To more accurately represent each food item's importance, food items were "weighted" by multiplying 3 the individual percentage volume of each food item by the percent stomach full-ness of each individual stomach. Thus, a food organism representing 50 percent.of the volume in a stomach would be rated 37.5 percent in a 75 percent full sto-mach (i.e., 0.50 x 0.75 = 0.375). Importance indices for each species were added and the food items' importance expressed as a percentage of the total food values i in all stomachs..
| |
| : c. Data Reduction Catch data for the various gear were expressed as a catch-per-unit effort (C/f) based on the following definitions:
| |
| Beach seine Number of individuals per seine haul Trap net Number of individuals per overnight set 111-20 science services division Trawl Number of individuals per 15-minute tow Gill net Number of individuals per gill net set.If standardized to a 12-hour set The gill net C/f, for example, was estimated as: (X)(12)Gill net C/f = T (12)where x = number of fish caught in ith sample T1 = duration of set in hours Fecundity estimates for each fish were calculated using the equation: Fecundity
| |
| = (13)W 2 where N = number of ova in subsample W = weight of both right and left ovaries W = weight of subsample 32 Aged fish were grouped by area of capture (experimental or control)1 and by age class. Mean total length for each age class was calculated using the equation: n I ~xi Ii= i=l (14)where N = number of fish xo ith~ii xi value of i fish 111-21 science services division Coefficients of maturity for the three key species were expressed as the simple percentage of gonad weight to total body weight. Maturity values were grouped by sex (male or female), month, and location of capture (experi- 71 mental or control area), and an average value was calculated using Equation 14.Length and weight data for individuals of the three key species were :1 grouped by sex (male or female), season (spring, summer, fall), and location of capture (experimental or control area). For each group, length-weight 71 relationships were calculated from the logarithms (base 10) of the lengths and weights using the equation:-:-
| |
| log W = log a+a log (TL) (15) 71 where W = weight in grams a and a = empirically derived constants TL = total length in millimeters A Condition factors (K) also were calculated for these-same groups of j}fish using the equation: W x 10 5 K xO (16)(TL) 3 where W = weight in grams 71 TL = total length in millimeters Equation 14 was used to average the condition factors of each group.7. Water Quality and Thermal Profiles 7 The water quality sampling program was developed to monitor water quality in the vicinity of the two operating power plants. A 9-liter PVC Van Dorn water bottle was used to collect samples for general chemical analyses.For tasks such as coliform bacteria and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), spe-cialized techniques (described below) were used. Holding times, required preservatives, and analytical methods are indicated in Tables 111-2 and 111-3. .71 science services division 111-22 j 4P Table 111-2 Recommended Sampling and Preservative Methods and Analysis Locations for Water Quality Samples Collected in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point on Lake Ontario Volume Coll ection Required Cotiner Group Parameter (me) Materialt Preservative Holding Time* Analysis Location llIII l~lIII Ill III IfIIl IIIII IIIII IlI*I IIIII Ill Ill Ill l, III 1, IIl Ill III Ill Ill IIl III III IIl IIl Ill Ill II'I IIIII Ill Ill IIl IIl Ill II I, Ill III 1,II I,II Alkal in i ty SOD 5 COD Total solids Total dissolved solids Total suspended solids Total volatile solids Total Kjeldahl nitrogen Ammonia nitrogen Nitrate nitrogen Total phosphorus Color Specific conductance Total coliform bacteria Fecal coliform bacteria Orqanic nitrogen Orthophosphate Sulfate Chloride Al umi num Cadmi um Calcium Chromi uni Copper Beryllium Iron Lead Magnesium Mercury Nickel Potassium Sodium Zinc Phenols Vanadium Silica ABS Arsenic Barium Carbon chloroform extract Cyanide Fluoride Manganese Sel eni um Ferro- and ferricyanide Silver Turbidity CO 2 Radioacti vity pH Temperature Dissol ved dxygen 100 1000 S OO 50 100 100.100 1I00 500 400 100 50 SO SOO 100 500 50 50 5O lO0**10DO**lOO**1 DO-*I DO**I OO**I DO**I DO**I DO**700"-1 Go**lOO**IOO**500 P,G P,r PG PG P.G P,G P,G PG PG P,G P.G PG P,G G G P,G P,G PG PG P.G PG P,G P,G P,G P,G P,G P,G P,G P P,G P,G P,G P,G G PG P P,G P,G PG G P,G P,G P,G PG P,G PG PG G P,G 4%4*C H 2 S0 4 None 4°C 4*C 4%4°C,H 2so 4 4°C,H 2 SO 4 4 °C,H 2 S0 4 4*C 4-C 4'C 4%4^C 4"C,H 2 so 4 4%4%None HNO 3 HN0 3 HN0 3 HNO 3 11N03.HNO 3 HNO 3 HNO 3 HNO 3 HNO 3 HNO 3 HN03 HNO 3 HNO 3 4oC,H 3PO4 l.0 g C.~o HN03 4'C 4°C HNO 3 HNO 3 None 4°C,NaOH 4%C HNO 3 HNO 3 4'C,NaOH 4%4*C None 24 hr 6 hr 7 days 7 days 7 days 7 days 7 days 24 hr 24 hr 24 hr 7 days 24 hr 24 hr 6 hri 6 hr 24 hr 24 hr 7 days 7 days 6mo 6 mo 6 ci0 6 mo 6mo 6mo 6mo 6 mo 6 mo 13 days 6 mo 6 mo 6mo 6mo 24 hr 6 mo 7 days 24 hr 6 m 6 mo 48 hr 24 hr 7 days 6 mo 6nw 24 hr 6mo 7 days 6 hr 6 mo Field Field Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas DalIas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallos Dallas Field Subcontract Subcontract Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas'Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dal las Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Dallas Field Field Subcontract Field Field Field loo*250 100"*601 500 300 1O0 100 500 100 SOD 500'81 In situ In situ In situ or 30D G see Winkler Method 4 hr tp = plastic, G = glass 1T, ...*Samples properly preserved may be held for extended periods beyond recommended holding time."One l00-mL sample preserved with HN03 is sufficient sample for all metals.111-23 science services division
| |
| !* 1 Table 111-3 Analytical Methods and Detection Limits for Selected Physicochemical Parameters aDetection Pararpeter Method Reference*
| |
| Limits Temperature Dissolved oxygen Specific conductance (salinity)
| |
| Turbidity pH Alkalinity Total dissolved solids Total suspended solids Color Carbon chlo roform extract (CCE Ammonia nitrogen Nitrate nitrogen Nitrite nitrogen Organic nitrogen Total inorganic phosphate Total phosphate Sulfide Silica Biochemical oxygen demand Total coliform bacteria Fecal coliform bacteria Sulfates Chlorides Hardness Surfactants Phenols Oil and grease Aluminum Beryllium Boron Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Cyanide Fluoride Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Molybdenum Nickel Potassium Selenium Sodium Titanium ITin Vanadium Zinc Radioactivity Thermistor Polarographic probe (in situ)or titration Wheatstone bridge Nephelometric Electrometric (in situ)Electrometric titration Gravimetric (105'C)Glass-fiber filter (103-105°C)
| |
| Automated (APHA)Gravimetric Automated (phenolate)
| |
| Automated (cadmium reduced)Automated (diazo)Manual (digestion distillation), automated digestion phenolate Digestion (acid) + automated Digestion (persulfate)
| |
| + automated Automated Automated (molybdosilicate method)Polarographic probe Multiple tube fermentation Multiple tube fermentation Automated (barium, chloranilate)
| |
| Titration (mercuric nitrate), automated EDTA titrimetric Methelene blue method 4-aminoantipyrine method Trichloratrifluoroethane extraction Atomic absorption Atomic absorption Carmine method, automated Atomic absorption Atomic absorption Atomic absorption Atomic absorption Atomic absorption Pyridine-pyrazalone method Ion selective electrode Atomic absorption Atomic absorption Atomic absorption Atnmic absorptinn Atomic absorption Atomic absorption Flame emission Atomic absorption Flame emission Atomic absorption Atomic .absorption Atomic absorption Atomic absorption Gas-flow proportional counter., ic-tillation counter, and gamma spec.SM 16Z EPA p.5 6 &5 SM 154 SM 163A SM 144A SM 10z SM 148B SM 148C SM 118 SM 506 EPA p. 168 EPA p. 201 EPA p. 215 EPA p. 182 EPA p. 256 EPA 1. 256 EPA p. 280 EPA p. 281 EPA p. 11 SM 408D SM 408C EPA p. 279 SM 1Z2B SM 159A EPA p. 256 EPA p. 229 SM 129A SM 123A SM 107B SM 109A EPA p. 103 SM 117A SM 1I6A SM. I 19A SM 207C EPA p. 61'EPA p. 147 SM IZ58 SM 1277B°SM 128A EPA p. 139 EPA p. 141 SM 147A EPA p. 145 SM 153A EPA p. 143 EPA p.- 143 EPA p. 144 SM 165A RMC 0. 14C 0. 1 mg/i 5 I FTU 0.01 units 0. 1 mg/.I mg/I.0. 1 mg/,t 5 APHA 0.2 rag/!0. 002 mg/,.0.02 mg/I.0.002 mg/,t 0.03 mg/t.0. 002 mg/., 0.00Z mg/c.0. 005 mg/I.0.05 mg/t.0. 1 mg/c.o.2 mg/t 0. 1 mgei 0.01 mg/c.0.005 mg/c.0.1 mg/t 0. 001 mg/1.0.001 mg/t.0. 1 mg/t 0.001 mg/,I 0.002 mg/I, 0.001 mg/c, 0.001 mg/l.0.001 mg/I.0. 005 mg/,.0.04 mg/I.0.001 mg/I.0.001 mg/I.0. 0001 mg/I 0.001 mg/t 0.03 mg/t.0. 005 mg/t 0. 005 mg/c 0. 0003 mg/I.0. 0007 mg/I 0.001 mg/c.0.001 mg/c, 0. 001 mg/c.0.001 mg/L I~1 Li 1, ASTM -.Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Part 31 Water. American Society for Testing and Materials.
| |
| Philadelphia.
| |
| SM -Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wsstewater, 14th ed., 1976, APHA, AWWA, WPCF.EPA -Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes. 1976a. and various technical leaflets: RIC -Radiation Management Corporation Analytical Ald_(ujLtyControl Procedures RMC-TH-75-3.
| |
| July 1976 Li-I science services division .111-24 Sampling regimes for the water quality tasks required different param-eters and frequencies.
| |
| For convenience, the sampling regimes were categorized into three groups.a. Group I Water samples were collected monthly at the 20- and 40-foot depth con-tours on the NMPW, FITZ, and NMPE transects and examined for the 11 parameters specified in Table 111-2. Whole-water samples were collected from 0.5 meter S-below the surface in a 9-liter. PVC Van Dorn water bottle, then dispensed into polyethylene containers and placed on ice. Temperature, dissolved oxygen (D.O.), and pH were determined in situ with a Yellow Springs Instruments (YSI) Model 57 D.O. meter or titration and an Instrumentation Laboratories (IL) Model 175 Porto-matic pH meter (or equivalent).
| |
| Except for radioactivity samples, which were analyzed by Radiation Management Corporation (RMC 1976), samples were sent via airfreight to Dallas and analyzed according to techniques described in Tables 111-2 and 111-3.b. Group II Samples were collected at the 20- and 60-foot depth contours of the NMPW, NMPP, and NMPE transects and were examined for the 16 parameters specified in Table 111-2, as well as for chlorophyll a concentrations.
| |
| Whole-water sam-ples were collected from the 0.5-meter depth in a 9-liter PVC Van Dorn water bottle, then dispensed into polyethylene containers and placed on ice. Temper-V) ature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, and pH were measured in situ. Free carbon dioxide was determined with standard titration techniques.
| |
| Samples for BOD analysis were placed in sterilized glass BOD bottles, which were allowed to overflow at least three times their volume. The BOD samples were placed on ice in the dark, and incubation was begun within 6 hours. Turbidity was determined at the field lab with a Hach Model 2100A turbidimeter.
| |
| Chlorophyll a samples were prepared according to methods described in subsection A.l.b, then frozen and shipped to Dallas, along with the remaining Group-IT parameters for anal-yses (Table 111-3).Ji 111-25 science services division
| |
| : c. Group III 1 Water quality samples were collected monthly from April through 2 December along the NMPP/FITZ transect.
| |
| Whole-water samples were taken from 0.5 meter below the surface and 0.5 meter off the bottom at the 25- and 45-foot depth contours and analyzed for the 48 parameters listed in Table 111-2. At each location, surface and bottom water temperatures were recorded and specific conductance measured in situ. For general water chemistry and analysis, six 1-liter polyethylene containers were filled and placed on ice. Samples for phenol determination were placed in a precleaned 500-milliliter glass container with a teflon-lined cap. Samples for BOD determination were collected as.described for Group II, and water for coliform analysis was collected in ster-ilized glass bottles using a J-Z sampler. Incubation of coliform samples was initiated within 6 hours. For carbon chloroform extract (CCE) analysis, 60 liters of water was collected at each station and stored in glass containers.
| |
| These samples were subsequently passed (for 48 hours) through a miniature CAM II-A sampler having a sample column packed with 70.0 grams of activated carbon. :1 The activated-carbon samples were then shipped to Dallas for analysis according to the method in Table 111-3.d. Thermal Profiles'I Three temperature profiles were made weekly during theday from April through December.
| |
| Temperatures were recorded at 1-meter intervals from surface to bottom at the 100-foot depth contour of. the NMPW, FITZ, and NMPE transects.
| |
| B. IN-PLANT STUDIES Both the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick power stations use once-through cooling-water systems to dissipate waste heat. In accord with the requirements of NRC's Environmental Technical Specifications, impingement rates were monitored three times a week at both power stations (Table 111-4).Planktonic organisms such as phytoplankton, zooplankton, and fish eggs and larvae pass through the screening devices and subsequently through the entire cooling-water system. This passive incorporation of planktonic organisms into a circulating water system is referred to as entrainment.
| |
| 111-26 science services division
| |
| ----------
| |
| H H H I'3 S 0 5.a 0 S 0*1 4 5.0 S 4.a.5.Table 111-4 Schedule for Impingement and Entrainment/Viability Studies at Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick Power Plants, Lake Outario, 1978 Samples Task Frequency*
| |
| Season Location Depth per Year** Comments Impingement Nine Mile Point Three times/week Jan-Dec Traveling screens Entire water .156 On Mondays and Fridays, a composite 24-hr (hourly on Wed.) and bar racks column sample is collected; on Wednesdays, sam-pling is hourly until 24 one-hr samples are obtained.J.A. FitzPatrick Three times/week Jan-Dec Traveling screens Entire water 156 On Mondays and Fridays, a composite 24-hr (D/N on Wed) and bar racks column sample is collected; on Wednesdays, sep-arate day and night samples corresponding Entrainment with sunrise and sunset are taken.Nine Mile Point Ichthyoplankton Semimonthlyt (D) Apr-Oct " Intake forebay 2 and 7.ft 28 Intake samples taken by drift nets set below sur- in forebay just upcurrent from travel-face ing screens.J.A. FitzPatrick Ichthyoplankton Semimonthly(D/N)
| |
| Jan-Dec Intake forebay 14 and 20 ft 96 Intake samples taken by drift nets set below surface in central area of intake.Zooplankton Semimonthly (D/N) Jan-Dec Intake forebay 5 ft below 96 Zooplankton samples pumped from central surface area of intake.Viability J.A. FitzPatrick Phytoplankton Chlorophyll a Semimonthly (D/N) Jan-Dec Intake, discharge, 5 ft below 1536 20 and 30 AT, and surface lake samples Primary production Semimonthly (D/N) *Jan-Dec Intake, discharge, 5 ft below 1536 Lab processing for primary production in-I 4 1C) 20 and 30 AT, and surface volves a larger number of samples per year lake samples because each sample is represented by one light bottle and one dark bottle.Zooplankton Semimonthly (D/N) Jan-Dec Intake, discharge, 5 ft below 384 2' and 30 AT, and surface lake samples Ichthyoplankton Semimonthly (D/N) Jan-Dec Intake, discharge, 14 and 20 ft 384 20 and 30 AT, and below surface lake samples at intake; 5 ft below sur-face at dis-charge (D) = day sampling; (N) night sampling Details on sampling requirements are presented in Section II of the SOP for the Nine Mile Point Ecological Monitoring Program.tSemimonthly is defined as twice per month.
| |
| Entrainment of ichthyoplankton was monitored at the Nine Mile Point plant by collecting intake samples twice per month from April through October.At the James A. FitzPatrick plant, entrainment rates and percent mortality due to entrainment were documented twice per month during the entire year (Table 111-4). Entrainment rates for zooplankton and ichthyoplankton were documented by determining the number of organisms in intake samples per volume of cooling water used.To estimate the mortality of phytoplankton, zooplankton, and ichthyo-plankton caused by entrainment through the James A. FitzPatrick plant, intake and discharge samples were collected from the same water mass and the percent mortality of the two then compared.
| |
| To estimate mortality due to plume entrain- iI ment the percentage of dead organisms in samples from a simulated or the actual discharge plume was compared to the percent mortality in the intake samples (Table 111-4).1. Impingement
| |
| : a. Field Sampling Impingement was monitored concurrently at both power stations (Table 111-4) for a 24-hour period on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday of each week from January through December.
| |
| Monday and Friday samples at both stations were cum-mulative 24-hour samples; the collection baskets remained in sampling position until the end of the 24-hour period. Each Wednesday, impinged fish were col-lected at the end of each hour throughout the 24-hour period at Nine Mile Point and at the end of day and night photoperiods at James A. FitzPatrick.
| |
| Impinge-ment monitoring generally began at 0001 (military time) on each sampling day.Just before the fish collection basket was placed into sampling posi- ]tion, the bar racks and traveling screens were cleaned and the debris and fish discarded.
| |
| The collection basket, a large rectangular metal basket constructed of 1-inch stretch mesh hardware cloth and lined with 3/8-inch mesh nylon netting, was placed at the end of the screen washwater sluiceway where it dumps into the discharge canal. All fish and debris washed off the traveling screens were col-lected in the basket, and the fish were identified and enumerated to document impingement.
| |
| science services division 111-28 Plant operational data were obtained for each sampling date to determine cooling-water flow rates, intake and discharge temperatures, and power production.
| |
| When impingement rates at either plant exceeded 20,000 fish per 24-hour period, impingement sampling was continued on a daily basis until the rate drop-ped below 20,000 fish per 24-hour period at the affected plant.*ri] b. Laboratory Processing All impinged fish were identified to species when possible and enumer-ated assoon as possible after collection.
| |
| Total numbers and weights for each species and individual total lengths (millimeter) and weights (nearest 0.1 gram)for a maximum of 60 fish of each species from each day, night, or 24-hour sample C (or for 10 individuals of each species collected in each hourly sample) were re-corded.. Unusual conditions (e.g., damaged individuals or presence of fish tags)were documented.
| |
| Impinged fish were used also for fecundity and age analysis.
| |
| There was an attempt to remove gonads from 25 gravid females of five species (alewife, T rainbow smelt, yellow perch, white perch, and smallmouth bass) during the spring spawning season (April through June) to estimate the fecundity of these fish.Gonads were selected and analyzed using the same procedure described for fecun-dity analysis of lake fish (subsection A.6.b).Scales for age analysis were removed from 25 individuals of the two most abundant species collected during each season sampled during 1978: winter.(January-March), spring (April-June), summer (July-September), and fall (October-December).
| |
| When alewives were selected, scales were removed from the left side be-low the lateral line and above the vent (Marcy 1969). When rainbow smelt were selected, scales were removed from the left side midway between the lateral line and dorsal fin, but from the area just posterior to the dorsal fin (Burbidge 1969, McKenzie 1958). Ages of threespine sticklebacks were determined using length-L-) frequency data.Age analysis was by the same procedure described for Lake Ontario fish (subsection A.6.b).NOTE: At the James A. FitzPatrick there is also a plan for additional impinge-ment sampling to meet New York DEC requirements.
| |
| 111-29 science services division
| |
| : c. Data Reduction and Analysis Data were tabulated to present impingement rates (number and weight)for each species as well as all species combined.
| |
| Two estimation techniques were used to calculate monthly impingement from the Monday, Wednesday, and.Friday catches: (xn) (N)No.= (17)m n where I No- = estimated impingement for month (number or weight)m x = total number (or weight) of species (or all n species combined) collected during n sample j days N = number of days in sample month n = number of days sampled during sample month and No 1 000 Nomr ( (18)where No.mr = estimated number of fish impinged per 1000 cubic meters of cooling water used x = total number (or weight) of species (or all J'I species combined) collected during n sample days G = total number of cubic meters of water taken into plant during sampling month g = total number of cubic meters of water taken into plant during days sampled Annual impingement was estimated by summing the monthly impingement values calculated by Equation 17. 7J Occasionally, high debris loads inhibited the collection of all fish and debris impinged during a 24-hour sampling period. When this occurred, A-A volumetric subsampling technique was employed.
| |
| The total catch (numbers and weight) was estimated using the formula: i (xn) V No- d f.111-30 science services division E. I where No.d = estimated impingement for 24-hour period Hxn = total number (or weight) of species (or all species combined) within subsample f = volume of subsample V = volume of total 24-hour catch I A concerted effort was made to obtain a subsample of at least 25 percent of the total catch.i Age composition data were grouped by season of capture and by age class. Mean total lengths by age class and season were calculated using Equa-tion 14 (subsection A.6.c).Fecundity was calculated using the same procedure that was used for lLake Ontario fish (Equation 13, sub'section A.6..c).2. Entrainment/Viability
| |
| : a. Nine Mile Point Sampling within the Nine Mile Point plant documented entrainment of ichthyoplankton.
| |
| Twice per month from April through October, two samples were 4 collected during the day from the intake forebay at the Nine Mile Point (Unit 1)plant (Table 111-4) by lowering two 0.5-meter-diameter 571-micrometer mesh plank-*J ton nets simultaneously into the center forebay and setting them at depths of ,. 2 and 7 feet. The stationary nets were set for 15 to 30 minutes, depending on how many pumps were running. The volume of water sampled was determined with a center-mounted digital flowmeter.
| |
| The samples were preserved in 5 percent buffered formalin.
| |
| Lab processing and data analysis techniques were the same as those used for Lake Ontario ichthyoplankton samples (subsection A.5).b. James A. FitzPatrick 1 At the James A. FitzPatrick plant, entrainment and viability samples were collected twice monthly from January':through December.
| |
| Sampling involved all three major components of the planktonic biota in Lake Ontario: ichthyo-plankton (fish eggs and larvae), zooplankton, and phytoplankton (Table 111-4).111-31 science services division
| |
| : 1) Ichthyoplankton a) Field Sampling To document entrainment rates for ichthyoplankton at the James A.FitzPatrick plant, day and night samples were -collected from the intake fore-bay twice each month (Table 111-4) by simultaneously lowering two 0.5-meter-diameter plankton nets (5 7 1-micrometer mesh) into the common forebay area. The metered nets were set for about 5 to 15 minutes approximately 14 and 20 feet below the water surface. Upon retrieval, the samples were processed first as viability samples (see below), then preserved with formalin and processed later for entrainment data. For entrainment, all ichthyoplankton were identified and enumerated by life stage using procedures described in subsection A.5.b.To estimate mortality due to plant entrainment, the percentage of dead eggs and larvae in intake and discharge samples were compared.
| |
| To insure that the same water mass was sampled at both the intake and discharge, a cal-culated time lag (Table 111-5) was used between discharge and intake sampling.Discharge samples (two from day and two from night) were taken by pumping water with a 750-gallon-per-minute centrifugal pump for about 5 minutes from a depth of 5 feet. After the pumped samples were filtered through a 571-micrometer mesh net, they were held at the ambient discharge temperature for a period comparable to the travel time required for discharge water to flow from the point of collec-tion to the discharge outlet in the lake (Table 111-5). The samples then were diluted with filtered intake water to simulate the temperature change experienced by ichthyoplankton traveling from the discharge outlet to the 2*F isotherm in the plume (Figure 111-2). The samples were then processed to determine the percen-tage of live and dead eggs and larvae.Table 111-5 Time Required for Mass of Cooling Water To Flow from Intake Forebay to Discharge Aftbay and from Aftbay to Lake Ontario Discharge Structure No. of Circulating Approximate Travel Time (minutes)Water Pumps Intake Forebay to Discharge Aftbay to Operating Discharge Aftbay Lake Discharge Structure 1 .9-12 18 2 5-6 9 3 3-4 6 111-32 science services division DISCHARGE SAMPLE[0.5 LITER @ APPROXIMATELY 31.50 F _ _ _2.25 LITERS ABOVE AMBIENT (AT)] @ 7.0' dT/l75 LITERS OER 20 SECONDS FILT ERE INTAKE WAE .0LITERS 3.1 oLITERS I FILERE INAKEIJAER OVER 40 SECONDS @ 5.0 aT AAY S47.85 LITERS OVER 300 SECON D) 5.25 LITERS'ANALYSIS 2.0" T 3.00 AT Figure 111-2. Serial Dilution Sequence Used To Simulate Temperature Reduction in Thermal Plume from Discharge Outlet to 2 0 F Isotherm To estimate mortality due to entrainment of Lake Ontario ichthyoplank-ton in the thermal plume, the percentage of dead eggs and larvae in simulated or actual plume samples was compared with mortality in the intake samples. Actual lake plume samples were collected from a depth of 5 feet by towing two 0.5-meter-diameter 571-micrometer mesh nets from the visible boil area above the discharge structure through the plume toward the 2 0 F isotherm.
| |
| Sampling duration and tow velocity were similar to those during intake sampling.
| |
| Two replicate plume simu-lation samples were obtained by collecting intake samples as previously described and simulating increasing and decreasing temperatures within the plume by adding filtered discharge water and then ambient filtered intake water (see Appendix II and Table 11-7, LMS 1977).b) Laboratory Processing Viability samples were examined under a dissecting microscope soon after being collected.
| |
| Dead eggs and larvae were removed, identified, enumer-ated, and preserved in 10 percent buffered formalin in a labeled vial. Live eggs and larvae were placed in a separate vial, preserved, and later identified and enumerated.
| |
| Fish eggs were considered dead if they were opaque, had dis-rupted membrane structure or obvious surface abrasions, or were infected with fungus. The live/dead status of fish larvae was based primarily on movements, but larvae infected with fungus or exhibiting surface abrasions also were consi-dered to be dead.111-33 science services division
| |
| : 2) Zooplankton a) Field Sampling Zooplankton samples for documenting entrainment during the day and night were collected from the intake forebay twice each month (Table 111-4).Replicate zooplankton samples were pumped from approximately 5 feet below the surface of the forebay into a 76-micrometer mesh plankton net suspended in a barrel of ambient water. The pump was calibrated before each sampling period, and sufficient water was pumped to yield a concentration of approximately 200 zooplankton per counting chamber (Davies and Jensen 1974). The net contents were washed into a incubation container, held in a water bath at ambient intake temperature for 8 to 10 hours, and then used as both viability and entrainment samples. Densities were determined with lab techniques identical to those used for lake zooplankton samples (subsection A.2.b).Discharge aftbay samples were collected using the same procedures previously described for intake samples, and intake and discharge samples were compared to estimate mortality due to plant entrainment.
| |
| To insure that the intake and discharge samples came from the same mass of water, the replicate discharge samples were collected after the proper lag time (Table 111-5). After the discharge samples were collected, they were held at the discharge water temperature to simulate travel time to the discharge structure in Lake Ontario;then, to lower the temperature of the zooplankton samples to lake ambient, the samples were diluted with filtered intake water (Figure 111-2). The samples were transferred to incubation chambers and held at ambient intake temperature for 8 to 10 hours-before live/dead counts were made.Procedures for measuring the effects of plume entrainment on zooplank-ton were similar to those used for ichthyoplankton (see Appendix II and Table 11-5, LMS 1977).b) Laboratory Processing After the 8- to 10-hour incubation period, the viability sample was carefully washed into a 250-milliliter graduated beaker and uniformly mixed.A 1-milliliter aliquot was withdrawn with a wide-bore pipette and placed in a clean Sedgwick-Rafter cell. All nonmotile organisms in the chamber were iden-tified to major taxonomic groups and counted using a Whipple grid and 10OX 111-34 science services division magnification.
| |
| Motility was defined as the ability of zooplankton to show any movement or activity whatsoever (e.g., appendicular and visceral movements).
| |
| After the nonmotile organisms were counted, the Sedgwick-Rafter cell was placed on a hot plate for 5 minutes at 65*C to heat-kill all live organisms.
| |
| Then, the entire chamber was examined again and all zooplankton identified to major taxonomic groups and counted. Live/dead counts from the two replicate samples at each location were used to calculate a mean percent mortality.
| |
| : 3) Phytoplankton a) Field Sampling The effect of entrainment on the phytoplankton community was deter-mined by examining chlorophyll a concentrations and primary production rates 14 (4C method) in the intake forebay, the discharge aftbay, the 3*F mixing zone in Lake Ontario near the diffuser discharge, and ambient Lake Ontario waters near the 2*F isotherm (or 30 and 2*F simulation samples).
| |
| Phytoplankton viability samples were collected twice per month both day and night (Table 111-4).At the intake forebay, two water samples were collected with a pump-from a depth of about 5 feet. From each sample, four 2-liter aliquots were withdrawn for chlorophyll a determinations.
| |
| The four chlorophyll a samples were placed inside a black plastic bag and held at ambient temperature for*temporary storage, then transferred to the lab for further processing.
| |
| For primary production measurements, four sets of BOD bottles (one light and one J i dark bottle per set) were filled and each bottle allowed to overflow at least once its volume before being capped. These light and dark bottles were stored temporarily in a cool, dark area, then transported to the lab for additional processing.After the appropriate lag time (Table 111-5), two discharge aftbay samples were pumped from approximately 5 feet below the water surface. The two discharge samples were held at the discharge water temperature for 6 to 18 min-utes to simulate the travel time to the discharge structure.
| |
| Then, both samples were placed in an ice bath until their temperatures approached to within 3°F of the intake (ambient) water temperature; at that time, four 2-liter aliquots were removed from each sample for chlorophyll a analysis and four sets of light/dark bottles were prepared using procedures identical to those used for the intake samples.11173.5 science services division To determine the effect of plume entrainment, samples were collected from the 3*F and 2'F isotherms in the discharge area of the lake or thermal plume conditions were simulated.
| |
| Lake samples were obtained by pumping the required water from 5 feet below the surface and prepared in the same manner used for intake samples. For a simulation sample, approximately 30 liters of unfiltered intake water was mixed with 2.5 liters of discharge water (at pre-vailing discharge temperature) using a serial dilution scheme similar to that used for zooplankton simulation samples (LMS 1977).b) Laboratory Processing K)The light and dark bottles for primary production were brought into the laboratory within 2 hours of collection.
| |
| These samples were injected imme- I diately with 1 milliliter of NaHI 4 Co 3 (5 microcuries per milliliter) and placed in an incubator at ambient (intake) temperature under fluorescent.
| |
| lighting (about j 200 foot-candles).
| |
| Two sets (one light and one dark bottle per set) from each sampling location (intake, discharge, plume, simulation) were removed after 7, 24, 48, and 72 hours' incubation and processed according to the methods described in subsection A.l.b. Primary production was reported as milligrams of carbon assimilated per cubic meter during the incubation period (Equation 8, subsection A.l.c). A-I The chlorophyll a samples.were incubated with the productivity samples.Two 2-liter samples per location were removed after the 7, 24, 48, and 72 hours'incubation and filtered using the same techniques described for Lake Ontario samples (subsection A.l.b). Chlorophyll a-and phaeophytin a concentrations
| |
| -were determined spectrophotometrically following laboratory and data reduction procedures described in subsection A.l.b and A.l.c.11 111-36 sclence services division ;i SECTION IV SRESULTS AND DISCUSSION
| |
| -LAKE ONTARIO STUDIES Two nuclear electric generating plants, Nine Mile Point Unit I and James A. FitzPatrick, are located on the New York shoreline of southeastern Lake Ontario on a promontory called Nine Mile Point. Both plants withdraw cooling water from the lake for once-through cooling systems and discharge into the lake.This section presents results of ecological studies conducted in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point during 1978 to monitor the lake ecosystem in order to detect potential plant influences, if any, and assess their impor-tance. The 1978 results represent the most recent ecological data available from a continuing program that has been administered by the utilities oper-ating the stations -Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation and the Power Authority of the State of New York.The Lake Ontario monitoring program was designed to describe the com-position and relative abundance, both spatially and temporally, of the major components of the aquatic biota, including phytoplankton, zooplankton, peri-* phyton, benthic invertebrates,*
| |
| and fish. The program also monitored water quality in the area.The study has two major objectives:
| |
| * Monitor the aquatic ecosystem in the vicinity of the two plants following guidelines established by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the Environmental Technical Specifications for the plants* Compare abundance, species composition, and distri-bution of aquatic biota in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point, especially in the area immediately adjacent to the power stations (the experimental area) and in areas farther away from the stations (the control area) that usually are not influenced by plant operations.
| |
| IV-I science services division F A. PHYTOPLANKTON Phytoplankton, which are minute aquatic plants and the primary food source for higher levels of organisms in an aquatic ecosystem, use the sun as J an energy source for biochemically incorporating carbon needed for respiration and reproduction.
| |
| : 1. Phytoplankton Densities In this study, cell density estimates for species composition and temporal and spatial distribution were used to describe the phytoplankton community.
| |
| Chlorophyll a concentrations and rates of carbon assimulation (utilizing radioactive carbon-14 tracer methods) were used as an estimate of phytoplankton biomass and productivity.
| |
| : a. Species Composition Changes in species composition may indicate changes in those phys-ical and chemical factors that affect the composition of the phytoplankton community (Schelske et al 1971). In the vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 223 phytoplankton taxa were observed from April through December 1978 (Appendix Table A-l), however only 51 of these taxa comprised 2 percent or more of th total number of phytoplankton collected during any sampling month (Table IV-l). The most abundant taxa during the 9-month sampling period (Table IV-l)were Microcystis sp. (a blue-green alga) and Rhodomonas minuta (a phyto-flagellate).
| |
| Although all major phytoplankton divisions were observed, the majority of the taxa were blue-green algae (Cyanophyta), green algae (Chloro-phyta), and diatoms (Bacillariophyta-Centric and Pennate combined);
| |
| these three divisions were represented by 21, 107, and 47 taxa, respectively.
| |
| Several taxa of nuisance algae were identified throughout the study, but none were at levels high enough to create nuisance problems.
| |
| Cladophora, a filamentous green alga capable of producing nuisance blooms, was not en-countered in phytoplankton samples during 1978. Although it was observed in nearshore waters by divers during benthic sampling, Cladophora did not exhibit extensive large mats of growth along the shoreline as it has in previous years (Mantai 1974).IV-2 science services division'.J Table IV-I Monthly Occurrence and Relative Abundance of the More Abundant Phytoplankton Collected in Whole Water Samples in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, April-December 1978 Taxa Annual Mean Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec (%)(.1 I;I'1 Cyanophyta Chroococcales Aphanothece sp.Gunos aeriaa nina Gounhosphaeria lacustris Gomphosphaer naee nun MI' sV p.Oscillatoriales Lyngbya contorta b)_q sp,,s..Oscillatoria sp.Nostocale s Anabaena circinalis MAUzoenon fi s-aguae Chlorophyta Volvocales Chlamydomonas sp.Chlorococcales Ankistrodesmus convolutus Ankistrodesmuns Tacatu Coelautrun nicroporum sp.Iicracinfium -sp.oocyj~s p...Pediastrun I'ediastrun duplex Sceniedemus ecornis Scenedesmus uadr-icauda SApharcutis schroeteri Chlorococcales unid.Ulotrichales Ulothrix zonata Oedogoeiae-s 9pOed sniuusp.Choropyta unid..Xanthophyta Rh*zochloridales Sttpitococcus sp.Chrysophyta Chrysmonadal es Chrysochromulina parva p Sobronuociale Chrysoion adale-sunid.
| |
| Monosigales Stelexononas dichotoma Bacil-arisophyta-Centric Eupodiscales Cyclote11a up.We1FTFaislandica Melosira up.Tt--Fanodiscus astraea Stephanodiscus 1 St ' odisu p Eupodiscales unid.Baclllariophyta-Pennate Fragilariales Asterionella formosa Diatoua tense i I jar!A cpuin a' crotonensis F l a sup.Cryptophyta Cryptomonadales Chroomonas sp.SEýyononas umarssonii Rhodousonas inuta dCrytomonadales unid.Unidentified alga Density (flo./mi)T-T T I 7 24.T 7 8 5 1 T 14 8 47 14 11 T 3 3 9 T 4 2 2 1 1 10 27 7 14 2 1 T T I 2 2 1 1 T T T I T 11 3 1 1 T T 1 4 3 T T 8"10 2 1 T 1 2 T T 2 2 1 4 2 8 4 17 I 2 T 9 6 2 2 2 T 2 3 T 2 2 T T 3 T T T 1 1 1 T T T T 3T T 2 1 3 1 41 1 2 T T 1 1 T 2 1 1 1 1 1 T T 2 T 1 T 1 T 2 1 6 1 2 T T 3 1 1 4 2 18 2 1 22 5 T 2 2 2 T T 4 1 13 T 2 T I T 1 3 48 T 4 3 T T 1 15 T T I016.1 T T 6 2 3 1 T T T T T T T T 6 T. T 3 T T 2 T T T T 1 13 4 2 T T T 16, 4 21 1 5 T 41 4029.2 T T1 T 4 T 7 3 2 2 10 I T T 2 3 T 1 4168.6 3 T T T T T 5 T I T T T T 4 2 4 T 3 3 2 8 T 1 3104.4 T 4 T 2 8 2 1 1206,7 T T I T 3 3 T 1 4970.1 T I 2 1 2 2 T 1 1899.8 I 3 2 2 6 T T 3801.3 T T 10 3 23 1 T 5357.9 4 T 4 1490.3*T= 4.5%IV-3 science services division
| |
| : b. Temporal Distribution Total phytoplankton cell densities fluctuated throughout the 1978 sampling season (Table IV-2). Phytoplankton cell densities were lowest in 1 April and highest in November.
| |
| A late spring peak (total cell densities of 4000-4200 per milliliter) was observed in May and June and a late summer peak (nearly 5000 cells per milliliter) in August. A total cell density of more than 5300 cells per milliliter was observed in November.The three most abundant groups in the vicinity of the Nine Mile.Point and James A. FitzPatrick plants during 1978 were blue-green algae, which accounted for about 39 percent of the algae collected, and green algae and dia-toms, which accounted for 20 percent each (Appendix Tables A-2 through A-5).Phytoflagellates (Cryptophyta) were fourth in abundance (Appendix Table A-6).Diatoms were dominant during April, May, June, and December when water temperatures were low (Table IV-2). Blue-green algae dominated the community from July through November; during July through October, the greens were second in abundance.
| |
| These two groups typically peak during warmer-water periods. Phytoflagellates (Cryptophyta) were second in abundance during April and codominated with the blue-green algae during November.
| |
| Other phytoplankton divisions collected included the Euglenophyta, Chrysophyta, Xanthophyta, and Pyrrhophyta (dinoflagellates).
| |
| Densities of. these groups were low throughout
| |
| -the study period (Table IV-2 and Section I-A, pages I-A 1 through I-A 20 of the 1978 Data Report prepared by Texas Instruments Incorporated 1979).The presence of a filamentous red alga, Batrachospermum sp. (Rhodo-phyta) in April was atypical.
| |
| This genus is usually found within cool, flowing streams rather than in open waters of a lake (Hynes 1972) and perhaps it was washed into the lake by spring runoff. A c. Spatial Distribution There were no apparent spatial trends among sampling stations within each sampling month for either individual divisions or total phytoplankton den-sities, nor were there specific trends among depth contours (Appendix Tables A-2 through A-7). In addition, there were no apparent differences of monthly IV-4 science services division L.ij Table IV-2 Mean Density and Relative Abundance*
| |
| of Major Phytoplankton Groups Collected in Surface Samples, and Associated Chlorophyll a Concentrations and Primary Production Rates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, April-December, 1978 Annual Apr- Kay Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean Division No./mt % No./ms % No./mi % No./mi % No./mt % No./mi % No./mt % No./mi % No./mt % No./mt %Cyanophyto 55.0 5.4 662.3 16.4 643.7 15.4 494.4 41.0 2795.6 56.2 1249.1 65.7 2476.1 65.1 2097.0 39.1 410.3 27.5 1209.3 38.9.Chlorophyta 96.7 9.5 860.1 21.3 913.6 21.9 372.5 30.9 1437.6 28.9 384.7 20.2 661.5 17.4 706.4 13.2 259.7 17.4 632.5 20.4 Euglenophyta 1.6 0.2 1.4 <0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 <0.1 Chrysophyta 31.6 3.1 42.7 1.1 378.1 9.1 42.9 3.6 12.7 0.3 14.1 0.7 1.7 <0.1 22.5 0.4 89.1 6.0 70.6 2.3 Xanthophyta 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 532.9 12.8 7.1 0.6 204.9 4.1 3.9 0.2 14.0 0.4 12.9 0.2 3.0 0.2 86.5 2.8 Bacillariophyta 626.5 .61.7 2096.7 :52.0 1401.0 33.6 75.3 6.2 54.9 1.1 123.6 6.5 233.4 6.1 483.2 9.0 528.1 35.4 624.7 20.1 Pyrrhophyta-Dinophyceae 14.8 1.5 41.3 1.0 9.7 0.2 0.8 <O.l 11.5 0.3 12.2 0.6 2.1 <0.1 8.4 0.2 7.4 0.5 12.0 0.4 Cryptophyta 176.1 17.3 277.9 6.9 252.3 6.1 199.0 16.5 412.4 8.3 96.4 5.1 398.9 10.5 2011.1 37.5 127.5 8.6 439.1 14.1 Unidentified algae 0.8 < 0.1 46.8 1.2 37.3 0.9 14.7 1.2 40.5 0.8 15.8 0.8 13.6 0.4 16.4 0.3 65.2 4.4 27.9 0.9 Total density 1016.1 4029.2 4168.6 1206.7 4970.1 1899.8 3801.3 5357.9 1490.3 3104.4 Chlorophyll a (mg/t) 3.01 8.69 9.08 2.29 5.01 0.73 2.34 4.07 4.98 4.47 Primary production 9.63 18.58 21.86 8.53 19.78 1.06 7.69 18.26 9.07 12.72 o(mgCmJ/4 hr)**Mean density based on 32 samples per sampling date, and relative abundance equals major group density divided by total density times 100.**Theoccurrence of Rbodophyta (red algae) during April is discussed in the text (Section IV A l.b.). Batrachospermum sp comprised of 13.0 cells/mt O approximately 1.3% of the monthly density.0 total phytoplankton among the control (transects NMPW and NMPE) and experimen-tal areas (transects NMPP and FITZ). Turbulence is probably the most important condition influencing short-term variations, and it tends to negate physical and chemical factors that are necessary for spatial differences to develop.within individual sampling periods.Observation of annual mean data for all depth contours combined revealed no apparent differences between the control and experimental areas,%but comparison of individual transect means for total phytoplankton cell densities suggested a west to east gradient; that is, cell densities at NMPW and NMPP transects were approximately 30 percent higher than the FITZ and NMPE transects.
| |
| This west-to-east density gradient was not apparent in monthly samples. A gradient with respect to depth contours was observed in surface samples, showing the density at the 10- and 20-foot contours was higher than the density at the 40- and 60-foot contours based on annual mean values (Ap-pendix Table A-7).Spatial distribution data for the total phytoplankton community at depths equivalent to the 50, 25., and 1 percent light penetration levels along the 40-foot depth contour indicated a general trend of equally abundant dens-ities at the three light penetration levels (Appendix A-7).2. Chlorophyll a and Phaeophytin a a. Temporal Distribution Chlorophyll a and phaeophytin a concentrations are presented in Appendix Tables A-8 and A-9.Highest monthly averages for chlorophyll A concentration occurred during May and June, coinciding with the late spring peak in cell densities (Table IV-2). A smaller late-fall peak in chlorophyll a was observed in November when cell densities peaked. The lower than expected chlorophyll a values were probably a result of peak phaeophytin values in November.
| |
| Lowest chlorophyll a concentrations occurred in September when densities were also low. Generally, phytoplankton cell densities can be directly correlated to chlorophyll a concentrations; however, during certain periods when the chloro-phyll a degradation product (phaeophytin a) is present, the determination of L IV-6 science services division iv-6-_A.
| |
| the chlorophyll a concentrations may be affected because phaeophytin a is spectrophotometrically inactive.
| |
| The monthly mean phaeophytin a concentrations were generally low throughout the study, but during November high phaeophytin concentrations were found. These results support the low chlorophyll a con-centrations in relation to high cell density which occurred in November.Chlorophyll a/phaeophytin a concentrations were surveyed with water quality collections semimonthly at the 20- and 60-foot depth contours.
| |
| Through-out the study, trends in chlorophyll a concentrations at the 20- and 60-foot contours were similar to trends observed in concurrent lake phytoplankton sam-ples (Appendix Table G-3). Peaks in chlorophyll a concentrations in May and June water quality samples were similar to those in lake samples collected with phytoplankton.
| |
| Phaeophytin a concentrations at the 20- and 60-foot water qual-ity stations were low throughout the study.b. Spatial Distribution There were no distinct spatial distribution differences for chloro-phyll a or phaeophytin a concentrations among sampling stations within a monthly sampling period (Appendix Tables A-8 and A-9). From the 10- out to the 60-foot depth contours, chlorophyll a concentrations slightly decreased (based on an annual mean). There were no overall differences among control and experimental transects for chlorophyll a and phaeophytin a (Appendix Tables A-8 and A-9).Sampling at the 50, 25, and 1 percent light-transmittance levels showed that chlorophyll a concentrations were generally higher at the 50 per-cent level and lowest at the 25 percent level. Phaeophytin a values showed a distinct trend; based on the annual mean concentrations, phaeophytin a concen-trations were higher at the 25 percent level than at the 50 or 1 percent levels.3. Primary Production
| |
| : a. Temporal Distribution Primary productivity is a measure of the amount of carbon assimilated per unit of time by the phytoplankton community.
| |
| Rates of productivity for lake samples were highest in June and lowest in September (Appendix Table A-10).IV-7 science services division sio Monthly primary productivity rates followed the same seasonal trend that total phytoplankton cell densities exhibited during 1978. However, primary produc-tivity rates frequently do not follow cell density trends because productivity rates will respond to short-term effects that may not produce a change in cell densities.
| |
| Results of the primary production studies conducted by Vollenweider 1 et al (1974) on Lake Ontario near Oswego support this year's results.i.11 b. Spatial Distribution Primary productivity values along the depth contours were lowest at the 60-foot depth contour and highest at the 20-foot contour (Appendix Table A-10). There were no consistent trends in productivity among stations within each monthly sampling, nor trends among stations based on annual means. There were also no consistent differences in productivity rates among experimental 4 and control transects.
| |
| Productivity rates were higher at the 50 percent light-transmittance level than at the 25 and 1 percent levels, and rates at the latter A two levels were similar.The overall results indicate that there were no discernable temporal or spatial patterns of rates of carbon assimilation during the 1978 study in the Nine Mile Point vicinity.4. Overview of Year-to-Year Results Phytoplankton samples have been collected in the vicinity of Nine Mile 1 Point since 1973 to document species composition, temporal and spatial distribu-tion, chlorophyll a concentrations, and primary production (1 4 C tracer method). 4 Species composition has been similar from year to year, and the number of taxa has ranged between 223 and 254. The majority of the taxa were Chlorophyta
| |
| -1 (green algae), followed by Bacillariophyta (diatoms), and Cyanophyta (blue-green algae). Other taxa included representatives of 6 Cryptophyta, Pyrrhophyta, Euglenophyta, Xanthophyta, Chrysophyta, and Rhodophyta.
| |
| I-IV-8 science services division !
| |
| Total phytoplankton cell densities usually increased in April and exhibited a spring pulse (generally in May) and a large late-summer pulse in August. In addition to similar temporal patterns among years, total phyto-plankton cell densities were similar from year to year. The diatoms generally dominated during spring, while the combination of green and blue-green algae was characteristically most abundant during the summer pulse. The phytoflagellates were present during most of the year, but were usually more abundant during fall. Based on annual mean densities, spatial distribution trends were similar from year to year. Total phytoplankton cell densities decreased from west to east, and it was generally noted that densities decreased from the 10-foot to the 60-foot depth contours.A! Chlorophyll a and phaeophytin a concentrations have been measured since 1973. Chlorophyll a showed.a similar temporal distribution each year with peaks in late spring and late summer. However, no consistent spatial trends were observed from year to year. Phaeophytin a concentrations were generally low throughout all of the years.Primary production was variable within a given year and from year to year. Temporal distribution generally followed total phytoplankton cell den-sity.B. ZOOPLANKTON The zooplankton community in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point was sampled using two different types of gear:. a 12-centimeter-diameter Wisconsin net with 76-micrometer mesh to sample microzooplankton (smaller zooplankton);
| |
| and a 1-meter-diameter Hensen net with 571-micrometer mesh to sample macrozoo-plankton (larger zooplankton).
| |
| Micro- and macrozooplankton data are presented independently.
| |
| : 1. Microzooplankton The microzooplankton community is composed of protozoans, rotifers, small microcrustaceans, and early life stages of macrozooplankters.
| |
| For this study, microzooplankton were defined as invertebrates larger than 76 micro-* meters but less than 571 micrometers..IV-9 science services division
| |
| !i a. Species Composition Of the 47 microzooplankton taxa collected during 1978, Rotifera was the dominant group (Table IV-3). All other taxa combined, including Protozoa, 1 Calanoida, Cyclopoida, Cladocera, and Copepoda nauplii, accounted for only 20 percent of the microzooplankton community sampled. Numbers of microzooplankton I taxa fluctuated from month to month in no definite pattern, ranging from a low of 18 in July when density was greatest to a high of 31 in September, the period of lowest density.b. Temporal Distribution The seasonal distribution pattern of total microzooplankton abun-dance was unimodal (Table IV-4); density increased throughout the spring, peaked in July (188,687 organisms per cubic meter), declined precipitously I T through September, and increased slightly in October and November.'
| |
| No samples I were collected in December because of severe winter weather and ice.Rotifers totally dominated the microzooplankton community throughout the study except during April when five taxonomic groups shared dominance.
| |
| In 'percent composition, rotifers ranged from 13 percent in April to 90 percent in August (Table IV-4). Rotifera density was highest in July, accounting for the major portion of the peak in total density observed for that period (Appendix Table B-I). The most abundant organism throughout this survey was the rotifer Keratella sp., which ranged in percent composition from 1 percent in April to 56 percent in June and had an annual mean of 35-percent (Table IV-3). Copepoda nauplii was the second most abundant major group during 1978, but accounted for only 8 percent of the microzooplankton community (Table IV-4). The Clado-cera group had an annual mean of only 5 percent, with peak relative abundance 1-during October. Cyclopoida and Protozoa accounted for only 3 and 4 percent, respectively.
| |
| 7 c. Spatial Distribution Among individual transects and between experimental and control transects, no salient differences were observed in total microzooplankton density (Table IV-5). With respect to depth contours, there were more or-ganisms in inshore waters except during July and August (Table IV-5).IV-10 science services division Table IV-3 (Page 1 of 2)Monthly Occurrence and Relative Abundance (by Number) of Microzooplankton from Wisconsin Net (76 Micrometers)
| |
| Oblique Tows, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 1'axa Annual Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean CL Z F 0 2 Protozoa Mastigophora Ciliophora Suctoria Protozoa unid.Coelenterata (Cnideria)
| |
| Hydra sp.Rotifera Brachionidae Keratella sp.Brachionus sp.Euchianis sp.KeTffcottia sp.Nlotholca sp.tE sp.P!-ca 4 sp.E-fla sp.Conochilidae Conochilus sp.Filinidee Filinia sp.Aspianchnidae Asplanchna sp.Synchaetidae Polyarthra sp.Sýyaetasp.
| |
| Trichoceridae Trichocerca sp.Ploesomatidae Ploesoma sp.Rotifer unid.Nematoda Nematoda unid.9 11 19 T T 10 T T 1 T T T 2 T T 1 1 T T 3 3 T 2 56 1 1 36 27 21 21 52 T T. 9 1 T 3 6 T 2 T T I T T T T T T 3 5 3 T T 3 II 11 1 T 35 1 T 4 1 T T T T 23 T T 1 I1 T T T T 1 11 T 2 T T 6 58 13 T 24 55 14 T 1 31 1 T 8 T 7 T 1 T 4 1 T 2 T 21 7 T T T Table IV-3 (Page 2 of 2)Annual Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean Taxa H CL Nematode (cont)Cladoiera Bosminldae unid.Chydoridae Alona sp.ZFZorssp.Daphnidae Paphnia retrocurva Daphnia sp.a hnia sp.Leptodoridae Leptodora kindtii Sidida-e Diaphanosoma sp.Copepode Calanoida iatOSoreqonensis.iaptomus ashlandi iatou s icl-7T~-s Diaptomus mini~utu Diaptomus sp.Eurytemora sp.Limnocal anus macrarus Calanoida (Copepod-id-sunid.
| |
| Cyclopoida N bicuspidatus thomasi Tropocyclops prasinus mexicana Trpocyclops sp.Cyclopoida (Copepodids) unid.Cyclopoida unid.Harpacticoida Longipedia sp.Caligusp.Copepoda naupili unid.Total density (No./m3.)Number of taxa T T 2 6 T 4 13.T 1 T T T T T T T T T T 1 T T T T I T T T T 6 T 1 T T 64 T 4 T T 1 T T T T 2 T 1 13 3 T T T T T T T T 5 T T T 2 T T T 2 T 5 I T T T 2 T T 3 T T T T T T T 1 T T T T 3 T T T 8 51,099 47 18 7 T 3 25 4,938 25 3 37,615 21 2 87,782 28 T 10 188,687 20 T 8 20 9 58,550 3,477 16,315 21 31 19 9 8 11,424 19 T = <0.5%.
| |
| Table IV-4 Percent Relative Abundance of Major Microzooplankton Groups and Total Density q of Microzooplankton from Wisconsin Net Oblique Tows, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Annual Taxa Apr May Jun Jul Auq Sep Oct Nov Dec* Mean Protozoa 21 29 2 T** T T 1 1 4 Rotifera 13 68 90 80 88 71 70 71 8o Cladocera T T 3 7 2 5 16 7 5 Calanoida 19 T T T T T 1 T T Cyclopoida 23 T 3 2 2 3 5 13 3 Copepoda nauplii 25 3 2 10 8 20 7 8 8 Others T T T T 0 0 0. 0 T Total density (No./m3) 4,913 37,615 87,782 188,687 58,550 3,477 .16,103 11,424 51,069.*No samples collected due to severe winter weather and ice.Li **T = <0.5%.."Depth-related differences in total microzooplankton density were primarily a function of rotifers (Appendix Table B-l). From May through November rotifers comprised a higher percentage of the total microzooplankton community (from 68 to 90 percent) than any other taxonomic group. Generally, numbers of rotifers were inversely related to water-depth contours except in July. Neither major nor consistent density differences between control and experimental transects were observed for the major microzooplankton groups_J (Appendix Tables B-1 through B-4).2. Macrozooplankton
| |
| : a. Species Composition Of the 33 taxa of macrozooplankton collected during the 1978 study (Table IV-6), cladocerans were dominant; however, calanoid copepods were pres-ii 1 ent to the exclusion of all other macrozooplankton during April and virtually so during May. Although .scuds (Amph.ipoda)
| |
| Gammarus fasciatus and Pontoporeia affinis, and a mysid shrimp, Mysis oculata relicta (Mysidacea), were designated as selected species for this study, only a few Pontoporeia affinis were col-lected in 1978 macrozooplankton samples (Table IV-6). All three species are epibenthic during the day and migrate up into the water column only during evening hours. Since G. faciatus and P. affinis were common taxa in 1978 benthic collections (Appendix Tables D-2 and D-3), their temporal and spatial distribution is discussed in subsection D.IV-13 science services division Table IV-5 Total Microzooplankton Abundance (No./m3 ), Wisconsin Net (76-Micrometer)
| |
| Oblique Tows, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Getaur (ft) Transect 10 NOR9 NWP FITZ Contour mean 20 N6W FITZ Contour mean 40 8195 NI9P FITZ HMPE Contour mean 60 fimpw FITZ Contour mean Control mean--Experimental mean Yonthly mean Monthly range Nun S .E. mean S. E.7065.62 656.36 47148.25 4635.17 4401.85 476.19 30143.6 3616.07 7659.65 1457.91 39307.33 1558.44 5332.39 212.16 66629.62 5721.63 6114.88 754.82 !45812.21 7758.54 3177.22 441.37 43247.73 651.04 5540.36 372.67 43313.93 3052.54 5266.61 79.00 37598.80 3585.22 3401.36 583.72 44085.45 5721.02 4346.39 614.57 42111.48 1514.34 5569.75 55.59 26752.98 1242.81 5506.71 183.15 35917.77 1323.75 3967.52 280.88 37933.35 1122.58 4257.70 268.91 36688.77 3344.92 4825.62 4L5.98 34323.21 2357.34 3970.81 119.60 22844.25 321.75 4529.00 187.1L5 44600.91 12.1.78 5048.76 458.98 23384.32 1700.68 3908.26 105. 11 22028.33 0; 00 43,64.21 267.46 28214.45 5469.26 4585.39 663.11 38711.92 5314.92 3240.06 398.38 36552.51 Z458.63 6912.72 306.88e 37615.34 3943.55 3177.22-7659.65 21683.64-72351.31 Jun Mean S.E.A123721 4674 94852 2699 87849 3695 71955 3422 94594 10826 92262 3770 73610 7740 87344 4633 84454 5039 84418 3947 75317 1923 95635 4365 100115 0.03 89190 2528 90064 5403 83616 4843 78760 5896 92761 6662 73072 4203 82052 4169 86698 5905 88866 3165 87782 2825 71955-123721 Jul A" Sap M .ean S.$. Men S.E. Mean S.[.
| |
| 17801.47 70847.75 3484.34 417A.60 195.77 97545.94 2911.25 61354.59 1560. P4 1 4756.40 89.74 160435.75 14908.81 71189.31 7523.37 L346. 01 147.75 156403.62 2873.62 50091.16 4863.22 5024.09 466.56 180888.12 13212.96 63370.70 4978.69 4325.2i 371.47 131474.69 14169.47 89880.87 2976.19 3121.61 11.68 152406.12 24522.53 79649.75 213.56 4931.66 111.80 246059.12 17710.97 41064.40 3753.50 2580.42 86.91 190969.31 2467.25 58730.12 3802.14 3153.79 93.68 180227.31 25166.20 67331.25 10849.02 3446.87 512.11 120975.37 650.41 72715.50 2252.25 4127.57 352.94 126022.87 4324.31 87155.75 1092.22 3107.40 285.02 234026.75 9093.06 32357.99 841.46 2541.87 177.34 259258.87 9700.12 50384.01 5529.95 3409.30 44.47 185070.94 35934.47 60653.31 12089.80 3296.53 330.23 120659.94 2276.62 76385.37 1625.12 3447.97 202.82 192077.87 51854.25 41727.17 2663.44 2640.19 7.35 249262.31 14408.56 23298.41 635.74 2434.06 159.34 272246.12 9620.00 29966.49 390.64 2833.53 47.23 208561.56 33801.73 42844.36 11811.47 2838.94 218.78 182644.41 21390.53 62370.66 6669.11 3661.56 256.39 194729.59 16287.44 54724.67 8271.61 3292.25 356.07 188687.00 13080.36 58549.92 5226.32 3476.90 217.24 272246.12-120659.94 89880.87-23298.41
| |
| '2434.06 --5024.09 Oct Man S.[.*15407 125 14500 989 14760 211 23370 879 170D9 2129 12574 670 16120 705 17677 738 I8362 1233 16183 1291 13834 533 13256 745 13885 628 18645 201 14905 1255 14663 513 12130 193 14750 656 23716 1842 16315 2541 17571 1495 14635 601 16188 a6 12130-23716 yaam S.[.10859 858 15169 1762 8277 519 14568 820 12218 1623 12730 867 14756 721 9888 535 16152 356 13381 1360 8380 326 11334 836 15589 377 6288 72 10398 2016 8102 187 7074 462 11099 132 12S28 256 9701 1272 11201 1208 11648 1145 11424 W6 6288-161g Dec Mean S.E.N0 samples taken due to ice and strong winds 4-H-standard error.O.ntrol represents WPM6 and NIP!. aseinant~aI represets NWPf and FITZ.P I Z a 0 3 0 0a 0 S 4 0ur@2.~....~................-~
| |
| '-
| |
| -,~.-~ ~Table IV-6 Monthly Occurrence and Relative Abundance (by number) of Macrozooplankton Collected in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 Annual Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean Taxa*1 H Lfl S C I.2 C S 0 5.S S S S i 2 Coelenterata (Cnideria)
| |
| Hydrozoa Hydra sp.CordIyophora lacustris Nematoda Unid.Annelida Oligochaeta Naididae unid.Arachnida Prostigmata Hydracarina sp.Arthropoda Cladocera Bosminidae unid.Eurycercus lamellatus Daphnia galeata mendotae Daphnia retrocurva Daphnia schodleri Cerioda hnia sp.-Ho og~edium gbberum Lptodora kindtii Y y u sordidis Pal hemu p -cuu D'ahacrsma sp.Ostracoda und.Copepoda Calanoida Diaptomus oregonensis iaptomus ashlandi Diaptomus sicilis Eurytemora a miis Limnocalanusmacrurus Limnocalanus sp.1 ihura lacustris Calano a immature Cyclopoida Cyclops bicuspidatus thomasi Cyclopoida juvenile Amphi poda Pontoporeia affinis Isopoda unii.Insecta Diptera Chironomidae unid.Total (No./ 1000 m ) 1,802 Number of taxan 3*T = <0.5%3 T T T T T T T T T T T T T T 8 32 T 4 3 1 30 2 T T 12 4 T T I T T l 71 T 1 T 1 3 T 67 T T T 31 T T 4 2 71 68 T T 1 18 24 11 3 91 T 3 12 I T T T 9 2 55 38 T T T T 1 T 11 T T T T T T T T T 100 99 T 11 T T T T 1 T 5 T T 5 1 T T 1 1 T I T T T T 47 T T T T T T T T T I.T T T T T T 1 T T T T T T ,877 46,336 4 16,191 69,782 736,339 1,214,722 25 17 9 5 169,566 405,535 98,489 506,655 15 11 19. 33 15 11 19. 33 0 b. Temporal Distribution The seasonal distribution pattern of total macrozooplankton abundance fl was essentially trimodal (Table IV-7). Density was highest in April, then de-clined through June. A second major peak occurred in September.
| |
| Densities subsequently declined, but another minor peak was observed in November.
| |
| Cala-noid copepods accounted for all of the macrozooplankton during the initial density peak in April, while cladocerans were the only organisms present during September.
| |
| During the minor peak (November), cladocerans were also predominant.
| |
| '1 Table IV-7 Percent Relative Abundance of Major Macrozooplankton Groups and Total Density of Macrozooplankton Collected from Composited Hlensen Net Tows in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 Al AnnualJ Taxa Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean Cladocera 0 T** 80 88 99 100 100 100 85 59 Calanoida 100 100 18 12 1 0 T T 11 41 Cyclopoida 0 0 1 0 T 0 T T T T Amphipoda 0 0 T 0 0 0 0 0 T T Diptera 0 0 T T 0 0 0 0 T T Other 0 0 1 0 0 0 o 0 4 T Density (No./1000 m3) 1,802,877 46,336 16,191 69,782 .736,399 1,214,722 169,566 405,535 98,489 506,655*Composite of surface, mid-depth and bottom horizontal tows.**T= 0.5%. 71 Since cladocerans totally dominated the macrozooplankton community during most of the sampling period, the temporal distribution pattern for cla-docerans generally (except during April and May) determined monthly total dens-ity distributions.
| |
| Copepods dominated in April and May because of a "bloom" of Limnocalanus macrurus.
| |
| In September, the cladoceran community was composed almost exclusively of Daphnia retrocurva and Leptodora kindtii (Table IV-6). I In December, Daphnia galeata mendotae, D. retrocurva, and D. pulex were the dominant cladocerans and Diaptomus sicilis and Limnocalanus macrurus were thd dominant copepods.
| |
| Calanoids and/or cladocerans accounted for almost 100 per-cent of the macrozooplankton collected in monthly samples; in December, however V Hydra sp. (Coelenterata) represented 4 percent of the density. All other taxa, IV-16 science services division 11 including cyclopoid copepods, scuds (amphipods), and dipterans, comprised no more than 1 percent of the total macrozooplankton community during any month in 1 1978.! I c. Spatial Distribution The distribution of total macrozooplankton during 1978 (Table IV-8)was a reflection of the concentrations of cladocerans, which were widely dis-tributed over the study area, and copepods, which were found in slightly higher concentrations off shore (Appendix Table B-5). On an annual basis, cladoceran concentrations were greater in 40 feet of water than in 20 feet; however, no I consistent monthly depth-related distribution pattern was evident. There were no apparent cladoceran concentration differences between stations near the 1l thermal discharges
| |
| [stations on the 20- and 40-foot depth contours within the i.. 0.5-mile radius and within the 1-mile radius east zone (Figure III-1 in Section III, Methods and Materials)]
| |
| and other stations.
| |
| Calanoid copepod densities Z.J were higher at the deeper contours than at the 20-foot contour and decreased from west to east along all contours.3. Overview of Year-to-Year Results 1 Microzooplankton were collected monthly during 1973-78 (except for twice monthly collections during summer 1973-75) at four depth contours (10, 20, 40, and 60-feet) along four transects (NMPW, NMPP, FITZ, and NMPE). Roti-fers usually dominated the samples in both density and number of taxa, with species of the genus Keratella numerically the most important.
| |
| Cladocerans and copepods were of secondary importance (based on annual trends), typically domi-nating for 1 or 2 months annually in spring (either cladocerans or copepods)and/or early fall (cladocerans).
| |
| Bosmina sp. was the dominant cladoceran, and Daphnia retrocurva was often a major component of the cladoceran group. Cope-ý'J pods were represented by several genera, including Diaptomus, Limnocalanus, Cyclops, Tropocyclops, and Diacyclops.
| |
| Temporal trends in abundance were bi-modal, with summer and fall peaks and often a late spring peak. Spatial trends included a decrease in abundance from shallow to deeper waters and, during some years of the study (1973), a higher abundance of rotifers at experimental tran-sects than at control transects.
| |
| Annual fluctuations in densities were appar-ently related to many complex physicochemical and biological interactions.
| |
| The V -17 science services division Table IV-8 Abundance*
| |
| of Macrozooplankton from Composited*
| |
| Hensen Net Tows, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Total Macrozooplankton H H 20-Ft Contour 40-Ft Contour I60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date '3-West 1-West 1/2-West l/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3Mest 1-West 1/2-Westi1/2-Eas 1-East 3-East Mean N PPP NpPP mean Apr 380538 756036 2880809 798522 348499 90833 875873 3933013 4902058 4107945' 1198632 1050185 642656 2639081 3395762 1375240 1182421 1802877 may 20865 27143 64744 164870 11695 37236 54426 57446 26165 40026 88382 53499 59414 54155 13659 6433 23457 46336 Jun 22862 14278 14971 14105 33713 30994 21821 9730 9050 11719 8924 11765 18101 11548 14903 8360 19387 16191 Jul 50708 54563 24424 70062 34096 20247 42350 62666 52930 60819 89920 44953 61872 62193 168680 150894 99896 69782 Aug 751719 782222 911693 339898 812168 236451 639025 595749 720783 572394 908814 1304006 1709249 968500 538769 541405 320665 736399 Sep 929048 1695454 585109 2091500 926086 1428640 1275973 1404650 1530692 1620982 1280772 905144 1590894 1388856 1500273 382980 348608 1214722 Oct 167116 272219 149274 113195 221109 140677 177265 189504 122445 177643 148218 186968 189471 169042 173812 146592 145247 169566 Nov 185612 420998 162102 157338 159774 1156479 373717 533786 596292 419470 162790 419577 1291914 570638 140553 147039 129301 405535 Dec 99842 .270M55 97735 61394 108201 110964 124832 107609 68648 138022 139879 101477 80542 106030 38195 27861 26111 98489 No./1000 m 3.*Composite of surface, mid-depth, and bottom horizontal tows.S (.a CL 0 S 0m S 2.I S_... .... .- --.. ,.... .-... -. -.-.--- ---' 7 -
| |
| same species have dominated the community throughout the studies (1973-78).
| |
| Based on findings, the two power plants have had negligible effects on the microzooplankton populations near Nine Mile Point.Macrozooplankton samples have been collected weekly or monthly in 1-meter nets since 1973 and analyzed weekly through 1974 and monthly since T T1975. During 1973-76, Leptodora kindtii was the most abundant organism col-lected, but large numbers of Gammarus fasciatus were also present. During 1977 and 1978, the dominant organisms were Daphnia galeata mendotae, D. retro-curva, and Limnocalanus macrurus.
| |
| Leptodora kindtii was abundant but of lesser importance.
| |
| Differences between the periods (1973-76 vs 1977-78) may be re-lated to changes in the ecological study. Since both L. kindtii and G.fasciatus are epibenthic during the day but migrate vertically into the water column at night, they are frequently more abundant in night samples. Benthic samples taken with a diver-operated suction sampler during both 1977 and 1978 were dominated numerically by Gammarus fasciatus.
| |
| Over the 6 years of study, macrozooplankton have been variable; some trends indicated slight density in-creases at deeper depth contours.
| |
| Operation of the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick power plants apparently has had no effect on the macrozooplank-ton community.
| |
| C. PERIPHYTON
| |
| : 1. Bottom Periphyton
| |
| : a. Species Composition Seven algal divisions were represented in periphyton collected from early May through mid-December from artificial substrates placed on the lake bottom (Table IV-9). Green algae (Chlorophyta) were most numerous taxonomi-cally, followed by blue-green algae (Cyan6phyta), then diatoms (Bacillariophyta-Centric and Pennate combined).
| |
| All other algal divisions combined represented approximately 10 percent of the total number of periphyton taxa present.In the bottom periphyton community, green algae consistently accounted for higher numbers of taxa than did any of the other divisions.
| |
| The number of diatom and blue-green taxa were relatively high but variable throughout the study (Appendix Table C-1). All other divisions were represented by relatively few or no taxa during each sampling period.IV-19 science services division Of the 206 taxa collected during the study, only 12 accounted for I percent or more of the total annual abundance (Table IV-10 and Appendix Table C-l). These 12 comprised 86 percent of the total bottom periphyton.
| |
| The most abundant alga was Lyngbya spp., a filamentous blue-green making up 72 percent of the bottom periphyton community.
| |
| Table IV-9 Percent Relative Abundance of Major Bottom Periphyton Groups Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Annual Division May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean Cyanophyta 5 83 85 86 61 79 56 35 73 Chlorophyta 45 14 14 12 34 9 37 58 17 Euglenophyta T* T T Chrysophyta T T T T T T T T Bacillariophyta 48 3 1 2 5 7 7 6 8 Pyrrhophyta-Dinophyceae T T T T T T T T Cryptophyta 1 T T T T 5 T T 2 No. of taxa 99. 93 77 103 95 89 78 56 206*T = <0.5%b. Temporal Distribution Bottom periphyton were most abundant during August and October (Table IV-II). Periphyton biomass exhibited highest values during May, September, and October (Table IV-12). Abundance and biomass were maximum during the spring-summer and summer-fall transition periods, producing a bimodal growth cycle.Blue-green algae dominated from June through November 1978, com-prising 73 percent of the bottom periphyton (Table IV-9). Maximum numbers per unit of area were observed in October, although the highest percent composi-tion occured in August. Green algae had their greatest relative abundance in December but highest numbers of organisms in September.
| |
| Diatoms were most num-erous and had highest relative abundance during May. The only other periphy-ton group to comprise more than I percent of the annual composition was the phytoflagellates (cryptophyta) (Appendix Tables C-I through C-5).*1 2; 1.1.1)7'.1 5'TI IV-20 science services division
| |
| ~. J II~ I~1 I I I Table IV-10 Monthly Occurrence and Relative Abundance of Bottom Periphyton Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Annual Taxa May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Mean Cyanophyta Chamaesiphonales Chamaesi hon sp. T** T T T T T 1 12 T Osc 1 atoriales Oscillatoria sp. 1 T T T T I T Ln a sp. 3 85 84 85 60 78 55 22 72 Chlorophyta Chlorococcales Pediastrum boryanum 2 ..T T T T T Ulotr7chales Ulothrix zonata 8 T T 1 Ulothrix sp. 17 T T 1 1 Ulotr-ict-aTes unid. 9 T T T 1 Chaetophorales
| |
| -grosira sp. 4 3 T 27 1 1 PseidijiWela americanum 2 1 T B 1 3 1. 1 Stiýeoclornufdsp.
| |
| 3 9 4 9 20 4 5 2 8 Chaetophorales unid. T 1 T T 52 1 Oedogonlales oonium sp. T 1 2 ,T 2 T T T T BacilTlariophyta-Centric Eupodiscales unid. 6 T T T T T T T T Bacillariophyta-Pennate Fragilariales Diatoma tenue 20 T T T T T T T 2 faglariasp.
| |
| 2 T T T T T T T Naviculales Navicula sp. 2 T T -L.T T T T T t Bac'ilariales Nitzchia sp. 5 T T T T 1 1 *T 1 BaciTT-arophyta-Pennate unid. 4 1 1 1 4 3 3 4 2 Cryptophyta Cryptomonodales Rhodomonas minuta T T 'T T T 4 T T 2 Total density (No./mm 2) 241,063 442,364 i47,337 633,392 361,695 1,151,482 59,247 35,282 383,983 Total number taxa 17 15 14 16 15 18 17 17 19 Taxa listed include only those that accounted for at least 1% of the bottom periphyton collected during one or more of the 1977 sampling periods.T = <0.5%.}IV-21 science services division Table IV-11 2 Abundance (No./mm ) of Total Bottom Periphyton Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct kNO Dec Depth Contour q (ft) Transect Meanr S.E.*5 NMPW 227551 26746*MPP 24098 14099 FITZ 797625 300148 HMPE 178379 222746 Contour mean 708246 394096 10 NMPW 291163 91778 NMPP 186565 62927 FITZ 445658 75113 NWPE 391536 173923 Contour mean 328730 57183 20 NKPW 77826 6887 NMPP 174805 11017 FITZ 81349 11750 NMPE 98887 21476 Contour mean 108217 22669 30 NMPW 20003 2861 NMPP 20150 4856 FITZ 69977 5260 WMPE 78417 5418 Contour mean 47137 15718 40 NMPW 6117 1240 NIPP 1791 482 FITZ 27805 1408 RWPE 16235 2611 Contour mean 12987 5793 Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean 2526958 2174393 131228 51149 321608 697651 149405 -* 9736741 300946 95469 206011 60474 626227 909792 645339 187973 78233 -1108836 489255 175071 22531 3581525 1896836 1247809 199775 90593 40580 45557 17525 239843 180614 64488 167439 59202 139766 52588 143146 1019193 571426 28532 3631 313596 779756 431231 151979 46001 140453 662540 550212 31016 12799 5294 128383 91984 509887 390945 5599 19647 6826 205650 109184 74810 61022 34842 ** **222898 154844 248851 139916 28568 26455 3361 4020 534 8524 62085 33404 5433t 1370 11522 139803 70196 346363 276190 15253 62411 42856 17529 9386 8847 72689 23909 93336 84397 11036 14880 2293 384489 257637 6721 12158 35?0 7048 2436 6995 21344 4122 3966 1332 5671 62176 54299 3541 1610 5534 27640 11672 99761 94912 6205 S.E, 86956 6396476 175489 3088859 7198 40451 46648 148147 61733 2946 461 31234 23121 3564 7982 8289 2308 1558 1603 1045 1257 2117 381 Mean 421268 457785 4810 294621 1309918 10838756 711636 1175138 1070141 95215 449289 189540 288073 255529 9130 71049 215668 5881 75432 4529 10118 7587 7411 S.6. Mean S.E.* Mean S.E. Mean S.C.34791 78042t 38308 65756 21757 ***** u****269699 12159371 3091294 *.** -.** *** *nae.uu... 88038 28914 22671 6079 *2412 54521 42559 22251 8266 2647 4 775 145288 3094993 3021467 38892 14432 2647 775 538270 843733 217765 219180. 76060 110172 49801 272525 4045925 1137524 60444 15025 2 7 9 7 2 8 tt .100 227456 384202 218806 27381 8734 62739 11217 262417 645400 287701 118960 44392 15750 1454 128203 1454815 868933 106491 42064 117097 57534 9166 170099 95228 230597 104229 28528 16120 221730 53429 45216 26172 13409 38873 10950 71357 79731 9637 124741 31210 13297 3879 53955 136853 76916 100066 15635 94 75640 110028 26535 120394 42283 20432 8331 1723 5883 1525 6317 602 1629 408 29157 13551 5285 24046 13663 3885 84387 14165 1059 **** *"** ****.2106 6609 3098 2603 1388 2659 1111 49091 10052 2206 10989 6616 2724 652 724 3768 1823 5716 2179 933 359 4632 5107 759 3805 2330 636 1451434 373 2286 524 379 83 3011 4799782 4796995 3459 793 1628 418 1616 1202523 1199087 3816 712 894 270 S 0 5, 2 0 0 S 0 0 0 S 0.4 S 0 2 Control mean** 299144 170067 726226 279964 Experimental mean** 182982 80240 144092 61543 Monthly mean 241063 129077 442364 154405 Monthly range 1791-178371 12158-2526958
| |
| *Standard error.**Control represents KKPW and WIPE, experimental represents I'Pp and FITZ..****Substrates lost during severe weather.tOne of four replicates missing due to weather.109789 43129 88838 50096 184885 57033 1069035 964933 147337 35860 633392 536904 3541-504887 5294-973641 332155 158581 664469 467724 77491 27937 398620 127408 1684495 1229316 36443 14101 361695 102134 1151482 651731 69247 17041 4529-1309918 1434-12159371 2286-230597 18331 11901 57077 38136 35282 17934 379-279720 I.~- -.~ --
| |
| Table IV-12 Ash-Free Dry Weight (mg/dm2 ) of Total Bottom Periphyton Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978.jo'A".S"l Oct NOV Dec Depth Contourw (ft) Transect Mean 5 6MPW 27.46 NMP 19.24 FITZ 72.61 NIPE 96.99 Contour mean 54.08 10 NMPW 24.14 wMPp 19.59 FITZ 39.60 NKPE 16.72 Contour mean 25.01 20 NXPW 36.43 N1PP 19.78 FITZ 18.48 NNPE 16.05 Contour mean 22.69 30 NKPW 52.19 14pp 22.03 FITZ 13.99 1HMPE 13.38 Contour mean 25.40 40 NMPW 16.01 N9P1 24.59 FITZ 13.12 NMFE 13.62 Contour mean 16.84 S.E.. Mean S.E.6.50 17.57 3.96 2.86 13.04 1.70 2.56 12.12 1.82 9.30 22.39 12.66 18.50 16.20 2.29 0.75 10.56 4.97 6.59 7.59 0.43 8.68 7.37 0.88*3.72 18.39 1.52 5.10 11.76 2.66 2.03 8.18 1.06 1.80 7.95 2.03 0.91 4.79 0.75 3.00 10.94 1.29 4.65 7.96 1.18 31.23 8.34 1.11 7.98 19.22 2.10 3.09 26.40 1.80 1.80 20.21 6.62 9.15 18.67 3.64 5.41 11.97 0.82 6.93 5.23 1.26 2.16 9.59 3.13 4.94 4.81 0.76 2.66 7.90 1.73 Mean SE.12.39 1.79 12.43 1.65 8.29 1.91 11.04 1.37 8.45 1.67 7.14 1.22 8.63 2.91 4.94 1.47 7.29 0.85 3.98 0.71 7.76 1.76 10.08 2.92 7.27 1.78 9.22 2.98 6.91t 0.50 17.02 1.48 5.86 1.44 9.75 2.52 8.93 1.98 8.09 1.85 9.10 1.05 6.20 1.79 8.08 0.66 Mean S. F.14.49 1.39 49.25 13.51 23.83 6.09 29.19 10.39 11.80 2.13 7.28 1.27 16.85 4.15 15.37 3.17 12.82 2.13 14.97 2.95 9.64 2.62 7.96 1.10 10.86 2.11 8.84 2.76 8.98 1.52 9.32 1.62 12.21 5.74 9.84 0.80 3.63 0.74 6.34 1.11 19.20 3.99 39.00 6.52 17.04 8.07 Mean 26.06 28.58 24.32 26.32 26.7b 27.95 44.53 38.73 34.48 15.78 30.31 23.71 15.95 21.94 7.71 21.95 40.57 5.75 19.00 7.50 13.13 24.56 15.06 S.E. Mean 2.71 6.52 t 2.45 59.61*-*5 6.57 4.20 4.13 1.24 19.21 2.33 19.18 4.04 33.95 3.18 15.21 6.07 50.15 4.30 29.62 4.93 35.67 6.33 22.37 5.77 20.88 2.35 9.60 3.49 22.13 1.35 13.02 11.59 28.45 5.19 34.12.90 8.92 8.05 21.12 2.50 22.73 3.81 31.12.... 10.18 4.08 12.4.6 5.02 19.12 S.E.* Mean 1.10 8.234 7.20 ***1.84 9.65 1.39 5.71 13.34 7.93 1.68 11.34 7.56 10.33 3.88 10.53 33.33 17.27 7.49 12.33 3.77 16.86 5.05 22.35 3.27 10.79 2.37 11.38 5.34 15.39 0.64 8.85 3.95 16.31 7.08 ****.3.42 11.37 6.04 12.17 6.02 27.75 6.43 19.23 0.73 10.41 3.09 13.43 4.85 17.7?S.E. Mean S.E.1.09 *** **-00 2.78 tt.n* .0.66 14.37
| |
| * 2.89 5.20 14.37 2.89 1.42 20.66 2.29 1.89 37.97t 0 2.72 36.94 6.12 4.05 25.19 3.38 1.64 30.19 4.30 3.81 17.77 6.19 4.97 29.86 8.83 4.56 26.96 4.41 1.64 19.074 5.17 2.71 23.40 2.96 0.67 18.20 3.27 7.46 20.26 1.49 1.00 22.44 4.28 2.20 20.30 1.22 9.63 18.11 2.16 5.26 23.00 3.73 0.64 16.63 4.16 3.30 29.20 3.60 3.81 21.74 2.84 1.-I Control mean** 31.30 8.27 11.53 1.63 Experimental mean** 26.30 5.64 11.38 2.14 Monthly mean 28.80 4.91 12.40 1.40 Monthly r'ange 4.41-- 57.25 4.80- 26.40-Standard error.-*Control represents N4PW and NEIPE, experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.*t Substrates lost during severe wiather.tOe of four replicates missing due to weather.7.59 0.86 15.04 3.69 16.75 4.21 18.24 4.60 13.21 1.98 20.55 1.49 9.68 1.08 15.86 4.14 28.84 3.55 26.25 4.80 13.75 1.73 27.37 3.07 8.63 0.72 15.50 2.75 23.54 2.63 22.24 3.36 13.45 1.30 23.54 1.75 3.98- 17.02 3.63- 49.25 7,50 -44.53 4.13 -:59.61 5.71 -27.76 14.37 -37.97 U 0 5 0mu rio The blue-green algae Lyngbya sp. was the dominant taxa found in bottom periphyton sampling during 1978. Only during May and December were other taxa relatively more abundant:
| |
| Ulothrix sp., a green alga, and Diatoma tenue, a diatom, during May; and an unidentified Chaetophorales during Decem-ber. Lyngbya produced no problems at either the Nine Mile Point or James A.FitzPatrick power plants during 1978, although extensive growths can interfere with passage of cooling waters through power plants (Round 1965). 1 c. Spatial Distribution Numerical abundance and biomass of bottom periphyton decreased with increasing water depth, especially during periods when peak densities were ob-served (Tables IV-11 and IV-12). A comparison of the data from experimental (NMPP and FITZ) and control (NMPW and NMPE) transects indicated that bottom periphyton in both areas exhibited the same temporal trend. Densities and 1 biomass were variable, with monthly changes occurring between control and , experimental transects so that no definite annual differences could be deter-mined. Monthly variability masked any differences that could have been attri-buted to thermal discharges from the power plants (i.e., increases in bottom periphyton at the experimental transects).
| |
| : 2. Suspended Periphyton
| |
| : a. Species Composition Taxa from six algal divisions were collected from early May through September from substrates suspended at depths of 2, 7, 12, and 17 feet on the 4 40-foot contour (Table IV-13). Blue-green algae (Cyanophyta) were most abun-dant, followed by diatoms (Bacillariophyta), then green algae (Chlorophyta).
| |
| All other divisions combined accounted for less than 1 percent of total numbers.During the study, 88 taxa were collected, including seven that had at least 1 percent relative abundance (by number) during any one sampling month (Table IV-14 and Appendix Table C-6); the other 81 taxa combined accounted for less than 1 percent of the total periphyton population.
| |
| 1 iIr IV-24. science services division i Table IV-13* Percent Relative Abundance of Major Suspended Periphyton Groups Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978.¶ 1 Annual Division May Jun Jul Aug Sep Mean Cyanophyta T* 98 98 99 88 98 Chlorophyta Chrysophyta T T Bacillariophyta 97 l 1 1 I1 1 Pyrrhophyta-Dinophyceae T T T j Cryptophyta T T T T No. of taxa 59 24 31 24 60 88*T <0.5%.1 b. Temporal Distribution Both density and biomass of suspended periphyton peaked during June and August (Tables IV-15. and IV-16). Maximum density was in June, while maxi-mum biomass was in August. Only during May did taxa other than Lyngbya reach high abundance.
| |
| The major suspended periphyton components at this time were the diatoms Gomphonema olivaceum (56 percent), Diatoma tenue (17 percent), and Achnanthes sp. (18 percent).
| |
| During the remainder of the 1978 sampling program, however, diatoms represented less than 1 percent of the suspended periphyton.
| |
| Lyngbya was so dominant that other taxa, although occasionally quite numerous, composed a very small percentage of the suspended periphyton density.7-7-.J However, as previously stated, Lyngbya did not cause problems at either the Nine Mile Point or James A. FitzPatrick power plants during 1978.L~i Green algae consistently exhibited a greater diversity of taxa than did other divisions, comprising about half of the taxa collected during each sampling period. Diatom and blue-green algal diversity varied throughout the IV-25 science services division sampling season, (Appendix Table C-6). All other divisions showed little di-versity across sampling periods.Table IV-14 Monthly Occurrences and Relative Abundance of Suspended Periphyton Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 i-i:1 ii Annual Mean Taxa May Jun Jul Aug Sep Unidentified Algae Cyanophyta Oscillatoriales Lyngbya sp.Bacillar-iophyta-Pennate Fragilariales Diatoma tenue Achnanthales Achnanthes sp.Naviculales Gomphonema olivaceum Gomphonema montana Bacillariophyta-Pennate unid.Total density (No./m2)Total number of taxa*Taxa listed accounted for at sampling periods.**T = <0.5%I T T T T 98 97 99 88 98 4 17 18 I T 1 T T 56 1 1 602,970 6 least 1% of T 27.3,298,432 5 the suspended T T 1 T 9 T 9,196,302 45,290,279 9,457,771 67,569,151 4 2 3 7 periphyton collected during one or more of the 1978 I'c. Spatial Distribution Generally, total suspended periphyton density decreased as depth increased from the 2 to 17-foot strata; during May and August, however, den-sities were highest at the 7- and 12-foot depths respectively (Table IV-15).Biomass of suspended periphyton was highest at the 2-foot depth strata during June, July, and August and at the 7-foot depth during May and September.
| |
| As expected, biomass typically decreased as water depth increased inasmuch as photosynthesis is limited by decreasing light levels (Table IV-16). During peak densities in June all groups. of periphyton were most abundant (by number)at the 2-foot depth strata.During three of the five sampling months, periphyton densities were noticeably higher at the experimental transects; during the other two sampling periods, densities at control and experimental transects were similiar.
| |
| Thermal I IV-26 science services division Table IV-15 Abundance (No./mm 2) of Total Suspended Periphyton on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile. Point Vicinity, 1978 Depth Strata -(ft) Transect 2 NMPW NMPP FITZ Strata mean 7 NMPW NMPP FITZ Strata mean 12 NMPW NMPP FITZ Strata mean 17 NMPW NMPP FITZ Strata mean Control mean**Experimental mean**Monthly mean Monthly range May Mean S.E.*460155 10047C 407221. 108581 97060 13542 321479 113245 924108t 190817 985751 36535 780546 178755 896802 60791 421702 49514 1150956 62165 542955 247898 705204 225608 356568 61589 202949t 60035 905669 21420 488395 213298 540633. 129600 588326 152508 602970 125550 97060-1150956 Jun Jul Mean S.E. Mean S.E.72614352 528648 23023488 14296757 1829906940 360916480 121424t 110855***** 17779200 10423715 951260416 878646272 13641370 6927417 43056640 21636768 1621420t 82896 47808928 25217776 4661592 1852677 151183200 107907584 17393376 3226725 80682912 35276816 7892129 4831008 11708127 5733713 18787920 1954296 13458926 970242 10842298 7868037 122973152 65328352 8576929 2786701 49380064 36800000 12735715 3095957 2096083 268566. 4664823t 1082175 2158762 862727 2774192 2187045 31359040 15575384 108965 14780 11871295 9743889 2515993 1321483 32368801 16013627 12024413 5236972 314121278 253106383 7782247 2516711 273298432 226424512 9196302 2354548 2096083-1829906940 108965-18787920 Aug Mean S.E.18309744 6096584 18309744 9144248 53002736 35954960 5849824 52780320 55826272 2823536 42847088 4809904 135145152 125600528 88996112 46149024 3565760 724447 5512351 1923863 4539055 973294 33138528 15092083 54404268 29198107 45290279 17133805 135145152
| |
| -3565760 Sep Mean S.E.169772 162743 21853504 20700592 11011638 10841865 332098 6517 16462666 9027861 15957325 6669891 10917363 5294642 294775 207163 14383358 5211986 11669906 4115847 8782679 4315634 21663 7995 20453568 10187500 2436848 1316900 7637359 6445920 204577 70158 14745311 2432989 9457771 2671855 21663-21853504 S 0 I.2 0 0 S S 0 S S S i 2*Standard error.**Control represents NMPW and NMPE, experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.*****Substrates lost during severe weather.tOne of four replicates missing due to weather.
| |
| Table IV-16 2 Ash-Free Dry Weight (mg/dm ) of Total Suspended Periphyton Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Jun Jul Depth Strata (ft)Aug Sep Transect Mean S.E.* Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean 2 NMPW NMPP FITZ Strata mean 7 NMPW NMPP FITZ Strata mean 12 NMPW NMPP FITZ Strata mean 18.23 12.00 4.84 11.69 35.14t 27.90 24.48 27.98 11.91 125.87 0.60 166.89 0.05 *****3.87 146.38 0 60.87 2.28 68.77 0.39 210.53 1.95 113.39 13.66 0.06 31.37 24.06 2.68 30,23 30.47 5.93 216.10 22.73 4.90 92.57 6.53 1.62 20.57 3.99 0.63 11.64 48.68 2.55 2.81 58.45 62.09 7.78 0.35 23.99 23.82 23.70.31.06 22.39 216.10 107.04 2.87t 99.47 69.79 24.94t 47.72 67.22 46.63 17 12.57 *****0 344.10 2.49 33.53 344.10 0 141.27 5.28 149.06 0.07 12.22 145.16 NMPW NMPP FITZ Strata mean 14.731 5.02 32.82 20.02 0.73 20.20 0 21.40 3.42 92.17 5.52 44.59 54.91 1.13 168.26 40.26 *7.86 273.97 38.50 4.66 44.56 5.20 221.11 21.43t 0 42.64 13.60 1.01 81.19 5.13 0.90 13.39 4.71 61.91 52.08 19.80 117.39 39.35 11.67 212.08 43.59 9.83 171.50 2.87 -107.04 42.64-3 S.E. Mean***** , 21.53 38.48 253.20 38.48 137.37 27.72 72.83 4.14 254.35***** 130.14 3.90 152.40 15.68 198.93 24.46 59.66* 34.15 52.86 97.58 9.07 3.58 9.49 101.16***** 28.60 19.28 44.45 38.18 74.22 59.42 123.04 39.79 105.28 44.10 3.58 S.E.3.06 70.79 115.84 36.30 12.76 4.88 53.57 194.50 9.47 29.96 51.21 1.35 3.92 1.71 29.26 44.08 36.37 27.79-254.35 Control mean**Experimental mean**Monthly mean Monthly range 18.34 2.90 59.58 21.21 3.87 115.16 20.61 3.40 94.95 4.84 -35.14 20.20 -0 3';Standard error.**Control represents NMPW and NMPE, experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.*****Substrates lost during severe weather.tOne of four replicates missing due to weather.
| |
| C discharges from the power plants may have stimulated periphyton growth on the suspended artificial substrates; however, plant operations would not affect naturally occurring periphyton as they occur only on bottom substrates.
| |
| : 3. Overview of Year-to-Year Results Both bottom and suspended periphyton have been sampled since 1973 using artificial substrates in the control and experimental areas in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point. During the 6 years of study, species compositions have been similar, with Lyngbya sp. always dominating numerically.
| |
| During 1975, 1976, and 1978, suspended periphyton biomass was greater at the experi-mental transects than at the control transects.
| |
| Bottom periphyton sampling data, however (a more realistic measure of the naturally occurring periphyton populations in the area), showed the experimental transects to have higher periphyton densities during only 1 year, but the natural variability observed that year (1977) suggested that the difference was not significant.
| |
| No consis-tent trends (increases or decreases) were apparent for bottom periphyton during the 6 years of study, which would indicate no influence from the two power plants on periphyton.
| |
| Controlling factors for natural periphyton populations are substrate availability and light penetration.
| |
| Location of the discharges at about the 20-foot contour and the presence of a mixed or floating plume pre-clude thermal stimulation of the natural periphyton.
| |
| D. BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES
| |
| : 1. Species Composition An average of 50 taxa of benthic invertebrates per month were col-lected during the 1978 study (Table IV-17), and 24 of these each accounted for at least 1 percent of the total number collected during any one sampling month. The most abundant group was scuds (Amphipoda), which accounted for about 52 percent of all the benthic invertebrates collected (Table. IV-18), followed by oligochaete worms, then polychaete worms and midges (Diptera), third and fourth, respectively.
| |
| All other groups combined accounted for only 12 percent of the total population present (Table IV-18).IV-29" science services division Table IV-17 " Seasonal Occurrence and Relative Abundance of Benthos Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Annual Taxa Apr Jun Aug Oct Mean Coelen terate Hydrozoa 4ýdr, americana T. T sp. 1 4 1 4 3 Mora lacustris T T T T T Platyhelminthes Turbellaria unid. T 2 T 1 1 Nemertea Nemertea unld. T T T 1 T Nemnatode Nematoda unid. 1 2 1 1 1 Annelida Polychaeta 01go ananchnoeciosa 42 5 8 7 1 01gcaeta Cheaetrsp.
| |
| 6 T I Nafdida unid. 13 7 T 2 Tubificidae unid. 10 8 13 8 10, Hirudinae unid. 7 T T T i Mollusca Gastropoda Ferrissaa sp. T T Lymnaea p. 7 7 7 7 T macoasp. 2 2 .1 1 "1 Bithinii sp. T T T' .T T I T T r5m as sp. 1 T T T GenIebasop.
| |
| T T fs sp.TT Tsp. T T T Ple4Mqridae unid. T T T Valvata sp. 2 2 1 1 1-Cmemasp. T T Gastropoda unid. T T T Pelecypoda 6aru,,.T 2 T T T p P. 7 5 1 1 2"phpac--erae unid. T T La sis op. T T T Unloncane unid. 7 T*Pelecypoda unid. T T Arthropoda Arachnida Hydracarina unid. 1 2 T 1 1 Isopoda Erichsonella sp. T T Asellus sp. T T T T Amphirpada Gacocrus mucronatus 1 T T Gammaruiiscitus 7 6 38 65 40 Ga-anoras Op. T 1 TF Tonjoreim affinis 10 19 14 6 11 HvTalTla aztecs T T T h aci. d. 7 T T Ephemeroptera Caenis sp. TT Trich-p-tera Psychaayildae unid. T T Ndraschesp.
| |
| T T Agaiasp. I T T ecetis op.T T T Ss T 1 T teforidananid.
| |
| T T T Trichoiptera Mid. T T Diptera Ceratopogonidae unid. T T Chironomus sp. T T 2 1 1 Orthocladinus sp. T 3 1 Cr~ptocnironomus sp. 1 T 1 7 1 Crocotopas op. 9 T T 1 Tanytursasp.
| |
| T 1 6 T 2 Scrotendo sp. T 2 T T 1 a T. 1 T T T nabn sp. T T T mcroten ssp. T T' I T Procead ussp. T T T 1 1 Parachironamus sp. T T T Pseudochironomus sp. T T T G n sp. T T Phaenopsectra sp. 1 T T Eukiefferiellasp.
| |
| T T Stictochironomus sp. T T T Nannocladius sp. T LS sironomus sp. T T Psectrocladlus sp. 1 T licrp~sectra sp. T T T4 Far-aTnaidi sp. T T T Paracladopeltoa sp. T T T T PottFastIa sp. T 7 T rtrTcladus sp. T T T" Chironnaidae unid. 3 1 2 T 1 Bryozoa Loaha odella carteri T T 7sp. T T rapons T T T Fredecella sal ana T T T T-I- 5-l'ta T T T ea adcla articlta___s______
| |
| sp. T T Inverte-lbrateaid.
| |
| T T Density (No./m2) 927 1499 2259 3378 2016 science services division IV-30 Table IV-18 Percent Composition of Benthic Invertebrate Groups and Total Density of Benthic Organism.
| |
| Collected by Suction Sampler in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978#April Contour Depth (ft)June Contour Depth (ft)Monthly Monthly 10 20 30 40 60 Mean 10 20 30 40 60 Mean (0.-4 S 0a S SD<1 Group Coelenterata Platyhelmlnthes Nemertea ematode Polychaeta Oligochaeta H6rodinea Gastropoda Pelecypoda Hydracarina" Isopoda Amphlpoda Ephemeroptera Trichoptera Diptera Bryzoa 5.8 1.9 0.4 0.0 0.5 1.5 3.2 11.8 6.2 1.0 2.7 4.3 0.4 17- 0.3 0.1 1.6 0.5 0.4 5.4 3.2 2.3 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.4 T 0.1 0.6 0.2 1.5 1.4 0.6 1.4 1.6 1.0 2.0 3.9 2.2 4.1 6C. 5 73.8 0.3 0.1 41.9 0.2 3.1 3.4.3 1.5 5.4 0.1 1.2 6.4 21.4 28.1 10.2 59.8 56.6 16.4 16.0 15.3 34.2 0.6 0.1 0.1 .0.3 0.1 0.6 0.8 1.9 5.0 31. 1 3.5 1.5 1.5 0.9 13.2 8.2 5.1 0.7 2.2 19.6 23.1 7.2 T 7 0.2 15.4 16.7 7. 1 0.1 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.2 2.5 4.4 3.0 2.1 2.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 22.0 11.7 11.9 44.9 30.6 20.1 5.9 9.9 23.8 36.2 44.0 24.3 0.1 T 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.4 3.7 1.8 1.2 0.3 1.4 65,8 15.7 1.9 4.4 4.9 13.8 24.7 8.6 9.7 4.2 3.5 11.4 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 T 0.2 October August .-Contour Depth (ft) Contour Depth (ft)Monthly Monthly 10 20 30 40 60 Pean 10 20 30 40 60 Mean 0.1 2.7 0.2 0.6 1.0 10.8 4.3 2.7 1.2 4.5 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.9 1.2 T 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.3 3.0 3.0 1.6 1.1 1.4 1.4 2.4 0.7 4.8 73.5 12.0 0.6 2.0 17.9 0.2 3.2 29.7 5.0 0.6 6.6 0.9 6.7 34.2" 39.3 16.1 13.7 T 0.3 20.1 22.6 15.2 8.1 0.2 0.2 1 0.8 4.3 3.3 2.0 1.4 2.0 0.5 2.4 5.8 3.8 2.7 2.4 T 0.5 2.6 1.7 1.0 0.8 T T 2.9 1.5 2.1 0.9 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.6 1.1 5.5 1.1 0.1 0.1 T T T T T 92.3 6.3 23.3 33.2 52.9 52.4 96.9 80.1 31.1 56.6 56.8 71.8 T 0.4 0.1 T 0.1 T 0.7 4.6 21.0 20.2 25.0 11.1 0.7 1.1 3.5 3.2 12.9 2.8 0.1 T 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 4091 2211 1180 1474 2341 2260 5448 4617 2803 2384 1638 3378 Annual Mean 3.0 0.7 0.3 1.1 13.6 14.8 T 2.9 2.8 1.0 0.3 51.6 0.3 8.0 T 2016-...~ o,~ snnu mod 1fl2h 1117 2130 1444 total density 19O./fl~1 nn~ rn ~#No samples collected during December due to winter weather.
| |
| Bryozoa accounted for 41 percent of the annual benthic biomass I (wet-weight) during 1978 (Table IV-19) due to the fact that large colonies were collected in a single sample at the 40-foot depth contour in June. 1 Scuds, snails (Gastropoda), and clams (Pelecypoda) followed respectively in decreasing biomass, while all other groups of benthic invertebrates comprised only about 6 percent of total biomass.2. Temporal Distribution The number of invertebrates per area of substrate steadily increased from April through October (Table IV-18 and Figure IV-l). Scuds and polychaete worms were dominant in April, with oligochaete worms and scuds dominant in June. During August and October, scuds dominated (52 percent), with Gammarus fasciatus being the most numerous species of this group (41 percent) and Pontoporeia affinis of secondary numerical importance (11 percent annually).
| |
| Oligochaetes and polychaetes decreased in number in October (Figure IV-l).Immature flies (midges, Diptera) were found in similar numbers throughout all sampling periods (Figure IV-I). Ice formation and severe winds precluded the collection of December benthic samples.Total biomass, excluding the large weight of bryozoan colonies S collected in June, increased consistently throughout the collection period*(April, June, August, October).
| |
| Only biomass was determined for the June bryozoan colonies, accurate determination of density is almost impossible because of the nature of the gelatinous mass. Density and biomass during June, then, do not represent an actual organism-weight relationship.
| |
| A Biomass of clams was highest in April and October. Snail biomass increased through August, then decreased slightly in October. Scud (amphipod) biomass increased throughout the 1978 sampling period, peaking in October (Figure IV-2).3. Spatial Distribution During April, total densities were lowest at the 10- and 40-foot depth contours, but this trend did not continue and more organisms were found at the 10-foot contour during the remainder of the study than at other contours IV-32 science services division Table IV-19 Percent Composition of Benthic Invertebrate Groups and Total Biomass of Benthic Organisms Collected by Suction Sampler in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 #April June Contour Depth (ft) Monthly Contour Depth (ft) Monthly 10 20 30 40 60 Mean 10 20 30 40 60 Mean Group Coelenterata P1 atyhelmi nthes Nemertea 0.8 0.3 T 0.2 0.1 0.1 T 0.2 I LjNenjatoda 0.3 T 0.6 0.6 Polycheeta 1.1 8.8 3.4 0.2 0.1 Oligochaeta T 0.4 1.1 1.7 5.4 Hlrudinea 0.1 0.2 Gastropoda 6.1 65.1 1.4 39.7 26.5 1 Pelecypoda 0.8 88.6 24.6 21.1 5 Hydracarina T 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.1 Isopoda 0.4 T T Amphipoda 47.0 10.3 3.6 30.9 43.8 1 Ephemeroptera Trichoptera 0.4 .T Diptera 44.0 10.5 0.4 1.4 2.2 Bryzow T T T T T Total biomnass (gui/r 2) 0.74 .0.77 5.01 0.65 1.21 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 T 3. 0.5 T T 0.5 0.2 T T T T 0.2 0.1 T T T T T 3.0 0.1 0.3 1.3 T 0.1 1.6 6.4 6.2 11.7 0.1 4.1 0.9 0.1 T T 4.3 60.6 36.8 9.7 2.9 31.6 7.7 8.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 1.2 41.0 4.0 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.3 T 0.2 T T 6.0 13.5 39.5 16.8 1.1 21.4 3.7 T 2.0. 8.6 1.5 0.3 0.4 0.5 5.5 14.0 5.4 6.1 T 0.4 0.8 T T T 51.9 93.8 0.2 81.9 1.67 1.88 0.37 1.15 41.77 3.39 9.71 August October Contour Depth (ft) Contour Depth (ft)Monthly Monthly Annual 10 20 30 40 60 Mean 10 20 30 40 60 Mean Mean T 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.1 T T 0.1 0.4 T 0.6 1.4 T 0.4 0.2 0.5 T 0.1 0.1 T 1. 0.2 0.1 T 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 T T T 3.2 0.7 T 0.2 0.9 T 0.2 1.6 0.2 T 0.3 0.5 0.1 4.0 10.4 19.3 10.4 6.6 T T 8.6 7.9 2.0 2.6 2.3 T T T 35.1 88.5 15.5 8.5 7.3 37.8 12.1 29.8 50.4 24.5 12.7 22.5 16.5 0.1 0.6 52.4 22.9 10.3 11.8 0.2 0.1 11.0 24.2 42.8 12.8 11.8 0.1 T 0.1 0.1 T 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.1 T 0.2 T T T T T 64.6 1.3 11.1 41.8 57.1 37.2 86.8 67.6 23.9 37.9 135.4 :58.5 22.4 0.1 T T 0.1 1.7 0.3 T 0.3 T 0.3 0.3 2.0 7.8 7.5 14.6 5.2 0.2 0.5 2.4 2.5 6.1 1.9 2.2 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.7 0.1 0.3 41.3 5.11 4.21 2.25 1.82 3.03 3.28 7.13 4.49 2.54 3.24 3.81 4.24 4.73 T- <0.1%.#No samples collected during December due tn winter weather.U a S S S 4 5.
| |
| Ti 3400 3200 Other n Diptera 2800 Amphipoda l i i 2600 Oligochaeta Polychaeta
| |
| ,~ I* 1 1 NS- December due to severe weather.2000 c'.'0 2!1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 I 600 I i~I Il 1. 1 400 26-27 Apr 27-28 23 24-25 Jun Aug Oct Figure IV-1. Temporal Distribution in Abundance of Benthic Invertebrate Groups Collected in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 IV-34 science services division*1 r (Appendix Table D-l). Densities at all contours generally increased through-out 1978, and there were only small, inconsistent differences between control and experimental transects.
| |
| NS -December due to severe weather.*Other 10 9 8 7 Diptera Amphipoda 1 Oigochaeta Pelecypoda Gastropoda
| |
| *During June, 80% of total biomass was Brvozoa.a-)G 5 4 3 2 0 26-27 27-28 23 Apr Jun* Aug 24-25 Oct Figure IV-2. Temporal Distribution in Biomass of Benthic Invertebrate Groups Collected in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 IV-35 science services division Scuds (all species combined) were more numerous at the 10- and 20-foot contours than at the deeper sampling locations.
| |
| The dominant organism collected, Gammarus fasciatus, was most numerous at the shallow-water loca-tions. Pontoporeia affinis, the second most abundant scud, was most abundant at the deeper sampling locations.
| |
| Numbers of G. fasciatus and P. affinis were typically higher at the two experimental transects (NMPP and FITZ) than at the two control transects (Appendix Tables D-2, and D-3).Oligochaetes were distributed over the entire study area but, except for June samples, were more numerous at the deeper sampling locations;.numbers also increased from west to east. Except for October, monthly mean densities were greater at experimental transects (NMPP and FITZ) than at the controls (Appendix Table D-4).. Variability between samples was noted throughout the study; however, the differences'noted were probably well within the natural variability of the existing benthic community.
| |
| Midges were collected in increasing numbers during the course of the year at progressively deeper contours (Appendix Table D-5). This phenomenon was probably related to an increase in bottom-water temperatures outward from shallower to deeper contours as the summer progressed.
| |
| Emergence occurred first at the shallow depth contours, therefore decreasing densities of imma-ture flies in this area, while at deeper contours apparent densities increased as immature flies developed to larger instars and became susceptible to the*sampling gear.In general, benthic invertebrates were distributed over the entire study area. The high variabilities observed in samples preclude all but the broadest generalities.
| |
| Total densities at control and experimental transects showed no real differences that could be attributed to plant operations.
| |
| : 4. Description of Bottom Sediment Visual observations of the bottom sediments in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point indicated that the area is primarily bedrock, which is covered in some areas with boulders and rubble (Table IV-20).IV-36 science services division f-j 0 Table IV-20 Composition of Bottom Sediment Determined by Visual Examination at Benthic Sampling Stations in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 Depth Contour (ft) Transect 10 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 20 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 30 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 40 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 60 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE Description*
| |
| Comments 100% bedrock 70% boulders, 20% rubble, 10% gravel 80% boulders, 10% gravel, 10% sand 70% boulders, 20% gravel, 10% sand 50% bedrock, 50% rubble 50% boulders, 30% rubble, 20% gravel 50% boulders, 20% gravel, 20% rubble, 10% sand 40% bedrock, 30% boulders, 25% gravel, 5% sand 100% bedrock 100% bedrock 80% bedrock, 20% rubble 100% bedrock 50% bedrock, 30% rubble, 20% sand 80% boulders, 20% bedrock 50% bedrock, 20% boulders, 50% rubble 100% bedrock 100% bedrock 80% boulders, 10% rubble, 10% gravel 80% bedrock, 20% boulders 80% bedrock, 20% rubble Some algae on rocks Some algae Some algae All lying on bedrock Some rubble Some boulders Some sand Some rubble and sand Some scattered sand Some rubble Some sand Description based on USEPA (1973) field evaluation method for categorizing soifs.5. Overview of Year-to-Year Results Benthic invertebrates in the Nine Mile Point vicinity have been investigated since 1973. Differences in species composition and density were generally related to substrate differences:
| |
| on the NMPW and NMPP transects, substrates are primarily bedrock and rubble; at NMPE and FITZ, they are bed-rock and rubble inshore and sand and silt offshore.
| |
| Maximum abundances were observed in mid-summer, with densities increasing from west to east (i.e., NMPW to NMPE). Annually, Gammarus fasciatus was the dominant organism collected.
| |
| The control and experimental areas exhibited no differences that could be attributed to operation of the power plants.j IV-37 science services division E. ICHTHYOPLANKTON
| |
| : 1. Species Composition Samples from Lake Ontario in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point in 1978 yielded five taxa of eggs and 20 taxa of larvae [prolarvae (yolk-sac stage)and postlarvae (post yolk-sac stage) combined] (Table IV-21). April samples contained only burbot and lake herring (cisco) larvae. During May, larvae of early spring spawners such as rainbow smelt and yellow perch were collected, along with eggs of rainbow smelt and Morone spp. The highest diversity (num-ber of taxa) of ichthyoplankton occurred during June and July when 15 taxa were present. After mid-September, only alewife larvae were captured in the study area; no eggs or larvae were observed in December samples.2. Temporal Distribution
| |
| : a. Eggs Fish eggs of five taxa were collected in the study area from 2 May through 14 August (Table IV-22). Rainbow smelt eggs, which are adhesive and demersal, were collected only during May; average site densities were always less than one egg per 1000 cubic meters of water sampled. Similarly, very few eggs of Morone spp. and carp were collected, the former being captured in late May and early June and the latter observed in June and late July.Alewife eggs were present from mid-June through mid-August, account-ing for 99 percent of the fish eggs collected in 1978. Egg densities peaked during night sampling on 24-25 July when average site ,density for alewife eggs was slightly more than 160 eggs per cubic meter. Alewife egg densities were-usually higher in night than in day samples, perhaps the result of greater spawning activity during the night (LMS 1975a). The low catches for the other species exhibited no day/night trends.b. Larvae Larvae were present in ichthyoplankton samples from early April through late November (Tables IV-21 and IV-23). Only prolarvae were collected during April, but both prolarvae and postlarvae were common from May through IV -38 science services division Table IV-21 Seasonal Occurrence of Fish Eggs and Larvae Collected in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, Lake Ontario, April-December 1978 Species*Apr May Jun Jul Aug*' 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 Sep Oct Nov 1234 1234 12345 Dec++Alewife Bluegill Burbot Carp E***E E E E E E E E E L***L L L L L L L L L L L L LLL LILL L LL LL LLL L EE LL E E LI LLLL LLL L L L L L LLLL LL Clupeidaet Freshwater drum Goldfish L LL L L IL L L LIL L Gizzard shad-Lake herring Minnowstf Morone sp.tt Rainbow smelt LLL L E L EE LLL LL E LL LL LLLL LL LI LLLL LLL E L LL LL ILL L L L LL Sculpin#L' L L L L L L L L L Spottail shiner Sunfish##Tessellated darter, Threespine stickleback Trout-perch White perch Yellow perch L L L LL L L LL L LL LL L LL L L L L.L LLI LLL*Common names are those recognized by the American Fisheries Society (Bailey et al 1970).**Weeks of the month.***E = eggs, L = larvae (prolarvae and postlarvae combined).
| |
| t Most Clupeidae are probably alewife.etIncludes species of Cyprinidae, except carp and goldfish.ttt Most Morone sp. are probably white perch.#Includes the mottled sculpin and a few slimy sculpins.##Includes species of Centrarchidae,+Includes tessellated and johnny darters, previously considered as subspecies and reported underthe name of johnny darter in earlier Nine Mile Point studies.++No ichthyoplankton caught during December.IV.-39 science services division Table IV-22 Temporal Distribution in Density* of Fish Eggs Collected in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, Lake Ontario, April-December 1978*may 2 8 15 Taxe Dt D D June 22 30 5 6-7 12 15-16 19 19-20 D 0 D Nt D N D N 26 26 15 5-6 10 12-13 0 N 0 N D N Jul 17 17-18 D N 24 24-25 0 N Aug 31 31-1 7 7-8 14 14 21 21 D N D N D N D N 28 28 0 N 1-4 0 S 0 i.0 S S 9 4 5.S S 4 0 Alewife NC NC NC Carp NC NC NC Freshwater drum NC NC NC Moron sp. NC NC NC Rainbow smelt 0.9 KC 0.1 Unidentified NC NC NC Total 0.9 NC 0.1 NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.1 NC 0.2 NC NC NC 0.3 NC NC NC 0.1 12.6 NC 0.2 0.3 NC NC NC NC NC 0.2 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.5 13.0 0.4 0.9 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.1 NC 0.5 0.9 0.3 5.2 NC 0.6 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.3 0.3 6.1 1.1 17.0 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 1.4 NC 2.5 17.0 12.0 NC 0.2 NC NC NC 12.2 1.2 NC NC NC NC 0.1 1.3 1.1 NC NC NC NC NC 1.1 5.6 NC NC NC NC NC 5.6 12.3 NC NC NC NC NC 12.3 161.6 0.1 NC NC NC T1.161.7 0.4 NC NC HC NC NC 0.4 NC 2.6 46.7 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2.6 46.7 NC 0.1 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 0.1 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC*Nean density (No/11000 m3) of all surface, mid-depth, and bottom tows at 15 stations.No1 fish eggs collected during April or after August.1O day collections, N = night collections."T trace (4O.1).NC No catch.
| |
| i0 Table IV-23 Relative Numerical Abundance of 11 Most Abundant Prolarvae and Postlarvae Collected in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, Lake Ontario, April-December 1978 Apr 1i 2 3 4 O' 0 0 D May 1 2 3 4 5 0 D D 0 D Jun 1 2 O 400 0 N 3 4 0 N 2 N Jul 2 3 4 N 0 *N 0 N 0 N D}[Prolarvae Burbot Carp-Goldfish Lake herring MI nnc.:+lsrone .sp.tt Rainbow se It Sculpint SunfishiV Tessellated darterill Yellow perch Postlarvae Alewife Burbot Carp-Goldfish Lake herring Mi nnows Moroe sp.Rainbow smelt Sculpit Sunfish Tessel lated darter Yellow perch 02 31 50 10 h9 so 26 72 93 2 2 4 O00 88 to 5 1 89 28 4 32 1 19 g2 92 10 9 59?7 40 2 42 T 9 94 1T 6 35 2 T 5 99 81 1 8 2 T q 9R 78 T 10 T 2 12 1i0 73 100 9 2£1 1 I 38 us 27 100 1 3 2 36 30 3 8 T T 1 72 100 98 27 9 31 18 15 89 69 74 78 1 7 1 2 T 2 3 17 10 as 77 48 10 39 12 98 T T T T T I 98 T T T T ON T T 99 T 00 T02 100 T T T T T T T , T 11 99 T T T T T T T T T T T T 3 1 4 2 T Aug Sep Oct Nov oec 1 2 3 4 5 I 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 1 3 0 N D N .0 D N D N 0 N D N D D D D G D 1) O D 0 D 0)Prolarvae Al esife 44 76 9 100 97 Burbot Carp-Goldfish 56 97 23 90 3 Lake herring Minnows Morane sP. 1 T Rainbuow went Sculpin Sunfish Tessellated darter 3 Yellow perch Postlarvae Alewife 120 99 i00 98 102 100 100 100 94 9RN 9 99 10032 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Burbot Carp-Goldfish T T I Lake herring"i'u-$Morone sp. T T T 7 Rainbow smelt T T 5 1 1 1 70 Sculpin 1 T T Sunfish T T Tessellated darter T T Yellow perch*Weeks of the month.' D = day, N -Night.No larvae collected during December.Alewife includes the unidentified herring since most Clhpeidee in the area were aletifes.It+ItMinnows include the unidenified species of Cyprialdaa eucept for carp aod goldfish.Norone sp. includes white perch and white bass.I Sculpin includes the mottled and the sitmy sculpin.0: Includes species of Centrarchidae.
| |
| #it Includes tessellated and Johnny darters, previously considered as subspecies and reported under the name johnny darter in earlier Nine Mile Point stadies.T- Trace ( 4o.5% )IV-41 science services division mid-August.
| |
| After mid-August, alewife postlarvae dominated ichthyoplankton 7]samples.Table IV-23 illustrates that for several species (e.g., alewife and Morone spp.) the prolarval and postlarval stages attained maximum relative abundance at about the same time. Prolarvae of burbot and rainbow smelt, how-ever, were abundant in the area for a week or more before substantial numbers of postlarvae were collected.
| |
| Highest densities of larvae (all species of prolarvae and postlarvae combined) were observed during July and August; however, two minor peaks oc-curred prior to July (Figure IV-3) as a result of the sequential spawning of several species. The first minor peak was due primarily to yellow perch, I which accounted for 98 percent of the postlarvae collected on 22 May (Table IV-23). The second minor peak occurred in mid-June when rainbow smelt and Morone spp. larvae densities were at their highest. After June, alewife larvae completely dominated the ichthyoplankton population, accounting for I most of the prolarvae and almost all of the postlarvae collected from July through November.
| |
| Larvae densities decreased rapidly during late August, and f no larvae were collected (Figure IV-3) after November.Day/night sampling indicated that larvae densities were generally higher at night, based on total catch (all species combined) and on catches of alewife larvae, the most abundant taxa during the summer months. There was also a distinct day/night difference in the catches of several species that were not very abundant in the area; these species, including sculpin, tessel- A lated darter, and trout-perch, were frequently present in night collections but often were not found in day samples (Table IV-23). These day/night dif-ferences reflect both diel movement or behavior patterns and daytime gear avoidance.
| |
| : 3. Spatial Distribution
| |
| : a. Eggs The small catches of eggs prevented analysis of spatial distribution except for alewife (Appendix Tables E-1 through E-4). Alewife eggs were con-sistently more abundant along the 20- than the 40-foot depth contour during IV-42 science services division f -1 0 500 1 4001-TOTAL 3001- ..............
| |
| ALEWIFE RAINBOW SMELT I l MORONE SP.200 ---- -- YELLOW PERCH 100%50 40 APR JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT Figure IV-3.Daytime Temporal Distribution of Larvae in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, Lake Ontario, April-September 1978*night sampling; also, egg densities were highest at the stations to the west of the power plants (upcurrent of the intake and discharge structures) along both the 20- and 40-foot depth contours (Appendix Table E-4). Alewife egg distribution exhibited no consistent trend with respect to the three depth (surface, mid-depth, and bottom) strata.b. Larvae Data collected from June through mid-September were used to illus-trate the spatial distribution of fish larvae within the study area, because both day and night data were available and total larvae densities were highest during this period. Prolarvae are purely planktonic while postlarvae attain the ability to maintain or change their position in a moving water medium as they develop.IV-4 3 science services division Densities of prolarvae (all species combined) decreased from the 20-to the 100-foot contour (Figure IV-4). This trend was uniform both day and night. Although postlarvae catches were somewhat greater at the 100-foot con-tour during night sampling, postlarvae densities overall were relatively equal at all contours during both day and night sampling (Figure IV-5). As observed during previous studies (LMS 1975a, NMPC 1976a, TI 1978), the larvae of several species common in the study area, including rainbow smelt and alewife, move farther offshore as they mature. The relative similarity in postlarvae densities observed at all depth contours may result from offshore movement of the older postlarvae.
| |
| :1 Data from six stations along the 20- and 40-foot depth contours were used to determine the influence, if any, of the two plant discharges on the spatial distribution of larvae (Section III.A.5 and Figure 111-0). Based on day samples, mean densities of prolarvae along the 20- and 40-foot depth con-tours were slightly higher at stations just east of the Nine Mile Point Unit I T'discharge (Figure IV-6 and Appendix Tables E-5 and E-6). Night sampling, how- J ever, indicated that average densities were highest at stations west (1/2 and I mile vest, upstream with respect to the prevailing current) of the Nine Mile -I Point and James A. FitzPatrick discharges.
| |
| No consistent trends were observed in prolarvae densities along the 40-foot contour during night collections.
| |
| Mean station densities of postlarvae along the 20-foot contour were fairly uniform during the day but generally higher at night at the western most stations (Q and 3 miles west) (Figure IV-7 and Appendix Tables E-13 and ,1 I E-14). Along the 40-foot contour, average postlarvae densities at all sta-tions were fairly uniform, at night but higher both to the east and west of the discharge area during the day.From June through August when larvae were most abundant, both pro- ]larvae and postlarvae were usually more abundant in surface than in mid-depth and bottom samples (Appendix Tables E-5 through E-22). Alewives usually ac-counted for more than 90 percent of the catches during this period. Prior to the influx of the alewives, rainbow smelt larvae were usually most abundant, their densities being generally highest in the bottom or mid-depth water strata (Appendix Tables E-11, E-12, E-19, and E-20). No pattern was observed in the vertical distribution of yellow perch larvae.IV-44 science services division F-1 0ýv is, DAY NIGHT*)"go Figure IV-4.20 FT 40 FT 60 FT 8( FT 100 FT DEPTH CONTOURS Distribution of Total'ýirolar Densities in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, June through mid-September 1978-AY NIGIITE 250 -'I5 15 SO m -E I?0 FT in FT 60 FT .90 FT 101) FT OEP71, CZONT OU R Figure IV-5. Distribution of Total Pý ýIax Densities in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, June through mid-September 1978 iv-45 solenoe services division fl~o~f ,I C,.)0 0 0 u-i-J 0 0~0 0 3 MILE 1 MILE 1/2 MILE 1/2 MILE I MILE 3 MILE I -WEST t -EAST- I TRANSECT LOCATIONS Figure IV-6.Spatial Distribution of Prolarvae in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, June through mid-September 1978 IV-46 science services division 0 o./0 0z 3 MILE 1 MILE 1/2 MILE 1/2 MILE 1 MILE 3 MILE I -WEST-- j -EAST -TRANSECT LOCATIONS Figure IV-7.Spatial Distribution of Postlarvae in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, June through mid-September 1978 Ji.IV-47 science servioes division
| |
| : 4. Overview of Year-to-Year Results The distribution of fish eggs and larvae was monitored weekly at depths ranging from 20 to 100 feet in the Nine Mile Point vicinity during April-December 1973-78. Thermally influenced and control areas were sampled over a range of depths in order to characterize the temporal and spatial dis-tribution of the ichthyoplankton community in the Nine Mile Point vicinity and to detect potential effects attributable to Nine Mile Point and James A. Fitz-Patrick station operations.
| |
| U Egg collections, which included up to six species during any one year, were consistently dominated by alewife and rainbow smelt; the eggs of other species were collected infrequently and/or in relatively low numbers.Larval samples, also dominated by alewife, included up to 22 species in a given year. Although yellow perch, rainbow smelt, and Morone spp. (white bass ¶and white perch) larvae were consistently present over the years, they and other species generally'occurred either in low numbers or were collected infrI-quently during each year. These data indicate that significant spawning in the study area is limited to the two introduced species, alewife and rainbow smelt, and that the Nine Mile Point area is not a major spawning habitat for /the majority of the Lake Ontario fish community.
| |
| Two major periods of egg and larval occurrence and abundance were observed in the Nine Mile Point vicinity during each of the 6 years studied: a spring peak in late April or early May and a summer peak during July-August.
| |
| This temporal pattern, reflecting the seasonal abundance of dominant species, was similar to patterns observed at other southeastern Lake Ontario locations 2 and could not be directly attributed to plant operations.
| |
| Late fall and early spring spawners, including burbot, yellow perch, and rainbow smelt, comprised the majority of catches during the spring peak period, while alewife, Morone spp., and sometimes rainbow smelt accounted for the greatest portion of the summer spawning peak.Eggs and larvae were more abundant along the 20-foot than 40-foot depth contour during at least the past 6 years. Additionally, egg and larvae densities were usually lowest at the deeper (60-, 80-, and 100-foot) stations.Older larvae consistently displayed a pattern of offshore migration to deeper science services division IV-48 waters; during the spawning season, however, no consistent spatial distribu-tion patterns attributable to plant operation were discerned.
| |
| Relative to diel distribution in the Nine Mile Point vicinity, ale-wife eggs were more abundant in night samples (generally near the bottom)during the 6-year study. Alewife larvae also were more abundant during the night (generally near the surface).
| |
| These findings were consistent with data from studies performed in other Great Lakes areas. Although the vertical distribution of rainbow smelt eggs was not consistent from year to year, smelt larvae proved more abundant more often near the bottom, especially at night.In conclusion, analyses of egg and larval catches in the thermally influenced and control areas along the 20- and 40-foot depth contours uncov-ered no consistent temporal or spatial patterns that indicate plant-induced
| |
| -_J alterations of normal spawning patterns or egg and larval abundance and dis-tribution in the vicinity of the Nine Mile Point study area over the past 6 years (1973-78).
| |
| F. FISHERIES 1. Species Composition From the approximately 45,700 fish collected in the Nine Mile Point vicinity during 1978, 37 taxa were identified (Table IV-24). The highest number and diversity of fish were collected by beach seine and gill net, re-spectively; box traps collected the least number of species and individuals.
| |
| Alewives dominated beach-seine collections and were second most abundant in gill-r'ýt and trawl catches. Spottail shiners and alewives accounted for 56 percent of gill-net collections, while rainbow smelt and alewives comprised almost 70 percent of trawl catches. The five most abundant species in the-Nine Mile Point area, ranked in decreasing order of abundance based on the combined data from all gear, were alewife, spottail shiner, rainbow smelt, white perch, and yellow perch (Table IV-24). Ten taxa -alewife, brown trout, gizzard shad, lake chub, rainbow snelt, Salvelinus spp., spottail shiner, white perch, white sucker, and yellow perch -were collected during each month of the study; and 5 other species were collected during at least seven of the nine months (Figure IV-8).IV-49 science services division Table IV-24 Numbers and Percent Composition of Fish Collected by Each Sampling Gear, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Gill Net Trawl Beach Seine Box Trap% No. % No. % No. %Species*No Total No.4,216 23.7 H U, 0 S a is a 0 S 5.0 S a.i.5, Alewife American eel Banded killifish Black bullhead Brook stickleback Brown bullhead Brown trout Burbot Carp Chinook salmon Coho salmon Emerald shiner Gizzard shad Golden shiner Lake chub Largemouth bass Longnose dace Northern pike Pumpkinseed Rainbow smelt Rainbow trout Rock bass Sculpin Salvelinus spp.Sea lamprey Shorthead redhorse Smallmouth bass Spottail shiner Stonecat Tessellated dartert Threespine stickleback Trout-perch Walleye White bass White perch White sucker Yellow perch Total 4,216 8 1 67 117 12.4 11 4 258 123 23.7 T**T 0.4 0.7 0.1 T 0.1 T 1.5 0.7 1,172 23.9 1 T 1 T 1 T 4 0.1 1 3 2 12 10 3 T T T T T T T 22,578 98.4 3 T 27,966 9 3.1 67 129 12 4 14 6 13 272 3 123 3 1 2 6 4,278 16 266 107 189 3 1 2 T 6 T 3 T 1 T 1 T 3 T 61.1 T T T T 0.1 0.3 T T T T T 0.6 T 0.3 T T T T 9.4 T 0.6 0.2 0.4 T T 0.3 13.1 0.2 0.5 2.1 1.9 T T 3.9 1.0 3.6 2,031 1.3 154 11 189 3 1 126 5,777 96 3 657 8 18 1,757 473 1,636 17,782 11.4 0.1 0.9 0.1 1.1 T T 0.7 32.5 0.5 T 3.7 T 0.1 9.9 2.7 9.2 2,246 45.9 95 1.9 112 86.8 1 0.8 12 242 894 226 3 T 192 0.8 0.2 4.9 18.3 4.6 72 1 1 16 2 21 0.3 T.T 0.1 T 0.1 1 0.8 130 7 5.4 5,988 96 242 3 2.3 972 883 9 19 2 1.6 1,779 2 1.6 477 1 0.8 1,658 4 0.1 4,898 22,939 129 45,748*Common names according to the American Fisheries Society (Bailey et al 1970).**T m <0.1%,Includes tessellated and johnny darters, previously considered as subspecies and earlier Nine Mile Point studies.reported under the name of johnny darter in... ~.s.................~
| |
| .
| |
| SPECIES APR MAY JUN I JUL AUG SEP I OCT NOV I TEC APR MAY-JUN JUL AUG SEP I OCT Nov I'DEC!IIImmll.NOV 1 ;DEC , , 17 ......................................................
| |
| Al i f .......American eel-Banded killifish Rlerk huillhead Black bullhea!Brook stickleback Brown bullhead--. 1nm7777nm7mnmv~
| |
| Burbot Carp Utl UWII Ut UU J2u r/llllllllJl~lllllll/
| |
| Burbot Carp Chinook salmon Coho salmon..............
| |
| Emerald shiner Gizzard shad Golden shiner 1'n7wm I al(p rnllil Lak cLLLLUL Largemouth bass Longnose dace 4. -.-I---------
| |
| 4 1 Northern Dike 4 4 ~Pumpkinseed
| |
| ........l.77, Rainbow trout Rock bass n ow sme lt Rainbow trout Rock bass.1 Sculpin Salvelinus sop.
| |
| Sea lamprey Shorthead redhorse 4-Smallmouth bass Spottail shiner Stonecat Tessellated darter*Threespine stickleback Trout-perch Wal leye x//////////j White bass White perch White sucker Yellow perch*Includes tessellated and johnny darters, reported under the name of johnny darter previously considered as subspecies and in earlier Nine Mile Point studies.~- Species present Figure IV-8. Monthly Occurrence of Fish Collected by All Gear, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978& I 2. Temporal and Spatial Distribution
| |
| : a. Gill Net The temporal distribution of fish collected by gill nets was charac-terized by periods of peak abundance (catch per 12-hour set) during May-July and October-November and low catch rates during April, September, and December (Figure IV-9). Alewives, rainbow smelt, spottail shiners, white perch, and yellow perch dominated monthly catches.I IV-51 science services division
| |
| ~ I I 11 71 35 30 25 OTHERS YELLOW PERCH WHITE PERCH --SPOTTAIL SHINERI RAINBOW SMELT ALEWIFE I I F-LU' 20 CLi= 15 10 I iJ:.--5.1..1 11 n~1 A-5 0 APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP MONTH IMONTHLY MEAN CATCH RATES FOR SAMPLES COLLECTED AND 60-FT DEPTH CONTOURS ON FOUR TRANSECTS.
| |
| OCT NOV AT THE 15-, 30-, 40-, Figure IV-9.Temporal Abundance of Fish Collected by Gill Net, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 I:1 science services division IV-52 i s t g Because of weather conditions and catch sizes, the time expended setting and retrieving gill nets at all stations Varied during the study period, precluding the use of all gill-net data for describing day/night catch differences (Appendix Tables F-I through F-10); therefore, additional effort was made at the 15- and 40-foot depth contours to insure better representation of day/night catch rates at these locations.
| |
| At stations along these two con-tours, catch rates were considerably higher at night than during the day (Fig-ure IV-10). In all cases, total catches as well as day/night differences were greater along the shallower contour.Based on catch data from both day and night collections (combined) and equal effort at all four depth contours, fish were more abundant at sta-tions along the 15-foot contour than along the 30-, 40-, and 60-foot contours (Figure IV-1). Gill-net catch rates (catch per 12-hour set) for samples taken at stations on the 20-foot depth contour are excluded from this dis-cussion because catch data at this contour were based on two rather than four samples of approximately 12-hour duration, as were taken at the other four depth contours.
| |
| Catch data for the 20-foot depth contour and more detailedgill-net data for all contours appear in the 1978 Data Report (Texas Instru-ments 1979).Catch rates at stations along the 15-foot contour (Figure IV-II)were frequently lowest at control station NMPW (the westernmost station, which was not subject to thermal influence from power plant discharges).
| |
| Largest catches along the 15-foot depth contour were usually at the station farthest east (control station NMPE) in May, July, August, and December or at the sta-tion near the James A. FitzPatrick plant (experimental station FITZ) in April, September, October, and November.Gill-net catches at stations along the 30-foot depth contour ex-hibited seasonal peaks in abundance (similar to that displayed in Figure IV-9)during July and October-November.
| |
| Distribution of largest catches along the_*J 30-foot contour was variable during spring and summer; during October-December, however, catches were larger in the eastern portion of the study area (FITZ and NMPE transects).
| |
| IV-53 science services division ji*1 I I MEAN OF ALL SAMPLES TAKEN -ON CONTOUR DURING MONTH T TRACE ('I.0) P1 T I JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH Day and Night Catch Rates for Total Fish Collected by Gill Net, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 1 Figure IV-lO.IV-54 science services division C.J 1 60.AP. ý A g j o, un AW SEP O T S 005 etc 6D a 71)5o -1 0YJF 352.2 CT[os.J-o L FITZ B~ Nr4PE IS-FT 0001000 APR p A IRA Jog li .S EP s O, tT HO OC Figure IV-I1. Spatial Distribution of Total Fish Collected by Gill Net, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 IV-55 science services division 1 Catch data for the 40-foot contour displayed lower numbers but the same seasonal abundance trend and fall dominance of eastern stations (FITZ and NMPE transects) that were observed at the 30-foot contour.Abundances along the 60-foot contour were variable, displaying no consistent temporal trend, but catches were largest at station FITZ during eight of the nine months of the study.b. Trawls Trawl catches (catch per 15-minute tow) were largest during May, August, and September (Table IV-25). Threespine stickleback comprised the majority of the catch during May, while young-of-the-year alewives and rainbow smelt dominated August and September collections (Appendix Tables F-16 through F-19).A comparison of day and night trawl catch rates during the 9-month study period revealed predominantly larger night than day catches for individ-ual sampling dates along the three depth contours sampled. However, a compar-ison of mean monthly catches revealed significantly larger night than day catches during only five of the nine months (Appendix Table F-16).Table IV-25 Temporal Distribution
| |
| * of Fish Collected by Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Bottom Trawl, Species Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec**Alewife 0 0.3 2.3 0.3 22.8 6.3 0.4 0.4 0.1 Rainbow smelt 0.5 0.2 2.6 5.8 13.3 37.8 0.8 0.1 3.7 Threespine stickleback 0.7 22.6 1.5 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 Other 0 0 5.6*** 6.5t 1.3 2.6 0 0 0.2 Total catch 1.2 23.1 12.0 12.7 37.4 46.7 1.2 0.4 4.0*Mean monthly catch per 15-min tow..**Day samples in late December missed due to weather.***Mostly tessellated darters.tMostly trout-perch.
| |
| I.IV-56 science services division Trawl catches along the 20-foot contour were generally larger at stations NMPW and NMPP/FITZ during May-August and at stations NMPP/FITZ and NMPE during September.
| |
| Catches during April and October-December were small and sporadic, yielding no discernible spatial patterns (Appendix Table F-16).Trawls captured highest numbers at stations NMPW and NMPP/FITZ along the 40-foot contour during April-September.
| |
| Monthly abundances were highest at experimental station NMPP/FITZ during April-August and at control station NMPW during September.
| |
| As at the 20-foot contour, catches during October-December were small and sporadic, displaying no obvious trends.Along the 60-foot contour, trawl catches were largest at-experimental transect NMPP/FITZ during May-July and in September and were equally large at control transects NMPW and NMPE in August. No spatial differences were dis-cerned from the small and sporadic catches taken during October-December.
| |
| : c. Beach Seine Beach-seine catches were small from April through July, then in-creased markedly in August and September as young-of-the-year alewives became available to the seining effort (Table IV-26). Spottail shiners (both young-of-the-year and adults) were also common in August and September seine catches.Catches were again small from October through December.
| |
| Threespine stickleback and brown trout were relatively abundant in May and June catches.Table IV-26 Temporal Distribution of Fish in Beach Seines, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Species Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec**Alewife 0 0 0 0 286.5 2535.0 0.3 0 0 Spottail shiner 0 0.2 0.4 0 9.6 13.6 0.6 0 0 Threespine stickleback 0 2.4 6.4 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 Other 1.2 3.7 1.0 1.2 3.9 0.7 0.6 0.3 0 Total catch 1.2 6.3 7.8 1.2 300.0 2549.3 1.8 0.3 0*Mean monthly number of fish collected per seine haul.**Samples not collected in late December due to weather.IV-57 science services division Ii 1 Annual mean catch rates (number of fish per beach-seine haul) were -1 highest at experimental station NMPP, primarily because of an extremely large 47 catch of alewives (15,575 fish) during September (Appendix Tables F-20 and 21). S As noted in TI's interpretive report for 1977 data (TI 1978b), NMPP was located on a section of shoreline that was visibly different from the other three sein-ing sites; it possessed within its boundaries a relatively large, shallow vege-tated area generally protected from the surf. However, an examination of monthly catches indicates that fish were abundant also at NMPE. During three of the 4 months when seine catches were relatively substantial (May, June, August, September; see Appendix Table F-20), NMPE yielded larger catches than did the other three seining stations.d. Box Trap Box-trap catches were largest in June, July and September (Appendix Table F-24). Rock bass, spottail shiners, and threespine sticklebacks ac-counted for almost 95 percent of all fish collected in trap nets (Table IV-24).Frequency of capture was highest at control station NMPW, while experimental stations FITZ and NMPP displayed the largest annual mean catches (Appendix Table F-24)..11 3. Selected Species Studies Species selected for detailed studies of several of their population ILI characteristics were alewife, rainbow smelt, smallmouth bass, white perch, and yellow perch. They were chosen because of their classification as representa-tive important species by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, the Nuclear Regu-latory Commission, the Power Authority of the State of New York, EPA, and the New York Department of Environmental Conservation.
| |
| This subsection discusses the temporal and spatial distribution, length-frequency distribution, spawning season, and fecundity of each species, as well as the age-class structure, coefficients of maturity, length-weight relationships, and stomach contents of white perch, yellow perch, and small-mouth bass.II
| |
| : a. Alewife 1) Temporal and Spatial Distribution Gill-net catches (catch per 12-hour set) of alewives increased during May and June, reached peak levels in July, then declined sharply during late summer and exhibited a minor peak in the fall (Figure IV-9). Very few alewives were collected by gill net in April and September.
| |
| Alewives were usually most abundant along the, 15-foot contour. Annual mean catch rates were highest at experimental transect NMPP along the 15-, 30-, and 40-foot contours and at experimental transect FITZ along the 60-foot contour (Appendix Table F-il).In bottom-trawl catches, alewife abundance peaked in August and declined through the fall; no alewives were collected in April (Table IV-25).Catches along the 20-foot contour were quite sp6radic throughout the study i period. Greatest numbers occurred at experimental transect NMPP/FITZ and control transect NMPW in August and at easternmost transect NMPE in September S(Appendix Table F-17). Alewife catches after September were quite small and displayed no discernible spatial patterns.
| |
| Along the 40- .and 60-foot contours, numbers of alewives were highest at transects NMPW and NMPP/FITZ during May-mid August and at eastern control transect NMPE during late August. Catches at the 40- and 60-foot contours after August were small.Beach seines captured alewives only in August, September, and October (Table IV-26 and Appendix Table F-21). Less than half the seine hauls in August and September captured alewives, but they usually contained several hundred individuals.
| |
| This reflects recruitment of young-of-the-year alewives into a catchable size range, as well as the schooling nature of this typically pelagic species.2) Length-Frequency Distribution Alewives collected by gill net during 1978 ranged from approximately 51 to 220 millimeters in total length and were primarily adult and subadult fish (Appendix Table F-25). Modal lengths of alewives collected in June and July were slightly greater than those collected during the remainder of the study.IV-59 science services division Adult and subadult alewives were collected by trawl during May-December and by beach seine during October (Appendix Tables F-30 and F-33).Young-of-the-year alewives first occurred in seine and trawl collections in August, the same month in which this age class appeared in impingement samples at the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick plants (Appendix Tables H-6 and H-15).3) Spawning and Fecundity Adult alewives in Lake Ontario reside in the open lake but migrate inshore during spring and summer to spawn. Spawning occurs in streams or near-shore shallows with sand and gravel bottoms generally when water temperatures are between 160 and 28 0 C. Spawning females randomly broadcast from 10,000 to 22,400 (Scott and Crossman 1973, Norden 1967) eggs that are demersal and es-sentially nonadhesive (Mansueti 1956). 1)Alewife spawning in the Nine Mile Point vicinity was first detected on 12 June (when eggs were first collected) and continued through mid-August (Appendix Tables E-3 and E-4). During this period, surface water temperatures
| |
| .' )at the 20-foot depth contour ranged from approximately 14.90 to 24°C (Appendix Tables G-2 and G-3). Fecundity (total number of yolk eggs) of alewives selected for analysis ranged from approximately 5,400 to 44,900 (Appendix Table F-38).Alewife fecundity was extremely variable; however, data indicated a general in-crease in fecundity with increasing specimen length.b. Rainbow Smelt 1) Temporal and Spatial Distribution Gill-net catches of rainbow smelt were largest in April and May, declining during the summer and increasing somewhat in early fall (Figure IV-9). Few rainbow smelt were caught in gill nets during August. Smelt abundance apparently shifted from nearshore stations (15-foot contour) in early spring to offshore stations (30-, 40-, 60-foot contours) during June-August, probably reflecting an offshore movement of postspawning adults (Ap-pendix Table F-12). Catches along all contours increased during early fall, possibly reflecting movement associated with lower water temperatures.
| |
| Mean monthly catches were generally largest at experimental station FITZ and control IV-60 science services division transect NMPE during the study period; annual mean catches were largest at these two stations along all depth-contours (Appendix Table F-12).In trawl catches, rainbow smelt abundance increased from April through September (37.8 fish per haul) and fluctuated during October-December (Table IV-25). Along the 20-foot contour, catches were sporadic and displayed no discernible abundance trends. Along the 40-foot contour, catches were more or less evenly distributed among the three transects through August, but were significantly larger at control transect NMPW than at either NMPP/FITZ or NMPE(Appendix Table F-18) during September, the month of peak abundance.
| |
| After September, catches became quite sporadic at all transects along the 40-foot contour. Based on relatively sporadic trawl catch data, rainbow smelt appeared to be most numerous along the 60-foot contour during July-September, primarily at control transect NMPW and experimental transect NMPP/FITZ.
| |
| After September, catches of rainbow smelt declined sharply at all stations along this contour.Only one rainbow smelt was collected by beach seine (Table IV-26), suggesting that this species was not abundant in the vicinity of the seiningI stations.2) Length-Frequency Distribution Rainbow smelt collected by gill nets ranged from approximately Ill to 260 millimeters in total length. During the spring, the predominant size class was from 131 to 160 millimeters in total length, plus a slight second peak in the 181- to 220-millimeter length range. Few specimens were collected during July or August but the predominant size range captured during late summer was 151 180 millimeters (Appendix Table F-26).Trawls collected rainbow smelt ranging from 21 to 200 millimeters in total length. During early spring, a slight bimodal length-frequency was ap-parent in trawl catches, with individuals grouped in the 51- to 80-millimeter and 151- to 180-millimeter length ranges. Yearling (age I) and older fish dominated trawl catches during late spring and early summer; young-of-the-year smelt dominated trawl catches beginning in August and continuing through Decem-ber (Appendix Table.F-31).
| |
| IV-61. science services division
| |
| : 3) Spawning and Fecundity Rainbow smelt leave the open water of lakes in spring and spawn in streams or shallow lakeshore waters over gravel shoals (Rupp 1965). Spawning migrations or "runs" of ripe smelt usually begin in March and continue through May when water temperatures range from 8.90 to 18.3 0 C (McKenzie 1964). The number of demersal (and adhesive) eggs spawned depend on the size of the female but ranges from approximately 8,000 to 30,000 eggs (Scott and Crossman 1973).Smelt spawning in the Nine Mile Point vicinity was documented by small catches of eggs in ichthyoplankton samples during May and sporadic catches of prolarvae from 2 May through 26 June (Appendix Tables E-11 and E-12). Fecundity of smelt collected for analysis ranged between approximately 1 8,200 and 39,000 eggs for individuals in the 129- to 226 millimeter length range. Increased fecundity estimates correlated well with increasing rainbow A smelt length (Appendix Table F-38).c. White Perch I) Temporal and Spatial Distribution White perch, which comprised approximately 10 percent of the 1978 gill-net catch in the Nine Mile Point area, were most abundant during May-August and least abundant during November and December (Figure IV-9). Abun-dance was greatest along the shallowest (15-foot) depth contour; catch rates decreased with increasing depth (Appendix Table F-13). Along the 15-foot depth contour, the highest annual mean catch was at experimental station NMPP and con-trol station NMPE. Along the 30-, 40-, and 60-foot contours, catch data indi-cated no obvious spatial patterns with respect to experimental and control areas. 2 Seine hauls in 1978 took 16 white perch (0.1 percent of the total seine catch). Trawling took only four individuals and trap nets only two-specimens.
| |
| No temporal or spatial trends could be discerned from these low catches (Table IV-24).2) Length-Frequency Distribution Adult and subadult white perch were collected by gill net during each month of the study (Appendix Table F-27). Young-of-the-year white perch first.IV-62 science services division appeared in gill nets during September, occurred in greatest abundance during October, and remained in catches through December.3) Age-Class Distributon White perch collected at control (NMPW and NMPE) and experimental (NMPP and FITZ) transects ranged in age from young-of-the-year to age XI (Appendix Table F-39). Few age-Il perch were collected.
| |
| Based on the mean total length for each age class and the length-frequency distribution for gill-netted fish (Appendix Table F-27), most fish in the Nine Mile Point J vicinity were in age. classes III through V. Mean total lengths of fish from control and experimental transects were similar for ages 0 through V. Based'on relatively few data points, mean total length at control transects was greatest for ages VI through VIII, while at experimental transects it was greatest for age X.4) Spawning and Fecundity Lake Ontario white perch spawn in shallow water over a variety of substrates from mid-May through June (Sheri and Powers 1968). Spawning usually* occurs over a period of 1 to 2 weeks when water temperatures are 110 to 15 0 C..SI. The number of demersal and adhesive eggs spawned depends on the size of the female but may range from 20,000 to 300,000 eggs (Scott and Crossman 1973).L Spawning activity in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point was documented by the collection of Morone spp. (white perch and/or white bass) eggs during late May and early June when water temperatures along the 20-foot depth contour ranged between 9.90 and 15.5 0 C. Morone spp. prolarvae were collected from 5 June through 7-8 August (Appendix Tables E-9 and E-10) when surface-water tem-peratures ranged between approximately 15.50 and 23.8 0 C (Appendix Table G-3).Coefficients of maturity, an indication of gonad development, rose from April to May, then declined through August or September, reflecting a peak and general decline in spawning activity during this period (Appendix Table F-35). Coefficients increased through November, reflecting development of white perch gonads for spawning the following spring. Predictably, coeffic-ients of maturity during any given month were higher for females than for IV-63 science services division males, while male gonad development increased at a faster rate than females'during the fall. Coefficients of maturity each month were similar at control and experimental transects.
| |
| Fecundity (total number of yolk eggs) determined for fish ranging from 204 to 321 millimeters in total length was 43,800-463,900 eggs. Fecundity values displayed a general increase with increasing fish length, although some variability was noted (Appendix Table F-38).5) Length-Weight Relationships 4 Length-weight relationships were calculated for white perch males, females, and male, female, and undefined sexes combined from gill-net samples taken at control (NMPW and NMPE) and experimental (NMPP and FITZ) transects 2 (Table IV-27). Coefficients of determination (r ), a measure of 'the linear association of length and weight, were generally high for length-weight rela-tionships calculated for white perch during spring, summer, and fall, indi-cating that a high degree of the variation in fish weight was due to variaton in length. The low coefficient in spring for white perch males from the experi-mental transects may have resulted from collecting fish in various stages of gonad development during the spawning season, since mature, gravid, ripe, and spent white perch of similar lengths can vary considerably in weight. During the spring, the slope (b) of the length-weight relationship for males from control transects was steeper than the slope for males from the experimental area, indicating that males taken at control transects proportionally grew faster in weight per unit increase in length than those from the experimental transects.
| |
| This difference in length-weight relationships between control and experimental areas may have been an artifact of collecting fish in different stages of gonad development or collecting fish over a narrow range of lengths (e.g., an adult population during the spawning season). Length-weight relation-ships for females, males, and the sexes combined during summer and fall were similar (Table IV-27).Condition factors, an indication of the relative plumpness or well-being of the fish, were calculated for the same white perch used for length-weight relationships.
| |
| Condition factors for males, females, and the sexes combined generally decreased from spring through fall. This seasonal pattern IV-64 science services division 4v;Table IV-27 Length-Weijht Relationships and Condition Factors for White Perch Collected by Gill Net at Control and Experimental Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Season Spring (Apr-Jun)Sex Males Females Pooledý*Control Transects (NMPE and NMPW)2*Length-Weight Relationship No. r KTL i S.D.**log w =-5.21 + 3.18 log TL 110 0.92 1.65 +/- 0.14 log w =-4.76 + 3.00 log TL 124 0.88 1.77 +/- 0.43 log w --5.11 + 3.14 log TL 310 0.91 1.70 +/- 0.30 log w =-3.77 + 2.57 log TL 135 0.79 1.72 +/- 0.93 log w a-5.00 + 3.10 log TL 130 0.97 1.71 +/- 0.13 log w =-4.95 + 3.07 log TL 417 0.92 1.67 +/- 0.54 Sumner Males (Jul-Sep)
| |
| Females Pooled Fall Males (Oct-Dec)
| |
| Females Pooled Experimental Transe Length-Weight Relationship log w = -2.82 + 2.17 log TL log w = -5.49 + 3.30 log TL log w = -4.17 + 2.75 log TL log w --4.74 + 2.98 log TL log w = -5.09 + 3.14 log TL log w = -4.74 + 2.98 log TL log w =*-5.55 + 3.33 log TL log w = -5.31 + 3.22 log TL log w = -5.50 + 3.30 log TL*cts (NMPP and FITZ)No. r2 KTL +/- S.D.126 0.65 1.81 +/- 1.22 185 0.95 1.72 +/- 0.18 409 0.82 1.76 r 0.81 80 144 303 22 40 141 0.96 1.64 +/- 0.13 0.97 1.70 +/- 0.14 0.92 1.71 +/- 0.63 0.99 1.54 +/- 0.15 0.99 1.57 +/- 0.15 1.00 1.43 +/- 0.20 Hi 0'log w =-5.21 + 3.18 log TI lo9 w =-5.58 + 3.35 log TI log w =-5.56 + 3.34 log TI 18 71 132 0.97 1.65 +/- 0.11 1.00 1.62 +/- 0.19 1.00 1.47 +/- 0.23*Coefficient of Determination.
| |
| ~*Condition factor. (based on total length in emi)+/-standard deviation.
| |
| **Males. females and. undefined sex.U 0 I.0 S S 0*1 (5.0 S 0.I S 8*
| |
| was expected, since mature fish with gravid gonads (in spring) weigh more per unit length than do spent or maturing fish during summer and fall. Condition factors calculated for males, females, and pooled sexes were similar at control and experimental transects during each season (Table IV-27)..6) Stomach Contents The stomach contents of 50 adult white perch ranging in size from 123 to 282 millimeters in total length were examined to determine what food items were ingested by fish collected at control and experimental areas (Figure IV-12 and Appendix Table F-42). Numerically, Amphipoda comprised 95 percent of the stomach contents of perch collected in the control and 62 percent in the exper- P imental areas. Dominant amphipods included Gammarus faciatus and unidentified amphipods.
| |
| In experimental areas, amphipods, copepods, cladocerans, and chiro-nomids accounted for the majority of stomach contents.
| |
| Gammarus faciatus and unidentified amphipods, cyclopoid copepods, chironomid pupae, and bosminid and chydorid cladocerans were the dominant forms encountered.
| |
| In terms of fre-quency of occurrence, Gammarus faciatus and filamentous algae were encountered in 86 percent and 67 percent respectively, of the stomachs examined from con-trol transects NMPW and NMPE, while Gammarus fasciatus, cyclopoid copepods, filamentous algae, and unidentified fish each occurred in at least 40 percent of the white perch taken from experimental transects NMPP and FITZ. Importance indices (Section III.A.6) calculated for food items in stomachs of white perch from control and experimental transects were highest for Gammarus fasciatus and postlarval and older fish (Appendix Table F-42). In terms of volume occupied, Gammarus fasciatus appeared to be more important to white perch at control than at experimental transects (56.9 percent versus 24.3 percent);
| |
| postlarval and older fish were more important to white perch at experimental than at control transects (46 percent versus 22 percent).d. Yellow Perch 7L 1) Temporal and Spatial Distribution Catches of yellow perch increased steadily in number through spring and early summer. Peak gill-net catches occurred in August and October, then declined through late fall (Figure IV-9). Gill-net catches indicated that yellow perch were more abundant along the nearshore (15-foot) depth contour IV-66 science services division NUMERICAL ABUNDANCE
| |
| (%)CONTROL TRANSECTS EXPERIMENTAL TRANSECTS LENGTH RANGE (mm) 142-277 LENGTH RANGE (mm) 123-282 NO. OF STOMACHS EXAMINED 25 NO. OF STOMACHS EXAMINED 25 NO. OF EMPTY STOMACHS 4. NO. OF EMPTY STOMACHS 0 II A I~ A.1 13%8%UiflLr U10 CONTROL T RANSECTS EXPERIMENTAL TRANSECTS IMPORTANCE INDEX (%)I CONTROL TRANSECTS EXPERIMENTAL TRANSECTS 1) Importance index = (% stomach fullness) x (% stomach volume occupied by a particular food item).Analysis of Stomach Contents of White Perch Collected by Gill Net at Control and Experimental Transects, Nine Mile Vicinity, 1978 Figure IV-12.41 IV-67 science services division than along the deeper contours (Appendix Table F-14). Based on annual mean catches, yellow perch abundance tended to increase from west to east at near-shore stations.
| |
| Catches were largest at the two control stations (NMPW and NMPE) along the 30- and 40-foot depth contours, but yellow perch were equally abundant at all four stations along the 60-foot contour. i No yellow perch were collected by trawling during 1978 in the Nine Mile Point area, and trap nets caught only one specimen.
| |
| Seines caught 21 yellow perch, representing
| |
| | |
| ===0.1 percent===
| |
| of the total catch, during June-Septem-ber (Appendix Table F-23); 10 of these occurred during August in a single haul at control station NMPE.2) Length-Frequency Distribution Adult yellow perch were collected by gill net during each month (Appendix Table F-28) of the study; the predominant total-length range during the spring (April-June) was 181 to 210 millimeters, representing primarily age-Ill and some age-IV fish. Bimodal peaks were observed during July and August, predominantly in the 81- to 140-millimeter and 171- to 230-millimeter-I size ranges. The predominant total-length range in gill-net catches during late summer and fall was 131 to 160 millimeters, primarily representing age-lI and age-Ill fish. Persisting throughout the study was a small group of fish with a length-frequency range of 251 to 270 millimeters in total length, repre-senting ages IV through VI.3) Age-Class Distribution Ages of yellow perch collected at control and experimental transects ranged from (young-of-the-year) to VII (Appendix Table F-40). Based on the mean total length of each age class and the length-frequency distribution of -gill-netted fish (Appendix Table F-28), most yellow perch collected at control and experimental transects were ages I, III, IV, and V. The mean total length of age-V perch collected at the control transects was somewhat greater than for fish of the same age collected at experimental transects, while age-Il and age-III fish were slightly longer at experimental transects.
| |
| Age-I, -IV, and -VI fish were similar in length at both areas.science services division IV-68 t4) Spawning and Fecundity Yellow perch migrate into the shallows of lakes to spawn during F spring (usually mid-April to early May) when water temperatures range from 8.9°to 12.2 C, however, spawning may extend into July in some areas (Scott and Crossman 1973). Yellow perch eggs are extruded in long gelatinous, accordian-folded strings that usually become entangled in rooted vegetation or other sub-strates over which spawning occurs. Fecundity of yellow perch from the Bay of Quinte, Lake Ontario, ranges from approximately 3,000 to 61,000 eggs for fish 131 to 250 millimeters in fork length (Sheri and Power 1969). Hatching usually takes approximately 8 to 10 days but has been reported to take as long as 27 days at 8.3°C (Scott and Crossman 1973).No yellow perch eggs were collected in the Nine Mile Point study area during 1978, but yellow perch larvae were collected from 15 May through 20 June (Appendix Table E-21 and E-22) when surface water temperatures along the 20-l 1 foot depth contour ranged from approximately 9.90 to 14.7 0 C (Appendix Table G-3). Highest concentrations of prolarvae occurred in late May (Texas Instru->1 ments 1979).Coefficients of maturity were highest in April, declining steadily-I through July and August for males and females, respectively (Appendix Table F-36). The apparent lag between peak coefficients of maturity and peak larval catches suggests relatively long egg incubation times because of the relatively low water temperatures (as previously noted by Scott and Crossman 1973). In 1978, maturity values for both sexes generally increased through December; some minor fluctuations reflected the development or maturation of yellow perch gona , for spawning early the following spring. Low maturity coefficients for yellow perch males and females during December at experimental and control tran-sects, respectively, perhaps were the result of low specimen numbers. Overall, 7 coefficients of maturity at control and experimental'transects were similar.Fecundity estimates determined for three yellow perch females ranging from 146 to 270 millimeters
| |
| *in total length were approximately 6,700 to 33,800 yolk eggs (Appendix Table F-38). Trends could not be established from this low number of specimens.
| |
| Four gravid yellow perch from impingement samples exhib-ited a similar range in fecundity
| |
| -from 10,600 eggs for a 118-millimeter-long perch to approximately 54,700 for a perch of 255 millimeter (Appendix Table H-25).IV-69 science services division
| |
| : 5) Length-Weight Relationships All length-weight relationships calculated for yellow perch displayed
| |
| ¶high coefficients of determination (r ), indicating that a high degree of the variation in weight was due to variation in length (Table IV-28) and that gonadal weight differences due to spawning occurred prior to spring collections for length-weight analysis.
| |
| All length-weight relationships displayed values of more than 3 for the slope, indicating allometric growth, i.e., increasing in weight (becoming plumper) faster than in length (becoming longer). Length-weight relationships and condition factors calculated for yellow perch at con-trol and experimental transects were similar (Table IV-28).6) Stomachs Contents The stomach contents of 50 yellow perch ranging from 102 to 286 milli-'meters in total length were examined to determine the food items that had been ingested by fish at control and experimental transects (Figure IV-13 and Ap-pendix Table F-43). Numerically, amphipods (unidentified adult amphipods and Gammarus fasciatus) were the dominant food items (94 percent) in stomachs of yellow perch taken from control and experimental transects.
| |
| These food items, as well as filamentous algae, unidentified fish, and ostracods, occurred fre-!1 quently in fish taken from experimental transects NMPP and FITZ, while fila-mentous algae, gastropods, and unidentified fish occurred frequently in fish collected at control transects NMPW and NMPE. Importance indices (Section III.A.6) ranked Amphipoda, fish, and crayfish as the most important food items in stomachs of fish collected at both control and experimental transects.
| |
| : e. Smallmouth Bass -i 1) Temporal and Spatial Distribution Gill nets captured 126 smallmouth bass, comprising
| |
| | |
| ===0.7 percent===
| |
| of the total catch (Table IV-24). Catches were small except in August and September, and no smallmouth bass were caught in April or May (Appendix Table F-15).Catches were largest along the nearshore (15-foot) contour and generally de-creased with depth. No distinct distribution pattern at control and experi-mental stations could be discerned because of the low catches. Beach seines captured three smallmouth bass, and box traps collected a single specimen.
| |
| No smallmouth bass were collected by bottom trawl during the 1978 study.IV-70 science services division
| |
| .- ~..I.. \,,~4 ~Table IV-28 Length-Weight Relationships and Condition Factors for Yellow Perch Collected at Con.-;,,l and.Experimental Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Length-Weight Relationships and Condition Factors (KTL) for Yellow Perch Collected by Gill Net at Control and Experimental Transects.
| |
| Control Transects (NMPE and NMPW) Experimental Transects (NMPP and FITZ)Season Sex Length-Weight Relationship No. r2. KTL +/- S.D** Lengtb-Weight Relationship No. r2 KTL +/- S.D.Spring Males log w = -5.75 + 3.37 log TL 21 0.98 1.21 +/- 0.18 log w = -5.37 + 3.20 log TL 38 0.98 1.23 +/- 0.13 (Apr-Jun)
| |
| Females log w = -5.69 + 3.34 log TL 67 0.99 1.29 +/- 0.15 log w = -5.50 + 3.27 log TL 54 0.99 1.28 +/- 0.14 Pooled***
| |
| log w = -5.66 + 3.33 log TL 107 0.98 1.26-+/- 0.17 log w = -5.50 + 3.26 log TL 95 0.99 1.25 +/- 0.15 Summer Males log w = -5.57 + 3.31 log TL 96 0.99 1.33 +/- 0.17 log w = -5.39 + 3.23 log TL 96 0.99 1.35 +/- 0.14 (Jul-Sep)
| |
| Females log w = -5.46 + 3.27 log TL 262 0.98 1.38 +/- 0.65 log w = -5.64 + 3.35 log TL 193 0.92 1.41 +/- 0.86 Pooled log w = -5.52 + 3.29 log TL 483 0.98 1.35 +/- 0.49 log w = -5.63 + 3.34 log TL 356 0.95 1.36 +/-0.64 Fall Males log w = -5.42 + 3.24 log TL 76 0.99 1.29 +/- 0.12 log w = -5.71 + 3.37 log TL 50 0.96 1.29 +/- 0.15 (Oct-Dec)
| |
| Females log w = -5.61 + 3.32 log TL 178 0.98 1.27 +/- 0.14 log w = -5.41 + 3.23 log TL 178 0.99 1.30 +/- 0.12 Pooled log w = -5.57 + 3,30 log TL 313 0.98 1.27 +/- 0.14 log w = -5.50 + 3.27 log TL 261 0.98 1.30 +/- 0.13*Coefficient of determination.
| |
| **Condition factor (based on total length in mm) +/- standard deviation,***Males, females and undefined sex.0 a i a 0 S 0 a S S I 0 I NUMERICAL ABUNDANCE
| |
| (%)CONTROL TRANSECTS LENGTH RANGE (mm) 102-286 NO. OF STOMACHS EXAMINED 25 NO. OF EMPTY STOMACHS 4 EXPERIMENTAL TRANSECTS LENGTH RANGE (mm) 105-285 NO. OF STOMACHS EXAMINED 25 NO. OF EMPTY STOMACHS 3 AMPHIPODA 94%OTHER 6%EXPERIMENTAL TRANSECTS INDEX (%)l 71 ii CONTROL TRANSECTS IMPORTANCE-j>1*1 I I CRAYFISH 1 ,/V~ -~< CRAYFISH 10%OTHER 15% OTHER 10%CONTROL TRANSECTS EXPERIMENTAL TRANSECTS 1) Importance index = (% stomach fullness) x (% stomach volume occupied by a particular food item).?Figure IV-13.Analysis of Stomach Contents of Yellow Perch Collected by Gill Net at Control and Experimental Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978.1~* I IV-72 science services division
| |
| : 2) Length-Frequency Distribution Smallmouth bass captured in gill nets ranged from approximately 181 J to 430 millimeters in total length (Appendix Table F-29). Few smallmouth bass werecollected during spring and fall, but those captured during the summer were distributed rather uniformly across a range of lengths (241 to 430 milli-meters). Based on length-frequency distribution data all smallmouth bass collected by gill net were yearlings and older.p 1i 3) Age-Class Distribution Ages of smallmouth bass collected at control and experimental tran-sects ranged from 0 (young-of-the-year) to XI (Appendix Table F-41). Based on mean total length at a given age, the majority of smallmouth bass collected in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point were ages III, IV, and V. No consistent mean A length differences in a given age class were observed at either control or ex-perimental transects, and in both areas mean total lengths of males, females, and pooled sexes, ages III through VIII, were similar (Appendix Table F-41).Small catches of ages 0, 1, II, and IX through XI precluded their comparison atcontrol and experimental areas.4) Spawning and Fecundity Smallmouth bass spawn in late spring and early summer (usually from late May to early July) in 2 to 20 feet of water over a sandy, gravel, or rocky-substrate often near rocks or logs and sometimes in dense vegetation I (Scott and Crossman 1973). Nest-building occurs over a wide range of temper-atures (12.8 to 20.000), but actual spawning most often occurs when temperatues range from 16.10 to 18.30C. The number of eggs spawned (fecundity) varies with iJ the size of the female, ranging from 5,000 to 14,000 eggs.IJ During the 1978 study, no smallmouth bass eggs or larvae occurred in ichthyoplankton samples from the Nine Mile Point vicinity (Section IV.E). Al-though relatively few smallmouth bass were captured in 1978, coefficients of maturity for these specimens appeared to peak during June and decline through November and September for males and females, respectively (Appendix Table F-37). Maturity coefficients for females increased through October and Novem-ber, based on single specimens taken during each. month. No smallmouth bass IV-73 science services division were processed for coefficients of maturity during December.
| |
| During months in which smallmouth were collected at both control and experimental transects, coefficients of maturity were similar.Fecundities for four females (333 to 398 millimeters in total length) U collected from Lake Ontario ranged from approximately 2,500 to 7,300 yolk eggs 1 per female (Appendix Table F-38). Fecundities for an additional 12 females col-lected during impingement sampling at the James A. FitzPatrick plant ranged from approximately 5,300 to 33,800 yolk eggs per female (Appendix Table H-25).5) Length-Weight Relationships Length-weight relationships were calculated for males, females, and both sexes combined (Table IV-29). No smallmouth bass were processed for length-weight relationships analysis during the spring. The high coefficients of determination for smallmouth bass collected during summer and fall indicated that the variation in weight for males, females, and pooled sexes was due to variations in length. All length-weight equations for bass collected during the summer displayed slopes higher than 3, indicating allometric growth, i.e, increasing in weight faster than in length. Length-weight relationships and condition factors (KT) for bass collected at experimental and control TL transects were similar during the summer and fall (Table IV-29).6) Stomach Contents The stomach contents of 15 adult smallmouth bass ranging from 250 to 382 millimeters in total length were examined to determine what food items had been ingested by fish at control and experimental transects (Figure IV-14 and Appendix Table F-44). Of the 15 stomachs examined, three were empty. Uni-dentified postlarval and older fish and.crayfish (Astacidae) were the only food r-I items encountered in bass stomachs.
| |
| Although fish were found more frequently than crayfish in bass taken at control stations NMPW and NMPE, fish ranked second to crayfish in numerical abundance.
| |
| This pattern was reversed at ex-perimental transects NMPP and FITZ, where crayfish occurred more frequently but fish numerically dominated the contents (Figure IV-14). Importance index patterns displayed by fish and crayfish food items at. control and experimental transects were the opposite of numerical abundance trends, showing that fish IV-74 science services division j Table IV-29 Length-Weight Relationships and Condition Factors for Smallmouth Bass Collected at Control and Experimental Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 i.0 0 S Control Transects
| |
| (.NMPE and Experimental Transects (NMPP and FITZ)Season Sex Length-Weight Relationship No. r2* KTL t S.D.** Length-Weight Relationship No. r 7 KTL +/- S.D.Spring Males NC NC (Apr-Jun)
| |
| Females NC NC Pooled***
| |
| NC NC Summer Males log w = -5.21 + 3.17 log TL 25 0.98 1.61 +/- 0.18 log w = -5.30 + 3.20 log TL 20 0.97 1.59 +/- 0.16 (Jul-Sep)
| |
| Females log w = -5.19 + 3.15 log TL 21 0.99 1.60 +/- 0.11 log w = -4.94 + 3.06 log TL 21 0.98 1.65 +/- 0.15 Pooled log w = -5.25 + 3.18 log TL 55 0.98 1.61 +/- 0.15 log w = -5.00 + 3.08 log TL 49 0.99 1.61 +/- 0.15 Fall Males NC log w = -4.80+ 3.00 log TL 6 1.00 1.64 +/- 0.15 (Oct-Dec)
| |
| Females log w = -5.24 + 3.18 log TL 4 0.95 1.68 +/- 0.24 log w = -5.13 + 3.13 log TL 4 0.99 1.56 +/- 0.10 Pooled NC NC* Coefficient of determination.
| |
| ** Condition factor (based on total length in mm) +/-standard deviation* Males, females, and undefined sex.NC= Relationship was not calculated because of low catches.
| |
| f-Iýf NUMERICAL ABUNDANCE
| |
| (%)CONTROL TRANSECTS EXPERIMENTAL TRANSECTS LENGTH RANGE (mm) 250-342 LENGTH RANGE (mm) 250-382 NO. OF STOMACHS EXAMINED 7 NO. OF STOMACHS EXAMINED 8 NO. OF EMPTY STOMACHS 2 NO. OF EMPTY STO4ACHS I I 11 1*1 CONTROL TRANSECTS EXPERIMENTAL TRANSECTS II IMPORTANCE INDEX (%1 I.I I OTHER 17% OTHER 6%CONTROL TRANSECTS EXPERIMENTAL TRANSECTS 1) Importance index = (% stomach fullness) x (% stomach volume occupied by a particular food item).Figure IV-14.Analysis of Stomach Contents of Smallmouth Bass Collected by Gill Net at Control and Experimental Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978"I.IV-7 6 science services division I V were more important volumetrically at control transects NMPW and NMPE and that crayfish were more important at experimental transects NMPP and FITZ. This 11 finding, which indicates that numerical abundance is not necessarily important in terms of stomach volume occupied, emphasizes the need for more than a single analysis method to fully describe food habits via stomach contents.4. Overview of Year-to-Year Results The temporal and spatial distribution of fishes in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point in Lake Ontario were monitored at varying levels of effort from 1 1969 through 1978. Preoperational and early postoperational studies (1969-72)used fathometric techniques, gill nets, and traps. Subsequent higher-intensity 1postoperational surveys (197.3-78) employed a combination of gear. (gill nets, trawls, seines, and traps), depending on sample location and desired informa-tion. These studies examined data from a thermally influenced area and control regions to the east and west of the discharge area... Fish community structure in the Nine Mile Point vicinity varied seasonally during any given year, changing from a simple system in winter and early spring to a highly complex community in late spring, summer, and fall.'il Data provided by preoperational and postoperational studies indicated that the fish community in this area of Lake Ontario is not diverse; rather, for most of-the year, it is dominated by one or two species and has a small number of other species in low and intermediate numbers. Species diversity proved to be high-est in spring because of an inshore movement of a number of lake fish species.During months in which alewives are most abundant, typically June-August, diver-sity values remain low. Diversity usually rebounded in the fall, coinciding 1* with the offshore movement of alewives.-I/During the past 10 years, sampling in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point has collected 72 fish species. During a typical sampling year, alewives com-prised a majority of the total catch at lake stations, with rainbow smelt, spottail shiners, yellow perch, and white perch accounting for the majority of the remaining catch.Overall, normal life-cycle development patterns were observed for species designated as representative of the area (e.g., alewife, rainbow smelt, 7cJ! ...IV-77 science services division
| |
| '1 smallmouth bass, white perch, and yellow perch). Temporal and spatial distri-bution patterns have depended on the species, the stage of development, and the temporal and longitudinal temperature patterns and gradients.
| |
| Seasonally, fish have been collected in greatest numbers during the spring, coinciding with the shoreward migration of the two most abundant species, alweife and rainbow smelt. Abundances typically decline during the warmer summer months and rise during the fall, corresponding to increased catches of young-of-the-year fish.During 1973-78, the shorezone fish community typically remained low in abundance and was dominated by young-of-the-year alweives.
| |
| Cyprinids, pri-marily forage species such as spottail and emerald shiners, centrarchids, and white perch, comprised the other major community constituents.
| |
| In the lake, fish concentrations were highest at the two easternmost transects, control transect NMPE and experimental transect FITZ, and lowest at control transect NMPW; typically, abundances at experimental transect NMPP were intermediateJ between these high and low values.Yearly gill-net catch data for rainbow smelt, white perch, and small-mouth bass in the Nine Mile Point vicinity displayed no significant changes among years (1969-78).
| |
| Alweife abundance oscillated, displaying highest num-bers in 1974 and 1976 and declining through 1977 and 1978; abundance trends based on gill-net data generally mimicked the patterns displayed for impinge-ment catches at the Nine Mile Point and FitzPatrick plants. The yellow perch population declined from 1969 through 1974 but rebounded threefold in 1975, then declined slightly from 1977 through 1978. Data on gizzard shad indicated a generally increasing population in the Nine Mile Point vicinity through 1975 1 and a decline during 1977 and 1978; greatest concentrations were at the NMPP and FITZ transects (vicinity of plant thermal discharges) during the fall.Salmonids such as brown trout, chinook, and coho salmon appeared infrequently in gill-net catches through the years-and typically reflected stocking inten-sity for any given year.To date, no. incidents of cold-shock fish mortality due to plant shut-down at either the Nine Mile Point or the James A. FitzPatrick stations have IV-78 science services division I been reported; nor have rare, endangered, or threatened fish species been col-lected in the Nine Mile Point area since the onset of preoperational studies.In summary, comparisons of temporal and spatial abundances based on catch-per-effort data as well as length-frequency distribution, age and growth, fecun-dity, gonad maturity, and diet analysis between experimental and control areas in the Nine Mile Point vicinity for 1969-78 have revealed no distinct or con-sistent alterations to the normal seasonal life-cycle patterns of the fish com-munity directly attributable to operations at the Nine Mile Point or James A.FitzPatrick nuclear stations.G., WATER QUALITY During 1978, water was sampled and temperature measured in Lake Ontario in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point to monitor and evaluate the effects of operation of the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick power plants on nearshore water quality.1. Lake Ontario Thermal Profiles A Thermal profiles were obtained at the 100-foot contour of the NMPW, FITZ, and NMPE transects each week during the study (Appendix Table G-I). Ex-amination of these profiles and of the temperature of surface (3-foot) and bot-tom (100-foot) strata at these three transects revealed the presence of cold, hypolimnetic water intrusions during the summer (Figure IV-15). Comparisons of weekly temperature profiles among the three transects revealed that surface water temperatures at the FITZ transect (nearest the discharges) exceeded those at either or both the NMPW and NMPE transects by 1C or more on only four c,.casions (once each in May, July, August, and September).
| |
| Surface temperatures taken during collection of monthly and semi-77 monthly water quality samples at the FITZ transect (near the James A. Fitz-Patrick discharge) were elevated only on one occasion at the 20-foot contour and on four sampling days at the 40-foot contour, and maximum elevation was only 3°C (Appendix Appendix Tables G-2 and G-3.) At the NMPP transect near the Nine Mile Point discharge, surface temperatures exceeded by at least 1°C L 1 'those of one or both control transects, NMPW and NMPE, on 15 of 18 and 7 of 18 sampling dates at the 20-foot and 60-foot contours, respectively.
| |
| The maximum IV-79 science services division f--j 0 ,ý,T 24 20 I I£I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SURFACE BOTTOM MEAN VALUE 161-L)0 I-ILU I--12k I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1-I it I I I 4-I I I I I-I I I I I I-I-I I I I I I I I I-L*, i I I I I 1~~I I 8 k I I-I-I I U-1+4k_i I I i I I I I I APR .MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Figure IV-15.Seasonal Variation in Water Temperatures at Surface and Bottom Strata along the 100-Foot Depth Contour IV.780 science services division thermal difference between experimental and control transects occurred on April 11, when the NMPP 20-foot contour surface temperature was 5 °C higher than that recorded at the NMPE transect (Appendix Tables G-2 and G-3). The thermal plume at the NMPP transect is more pronounced, probably because of the¶1 difference between the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick discharge structures (jet diffusion at the FitzPatrick plant).2. Temporal and Spatial Distribution of Selected Parameters, Including Radiological Data j Three water quality sampling programs were conducted during the 1978 study. (Refer to subsection III.A.7 for a complete description of the sampling programs.)
| |
| To describe spatial and temporal trends in the water quality param-eters, the 20- and 25-foot contour surface data were compared with combined surface data from the 40-, 45-, and 60-foot contours for each transect.
| |
| Bottom samples from the 25- and 45-foot contours were evaluated individually inasmuch as no bottom.samples were collected at the other contours.
| |
| The groupings were made in order to compare inshore versus offshore areas in the Nine Mile Point vicinity.
| |
| Of the water quality parameters measured, nine are discussed in de-tail -dissolved oxygen (DO), nitrate nitrogen, total and orthophosphorus, silica, calcium, sulfate, and total and suspended solids -because of their roles in the biological processes in the waters around Nine Mile Point or their importance in general water quality evaluations.
| |
| Also briefly discussed are toxic and trace metals, organic contaminants and radioactivity data.a. Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved oxygen concentrations were lowest during July and August, droppiLlg to 7.4 milligrams per liter (mg/l) during the latter month (Table IV-30). At no time was DO low enough to stress aquatic organisms.
| |
| Oxygen levels were lower during summer because of decreased solubility of dissolved oxygen in the warmer water and not because of increases in oxygen demand from organic or reduced metals contamination.There were no observed differences between inshore (20- and 25-foot)and offshore (40-, 45-, and 60-foot) or between control and experimental areas (Table IV-31).IV-81 science services division Table IV-30 Monthly Variation in Selected Water Quality Parameters Collected in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 Parameter Uni t Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 00 CL T Dissolved oxygen Nitrate Total phosphorus Orthophosphorus Silica Cal ci um Sul fate Total solids Total suspended solids mg/t-DO Mean Range Std dev*No mg/i-N Mean Range Std dev No mg/i-P Mean Range Std dev No mg/i-P Mean Range Std dev No mg/Z-Si03 Mean Range Std dev No mg/L-Ca Mean Range Std dev No mg/i-SO 4 Mean Range Std dev No.mg/t-TS Mean Range Std dev No mg/i-TSS Mean Range Std dev No 14.9 14.2-15.5 0.5 18 0.31 0.28-0.38 0.04 16 0.021 0.005-0.Q48 0.009 22 0.009 0.004-0.019 0.004 16 0.37 0.31-0.49 0.08 16 37.0 33.1-38.4 1.9 10 33.4 27.7-40.7 5.9 10 204 146-248 29 22 1.6<0. 1-4.0 1.3 22 15. 1 14.2-16.7 0.6 18 0.26 0.20-0.35 0.05 16 0.018 0.008-0.033 0.008 22 0.011 0.006-0.018 0.005 16 0.08<0.05-0.13 0.03 16 41.3 36.4-50.6 5.7 10 31.5 27.2-42.0 5.8 10 251 176-419 62 22 3.1 0.8-15.8 3.5 22 13.1 12.0-14.6 1.0 18 0.18 0.15-0.27 0.03 15 0.024 0.018-0.033 0.005 22 0.004 0.003-0.006 0.001 16 0.11 40.05-0.17 0.05 16 41.9 39.2-45.3 2.1 10 27.9 25.8-30.9 1.7 10 212 167-251 20 22 1.4 0.2-4.0 0.9 22 8.8 8.3-9.7 0.5 18 0.03<0.01-0.06 0.02 16 0.028 0.017-0.044 0.007 22 0.004<0.002-0.
| |
| 008 0.002 16 0.19 0.09-0.30 0.08 16 44.7 37.5-53.8 4.6 10 25.0 24.3-25.9 0.5 10 168 136-222 25 22 4.8 0.6-7.4 2.3 22 8.6 7.4-9.0 0.6 18<0.04<0.04 0.00 16 0,012 0. 004-0.022 0.005 22 0.004<0.002-0.012 0.004 16 0.18 0.11-0.30 0.07 16 40.9 38.8-43.8 2.0 10 25.'8 23.7-28.2 1.8 10 185 147-211 34 22 1.1<0.1-4.0 1.0 22 9.3 8.5-11.1 1.0 18 0.13 0.05-0.17 0.04 16 0.013 0.008-0.020 0.003 22 0.003<0.002-0.004 0.001 16 0.21 0.13-0.27 0.05 16 33.0 30.7-37.8 2.2 10 27.9 24.6-30.7 1.9 10 233 163-316 55 22 0.3<0.1-1.2 0.5 22 9.1 8.8-9.7 0.3 18 0.14 0.12-0.19 0.02 16 0.027 0.016-0.048 0.010 22 0.002<0. 002-0.006 0.001 16 0.14 0.10-0.17 0.02 16 36.7 30.5-50.0 7.1 10 28.8 27.6-29.7 0.8 10 202 160-225 14 22 1.1<0.1-3.8 0.9 22 Nov.10.7 10.2-11.3 0.4 18 0.18 0.16-0.22 0.02 16 0.012 0.005-0.022 0.004 22 0.004 0. 002-0.006 0.002 16 0.18 0.11-0.25 0.04 16 41.0 36.4-47.0 3.6 10 31.1 29.9-32.9 1.2 10 226 196-266 17 22 2.0<0.1-7.6 2.2 22 Dec 13.6 13.3-14.0 0.2 18 0.29 0.27-0.33 0.02 16 0.038 0.008-0.110 0.030 22 0.008<0.003-0.022 0.007 16 0.29 0.14-0.37 0.07 16 34.6 28.6-43.0 6.0 10 27.6 25.8-30.8 1.7 10 217 178-249 18 22 7.3<0.1-21.0 8.0 22* Standard deviation... .. .. ......
| |
| Table IV-31 Spatial Distribution of Selected Water Quality Parameters Collected from Experimental and Control Areas, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Surface (20- and 25-ft contours)Surface (40- to 45- and 60-ft contours)H 0o 4.CL Z 0 Parameter Dissolved oxygen Nitrate Total phosphorus Orthophosphorus Silica Calcium Sulfate Total solids Total suspended solids Unit mg/i-DO mg/z-N mg/i-P mg/i-P mg/L-Si 0 2 mg/l-Ca mg/2-SO 4 mg/z-TS mg/i-TSS Mean Range Std dev**No.Mean Range Std dev No.Mean Range Std dev No.Mean Range Std dev No.Mean Range Std dev No.Mean Range Std dev No.Mean Range Std dev No.Mean Range Std dev No.Mean Range Std dev No.11.3 8.2-14.8 2.5 27 0.17<0.01-0.33 0.10 18 0.021 0.009-0.044
| |
| .0.010 27 0.005<0.002-0.017 0.005 18 0.19<0.05-0.44 0.11 18 37.6 29.2-48.8 6.5 9 27.8 25.0-30.7 1.9 9 216 153-337 42 27 2.0<0.1-10.6 2.6 27 West Control*(NMPW)Experimental East Control West Control (NMPP-FITZ) (NMPE) (NMPW)11.5 11.6 11.4 8.2-15.5 8 1-15.4 8.2-16.7 2.6 2.7 2.8 27 27 27 0.18 0.17 0.17 ,0.01-0.37
| |
| <0.01-0.34
| |
| <0.01-0.37 0.11 0.10 0.10 27 18 18 0.022 0.018 0.019 0.005-0.047 0.009-0.033 0.004-0.052 0.010 0.008 0.011 36 27 27 0.006 0.004 0.004<0.002-0.022
| |
| <0.002-0.012
| |
| <0.002-0.012 0.006 0.003 0.003 27 18 18 0.20 0.19 0.20<0.05-0.49
| |
| <0.05-0.46
| |
| <0.05-0.49 0.11 0.11 .0.11 27 18 18 39.5 36.0 38.2 29.2-50.6 28.6-41.9 29.9-53.8 5.7. 4.3 7.6 18 9 9 29.4 27.7 28.0 24.4-42.0 24.4-30.2 24.6-30.9 4.7 .2.1 2.0 18 9 9 223 212 207 139-419 154-300 139-282 57 35 36 36 27 27 2.6 2.2 2.0<0.1-19.0
| |
| <0.1-15.8
| |
| <0.1-21.0 4.2 3.2 4.0 36 27 27 Experimental (NMPP-FITZ) 11.4 7.4-15.5 2.7 27 0.18 0.01-0.37.
| |
| 0.10 27 0.025 0.005-0.110 0.025 36 0.005<0.002-0.016 0.004 27 0.19<0.05-0.45 0.10 27 39.2 31.1-43.8 4.5 18 28.7 24.4-39.9 3.9 18 203 144-300 39 36 2.3<0.1-15.8 3.6 36 East Control (NMPE)11.6 8.3-16.6 2.7 27 0.17<0.01-0.37 0.10 18 0.019 0.004-0.044 0.010 27 0.005<0.003-0.016 0.004 18 0.19 0.05-0.44 0.10 18 37.0 30.7-48.8 5.8 9 27.4 24.6-31.7 2.6 9 206 153-294 30 27 2.1<0.1-6.6 2.0 27 See section III.A.7 for details of sampling locations.
| |
| Standard deviation.
| |
| See section III.A.7 for details of sampling locations.
| |
| Standard deviation.
| |
| : b. Nitrate Nitrate concentrations at all transects decreased from April through August and increased from September through December (Table IV-30). Monthly mean values were highest in April and December.
| |
| There were no observed differ-ences between control and experimental areas or between inshore (20- and 25-foot) contours and offshore (40- 45-, and 60-foot) contours (Table IV-31 and Appendix Tables G-3 and G-4).c. Phosphorus 11 Highest total phosphorus occurred in December, lowest in August and November (Table IV-30). The December values (maximum, 0.110 mg/i) came from j samples collected at the 45- and 60-foot contours on the experimental tran-sects (Appendix Tables G-3 and G-4). These high values at the offshore con-tours produced a higher annual mean at the experimental transects than at the control transects.
| |
| These higher experimental transect levels could not be directly attributed to power-plant operation.
| |
| J Orthophosphorus was low throughout 1978, with April, May, and Decem-ber exhibiting highest values (Table IV-30). There were no observed spatial differences among transects, between inshore and offshore groups, or with t depth (Table IV-31 and Appendix Table G-4).d. Silica Silica Values were lowest during May and June, and many were at or 2j near the 0.05-mg/l detection limit (Table IV-30). No differences could be seen between inshore and offshore samples or between control and experimental transects (Table WV-31). Temporal changes and variability in silica could not be attributed to power-plant operation.
| |
| : e. Calcium and Sulfate Only small monthly variations occurred in the concentrations of these two parameters.
| |
| No specific temporal trends were apparent (Table IV-30). Levels of both were only slightly elevated from the 1977 data base, (Table IV-31, Appendix Tables G-2 and G-4, and TI 1978b). The levels found I IV-84 science services division during the 1978 program were well within ranges expected for Lake Ontario and no effects of plant operation could be determined.
| |
| : f. Solids In 1978, total solids were lowest during July and August; during the rest of the year, mean monthly values exhibited only slight variation (Table lj IV-30). Mean monthly suspended solid concentrations were at a low in Septem-ber and reached a high in December (Table IV-30). Relatively calm weather in September and winter storms in December played a major role in creating theseextremes.
| |
| Winter storms with high winds were significant because the absence of the usual shoreline ice cover created extreme wave-action, which increased the suspended sediment load.Total and suspended sediments in nearshore transect samples (20- and 25-foot contours) were only slightly higher than in offshore transect samples (Table IV-31), and there were no apparent differences between experimental and control transects, indicating that plant operation had no effect on suspended or total solids (Table IV-31 and Appendix Tables G-2, G-3, and G-4).g. Common, Trace, and Toxic Metals ,i.-Concentrations of nickel and magnesium relative to the other common metals were very uniform throughout 1978, while sodium, iron, and manganese were somewhat more variable (Appendix Table G-2 and G-4). Sodium levels were highest in May and December at the 25-i. and 45-foot contours.
| |
| Iron was gener-ally more variable from sample to sample than were the other metals, but there were no apparent temporal trends. Manganese concentrations fluctuated monthly jJ and were below detection ( 0.001 mg/l) in June (Appendix Table G-3).Of the trace metals, beryllium and vanadium had levels during the entire year that were at or below the detectability limit. Selenium was de-tectable only during August, September, and December (Appendix Table G-4).Cadmium and silver concentrations never exceeded their detection limits.Chromium levels at or only slightly above detection limits were noted only in-- November and December; during all other months, concentrations were below de-tection. Detectable levels of mercury were very low (Appendix Table G-4) and IV-85 science services division occurred only in December.
| |
| Copper, lead, zinc, and arsenic were commonly en- I countered at levels above those of minimum detection but never at levels harm-ful to organisms in the area or exceeding EPA standards (USEPA 1976b). I No spatial trends could be determined among transects, since metal j analyses were conducted only on samples from the NMPP/FITZ
| |
| 'transect (Appendix Table G-4). No inshore-offshore or surface-bottom differences were found for any of the trace metals.h. Indicators of Organic Pollution J No temporal or spatial trends among transects were apparent for bio-logical oxygen demand (BOD 5), chemical oxygen demand (COD), total coliform i bacteria, or carbon chloroform extract (CCE). Phenols and MBAS (analysis for 1 anionic surfactants) were at or below limits of detection except during August when phenols were slightly elevated (Appendix Table G-4).Total coliform bacteria counts were slightly higher in nearshore than in offshore samples. No pollution problem was indicated from either coliform or COD analyses, because no monthly value exceeded either state or federal regulations.
| |
| No effects of plant operations on these parameters were observed.i. Radioactivity L Gross alpha and gamma radiation values were below detection limits A except for some very low gross alpha counts in October. Gross beta counts and tritium concentrations were low and did not exceed ambient Lake Ontario levels.No differences were determined between experimental and control areas (Appendix Tables G-2 and G-4). -3. Overview of Year-to-Year Results i Monthly and semimonthly water quality sampling programs conducted in the Nine Mile Point vicinity from 1973 through 1978 included weekly thermal profiles at the 100-foot depth contour. Although many of the parameters ana-lyzed fluctuated monthly and-annually, there were no persistent trends. During IV-86 science services division .
| |
| T'! any given year, there were temporal cycles for many of the parameters, partic-ularly nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus compounds) and water temperatures.
| |
| For example, inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus characteristically increased during winter and decreased during summer with a corresponding summer increase in organic nitrogen and organic phosphorus compounds.
| |
| Annual and monthly param-eter means were typical of those reported by other investigators for the Nine Mile Point area of Lake Ontario. Data collected over the past 6 years showed no short-term or long-term effects from operation of the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and James A. FitzPatrick power plants. The Oswego River, west-to-eas~t long-shore currents, and hypolimnetic upwellings of cold, often nutrient-rich waters exert the most influence on the physicochemical parameters at Nine Mile Point.'1.j IV-87 science services division SECTION V RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
| |
| -'IN-PLANT STUDIES A. INTRODUCTION When a natural water body such as Lake Ontario is used by an electric power station for once-through cooling, debris, fish, larger invertebrates, and small planktonic organisms are drawn into the cooling-water system. The de-bris, fish, and large invertebrates are impinged on the bar racks and traveling'*1 screens and consequently removed from the cooling water. The small planktonic organisms, on the other hand, pass through the screens and subsequently through the entire cooling-water system (entrainment).
| |
| Both the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick power stations have once-through cooling systems with offshore submerged intakes and discharges (see Section II). At maximum operation, the Nine Mile Point plant requires 597 cubic feet per second (cfs) of cooling water, while the James A. FitzPatrick plant requires 825 cfs.Water from Lake Ontario enters the cooling-water systems at the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick plants through separate submerged intake structures at velocities of approximately 1.8 and 1.2 feet per second (fps)respectivley, with all circulating pumps running. The intakes are located directly offshore of each plant near the 25-foot depth contour. Fish entering the cooling-water.
| |
| systems are impinged on traveling screens and subsequently backwashed from the screens into washwater sluiceways where the impingement collection baskets are located. The impinged fish are removed from the Lake 4it Ontario ecosystem since neither plant has facilities for returning them to the lake.Phytoplankton, zooplankton, and fish eggs and larvae in the cooling water pass through the traveling screens and subsequently through the circu-lating pumps, condenser tubes, and discharge structures.
| |
| These organisms are exposed to such stresses as temperature changes, mechanical abrasion, shear forces, pressure changes, and exposure to biocides, which act independently or synergistically to affect the entrained organisms.
| |
| Although entrainment kills some of the aquatic biota in the cooling water, it may also produce subtle v- science services division nonlethal short- or long-term effects, benefits, or in some cases no identi- 1 fiable response.
| |
| Phytoplankton, as a group, can survive higher temperatures than can zooplankton and ichthyoplankton (Marcy 1975) and are less vulnerable to mechanical damage because of their smaller size. Not only are phytoplankton more tolerant to entrainment effects, but they also have the greatest capacity ,to regenerate losses following entrainment (Morgan and Stross 1969). Zooplank-ton also have relatively short regeneration times and can replace entrainment losses quickly (Churchill and Wojtalik 1969, Heinle 1969). 1 Specific studies of fish impingement at Nine Mile Point Unit I began in the spring of 1972 and were initiated at FitzPatrick when the plant began operating in 1975. The impingement of fish on the traveling screens at these two plants has been monitored in order to estimate total loss of fish, in terms of numbers and weights, each year. In addition to estimating annnual impinge-ment, the principal objectives of the 1978 impingement program were to: e Determine species composition of impinged fish a Describe seasonal patterns of impingement rates e Characterize daily variations in impingement rates Entrainment studies at the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick plants were initiated about the same time as the impingement studies, with com-prehensive results appearing in the 1973 Nine Mile Point Report (QLM 1974) and.the 1976 Annual Report for Nine Mile Point (LMS 1977a). The 1978 entrainment program at Nine Mile Point was conducted to document the species composition and seasonal variation in entrainment of ichthyoplankton.
| |
| Previous entrainment studies at Nine Mile Point on phytoplankton and microzooplankton (QLM 1974 and LMS 1975a), established no significant impact on these two biotic groups. At the James A. FitzPatrick plant, the 1978 program included both entrainment and viability (mortality) studies on phytoplankton, zooplankton, and ichthyoplank-ton. The major objectives were to: " Determine entrainment rates for the zooplankton and p ichthyoplankton communities at the FitzPatrick plant" Describe the potential effect of entrainment on the phytoplankton community by monitoring chlorophyll a levels and primary production (1 4 C tracer method) at several locations at the plant and in the lake V-2 science services.
| |
| division
| |
| * Estimate the percent mortality due to entrainment in the zooplankton and ichthyoplankton components of the aquatic biota Since plant operations have a direct impact on the effects of impinge-ment and entrainment (i.e., changing intake velocities and discharge tempera-tures), certain parameters describing plant operation for each day of 1978 are presented in Appendix Tables H-i and H-2.The results-presented in this section of the report document the en-trainment and impingement at both power stations during 1978, satisfying the NRC and NPDES. permit requirements to monitor the plants for potential effects on the aquatic biota.B. IMPINGEMENT
| |
| : 1. Nine Mile Point Unit 1 a. Species Composition Impingement sampling at Nine Mile Point during 1978 resulted in the collection of 41 fish taxa, 36 of which were identified to species (Table V-0).Of the total number of fish collected, threespine sticklebacks and rainbow K. smelt comprised approximately 74 percent (Appendix Table H-3); threespine sticklebacks dominated February-July samples, while rainbow smelt were dominant in mid-winter (January and December) and late summer (August and September).
| |
| * Threespine sticklebacks were absent only during September.
| |
| During October and November, alewife was the most abundant species in impingement collections.
| |
| Eight species -alewife, gizzard shad, rainbow smelt, smallmouth bass, spottail shiner, trout-perch, white perch, yellow perch -and specimens of the genus Cottus were consistently present in impingement samples and seven other species were found during at least 10 of the 12 months.Gizzard shad, alewife, and rainbow smelt comprised 77 percent of the total fish biomass collected (Table V-I and Appendix Table R-4) during impinge-ment sampling:
| |
| gizzard shad dominated during January-April and October-Decem-ber. Alewife were dominant during May and June, and rainbow smelt during Sep-tember. White sucker and burbot were the dominant species, respectively, in July and August.V-3 science services division Table V-I Number and Weight of Fish Collected during Impingement Sampling and Estimated Annual Impingement, Nine Mile Point Unit 1, 1978 Number Collected Weight Collected (g)Estimated Number Estimated Weight (9)Common Name*Alewife American eel Black crappie Bluegill Brook stickleback Brown bullhead Brown trout Burbot Central mudminnow Cisco Cottus sp.**Cyprinidae Emerald shiner Fathead minnow Freshwater drum Gizzard shad Golden shiner Goldfish Lake chub Largemouth bass Lepomis sp.Longnose dace Longnose gar, Oncorhynchus sp.Pumpkinseed Rainbow smelt Rainbow trout Rock bass Salvelinus sp.***Sea lamprey Smallmouth bass Spottail shiner Stonecat Tessellated darter-Threespine stickleback Trout-perch Walleye White bass White perch White sucker Yellow perch Unidentified 8,074 39 1 16 17 28 5 29 28 1 2,098 3 1,312 4 11 4,282 2 18 39 2 1 1 1 1 24 25,331 2 176 44 20 136 1,325 68 375 57,857 1,027 11 2,350 3,784 58 3,992 3 112,596 218,728.2 17,472.2 3.0 178.7 27.3 2,128.1 12,477.5 32,604.4 135.9 74.7 7,254.3 7.3 3,456.5 15.5 3,005.6 1,047,236.7 12.3 618.5 598.1 28.5 1.3 17.9 131.3 865.7 152.3 155,338.6 1,407.0 22,218.0 4,807.7 3,177.5 27,159.5 6,296.1 3,656.1 712.9 83,821.7 6,910.2 715.4 34,308.0 96,655.3 24,168.9 29,055.9 NA 1,847,640.6 18,252 90 2 38 41 65 11 68 68 15 4,919 7 3,051 10 25 10,167 5 43 79 5 2 2 2 2 57 59,866 4 417 103 47 320 3,097 159 867 139,579 2,349 27 5,550 8,830 137 8,951 7 267,336 488,260.9 40,827.7 7.2 426.1 66.3 5,024.1 29,754.1 76,773.2 333.3 502.3 17,011.9 17.4 8,017.1 35.6 6,793.9 2,487,502.2 30.0 1,411.5 1 ,079.6 68.0 3.1 41.8 313.1 2064.4-363.2 366,469.5 3,309.7 52,579.6 11,232.2 7,522.3 63,622.4 14,754.0 8,568.9 1,630.4 201,788.7 15,743.2 1,694.7 80,631.6 226,053.3 57,608.4 67,600.0 NA 4,347,536.9
| |
| ~1 Total*Common names are according to the American Fisheries Society list of common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada (Bailey et al 1970).**Primarily mottled sculpin.***Species identification of lake trout and splake remains tentative because of overlapping identifying characteristics of native and stocked populations.
| |
| tIncludes tessellated and johnny darters, previously considered as subspecies and reported under the name of johnny darter in earlier Nine Mile Point studies.I..1-ii V-4 science services division
| |
| : b. Temporal Distribution The temporal distribution for total catch rate (number collected per 1000 cubic meters cooling of water used) during 1978 was characterized by peak periods of abundance (Figure V-I) in spring (April) and winter (January and December).
| |
| Threespine sticklebacks accounted for 96 percent of the fish im-pinged during the April peak and were a major component of impingement samples from January through June. Rainbow smelt were most abundant during the winter (January and December) but also exhibited a minor peak in abundance during September.
| |
| The catch rate for alewife was highest during May (Figure V-I).ti.Diel variations in catch rates (number impinged per hour) were observed in day and night samples collected each Wednesday during 1978.Generally, catch per hour was greater at night than during the day but the 9 magnitude of this difference varied from month to month (Figure V-2). During the peak in impingement rates in April when threespine sticklebacks dominated catches, catch rates were higher during the day than at night.c. Estimated Impingement The total number of fish impinged at Nine Mile Point Unit 1 during January-December 1978 was estimated to be approximately 267,000 (Table V-i)over half of which were threespine sticklebacks.
| |
| Total weight was estimated to be approximately 4,350 kilograms, with gizzard shad contributing 57 percent of the total biomass. The estimated numbers and weights of fish impinged during each month of 1978 are presented in Appendix Table H-5.d. Length Frequency, Alewife, rainbow smelt, smallmouth bass, threespine stickleback, white perch, and yellow perch length-frequency distibutions (Appendix Tables-H-6 through H-Il) showed that adults and subadults generally were impinged during January-July.
| |
| Young-of-the-year were first encountered during summer (usually July or August) and dominated samples from September through December.Bimodal length-frequency distributions of alewives during May and June suggest-ed that impinged alewives were predominantly yearlings with an adult contingent.
| |
| V-5 science services division 2.'192.lb 1.0 0.9 0 TOTAL CATCH THREESPINE STICKLEBACK 3%p 0 5 0 S*1 4 5.p 0.i.0.7 e--=- 0.6 0.5 S0.4 0.3M GIZZARD SHAD[] ALEWIFE Eg OTHER RAINBOW SMELT T TRACE (<0.010)NC NO CATCH 0.2 0.1 FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL SEP OCT NOV DEC SAMPLING MONTH Figure V-I.Seasonal Variation in Impingement Unit 1, January-December 1978 Rates at Nine Mile Point II.
| |
| * 246 90 -2 6135 DAY S80- NIGHT 70 60 CD-50"40 C 30 R 20 10 0-JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1978 Figure V-2. Diel Variation in Impingement Rates at Nine Mile Point Unit 1 during 1978 A 0Total lengths of impinged threespine sticklebacks fell within a range of 31 to 80 millimeters (Appendix Table Ht-9), but most sticklebacks were between 50 and64 millimeters.
| |
| : 2. James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Station a. Species Composition Impingement sampling at James A. FitzPatrick in 1978 resulted in the collection of 45 fish taxa, 42 of which were identified to species (Table V-2).V-7 science services division Of the total number of fish collected, threespine sticklebacks, rainbow smelt, and alewives comprised approximately 86 percent. Threespine sticklebacks domi-nated impingement samples from February through June, rainbow smelt in January and September-December, and alewives in July and August (Appendix Table H-12).Two species -rainbow smelt and spottail shiner -and specimens of the genus Cottus were consistently present in impingement samples, and 11 other species were found during at least 10 of the 12 months.Gizzard shad and alewives comprised approximately 65 percent of the total fish biomass collected at FitzPatrick (Table V-2 and Appendix Table H-13). Gizzard shad was the dominant species collected during January-April and was a major component of the biomass in November and December.
| |
| Alewives dominated samples from May through July and contributed much of the biomass during September and December.
| |
| Smallmouth bass dominated in August, American eel in October; alewives and rainbow smelt were equally dominant in September.
| |
| : b. Temporal Distribution The temporal distribution of impingement rates (number of fish im-pinged per 1000 cubic meters of water sampled) was characterized (Figure V-3)by highest catch rates during the spring (March and May) and lowest rates in late summer (July). Although catch rates were also low during October and November, cooling-water flow rates were down at least 50 percent during these -months while the reactor was being refueled.
| |
| Impingement rates were inter-mediate during the fall (September) and winter. Most of the fish impinged during the spring maxima were threespine sticklebacks.
| |
| Catch rates for rainbow smelt were highest during the winter (January) and during the late fall (Sep-tember through December).
| |
| Although alewives were common in catches from May through August and in December, impingement rates for alewives were highest in August. Since the traveling screens were inoperable from 8 to 13 November, the November catch rates are based on approximately 3 weeks of data. 77 Diel variations in catch rates (number impinged per hour) were ob-served in day and night impingement samples collected each Wednesday during 1978 (Figure V-4). Although catch per hour was greater at night than during the day during 10 of the 12 months, day/night differences were frequently small. The noticeably higher night than day catch rates during September, Ai V-8 science services division f-I 0'NinT Table V-2 Number and Weight of Fish Collected during Impingement Sampling and the Estimated Annual Impingement, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Station, 1978 Number Collected Weight Collected (g)Estimated Number Estimated Weight (g)Common Name*Al ewi fe American eel Black crappie Bluegill Bowfin Brook stickleback Brown bullhead Brown trout Burbot Carp Central mudminnow Channel catfish Cisco Cottus sp.**Cyprinidae Emerald shiner Fathead minnow Freshwater drum Gizzard shad Golden shiner Goldfish Lake chub Lake chubsucker Logperch Longnose dace Longnose gar!) Northern pike Pirate perch Pumpkinseed Rainbow smelt Rock bass Salvelinus sp.***Sea lamprey Smallmouth bass Spottail shiner Stonecat Tadpole madtom Tessellated dartert Threespine stickleback Trout-perch Walleye White bass White perch White sucker Yellow perch 28,691 12 4 20 1 30 24 21 12 5 44 2 1 1 ,452 9 2,416 13 20 6,497 17 27 81 1 4 10 2 3 l 38 31,992 529 28 10 478 2,732 58 5 917 98,347 1,510 20 1 ,197 2,488 72 4,403 580,593.5 3,863.3 307.5 468.5 350.8 40.6 2,430.8 51,957.1 6,013.4 305.1 203.2 80.3 36.2 4,502.7 19.8 5,488.4 30.1 4,988.0 1,185,250.1 61.2 1,744.6 422.3 524.0 24.8 103.3 141.3 3,088.8 12.9 3,474.5 152,700.6 98,569.4 1,876.9 1,059.6 231,498.3 11,805.9 1,834.2 13.4 1,390.2 167,216.6.11,262.0 1,446.5 18,152.7 81,447.1 26,372.5 39,624.2 67,311 28 9 47 2 74 56 49 28 11 105 4 2 3,425 21 5,715 30 47 15,468 41 64 193 2 10 24 5 7 3 90 74,962 1,258 65 24 1,135 6,459 135 12 2,157 222,837 3,479 47 2,843 5,863 172 9,874 1,354,300.5 9,174.5 766.6.1,116.0 836.5 100.9 5,747.9 122,816.8 14,333.1 724.5 487.4 177.9 86.3 10,627.0 47.8 12,984.4 68.4 11,802.6 2,805,680.3 106.4 4,197.6 1,001.5 1,209.2 59.1 243.5 326.1 7,134.9*32.3 8,280.3 359,488.7 233,910.2 4,472.4 2,512.7 549,622* 0 27,954.9 4,313.2 32.0 3,253.9 378,514.8 25,815.6 3,449.4 43,047.7 190,309.0 63,322.9 93,157.3 Total 184,244 2,702,797.2 424,193 6,357,647.0
| |
| *Common names are according to the American Fisheries Society list of common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada (Bailey et al 1970).**Primarily mottled sculpin.***Species identification of lake trout and splake remains tentative because of overlapping identifying characteristics of native and stocked populations.
| |
| tIncludes tessellated and johnny darters, previously considered as subspecies and reported under the name of johnny darter in earlier Nine Mile Point studies.V-9 science services division 1.1.01* TOTAL CATCH T TRACE (<O.'010)13 THREESPINE STICKLEBACK NC NO CATCH[ RAINBOW SMELT* GIZZARD SHAD[J ALEWIFE O OTHER -E H 0 S 0 2 0 S S 4 S S a.0 2 Cý0j JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC SAMPLING MONTH Figure V-3. Seasonal Variation in Impingement Rates Nuclear Station, January-December 1978 Ji j *] ........ .. .... ' ...... .... .... ... .... .... ....at James A. FitzPatrick DAY NIGHTf 10o.J LU 0-LU (.0 LU JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN 1978 JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Figure V-4.Diel Variation in Impingement Rates at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Station during 1978 V-11 science services division December, and January probably were related to the high relative abundance of rainbow smelt during these 3 months. Although the very high night impingement rate in April occurred when threespine sticklebacks dominated samples, day/night differences were negligible during May and June when sticklebacks again dominated catches.c. Estimated Impingement The total number of fish impinged at James A. Fitzpatrick during 1978 was estimated to be approximately 424,000 (Table V-2), over half of which were threespine sticklebacks.
| |
| The total weight of all impinged fish was estimated to be approximately 6,400 kilograms, with gizzard shad contributing 44 percent of the total biomass. The estimated numbers and weights of fish impinged dur-ing each month of 1978 are presented in Appendix Table H-14).d. Length Frequency Alewife, rainbow smelt, smallmouth bass, threespine stickleback, white perch, and yellow perch length-frequency distributions (Appendix Tables H-15 through H-20) showed the general trends that have already been discussed for these same species in Nine Mile Point plant impingement samples.e. Age Composition During each season of impingement sampling, the two most abundant species were chosen for age analysis to define the relative sizes of the fish in the age classes observed.
| |
| These data, combined with length-frequency data, provided an estimation of ages for the more frequently impinged fish., Rainbow smelt and threespine sticklebacks were chosen for age analysis for winter (Jan-uary-March) and spring (April-June).
| |
| The most frequently impinged species dur-ing summer (July-September) were alewife and threespine stickleback; and during fall (October-December), alewife and rainbow smelt. As noted by Eddy (1969), sticklebacks have no scales so they are typically aged by examining otoliths (Jones and Hynes 1950, cited in Scott and Crossman 1973) or length frequencies (Greenbank and Nelson 1959, cited in Carlander 1969). The latter method was used to age threespine sticklebacks impinged at the James A. FitzPatrick plant.V-12 science services division.
| |
| Alewives collected for age analysis ranged during the summer from young-of-the-year (age class 0) to age class IV and during the fall from young-of-the-year to III. The seasonal age-class distributions (Appendix Tables H-23 and H-24) and the length frequency for impinged alewives (Appendix Table H-15) indicated that ages 0, I, and II dominated impingement samples during the summer and that young-of-the-year (age 0) and age III dominated in the fall.The strong contingent of young-of-the-year alewives in August and September was the result of young-of-the-year recruitment into an impingeable size range (Appendix Table H-15).Rainbow smelt from impingement collections ranged from yearlings to age VI during winter and spring and from young-of-the-year to age IV in the fall (Appendix Tables H-21, H-22, and H-24). Length-frequency distributions during the winter (January-March), spring (April-June), and fall (October-Decem-ber) were distinctly bimodal (Appendix Table H-16), with large numbers in the 51- to 100-millimeter and 131- to 180-millimeter length ranges. Age-class data indicated that fish in the 51- to 100-millimeter length range were predomi-nantly yearlings during winter and spring and young-of-the-year (age 0) during the fall (Appendix Tables H-21, H-22, and H-24). Individuals in the 131- to 180-millimeter length range during winter and spring were mostly ages.II and III; in the fall, yearlings and 2-year-olds (age classes I and II) comprised most of the smelt in the larger category (131 to 180 millimeters).
| |
| Length frequencies of threespine stickleback, a dominant species in impingement catches at FitzPatrick from January through September, ranged from about 25 millimeters to 84 millimeters, representing young-of-the-year (age 0)to age-IV fish [Jones and Hynes 1950 (for Alaskan waters) and Greenbank and Nelson (for English waters), cited in Carlander 1969]. The predominant three-spine stickleback year classes impinged during the winter through summer were a mixture of predominantly age-Il and yearling (age-I) fish plus some age-Ill and possibly age-IV specimens.
| |
| Otolith data from English waters indicate that sticklebacks probably don't live longer than 3.5 years. Although 2.5 years is the typical lifespan in Alaskan lakes, some age-IV threespine sticklebacks (ap-proximately 75-millimeter mean fork length) have been reported, with all age-IV specimens being females (Rogers 1962, cited in Carlander 1969). Therefore, the V-13 science services division impinged threespine sticklebacks that were longer (total length) than 75 milli-meters may have included some age-IV individuals (probably females).f. Fecundity Alewives generally spawn in late spring when water temperatures are between 16 and 280C. Spawning females randomly broadcast from 10,000 to 22,400 (Scott and Crossman 1973, Norden 1967) demersal and essentially non-adhesive eggs (Mansueti 1956). During the 1978 study, fecundity estimates of impinged alewives were extremely variable; however, larger specimens generally possessed the most yolk eggs. Fecundity estimates for alewives collected by gill net from the lake ranged from 5,400 to 44,900 eggs (Appendix Table F-38).Estimates for lake-caught specimens were also highly variable, but data indi-cated a general increase in fecundity with increasing fish length.Rainbow smelt spawn in streams or shallow lakeshore waters (Rupp 1965) over gravel shoals. Spawning runs of ripe smelt usually begin in March and continue through May when water temperatures range from 8.90 to 18.3'C (McKenzie 1964). The number of demersal and adhesive eggs spawned depends on the size of the female but generally ranges from approximately 8,000 to 30,000 (Scott and Crossman 1973). In 1978, the fecundity (total number of yolk eggs)of impinged rainbow smelt 133 to 224 millimeters in total length ranged from approximately 6,000 to 30,600 eggs. Fecundity estimates displayed some varia- -tion among individuals of comparable sizes but generally followed a pattern of increasing numbers of yolk eggs with increasing length and weight (Appendix Table H-25). Fecundity of smelt 129 to 226 millimeters in length collected from the lake ranged from approximately 8,200 to 39,000 eggs and displayed a positive correlation between increasing fecundity and total length (Appendix Table F-38).White perch usually spawn over a period of 1 to 8 weeks in the spring when water temperatures range from 110 to 15 C. The number of eggs produced per female may range from 20,000 to 300,000 (Scott and Crossman 1973). At the James A. FitzPatrick station in 1978, the total number of yolk eggs for im-pinged white perch 205 to 305 millimeters in total length ranged from approx-imately 35,400 to 267,400 (Appendix Table H-25). Although fecundity estimates for certain fish of comparable lengths varied, there was generally an increase V-14 science services division 1 with increasing length and weight. Estimates of fecundity for lake-caught white perch 204 to 321 millimeters in total length varied from 43,800 to 463,900 yolk eggs.Yellow perch spawn from mid-April to early May when water tempera-0 0 tures range from 8.9 to 12.2 C (Scott and Crossman 1973). Yellow perch eggs are extruded in long, gelatinous masses that frequently become entangled in aquatic vegetation.
| |
| Fecundity of four yellow perch 118-255 millimeters im-pinged at the James A. FitzPatrick plant ranged from approximately 10,600 to 54,700 yolk eggs (Appendix Table H-35). Fecundity of three yellow perch ranging from 146 to 270 millimeters in total length taken from Lake Ontario during the 1978 study ranged from approximately 6,000.to 33,800 yolk eggs (ul (Appendix Table F-38). Fecundity of Lake Ontario yellow perch from the Bay of,* iQuinte (131-257 millimeters in fork length) ranged from 3,035 to 61,465 eggs ,,j (Sheri and Power 1969). Fecundity of Maryland yellow perch 147 to 254 milli-meters in total length was 36,600 to 109,000 eggs (Scott and Crossman 1973).Smallmouth bass spawn in late spring and early summer, often near rocks, or logs and sometimes in dense vegetation (Scott and Crossman 1973).Nest building takes place over a wide range of temperatures (12.90 to 20.0 0 C), but actual spawning usually occurs at temperatures between 16.10 and 18.3°C.The number of eggs spawned (fecundity) per female ranges from 5,000 to 14,000 and is reported to average 7,000 eggs per pound of female (Scott and Crossman 1973). The total number of yolk eggs for 12 smallmouth bass impinged at the Fitzpatrick station in 1978 ranged from approximately 5,300 to 33,800 (Appendix Table H-25). Fecundity for 58 percent of these fish were between 11,000 and 16,000. Fecundity estimates for four smallmouth bass 333 to 398 millimeters
| |
| * for total length, collected from Lake Ontario in the vicinity of Nine Mile*Point during 1978 ranged from approximately 2,500 to 7,300 eggs (Appendix Table F-38).3. Overview of Year-to-Year Results Fish have been collected from the traveling screens at Nine Mile Point Unit I since 1972 and at the James A. FitzPatrick plant since late 1975.Sample' have been taken every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday since June 1973 and at James A. FitzPatrick since January 1976. On Mondays and Fridays impingement V-15 science services division 0 was monitored for a 24-hour period; Wednesday sampling was divided into day and night photoperiods.
| |
| Nine Mile Point impingement collections have yielded be-tween 37 and 48 species of fish each year since 1973; the James A. FitzPatrick power plant has yielded between 43 and 54 species each year since 1976. Ale-wives consistently dominated impingement samples at both plants through 1977: they comprised at least 80 percent of the fish impinged annually at Nine Mile Point during 1973-76 and 90 percent of the 1976 catch at James A. FitzPatrick.
| |
| Rainbow smelt have been second in abundance at both power plants except in 1976 when threespine sticklebacks were second at Nine Mile Point. Rainbow smelt were relatively more abundant in 1977 than in earlier years, accounting for 27 percent and 30 percent, respectively, of the fish impinged annually at Nine Mile Point and J.A. FitzPatrick; alewives comprised 48 percent and 56 percent of the annual catch respectively at the plants in 1977. In 1978, threespine sticklebacks were very abundant in impingement samples, replacing alewife as the dominant species, while smelt again were second in abundance; e.g., stickle-backs, smelt, and alewives comprised-52, 22, and 7 percent, respectively, of the total 1978 catch, at Nine Mile Point.Estimated annual 1974-78 impingement at Nine Mile Point Unit 1 ranged between 135,000 and 3.4 million fish with 1976 exhibiting the largest impinge-ment. James A. Fitzpatrick also had its largest estimated annual impingement in 1976 (compared with other years), when 4.3 million fish were impinged on the traveling screens. Additionally, FitzPatrick has had higher impingement rates than Nine Mile Point since 1976.Both power plants exhibited a major spring peak in impingement, corresponding with the onshore movement and spawning season of many of the major species. Impingement rates typically decreased through the summer and increased to a minor peak in the fall. Alewives and rainbow smelt character-istically dominated the spring peak. Alewives were most abundant in the vicinity of the power stations (and therefore in impingement samples) from April or May through the summer. Rainbow smelt, in contrast, were most abun-dant in late fall and winter (December-March).
| |
| Impingement rates were usually higher at night than during the day. During several years, the day/night dif-ference was statistically significant for rainbow smelt.V-16 science services division Several methods were used to assess the impact of impingement on selected fish species, including comparing annual impingement estimates to standing-stock estimates, lake-stocking data, and commercial-fishing harvests.Based on individual species analysis using the above comparisons, the numbers of fish impinged at Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and James A. FitzPatrick represent a negligible portion of the Lake Ontario fish community and the existing fish populations are not expected to be altered by power plant operations.
| |
| C. ENTRAINMENT/VIABILITY
| |
| : 1. Nine Mile Point Unit I The cooling-water system at the Nine Mile Point power station was sampled at the intake forebay from April through October 1978 to determine the abundance and composition of entrained fish eggs and larvae. Eggs, mostly those of alewife, occurred only during June and August (Table V-3). Larvae were collected from early May through late August, with peak abundance oc-curring in early August. Except for some. tessellated darters in early July, alewives comprised the entire July and August catches. The entire early June catch was rainbow 'smelt, and the May catch was yellow perch. Except for some prolarval tessellated darters, postlarvae predominated larval catches [Table V-3 and Section VI.A of the 1978 Data Report (TI 1979)].The abundance of eggs and larvae in entrainment samples did not correspond closely with periods of peak ichthyoplankton abundance in Lake Ontario. Day catches of both eggs and larvae in Lake Ontario peaked in July, whereas entrainment sampling yielded eggs only in late June and early August, with the peak in abundance occurring in early August.Although egg densities were slightly higher in entrainment samples-- than along the 20-foot depth contour in Lake Ontario, larval densities were usually lower inside the plant intakes than in the lake. Lake samples from the 20-foot contour were chosen for comparison with intake (entrainment) samples because the submerged offshore intakes for both stations are located near the 24-foot depth contour. Lake egg densities along the 20-foot contour ranged between 0 and 5 eggs per 1000 cubic meters on 26 June and between 0 and 43 per 1000 cubic meters on 7 August compared with densities of 87 and 47 per 1000 V-17 science services division Table V-3 Occurrence of Fish Eggs and Larvae in Entrainment Samples from the Cooling-Water Intakes of the Nine Mile Point and James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Stations, Lake Ontario, 1978 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep** Oct Location*
| |
| 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Alewife NMP E** L*** L E/L L JAF E/L E/L E/L Q/L @1 Carp NMP No carp caught at NMP JAF L Goldfish NMP No goldfish caught at NMP JAF L L Herring, unid.# NMP No herring caught at NMP JAF ( 0 Q0 Minnows unid. NMP No minnows caught at NMP JAF L Rainbow smelt NMP L JAF L Q i L Sculpin NMP No sculpin caught at NMP JAF L Sunfish NMP No sunfish caught at NMP JAF Tessellated darter NMP L .JAF Trout-perch NMP No trout-perch caught at NMP JAF L White perch NMP No white perch caught at NMP JAF Q Yellow perch NMP L L JAF L Unidentified eggs NMP E JAF Q. E* Nine Mile Point or James A. Fitzpatrick Power Plant.** JAF shut down in late September and intake velocity was insufficient for sampling.* E=eggs, L=larvae.t Eggs or larvae collected during viability studies but not in intake samples.tt Most were probably alewife.TI cubic meters in entrainment samples on 27 June and 8 August, respectively (Table V-4 and Appendix Table E-l). In early and late August when larval abundance peaked in entrainment samples at 383 and 140 larvae per 1000 cubic meters, larvae densities in the lake ranged from about 50 to more than 400 per 1000 cubic meters in early August and from 5 to more than 650 per 1000 cubic meters in late August (Appendix Tables E-5 and E-13). In addition to differ-ences in densities, entrainment samples contained only a few taxa in contrast to the 20 taxa of eggs and larvae identified in Lake Ontario samples.VI-18 science services division V-4 Density of Eggs and Larvae Entrained at the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Lake Ontario, 1978 f S Life Stage Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 3 17 9 23 16 27 11 25 8 22 13 29 10 24 Eggs 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 0 47 0 0 0 0 0 Larvae 0 0 10 26 132 0 16 11 383 140 0 0 0 0*Mean density of two daytime, samples per ,date, expressed as No./1000 i 3.2. James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Stationý. a. Phytoplankton The potential effect of the James A. FitzPatrick power station opera-* on the phytoplankton community in the vicinity of the station was moni-t ored by determining chlorophyll a concentrations and primary production levels inside the power station (intake and discharge) and within the thermal plume(actual lake samples or simulation of the thermal plume; refer to Section III.B.2 and LMS 1977a). Concentrations of chlorophyll a, a photosynthetic pigment, were measured as an estimate of phytoplankton abundance.
| |
| Also deter-mined were levels of phaeophytin a (a degradation product of chlorophyll a), which optically interferes with the quantitative measurement of chlorophyll a, and also provides an estimate of chlorophyll molecule loss due to.either en-trainment effects or oxidation during cellular respiration.
| |
| A radioactive carbon tracer (14C) technique was used to determine the amount of carbon that the phytoplankton community can incorporate (primary production) per unit of time.Chlorophyll a and primary production samples were collected within the intake forebay to monitor the relationship between in-plant samples and monthly lake phytoplankton samples. Discharge samples were compared with intake samples to measure the potential effects of passage of the phytoplankton through the power station. In addition, simulation studies were conducted to estimate the effects of entrainment in the thermal plume out to the 3 F and 20F V-19 science services division isotherms.
| |
| These simulation studies were made by collecting phytoplankton samples at the intake and subjecting them to temperature changes simulating the temperature regime within the thermal plume. The methods are further described in Section III.B.2.1) Chlorophyll a and Phaeophytin a a) Temporal Distribution Chlorophyll a concentrations in the cooling-water intake, based on the average of two replicate samples incubated at ambient intake temperature for 7 hours, ranged from a low of 0.47 micrograms per liter in February day collections to a high of 13.72 in May night samples (Appendix Table J-l).Chlorophyll a concentrations were low in the winter (December-February) and mid-summer (July) and peaked in May. April-December lake surface samples ex-hibited similar seasonal changes, with chlorophyll a concentrations ranging from 0.73 micrograms per liter in September to 9.08 in June (Appendix Table A-9). Estimates of chlorophyll a concentrations at the intake forebay were comparable with results from lake surface waters. Chlorophyll a concentrations for intake samples incubated for 24, 48, and 72 hours revealed a temporal dis-tribution pattern and concentrations similar to the 7-hour incubation samples (Appendix Tables J-2 through J-4).Phaeophytin a concentrations in the samples collected semimonthly (twice per month) and incubated for 7 hours (Appendix Table J-5) ranged from below detection limits (<0.10 micrograms per liter) in early March, April, and early November to a-high-of-3.71 in early June. Phaeophytin a monthly mean concentrations from surface lake samples ranged from a low of 0.24 micrograms per liter in September to a high of 1.73 in November.
| |
| A comparison of the A monthly means of lake (Appendix Table A-10) and intake (7-hour incubation) samples indicated no consistent pattern among them. Intake phaeophytin a results for the 24-, 48-, and 72-hour incubation periods indicated a temporal distribution pattern similar to that of the 7-hour incubation samples (Appendix Tables J-6 through J-8). There was no significant increase in phaeophytin a concentrations with increase in incubation time.V-20 science services division There were no consistent differences among day and night samples col-lected at the intake or discharge for chlorophyll a and phaeophytin a during any of the incubation periods.b) Plant Entrainment Discharge and intake concentrations of chlorophyll a and phaeophytin a were compared (as a ratio of discharge to intake) to evaluate the entrainment effect of the plant on the phytoplankton community.
| |
| Discharge samples were collected after intake samples at a specific time interval, depending on the time required for the water to pass through the plant, to insure that the same mass of water would be sampled at both the intake and discharge.
| |
| A ratio of less than 1 represents a decrease in chlorophyll during plant passage while a ratio greater than I indicates potential stimulation of the phytoplankton comr-munity.Chlorophyll a discharge/intake ratios for the 7-hour incubated sam-ples revealed that approximately 60 percent of the sampling periods showed a small reduction in chlorophyll.a concentration at the discharge (Appendix Table J-1). Although discharge/intake ratios were frequently less than 1, the loss to the phytoplankton community was not great, as indicated by the frequency of ratios that fell within the range of 0.80-0.99.
| |
| Results of the chlorophyll a discharge/intake ratios for the 24- and 48-hour incubations revealed a trend that was similar to that of the 7-hour incubation period (Appendix Tables J-2 through J-3). However, only about 54 percent of the samples incubated for 72 hours exhibited a reduction in chlorophyll a concentrations at the discharge (Appendix Table J-4). These results may indicate that phytoplankton losses to entrainment are small and that possibly, over a long incubation period, the phytoplankton begin to partially replace chlorophyll a lost during entrainment.
| |
| Throughout the 1978 study, discharge/intake ratios for phaeophytin a* concentrations were variable for the four incubation periods. A majority of the discharge/intake ratios were greater than 1 (Appendix Tables J-5 through J-8). The ratios showed that there was an increase in phaeophytin concentra-
| |
| *i tions in the discharge, indicating that the phytoplankton community had lost some chlorophyll a as a result of passage through the plant.V-21 science services division c) Plume Entrainment To estimate the effect of entrainment of lake phytoplankton into the thermal plume, 30 and 20 simulation/intake ratios were determined.
| |
| A ratio of less than 1 indicates a decrease in chlorophyll a due to entrainment into the thermal plume; a ratio greater than 1 indicates that entrainment of phytoplank-ton in the thermal discharge may stimulate the production of more chlorophyll and/or increase cell reproduction because of the elevated water temperatures.
| |
| Chlorophyll a results based on 7-hour incubation indicated that approximately 60 percent of the 30 simulation/intake ratios and 50 percent of the 20 simulation/intake ratios were greater than 1 (Appendix Table J-1).Ratios from the 24-, 48-, and 72-hour incubation periods showed similar results (Appendix J-2 through J-4). The 3 and 20 simulation/intake ratios for the four incubation periods suggested no affect or only a slight increase in chloro-phyll a values in the plume area.The 30 and 20 simulation/intake ratios for the four incubation periods indicated that phaeophytin a increased in approximately 57 percent of the thermal-plume samples (Appendix Tables J-5 through J-8).Comparison of chlorophyll a samples collected in the 30 and 20 AT areas of the thermal plume in Lake Ontario indicated an overall slight increase 4-in chlorophyll a concentrations, as was observed in the simulation studies.These comparisons also indicated an overall small loss in phaeophytin a concentrations.
| |
| Discharge/intake ratios indicated a small overall decrease in chloro-phyll a concentrations, which may have been indicative of a slight depression in chlorophyll a in the phytoplankton community due .to entrainment through the-- 7 plant or into the thermal plume. The slight increase in phaeophytin a concen-tration tends to support the chlorophyll a observations.
| |
| Although this depres-sion may represent a loss of phytoplankton cells, the phytoplankton community typically exhibits rapid regeneration, which probably negates any entrainment effects within a few hours to several days.V-22 science services division 3 Simulation/intake ratios for the 30 and 20 simulations (or the 30 and 20 lake plume samples) indicated an overall increase in chlorophyll a and phaeophytin a as a result of the temperature increase in the plume area.14 i I2) Primary Production ( C)a) Temporal Distribution Primary productivity samples were collected to determine the amount of carbon the phytoplankton community incorporates per unit of time, and to estimate plant and plume entrainment effects. These samples were collected and incubated at ambient intake temperatures for periods of 7, 24, 48, and 72 rl hours. The temporal distribution of primary production values for intake sam-pies incubated for 7 hours showed that lowest production occurred during Jan-uary-early March and again during early September.
| |
| Production peaked during April-August (Appendix Table J-9).Surface samples collected in the lake during phytoplankton surveys exhibited peak primary production values in June and secondary peaks in May, August, and November.
| |
| Lowest monthly values for lake phytoplankton production were observed in September.
| |
| The peaks and valleys observed in the lake samples were reflected in the intake samples during April-December.
| |
| This indicated that the samples collected in the forebay area were representative samples for the viability studies.Comparisons of day and night primary production data at the intakewere made, considering each of the four incubation periods individually.
| |
| Sam-pies from the 7-hour incubation period indicated that day values were higher than night values on 60 percent of the sampling dates (Appendix Table J-9).For the 24-, 48-,. and 72-hour incubation periods, production was higher during-day on 67, 71, and 79 percent of the sampling dates respectively (Appendix Tables J-10 through J-12). The trend for higher carbon uptake during the day would appear to be a natural phenomenon since phytoplankton utilize sunlight for their energy source and have their highest rate of respiration during the day. It should be noted, however, that during both short and long incubation periods the samples were incubated under a continuous light source.V-23 science services division b) Plant Entrainment About 70 percent of the discharge/intake ratios from the 7-hour in-cubation series over the 12-month study were less than 1, indicating a loss in phytoplankton abundance and/or productivity, probably because of plant entrain-ment (Appendix Table J-9). For the 24-, 48-, and 72-hour incubation periods, 65 percent of the discharge/intake ratios were less than 1 (Appendix Tables J-10 through J-12). However, the results for the longer incubation periods tended to be more variable than for the 7-hour incubation and therefore may not reflect actual depression in the rates of phytoplankton production as ac-curately as the 7-hour incubation.
| |
| Data from all four incubation periods -suggested that primary production was slightly lower in the discharge than in the intake.c) Plume Entrainment 0 Approximately 55 percent of the 30 and 2 simulation/intake primary.production ratios for the 7-hour incubation period were less than 1 (Appendix Table J-9). The plume simulation studies showed a slight decrease in produc-tion in the 7-hour incubation period. For the 24- and 48-hour incubation j periods, 50 percent of the 30 and 20 simulation/intake ratios were less than 1, while about 63 percent of the 72-hour incubation ratios were less than 1.These data indicate that entrainment in the plume for a long period tends to decrease production.
| |
| In many natural systems, entrainment in slightly higher water temperatures would stimulate phytoplankton production; however, if a loss in phytoplankton cells occurs, a decrease in production should also occur. 1 Primary production samples collected from the lake in the 30 and 20 AT plume areas exhibited rates of production that were similar to those of the simulation samples. An average of 63 percent of the 30 and 2 lake/intake ratios for the four incubation periods were less than 1. As in the simulation studies, entrainment in the actual plume area during 1978 decreased the rate of production.
| |
| V-24 science services division
| |
| : b. Zooplankton I) Entrainment (Intake)Entrainment sampling (day and night) at the James A. FitzPatrick Power station intake during 1978 yielded 79 zooplankton taxa comprising primarily Rotifera, Copepoda (Calanoida, Cyclopoida, and copepod nauplii), Cladocera, and Protozoa (Appendix Tables J-13 and J-14). No single group of organisms dominated 1978 collections.
| |
| Three calanoid copepods -Diaptomus oregonensis, D. sicilis, and Limnocalanus macrurus -were most numerous during It YJanuary-April, and rotifers began to dominate samples in April, maintaining this dominance through September.
| |
| The numerically dominant rotifers were in the genera Asplanchna, Keratella (most species), Polyarthra, and Synchaeta.
| |
| A cladoceran, Bosmina sp., was abundant in July and became the dominant taxon in October. A variety of rotifers -primarily Keratella sp., Polyarthra spp., and Synchaeta spp. -dominated the remainder of the year (November and December).
| |
| 1 The temporal distribution of total zooplankton density (Figure V-5.. and Appendix Table J-l1) was characterized by an initial period of slightly fluctuating low levels from January through the first of April, followed by a I sharp increase in late April and early May. High densities were sustained fromJune through August. After a secondary peak in late September, densities de-creased through the remainder of the study. Density estimates ranged from a 3 3 low of 1945/m3 in February (night samples) to a high of 1,721,938/m, in June (day samples).
| |
| Temporal distribution of zooplankton densities in day and night collections were quite similar through the study.A comparison of zooplankton entrainment densities with Lake Ontario-) microzooplankton densities along the 20-foot depth contour (chosen as a basis for comparison because the intake structure is located in water approximately 24 feet deep) indicated close similarity in seasonal distributions although 7actual densities were often quite different (Figure V-5). A comparison of intake zooplankton density with operational data for the main circulating water pumps (Figure V-5) indicated no consistent cause/effect relationship between the number of pumps running and zooplankton density at the intake; i.e., den-! sity peaks at the intake occurred during periods of both high and low plant circulating-water intake.V-25 science services division i-INTAKE (DAY)INTAKE (NIGHT)LAKE ONTARIO MICROZOOPLANKTON AT 20-FT CONTOUR (DAY)1,O000,O00 C)l100,000 10,000:19 15 I 5'-5* II~ N4 ~...... .............
| |
| ........................
| |
| 3**-.2 NO. CWP.....o ..... 1 J FEB M A I J JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC NUMBER OF CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS OPERATING:
| |
| DURING SEPTEMBER, 1 OR 2 CIRCULATING PUMPS WERE OPERATING AT NIGHT; DURING DECEMBER, 3 CIRCULATING PUMPS WERE OPERATING AT NIGHT ON THE FIRST SAMPLING DATES.Figure V-5.Temporal Distribution of Total Zooplankton Density in Day and Night Entrainment Samples and in Lake Ontario Samples from the 20-Foot Depth Contour, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 V-26 science services division t,
| |
| '2) Viability (Intake and Discharge)
| |
| Intake and discharge samples at the James A. FitzPatrick Power Sta-tion were examined to determine the number of live and dead organisms.
| |
| The temporal distribution pattern of zooplankton mortality (percent dead) was characterized by a series of peaks and valleys occurring irregularly through-out the year (Table V-5 and Appendix Table J-16). Periods of highest zooplank-ton percent dead at the intake, a reflection of natural and sampling-induced.
| |
| mortality, occurred in July, August, and September in both day and night sam-ples. Lowest intake percent dead generally occurred in late winter and early spring (February-May).
| |
| In most respects, estimates of percent dead at the dis-charge, a reflection of natural and sampling-induced mortality and mortality due to plant passage, followed a temporal pattern similar to that described for intake samples. Estimates of percent dead at the discharge were similar for both day and night samples; however, at the intake, mortality was greatest during the daytime.To estimate the impact of thermal-plume entrainment upon zooplankton, a series of experiments were conducted to simulate thermal-plume effects in 0 0 Lake Ontario at the 3 F and 2 F isotherms (Section III.B). In general, no salient differences in mortality (percent dead) between the two isotherm simula-tions were observed (Table V-5). Seasonal distribution of zooplankton percent dead in simulation samples followed that of intake and discharge, with major peaks occurring in August and September.
| |
| A comparison of day and night simu-0 lation data revealed no consistent trends in the 2 simulations, but mortality 0 (percent dead) was frequently higher during the day in the 3. simulations.
| |
| A comparison of discharge mortality (percent dead) with plume-entrainment mor-tality (percent dead) indicated that mortality was higher in the discharge sam-ples than in either the 2 or 3 simulation samples throughout 1978. This indicated that mortality (percent dead) due to plant entrainment in 1978 was higher than mortality due to entrainment into the lake thermal plume.As an estimate of zooplankton mortality due to plant passage, mor-tality was computed as the difference.
| |
| between intake and discharge survival divided by intake survival.
| |
| This method of estimating zooplankton mortality was used because it compensates for the effects of sampling-induced mortality.
| |
| V-27 science services division Table V-5 Percent of Zooplankton Dead* in the Zooplankton Collections Taken at the Intake and Discharge, or Subject to Thermal Plume Simulation, James A. FitzPatrick Plant, 1978 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan.-Sample '.ocation Period 17-18 25-26 7-8 21-23 7-8 21-22 6-10 21-22 11-12 25-26 18-19 27-30 13-14 .7-28 10-11 24-25 15-17 27-28 12-13 26-27 8-9 29-30 20-21 4-6 Intake Day 53 56 43 27 23 49 39 11 30 37 58 29 43 53 79 56 69 75 44 69 44 36 24 70 Night 50 47 43 17 40 34 15 27 19 32 50 37 73 59 71 41 79 57 35 21 41 39 31 41 Discharge Day 63 65 71 52 29 73 61 31 61 57 47 66 84 98 92 90 81 70 63 51 90 62 66 84 Night 68 80 76 21 74 61 44 64 62 56 78 66 84 96 98 66 84 73 62 28 75 56 60 77 VO Simulation Day 53 66 53 S5 25 67 32 18 56 34 58 42 51 61 86 59 67 65 35 49 49 54 39 65 00 Night 71 46 81 34 64 35 28 18 20 35 45 43 46 48 68 63 82 64 37 38 38 41 41 63 2* Simulation Day 76 60 56 56 7 43 45 23 52 46 71 54 61 63 34 61 66 73 61 44 65 48 53 77 Night 58 77 62 27 56 49 49 39 22 47 57 52 64 54 77 69 78 70 61 23 56 54 42 61 Number dead Tota' 00**Samples for late December were collected in early January 1979 because of heavy detrital loads and nlant operations.
| |
| S 06.-0 Percent mortality within the major zooplankton groups was generally highest among the Protozoa (Table V-6); Rotifera and Cladocera were intermediate and total Copepoda lowest. Within the Copepoda group, cyclopoids reflected the lowest percent mortality.
| |
| In general, the percent mortality among the major zooplankton groups exhibited no consistent trend in day/night differences.
| |
| Highest mortality for each of the major groups occurred in July and August.Temporal distribution in percent mortality due to plant passage for all zooplankton taxa combined was characterized by several peaks (Figure V-6, which plots combined day and night mean values because of their close simi-larity). Total zooplankton percent mortality ranged from negative values in June, September, and October (a result of the intake percent dead exceeding the discharge percent dead), to a high of 95 percent in July (Figure V-6 and Table V-6). A close relationship between zooplankton mortality and plant operation was observed only during late June-September and December.
| |
| Most noticeable was the sustained peak in total zooplankton mortality that occurred during July and August when discharge temperatures exceeded 30 0 C. No real relationship existed between AT and zooplankton mortality.
| |
| It should.be noted that thermal stress was not the only factor affect-ing zooplankton mortality at the James A. FitzPatrick power station. During October and November when there was no increase in temperature (Figure V-6), mortality was high simply because of mechanical stresses due to plant passage and sample collection.
| |
| Additionally, on November 7 and 8 no circulating-water pumps were operating, thereby stranding entrained zooplankton in the intake forebay and discharge aftbay; this, combined with sampling, resulted in higher than expected mortality.
| |
| : c. Ichthyoplankton
| |
| : 1) Entrainment To monitor entrainment of fish eggs and larvae in the cooling-water system at the James A. FitzPatrick power station, samples were collected from the intake forebay day and night twice monthly throughout 1978.V-29 science services division Table V-6 Percent Mortality*
| |
| of Major Zooplankton Groups Due to Plant Passage, James A. FitzPatrick Plant, 1978 Taxa Jan Feb Mar Apr may Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan*'Period 17-18 25-26 7-8 21-23 7-8 21-22 6-10 21-22 11-12 25-26 18-19 27-30 13-14 27-28 10-11 24-25 15-17 27-28 12-13 26-27. 8-9 29-30 20-21 4-6 0 S 0 i 0 0 S 0 5.S S A.I S 0 Protozoa Rotifera Cladocera Calanoida Cyclopolda Copepoda nauplit Total Copepoda Total Zooplankton Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Hight Day Ni.ght DaY Night Day Night Day Night N 17 N NO *N N N NO 48 N N 57 N NO N 26 66 ND 80 12 N 53 N N 50 N ND ND 61 12 62 71 N 29 27 28 44 36 N 63 *77 94 84 20 78 N 60 24 64 61 54 33 61 59 N 95 100 N 50 NO ND 100 ND 33 ND ND 5 26 24 54 58 N 100 NO ND 100 ND NO N NO 22 23 68 79 N N 23 28 1 59 N 9 N 100 100 0 0 100 65 N 21 6 52 11 21 33 0 N NO ND 100 75 26 18 79 N N N 49 33 N 43 N 33 51 94 N 43 89 N N 54 73 62 7 N 46 44 68 84 N 1 50 33 10 60 44 N N 43 2 21 91 100 59 47 51 5 55 48 34 46 42 60 52 67 74 90 N N 52 N 11 N 71 N N 46 N 33 74 97 74 78 N N 59 55 59 28 53 76
| |
| * 56 78 73 100 21 19 49 34 7 46 36 22 44 31 N 52 73 95 36 62 58 5 57 41 34 50 53 35 56 46 40 91 ND 100 ND H 75 ND ND NO 100 14.3 78 100 54 82 30 N 79 27 94 41 78 61 75 24 83 34 N 2 14 N 86 44 13 8 13 4 100 ND N 100 0 0 100 100 N 40 100 11 87 42 45 3 18 N 95 27 5 9 37 43 67 85 63 N 5 52 86 71 20 51 N N 51 78 42 N 14 N 94 63 16 28 19 12 59 76 38 N 35 N 93 42 24 37 42 8 100 40 100 100 87 43 78 35 68 ND 17 10 0 ND NO 0 68 29 25 7 67 39 1 53 67 34 20 N 82 41 57 29 50 N 100 14 57 48 65 62 33 N N 33 0 ND 0 ND 0 50 13 59 100 78 37 22 9 12 59 55 45 42 61% Live 1 -Live[D*% Mortality=
| |
| -Live I intake sample; 0 = discharge sample.--aples for late December were collected in early January 1979 because of heavy detrital loads and plant operations.
| |
| N -Intake/discharge comparisons not possible; intake mortality I discharge mortality.
| |
| ROD No organisms collected at discharge.
| |
| S.. ...... .... .....
| |
| *MRAIY % LIVE T -% LIVE D M = L-E% LIVEI ; I = INTAKE, D = DISCHARGE 40 39 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 8 m 100 90 80 70 16 14 I--4 I-0 S C i 3 a S S 0 5.S S a.I S 0 3 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 JAN 'FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Figure V-6.Percent Mortality of Total Zooplankton Due to at James A. FitzPatrick Power Station, 1978 Plant Entrainment Alewife and unidentified eggs occurred in entrainment (intake) sam-pies from early July through early August (Table V-3); also during the same months, tessellated darter, white perch, and alewife eggs occurred in viability samples (from the discharge or intake). Almost all of the eggs in entrainment samples were those of alewife (Table V-3). Egg densities were highest in late July (Table V-7).Table V-7 Densities of Eggs and Larvae Entrained at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Station,.
| |
| Lake Ontario, 1978**Life Stage May Jun Jul Aug 23 16 27 11 25 8 22 Eggs 0 0 0 5 87 11 0 Larvae 10 79 4 90 34 54 159 Mean density of two daytime and two nighttime samples per sampling date, expressed as No./l000 m 3.**No fish eggs or larvae were collected in entrainment samples during January through April and September through December.Larvae occurred in entrainment samples from late May through August.In addition to the nine taxa identified in entrainment samples, some herring and sunfish larvae were present in viability samples during late July through early September (Table V-3). Alewives dominated entrainment collections, especially in July and August. Larval density peaked in late August and was made up entirely of alewives.
| |
| Rainbow smelt larvae made up the entire catch during the first half of June and were present also in early July (Table V-3).Yellow perch comprised the smaller May catch. Carp, sculpin, some unidentifi-able minnows, tesselated darter, goldfish, and trout-perch larvae were col-lected in small numbers in late June and early July.V-32 science services division 11~;z j* 1 1. J The monthly occurrence of eggs in entrainment samples reflected a period of peak abundance in Lake Ontario; during that period (July and early August), densities within intake samples and lake collections were not appar-ently different (Table V-7 and Appendix Tables E-1 through E-4). The temporal distribution of larvae in entrainment samples also generally coincided with changes in larval densities in lake samples, but densities in the lake were usually higher. For example, the peak density of yellow perch in entrainment samples in late May (10 larvae per 1000 cubic meters) coincided with the high-est yellow perch densities in the lake (average of 72.8 larvae per 1000 cubic meters along the 20-foot depth contour);
| |
| likewise, rainbow smelt densities were highest during mid-June in both lake and entrainment samples (Table V-7 and Appendix Tables E-19 and E-20). During July and early August, lake samples (from along the 20-foot depth contour) had significantly higher densities of alewife than did entrainment samples, but lake and entrainment densities of alewife were similar in late August (Table V-7 and Appendix Tables E-7, E-8, E-15, and E-16). Surprisingly, the larval density reported in entrainment samples in late August was the highest observed for larvae during 1978 en-trainment sampling.
| |
| In addition to the lower densities of larvae in entrain-A ment samples compared with lake samples, egg and larval diversity (number of'-3 species) also was lower in entrainment samples.2) Viability A comparison of the percent mortality of eggs and larvae, primarily alewife and rainbow smelt, in intake and discharge samples during 1978 was made to estimate the effect of entrainment.
| |
| In addition, eggs and larvae from in-take samples were subjected to temperature changes to simulate the potential impact of entrainment in the thermal plume in Lake Ontario. These mortality sdata have been presented in the 1978 Data Report for the Nine Mile Point aquatic ecology studies (TI 1979). Unfortunately, the numbers of eggs and larvae in viability samples were quite low, precluding any conclusions with respect to mortality or survivability following entrainment.
| |
| V-33 science services division
| |
| : 3. Overview of Year-to-Year Results a. Ichthyoplankton Entrainment at Nine Mile Point Entrainment of ichthyoplankton at the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 plant has been monitored either weekly or twice per month since 1973. Generally, the species in entrainment samples reflected the lake's species composition, except that species occurring infrequently or in low numbers often were not observed in entrainment samples. The temporal abundance of eggs and larvae in intake samples was generally similar to temporal patterns observed in Lake Ontario samples. However, densities in entrainment samples were sometimes A lower than corresponding densities in lake samples, particularly larval den-sities in 1977 and 1978. Also, the diversity (number of species) of eggs and larvae was frequently lower in entrainment than in Lake Ontario samples. Al-though 100 percent mortality of entrained ichthyoplankton was assumed for the purposes of impact evaluation, station operation over the past 5 years had a minimal effect on ichthyoplankton populations in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point. For example, cropping estimates for larvae indicated that only about 0.26 percent of the alewives and rainbow smelt in Lake Ontario that were avail-able for entrainment during 1976 were actually entrained, assuming both Nine Mile Point and the James A. FitzPatrick plant to be operating at full intake flow.b. Phytoplankton Entrainment/Viability at James A. FitzPatrick Phytoplankton entrainment and viability studies have been conducted at the James A. FitzPatrick plant since 1976. These studies used estimated phytoplankton cell densities (1976 only), chlorophyll a concentrations, and -primary production rates ( 14C tracer method), to measure potential effects on the phytoplankton community of entrainment through the power plant or into the thermal plume. To determine both short-term and longer-term effects of entrain-ment, viability studies have been conducted using incubation periods of 7, 24, 48, and 72 hours.Each year, temporal changes in chlorophyll a concentrations were similar. Chlorophyll a concentrations in intake samples were generally low.during January-March, then exhibited a spring peak in late April and May and smaller peaks in mid-summer.
| |
| Chlorophyll a concentrations were low during V-34 science services division October-December.
| |
| The temporal trend of intake concentrations was similar to that of chlorophyll a concentrations in Lake Ontario. Overall, 1976-78 sam-pling results indicated lower chlorophyll a concentrations in the discharge compared with the intake. Concurrently, slightly higher concentrations of phaeophytin a (a degradation product of chlorophyll a) were observed in the H discharge area. These results indicated that entrainment through the plant had some adverse impact on the entrained phytoplankton.
| |
| The 3° and 2 F simulation Isamples and samples from the thermal plume itself (conducted to measure the* effect of plume entrainment) revealed no noticeable differences in chlorophyll a concentrations between intake and plume samples. Although plant entrainment had an adverse effect on phytoplankton, the lake phytoplankton community has 1 the potential to regenerate losses quickly and therefore negate the possible adverse affects of plant entrainment.
| |
| Primary production rates at the intake were low during March and exhibited peaks during late spring (May) and late summer (August).
| |
| Temporal distribution patterns for intake production rates were similar to those in the lake. During all 3 years of sampling there was an overall yearly reduction in Iproductivity in the discharge aftbay relative to intake rates prior to plant entrainment; however, when water temperatures were low, there was a tendency 0 0 for production to be stimulated in the discharge area. The 30 and 2 F simula-tion and thermal plume studies in 1976 and 1977 showed that entrainment of lake ( phytoplankton in the thermal plume increased production; in 1978, however, in-creased production rates were not observed.* IIn summary, entrainment and Viability study results showed that the power plant had little lasting effect on the phytoplankton community in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point. The ability of the phytoplankton community to quickly replace cells lost to either plant or plume entrainment resulted in negligible overall impact.c. Zooplankton Entrainment/Viability at James A. FitzPatrick Samples taken from the power-plant intakes contained zooplankton populations that were generally similar to those in lake samples collected during the same time period. Zooplankton entrainment typically increased from 4 spring to summer, then decreased from fall to winter, following the temporal V-35 science services division trend in the lake. Densities of entrained zooplankton during a typical year ranged from less than 104 to more than 106 organisms per cubic meter, with a maximum usually occurring in late summer (July or August). Entrainment samples were dominated by rotifers, followed by copepods, cladocerans, and protozoans.
| |
| The latter three groups varied in numerical importance from year to year.Mortality of zooplankton passing through the plant ranged from near 0 to almost 100 percent. Mortality after plant passage was generally less than 50 percent and was typically greatest during summer. Evaluation of plume en-trainment mortality showed it to be considerably less than plant mortality.
| |
| The greatest overall mortality was exacted upon the protozoan group.. From the overall stability of the zooplankton population, as measured in lake samples, operation of the power plants had no discernible effects on these organisms, regardless of mortality caused by plant passage.d. Ichthyoplankton Entrainment/Viability at James A. FitzPatrick Entrainment of ichthyoplankton at the James A. FitzPatrick plant has been thoroughly monitored since 1976. During the first 8 months of 1976, repli-cate samples were collected every 6 hours on sampling dates twice per month.Replicate day and night samples have been collected twice per month since late September 1976. In addition to collecting samples from the intake to determine entrainment densities, samples were collected from the discharge and lake thermal plume (or thermal plume conditions were simulated) and compared with intake samples to determine egg and larval viability.
| |
| * !~I!The number of species observed in entrainment samples in 1976 was similar to the diversity reported in Lake Ontario ichthyoplankton samples;also, peak densities of eggs and larvae in entrainment samples corresponded closely with those in lake samples. During 1977 and 1978, the temporal dis-tribution of eggs and larvae in entrainment samples continued to reflect the temporal abundance in Lake Ontario, but the entrainment samples generally had fewer species. A comparison of egg and larval densities in entrainment and lake samples during 1976-78 indicated that egg concentrations within the intake were similar to or higher than those in the lake but that larval densities within the intake were frequently lower than in the lake. The number of eggs V-36 science services division ,
| |
| and larvae in viability samples was low during all 3 years of monitoring, pre-cluding any conclusions with respect to mortality or survivability following entrainment.
| |
| Assuming 100 percent mortality, the impact of cropping eggs and larvae of alewife and rainbow smelt (the two most abundant fish species in entrainment samples) has been estimated to represent an extremely small per-centage of the reproductive potential of Lake Ontario populations.
| |
| Thus, normal compensatory mechanisms should offset these minimal losses.'1 71, I V-37 science services division SECTION VI CITED REFERENCES American Public Health Association (APHA). 1976. Standard methods for the I 1 examination of water and wastewater.
| |
| 14th ed. New York, N.Y. 874 p.American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1977. Annual book of ASTM Part 31, Water. Am. Soc. Testing Materials, Philadelphia, Pa.Bailey, R.M., J.E. Fitch, E.S. Herald, E.A. Lachner, C.C. Lindsey, C.R. Robins,* and W.B. Scott. 1970. A list of common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada. AFS Spec. Pub. 6:1-149.Brinkhurst, R.O. 1969. Changes in the benthos of Lake Erie and Ontario.Bull. Buffalo Soc. Nat. Sci. 25:45-71.Brinkhurst, R.O. 1970. Distribution and abundance of tubificid (Oligochaeta) species in Toronto Harbour, Lake Ontario. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 27:1961-1969.Christie, W.J. 1973. A review of the changes in the fish species composition of Lake Ontario. Great Lakes Fish. Comm. Tech. Rpt. No. 23:65 p.Christie, W.J. 1974. Changes in the fish species composition of the Great Lakes. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 31:827-954.
| |
| Churchill, M.A. and T.A. Wojtalik.
| |
| 1969. Effects of heated discharges:
| |
| the TVA experience.
| |
| Nuclear News Sep:80.Cole, R.A. et al. 1978. The occurrence of young fishes in the Michigan coas-tal waters of the Great Lakes. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Division Technical Report 78-1.Consumers Power Company. 1976. Section 316(b) -Intake study, J.H. Campbell Plant Units No. 1 and 2.Consumers Power Company. 1975. Summary of the effects of once-through cooling at the Palisades.Nuclear Power Plant.Cook, D.G. and M.G. Johnson. 1974. Benthic macroinvertebrates of the St.Lawrence Great Lakes. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 31:763-783.
| |
| Coutant, C.C. 1970. Biological aspects of thermal pollution.
| |
| I. Entrainment and discharge canal effects. CRC Critical Review in Environmental Con-i!! trol. p. 341-380.Csanady, G.T. 1972. The coastal boundary layer in Lake Ontario. II. The summer-fall regime. J. Physical.
| |
| Oceanogr.
| |
| 2:168-176.
| |
| VI-I science services division Davies, R.M. and L.D. Jensen. Electric Power Research Institute and Duke Power Company. 1974. Zooplankton entrainment.
| |
| In Environmental responses to thermal discharges from Marshall Steam Station, Lake Norman, North Carolina (L.D. Jensen, ed). 235 p.Davis, C.C. 1966. Plankton studies in the Great Lakes of the world with spe-cial reference to the St. Lawrence Great Lakes of North America. Univ.Mich. Great Lakes Res. Div. Publ. 14:54. !Davis, C.C. 1969. Plants in lakes Erie and Ontario and changes of their num-bers and kinds. In Proceedings of Conference on changes in the biota of Lake Erie and Ontario. Bull. Buffalo Soc. Nat. Sci. 25:18-44.Detroit Edison Company. 1977. Belle River Power Plant, Thermal Discharge Demonstration.
| |
| Detroit Edison Company. 1976. Enrico Fermi Power Plant No. I, Study Report on Cooling Water Intake.Edsall, T.A. and T.G. Yocum. 1972. Review of recent technical information concerning the adverse effects of once-through cooling on Lake Michigan.Lake Mich. Enforcement Conf. Paper, Sep 19-21, 1972.Ekman, V.W. 1928. Eddy viscocity and skin friction in the dynamics of winds and ocean currents.
| |
| Mem. Roy. Met. Soc. 2(20).Fretwell, S.D. 1972. Population in a seasonal environmental.
| |
| Monographs on population biology-5.
| |
| Princeton Univ. Press. Princeton, New Jersey.217 p.Gale, W.F. and J.D. Thompson.
| |
| 1975. A suction sampler for quantitatively sampling benthos on rocky substrates in rivers. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.104(2):398-405.
| |
| Glooschenko, W.A., J.E. Moore, and R.A. Vollenweider.
| |
| 1972. The seasonal cycle of phaeo-pigments in Lake Ontario with particular emphasis on the role of zooplankton grazing. Limnol. Oceanogr.
| |
| 17(2):597-605.
| |
| Greenbank, J. and P.R. Nelson. 1959. Life history of the threespine stickle-back, Gasterosteus aculeatus Linnaeus, in Kaluk and Bare Lakes, Kodiak Island, Alaska. Fish. Bull. U.S., 59(153):537-59.
| |
| Gunwaldsen, R.W., B. Brodfeld, and G.E. Hecker. 1970. Current and tempera-ture surveys in Lake Ontario for James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant.Proc. 13th Conf. Great Lakes Res. 1970:914-926.
| |
| -Haight, F.J. 1942. Coastal currents along the Atlantic Coast of United States. Dept. of Commerce, Coast and Geodetic Survey, Special Publ. 230.Heinle, D.R. 1969. Temperature and zooplankton.
| |
| Nati. Res. Inst., Univ. Md.Ches. Sci. 10(3&4):186-209.
| |
| Hiltunen, J.K. 1969. The benthic macrofauna of Lake Ontario. Great Lakes Fish. Comm. Tech. Rpt. No. 14:39-50.VI-2 science services division Hubbs, C.L. and K.F. Lagler. 1958. Fishes of the Great Lakes Region. Univ.Mich. Press, Ann Arbor, 213 p.Hynes, H.B.N. 1972. The ecology of running water. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 555 p.International Joint Commission (IJC). 1969. Pollution of Lake Erie, Lake Ontario and the International Section of the St. Lawrence River-Ill.
| |
| Report of the International Lake Erie Water Pollution Board and the International Lake Ontario-St.
| |
| Lawrence River Water Pollution Board.International Joint Commission (IJC). 1975. Cladophora in the Great Lakes, eds. Harvey Shear and Dennis E. Konasewich, Windsor, Ontario.Johnson, M.G. and R.O. Brinkhurst.
| |
| 1971a. Associations and species diversity in benthic macroinvertebrates of Bay of Quinte and Lake Ontario. J. Fish.Res. Bd. Can. 28:1683-1697.
| |
| Johnson, M.G. and R.O. Brinkhurst.
| |
| 1971b. Production of benthic macroinverte-brates of Bay of Quinte and Lake Ontario. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 28:1699-1714.Johnson, M.G. and D.H. Matheson.
| |
| 1968. Macroinvertebrate communities of the sediments of Hamilton Bay and adjacent Lake Ontario. Limnol. Oceanogr.13:99-111.
| |
| Jones, J.W. and H.B.N. Hynes. 1950. The age and growth of Gasterosteus acu-leatus, Pygosteus pungitius and Spinachia valgaris, as shown by.their otoliths.
| |
| J. Anim. Ecol., 19(l):59-73.
| |
| Judd, J.H. and D.T. Gemmel. 1971. Distibution of benthic macrofauna in the littoral zone of southeastern Lake Ontario. Midwest Benthological Soc.10th Annual Meeting, Contrib. 4 (State Univ. of N.Y. at Oswego). Lake Ontario Environ. Lab. Contrib. 3:9 p.Jude D.J. 1976. Entrainment of fish larvae and eggs on the Great Lakes with special reference to the D.C. Cook Nuclear Plant, southeastern Lake Michigan.
| |
| Proceedings 3rd Ann. Workshop on Entrainment and Impingement.
| |
| N.Y., N.Y. 4 Feb 1975.Jude, D.J., F.J. Tesar, J.A. Dorr III and J.T. Miller. 1975. Inshore Lake Michigan fish populations near the D.C. Cook Nuclear Power Plant, 1973.Great Lakes Res. Div., Univ. Mich., Spec. Rpt. No. 52:267.Kinney, W.L. 1972. The macrobenthos of Lake Ontario. Proc. 15th Conf. Great Lakes Res. 1972:53-79.
| |
| Lagler, K.F. 1956. Freshwater fishery biology. W.C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa. 421 p.Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers (LMS). 1975a. 1974 Nine Mile Point aquatic ecology studies. LMS Project Nos. 191-21, 22, 23. Prepared for NMPC and PASNY.VI-3 science services division Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers (LMS). 1975b. Oswego Steam Station -j Unit 6 316(a) Demonstration Submission.
| |
| Prepared for NMPC.Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers (LMS). 1976a. 1975 Nine Mile Point j aquatic ecology studies. LMS Project Nos. 191-31, 32, 33. Prepared for NMPC and PASNY.Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers (LMS). 1976b. James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant 316(a) Demonstration Submission, Permit No. NY0020109.
| |
| Prepard for PASNY.Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers (LMS). 1977a. 1976 Nine Mile Point aquatic ecology studies. LMS Project Nos. 191-40, 41, 42. Prepared for Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. and Power Authority of the State of New York.Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers (LMS). 1977b. James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant 316(a) Demonstration Submission, Permit No. NY0020109.
| |
| Prepared for Power Authority of the State of New York.Lewis, S.A. and D.D. Garriott.
| |
| 1970. A modified Folsom plankton splitter for analysis of meter net samples. Proc. 24th Ann. Conf. SE Assn. Game and Fish Comm. p. 332-337.Mansueti, R.J. 1956. Alewife herring eggs and larvae reared successfully in lab. Md, Tidewater News 13(l):2-3.
| |
| Mansueti, R.J. 1960. Selection of body site for scale samples in the white perch, Roccus americana.
| |
| Ches. Sci. 6(l):103-109.
| |
| Mansueti, R.J. 1961. Movements, reproduction, and mortality of the white perch, Roccus americana, in the Patuxent estuary, Maryland.
| |
| Ches. Sci.2(3-4):142-205.
| |
| Mantai, K.E. 1974. Some aspects of photosynthesis in Cladophora glomerata.
| |
| 3 J. Phycol. 10:288-291.
| |
| Marcy, B.C. Jr. 1975. Entrainment or organisms at power plants, with em-phasis on fishes -an overview.
| |
| Pages 89-106. In: Fisheries and Energy production:
| |
| a symposium (S.B. Saila, ed). Lexington Books, D.C. Health and Co., Lexington, MA.McKenzie, R.A. 1964. Smelt life history and fishery in the Miramichi River New Brunswick.
| |
| Fish. Res. Bd. Can. Bull. 144-77 p.McNaught, D.C. and M. Buzzard. 1973. Changes in zooplankton populations in Lake Ontario (1939-1972).
| |
| Proc. 16th Conf. Great Lakes Res. 1973:76-86.
| |
| McNaught, D.C., and M. Fenlon. 1972. The effects of thermal effluents upon secondary production.
| |
| Verh. Int. Verein. Limnol. 18:204-210.
| |
| Munawar, M. and A. Nauwerck.
| |
| 1971. The composition and horizontal distribu-tion of phytoplankton in Lake Ontario during the year 1970. Proc. 14th Conf. Great Lakes Res. 1971:69-78.
| |
| VI-4 science services division Murarka, I.P. 1976. An evaluation of environmental data relating to selected nuclear power plant sites. The Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Station Site. ANL/EIS-7 Div. of Environmental Impact Studies. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois.Nalewajko, C. 1966. Composition of the phytoplankton in surface waters of Lake Ontario. J. Fish. Res. Bd.. Can. 23:1715-1725.
| |
| Nalewajko, C. 1967. Phytoplankton distribution in Lake Ontario. Proc. 10th Conf. Great Lakes Res. 1967:63-69.
| |
| Neil, G.H. and G.E. Owen. 1964. Distribution, environmental requirements, and significance of Cladophora in the Great Lakes. Great Lakes Res. Div.Publ. No. 11:113-121.
| |
| Nelson, D.N. and R.A. Cole. 1975. The distribution and abundance of larval fishes along the western shore of Lake Erie at Monroe, Michigan.
| |
| Tech.Rpt. No. 324, Inst. Water Res., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, Mich.66 p.Neumann, G., and W.J. Pierson. 1966. Principals of physical oceanography.
| |
| Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.New York State Electric and Gas Co. (NYSEG). 1978. Environmental Report for New Haven Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2.Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NMPC). 1975. NMPC Nine Mile Point Unit 1.316(a) Demonstratin Submission, NPDES Permit NY 0001015.Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NMPC). 1976a. Application to the New York State Board on Electric Generating Siting and the Environment, Lake Erie Generating Stations.
| |
| Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., Syracuse, NY.Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NMPC). 1976b. NMPC, Oswego Unit 5, 316(a)demonstration submission NPDES Permit # 070 0X22 000632, NY (0003212).
| |
| Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NMPC). 1976c. NMPC, Oswego Unit 5. Intake Considerations.
| |
| NPDES Permit # 0700X22 000632, NY (0003212).
| |
| Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NMPC). 1976d. NMPC Oswego Steam Station Units 1-4. 316(a) Demonstration Submission, NPDES Permit # NY 0002186.Norden, C.R. 1967. Age, growth, and fecundity of the alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus (Wilson) in Lake Michigan.
| |
| Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.96(4):387-393.
| |
| Norden, C.R. 1968. Morphology and food habits of the larval alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus (Wilson) in Lake Michigan.
| |
| Proc. llth Conf. Great Lakes Res. Vol. 11:103-110.
| |
| Odum, E.P. 1971. Fundamentals of ecology. W.P. Sanders Co. Philadelphia, Pa. 574 p.science services division VI-5 O'Gorman, R. 1975. Distribution of fish fry in the nearshore waters of : western Lake Huron, May-June 1973. Admin. Rep. Grate Lakes Fish. Lab, U.S. Bur. Sport Fish. and Wildlife, Ann Arbor, Mich.Palmer, M.D., and J.B. Izatt. 1970. Lakeshore two-dimensional dispersion.
| |
| Proc. 13th Conf. Great Lakes Res. 1970(l):495-507.
| |
| Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY). 1971. Environmental report for James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant. Prepared for United States Atomic Energy Commission.
| |
| Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY). 1977. James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant 316(b) Demonstration Submission, Permit No. NY0020109.
| |
| Quirk, Lawler, and Matusky Engineers (QLM). 1972. Effect of circulating water system on Lake Ontario water temperature and aquatic biology. (Oswego Steam Station Unit 6). Prep. for Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.Quirk, Lawler, and Matusky Engineers (QLM). 1973a. Effect of circulating water systems on Lake Ontario water temperature and aquatic biology. 1972 ecological investigations of Lake Ontario at Nine Mile Point. Rpt. to Miagara Mohawk Power Corp.Quirk, Lawler, and Matusky Engineers (QLM). 1973b. The effects of impingement at Nine Mile Point on the fish populations of Lake Ontario. Prep. for Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Syracuse, New York.Quirk, Lawler, and Matusky (QLM). 1974. 1973 Nine Mile Point Aquatic Ecology Studies. A report prepared for Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Syracuse, New York and Power Authority of the State of New.York, New York, NY. i Radiation Management Corporation.
| |
| 1976. Radiation Management Corporation analytical and quality control procedures.
| |
| RMC, Philadelphia, Pa.Richer, W.E. 1971. Methods for assessment of fish production in freshwater International Biological Programme Handbook No. 3, Blackwell Scientific Publication, Oxford. 348 p.Rochester Gas and Electric (RGE). 1974. The Sterling power project (August 1973, revised January 1974), Rochester, NY.Rogers, D.E. 1962. Reproduction of threespine stickleback.
| |
| Univ. Wash.Fish. Res. Inst. Contr., 139:9-10.Round, F.E. 1965. The biology of the algae. Edward Arnold, Ltd., London.269 p.Rupp, R.S. 1965. Shore-spawning and survival of eggs of the American smelt.Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 94(2):160-168.
| |
| Ryder, R.A. 1972. The limnology and fishes of oligotrophic glacial lakes in North America (about 1800 A.D.). J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 29:617-628.
| |
| VI-6 science services division _7 4' Schelske, C.L., E.F. Stoermer, and L.E. Feldt. 1971. Nutrients, phytoplank-4 i ton productivity and species composition as influenced by upwelling in Lake Michigan.
| |
| Proc. 14th Conf. of Great Lakes Res. 1971:102-113.
| |
| Scott, W.B. and E.J. Crossman.
| |
| 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fish.Res. Bd. Can., Ottawa, Canada. 966 p.Sharma, R.K. and R.F. Freeman III. 1977. Survey of fish impingement at power plants in the United States. Vol. I -The Great Lakes. Argonne National Lab., ANL/ES-56, Vol. I.I Sheri, A.N. and G. Power. 1968. Reproduction of white perch, Roccus ameri-canus in the Bay of Quinte, Lake Ontario. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 25(10): 2225-2231.
| |
| Sheri,.A.M.
| |
| and G. Power. 1969. Fecundity of yellow perch, Perca flavescens 1- Mitchell, in the Bay of Quinte, Lake Ontario. Can. J. Zool. 47(M):55-58.
| |
| Smith, S.H. 1972a. Factors of ecologic succession in oligotrophic fish com-munities of the Laurention Great Lakes. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 29:717-730.
| |
| Smith, S.H. i972b. The future of salmonid communities in the Laurention Great Lakes. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 19:951-957.
| |
| Snedecor, G.W. and W.G. Cochran. 1967. Statistical methods. Iowa State Univ.Press, Ames. 593 p.Storr, J.F. 1973. Summary of studies to evaluate ecological effects from the introduction of a thermal discharge into Lake Ontario in the.area of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit One. Niagara Mohawk Power Corpora-tion.Storr, J.F. 1977. Lake Ontario fish tag report summary 1972-1976.
| |
| Prepared for Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.i-i Storr, J.F. and R.A. Sweeney. 1971. Development of a theoretical seasonal* growth response curve of Cladophora glomerata to temperature and photo-period. Proc. 14th Conf. on Great Lakes Res. 1971:119-127.
| |
| -Strickland, J.D.H. and T.R. Parsons. 1972. A practical handbook of seawater analysis.
| |
| Bull. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 167:310.* Sweers, H.E. 1969. Structure, dynamics and chemistry of Lake Ontario: inves-tigations based on monitor cruises in 1966 and 1967. Mar. Sci. Branch, Dept. of Energy, Mines and Resources, Ottawa, Canada. Manuscript Rpt.Ser. 10:227 p.*~ Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI). 1976. 316(b) demonstration Bailly Sta-tion Units 7 and 8. Rpt. for Northern Indiana Public Service Company, Hammond, Indiana.Instruments Incorporated (TI). 1977a. Final Report, 1975-76 Nearfield Study at Pomfret and Sheridan Sites, Lake Erie Generating Station. Prep.for NMPC, Syracuse, NY.sr l'" lI--7scienceoservices division Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI). 1977b. 316(b) Demonstration, Dunkirk Steam Station on Lake Erie near Dunkirk, New York. Prep. for NMPC, Syracuse, NY.Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI). 1977c. NMPC Dunkirk Steam Station Units 1-4. Intake Considerations, NPDES Permit No. 070 0X22 000457, NY (0002321).
| |
| Prep. for NMPC, Syracuse, NY.:1 Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI). 1977d. Dunkirk Steam Station Units 1-4, Intake Considerations.
| |
| A report prepared for NMPC, Syracuse, NY.Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI). 1978a. Nine Mile Point Aquatic Ecology Studies, 1977 Data Report. Report prepared for Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Syracuse, NY and the Power Authority of the State of New York, New York, NY.Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI). 1978b. 1977 Nine Mile Point Aquatic Ecology Studies. Report prepared for Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, I Syracuse, NY and the Power Authority of the State of New York, New York, NY.Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI). 1979. Nine Mile Point Aquatic Ecology Studies, 1978 Data Report. Report prepared for Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Syracuse, NY and the Power Authority of the State of New York, New York, NY.U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
| |
| 1979. Monthly bulletin of lake levels for the Great Lakes, Detroit, Michigan.
| |
| 2 U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.
| |
| 1973. Final Environmental Statement related to construction Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. Docket No. 50-40.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1976a. Methods for chemical analysis j of water and wastes. EPA-62/6-74-003a.
| |
| Environmental Research Center, Cincinnati, OH. 298 p.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1976b. Quality criteria for water.EPA-440/9-76-023, Washington, D.C.Vollenweider, R.A., M. Munawar, and P. Stadelmann.
| |
| 1974. A comparative re-view of phytoplankton and primary production in the Laurentian Great Lakes. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 31:739-762.
| |
| Weber, C.I. (ed). 1973. Biological field and laboratory methods for measuring the quality of surface waters and effluents.
| |
| Off. Res. and Dev., USEPA, EPA-670/4-73-001, Cincinnati, OH.Weiler, R.R. and V.K. Chawla. 1969. Dissolved mineral quality of Great Lakes waters. Proc. 12th Conf. Great Lakes Res. 1969:801-818.
| |
| Wetzel, R.G. 1975. Limnology.
| |
| W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, 743 p.VI-8 science services division VI-8 Wezernak, C.T., D.R. Lyzenga, and F.C. Polcyn. 1974. Cladophora Distribution in Lake Ontario (IFYGL), National Environmental Research Center, Office of Research and Development, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, Oregon, EPA-660/3-74-028, 76 p.Williams, R.W., J. Simmons, and J. Hillegas.
| |
| 1975. Species composition and distribution of fish larvae collected in the Nine Mile Point area of Lake Ontario. Proc. 18th Conf. Great Lakes Res.-Wolfert, D.R., W.D.N. Busch, and H.D. Van Meter. 1977. Seasonal abundance of fish in an inshore area of southcentral Lake Erie, 1974-75. Administra-tive Rpt. Great Lakes Fish. Lab., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sandusky Biological Station, Ohio. 16 p..1o 1..3 1*I.1--!.IJ.VI-9 science services division APPENDIX A PHYTOPLANKTON I. science services division Table A-I Taxonomic List of Phytoplankton Collected in Whole-Water Samples in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, April-December 1978 Ti J Cyanophyta Chroococcales A nellum sp.Tphanocapsa sp.ý-sp.Chroococcus linmetkius ococcus sp.eo.- ria anlnai omp osphaerl a stris Gomphospheeree anum Gmphoshaeria sp.Marssonlella sp.CHr3coccal s unid.Oscillatoriales a contorta a sp.sa 1atoria limnetica Oscill atoria SD.Oslltraes unid.Nostocal es Anabaena circinales Anabaena sp.T men flos-aquae anizh. enan 28.Cyanophyta unid.Chlorophyta Vol vocales Carteria sp.MT-r monas sp.Eudorina sp.P anorne sD.Vdinopera sp.Tovocaesunid.
| |
| Tetrasporal es Elakatothrix gelatinosa Elakatothrlx sp.M~eOVSTsp.haeridlum sp.Tetrasporales unid.Chi 0orococcales Actinastrum hantzschiitraodesmus convolutus Ankistrodesymus T Ankistrodesmus sp..ll1ra sp.Chiarocaccam sp.Chodatella ciliata CFoda-t-ea
| |
| !i tae hoda~tell
| |
| _uadFj~sjefa ChodaTell
| |
| _subFs~alsa Chodatella sp.sis longisima Coelastrum cambricum Coelastrum Sp.Truegenl a piculata a ni u~ -l C-rudgenia
| |
| _ rapediga Ce ala sp.UpTHYsaerium ehrenbrianun Dictyosphaeriun SD Dicyosphaeri um sp.Franceia druescherl rani sp.
| |
| radiata 9olenTlnla sp.Urs chneriella contorta Kirschneriella TuiiailF Kirschneriella obese Kirschneriella subsoli taria Kirschneriella sp.Mi cractiniun pualm Micractinium sp.0ocystis novae-semliae Paradoala multiseta Pedi aS-t-ruM-in biradituni Pediastrum bor anum Pedia-strun W..~Pediastrumsip'x Pediastrum tetras Padlastrun ap.Chlorophyta (Contd)Pseudochlorella sp.rgul ch datiio~j lstr ides u a lacustris r a ap.cenedesnus acuminatus Scenedasmus arcuatus Scenedesmus armatus Tcenedesmas Ica-udatus TE -s-us dentiu-atus Scenede-seus ec~o~rnI~s 3cenedesnus -internedius Scenedesnis sp Scenedesinus quadricauda Scenedesinus sp asp.Selenastrum sp.T Ip-rocysti schroeteri Sphaero tps p.'hi~datum Tetraedron aunidaum Tatrastram stauroqeni aeforne Tetrastrum sp.Traubaria etier Traubaria triappendiculata Traubaria sp.~i1 sp.Ve-s eas p.ZTohioccales unid.Ulotrichales Ulothrlx zonata UTO-thFrlxs.P Chaetop'rales Chetphrasp.
| |
| L sp.Oedagonial es Oedognium sp.
| |
| Zygnemataceae Muetasp.ra sp.Depsmidflaceae Closterim monlllferum Clseimsp.Cosmrium sp.Staurastrum longiradiatum Staurastrum paradoxun 5Earitrum tetracerum Staurastrum sp.ChlarapFyta unid.Euglenophyta Euglenal es Luleasp.Phacus sp.Xa Heterococcales Peroniella-sp.
| |
| Reterocaccales unid.Rhizochloridales Sti pitococcus sp.Chrysophyta Chrysonionadales Ch raau~i.5 j narsp.r i sp.a"ryn jvar enS hy -on sp.-eTa~ sph tonsurata Mallamonas sp.ra la Chrysamonadales unid.Rhizochrysidales sywon sp.izcrsis sp.Isochrysidales Isachrysldales unid.Monosigales Stelexomona dichotoma ChrysopytaunlT.
| |
| Baci 1 lariophyta-Centric Eupodiscales Actinocpy u nornanii Caac.di5 ss -custris c ~o aIa eaneghiniane syJ~eJ p.Me csus asiitrae Stepasira M and.li telpaosira sp.SWe atanesna potamus Skeletonensa asbsal sa Skeletanasna sp.Stephanodi scus astraea tep anod~iSCU as traaa var. mlauta Stephanod scus tanuis Stephanodiscus sD.Eupodiscales unid.Bacillariophyta-Pennate Fragilariales Asterlonel la formosa Diatoma tenue FraqilTarla ceucina I a crtonensi s Meri din circulara Syubdra SD.Ta Taaria flocculosa Tabsllaria Fp.FraTa-rFlales unid.Achnanthales Cocconeis sp.Rhoiienia curvata Naviculales~
| |
| N.0 asP Apoasp.sp.DP.SDP.Na iua sp.NavicuTaes unild.Bacillariales Nitzschia acicularis Nitzschia halIsatica Nitzs-chia aininoidee NitzschiR D a sp .SurfireM lala 0pJg salea Suriralla sp.Badciiariaplyta-Pennate unid.Rhodophyta-Flori deophyci dae Nemalionales Batrachospermm sp.Pyrrhophyta-Di nophyceae Gymnodiniales G Jnolj n1um fuscum Cyrmdini h e sp.Ceratium hirundlnella Peril-dsin-u acicalifre'rau P aridinm ý -tunense Pe-r-di-nlun, ggjem i n u Peridinius inconspicuum Py wp-- ta-Dinaphyceae unid.Cryptophyta Cryptomonadal es Chroomonas sp.Cryvtomonas arosa cryotoianas marssnii Cryptomonas ovata Cryptassonas sp.C sp.Rhodomonas lens ARhadasnnas ni~nuta, Rhadosasnas sp.Cryptomonales unid.Cryptophyta unid.Alga unid.A-1 science services division LJ Table A-2 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance.(Cells/mk) of Phytoplankton in Whole Water Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Cyanophyta APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPw 761.5 587.7 780.4 780.4 1002.6 894.5 3587.7 2321.4 2562.7 811.0 0.0 0.0 NMPP 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 777.4 777.4 42.9 42.9 2236.9 1069.8 378.8 378.8 FITZ 0.0 0.0 667.1 667.1 264.9 264.9 119.4 26.0 5070.7 102.3 217.9 191.3 NMPE 0.0 0.0 1841,6 1685.4 37.6 37.6 1109.2 513.3 1276.8 920.5 8746.9 87.7 CONTOUR MEAN 190.4 190.4 822.3 380.9 520.6 223.0 1214.8 827.4 2786.8 808.7 2335.9 2138.4 20 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 0.0 0.0 1418.5 780.9 821.4 385.4 326.1 326.1 1370.0 1276.6 240.7 37.1 0.0 0.0 2788.1 1689.4 2158.2 2158.2 0.0 0.0 7970.6 5034.5 3723.0 1713.5 0.0 0.0 640.4 640.4 1424.1 168.1 346.9 346.9 1003.5 657.4 1213.5 1213.5 11.8 11.8 0.0 0.0 91.9 91.9 0.0 0.0 13.4 13.4 19.9 19.9 3.0 3.0 1211.7 600.2 1123.9 439.4 168.3 97.2 2589.4 1816.5 1299.3 848.5 41.0 22.9 0.0 0.0 16.0 41.0 22.9.0.0 0.0 392.5 946.2 30.3 0.0 327.6 707.7 30.3 0.0 205.7 957.0 128.9 0.0 205.7 502.8 42.4 0.0 49.0 49.0 1731.5 356.1 0.0 0.0 1077.9 7.3 0.0 0.0 568.3 568.3 91.7 91.7 303.4 243.7 35.2 22.1 920.3 314.6 95.0 77.0 154.7 453.0 39.9 77.0 5.5 453.0 9.9 342.3 220.2 322.9 215.6 194.9 87.6 41# NMPE 50% 0.0 25% 0.0.1% 58.4 0.0 0.0 58.4 1282.6 10.1 0.0 U 9.0 C 0 S S C 0 S a.I a i 1282.6 10.1 0.0 106.9 0.0 310.0 134.9 418.4 1571.0 940.3 864.1 238.3 177.3 1149.7 418.4 1571.0 940.3 401.0 143.2 84.2 507.4 91.7 260.8 13.3 124.6 1922.6 174.8 15.7 91.7 260.8 13.3 124.6 917.0 174.8 15.7 303.4 284.5 616.5 16965.1 1466.3 624.2 488.0 243.7 258.5 618.5 15484.8 791.5 372.4 428.3 59.0 171.5 32.4 59.0'27.5 32.4 60 NMPw NMPP FITZ NMPE 0.0 0.0 289.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.0 11.0 667.5 31.6 31.6 134.9 CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL :EXP. MEAN4*MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 10.7 105.7 9'4.2 55.0 4" 0.0- 761.5 7.4 273.1 144.2 607.4 238.3 559.4 455.6 4885.9 4032.2 219.8 62.0 490.1 135.0 3880.4 3740.3 74.7 3.8 1166.3 908.8 1231.3 1074.9 1266.9 567.1 1249.1 587.1 0.0- 8746.9 3.8 3.0 7.2 607.2 717.4 662.3 243.5 323.3 196.0 521.6 170.3 765.8 256.7 643.7 152.1 0.0- 2158.2 663.0 437.5 325.8 232.0 494.4 243.1 0.0- 3587.7 3088.9 2004.0 2502.3 937.2 2795.6 1071.3 13.4-16965.1 0.0- 2788.1* STANDARD ERROR** MEANS ARE FOR SURFACE SAMPLES ONLY; CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ 4 40-FT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT VARIOUS LIGHT PENETRATION LEVELS
| |
| -I-'.Table A-2 (Page 2 of 2)Cyanophyta OCT NOV DEC DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPW 3196.7 NMPP 7333.8 FITZ 1316.3 NMPE 753.7 CONTOUR MEAN 3150.2 20 NMPW 5157.7 NMPP 4677.8 FITZ 2873.6 NMPE 5536.8 CONTOUR MEAN 4561.5 ,>~40 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 2434.9 1377.5 2035.3 0.0 120.7 1569.1 1119.7 355.8 1489.2 5043.5 1439.0 2572.3 4232.4 589.4 1169.4 1377.5 82.9 0..0 533.8 0.0 908.8 2258.9 1565.4 74.7 245.4 674.7 1996.8 442.0 354.5 276.0 767.3 411.2 431.0 201.4 1370.4 15065.0 2188.9 1570.0 1197.4 14532.5 2188.9 1570.0 40.7 1028.9 109.2 78.9 40.7 775.9 9.7 78.9 5048.6 3343.3 314.4 238.6 1996.8 442.0 190.1 276.0 563.6 234.7 925.8 0.0 44.3 234.7 925.8 0.0 907.7 252.2 3792.4 1473.4 907.7 252.2 2324.4 184.1 192.6 143.8 1796.9 527.8 145.6 143.8 652.5 527.8 CONTOUR MEAN 1461.9 1606.4 770.2 665.3 386.7 41# NMPE 50s 0.0 25X1248.5 1%4123.4 C q.0 T 1A 1473.4 1473.4 0.0 1324.0 926.1 169.4 1443.4 184.1 184.1 0.0 1324.0 926.1 169.4 1443.4 527.8 527.8 311.5 350.0 173.4 17.6 381.5 527.8 527.8 11.8 301.1 64.8 17.6 381.5 60 NMPW 1565.4 NMPP 330.7 FITZ 287.5 NMPE 739.6 CONTOUR MEAN 730.8 CONTROL MEAN** 2423.1 EXP. MEAN** 2529.1 MONTHLY MEAN 2476.1 MONTHLY RANGE 0.0-296.3 965.7 287.5 230.6 84.5 731.9 852.7 543.0 7333.8 1295.2 2898.8 2097.0 180.1 1793.7 895.1 266.9 77.8 553.8 224.0 410.3 120.4 0.0- 1796.9 0.0-15065.0
| |
| * STANDARD ERROR .** MEANS ARE FOR SURFACE SAMPLES ONLY; CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP& FITZ S 40-FT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT VARIOUS LIGHT PENETRATION LEVELS Table A-3 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance (Cells/m£)
| |
| of Phytoplankton in Whole Water Collections, Nine Mile point Vicinity, 1978 Chlorophyta APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 N1-Pw 378.8 152.9 3837.1 2015.8 1747.0 147.5 1116.5 522.8 1278.8 104.5 811.5 152.6 NMFP 136.5 19.5 1207.7 567.9 464.8 186.6 23.8 23.8 1707.9 109.8 59.7 5.2 FITZ 133.7 20.1 1007.7 68.3 800.4 231.7 454.2 90.8 1398.9 40.8 94.8 1.8 NMPE 77.5 19.0 1000.2 167.9 1187.9 159.4 347.8 17.2 1538.1 837.3 657.1 293.8 CONTOUR MEAN 20 NMPW NMPP FITZ NrE CONTOUR MEAN 40 NmPW NMPP FITZ NPE CONTOUR MEAN 181.6 67.1 1763.2 693.0 1050.0 275.3 485.6 229.4 1480.9 92.4 405.8 192.4 125.1 67.9 75.5 29.9 53.5 589.8 58.4 2405.9 30.0 1557.0 26.9 548.4 210.1 511.7 153.5 64.5 1013.8 2067.5 1298.2 1440.4 212.4 467.2 41.6 300.6 1036.6 236.2 448.2 99.0 240.9 33.7 240.0 17.7 478.1 2789.2 1216.4 1345.3 338.5 358.2 387.7 1027.5 588.6 878.0 303.1 396.9 192.0 125.2 133.8 188.0 74.6 19.6 1275o3 443.1 1455.0 222.6 455.0 206.7 1457.2 483.3 541.6 126.9 25.8 27.6 13.2 284.0 10.4 820.8 46.5 338.9 167.6 958.0 123.9 525.5 421.5 238.3 205.4 53.6 1347.2 791.7 74.9 490.8 66.7 496.6 6.0 119.0 116.1 31.5 33.4 15.8 796.2 277.2 59.8 21.6 3210.2 590.9 163.9 134.4 102.1 33.2 117.6 4.7 662.4 77.2 162.5 36.0 501.4 192.0 502.2 75.7 67.9 24.0 313.9 176.8 646.1 170.6 220.5 76.3 1462.6 608.4 307.4 112.7 41# NMPE 507 102.1 25% 28.0 IX 36.5 S 0 5.0 S 0 4 0 0 S a.5.U 33.2 187.3 4.0 77.2 21.9 199.0 40.7 85.1 3.5 140.6 31.8 38.1 15.9 88.4 59.0 16.8 42.7 314.3 147.1 627.9 254.6 63.6 262.9 14.0 284.1 255.0 54.2 162.5 181.6 186.3 285.6 694.1 66.1 269.7 36.0 501.4 64.8 559.8 84.1 689.5 192.0 382.0 182.0 704.4 706.9 389.9 1042.8 217.6 90.4 357.9 322.6 408.1 252.6 153.0 208.6 57.6 195.7 121.3 26.0 135.8 7.5 60 Nl'Pw NI1PP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MEAN**MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 134.7 33.1 55.0 28.5 52.0 150.3 80.2 402.8 12.1 411.9 4.4 1048.6 122.1 181.6 19.5 34.0 1731.8 1218.7 1120.7 1327.8 62.8 24.7 112.8 41.0 80.7 15.3 96.7 21.6 25.8- 378.8 88.0 21.0 503.4 191.6 328.9 131.6 1349.7 134.2 284.1 54.0 818.8 901.4 8&0.1 445.6 295.3 258.4 927.2 900.0 913.6 201.6 199.1 136.9 467.4 277.6 372.5 137.7 83.8 81.7 1193.5 1681.7 1437.6 162.1 304.2 178.0 437.3 332.1 384.7 59.7-89.5 94.2 64.2 878.0 33.4- 3837.1 147.1- 2067.5 23.8- 1116.5 478.1- 3210.2 I
| |
| * STANDARD ERRO I ** MEANS ARE FOR NMPW & NMPE,# 40-FT SAMPLES R SURFACE SAMPLES ONLY; CONTROL REPRESENTS EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ COLLECTED AT VARIOUS LIGHT PENETRATION LEVELS.- -s ..
| |
| Table A-3 (Page 2 of 2)Chlorophyta OCT NOV DEC DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPW 1769.5 N.iPP 584.6 FITZ 261.0 NMPE 564.8 1610.2 141.5 105.5 350.4 612.9 988.1 409.3 357.8 255.3 582.0 30.4 195.1 224.9 209.3 407.5 151.1 3.9 82.0 155. z 8.1 CONTOUR MEAN 795.0 333.2 592.0 143.1 248.2 55.4 20 NMIPW 263.6 NMPP 407.0 FITZ 795.2 NiPE 1323.5 10.4 40.2 439.2 918.0 842.3 1277.3 478.8 377.2 626.1 976.0 152.6 112.1 525.8 92.9 150.0 385.4 288.7 0.8 41.8 22.4 U, CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 697.3 237.0 743.9 203.9 288.5 101.3 316.1 887.8 1022.3 547.6 118.0 88.0 355.7 84.4 593.8 690.0 473.0 980.3 432.3 49.7 269.1 269.9 249.8 247.8 315.3 154.9 11.0 97.1 25.4 29.7 693.5 160.6 684.3 108.2 241.9. 33.0 p a p S S S 41# NMPE SOX 547.6 25% 421.3.ix 811.1 60 NMPW 648.8 NMPP 255.2 FITZ 450.9 NMPE 486.4 CONTOUR MEAN 460.3 CONTROL MEAN** 740.0 EXP. MEAN** 583.0 MONTHLY MEAN 661.5 MONTHLY RANGE 255.2- 1 84.4 73.4 413.7 235.0 136.3 6.9 153.4 980.3 980.3 1888.6 752.4 493.2 315.7 1660.5 269.9 269.9 1225.6 9.9 180.3 315.7 319.2 154.9 154.9 165.9 197.7 219.2 409.8 214.0 29.7 29.7 21.6 91.7 1.9 88.8 116.1 80.8 805.5 298.8 .260.2 50.1 186.5 102.7 104.8 1769.5 772.1 640.7 706.4 147.8 116.8 92.5 263.0 256.5 259.7 92.9-45.6 40.4 29.5 525.8 315.7- 1888.6* STANDARD ERROR** MEANS ARE FOR SURFACE SAMPLES ONLY; CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS HMPP & FITZ* 40-FT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT VARIOUS LIGHT PENETRATION LEVELS Table A-4 (Page I of 2)Abundance (Cells/mi) of Phytoplankton in Whole Water Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Bacillariophyta-Centric APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPw 2370.8 129.2 4381.0 1147.9 914.9 93.1 330.6 259.2 40.3 4.6 175.4 23,5 NMPP 398.1 18.0 1548.1 221.3 672.1 79.7 82.9 15.1 89.4 50.7 0.0 0.0 FITZ 736.8 12.5 116.7.3 44i5 544.1 72.7 23.4 23.4 14.1 3.2 0.0 0.0 NMPE 501.8 84.1 450.9 60.2 822.7 135.3 149.2 89.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 CONTOUR MEAN 1001.9 461J8 1886.8 861.9 738.5 81.9 146.5 66.5 35.9 19.7 43.9 43.9 20 NMPw 1098.7 187.1 NMPP 179.2 10.2 FITZ 651.1 237.7 NMPE 357.5 49.7 1371.7 1500.8 1729.6 484.9 685.6 184.3 35.3 68.6 970.3 1246.7 1213.4 815.0 96.3 622:.2 501.6 98.1 12.7 7.8 40.3 0.0 1.4 7.8 8.3 0.0 0%CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPw NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 571.6 200.8 1271.7 272.5 1061.4 102.6 15.2 8.8 28.0 15.8 13.0 51.3 27.0 5.3 19.7 0.0 0.0 22.2 15.8 13.0 51.3 8.7 5.3 19.7 0.0 0.0 127.3 0.0 134.8 49.2 139.8 146.9 568.1 469.3 127.3 0.0 21.5 49.2 0.9 43.4 110.3 13.2 533.2 940.9 60.9 156.9 88.3 391.3 68.4 378.5 6.9 204.6 0.9 129.8 82.7 151.4 33.3 13.0 37-. 4 18.7 144.0 51.7 21.4 5.5 86.6 36.8 77.8 32.4 38.6 38.6 90.0 63.9 76.7 76.7 37.1 37.1 60.6 13.4 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 331.0 110.2 423.0 200.5 276.0 64.7 63.0 27.9 6.3 4.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 14.1 41# NMPE 50%25X 1X 469.3 291.3 272.3 S a I.a 0 S 0 a a 0 S 0.S i UK:: 13.2 83.6 60.6 128.1 49.4 96.9 65.2 238.6 139.3 233.8 135.4 120.6 41.2 74.1 46.2 421.7 4.3 168.3 64.6 281.6 31.8 240.9 11.9 272.6 27.8 182.1 21.2 675.0 421.7 49.7 127.2 128.9 39.0 101.7 142.1 51.7 77.4 102.6 36.8 38.5 35.3 6U NMPW 376.3 NMPP 198.8 FITZ 203.0 NNPE 231.6 CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 252.4 41.9 92.8 21.6 342.7 112.4 14.8 8.5 29.1 7.5 14.3 2.4 0.0 0.0 14.5 5.9 74.5 40.4 45.0 16.4 59.8 21.4 0.0- 330.6 36.1 22.1 66.5 7.5 33.0 12.1 9.1 25.0 7.5 12.6 0.0 122.7 16.2 9.3 37.1 0.0 103.0 16.2 2.2 28.7 693.2 385.3 539.2 260.4 84.0 138.0 948.5 511.4 888.7 253.2 918.6 275.8 41.2- 4381.0 620.0 114.0 589.3 151.7 604.6 91.8 129.8- 1246.7 21.1 7.2 30.1 10.9 25.6 6.4 0.0- 89.4 54.6 22.6 55.0 20.4 54.8 14.7 0.0- 175.4 139.8- 2370.8* STANDARD ERROR* MEANS ARE FOR SURFACE SAMPLES ONLY; CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & N1PE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ 40-FT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT VARIOUS LIGHT PENETRATION LEVELS Table A-4 (Page 2 of 2)Bacillariophyta-Centric OCT DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN 10 NMPW 0.0 NMiPP 9.8 FITZ 4.5 NMPE 5.3 NOV S.E.* MEAN S.E.DEC MEAN S.E.0.0 9.8 4.5 5.3 178.8 83.2 236.8 361.4 178.8 41.1 236.8 233.0 278.8 159.0 260.5 423.8 159.9 8.5 169.7 299.7 CONTOUR MEAN 20 NMPW NM3P FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 40 N1PW NMPP FITZ NOMPE CONTOUR MEAN 4.9 2.0 215.1 58.2 280.5 54.6 0.0. 0.0 180.5 0.0 0.0 19.7 31.2 23.3 1529.9 0.0 0.0 428.2 180.5 19.7 182.8 61.2 Z77.7 191.3 Z79.9 489.6 169.3 59.2 8.5 18.7 7.8 7.8 539.6 340.6 309.6 63.4 0.0 0.0 547.6 0.0 0.0 215.7 0.0 0.0 836.0 28.3 11.2 628.1 478.4 133.5 305.8 36.1 316.6 247.4 498.4 781.0 16.6 10.5 2.5 206.5~.1 7.1 7.1 556.8 128.9 460.9 119.1 41# NMPE 50 28.3 11.2 628.1 25% 2.7 2.7 628.1 1% 0.0 0.0 498.1 36.1 36.1 238.6 0.0 239.8 399.9 21.7 781.0 781.0 186.5 291.4 178.2 159.8 211.2 206.5 206.5 60.0 34.9 8.1 112.8 45.7 S 2.S 0 S S 0 5.S S a.S 0 60 NMPW NMPP FITZ NH1PE CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MEAN**MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.6 5.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 408.2 399.9 21.7 1.4 1.4 207.5 113.6 210.1 29.1 4.2 6.4 5.3 0.0-3.5 3.8 2.5 31.2 293.3 466.2 379.7 82.9 176.1 96.7.383.8 246.8 315.3 159.0-64.9 39.6 40.7 781.0 0.0- 1529.9 STANDARD ERROR* MEANS ARE FOR SURFACE SAMPLES ONLY; CONTROL REPRESENTS NMP4 & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ 4 40-FT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT VARIOUS LIGHT PENETRATION LEVELS Table A-5 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance (Cells/mt) of Phytoplankton in Whole Water Collections, Nine.Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Bacillariophyta-Pennate APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NHPW 706.0 110.7 .5773.0 354.9 434.9 67.3 37.3 11.3 16.4 5.2 13.1 0.7 NMPP 192.5 84.9 1648.5 24.0 688.3 350.8 1.8 1.8 19.3 19.3 2.4 2.4 FITZ 50.7 16.1 1243.9 115.2 487.0 99.0 11.4 6.7 4.5 4.5 9.3 9.3 NIPE 103.1 103.1 1260.5 294.6 793.7 480.1 23.3 8.0 102.8 83.9 0.0 0.0 CONTOUR MEAN 263.0 20 NMPW 101.5 NMPP 46.0 FITZ 13.3 NMPE 12.6 150.5 2481.4 1101.2 601.0 84.3 18.4 7.7 35.8 22.6 6.2 3.0 57.2 1530.3 21.9 2383.8 0.3 1543.6 8.1 402.2 972.7 815.4 468.1 102.1 1180.7 797.6 424.8 1659.3 238.2 157.5 148.8 859.1 0o CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPw NWPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 43.4 20.9 1465.0 406.6 1015.6 264.3 16.2 4.9 45.9 45.9 19.2 19.2 20.3 20.3 25.4 6.9 4.9 4.9 38.8 20.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 452.4 15.6 0.2 23.7 20.8 20.8 6.5 6.4 6.4 165.9 10.7 4.6 162.1 103.2 73.6 8.7 6.5 36.6 3.8 0.1 855.4 1.4 1.4 1290.2 26.6 5.5 91.8 88.5 77.0 201.4 258.5 21.8 8.8 2.3 401.3 604.5 275.2 1291.2 133.9 239.0 184.4 51.8 0.0 88.8 162.8 0.0 0.0 88.8 162.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 170.0 212.1 0.0 0.0 161.5 22.1 30.1 20.3 609.7 282.6 643.0 226.4 10.9 9.4 62.9 39.3 48.0 41.0 7.9 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.6 41# NMPE 50 88.5 77.0 25Z 44.2 36.7 1% 16.1 7.3 391.3 204.9 507.3 95.0 73.5 102.2 673.4 1812.5 413.7 p a S 0 S 472.6 424.6 162.3 272.6 283.2 264.1 72.8 0.0 12.4 56848 0.0 0.7 24.9 60 NMPW 0.0 0.0 .224.2 NMPP 11.6 11.6 247.4 FITZ 4.9 4.9 46.0 NWPE 33.7 30.1 107.2 56.7 739.5 73.6 691.5 20.5 838.0 52.0 1235.6 CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MEAN*9 MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 12.5 7.4 156.2 47.9 926.2 107.9 3.9 3.9 5.4 5.4 8.3 8.3 11.7 11.7 7.3 1.7 14.7 4.3.16.4 6.1 15.5 3.6 0.0- 568.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 8.0 13.0 13.0 3.1 3.1 0.0 0.0 8.0 3.8 163.8 38.3 8.1 25.0 104.6 20.9 8.1 25.0 58.8 35.5 131.1 43.4 87.3 0.0-83.5 22.2 43.3 706.0 1294.2 1061.9 1178.1 666.2 300.2 354.2 967.0 625.9 796.4 157.4 77.0 95.4 17.7 41.0 29.3 0.0-12.4 19.9 11.7 162.6 105.3 32.3 68.8 0.0-55.4 20.2 30.0 452.4 46.0- 5773.0 275.2- 1812.5 STANDARD ERROR** MEANS ARE FOR SURFACE SAMPLES ONLY; CONTROL REPRESENTS NPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ 4 40-FT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT VARIOUS LIGHT PENETRATION LEVELS.............
| |
| LIZ- ~zzzn: LIZ UIZ LIZ IZ L2 L22 .~Table A-5. (Page 2 of 2)Bacillariophyta-Pennate OCT NOV DEC DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPW 4.3 1.4 21.7 21.7 108.1 5.4 NMPP 103.5 62.3 233.3 238.3 184.2 25.3 FITZ 123.2 27.6 52.9 29.3 194.2 3.6 NMPE 134.4 132.2 15.6 15.6 302.3 140.5 CONTOUR MEAN 20 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 91.3 29.7 82.1 52.7 197.2 40.0 156.3 166.7 179.1 147.6 156.3 152.9 102.2 134.5 21.6 0.0 42.1 210.0 21.6 177.2 0.0 143.9 42.1 199.2 6.1 269.7 65.4 5.2 165.2 188.1 162.4 6.8 68.4 48.0 197.5 26.6'.4.0 NMPW 32.9 NMPP 64.0 FITZ 450.8 NMPE 682.0 32.9 11.4 245.9 668.2 0.0 276.2 0.0 136.7 0.0 111.8 0.0 136.7 417.3 386.9 133.0 318.9 124.8 323.9 31.8 16.5 CONTOUR MEAN 41# NMPE 307.4 156.9 103.2 66.1 314.0 63.7 50 682.0 25X 84.5 1X 68.0 p 0 i.0 S U S 5.S S A.S S 0 668.2 83.9 40.5 267.5 118.4 28.0 378.4 136.7 136.7 18.4 260.8 22.3 357.8 0.0 136.7 136.7 18.4 260.8 22.3 357.8 0.0 318.9 318.9 126.8 88.1 138.1 90.8 253.6 16.5 16.5 93.0 27.7 37.2 69.2 105.7 60 NMPW 591.2 NMPP 166.5 FITZ 116.4 NMPE 530.8 CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL EXP. MEAN4*MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 351.2 122.2 284.9 95.7 171.3 .42.2 228.1 52.6 4.3- 682.0 160.2 88.4 142.6 38.7 83.3 123.7 103.5 0.0-37.0 50.7 30.7 357.8 241.9 183.8 212.8 88.1-39.4 31.8 25.6 417.3* STANDARD ERROR* MEANS ARE FOR SURFACE SAMPLES ONLY; CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ# 40-FT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT VARIOUS LIGHT PENETRATION LEVELS Table A-6 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance (Cells/mk) of Phytoplankton in Whole Water Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Cryptophyta APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPN 200.5 37.6 651.1 246.3 299.7 35.6 207.6 122.0 201.5 42.5 64.9 9.7 NMPP 176.4 37.7 288.3 7.7 164.1 24.4 262.0 95.5 160.Z 24.8 36.7 C0.5 FITZ 195.9 53.9 252.2 75.2 71.1 58.7 149.2 22.1 459.8 48.0 92.0 71.6 NriPE 254.7 4.1 334.7 96.0 254.2 44.4 579.3 314.5 601.7 118.1 190.2 122.7 CONTOUR MEAN 206.9 16.8 381.6 91.4 197.3 50.6 299.6 96.1 355.8 105.4 96.0 33.4 20 NMPw 240.2 NiPP 69.8 FITZ 139.5 NMPE 130.5 122.9 24.9 58.1 0.3 622.4 225.8 210.9 156.2 152.3 9.1 123.2 51.9 271.2 175.5 190.3 192.3 1.3 141.3 14.8 71.4 43.8 362.3 8.4 103.9 6.3 2.9 314.3 1.8 202.0 391.1 510.6 561.8 178.1 114.0 69.4 413.0 93.0 140.9 64.9 147.1 17.3 20.9 0.2 100.3~3,.H 0 CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPw NXPP FITZ NMPE 145.0 35.3 303.8 107.2 207.3 21.6 169.7 65.8 416.4 79.9 111.5 19.7 138.6 128.1 217.6 297.5 34.4 396.2 5.1 439.2 70.0 48.7 77.0 172.4 13.5 99.4 74.6 302.8 3.2 390.1 7.2 325.5 12.0 106.1 89.5 21.0 53.4 183.8 122.2 188.3 5.4 58.4 84.0 20.6 284.9 452.5 532.7 347.9 20.0 86.2 222.0 80.3 0.0 85.2 20.7 185.1 0.0 7.1 20.7 74.6 CONTOUR MEAN 195.5 39.4 264.1 92.6 279.4 62.8 136.9- 31.7 404.5 55.0 72.8 41.6 S a S a 0 S 0 5.S S 0.S 8~41# NMPE 50X 297.5 25% 161.9 IX 118.6 60 NMPw 172.9 NmPP 211.5 FITZ 70.6 WiPE 172.8 77.0 12.8 38.3 41.4 58.6 45.8 51.4 280.2 76.2 326.6 188.9 245.2 51.1 162.5 43.0 9.1 113.9 56.7 23.8 14.8 15.1 290.8 309.8 364.9 335.6 232.5 303.0 429.1 211.2 10.1 113.5 131.5 85.4 33.5 8.0 188.3 262.3 283.0 167.5 220.8 79.7 290.8 20.6 59.5 190.6 23.2 15.4 20.2 141.3 347.9 461.1 698.1 305.5 685.1 477.2 424.6 80.3 115.9 342.1 127.8 363.3 163.7 33.6 96.4 31.9 9.1 96.3 164.6 68.6 91.5 77.3 7.9 9.1 2.4 26.4 60.8 56.9 CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL r.EAN**EXP. MEAN**MONTHLY NEAN MONTHLY RAKGE 157.0 30.2 161.9 40.8 325.1 40.8 189.7 44.5 473.1 79.3 105.2 20.7 201.0 151.2 176.1 20.8 335.6 20.9 220.2 15.6 277.9 72.7 275.9 44.8 228.7 43.8 252.3;l 71.1-35.0 35.5 24.8 429.1 216.5 181.4 199.0 57.5 366.2 34.8 458.6 32.8 412.4 53.8 52.4 38.2 108.5 84.2 96.4 0.0-22.5 17.2 14.0 190.2 69.8- 297.5 48.7- 651.53.4- 579.3 160.Z- 698.1* STANDARD ERROR M MEANS ARE FOR SURFACE SAMPLES ONLY; CONTROL REPRESENTS
| |
| 'NMPW & NMPEb EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ# 40-FT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT VARIOUS LIGHT. PENETRATION LEVELS 1~~
| |
| 11'Q 1.i!1I--~ --.- -Table A-6 (Page 2 of 2)Cryp tophyta OCT NOV DEC DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPW 343.9 84.4 1489.4 550.8 67.5 54.1 NIMPP 311.7 130.3 2478.0 878.4 44.0 9.3 FITZ 335.7 27.3 770.5 162.4 76.5 36.1 HMPE 400.4 120.9 1232.7 331.6 244.8 116.9 CONTOUR MEAN 20 NMFW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPW N1PP FITZ.NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 347.9 18.8 1492.7 360.5 108.2 46.1 492.8 340.5 399.8 839.6 197.4 130.1 217.4 337.2 2573.5 1757.2 2450.5 2314.2 475.7 1025.0 664.4 438.4 186.1 68.5 75.5 203.2.98.0 23.5 18.6 33.5 518.2 111.6 2Z73.8 160.2 133.3 35.6 H H 366.6 461.6 496.7 439.8 146.4 184.8 151.5 143.5 928.0 1378.1 1916.6 3314.9 374.3 453.5 570.9 592.0 103.6 72.2 244.9 133.0 14.1 14.7 31.3 43.5 441.2 27.5 1884.4 517.9 138.4 37.6 U 0 i S 0 2 41# NMPE 60 NMPW NMPP FITZ NWPE 5OX 439.8 25Z 283.4 1% 245.0 498.8 143.9 276.2 234.4 143.5 53.3 14.9 176.8 69.4 76.4 223.6 3314.9 3314.9 1744.5 2839.4 1779.7 1665.8 3289.6 592.0 592.0 1017.9 972.1 796.4 649.4 204.9 133.0 133.0 136.5 134.2 129.4 81.8 174.9 43.5 43.5 40.0 28.9 10.3 18.4 6.7 CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL HEAN**EXP. MEAN**MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 288.3 75.4 2393.6 398.8 130.1 19.0 452.1 345.8 398.9 143.9-63.1 39.2 38.4 839.6 2247.7 328.2 155.9 1774.5 195.9 99.1 2011.1 194.5 127.5 770.5- 3314.9 44.0-20.3 22.5 16.3 244.9* STANDARD ERROR** MEANS ARE FOR SURFACE SAMPLES ONLY;. CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ* 40-FT SAMPLES COLLECTED AT VARIOUS LIGHT PENETRATION LEVELS Table A-7 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance (Cells/m£)
| |
| of Phytoplankton in Whole Water Collection, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Total Phytoplankton Depth Contour (ft)Apr Transect Mean S.E.*may Jun Jul Au4 Sep 10 20 i.S S 0 40 N4PW NNPP FITZ NMPE Contour mean NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE Contour mean NMPW NMP FITZ NI9E Contour mean NIUE-501-25%-1%-ww NMPP FITZ NtrPE Contour mean 4526.6 862.3 976.0 98.8 1214.8 68.7 1013.5 186.5 1932.7 866.2 1836.5 685.3 370.6 107.7 918.9 304.2 551.6 60.3 919.4 326.3 369.7 78.6 339.4 41.3 983.8 188.6 1039.9 12.3 683.2 190.2 1039.9 12.3 540.3 126.5 516.5 175.6 755.6 99.6 490.7 98.5 356.6 174.2 514.0 165.4 529.2 83.0 1325.9 485.3 706.4 124.6 1016.'1 254.9 339.4- 4526.6 Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E.15979.3 1205.9 4943.2 1067.8 5364.9 1357.8 4223.4 1081.1 1098.1 128.4 4727.3 758.3 3477.1 1141.8 485.8 128.9 4456.0 881.0 482.1 396.2 4620.2 238.9 2519.9 291.5 792.6 84.1 7041.2 5.5 464.5 294.3 5044.4 1018.8 3600.6 670.5 2285.3 339.7 3787.1 1906.9 9664.0 506.7 7592.8 2797.0 3635.2 498.4 2232.2 1115.8 4876.9 734.6 2927.2 2250.4 5640.4 2843.8 5043.1 1490.8 1552.5 546.0 2078.1 1815.3 1582.1 326.9 9707.1 3101.9 6948.1 3365.1 380.3 13.7 11982.7 5862.8 4796.7 1869.5 5766.6 222.8 5979.2 859.8 1234.2 427.6 2778.0 1136.2 1786.1 1304.3 1668.6 128.2 4807.5 1027.0 223.3 4.4 2312.8 1765.7 783.5 251.3 5695.7 1641.1 5694.5 488.5 847.6 323.3 4787.9 2402.7 2237.1 880.2 2526.9 571.4 3460.2 959.2 830.6 550.6 3402.7 438.7 222.1 4.1 4504.0 215.5 4892.9 1075.9 492.2 96.4 2801.6 1052.0 937.4' 455.5 285.2 7.9 2494.6 502.8 443.4 264.7 5569.7 360.5 598.5 391.8 693.2 4.7 3726.4 353.4 662.4 150.6 1168.6 512.1 1306.9 398.1 2002.3 965.9 3643.5 493.4 607.1 88.1 3235.7 910.0 766.2 232.0 2592.2 1051.6 2737.4 1352.6 662.4 150.6 1168.6 512.1 388.8 242.6 538.7 91.2 4624.7 1727.2 868.1 275.1 1390.2 841.3 315.8 24.3 1356.2 230.7 3746.9 1318.8 1450.7 166.6 2026.9 1150.0 459.8 166.5 958.5 81.2 3967.1 1764.9 625i5 67.4 19106.5 16357.2 809.2 49.j 904.8 82.7 2825.9 454.4 2903.9 1126.2 3528.4 1978.5 1251.0 224.9 846.3 236.7 2559.7 236.8 351.6 194.6 2930.1 0.4 4254.0 3981.6 593.9 199.5 5453.6 1126.4 678.1. 178.3 2355.1 1559.7 360.7 83.2 825.9 80.6 3701.6 659.0 1139.8 592.4 6980.0 4049.3 1668.7 880.7 4138.2 1825.3 4375.2 272.0 1527.8 594.3 4804.3 2073.4 1978.3 1109.8 3920.2 1119.3 3962.2 620.8 885.5 306.3 5136.0 1115.1 1821.3 612.6 4029.2 1034.5 4168.7 331.7 1206.7 333.4 4970.1 1138.0 1899.8 612.6 285.2-15979.3 2494.6- 6948.1 223.3- 5364.9 1168.F-19106.5 222.1- 9664.0 60 Control mean**Experimental mean" Monthly mean Monthly range Standard error."Means are for surface samples only, control represents NMPW and NME, experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.*"40-ft samples collected at various light penetration levels.ffl j~ _ -
| |
| Table A-7 (Page 2 of 2)Total Phytoplankton Oct Nov Dec Depth Contour (ft) Transect Mean S.E.* Mean S.E. Mean S.E.10 Im 5401.9 1650.5 4364.7 2711.0 1333.3 183.8 NMhPP 8366;0 1886.6 4457.7 319.9 1019.7 428.1 FITZ 2090.8 1014.6 1835.8 541.5 1989.7 1176.2 NMPE 1986.1 327.1 2243.5 109.2 1403.9 428.0 Contour Mean 4461.2 1524.2 3225.4 689.9 1436.7 202.4 20 WI2W 6106.3 5052.9 4988.3- 2458.1 1474.3 486.3 NMPP 5592.1 1502.1 18273.9 16635.3 1687.6 922.0 FITZ 4288.1 3363.5 6690.2 2865.2 1119.7 150.8 NMPE 7847.5 5353.2 4899.5 1311.0 1559.7 337.7 Contour Mean 5958.5 736.8 8713.0 3213.5 1460.3 121.7 40 NPW 3155.3 1461.9 3016.5 2232.2 1427.7 91.4 iKMPp 2817.2 1635.4 2812.2 901.5 1212.2 293.2 FITZ 4037-5 803.6 7058.8 2891.2 3164.6 688.1?0NE 1716.3 714.9 6710.7 712.3 2049.5 617.9 Contour"Mean 2931.6 479.9 4899.5 1149.1 1963.5 437.9 41"* NMPE-50% 1716.3 714.9 6710.7 712.3 2049.5 617.9-25% 2040.4 1116.7 6710.7 712.3 2049.5 617.9-1% 5251.0 2620.9 4168.0 67.7 1047.7 233.4 60 W" 3304.2 1891.1 5250.2 2573A4 1163.8 372.7 NMPP 938.2 13.4 3629.5 1640.6 1032.0 61.9 FITZ 1137.7 196.7 2992.8 1637.6 814.1 145.4 NMPE 2036.3 1452.4 6503.3 1392.9 1396.2 399.1 Contour Mean 1854.1 539.1 4594.0 794.3 1101.5 121.8 O Control mean*** 3944.2 796.4 4747.1 545.9 1476.1 91.4* Experimental mean*** 3658.5 880.1 5968.9 1874.8 1505.0 273.7 M Monthly mean 3801.3 574.4 5358.0 956.2 1490.5 139.4 M Monthly range 938.2- 8366.0 1835.8- 18273.9 814.1- 3164.6*1 *Standard error.*40-ft samples collected at various light penetration levels.*Means are for surface samples only; control represents NMPW and NMPE, experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.S a.0m (A Table A-8 (Page 1 of 2).Chlorophyll a Concentration (pg/li) in Whole Water Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Depth Contour (ft)Apr may Jun Jul Auq Sep Transect Mean S.E.* Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E. mean S.E.NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE Contour Mnean 6.45 0.12 14.77 0.41 12.32 1.21 3.53 0.69 7.32 0.54 0.51 0.14 2.82 0.10 11.99 0.03 8.79 0.30 1.44 0.16 6.09 0.06 0.86 0.06 3.48 0.00 2.95 0.00 10.41 2.51 2.01 0.51 5.82 0.96 0.72 0.08 5.37 2.21 6.76 0.19 11.57 4.25 4.36 0.52 3.58 0.80 1.20 0.03 4.53 -0.84 9.12 2.64 10.77 0.77 2.84 0.67 5.70 0.78 0.82 0.14 20 0 p S q S NMPW 4.01 1.01 13.57 1.61 6.57 0.4"3 3.37 0.17 6.86 0.83 0.45 0.08 NMPP 2.76 0.12 12.18 1.82 14.07 0.88 1.26 0.30 4.49 0.70 0.64 0.11 FITZ 2.82 0.06 12.02 2.30 11.83 1.15 1.74 0.19 4.86 0.86 0.62 0.03 NMPE 2.68 0.32 8.28 0.70 16.00 2.81 2.27 0.03 4.03 1.15 1.04 0.24 Contour mean 3.07 0.32 11.51 1.31 12.12 2.04 2.16 0.45 5.06 0.62 0.69 0.12 NwI 2.46 0.06 14.85 8.92 7.53 1.18 2.70 0.14 6.38 0.19 0.56 0.03 NMPP 2.44 0.12 15.51 0.83 8.84 0.46 1.66 0.27 6.11 0.24 0.51 0.14 FITZ 2.68 0.16 10.08 1.09 7.53 1.76 1.63 0.51 4.04 0.30 0.24 0.14 NMPE 2.68 0.12 2.43 0.19 5.40 0.11 2.56 0.16 3.98 0.14 1.23 0.06 Contour mean 2.57 0.07 10.72 3.02 7.33 0.71 2.14 0.29 5.13 0.65 0.64 0.21 40 41 **60 NMPE-50% 2.68 0.12-25% 2.60 0.20-1% 2.48 0.36 NMPW 1.86 0.38 NMPP 2.30 0.14 FITZ 1.36 1.20 N4MPE 2.00 0.56 Contour mean 1.88 0.20 2.22 0.19 6.94 0.75 2.56 0.16 3.98 0.14 1.50 0.00 2.51 0.05 8.68 0.78 1.63 0.08 2.30 0.22 0.75 0.16 2.51 0.11 7.91 0.06 2.24 0.16 2.70 0.14 0.48 0.05 5.55 0.16 6.62 0.43 1.71 0.11 5.26 0.24 0.56 0.08 2.86 0.19 7.51 0.14 2.27 0.67 5.58 0.13 0.70 0.22 2.81 0.14 6.30 0.64 1.98 0.16 3.10 0.96 0.59 0.16 2.46 0.32 4.03 0.67 2*19 0.05 2.64 0.56 1.20 0.08 3.42 0.72 6.12 0.74 2.04 0.13 4.15 0.74 0.76 0.15 8.58 1.84 8.76 1.45 2.84 0.30 5.01 0.60 0.84 0.12 8.80 1.81 9.41 0.91 1.74 0.12 5.01 0.38 0.61 0.06 8.69 1.25 9.08 0.83 2.29 0.21 5.01 -35 0.73 0.07 2.43- 15.51 4.03 -16.00 1.26- 4.36 2.64- 7 .0.24-1.50 Control mean**Experimental mean**Monthly mean Monthly range*Standard error.3.44 0.59 2.58 0.21 3.01 0.32 1.36 -6.45* **Means are for surface samples only; control represents NMPW and NHMPE, experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.0. *C*40-ft samples collected at various light penetration levels.0 L i L-- ,--- i r-.--, '
| |
| Table A-8 (Page 2 of 2)Chlorophyll a Oct Nov Dec Depth Contour (ft)10 20 Transect NMPW NNPP FITZ NMPE Contour Mean N-W NMPP FITZ NMPE Contour Mean Mpw NMPP FITZ N4PE Contour Mean S a i 0 S S 5.S U I S 0 40 Mean S.E.* Mean S.E. Mean S.E.2.39 0.12 4.49 0.04 4.66 1.41 2.34 0.29 4:29 0.32 5.09 0.43.3.03 0.18 2.89 1.17 5.30 0.31 3.75 0.19 4.23 0.61 5.64 0.26 2.88 0.33 3.98 0.37 5.17 0.20 2.82 0.08 4.71 0.51 4.94 0.03 1.72 0.50 3.64 0.04 5.72 0.23 1.99 0.64 2.60 0.13 5.90 0.12 1.27 1.17 1.48 0.97 5.21 0.14 1.95 0.33 3.11 0.69 5.44 0.22 2.31 0.93 4.15 0.02 6.39 0.63 2.55 0.24 6.23 0.98 4.15 0.29 2.39 1.24 4.31 0.47 4.46 0.25 2.16 0.40 5.21 0.34 4.97 0.70 2.35 0.08 4.98 0.48 4.99 0.50 2.16 0.40 5.21 0.34 4.97 0.70 1.03 0.93 5.21 0.34 4.97 0.70 3.16 0.40 2;97 0.31 5.99 0.18 2.53 0.13 5.03 1.06 4.91 0.00 1.95 0.16 2.75 2.59 3.37 0,26 2.71 1.65 5.29 1.03 4.56 0.10 1.60 0.03 3.86 0.37 4.64 0.03 2.20 0.26 4.23 0.58 4.37 0.34 2.35 0.27 4.15 0.41 5.17 0.21 2.34 0.15 4.00 0.46 4.82 0.30 2.34 0.15 4.07 0.30 4.98 0.18 1.27-3.75 1.48-6.23 , 3.37-6.39 41"* NMPE-50%-25%-1%60 H"Mpp FITZ MMPE Contour Mean Control mean***Experimental mean***Monthly mean Monthly range Standard error.40-ft samples collected at various light penetration levels.Means are for surface samples only; control represents NMPi4 and NMPE, experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.
| |
| Table A-9 (Page 1 of 2)Phaeophytin a Concentration (Ug/k) in Whole Water Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Depth Contour Apr MAY Jun JuT Auq Sep (ft) Transect Mean S.E.* Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E.10 NMPW 0.20 0.10 4.90 0.05 2.09 1.99 2.77 0.36 1.47 0.46 0.24 0.14 NMPP <0.10 0.00 2.80 0.18 <0.10 0.00. 0.86 0.14 1.99 0.10 0.12 0.02 FITZ <0.10 0.00 0.53 0.07 2.77 2.67 1.00 0.21 1.55 0.91 0.16 0.03 NMPE 0.53 0.43 1.58 0.00 2.82 2.72 2.98 0.41 0.95 0.10 0.50 0.14 Contour mean 0.23 0.10 2.45 0.94 1.95 0.64 1.90 0.56 1.49 0.21 0.26 0.09 20 NMPw 0.93 0.83 <0.10 0.00 3.04 0.28 1.77 0.21 1.57 0.09 0.37 0.120.18 0.08 0.22 0.12 0.47 0.37 0.95 0.12 1.40 0.22 0.35 0.02 FITZ <0.10 0.00 0.28 0.18 10.10 0.00 1.56 0.12 1.14 0.40 0.20 0.10 NMPE <0.10 0.00 0.34 0.24 0.10 0.00 1.15 0.12 0.94 0.20 0.21 0.11 Contour mean 0.33 0.20 0.24 ,0.05 0.93 0.71 1.36 0.19 1.26 0.14 0.28 0.04 40>1 NMPW <0.10 0.00 NMPP 0.13 0.01 FITZ 0.21 0.01 NMPE <0.10 0.00 Contour mean 0.14 0.03 0.45 0.35 <0.28 0.18 1.40 0.04 1.98 0.51 <0.10 0.00 0.50 0.40 <0.10 0.00 0.93 0.19 1.55 0.02 0.11 0.01 2.17 0.56 1.02 0.92 1.06 0.09 1.02 0.11 0.73 0.24 0.22 0.12 2.63 1.29 1.03 0.41 1.03 0.17 <0.10 0.00 0.84 0.45 1.01 0.58 1.11 0.10 1.40 0.23 0.26 0.16 41 m 60 NIPE-50% <0.10 0.00 0.18
| |
| * 0.08 0.38 0.28 1.03 0.41 1.03 0.17 <0.10 0.00-25% 0.14 0.04 0.44 0.06 0eo10 0.00 1.36 0.07 0.64 0.03 0.43 0.10-1% <0.10 0.00 0.35 0.06 40.10 0.00 1.55 0.16 0.92 0.04 0.31 0.02 HWw <0.10 0.00 0.64 0.05 <0.10 0.00 1.15 0.02 1.43 0.21 0.12 0.01 NMPP 0.11 0.01 <0.10 0.00 0.42 0.32 1.60 0.10 1.19 0.24 0.17 0.07 FITZ 2.24 2.14 <0.10 0.00 0.63 0.36 1.21 0.24 1.06 0.39 0.23 0.13 NWPE <0.10 0.00 0.22 0.12 4.87 0.26 1.61 0.16 0.37 0.10 0.13 0.02 Contour mean 0.64 0.53 0.27 0.13 1.51 1.13 1.39 0.12 1.01 0.23 0.16 0.02 0.27 0.11 1.06 0.57 1.99 0.61 1.73 0.27 1.22 0.18 0.22 0.05 0.40 0.26 0.84 0.37 0.70 0.32 1.15 0.10 1.36 0.12 0.26 0.07 0.33 0;14 0.95 0.33 1.35 0.37 1.44 0.16 1.29 0.10 0.24 0.04<0.10 -2.24 <0.10 -4.90 <0.10 -4.87 0.86 -2.98 0.37 -1.99 <0.10 -0.73 S 2.2 a 0 S a Control mean*Experimental mean**Monthly mean Monthly range S*Standard error.F **Means are for surface samples only; control represents NMPW and NMPE, experimental represents NHMPP and FITZ.*I *I*40-ft samples collected at various light penetration levels.
| |
| Table A-9 (Page 2 of 2)Phaeophytin a Oct tNov Depth Contour (ft)10 Transect KMPP FITZ NWE Contour Mean 20 tWW NMPP FITZ NMPE C4Mtour Memn 40 NMPW NMPP FITZ NWE Contour Mean Mean S.E.* Mean S.E.0.41 0.18 1.94 0.64 0.38 0.28 0.52 0.42 0.23 0.13 3.36 0.40 0.33 0.23 1.64 0.06 0.34 0.04 1.87 0.58 0.65 0.05 0.30 0.20 0.62 0.14 1.45 0.12 0.70 0.52 1.30 0.48 0.18 0.08 5.32 1.40 0.54 0.12 2.09 1.11 0.46 0.36 0.66 0.12 0.73 0.31 0.36 '0.26 1.26 1.16 1.92 0.44 1.64 0.70 0.94 0.16 1.02 0.26 0.97 0.34 1.64 0.70 0.94 0.16 3.65 1.69 0.94 0.16 0.39 0.29 1.38 0.59 0.32 0.15 1.41 1.31 0.47 0.05 3.67 2.52 1.05 0.95 0.86 0.35 1.06 0.14 2.00 0.44 0.73 0.19 1.99 0.61 0,63 0.17 1.78 0.55 0.68 .0.12 1.68 0.44 0.66 0.10 1.73 0.34 0.18-1.64 0.30-5.32 Dec Mean S.E.1.04 0.51 1.46 0.55 0.36 0.26 0.92 0.04 0.95 0.23 1.19 0.79 0.64 1.21 0.96 0.28 1.14 0.83 1.77 1.01 0.61 0.37 0.24 0.19 0.14 0.18 0.25 0.34 1.56 0.31 41**60 NMPE-80%-25%-1%.NMPW NOPP FITZ NMPE Contour Mean 1.77 1.56 1.77 1.56 0.47 0.28 0.42 1.07 0.34 0.53 0.59 0.28 0.02 0.06 Q.40 0.16 S a S a Control mean***Experimental mean***Monthly mean Monthly range 0.92 0.17 0.83 0.14 0.87 0.11 0.28-1.77 Standard error.40-ft samples collected at various light penetration levels.Means are for surface samples only; control represents NMPW and NHPE, experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.
| |
| Table A-1O (Page 1 of 2)Primary Production (mg C/m3 /4 hr) in Whole Water Collections Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Depth Contour (ft)10 20 40 Transect Mean S.E.* Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E.NMPW 26.02 1.51 16.96 3.27 10.06 2.87 11.81 4.31 31.84 8.43 NMPP 4.86 0.00 26.87 2.55 34.53 2.75 7.29 0.19 17.05 2.71 FITZ 12.54 7.76 22.73 2.66 30.79 9.32 7.68 1.98 9.81 1.29 IMPE 12.18 5.41 10.64 2.07 26.06 6.75 13.21 0.98 9.92 1.56 Contour mean 13.90 4.41 19.30 3.53 25.36 5.39 10.00 1.48 17.16 5.18 NMPW 17.70 9.85 37.00 9.38 21.04 3.68 11.97 1.56 22.99 3.61 NMPP 8.84 0.77 33.49 5.16 19.99 4.99 8.14 2.55 28.72 18.94 FITZ 5.74 0.58 33.17 7.82 12.66 2.04 8.74 2.89 20.35 8.02 NMPE 13.80 0.20 11.49 0.07 32.03 0.70 8.37 0.66 9.79 5.71 Contour mean 11.52 2.65 28.79 5.83 21.43 3.99 9.31 0.90 20.46 3.96 NMPW 5.18 1.22 23.57 7.71 14.09 5.07 7.22 2.26 36.01 11.61 N4PP 9.92 2.19 35.28 9.61 15.52 3.72 5.82 2.40 30.06 10.41 FITZ 10.99 5.95 4.63 0.50 33.82 6.06 4.60 0.16 16.48 6.80 NMPE 10.32 3.04 8.27 2.57 23.84 3.82 6.56 2.70 12.58 6.87 Contour mean 9.10 1.33 17.94 7.09 21.82 4.54 6.05 0.56 23.78 5.54 NMPE-50% 10.32 3.04 11.56 2.27 11.93 0.46 6.56 2.70 12.58 6.87-25% 7.78 0.02 5.35 2.10 14.10 3.18 7.18 0.27 5.37 2.43-1% 5.94 3.43 5.94 0.65 17.20 7.18 4.21 0.55 19.71 8.05 NMPW 3.98 0.55 13.76 8.67 7.04 2.46 10.07 1.80 12.68 0.79 NMPP 8.07 1.00 3.12 0.54 14.59 4.56 13.75 1.42 17.46 7.25 FITZ 2.02 0.20 2.95 0.46 11.41 2.91 6.14 0.23 24.66 11.01 NMPE 1.97 1.82 13.30 1.67 42.34 2.71 5.10 0.44 16.03 2.02 Contour mean 4.01 1.43 8.28 3.03 18.85 7.98 8.77 1.98 17.71 2.52 Sep Mean S.E.1.48 0.41 0.35 0.10 1.10 0.26 3.74 0.27 1.67 0.73 0.54 0.31 0.73 0.25 0.77 0.22 0.86 0.16 0.73 0.07 0.11 0.00 0.35 0.31 0.83 0.11 2.76 0.03 1.01 0.60 2.66 1.06 1.15 0.31 0.46 0.12 0.57 0.02 0.85 0.23 0.15 0.06 1.82 0.31 0.85 0.35 1.49 0.44 0.64 0.11 1.06 0.25 0.11-3.74 00 41 ***60 S 0 S 0 0 3 Control mean**Experimental mean**Monthly mean Monthly range 11.39 2.82 16.87 3.31 22.06 4.15 7.87 1.23 20.28 5.10 21.66 3.47 9.63 1.55 18.58 2.97 21.86 2.61.1.97 "26.02 2.95-37.00 7.04- 42.34 9.29 1.03 18.97 3.60 7.77 0.98 20.57 2.42 8.53 0.71 19.78 2.11 4.60--13.75 9.79--36.01
| |
| *Standard error."Means are for surface samples only; control. represents NMPW and NNPE, experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.*6140-ft samples collected at various light penetration levels...........-
| |
| Table A-10 (Page 2 of 2)Oct Nov Dec Depth Contour (ft)10 20 40 41 **Transect NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE Contour Mean NMPW NMPP FITZ N4PE Contour Mean NMPW NMPP FITZ NWE Contour Mean NMPE-50%-25%-I%NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE Contour Mean Mean S.E.* Mean 2.42 4.15 6.65 6.10 4.83 6.57 3.34 8.83 16.06 8.70 7.98 9.77 9.92 16.28 10.99 0.32 13.75 0.42 2.24 0.21 16.55 3.23 4.79 3.33 12.43. 0.85 13.07 1.08 12.79 0.81 2.99 0.97 13.88 0.93 5.77 0.43 19.43 1.14 4.18 1.05 21.72 0.51 9.06 0.90 15.57 4.75 10.34 7.31 18.24 0.79 6.82 2.70 18.74 1.28 7.60 0.35 18.78 4.18 9.42 0.38 20.28 2.40 4.05 0.76 25.95 0.14 13.46 4.65 21.35 4.91 17.30 1.82 21.59 1.55 11.06 0.14 0.89 4.54 0.00 2.49 0.00 2.32 2.87 0.81 1.35 2.41 0.92 7.35 3.47 2.84 3.47 3.47 4.99 S.E. .Mean S.E.H, 16.28 4.65 21.35 7.83 1.16 21.35 8.03 2.90 13.22 4.91 17.30 4.91 17.30 1.49 12.57 60 4.10 0.67 22.32 4.95 9.42 1.72 6.15 1.15 21.89 3.41 5.54 0.90 6.55 1.36 17.48 0.93 17.17 3.21 8.16. 2.44 13.68 9.79 15.23 1.24 6.24 0.84 18.84 2.04 11.84 2.67 8.46 1.81 17.54 1.30 8.45 1.96 6.92 0.87 18.98 1.52 9.69 1.67 7.69 0.99 18.26 0.98 9.07 1.25 2.42-16.28 12.43-25.95 2.24 -17.30 Control mean***Experimental mean***Monthly mean Monthly range (A Q (A 0L Standard error.40-ft samples .collected at various light penetration levels.Means are for surface samples only; control represents NMPW and NNPE, experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.
| |
| AP~PENDIX B ZOOPLANKTO1N science services division
| |
| *1~ U ~ -...,. ,.-Table B-I (Page I of 2)Abundance (No./m ) of Rotifera (Microzooplankton), Wisconsin Net (76-1) Oblique Tows, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE i-..0 C1 0 I.SL a CONTOUR MEAN 20 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 60 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MEANW*MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 1130. 242. 35416. .2970. 110758. 4938. 153538. 10236. 64045. 3650.720. 93. 20818. 1057. 82128. 3084. 132668. 2914. 56070. 2228.235. 9. 32381. 2078. 82307. 1847. 134179. 15354. 64971. 7219.651. 85. 55832. 3784. .65087. 3829. 117405. 1642. 44742. 4701.684. 183. 3611Z. 7287. .85070. 9467. 134447. 7406. 57457. 4686.980. 212. 25205. 1581. 82936. 4762. 108130. 8246. 80556. 5159.547. 25. 21962. 205. 65870. 8196. 118946. 13063. 72817. 212.382. 39. 24821. 3309. 78936. 4461. 201169. 11807. 34118. 1513.450. .94. 32391. 3449, 78408. 2217. 151493. 2467. 55592. 3322.590. 135. 26095. 2220. 76537. 3697. 144934. 20887. 60771. 10303.678. 33. 18184. 1047. 67278. 1922. 101789. 2276. 67728. 1448.696. 37. 22385. 1221. 85516. 4960. 99150. 3398. 76234. 4150.448. 9. 24306. 1593. 87233. 1472. 195262. 7656. 23867. 0.695. 314. 21781. 764. 81607. 359. 208994. 11464. 39836. 4609.629. 61. 21664. 1279. 80408. 4532. 151299. 29485. 51916. 12159.671. 40. 16538. 322. 71186. 4358. 91804. 13489. 68584. 2275.378. 54. 29622. 111. 70295. 4989. 156462. 43230. 33737. 2260.566. 76. 13563. 1148. 81999. 4783. 211796. 10105. 17944. 791.621. 86. 11450. 109. .66565. 2847. 224627. 4329. 21652. 670.559. 64. 17793. 4079. 72511. 3317. 171172. 30309. 35479. 11539.735. .76. 27100. 4983. 77978. 5294. 144722. 17611. 55342. 6719.496. 59. 23732. 2017. 79285. 2630. 156204. 14833. 47470. 8069.616. 56. 25416. 2633. 78632. 2861. 150463. 11220. 51406. 5173.235.- 1130. 11450.- 55832. 65087.- 110758. 91804.- 224627. 17944.- 80556.3233. 283.2185. 10.3714. 162.1897. 51.1991. 23.2447. 427.2858. 216.2322. 139.1721. 184.2231. 126.2283. 233.2566. 168.1868. 103.1275. 88.1708. 87.1854.: 268.-)516. 212.2393. 329.2454. 190.1275.- 3833.3485. 120.3833. 218.2512. 44.3104. 351.* STANDARD ERROR**.CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ Table B-I (Page 2 of 2)OCT NOV ft-'DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPW 9473. 344. 7475. 397. No samples taken NIPP 10842. 758. 7894. 572. due to ice and FITZ 11984. 316. 7602. 606. strong winds NMPE 18679. 826. 12174. 401.CONTOUR MEAN 12744. 2044.8786. 1133.20 NMPW 7545. 937. 9026. 821.NMPP 10710. 778. 6610. 31.FITZ 15041. 914. 8371. 414.NMPE 14457. 1233. 12013. 432.CONTOUR MEAN 11938. 1751.9005. 1125.!I,,3 40 NMPW 8709. 573. 6079. 211.NMPP 9102. 176. 7709. 422.FITZ 10117. 628. 10856. 325.NMPE 14420. 469. 5044. 157.S a S a S S S S S 0.S 5.2 CONTOUR MEAN 10587. 1312.60 NMPW 8000. 770.NMPP 7784. 28.FITZ 9482. 342.NMPE 14918. 1376.CONTOUR MEAN 10046. 1667.CONTROL MEAN** 12025. 1452.EXP. MEAN** 10633. 772.MONTHLY MEAN 11329. 814.MONTHLY RANGE 7545.- 18679.7422. 1269.6258.. 80.4813. 51.8146. 237.9843. 537.7265. .1097.8489. *962.7750. 600.8120. 556.4813.- 12174.* STANDARD ERROR** CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ-~~ ~ ...--. ......
| |
| Table B-2 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance (No./m ) of Copepoda nauplii (Microzooplankton), Wisconsin Net (76-P) Oblique Tows, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 APR MAY.JUN JUL AUG SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAH MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPW 1150. 223.NHmPP 1022. 70.FITZ 1142. 32.NMPE 1216. 113.742. 199.967. 223.693. 0.1661. 0.CONTOUR MEAN 1133. 40. 1016. 223.to NmPW 768. 202. 465. 465.NMPP 1391. 149. 1026. 205.FITZ 1501. 184. 827. 92.NMPE 1135. 42. 1262. 252.CONTOUR MEAN 1199. 163. 895. 169.40 NNPW 1319. 15. 1047. 262.NMPP 1477. 12. 1221. 407.FITZ 1132. 61. 1331. 78.NHMPE 964. 874. 1370. 105.1631, 573. 36938. 3116.3085. 386. 8734. 416.1437. 205. 15799. 1113.718. 718. 28325. 2053.1718, 496. 22449. 6303, 2381. 397. 14111. 1916.1062. 759. 11001. 5500.1544. 515. 24728. 4678.605. 202. 22699. 2961.1398. 380. 18135. 3309.1747. 0. 10081. 325.1389. 198. 11429. 2162.1288. 184. 20579. 478.542, .181. 33951. 1323.W0 3982. 332.3626. 162.* 5001. 217.5025. 162.4409. 357.6548. 992.5552. 0.4650. 952.2455. 388.4801. 873.3378. 161.5898. 2403.7650. 459.7066. 717.5998. 946.4713. 163.4843. 161.2693. 898.5208. 595.4364. 567.4797. 545.4989. 526.t893. 367.2455.- 7650.492.692.695.1404.821. 200.502. 24.733. 62.563. 96.960. 39.690. 102.821. 66.577. 132.519. 59.778. 52.26.77.87.15.CONTOUR MEAN 1223. 112.1242.72. 1242. 253. 19010. 5499.674.74. 1 S 0 0 3 0.0O 5" 60 NMPW 1182.NMPP 1397.FITZ 1430.NMPE 1424.CONTOUR MEAN 1358.23.0.84.48.1737. 193.1453. 112.1318. 383.1363. 491.1453. 807. 9941. 1442.907. 605. 22734. 4301.1708. 683. 16920. 1354.678. 136. 27417. 1443.59. 1468.94. 1186. 238. 19253. 3774.591. 9.574. 59.544. 115.740. 31.612. 44.786. 105.612. 29.699. 57.492.- 1404.CONTROL MEAN** 1145. 72.EXP. MEAN** 1312. 65.MONTHLY MEAN 1228. 52, MONTHLY RANGE 768.- 1501.1206. 154.1105. 95.1155. 88.465.- 1737.1219. 240. 22933. 3729.1553. 237. 16490. 2071.1386. 169. 19712. 2222.542.- 3085. 8734.- 36938.* STANDARD ERROR** CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPN & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NIPP & FITZ Table B-2 (Page 2 of 2)OCT NOV DEC DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMFW 1333. 308. 1502. 167. No samples taken NMPP 989. 0. 1373. O. due to ice and*Qr. strong winds NMPE 914. 141.CONTOUR MEAN 976. 137.S C i CI S S a C S 20 NMPW 1391. 573.NIPP 1334. 148.FITZ 668. 35.NMPE 719. 445.CONTOUR MEAN 1028. 194.40 NMPW 952. 468.NMPP 984. 141.FITZ 837. 70.NMPE 1341. 201.CONTOUR MEAN 1029. 109.60 NMPN 1656. 23.NMPP 880. 55.FITZ 998. 230.NMPE 2493. 484.CONTOUR MEAN 1507. 370.CONTROL MEAN** 1350. 196.EXP. MEAN** 920. 76.MONTHLY MEAN 1135. 116.MONTHLY RANGE 668.- 249.3.259, 111.827. 354.1594. 47.1504. 251.653. 141.1213. 6.1241. 212.614. 77.992. 81.1385. 19.210. 116.800. 252.553. 90.600. 188.685. 0.767. 102.651. 47.839. 190.921. 167.880. 122.173.- 1594.S.
| |
| * STANDARD ERROR ,* CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ S_0~'C Table B-3 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance (No./m 3) of Cyclopoida (Microzooplankton), Wisconsin Net (76-p) Oblique Tows Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.I 10 NmPw 347. 39.NMPP 1034. 128.FITZ 1214. 185.HMPE 1627. 156.CONTOUR MEAN 1055. 267.20 NMPN 583. 84.NMPP 1391. 50.FITZ 1685. 53.NMPE 733. 233.CONTOUR MEAN 1098. 263.40 NMPW 901. 78.NMPP 1404. 236.FITZ 1115. 79.NMPE 1423. 78.CONTOUR MEAN 1211. 125.60 NMPW 843. 53.NMPP 1402. 71.FITZ 1469. 92.NMPE 640. 105.CONTOUR MEAN 1088. 205.CONTROL MEAN** 887. 153.EXP. MEAN** 1339. 74.MONTHLY MEAN 1113. 101.MONTHLY RANGE 347.- 1685.36. 36.491. 253.0. 0.92. 92.155. 114.0. 0.411. 205.184. 184.168. 0.191. 84. 1905. 660.3660. 573.771. 0.411. 411.0. 0.1210. 831.2183. 198.3035. 304.2402. 3.0. 0.0. 0.102. 102.78. 78.105. 105.4194. 699.4167. 595.5337. 1288.3430. 181.6676. 445.2495. 2.779. Ill.7389. 1642.4335. 1603.3020. 1858.1261. 573.1114. 1114.9869. 1974.3816. 2064.3252. 1301.2471. 618.5743. 0.5732. 441.4299. 845.285. 285.3138. 1163-7058. 1644.4329. 481.3702. 1404.5069. 1055.3007. 802.4038. 694.285.- 9869.1161. 498.406. 406.609. 261.81. 81.564. 227.1190. 794.214. 214.560. 560.277. 18.560. 223.1126. 483.2840. 218.612. 306.2355. 102.1733. 519.1950. 325.2098. 2.1471. 125.1972. 409.1873. 138.1264. 286.1101. 333.1183. 213.81.- 2840.112.75.19.101.0.26.9.274.77. 21.113. 26.49. 7.158. 13.148. 89.0.0.9.66.77. 66.24.0.4.23.71. 25. 4282. 394.117.25.S a a I, S 01 0. 0.224. 0.0. 0.164. 164.6780. 323.4384. 454.4783. 683.2169. 1.150. 9.118. 29.269. 49.165. 39.97. 57. 4529. 945.176.33.71. 25.186. 64.128. 37.0.- 491.2802. 795.3161. 651.2982. 498.0.- 6780.133. 27.90. 31.112. 21.0.- 274.* STANDARD ERROR CONTROL REPRESENTS NNPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ Table B-3 (Page 2 of 2)OCT NOV DFC DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPW 1348. 117.Nt1PP 527. 0.FITZ 246. 35.NMPE 158. 53.CONTOUR MEAN 20 NIPW NHPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 570. 271.893. 0.630. Ill.141. 70.685. 206.587. 159.t10'Iyl 40 NMPN 1259. 355.NNPP 822. 91.FITZ 767. 0.NMPE 469. 67.1254. 219.3106. 498.121. 17.641. 25.1261. 651.1284. 64.5232. 407.555. 90.1327. 260.2099. 1059.1074. 192.1409. 29.2366. 26.533. 31.1346. 385.856. 277.1148. 257.1503. 132.895. 128.1100. 149.983. 106.1930. 578.1456. 309.121.- 5232.No samples taken due to Ice and strong winds CONTOUR MEAN 830. 163.S 0 i 0 S S S a 0 S S 0.S i 60 NMPW 1664. 47.,.MPP 1183. 27.FITZ 747. 21.NMPE 2065. 279.CONTOUR MEAN 1414. 286.CONTROL MEAN** 1068. 225.EXP. MEAN** 633. 117.MONTHLY MEAN 850. 135.MONTHLY RANGE 141.- 2065.* STANDARD ERROR** CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NHPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ cj ffl ..~J ~2 ~ J31 12 22 &iJ 22 22 22 2
| |
| .1 II... ....... .,.. ........Table B-4 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance (No./m 3) of Cladocera (Microzooplankton), Wisconsin Net (76-p) Oblique Tows, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 20 NMPW NHMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 60 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MEAN**MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 0.12.0.0.0.12.0.0.0.0.87.0.0. 2249. 926. 12016. 4005.0. 2313. 2. 53649. 417.87. 1642. 1232. 9680. 1669.0. 2584. 287. 2874. 1232.3. 3. 22. 22. 2197. 199. 19555. 11529.13.12.13.0.13.12.13.0.0.0.0.84.0.0.0.84.3175. 3. 5923. 2439.1670. 152. 20283. 4469.2574. 172. 18602. 1894.1814. 1008. 4935. 987.10. 3. 21. 21. 2308. 350. 12436. 4065.1659. 664.974. 108.391. 43.243. 81.817. 322.1587. 397.1068. 641.1625. 616.406. 111.1171. 285.483. 161.1966. 1092.229. 76.1024. 205.926. 384.1138. 163.1049. 242.1091. 305.1079. 37.198. 49.141. 90.96. 9.185. 0.155.287.373.94.55.202.23.32.0.49.23.76.56.49.0.11.33.0.0.11.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.1398. 699. 5854. 0.2183. 595. 12355. 1853.5521. 0. 11486. 2871.1986. 903. 10141, 2205.315. 96.153. 14.138. 33.215. 37.29. 14.0. 0. 2772. 931.9959. 1442.205.40.19.46.27.10.1.29.4.10.O.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.3228. 3. 6792. 1100.1209. 0. 9436. 2853.3075. 342. 11748. 435.2440. 1085. 13468. *2886.141. 35.74. 0.308. 0.181. 39.C Z F 0 2 25. 8.0. 0. 2488. 459. 10361. 1448.1089.18. 176.49.14.20.17.0.-6.7.5.56.11.11.11.0.-11. 2359. 226. 7750. 1310.11. 2523. 476. 18405. 5229.7. 2441. 255. 13078. 2945.87. 1209.- 5521. 2874.- 53649.952. 188.1049. 202.1001. 134.229.- 1966.197. 29.172. 38.184. 23.55.- 373.STANDARD ERROR CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ Table B-4 (Page 2 of 2)OCT NOV DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| 0o 10 NMPN 3128. 51.NMPP 2010. 165.FITZ 1792. 176.NMPE 3514. 70.CONTOUR MEAN 2611. 420.20 NMPW 2552. 350.NMPP 3261. 371.ýFITZ 1757. 70.NMPE 2432. 240.CONTOUR MEAN 2501. 308.40 NMPW 2817. 170.NMPP 2130. 513.FITZ 1919. 105.NMPE 2012. 335.CONTOUR MEAN 2219. 204.60 NMPW 2900. 288.NMPP 1980. 220.FITZ 3314. 314.NMPE 3683. 781.CONTOUR MEAN 2969. 366.CONTROL MEAN** 2880. 197.EXP. MEAN** 2270. 226.MONTHLY MEAN 2575, 165.MONTHLY RANGE 1757.- 3683.506. 46.2717. 658.260. 187.1196. 395.1170. 552.774. 70.1284. 94.237. 88.1435. 292.933. 272.518, 19.1123. 308.813. 33.363. 13.704. 168.389. 100.445. 69.580. 158.793. 128.No samples taken due to ice and strong winds C a A Z 0 2 a_a_552.90.747. 138.932. 288.840. 156.237.-. 2717.* STANDARD ERROR CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ L Table B-5 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance (No.11000 m 3) of Cladocera, Calanoida, and Cyclopoida (Macrozooplankton), Composited*
| |
| 1-m Henson Net (571-p) Tows, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Cladocera 20-Ft Contour 40-Ft Contour Date 3-West I-West 1/2-WestI 1/2-Etast 1-st E 3-East Mean 3-WestT1-West 71/2-WestI 1/2-East I -Eas Mean NMPP NMPP NMPP Mean Apr No Catch No Catch No Catch May 85 0 0 0 0 0 14 689 0 0 0 0 0 115 0 0 109 59 Jun 22457 14003 14752 13966 33430 30185 21466 8967 8571 11498 7788 10952 17705 10914 12519 5788 9968 14837 Jul 50708 53943 24424 70062 34096 20155 42231 62666 52724 60415 89204 43908 61872 61798 143874 141092 73493 65509 Aug 751719 782222 907372 338505 809358 236451 637604 590764 720783 572396 908818 1304007 1709249 967670 538769 519257 311428 733406 Sep 929048 1695454 585109 2091500 926086 1428640 1275973 1404650 1530692 1620982 1280772 905144 1590894 1388856 1500273 382980 348608 1214722 Oct 166411 272219 149274 112756 219087 140677 176737 188844 122057 177643 145421 186968 189471 168401 172557 145935 144071 168893 Nov 184587 420998 162103 156641 159124 1156480 373322 533786 596292 4181179 162790 419577 1291914 570423 139934 146371 128126 405127 Dec 95908 26624 91341 56157 93384 107726 -118460 95696 62715 131418 133678 95733 72568 98634 30244 11121 14921 90590 Calanoida Apr 380538 756036 2880809 798522 348499 90833 875873 3933013 4902058 4107945 1198632 1050185 642656 2639081 3395762 1375240 1182421 1802877 May 20780 27143 64744 164870 11695 37236 54411 56757 26165 40026 88382 53499 59414 54041 13659 6433 23348 46277 Jun 303 206 73 0 142 809 255 572 420 221 1038 759 247 543 2325 2429 7771 1154 Jul No Catch 0 0 404 717 1045 0 361 24806 9802 26403 4212 Aug No Catch No Catch 0 22148 9237 2092 Sep No Catch No Catch No Catch Oct 0 0 0 0 674 0 112 660 387 0 699 0 0 291 1255 0 0 245 Nov 513 0 0 0 0 0 86 No Catch 619 J 1175 256['Dec 3935 4610 5480 5237 14473 3238.- 6162 11914 5085 5944 6202 5265 7576 6998 7667 6077 9792 6833!S 2 0m S Composite of surface, mid-depth, and bottom horizontal tows.T = density-less than 0.05/cubic meter.
| |
| Table B-5 (Page 2 of 2)Cyclopoida 20-Ft Contour 40-Ft Contour 6-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand lasts.["Es 3-Westn W NP NP Ma DateI3-West[
| |
| 1West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East ,Mean 3Westean PP PP NMPP Mean Apr No Catch No Catch No Catch May No Catch No Catch No Catch Jun 101 69 0 140 142 0 75 191 0 0 65 54 148 76 60 143 628 116 Jul 0 0 0 0 0 92 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Aug .0 0 4321 1393 2810 0 1421 4985 0 0 0 0 0 831 0 0 0 901 Sep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Oct 705 0 0 439 1348 0 415 0 0 0 1398 0 0 233 0 657 1176 382 Nov 513 0 0 696 649 0 309 0 0 1291 0 0 0 1 215 0 668 0 254 Dec 0 0 913 0 345 0 210 0 848 660 0 479 3991 398 142 0 0 252 Composite of surface, mid-depth, and bottom horizontal tows.I S i 2 a 0I APPENDIX C V PERIPHYTON" Bottom* Suspended.s-I scec.srie dvso Table C-I Species List of Bottom Periphyton Collected on Artificial Substrates in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 Taxa Cyanophyta Chroococcales A eelesp.Croccs sp.ia aponina Gomphosp aera pacustris emphosphaeria Lacnum Gomphosphaeria sp.Microc ytis sp.Chroococca es unid.Chamaes i phonal es Chamaesiphon sp.Pleurocapsa sp.Oscillatoriiaes Oscillatoria sp.Lyngbya martepsiana Lyngbya sp.Oscillatoriales unid.Nostocales Anabaena circinalis Anabaena op.Aemenon Chlorophyta Volvocales Carteria sp.C-hamydomonas sp.Eudorina sp.Pandorina morum Pa-ndorin sip-.
| |
| Tetrasporales Gloeocstis sp.Tetrasporales unid.Chl orococcal es Actinastrum hantzschi i Actinastrum sp.A st rodesmus convol utus Ankistrodesmus falcatus Ankistrodesmus op.Ankyr sp.Characlum sp.io-rTeTla sp.Chodatella citriformis Chodetella ciliata Chode a quadriseta Coelastrum cambrium Coelastrum microporum
| |
| ~i esp.rucigenla rectangularis tyPSeý!r'T Frenbergianum Dictyospha1erium sp.Francia sp.-l-enkn nia sp.M-icractiium pusillum Ficractinium sp.c sp.uocystis sp.Pediastrum boryanusi Pedlestrum 5!upffex Pediastrum sTm-FPe-id strum sp.FuaagTg-a chodatii tenedesmus acuminatus Scenedesmus acutus Scenedesmus ercuatus Scenedesmus bicalatus Scenedesmus ecornis Scenedeseus incrassatulus Scenedesmus interomedius S-e n-ede s mu s ~~jn Scenedesmus quadrlcauda Scenedesmus s pinosus Scenedesmus sp.Schroederla setigera Taxa Chlorophyta (Contd)Schroederia sp.Selenastrum sp.Sphaeroystis Sp.Tetraedron candatum teron imu setraer s T-re-ubriatrieppendiculata Westella sp.Chlorococcales unid.Ulotricales Geminella interrupta Geminella op.M csora sp.Schizomeris sp.t znata Ulothri_ px sp.Ulotricaes unid.Chaetophorales Chaetophora sp.Draparnaldia sp.-Gongrosira sp.ep sira sp.Pseudulvella americana Pseudulvella sp.Stigocloniumj tenue Stiqeoclon iurn sp.Chaetophorales unid.Oedongoniales Oed i sp.Cladophorales Cl pora sp.Cladophoral es unid.Zygnematales Closterium moniliferum Clse su p.Cosmariurnbtm i Cosmarium cosmeturn Co-smarium cyclicum Cosmarium sp.Mougeotla sp.Spsrogra op.Spondylosium sp.Staurastrum longiradiatum Staurastrum Pra oxum Staurastrum tetracerum Staurastrum sp.Chlorophyta unid.Euglenophyta Euglenales Eu lena SP..Trache monas sp.Xanthophyta Rhizochloridales Stipitococcus sp.Chrysophyta Chrysomonadales ChrysochromulIna parva Chrysochromulina op..sertularia Dinobryon sociele Dsinobryon p.Mallamonas sp.Synura sp.Monosi-gales Codosige sp.a sp.N2!A SP.Ste eonas dichotoma Monosigales uni.Bacillariophyta-Centric Eupodiscaies Cyclotella sp.Melosira ranulata Me-losira n-erqii Melosira ?si andica Melosira varians Melosira sp.Skeletonema potamus Taxa Bacillariophyta-Centric (Contd)Skeletonema subsalsa Sk tJtonen-a sp.Stephanodi-scus astraea Stephanodiscus binderena Stephanodlocus niaaraee Steehno icus, sp.Eupodiscales uni d.Bacillariophyta-Pennate Fragilariales Asterionella formosa Asterionella sp.Diatoma tenue Diatoma vuTgare Diatoma sp.Frgiaria crotonensis erýie cepcin Er aevauchelaee Fi;gilara sp.Meridion circulare Synedra ulna aria flocculosa Ta-Tsellee op.Fragila-iales unid.Eunotiales Eunotia sp.AcNenthales Achnanthes sp.Cocconeis-sp.
| |
| Rh~io-senia curvata Naviculales
| |
| 'n~ sp.Cym e prostrate asp.Gop oea auminatum Gomphonema olivaceum Navicula cryptocephala Nevicule pletystoma Navicufe Sp.Pi-nnulia sp.sleurosigmn op.Naviculaes unid.Bacillariales Epithemiaesp.
| |
| Nitzchia acicularis Nitzchie Folsatica WiTzchia siqinoideaes Nitzchsa op.Surire-TeTes Cymtopleura solea Surirel1a ovata Surirefla sp.BaciY-ario-pyta-Pennate unid.Pyrrhophyta-Dinophyceae Gymnodiniales Gymndinium fuscum Peridini ales Ceratium hirundinella Per-idnium aciculiferum Peridinium cinctum Peridinium g ro~nu idinium P.Per-id-lnies unid.Pyrrhophyta-Dinophyceae unid.Cryptophyta Cryptomonodales Chroomonas sp.Cryptoisonas marssonii Cryptomonas ovata Cryptomonas Sp.~y9~sop.Rhodomonas lens Rhodmonas minuta Rhodo-onas op.Cryptomnonadales unid.Alga unid.I)C-1 science services division Table C-2 (Page 1 of 2).2 Abundance (No./mm ) of Cyanophyta (Bottom Periphyton)
| |
| Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP 23-23 MAY 28-28 JUN 25-26 JUL 24-24 AUG 27-27 SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.5 NMPN 32431. 16894. 2392675. 2145155. 93037. 49591. 100828. 47620. 166930. 17374.NMPP 3023. 3023. 556123. 79249. ******* 0. 8715516. 6072561. 430756. 258274.FITZ 58772. 49547. 181009. 81620. 103565. 48339. 417495. 62020. 0.NMPE 17275. 17275. 851186. 634888. 94097. 46427. ******* 0. 3581. 1760.CONTOUR MEAN 27875. 11921. 995248. 485573.96900. 3347. 3077946. 2820266. 200422. 124447.10 NMPW 9831. 4127. 1759791. 1222723. 165642. 95976. 34997. 8065. 729038. 321783.N'1PP 41548. 20294. 16901. 10586. 223874. 173050. 48609. 33267. 633638. 104469.FITZ 15790. 9484. 69443. 42763. 109527. 43778. 48274. 10514. 309243. 78241.NMPE 50876. 45238. 941760. 578438. 21608. 3864. 288790. 142615. 783558. 207458.CONTOUR MEAN 29511. 9903. 696974. 412896. 130163. 43061. 105168. 61289. 613869. 106163.20 NMPW 3496. 3496. 296206. 238021. 12621. 5437. 4322. 2303. 55665. 6303.NMPP 4451. 2650. 18179. 13352. 505168. 389693. 3481. 216. 224854. 70409.FITZ 3351. 2011. 10068. 5866. .193398. 103926. 43813. 16584. 155700. 59425.NMPE 0. 0. 48707. 34545. ******* 0. ******* 0. 228660. 47829.I S 0 0 0 0 S 0 a 0 S CONTOUR MEAN 30 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPW NIPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 0. 0.0. 0.2504. 2504.0. 0.8937. 1048. 2001. 650.36582. 28585. 2330 t 898.70375. 55229. 335153. 274045.45529. 39394. 16554. 9404.2824. 973. 93290. 68148. 237062. 143852.17205. 13306. 166220. 40486.5963. 2490. 2673. 618.9100. 6999. 25275. 11720.10507. 7271. 176515. 80563.4576ý 2268.. 3025. 1975.626. 626. 40356. 12680.89010. 82118.7537. 1370.51872. 41883.64. 64. 4545. 1777. 380648. 257413.0. 0. 5966. 2177. 4768. 2200.0. 0. 7903. 3648. 1489. 369.232. 232. 57289. 53814. 2836. 1642.3629. 1591. 2602. 583.5411. 1217. 7172. 4722.3906. 1346. ******* 0.1445. 818. 4088. 2103.74. 55. 18926. 12806.97435. 94407.3598. 818.4621. 1346.a. CONTROL MEAN** 11420. 5521. 640662. 267172. 87671. 41092. 55569. 35400. 197982. 96425.-EXP. MEAN** 12944. 6498. 97255. 53684. 164363. 57089. 930611. 865903. 245394. 74112.-MONTHLY MEAN 12182. 4153. 368958. 146540. 126017. 35365. 541703. 481536. 219054. 61420.-MONTHLY RANGE 0.- 58772. 4545.-2392675.
| |
| 1489.- 505168. 1445.-8715516.
| |
| 2602.- 783558.i* Standard error** Control represents NMPW & NMPE, experimental represents NMPP & FITZ****** Substrates lost during severe weather One of four replicates missing due to weather
| |
| : 1. ... .'_Table C-2 (Page 2 of 2)OCT 24-25 OCT DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.5 NMPW 33789.t 13643.NMPP 12159371.
| |
| 3073998.FITZ 37557. 15841.HMPE 46625. 39099.NOV 22-22 NOV DEC 20-22 DEC MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E.42155.t 17888. 0.0. *** 0.13861. 3140, *w*** 0.15564. 7120. 2210J 808.CONTOUR MEAN 2971819. 2932497.23860. 9161.2210. 2210.10 NMPW 588334.NMPP 3098367.FITZ 349512.NMPE 260369.197465.866004.222370.99253.100366.45831.16723.12926.24973.11313.4451.4650.67826.6376.tt 45512.10361.44118..0.8804.3054.CONTOUR MEAN 1074145. 678283.43961. 20187. 32519. 14691.W3 20 NHPW 142806.NMPP 48981.FITZ 67673.NMPE 120753.91862.45243.10327.71379.107080.18979.111717.72776.+65880.14208.29711.1400.23491.25167.9790.579J1 16319.7284.3357.135.CONTOUR MEAN 95053. 22010.77638. 21394.14757. 5848.W 0 3.0 30 NMPW 3510.NMPP 7486.FITZ 6927.NMPE 3231.CONTOUR MEAN 5288.40 NMPN 2132.NMPP 1589.FITZ 925.NMPE 1981536.1188.4499.1732.2037.4296.20027.1975.562.13400.0.1237.919.2752.834.343.1461.0.422.1115. 8766. 5670.1565.761.321.1979939.4042.2711.1459.,1832.1934.2270.378.969.1502. 626.461. 232.235. 36.233. 41.527. 158.CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MEAN**,MONTHLY MEAN-MONTHLY RANGE 496545. 494997.2511. 574. 364.318308.1538832.928570.193377.1176468.596880.36301.28914.33018.13286.12773.9087.11912.12867.12330.233.-76.7444.6344.4866.67826.925.-' 12159371.1459.- 111717.* Standard error** Control represents NMPW & NMPE, experimental represents NMPP & FITZ******* Substrates lost during, severe weather t One of four replicates missing due to weatherý One of four replicates lost during shipment ttThree of.four replicates missing due to weather.
| |
| Table C-3 (Page 1 of 2)2 Abundance (No./mm ) of Chlorophyta (Bottom Periphyton)
| |
| Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP 23-23 MAY 28-28 JUN 25-26 JUL 24-24 AUG 27-27 SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.5 HIMPW 68619. 18080. 120363. 32777. 32748. 4202. 216160. 42129. 250778. 25428.NMPP 14832. 7094. 121289. 88794. ******* 0. 771997. 278083. 3353. 2466.FITZ 389936. 188655. 114791. 34165. 100086. 30650. 203928. 118038. ******* 0.NMPE 1084737. 264775. 32932. 20896. 84976. 38037. ******* 0. 168. 64.CONTOUR MEAN 389531. 246085. .97344. 21518. 72604. 20399. 397361. 187351. 84766. 83011.10 NMPW 152245. 89047. 117747. 57032. 32741. 13595. 5047. 2438. 568142. 219887.NMPP 93316. 22688. 24681. 7821. 14857. 8131. 15625. 7341. 375091. 171208.FITZ 207687. 0. 81052. 35518. 25182. 10359. 93429. 35701. 380326. 202016.NMPE 143798. 78949. 44666. 20080. 4626. 910. 15903. 5589.- 351087. 56922.CONTOUR MEAN 149262. 23420. 67037. 20539. 19351. 6126. 32501. 20466. 418661. 50232.20 NW1P4 7321. 3217. 373589. 309773. 18179. 13575. 1862. 687. 20469. 8587.NMPP 4076. 1718. 99485. 74392. 2048. 1379. 1440. 279. 180767. 157713.FITZ 9277. 3451. 5207. 1566. 8915. 5575. 28506. 26347. 16896. 11618.N'1PE 10898. 3479. 3455. 900. 0. 0***** 0. 46078. 16667.CONTOUR MEAN 7893. 1468. 120434. 87315.30 NMPW 417. 274. 3630. 337.NMPP 532. 276. 7535. 2043.FITZ 4481. 718. 23511. 11165.NMPE 2846. 950. 7595. 3371.CONTOUR MEAN 2069. 979. 10568. 4413.9714. 4674. 10603. 8952. 66053. 38786.S a S a S S S S S 914. 343.2159.t 1094.4534. 2357.549. 257.2039. 900.628. 291.705. 279.439. 292.299. 141.2063. 1499.2084. 960.3686. 953.3092. 308.2731. 399.1025. 216.9753. 4451.7137. 2588.1098. 771.4753. 2197.40 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 937. 763.123. 51.971. 378.763. 182.698. 197.4110. 1150.1557. 522.4163. 879.2061. 717.2973. 680.2158. 761. 1101. 279.850. 231. 897. 104.1068. 268. ****%** 0.3480. 1345. 1786. 557.517.92. 1889. 603.1261. 269.CONTROL MEAN** 147258. 105859. 71015. 36617. 19518. 9347. 31221. 26471. 124173. 63008.CL EXP. MEAN** .72523. 41047. 48327. 15729. 17658. 10656. 112261. 76110. 121778. 59735.Z MONTHLY MEAN 109890. 55916. 59671. 19568. 18588. 6879. 76243. 43902. 123108. 42670.* MONTHLY RANGE 123.-1084737.
| |
| 1557.- 373589. 299.- 100086. 850.- 771997. 168.- 568142.o
| |
| * Standard error* Control represents NMPW & N?4PE, experimental represents NMPP & FITZ***0*** Substrates lost during severe weather t One of four replicates missing d wue eWther ... ........
| |
| Table C-3 (Page 2 of 2)(A.0 OCT NOV DEC 24-25 OCT DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN 5.E. MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E.----------------------------------
| |
| ------------------------------------------------
| |
| 5 NMPW 41009.t 24505. 12047.t: 1091. **W* 0.NIIPP 8563. 4946. ******i 0. 0.FITZ 49185. 19956. 6757. 2540. -*
| |
| * 0.NWPE 3962. 1348. 4851. 2709. 237. 147.CONTOUR MEAN 25660. 11359. 7885. 2152.237A1 i 237.10 NMP4 242137. 102214. 115322. 52608. 41387. 23382.HIIPP 716614. 319907. 7918. 3047. 267112:" 0.FITZ 20756. 8638. 8192. 7556. 7512. 2433.NMPE 265009. 200687. 105048. 41571. 3946. 2180.CONTOUR MEAN 311129. 145952. 59120. 29557. 79989. 62942.20 NMPW 6288. 1897. 110019. 91797.NMPP 1563. 626. 1477. 873.FITZ 2780. 1168. 506. 297.NMPE 4593. 1795. 23073.A 14231.CONTOUR MEAN 3806. 1035. 33764. 25945.2373. 1956.4073. 2176.942. 329.291.t 166.1920. 839.30 NMPW 596. 126. 258. 51. 48. 20.NMPP 2390. 695. 1000. 293. 50. 35.FITZ 1797. 996. *www*** 0. ******* 0.NMPE 1622. 789. 177. 86. 1283. 703.U C 5.C S*1 4 C S 0.S 5.CONTOUR MEAN 1601. 373. 478. 262.40 NMPW 897. 376. 616. 201.NMPP 1512. 376. 390. 102.FITZ 47. 20. 315. 109.NMPE 837197. 837000. 674. 344.460.. 411.61. 34.50. 27.52. 18.607. 309.CONTOUR MEAN 209913. 209095.499. 87. 192. 138.CONTROL MEAN** 140331. 83970. 37208. 16089. 5581. 4497.EXP. MEAN*w 80512. 70840. 3319. 1275. 39970. 37872..MONTHLY MEAN 110421. 53904. 22147. 9649. 20627. 16627.-MONTHLY RANGE 47.- 837197. 177.- 115322. 48.- 267112.* Standard error** Control represents NMPW & NMPE, experimental represents NMPP & FITZ* Substrates.
| |
| lost during severe weather t One of four replicates missing due to weather t One of four replicates lost during shipment ttThree of four replicates missing due to weather.
| |
| Table c-4 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance (No./mm 2) of Bacillariophyta-Centric (Bottom Periphyton)
| |
| Collected on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP 23-23 MAY 28-28 JUN 25-26 JUL 24-24 AUG 27-27 SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.5 NMPW 20449. 8577.NMPP 1191. 1139.FITZ 82877. 37654.NMPE 104599. 20436.CONTOUR MEAN 52279. 24659.10 NMPW 17105. 7691.NMPP 5016. 2447.FITZ 60622. 0.NMPE 14768. 8851.CONTOUR MEAN 24378. 12362.20 NMPN 5341. 1712.NMPP 14260. 2236.FITZ 2678. 500.NMPE 4134. 1858.CONTOUR MEAN 6603. 2610.30 NHPW 542. 139.NMPP 879. 247.FITZ 3019. 1000.NIPE 2497. 607.CONTOUR MEAN 1734. 604.40 NMPW 330. 150.NMPP 27. 15.FITZ 1146. 114.NMPE 961. 511.CONTOUR MEAN 616. 263.CONTROL MEAN** 17073. 10005.EXP. MEAN** 17171. 9335.MONTHLY MEAN 17122. 6659.MONTHLY RANGE 27.- 104599.484. 402. 0.2451. 1492. w******1580. 1081. 0.472. 472. 0.0.0.0.0.985. 985.0. 0.0. 0.*** ) 0.1247. 478.2533. 2168.1163. 872.1482. 1405.2999. 1890.2044. 432.0. 0. 328. 328.297. 297.0. 0.0.0. 0.99. 99.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.524. 524.0. 0.O1 0.357. 274.37. 37.0. 0.0. 0.0. 0.112. 112.98. 86. 28.28. 131. 131.2874. 2105. 8.484. 343. 0.80. 29. 0.1944* 521. *******8.0.0.0.5.14.0.5.8.0.0.0. 0.469. 469.89. 89.0. 0.1345. 648.940. 321.2143. 728.4288. 458.1441. 528.2203. 737.3. 3.0. 0.15.t 15.173. 139.47. 40.7. 4. 140. 112.30. 17.75. 56.75. 53.155. 14.56. 47.405. 366.913. 913.0. 0.S 0 0 0 CL Z F 59. 39. 84. 26. 343. 210.1699. 663. 165. 145.931. 562. 271. 222.3097. 1570. 21. 8.154. 69. 38. 24.3. 3. 7. 7.29. 15. 46. 22.26. 14.
| |
| * 0.48. 12. 230. 176.1470. 627.1554. 327.1770. 400.1662. 253.80.- 4288.124.59. 26. 9. 94. 69.33. 18.93. 46.63. 25.0.- 357.167. 118.22. 10.87. 54.0.- 985.111. 57.240. 117.169. 61.0.- 913.* Standard error** Control represents NMPW & NKPE, experimental represents NWP & FITZ******* Substrates lost during severe weather t One of four replicates missing due to weather-- --------~ ~ --
| |
| Table C-4 (Page 2 of 2)OCT NOV DEC 24-25 OCT DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.5 NMPW O.t 0.NMPP 0. 0.FITZ 33, 33.NMPE 7. 7.22-22 NOV 20-22 DEC MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E.0.4 0. *** wi , 0.0. ** 0.100. 100. ******* 0.150. 108. 84 6.n ,1,,, CONTOUR MEAN 10 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 20 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 30 NMPW NMPP FITZ.NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MEAN**,MONTHL! MEAN-MONTHLY RANGE 10, 8. 83. 44.0.0.0..0.0.0.0.0.0. 0.0. 0.11. 11.316. 259.0.0.0.140.0.0.0.140.0. 0. 82. 78. 35. 35..45. 45.17. 17.90. 90.19. 19.0.0.i 751.0.1 0.0.751.0.0.0.6.11; .T 0.0.6.14.8. 8.43. 17. 188. 188.S. 4.3. 3. 12.86, 86. 8.106. 106. ****0. 0. 75.7.8.0.29.0.21.0.2.0.19.49. 28. 32. 21.8. 7.S 0 3, 18.15.2.81665.20425.8176.35.4105.0.-16.8.2.81663.20413.8165.13.4082.81665.7. 4.107. 79.127. 51.161. 100.100.72.138.101.0.-33.34.90.43.751.1.12.0.I.4.21.3.13.I.12.0.1.3.15.2.9.140.Standard error** Control represents NMPW & NMPE, experimental represents NMPP & FITZ******* Substrates lost during severe weather t One of four replicates missing due to weather One of fnur replicates lost during shipw.nt ttThree of four replicates missing due to weather.
| |
| Table C-5 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance (No./mm ) of Bacillariophyta-Pennate (Bottom Periphyton)
| |
| Collected on Aritficial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP 23-23 MAY 28-28 JUN 25-26 JUL 24-24 AUG 27-27 SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.5 NMPW 94258. 18296. 6682. 4019. 3999. 365. 1473. 1115. 3263. 2019.NMPP 4237. 2113. 11890. 4944. ******* 0. 245796. 234567. 23675. 13073.NMPE 525125. 17400.2399. 1515. 7134. 1298.20830. 15156. 7194. 5507.CONTOUR MEAN 220615. 114373.10 NMPW 99816. 11546.NMPP 41745. 16207.FITZ 299046. 0.NMPE 179645. 51751.CONTOUR MEAN 155063. 55699.20 NMPW 59774. 5906.NMPP 146941. 8345.FITZ 64477. 13267.NtMPE 82018. 22744.CONTOUR MEAN 88302. 20123.30 NMPW 18518. 2732.NMPP 18377. 4481.FITZ 59187. 7317.NMPE 71528. 4273.CONTOUR MEAN 41903. 13774.40 NMPW 4578. 1206.NMPP 1530. 395.FITZ 23425. 956.NMPE 13241. 2472..CONTOUR MEAN 10694. 4916.CONTROL MEAN** 114850. 48411.EXP. MEAN** 91780. 34008.M'ONTHLY MEAN 103315. 28914.MONTHLY RANGE 1530.- 525125.10725. 3786.11643. 11101.1899. 587.4 4623. 1189.29598. 8023.11941. 6233.4475. 1452.1050. 208.553. 217.4416. 3242.835. 660.1713. 907.3841. 1784.0.83704. 81049.255. 167.26. 15.1410. 511.8169. 4157.2465. 1925.0.953. 516.9297. 7220.11363. 1939.75147. 40810.21727. 1255.38807. 13426.36761. 13990.7052. 3499. 79. 38.9431. 4356. 2672. 1903.3088. 608. 2760. 393.6435. 1927. *w*.** 0.409.539.2247.181. 16986. 3596.18. 41360. 14779.663. 16125. 1385.0. 12245. 3142.6502. 1308.11956. 2428.14673. 2739.37496. 6633.6564. 929.17672. 6819.U S S 1837. 879.443. 44.280.t 139.5667. 2303.86. 67.1619. 1351..2663. 2241.369. 135.207. 120.38. 16.819. 618.1821. 808.2128. 658.1975. 507.38.- 7194.1065. 592. 21679. 6641.270. 127. 3628. 1494.123. 26. 33291. 14550.807. 405. 30213. 7653.558. 147. 1534. 348.440. 152. 17167. 8455.3301.3288.4461.684.602.560.272.243.540. 121. 400.124. 57. 932.176. 88. *******229. 183. 1204.204.305.0.292.2933. 799.10474. 2752.9435. 3398.9955. 2131.684.- 37496.267.94. 845. 236.1488, 965.25509. 24479.14833. 13594.26.- 245796.9038. 3779.30309. 7704.18492. 4651.400.- 75147.* Standard error= ** Control represents NMPW & NMPE, experimental represents NMPP & FIT Z******* Substrates lost during severe weather t One of four replicates missing due to weather Table C-5 (Page 2 of 2)OCT NOV DEC 24-25 OCT 22-22 NOV 20-22 DEC DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E.5 NMPW 2743.t 569. 11366.A 3051. -0a.NMPP 380408. .45462. 0*. .** 0. **w* 0.FITZ 1221. 346. 1876. 872. 0**.*** 0.NMPE 3711. 2534. 1671. 446. 1684 82.CONTOUR MEAN 97021. 94464. 4971. 3198. 168. 168.10 NMPJ 13262. 7668. 3179. 835. 958. 480.NMPP 230946. 39846. 6621. 2793. 5969.t 0.FITZ 13885. 3676. 2012. 658. 9714. 4106.NMPE 18545. 5256. 630. 197. 1283. 153.CONTOUR MEAN 69159. 53942. 3110. 1281. 4481. 2086.20 NMPW 20854. 7311. 13279. 6542. 1760. 265.NMPP 2528. 171. 5614. 1061. 9633. 1792.FITZ 9033. 2769. 11766. 1633. 2558. 1249.NMPE 11051. 4266. 4176. 856.t -117.A 24.CONTOUR MEAN 10866. 3793. 8709. 2243. 3517. 2101.30 NMPW 1737. 431. 1648. 193. 467. 114.NMPP 2990. 265. 2972. 539. 1079. 533.FITZ 4963. 484. ******* 0. ******* 0.NMPE 911. 278. 370. 113. 447. 136.CONTOUR MEAN 2650. 881. 1663. 751. 664. 207.40 NMPW 563. 390. 1010. 240. 332. 97.oNMPP 1620, 728. 521. 82. 338. 79.FITZ 167. 55. 376. 47. 62. 18.* NMPE 735511. 734791. 681. 196. 487. 60.CONTOUR MEAN 184465. 183682. 647. 136. 305. 89.O CONTROL MEAN** 80889. 72774. 3801. 1476. 669. 184.0 EXP. MEAN** 64776. 41687. 3970. 1366. 4193. 1600.MONTHLY MEAN 72832. 40858. 3876. 991. 2211. 814.MONTHWY RANGE 167.- 735511. 370.- 13279. 62.- 9714.* Standard error*
| |
| * Control represents NMPW & NMPE, experimental represents NMPP & FITZ o ******* Substrates lost during severe weather t One of four replicates missing due to weather f One of four replicates lost during shipment ttThree of four replicates missing due to weather.
| |
| Table C-6 Taxonomic List of All Suspended Periphyton Collected on Artificial Substrates in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, May-September 1978 ii Taxr Cyanophyta" Chroococcaceae Gomphosphaeria lacustris Microcystis sp.Chamaesiphonaceae Chamaesiphon sp.Oscillatoriaceae Lyngbya sp.Oscillatoria sp.Pseudoanabaena sp.Oscillatoriaceae unid.Nostocaceae Anabaena circinalis Anabaena sp.Chlorophyta Volvocales Chlamydomonas sp.*Pandorina sp.Chlorococcales Actinastrum hantzschii Ankistrodesmus convolutus Ankistrodesmus falcatus Ankistrodesmus sp.Chodatella quadrisetta Coelastrum microporum Coelastrum sp.Crucigenia rectangularis Oocystis sp.Pediastrum boryanum Pediastrum du .Pediastrum sim-plex Pediastrum tetras Quadrigula chdaii Scenedesmus acuminatus Scenedesmus acutus.Scenedesmus bicaudatus Scenedesmus ecornis Scenedesmus intermedius Scenedesmus quadricauda Scenedesmus spinosus Scenedesmus sp.Schroederia setigera Sphaerocystis sp..Tetraedron caudatum Tetraedron minimum Tetraedron tr-figonum Chlorococcales unid.Ulotrichales Ulothrix zonata Ulothrix sp.Chaetophorales Stigeoclonium sp.Chaetophorales unid.Oedogoniales Oedogonium sp.Zygnematales Closterium moniliferum Cosmarium botrytis Cosmarium sp.Taxa Chlorophyta (Contd)Mougeotia sp.Spirogyra sp.Chlorophyta unid.Chrysophyta Chrysophyta unid.Bacillariophyta Eupodiscales Cyclotella sp.Melosira variens Relosira sp.Stephanodiscus banderana Eupodiscales unid.Fragilariales Asterionella formosa Diatoma vulgare Diatoma tenue Fragilaria crotonensis Fragilaria vaucheriae Fragilaria sp.Meridian sp.Synedra cyclopum Synedra sp 'Tabellaria sp.Fragilariales unid.Achnanthales Achnanthes sp.Cocconeis sp.Naviculales Cymbella.prostrata C~nbela sp.Gomhonma livceum Gomphonema montanum Gomphonema sp.Gyrosigma sp.Navicula sp.Naviculales unid.Bacillariales Nitzchia acicularis Nitzchia holsatica Nitzchia sp.Bacillariophyta unid..Pyrrhophyta-Dinophyceae Gymnodiniales Gymnodinium fuscum nm sp.Peridiniales Peridinium sp.Ceratium hirudinella Pyrrhophyta-Dinophyceae unid.Cryptophyta Cryptomonodales Chroomonas sp.Cryptomonas marssoni Cryptomonas sp.Rhodomonas minuta Cyanomonas sp.7~1 LL J C-10 science services division
| |
| -~r.~r*- ii~.Table C-7 Abundance (No./mm 2) of Cyanophyta (Suspended Periphyton) on Artificial Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Substrates, MAY-23-23 MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP 29-29 JUN 26-26 JUL 23-23 AUG DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.2 NMPW 0. 0. 71314672.
| |
| 461087. 2Z819526.
| |
| 14460224.
| |
| 0.NMPP 0. 0. 1792603650.
| |
| 363120128.
| |
| 102206.t 92212. 17405440.
| |
| 6108069.FITZ 0. 0. .,-* ** 0. 17560432.
| |
| 10399363.
| |
| *** 0.27-27 SEP MEAN S.E.*131599. 129496.20765072.
| |
| 19647392.0.10448328.
| |
| 10316740.Cl H H-CONTOUR MEAN 7 NMPW NMPP FITZ CONTOUR MEAN 12 NMPW NMPP FITZ CONTOUR MEAN 17 NMP4 NMPP FITZ CONTOUR MEAN 0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0. 931959040.
| |
| 860644608.
| |
| 0.0.0.41861120.46460720.149635200.
| |
| 21775216.24784160.106601600.
| |
| 1440879.4627345.16880816.54132. 52579888.
| |
| 35975232.1861370. 58568496.
| |
| 52802992.3443331. 0.228782.14306312.11344736.1425.8844726.6760549.0. 79325680.
| |
| 35180048.7649680. 4706331.55574192.
| |
| 2994285.42405088.
| |
| 5039831.133482064.
| |
| 124285232.
| |
| 0.0.0.0.13494048.
| |
| 6865876. 17405440.
| |
| 17405440.11243152.
| |
| 5529218. 18486896.13066704.
| |
| 1115857. 10620128.121975184.
| |
| 65762512.
| |
| 8306373.1733068.7741371.2581570.8626608. 4285066.218029. 187591.13847648.
| |
| 4967149.9761864. 3627848.7942512. .4038321.0. 48761680.
| |
| 36610528.12471130.
| |
| 3081143. 87943568.
| |
| 45538496.6149.0.0.2050.1537.0.512.0.-6149. 1868752. 301247. 4396642. 1288688.0. 1852685. 811159. 2752942. 2169536.0. 30208832.
| |
| 15598046.
| |
| 100977. 11902.2050. 11310085.
| |
| 9449373. 2416853. 1251385.3528016. 713745.5428029. 1930175.0.4478022. 950003.13329.18773104.1756337.8290.10165688.976044.6847589. 5983942.S 0 3 0 6 S S 0.CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MEAN**MIONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 1537.0.512.6149.31571920.
| |
| 15760925.307974400.
| |
| 248327776.
| |
| 207464480.
| |
| 159186880.
| |
| 99999.-1792603650.
| |
| 11785980.
| |
| 5230239. 32837664.
| |
| 14946272.7618898. 2463096. 53720992.
| |
| 28919952.9007925. 2326256. 44770960.
| |
| 16990432.999991- 22819520.
| |
| 99999.- 133482064.
| |
| 147934.12936436.8286068.13329.-49862.2368779.2434590.20765072.* Standard error** Control represents
| |
| ?WPW & NMPE, experimental represents NIPP .& FITZ******* Substrates lost during severe weather t One of four replicates missing due to weather Table C-8 Abundance (No./mm 2) of Chlorophyta (Suspended Periphyton) on Artivicial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 KAY JUN JUL AUG sEP 23-23 MAY 29-29 JUN 26-26 JUL 23-23 AUG DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.27-27 SEP MEAN S.E.0 969. 969.256070. 256070.0.I NMPW NMPP FITZ I 1%)CONTOUR MEAN 7 NMPW NMPP FITZ CONTOUR MEAN 12 NtIPK NMPP FITZ CONTOUR MEAN 17 NMPN NMPP FITZ CONTOUR'MEAN 2492.3869.1665.2675.0.0.30472.2492.3869.250.213619. 213619.9108328. 5516673.0.643. 4660973. 4447354.74825.0.0.8669.433991. 328283.266341. Z064.1349085. 1187910.683139. 336472.158693. 20709.17180. 17180.456659. 210007.210844. 129519.167237.16733.t 40504.126716ý16523.40504.46713.0.512458. 87259.0.512458. 512458.291170. 10807.68299. 35706.0.179735. 111435.338440. 235550.585690. 497364.0.462065. 123625.4598.315934.168682.10157. 10157.163071. 89919.128519. 127551.1342*54044.168682.0.33602.6822.13475.9439.5082.9271.7930.2983.11348.8559.0.-0.7175.1008.10255.6960.5082.9271.70472.0.4773904 70472.0.477390.149225.54390.8178.149225.40747.8178.182621. 148782.70598. 41515.3085.14729.35236.17683.2164.192052.8262.3085.3079.35236.9398.2056.17460.8262.0.30832.157700.0.30832.124189.0.935.3692.1542.0.935.1137.1108.1425.62844. 48256.1048S.28104.19295.213365.298638.262092.10485.-8894.14676.0.8809.67493. 69305.i.0 S 0.m CONTROL MEAHR" EXP. MEAN**1NOITHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 2231.4636.3314.33602.179520.1627096.1100704.0.-95759.1259007.809142.9108328.115789'74784.89452.0.-39767.54943.38257.456659.102354.145592.88598.585690.t704.141567.91071.969.-796.46793.35809.313934.* Standard error*' Citrol represents PW & WNPE. experimental represents W4PP &. rTTZ* Substrates lost during severe weather t One of four replicates missing due to weather-, -.*1 .~...- .. ..~,
| |
| I"7 ...... ...... ... .Table C-9 Abundance (No.mm 2) of Bacillariophyta-Centric (Suspended Periphyton) on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 MAY 23-23 MAY JUN 29-29 JUN JUL 26-26 JUL AUG 23-23 AUG SEP 27-27 SEP DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN MEAN S.E.MEAN S.E.MEAN S.E.MEAN-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| -- -2 NMPN NMPP FITZ CONTOUR MEAN 7 NMPW NMPP FITZ CONTOUR MEAN 12 NMPW NHPP FITZ CONTOUR MEAN 0.C 0.0.0.0.0.0.42724.3591666.1817194.42724.3591667.0.1774471.0.0.t 0.0.0.0..0.0.21260. 21260.0.66. 66.0. 0.0.0. 21260.0 0.7267.15262.7510.0.0.5369.1790.4719.1270.15375.7121.1180.5568.4105.0.-0.7267.15262.4407.0.0.2462.1790.3480, 1270.1468.4245.1180..2332.1680.15375.71911. 33797.132135. 132135.0. 0.68015. 38194.17 NMPW NMPP FITZ CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MEAN**MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 16279.30354.0.15544.3605.0.16755.6787.33630.538701.355039.0.-16279.477.0.8770.3738.0.0.1246.0.0.0.0.0.0.183.61.934.23..327..0.-3738.0.0.1246.0.0.0.0.12582.0.6291.14000.0.7000.21260.12582.0.0.6291.14000.0.0.7000.1971.0.0.2197.2994.5315.3221.21260.33.271. 271.8809. 8809.39690. 39690.16257. 11973.3605.0.16755.5092.15140.509139.323889.3591666.0. 4393.0. 0.183.61. 2197.33.0.5825.0.1942.653.0.0.218.247.7761.5029.0.-0.5825.0.1942.a a 5.a St 0.54.0.0.218.147.S4"9.3579.39690.934.23.310.3738.10325.5315.7462.0.-* Standard error-- Control represents NMPW & NMPE, experimental represents W4PP & FITZ*"ft*** Substiates lost during severe weather t One of four replicates missing due to weather Table C-10 Abundance (No. mm 2) of Bacillariophyta-Pennate (Suspended Periphyton) on Artificial Substrates, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 MAY JuN 23-23 MAY 29-29 JUN DEPTH TRAN-COMTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E.2 NMPN 456838. 98809. 1043354. 188880.NMPP 395615. 96975. 21679152.
| |
| 7054164.FITZ 95155. 13052. 0.CONTOUR MEAN 315870. 111763. 11361248.
| |
| 10317898.MEAN 36744.2407.t 178270.72474.JUL 26-26 JUL S.E.36744.2196.64859.53819.AUG 23-23 AUG MEAN 5.E.370633. 54566.0.370633. 370633.MP 27-27 SEP MEAN S.K.*34983. 34096.832033. 797et.'433508. 398515.7 NMPW 919218. 185929. 689629. 156037.HMPP 978484. 29269. 929777. 303485.FZTZ 723912. 161261. 198856. 118268.CONTOUR MEAN 873871. 76906. 606087. 215093.12 NNPW 421702. 49514. 378224. 150317.N11PP 1099045. 63107. 361867. 146046.FZTZ 523216. 244147. 520584. 43194.CONTOUR MEAN 681321. 210908. 420225. 50402.18112. 4313.17068. 8478.31250. 31250.22143. 4563.151809. 72029.167780. 85920.262378. 213309.193989. 34504.268182. 206519.20315. 18445.3748. 2288.97415. 85517.119143. 43648.13037. 13037.66090. 53053.89659. 19661.1077400. 817946.583530. 493870.583530. 493873.96791. 3457.1831639. 246017.4404234. 117789.2110887. 1251266.70987. 25330.515158. 242094.1872801. 452778.819649. 541962.3537. 2655.1488405. 39281.672251. 349118.721398. 429348.51574. 20421.1659502. 502537.1074801. 395347.3537.- A44043.17 NMPW 332161. 40900.NMPP 180371. 38147.FITZ 851742. 1448.CONTOUR MEAN 454758. 203Z71.216518. 43495.275246. 20737.975764. 130098.489176. 243884.229869.56219.39544.3778.20989.0.16675.0 0 0 CONTROL MEAN** 532479. 131557. 581931. 182468. 118712. 57934.EXP. MEAN* 605943. 130203. 3563028. 3021557. 85402. 35888.MONTHLY MEAN 581455. 94205. 2478989. 1922293. 96505. 29562.MONTHLY RANGE 95155.- 1099045. 99999.- 21679152.
| |
| 2407.- 268182.* Standard error Control represents 1NWW A PIWE, experimental represents NMPP & FITZ**A Substrates lost during severe weather t One of four replicates missing due to weather 77224. 28479.379322. 245959.249851. 145346.13037.- 1077400.'--, ~-~I-~
| |
| f APPENDIX D BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES science services division Table D-1 Abundance (No. m ) of Total Benthos in 0.17-m2 Suction Sampler, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Depth .Apr Jun Aug Oct Dec Contour (ft) Transect Mean S.E.* Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Mean S.E.10 NMPW 610.8 129.4 1143.3 66.2 3107.9 989.8 4076.7 346.0 No samples taken NMPP 418.2 183.5 2091.0 1170.3 7518.5 1802.1 11444.7 1594.6 due to ice and FITZ 436.3 99.3 2891.3 664.9 3772.8 2864.2 845.4 652.9 strong winds NMPE 1107.2 950.7 2707.7 812.3 1964.6 21.1 5424.5 201.6 Contour mean 643.1 160.7 2208.3 394.1 4090.9 1202.0 5447.8 2217.8 20 NMPW 833.4 520.5 285.8 75.2 7377.1 6961.9 3640.4 1414.0 NMPP 475.4 60.2 1149.3 1016.9 478.4 171.5 5574.9 3095.8 FITZ 1645.7 791.3 547.6 451.3 782.2 228.6 6188.7 490.4 NMPE 90.3 12.0 2051.9 162.5 207.6 129.4 3065.8 2229.4 Contour mean 761.2 331.6 1008.6 391.1 2211.3 1725.9 4617.4 749.9 30 NMPW 2906.3 198.6 291.8 135.4 499.4 288.8 3691.6 1651.7 NMPP 3116.9 1299.7 1868.3 1140.3 1414.0 12.0 3285.4 679.9 I- FITZ 791.3 57.2 965.8 39.1 1197.4 391.1 1056.0 33.1 NMPE 806.3 282.8 974.8 192.5 1609.6 580.7 3180.1 2091.0 Contour mean 1905.2 640.2 1025.2 323.4 1180.1 242.0 2803.3 592.8 40 NMPW 99.3 9.0 174.5 168.5 1016.9 968.8 111.3 69.2 NMPP 51.2 33.1 60.2 48.1 189.5 15.0 4488.8 842.4 FITZ 1381.0 382.1 1290.7 1086.1 3174.1 1477.2 2966.5 36.1 NMPE 436.3 418.2 2942.4 108.3 1516.3 1251.6 1970.6 574.6 Contour mean 491.9 308.5 1116.9 668.8 1474.2 629.2 2384.3 917.7 60 NMPW 3.0 3;0 162.5 126.4 1609.6 3.0 120.3 6.0 NMPP 36.1 6.0 216.6 162.5 547.6 102.3 899.6 117.3 FITZ 2160.2 403.2 3366.6 1459.2 3011.6 2223.3 1778.1 436.3.2MPE 1134.2 195.6 4792.7 550.6 4197.0 941.7 3754.7 60.2 Contour mean 833.4 514.5 2134.6 1160.1 2341.4 798.2 1638.2 782.6 Control man** 802.7 267.5 1552:7 489.2 2310.6 674.7 2903.6 538.9 Experimental mean** 1051.2 31-9.2 1444.7 348.9 2208.6 712.9 3852.8 1040.6 Monthly mean 927.0 251.3 1498.7 292.7 2259.6 477.8 3378.2 580.6 Monthly range 3.0 -3116.9 60.2- 4792.7 7518.5 -207.6 111.3-11444.7
| |
| *Standard error.**Control represents Nh1PW and NMPE, experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.0 a.0 Table D-2 1 Abundance (No./m 2) of Gammarus fasciatus Collected by Suction Sampler, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1977 Depth Contour (ft) Transect Apr Jun Aug Oct Dec*10 NMPW 150 72 3,054 4,032 NMPP 69 268 7,380 11,303 FITZ 238 12 3,559 779 NMPE 108 144 1,104 4,384 Contour mean 141 124 3,774 5,124 20 NMPW 117 0 238 2,891 NMPP 78 93 6 3,902 FITZ 114 18 129 5,301 NMPE 42 241 21 2,587 Contour mean 88 88 99 3,670 30 NMPW 15 30 18 1,555 l.NMPP 51 36 18 1,155 FITZ 36 21 78 162 NMPE 0 0 45 196 Contour mean 29 22 40 767 40 NMPW 63 12 6 51 NMPP 6 3 36 3,496 FITZ 60 554 999 475 NMPE 0 3 36 108 Contour mean. 32 143 269 1,033 60 NMPW 0 0 6 12 NMPP 12 12 30 475 FITZ 27 199 21 469 NMPE 30 3 289 460 Contour mean 17 53 87 354 Control**
| |
| -53 51 499 1,628 Experimental mean** 69 122 1,226 2,752 Monthly mean 62 86 854 2,190 Monthly range 0-238 0-554 6-7380 12-11303 q*Samples not taken due to ice and severe weather.**Control represents NMPW and NMPE; experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.D-2 science services division Table D-3 Abundance (No./m 2) of Pontoporeia affinis Collected by Suction Sampler, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Depth Contour (ft) Transect Apr Jun Aug Oct Dec*1O NMPW 0 0 0 0 NMPP 0 0 0 0 FITZ 0 24 0 9 NMPE 0 0 0 0 Contour mean. 0 6 0 2 20 NMPW 0 12 0 0 NMPP 0 6 0 0 FITZ 0 27 36 0 NMPE 3 3 27 12 Contour mean 1 12 16 3 30 NMPW 0 3 3 0 NMPP 0 3 51 3 FITZ 499 433 379 235 NMPE 294 451 508 150 Contour mean 200 223 235 97 40 NMPW 0 0 0 0 NMPP 0 3 3 18 FITZ 120 165 469 683 NMPE 138 879 403 569 Contour mean 65 262 219 317 60 NMPW 0 15 27 6 NMPP .0 3 298 33 FITZ 614 1,273 1,835 397* NMPE 244 2,253 2,419 1,871 Contour mean 212 886 1,145 577 Control mean** 63 362 339 261-. Experimental mean** 123 194 307 138 Monthly mean- 95 278 323 199 , Monthly range 0-614 0-2253 0-2419 0-1871* *Samples not-taken due to ice and severe weather.**Control represents NMPW and NMPE; experimental represents NMPP and FITZ.D-3 science services division Table D-4 2 2 Abundance (No./m ) of Oligochaeta (Benthic Invertebrates) in 0.17-m2 Suction Sampler, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 APR JUN AUG OCT DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPW 3.0 3.0 550.6 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 NMPP 0.0 0.0 1308.7 604.7 30.1 18.1 0.0 0.0 FITZ 0.0 0.0 2220.3 607.7 114.3 66.2 3.0 3.0 NMPE 0.0 0.0 1203.4 324.9 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 DEC MEAN SE No samples taken due to ice and strong winds.(Aý'!a i a S S 4C C0 Z CONTOUR MEAN 20 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 30 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPW NIPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 60 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MEAN**MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 0.8 0.8 1320..8 343.6 15.0 15.0 27.1 0.0 0.0 643.8 12.0 12.0 291.8 9.0 3.0 1320.8 27.1 643.8 231.7 15.0 6.0 63.2 508.5 12.0 6.0 15.0 159.5 12.0 37.6 26.4 9.0 3.2 570.9 280.1 147.4 121.0 0.0 0.0 207.6 279.8 0.0 0.0 51.1 57.2 33.1 36.1 424.2 180.5 33.1 3.0 6.0 303.9 21.1 607.7 90.3 698.0 3.0 261.7 367.0 312.9 3.0 18.1 418.2 1805.2 3.0 12.0 15.0 1353.9 2.3 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.1 15.0 27.1 27.1 13.5 7.8 121.8 71.9 168.5 91.9 403.2 157.8 561.1 425.7 3.0 0.0 327.9 90.3 3.0 0.0 99.3 84.2 0.0 0.0 57.2 658.9 0.0 87.2 0.0 0.0 57.2 1465.2 99.3 764.2 87.2 0.0 947.7 577.7 30.1 3.0 1447.1 676.9 6.0 3.0 57.2 39.1 105.3 77.1 179.0 160.5 579.2 341.2 539.3 340.3 0.0 0.0 640.8 294.8 0.0 252.7 0.0 6.0 9.0 848.4 6.0 321.9 0.0 6.0 559.6 171.5 18.1 0.0 613.8 878.5 18.1 0.0 252.7 294.8 6.0 99.3 388.1 502.4 6.0 81.2 45.1 33.1 233.9 152.4 357.3 177.2 377.6 219.6 249.0 117.3 69.5 118.8 94.2 37.3 454.9 68.3 583.7 38.3 519.3 151.4 227.1 133.6 247.3 117.4 370.7 144.8 309.0 91.8 0.0- 1465.2 305.7 183.7 240.4 143.5 273.0 113.7 0.0- 1805.2 0.0- 640.6 0.0- 2220.3* STANDARD ERROR** CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EX... ...... ........ .. .." ... ........ .. ....PERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ' .'"" .,-.......,,"U.....
| |
| ' ..
| |
| Table D-5 Abundance (No./m ) of.Diptera (Benthic Invertebrates) in 0.17-m2 Suction Sampler, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 APR JUN AUG OCT DEPTH TRAN-CONTOUR SECT MEAN S.E.* MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E. MEAN S.E.10 NMPW 442.3 165.5 337.0 18.1 6.0 6.0 9.0 9.0 NMPP 207.6 21.1 252.7 96.3 69.2 21.1 6.0 6.0 FITZ 66.2 18.1 388.1 39.1 18.1 6.0 0.0 0.0 NMPE 977.8 863.5 1200.4 484.4 15.0 15.0 132.4 102.3 DEC MEAN SE No samples taken .due to'ice and strong winds.CONTOUR MEAN 20 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 423.5 200.4 544.6 220.4 27.1 14.3 36.9 31.9 30.1 291.8 138.4 18.1 24.1 15.0 66.2 0.0 87.2 24.1 60.2 174.5 27.1 0.0 54.2 18.1 162.5 69.2 93.3 84.2 66.2 63.2 21.1 42.1 9.0 0.0 60.2 141.4 9.0 0.0 30.1 135.4 119.6 63.5 86.5 32.1 102.3 20.7 52.7 32.4 30 NMPW 36.1 18.1 NMPP 15.0 3.0 FITZ 36.1 6.0 NMPE 54.2 0.0 42.1 54.2 42.1 258.7 36.1 45.1 42.1 752.1 6.0 48.1 60.2 144.4 15.0 150.4 0.0.90.3 3.0 0.0 87.2 297.9 3.0 0.0 3.0 189.5 U a i a U S S*1 (a 0'a a.S S 5, CONTOUR MEAN 40 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN 60 NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE CONTOUR MEAN CONTROL MEAN**EXP. MEAN**MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY RANGE 35.4 8.0 3.0 3.0 9.0 9.0 66.2 0.0 9.0 9.0 21.8 14.9 12.0 12.0 884.5 3.0 3.0 141.4 96.3 84.2 84.2 75.2 21.1 78.2 860.5 27.1 42.1 66.2 99.3 53.2 247.5 169.8 97.0 69.9 6.0 6.0 21.1 15.0 180.5 0.1 105.3 27.1 78.2 40.5 46.6 23.1 297.1 196.3 0.0 9.0 63.2 90.3 0.0 3.0 15.0 24.1 18.1 54.2 117.3 120.3 0.0 1480.2 12.0 189.5 9.0 352.0 60.2 .315.9 84.2 87.2 261.7 147.4 84.2 108.3 207.6 445.3 0.0 12.0 69.2 0.0 40.6 21.6 77.5 25.0 584.4 300.6 211.4 82.4 166.1 90.3 128.2 99.4 29.9 51.3 232.6 109.2 170.9 112.6 38.0 59.5 321.6 152.8 123.4 181.7 70.2 67.1 251.7 83.4 95.2 6.0- 1480.2 0.0-46.0 24.5 26.2 445.3 0.0- 977.8 3.0- 1200.4* STANDARD ERROR** CONTROL REPRESENTS NMPW & NMPE, EXPERIMENTAL REPRESENTS NMPP & FITZ 1~1 if I.,~ I I 3 APPENDlIX E I CHTHYOPLANKTON science services division Table E-1 (Page 1 of 3)Abundance*
| |
| of Total Eggs (All Species Combined) in Day Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No fish eggs were collected in day samples after August)I.I-a S 0 5.p S 0 S a.S 0 Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour' Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East -East Mean 3-West I-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1,-East 13-East Mean ,,,, NMPP NMPP Mean APR S 4 N No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean APR 10 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean APR M 17 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean APR S 24 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean MAY S 0 0 0 3.8 4.1 0 1.3 0 0 4.2 4.2 0 0 1.4 3.6 0 0 1.3 2 H 0 4.9 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 B 0 0 0 4.5 4.5 0 1.5 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0.9 Mean 0 1.6 0 2.8 2.9 0 1.2 1.5 .0 .1.4 1.4 0 0 0.7 1.2 0 0 0.9 MAY 8 MA " No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean MAY S 0 0 0 0 15 M No Catch No Catch 0 0 0 0 8 0 4.0 0 0.3 Mean 0 1.3 0 0.1 MAY S 0 0 0 0 4.4 0 0.7 0.3 22 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 9.8 0 0 0 1.6 No Catch No Catch 0.6 Mean 0 0 3.2 0 1.5 0 0.8 0.3 MAY S 30 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Number per 1000 m 3.***S = surface, M mid-depth, B bottom.**Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-1 (Page 2 of 3)2 o nt40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 6o-- 0-Ft 1t00.Ft Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-EastI 3-East Mean 3-West -West 11/2-West 1t/2-East I1-East 13-East Mean NMPP Mean S 0 9.2 0 0 0 0 1.5 0.6 JUN M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch No Catch 0.0 5 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 Mean 0 3.1 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.2 S 0 0 12.6 0 0 0 2.1 0.8 JUN M 0 5.5 0 5.7 0 0 1.9 No Catch No Catch 0.7 12 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 Mean 0 1.8 4.2 1.9 0 0 1.3 0.5 S. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 JUN M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 19 B 0 10.2 4.7 0 0 0 2.5 0 0 5.7 0 0 0 1.0 1.4 Mean 0 3.4 1.6 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 1.9 0 0 0 0.3 0.5 S 0 0 0 4.9 0 0 0.8 0 4.9 0 0.7 JUN M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0 0 0 0.0 26 B 0 0 0 4.9 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0.3 Mean 0 0 0 3.3 0 0 0.6 0 1.6 0 0.3 S 4.8 0 4.7 4.2 0 0 2.3 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 1.2 JUL M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 5 B 0 0 0 21.6 26.4 25.4 12.2 0 0 6.2 0 0 5.1 1.9 10.1 0 0 6.4 Mean 1.6 0 1.6 8.6 8.8 8.5 4.8 1.5 0 2.1 0 0 1.7 0.9 3.4 0 0 2.5 S 0 294.3 0 0 0 0 49.1 4.6 10.2 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 3.9 0 20.9 JUL N 0 56.1 0 0 0 0 9.4 0 0 0 0 5.2 0 0.9 11.6 0 0 4.9 10 B 0 145.5 0 0 0 0 24.3 0 19.0 0 0 0 0 3.2 0 0 0 11.0 Mean 0 165.3 0 0 0 0 27.6 1.5 9.7 0 0 1.7 0 2.2 3.9 1.3 0 12.2 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 -0 16.5 0 0 2.8 0 0 0 1.1 JUL MS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 4.6 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0.3 17 B 0 0 0 9.0 0 0 1.5 0 0 0 19.2 0 0 3.2 0 0 0 1.9 Mean 0 0 0 3.0 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 13.4 0 0 2.2 0 0 0 1.1 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 77.3 0 0 12.9 5.2 JUL M 0 0 0 5.6 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 143.3 0 0 23.9 No Catch 9.9 24 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 327.7 0 0 54.6 21.8 Mean 0 0 0 1.9 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 182.8 0 0 30.5 12.3 Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B bottom.**Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.S 0 a_0.. ....... .
| |
| Table E-1 (Page 3 of 3)t~1 p 0 5.0 U S (5.S S 0.U 5.SD e le 3-West e 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand t1/2-West 1/2-East -East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1-/2-West_1_1/2-East 1-East3-E.st en e, PP INPPI NMPP an S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 M NO CATCH 0 0 0 0 4.7 4.7 0 1.6 NO CATCH 0.6 July B 0 0 0 0 0 8.7 0 1.5 0.6 mean 0 0 0 0 1.6 4.5 0 1.0 0.4 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.2 0. 0 2.0 0.8 7 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.9 0 0 0.8 NO CATCH 0.3 Aug B 0 0 0 43.4 0 9.8 8.9 0 0 0. 45.5 0 0 7.6 6.6 Mean 0 0 0 14.5 0 3.3 3.0 0 0 0 20.9 0 0 3.5 2.6 S 14 M Aug B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean S 21 Aug N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean S 28 M Aug NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean S 5 Sept N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH mean S 11 Sept B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean S 18 Sept N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean S 26 S NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept Bea Mean Nunber per 1000 m 3..S = surface, MN- mid-depth, B = bottom.**Stations along contours are established within 3-. l-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-2 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Total Eggs (All Species Combined) in Night Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour'~
| |
| 60-Ft 80-TFt 100-Ft Grand Data Depth*' 3-West I 1-West 12-West 11/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 11/2-West 11/2-East 1I-East 13-East Mean Fwj P M PP Mean JUN S 0 0 0 4.0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.3 6-7 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 4.9 0 0 0.8 0.3 Mean 0 0 0 1.3 0 0 0.2 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0.31 0.2 JUN S 0 118.2 0 0 0 0 19.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 4.4 0 0 .8.2 15-161 M 0 102.8 4.6 0 0 0 17.9 0 0 4.5 0 0 0 0.8 5.5 0 0 7.8 B 0 334.3 0 0 0 0 55.7 0 5.1 4.9 0 0 0 1.7 0 , -0 0 23.0 Mean 0 185.1 1.5 0 0 0 31.1 0 1.7 3.1 0 0 0 0.8 3.3 0 0 13.0 JUN S 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0.8 0 4.7 0 4.4 0 0 1.5 0.9 19-20 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 B 0 8.8 15.9 0 0. 0 4.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.6 Mean 0 2.9 5.3 1.6 0 0 1.6 0 1.6 0 1.5 0 0 0.5 0.9 JUN S 0 40.9 14.0 0 0 0 9.2 0 0 4.4 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 4.0 26 N 9.6 33.3 0 0 0 19.3 10.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 4.2 B 0 61.5 4.8 10.0 0 26.6 17.2 0 14.7 25.5 0 0 9.1 8.2 0 0 5.0 10.5 Mean 3.2 45.2 6.2 3.3 0 15.3 12.2 0 4.9 10.0 0 0 3.0 3.0 0 0 1.7 6.2 JUL S 86.3 48.9 0 0 294.7 41.3 78.5 27.8 137.1 0 0 0 0 27.5 0 87.9 0 48.3 5-6 N 18.5 9.9 0 0 0 0 4.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 1.9 B 0 0 0 0 5.4 0 0.9 5.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0.7 Mean 34.9 19.6 0 0 100.0 13.8 28.0 11.1 45.7 0 0 0 0 9.5 0 29.3 0 17.0 JUL S 8.3 0 3.9 0 0 0 2.0 3.7 14.2 0 0 0 0 3.0 2.0 12-13 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 29.1 0 0 0 0 4.9 1.9 Mean 2.8 0 1.3 0 0 0 0.7 1.2 14.4 0 0 0 0 2.6 1.3 JUL S 207.9 4.2 8.1 0 0 0 36.7 8.6 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 15.3 17-18 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 B 5.3 5.7 4.9 0 0 0 2.7 5.2 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 1.4 Mean 71.1 3.3 4.3 0 0 0 13.1 4.6 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 5.6 JUL S 0 231.9 0 115.3 0 0 57.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 23.1 24-25 ' 021.7 1063.7 0 85.1 0 0 861.8 6.3 90.5 0 0 0 0 16.1 No Catch 351.2 B 10.7 1179.5 0 172.8 0 0 227.2 21.7 277.8 0 0 0 0 49.9 110.8 Mean 1344.1 825.0 0 124.4 0 0 382.3 9.3 122.8 0 0 0 0 22.0 161.7 Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, l-, and 1(Z-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit I.t!0 0 0i 5.
| |
| Table E-2 (Page 2 of 2)Sampe 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft NO-0Ft. Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East l-East 3-East Mean 3-West I-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean NMP N IPP Mean July S M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug MIen S 4.2 206.1 0 0 0 0 35.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14.0 7-8 M 1333.9 82.7: 0 0 0 0 236.1 0 4.3 0 0 0 0 0.7 NO CATCH 94.7 Aug 8 0 459.1 0 0 0 0 76.5 0 14.0 0 0 0 0 2.3 31.5 Mean 446.0 249.3 0 0 0 0 115.9 0 6.1 0 0 0 0 1.0 46.7 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 M 5.2 0 0 0 0 0 0N9 0.3 Aug B NO CATCH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NOCATCH 0 Mean 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.1 S 21 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 28 N Aug a NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH wean.S S Nt NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean S 14 M Sept B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean!ti Z 5, 3 Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B -bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-3 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Alewife Eggs in Day Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No alewife eggs were collected in day samples before June and after August)71 01 Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-F- t 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth- 3-Westj 1-West 1/2-West I1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-Wes t 11/2-West 11/2-East 1I-East 13-East Mean NjPP MP INMP Mean JUN S N No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean JUN S 0 0 4.2 0 0 0 0.7 0.3 12 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch No Catch 0.0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 Mean 0 0 1.4 0 0 0 0.2 0.1 JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 19 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 B 0 10.2 0 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 5.6 0 0 0 0.9 1.1 Mean 0 3.4 0 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 1.9 0 0 0 0.3 1 0.4 JUN S 0 0 0 4.9 0 0 0.8 0 4.9 0 0.7 26 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0 0 0 0.0 B 0 0 0 4.9 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0.3 Mean 0 0 0 3.3 0 0 0.6 0 1.6 0 0.3 JUL S 4.8 0 4.7 4.2 0 0 2.3 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 1.2 5. M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 9 0 0 0 21.6 0 0 3.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 10.1 0 0 2.1.Mean 1.6 0 1.6 8.6 0 0 2.0 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 3.4 0 0 1.1 JUL S 0 294.3 0 0 0 0 49.1 4.6 10.2 0 0 0 0 2.5 0 .0 0 20.6 10 N 0 56.1 0 0 0 0 9.4 0 0 0 0 5.2 0 0.9 5.8 0 0 4.5 B 0 145.5 0 0 0 0 24.3 0 19.0 0 0 0 0 3.2 0 0 0 11.0 Mean 0 165.3 0 0 0 0 27.6 1.5 9.7 0 0 1.7 0 2.2 1.9 0 0 12.0 JUL S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 16.5 0 0 2.8 1.1 17 N 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0.0 0 0 0 4.6 0 0 0.8 No Catch 0.3 B 0 0 0 9.1 0 0 1.5 0 0 0 19.2 0 0 3.2 1.9 Mean 0 0 0 3.0 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 13.4 0 0 2.2 1.1 JUL S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 77.3 0 0 12.9 5.2 24 N 0 0 0 5.6 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 143.3 0 0 23.9 No Catch 9.9 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 327.7 0 0 54.6 1.8 Mean 0 0 0 1.9 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 182.8 0 0 30.5 12.3 Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.S I S 0 0m..-, ,........t'--'-~, -~ .., .~J ~
| |
| Table E-3 (Page 2 of 2) ( l-4 S 0 C 0 U S 5.S U I S Sample 20-Ft Cntour' 40-Ft Contour" Ft 100-Ft. Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean P Mean S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 M NOCATCH 0 0 0 0 4.7 4.7 0 1.6 0.6 July B 0 0 0 0 0 8.7 0 1.5 NO CATCH 06 Mean 0 .0 0 0 1.6 4.5 0 1.0 0.4 S 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.2 0 0 2.0 0.8 7 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.9 0 0 0.8 NO CATCH 0.3 Aug 8 0 0 0 43.4 0 9.8 8.9 0 0 0 45.5 0 0 7.6 6.6 Mean 0 0 0 14.5 0 3.3 3.0 0 0 0 20.9 0 0 3.5 2.6 S 14 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 21 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 28 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 5 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 11 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 18 N NO CATCH NO 'CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 26 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.***Stations aloung contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/?-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-4 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Alewife Eggs in Night Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 tdj I 0 S So a a Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour*** Ft 8i 0 O0-Ft Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean t -es 11/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 13-East .Mean N14PPIMPP Mean JUN S 6-7 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean JUN S 0 118.2 0 0 0 0 19.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 7.9 15-16 M 0 102.8 4.6 0 0 0 17.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 6.9 B 0 329.3 0 0 0 0 54.9 0 5.1 4.9 0 0 0 1.7 22.6 Mean 0 183.4 1.5 0 0 0 30.8 0 1.7 1.6 0 0 0 0.6 12.5 JUN S 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0.8 0 4.7 0 4.4 0 0 1.5 0.9 19-20 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 B 0 8.8 15.9 0 0 0 4.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.7 Mean 0 2.9 5.3 1.6 0 0 1.6 0 1.6 0 1.5 0 0 0.5 0.9 JUN S 0 40.9 14.0 0 0 0 9.2 0 0 4.4 0 0 0 0.7 4.0 26 M 0 33.3 0 0 0 0 5.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 2.2 B 0 61.5 4.8 10.0 0 26.6 17.2 0 14.7 25.5 0 0 0 6.7 9.5 Mean 0 45.2 6.2 3.3 0 8.9 10.6 0 4.9 10.0 0 0 0 2.5 5.2 S 86.3 48.9 0 0 294.7 41.3 78.5 27.8 137.1 0 0 0 0 27.5 0 87.9 0 48.3 JUL N 18.5 9.9 0 0 0 0 4.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.9 5-6 B 0 0 0 0 5.4 0 0.9 5.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0.7 Mean 34.9 19.6 0 0 100.0 13.8 28.0 11.1 45.7 0 0 0 0 9.5 0 29.3 0 17.0 S 8.3 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 3.7 14.2 0 0 0 0 3.0 1.7 JUL H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0a 0 12-13 e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29.1 0 0 0 0 4.9 No Catch 1.9 Mean 2.8 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 1.2 14.4 0 0 0 0 2.6 1.2 S 207.9 4.2 8.1 0 0 0 36.7 8.6 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 15.3 JUL M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Catch 0 17-18 B 5.3 5.7 4.9 0 0 0 2.7 5.2 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 1.4 Mean 71.1 3.3 4.3 0 0 0 13.1 4.6 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 5.6 S 0 231.9 0 115.3 0 0 57.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23.1 JUL 4 021.7 1063.7 0 85.1 0 0 861.8 6.3 90.5 0 0 0 0 16.1 No Catch 351.2 24-25 B 10.7 1179.5 0 167.2 0 0 26.2 21.7 277.8 0 0 0 0 49.9 110.5 Mean 1344.1 825.0 0 122.5 0 0 382.0 9.3 122.8 0 0 0 0 22.0 161.6 Number per 1000 d 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.LU~~~~ ~~~ ~ ............
| |
| ~~9 1Z~ J 1C112 Table .E-4 (Page 2 of 2)t!1 S a i.2 0 S S 0 S S a.S i 2 Sample 204Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour3*s 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand Date Depth,'* 3-iles ]-Westl Il/2-West I1 2-Est I-East13-East Mean 3-West FI-.est 1l/2-West 11/2-East I 1-East I 3-East IMean NMPP, I HHP NPP Me~an 31 S July N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH&1 B Aug Mean S 4.2 206.1 0 0 0 0 35.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14.0 7-8 N 1333.9 82.7 0 0 0 0 236.1 0 4.3 0 0 0 0 0.7 94.7 Aug 8 0 459.1 0 0 0 0 76.5 0 14.0 0 0 0 0 2.3 NO CATCH 31.5 Mean 446.0 249.3 0 0 0 0 115.9 0 6.1 0 0 0 0 1.0 46.7 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 M NOCATCH 5.2 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 NO CATCH 0.3 Aug B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.1 S 21 14 Aug N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Meanf S 28 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Meanf S 5 N HO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 14 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M mid-depth, B = bottom Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| 0 C ii 0 S_S OS Table E-5 (Page 1 of 3)Abundance*
| |
| of Total Prolarvae (All Species Combined) in Day Ichthyoplankton Collections Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No prolarvae were collected in day samples after August)Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 6 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth" 3-Westtl-West 1/2-Wst I1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 13-East Mean NMPP N MP PP Mean Apr S No Catch No Catch No Catch 4 M B Mean Apr S 0 0 4.0 0 0 0 0.7 0 3.9 .0 0 0 0 0.7 4.1 0 0 0.8 10 M K 0 0 0 5.3 0 5.3 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 0 0 1.3 1.8 0 1.8 0.8 0 1.3 0 0 0 0 0.2 1.4 0 0 0.5 Apr S 0 0 0 0 0 0 a No Catch 0 0 0 0 17 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.9 0.3 B 0 0 0 5.21 5.5 0 1.8 0 0 0 0.7 Mean 0 0 0 1.7 1.8 0 0.6 0 0 1.6 0.3 Apr S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Catch No Catch 0 24 M 0 4.7 0 0 0 0 0.8 0.3 B 4.6 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0.3 Mean 1.5 1.6 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.2 May S 0 0 0 0 4.1 0 0.7 4.0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0.5 2 M 4.4 4.9 0 0 0 0 1.6 4.7 0 4.7 5.2 0 0 2.4 0 0 0 1.6 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.5 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0.3 Mean 1.5 1.6 0 0 1.4 0 0.8 2.9 0 .3.1 1.7 0 0 1.3 0 0 0 0.8 May S No Catch No Catch No Catch 8 M B Mean May S 0 0 13.1 13.8 0 0 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Catch 1.8 15 M 0 0 14.4 69.1 0 0 13.9 0 0 4.7 0 0 a 0.8 5.9 a 0 0 8.9 59.7 0 0 1L4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.6 Mean 0 0 12.1 47.6 0 0 ID.0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0.3 4.1 May S 4.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 No Catch No Catch 0.3 22 M 0 5.0 0 0 5.0 5.6 2.6 1.0 B 0 0 0 0 0 15.5 2.6 1.0 Mean 1.5 1.7 0 0 1.7 7.0 2.0 0.8 May S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.8 0 0.2 30 M 0 0 0 0 4.9 0 0.8 0 0 4.9 0 4.4 0 1.6 0 0 0 0.9 B 0 0 0 0 0 9.7 1.6 5.3 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 I.0 Mean 0 0 0 0 1.6 3.2 0.8 1.8 0 1.6 0 1.5 0 0.8 0 1.3 0 0.7* Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.'Surface and bottom samples at 1/2 east mislabeled; Prolarvae assigned to bottom sample............
| |
| ........... .bl. E -5 (F a g e 2 f L3 )Table E-5 (Page 2 of 3) 2FtContour***
| |
| I0F Cotur*Sale 20-Ft t- 80Ft 100-Ft.- Grand Dae0et~ -es -Ws 12Wet1/-as -East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 11/2-West 11/2-East 1I-East 13-East Mean NMP NMP MPP Mean Date-F Det"3Ws Ws /2Ws /-t1 11 10-tOn JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 4.1 0.3 5 M 5.1 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 4.8 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0.7 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 5.2 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0.4 Mean 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 1.7 1.6 0 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 1.4 0.5 JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 12 M No Catch 5.6 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 No Catch 0.4 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 Mean 1.9 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.1 JUN S 56.1 36.6 10.9 0 0 0 17.3 9.2 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 7.5 4.6 0 8.3 19 M 5.7 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 11.6 0 37.2 0 5.7 0 9.1 0 0 0 4.0 B 49.4 10.2 4.7 0 5.4 5.3 12.5 5.5 5.3 5.6 0 0 0 2.7 0 0 0 6.1 Mean 37.1 15.6 5.2 0 1.8 1.8 10.2 8.8 1.8 14.3 0 1.9 0 4.5 2.5 1.5 0 6.1 JUN s 13.8 0 10.0 0 46.7 0 11.8 9.6 8.8 0 20.9 34.6 0 12.3 9.5 0 0 10.3 26 N 0 0 0 55.0 0 5.3 10.1 5.0 0 4.9 5.2 0 4.6 3.3 0 0 4.4 5.6 B 19.3 4.8 0 14.7 5.0 0 7.3 4.7 14.2 14.7 10.3 19.9 0 10.6 0 0 0 7.2 Mean 11.0 1.6 3.3 23.2 17.3 1.8 9.7 6.5 7.7 6.6 12.2 18.2 1.5 8.8 3.2 0 1.5 7.7 JUL S 0 5.2 9.3 67.1 453.9 155.9 115.2 4.5 22.3 43.2 498.7 451.5 107.3 187.9 130.2 58.9 20.6 135.2 5 M 0 0 0 1320.0 462.9 74.7 309.6 0 0 0 44.9 165.6 0 35.1 0 0 0 137.9 B 0 0 29.8 420.7 79.2 30.5 93.4' 0 0 0 18.2 20.3 20.4 9.8 5.0 5.3 0 42.0 Mean 0 1.7 13.0 602.6 332.0 87.0 172.7 1.5 7.4 14.4 187.3 212.5 42.6 77.6 45.1 21.4 6.9 105.0 JUL S 23.1 413.1 46.5 34.4 208.8 12.9 123.1 36.4 15.3 0 204.5 327.3 13.3 99.5 126.0 172.1 23.8 110.5 10 N 0 0 0 0 22.3 21.8 7.4 0 5.4 0 14.5 15.5 0 5.9 0 12.5 6.2 6.5 8 41.1 6.1 20.4 5.4 23.1 0 16.0 6.2 19.0 38.6 5.6 14.6 5.4 14.9 26.2 41.3 20.1 18.2 Mean 21.4 139.7 22.3 13.3 84.7 11.6 48.8 14.2 13.2 12.9 74.9 119.1 6.2 40.1 50.7 75.3 16.7 45.1 JUL S 176.4 453.5 680.8 0 4.7 0 219.2 67.4 37.0 76.3 0 0 0 30.1 8.1 4.2 0 100.6 17 N 49.4 103.7 208.6 0 9.0 0 61.8 84.6 53.9 629.6 0 0 0 128.0 0 0 4.2 76.2 8 86.4 109.8 145.2 27.3 13.4 5.1 64.5 0 4.0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 3.7 26.3 Mean 104.1 222.3 344.9 9.1 9.0 1.7 115.2 50.7 31.6 235.3 0 0 0 52.9 2.7 1.4 2.6 67.7 JUL S 70.2 27.2 9.5 53.2 99.0 122.0 63.5 0 12.6 17.3 65.7 72.3 88.5 42.7 136.1 12.9 0 52.4 24 M 22.2 20.5 0 116.6 76.8 31.2 44.6 19.4 9.7 20.4 60.1 92.5 10.1 35.4 76.4 19.8 0 38.4 8 70.1 23.0 14.0 93.9 85.1 56.1 57.0 18.6 9.1 4.6 41.0 60.8 4.4 23.1 37.3 17.9 0 35.7 Mean 54.2 23.6 7.8 87.9 87.0 69.8 55.0 12.7 10.5 14.1 55.6 75.2 34.3 33.7 83.3 16.9 0 42.2 Number per 1000 v3.S -surface, M = mid-depth, 8 = bottom.S**stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.S 0 2 0 0 S S (0 S S I S 5.2 Table E-5 (Page 3 of 3)I H U 0 a 0 U SDt e20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Pt Contourý 60-Pt 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East -s-East 13-East Mean NMPP NPP NMPP ean S 0 0 0 0 4.5 8.1 2.1 0 0 4.5 0 0 4.3 1.5 0 4.0 0 1.7 31 M 0 0 0 0 0 4.5 0.8 4.6 0 0 0 0 4.5 1.5 0 0 0 0.9 July B 4.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 4.2 0.7 0 0 0 0.6 Mean 1.5 0 0 0 1.5 4.2 1.2 1.5 0 1.5 0 0 4.3 1.2 0 1.3 0 1.1 S 4.2 21.3 0 12.2 41.8 0 13.3 3.9 10.6 4.4 4.1 49.9 78.1 25.2 30.0 7.5 17.1 19.0 7 N 9.0 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 4.6 24.6 0 4.9 5.6 0 6.6 0 0 0 3.2 Aug B 0 0 5.9 0 0 0 1.0 4.2 8.4 27.8 9.1 14.7 0 10.7 0 0 0 4.7 Mean 4.4 7.1 2.0 4.1 14.0 0 5.2 4.2 14.5 10.7 6.0 23.4 26.0 14.2 10.0 2.5 5.7 9.0 S 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0.3 14 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.3 0 0.6 Aug B 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 NOCATCH 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 2.8 0 0.3 S 21 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug 8 Mean S 28 B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean.S 5 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 11 B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean 18 H Sept B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean S 26 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean Number per 1000 m3.*S a surface, 1 4 mid-depth, B bottom.***Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Nile Point Station. Unit 1.
| |
| , i _ ........ .. i , : ~ ........ ..: : ...Table E-6 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Total Prolarvae (All Species Combined)/in Night Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 S~SI 0 S 0*1 I 0 S Oi Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1 -West 1/2-West 1/-East 1-EastF3-East Iea 3-West 11-West 11/2-West 11/2-East 1I-East 13-E-ast IMean NKPP I NMPPIPP Mean JUN S 0 3.9 81.2 4.0 4.1 4.2 16.2 8.4 3.5 27.3 0 0 0 6.5 9.1 6-7 M 4.8 0 89.7 0 5.0 0 16.6 4.5 0 4.7 0 0 0 1.5 No Catch 7.3 8 0 0 5.0 0. 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.3 Mean 1.6 1.3 58.6 1.3 3.0 1.4 11.2 4.3 1.2 10.7 0 0 0 2.7 5.6 JUN S 21.1 38.0 30.4 9.0 14.1 15.6 21.4 12.8 0 8.7 0 9.7 0 5.2 4.4 4.5 3.7 11.5 15-16 M 0 15.4 18.5 14.9 5.1 25.8 13.3 0 19.5 22.6 4.8 5.2 0 8.7 5.4 0 0 9.1 8 5.0 5.0 9.7 9.9 10.7 17.8 9.7 5.5 0 4.9 10.6 0 0 3.5 0 5.7 8.5 6.2 Mean 8.7 19.5 19.5 11.3 10.0 19.8 14.8 6.1 6.5 12.1 5.1 4.9 0 5.8 3.3 3.4 4.1 9.0 JUN 5 27.8 84.5 97.5 57.0 22.6 4.4 49.0 13.6 32.9 40.8 0 66.9 0 25.7 25.5 17.4 0 32.7 19-20 1 10.1 46.9 64.0 16.7 31.2 4.8 29.0 0 0 4.1 0 5.3 0 1.6 0 0 0 12.2 B 9.9 39.4 15.9 41.9 9.9 4.6 20.3 5.1 4.9 3.9 0 0 4.5 3.1 0 0 4.8 9.7 Mean 16.0 56.9 59.1 38.5 21.2 4.6 32.7 6.2 12.6 16.3 0 24.1 1.5 10.1 8.5 5.8 1.6 18.2 JUN S 4.6 290.8 37.2 4.8 8.8 0 57.7 15.1 9.3 13.2 4.4 12.7 4.6 9.9 14.9 9.4 27.2 30.5 26 N 4.8 71.4 24.2 0 0 0 16.7 4.3 9.7 8.6 0 0 0 3.8 0 0 0 8.2 B 0 66.2 4.8 0 4.8 0 12.6 0 9.8 21.2 8.9 0 0 6.7 0 15.2 0 8.7 Mean 3.1 142.8 22.1 1.6 4.5 0 29.0 6.5 9.6 14.3 4.4 4.2 1.5 6.8 5.0 8.2 9.1 15.8 JUL S 298.0 93.4 251.1 -51.8 60.6 251.9 167.8 412.2 18.3 47.1 15.2 8.9 21.7 87.2 16.1 0 0 103.1 5-6 M 161.5 24.8* 250.7 5.4 16.6 64.8 87.3 42.3 0 9.7 0 4.8 0 9.5 D 0 0 38.7 B 134.9 44.11 120.8 0 10.9 17.7 54.7 21.4 21.7 4.9 0 0 0 8.0 0 0 0 25.1 Mean 198.1 54.1 207.5 19.1 29.3 111.5 103.3 158.6 13.3 20.6 5.1 4.6 7.2 34.9 5.4 0 0 55.6 J,.UL 5 116.6 36.6 62.8 25.9 34.2 4.3 46.7 36.8 35.5 26.9 35.1 19.8 4.0 26.4 11.3 7.0 0 30.5 12-13 N 181.4 41.9 69.9 25.7 115.5 0 72.4 47.7 8.5 21.3 5.9 5.3 0 14.8 0 0 0 34.9 B 96.8 41.5 55.8 21.7 107.0 14.4 56.2 34.4 4.2 8.5 10.9 0 0 9.7 0 0 3.9 26.6 Mean 131.6 40.0 62.8 24.4 85.6 6.2 58.4 39.6 16.1 18.9 17.3 8.4 1.3 16.9 3.8 2.3 1.3 30.6 S 76.4 33.3 153.2 110.6 33.6 8.4 69.3 43.0 25.8 35.9 75.7 12.6 195.8 64.8 67.4 16.1 0 59.2 JUL M 24.7 25.0 104.2 79.6 39.5 5.3 46.4 13.8 21.8 23.9 22.3 20.9 907.6 68.4 10.2 0 0 86.6 17-18 B 15.8 39.7 112.0 295.8 51.9 30.7 91.0 57.3 5.9 5.3 80.1 0 140.3 48.2 5.7 0 0 56.0 Mean 39.0 32.7 123.1 162.0 41.7 14.8 68.9 38.0 17.8 21.7 59.4 11.2 414.6 93.8 27.8 5.4 0 67.3 S 9.1 50.0 8.3 73.0 16.2 53.0 34.9 0 75.3 9.4 28.0 12.5 16.7 23.7 82.5 85.6 21.0 36.0 JUL N 15.2 49.6 33.8 17.0 23.4 12.0 25.2 37.7 51.7 26.7 22.4 0 5.1 23.9 27.5 16.2 0 22.6 2425 B 16.0 17.5 10.1 27.9 21.5 29.5 20.4 10.8 0 27.9 0 0 6.3 7.5 0 0 0 11.2 Mean 13.4 39.0 17.4 39.3 20.3 31.5 26.8 16.2 42.3 21.3 16.8 4.2 9.4 18.4 36.7 33.9 7.0 23.3 Number per 1000 m 3.S .= surface, M = mid-depth, 8 = bottom.***Stations along contours are established within 3-. 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station. Unit 1.
| |
| (Table E-6 (Page 2 of 2)Sae a -Wstl-es 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***-
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 1100-F4t.
| |
| Grand ,1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean I Mean 31 S 53.7 112.9 8.7 0 0 0 29.2 137.4 0 0 0 0 0 22.9 0 0 0 20.8 July M 94.2 77.8 4.8 0 0 0 29.5 14.2 4.5 0 0 0 0 3.1 4.4 0 0 13.3 1 B 10.1 116.4 0 0 0 0 21.1 0 0 13.3 0 0 0 2.2 4.1 0 0 9.6 Aug Mean 52.7 102.4 4.5 0 0 0 26;6 50.5 1.5 4.5 0 0 0 9.4 2.8 0 0 14.6 S 8.4 185.9 535.5 0 4.2 0 122.3 4.0 12.5 337.0 3.7 0 8.7 61.0 23.4 7.5 7.5 75.9 7&8 M 68.5 300.3 1055.4 0 0 0 237.4 45.3 13.0 253.3 8.4 5.0 32.8 59.6 11.6 0 0 119.6 Aug B 14.5 126.5 314.6 0 0 0 75.9 4.5 0 8.7 0 0 0 2.2 0 0 3.4 31.5 Mean 30.5 204.2 635.2 0 1.4 0 145.2 17.9 8.5 199.7 4.0 1.7 13.8 40..9 11.7 2.5 3.6 75.7 S 9.7 42.4 0 0 0 0 8.7 34.0 34.5 4.3 0 0 0 12.1 8.5 0 0 8.9 14 N 5.7 4.7 0 0 0 0 1.7 5.2 4.9 4.9 0 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 1.7 Aug 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 5.2 15.7 0 0 0 0 3.5 13.1 13.1 3.1 0 0 0 4.9 2.8 0 0 3.5 S 21 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 28 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug a Mean. J S 5 K NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 14 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean Number per 1000m'.**S = surface, N = mid-depth, B bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.tTj H.2~~S 0 2 0 0 S 0 0 0 S 4 0 2~---~
| |
| Table E-7 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Alewife Prolarvae in Day Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No alewife prolarvae were collected in day samples before June or after August)U, 5.C 0 Z 6 Date.Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour*-
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft100Ft Grand Ote th** 3-West 1-West 1/2-Westl1/2-East1-East 3-East Mea. 3-West 1l-West 11/2-West 1/2-East I-East 13-East Mean NMPP NMPP NMPP Mean JUN S 5 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean JUN S 12 M No Catch No Catch No Catch*B Mean JUN S 0 0 7.3 0 0 0 1.2 0.0 0.5 19 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 B 0 10.2 0 0 0 0 1.7 No Catch 0.0 0.7 Mean 0 3.4 2.4 0 0 0 1.0 0.0 0.4 JUN S 13.8 0 5.0 0 46.7 0 10.9 4.8 8.8 0 20.9 34.6 0 1.5 9.5 4.9 0 9.9 26 N 0 0 0 55.0 0 5.3 10.1 5.0 0 0 5.2 0 4.6 2.5 0 0 0 5.0 B 19.3 4.8 0 9.8 5.0 0 6.5 0 9.5 9,8 10.3 19.9 0 8.3 0 0 0 5..9 Mean 11.0 1.6 1.7 21.6 17.3 1.8 9.2 3.3 6.1 3.3 12.2 18.2 1.5 7.4 3.2 1.6 0 6.9 JUL. S 0 0 9.3 62.9 439.6 151.5 110.6 4.5 17.9 43.2 494.0 425.9 103.4 181.5 126.1 54.4 20.6 130.2 5 M 0 0 0 1320.0 441.7 74.7 306.1 0 0 0 44.9 155.5 0 33.4 0 0 0 135.8 B 0 0 29.8 420.7 79.2 30.5 93.4 0 0 0 12.1 10.1 10.2 5.4 5.0 5.3 0 40.2 Mean 0 0 13.0 601.2 320.2 85.6 170.0 1.5 6.0 14.4 183.7 197.2 37.9 73.4 43.7 19.9 6.9 102.1 S 23.1 413.1 46.5 30.1 204.2 12.9 121.7 36.4 15.3 0 187.5 323.1 13.3 95.9 126.0 168.2 7.9 107.2 JUL M 0 0 0 0 16.7 21.8 6.4 0 5.4 0 9.7 5.2 0 3.4 0 0 0 3.9 10 B 41.1 6.1 20.4 0 23.1 0 15.1 6.2 19.0 38.6 5.6 14.6 5.4 14.9 19.7 34.4 0 15.6 Mean 21.4 139.7 22.3 10.0 81.3 11.6 47.7 14.2 13.2 12.9 67.6 114.3 6.2 38.1 48.6 67.5 2.6 42.2 S 176.4 453.5 671.8 0 4.7 0 217.7 63.4 37.0 76.3 0 0 0 29.5 8.1 4.2 0 99.7 JUL M 49.4 95.4 208.6 0 9.0 0 60.4 84.6 53.9 629.6 0 0 0 128.0 0 0 4.2 75.6 17 B 86.4 109.8 140.8 27.3 13.4 5.1 63.8 0 4.0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 3.7 26.0 Mean 104.1 219.6 340.4 9.1 9.0 1.7 14.0 49.3 31.6 235.3 0 0 0 52.7 2.7 1.4 2.7 67.1 S 70.2 27.2 9.5 44.3 99.0 122.0 62.0 0 12.6 17.3 61.9 72.3 88.5 42.1 132.0 12.9 0 51.3 JUL M 22.2 20.5 0 116.6 76.8 31.2 44.6 19.4 9.7 20.4 50.8 87.7 10.1 33.0 76.4 19.8 0 37.4 24 B 70.1 23.0 14.0 93.9 85.1 56.1 57.0 18.6 9.1 4.6 41.0 60.8 4.4 23.1 37.3 17.9 0 35.7 Mean 54.2 23.6 7.8 84.9 87.0 69.8 54.5 12.7 10.4 14.1 51.2 73.6 34.3 32.7 81.9 16.9 0 41.5 Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-. and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-7 (Page 2 of, 2)Dae Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour- 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand Dae Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West I1/2-East 1 -East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/-Ws N/-at1Es -atMa J M 1 NPP Iean S 0 0 0 0 0 8.1 1.4 0 0 4.5 0 0 0 0.8 0 4.0 0 1.1 31 N 0 0 0 0 0 4.5 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 July B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 0 0 0 0 0 4.2 0.7 0 0 1.5 0 0 0 0.3 0 1.3 0 0.5 S 4.2 17.1 0 12.2, 37.7 0 11.9 0 7.1 4.4 4.1 49.9 78.1 23.9 30.0 7.5 17.1 18.0 7 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.9 5.6 0 1.8 0 0 0 0.7 Aug 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9.1 14.7 0 4.0 0 0 0 1.6 Mean 1.4 5.7 0 4.1 12.6 0 4.0 0 2.4 1.5 6.0 23.4 26.0 9.9 10.0 2.5 5.7 6.7 S 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0.3 14 N *0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.3 0 0.6 Aug 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NOCATCH 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0,3 0 0 2.8 0 0.3 S 21 N Aug B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean S 28 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug Mean S 5 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B mean S 11 8 NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 18 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 26 N Sept B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean (0 'I-i S S_*Number per 1000 m3.S = surface, N = mid-depth, 8 = bottom.'*Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.ULL)..... ... ....... ---- ----
| |
| Table E-8 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Alewife Prolarvae in Night Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978a U, S a 0 U S<U im Samle 20-Ft Contour**
| |
| 40-Ft Contour- 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand Date Depth** -West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East]1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean ""JP 1 IN PP Mgan JUN S 6-7 N No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean JUN 14 15-16 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean JUN S 4.6 0 4.1 0 0 a 1.5 0.6 19-2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 No Catch No Catch 0 Mean 1.5 0 1.4 0 0 0 0.5 0.2 JUN S 0 45.4 27A9 4.8 4.4 0 13.8 0 0 13.2 4.4 12.7 4.6 5.8 9.9 9.4 22.7 10.6 26 N 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 4.3 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0.6 B 0 28.4 0 0 0 26.6 9.2 0 0 0 4.5 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 4.0 Mean 0 24.6 10.9 1.6 1.5 8.9 7.9 0 0 5.8 3.0 4.2 1.5 2.4 3.3 3.1 7.6 5.1 JUL S 133.3 57.8 155.2 37.7 52.5 251.9 114.7 217.7 9.1 43.2 15.2 8.9 21.7 52.6 16.1 87.9 0 73.9 5-6 N 0 0 0 0 0 64.8 10.8 5.3 0 9.7 0 4.8 0 3.3 0 0 0 5.6 B 4.8 4.9 19.3 0 0 17.7 7.8 0 0 4.9 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 3.4 mean 46.0 20.9 58.2 12.6 17.5 111.5 44.4 74.3 3.1 19.3 5.1 4.6 7.2 18.9 5.4 29.3 0 27.6 S 16.7 6.7 0 0 0 4.3 4.6 0 7.1 0 17.5 11.9 4.0 6.8 3.8 0 0 4.8 JUL N 20.7 9.3 0 6.4 0 0 6.1 8.7 4.3 0 0 5.3 0 3.1 0 0 0 3.6 12-13 8 17.6 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 4.3 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 1.5 Mean 18.3 5.3 0 2.1 0 1.4 4.5 4.3 3.8 0 5.8 5.7 1.3 3.5 0 0 0 3.3 S 29.7 25.0 125.0 84.1 33.6 8.4 51.0 12.9 8.6 18.0 60.6 12.6 195.8 51.4 67.4 16.1 0 46.5 JUL N 19.8 15.0 58.9 58.4 34.6 5.3 32.0 4.6 5.4 14.4 0 20.9 907.6 158.8 5.1 0 0 76.7 17-18 B 0 5.7 87.6 262.3 36.3 30.7 70.4 36.5 0 0 12.3 .0 140.3 31.5 0 0 0 40.8 Mean 16.5 15.2 90.5 134.9 34.8 14.8 51.2 18.0 4.7 10.8 24.3 11.2 414.6 80. 24.2 5.4 0 54.7 S 9.1 22.7 8.3 61.5 8.1 53.0 27.1 0 70.9 9.4 24.0 4.2 16.7 20.9 82.5 81.5 21.0 31.5 JUL N 10.2 36.1 24.2 5.7 17.5 12.0 17.6 31.4 45.3 16.0 16.8 0 5.1 19.1 27.5 16.2 0 17.6 24-25 8 10.7 0 10.1 11.2 5.4 17.7 9.2 0 0 5.6 0 0 6.3 2.0 0 0 0 4.5 mean 1 10.0 19.6 14.2 26.1 10.3 27.6 18.0 10.5 38.7 10.3 13.6 1.4 9.4 14.0 36.7 32.6 7.0 17.9 Number per 1000 .3.S = surface, N = mid-depth, B bottom.
| |
| along contours are established within 3-, 1-., and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-8 (Page 2 of 2)20-Ft Contour**
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1-Westl 1/2-West I 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West I1-West 11/2-West 11/2-East
| |
| [1-East 13-East Mean NMPP INOpt NMPP Mean 31 S July M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH 1 B Aug Mean S 4.2 4.0 4.4 0 4.2 0 2.8 0 8.4 11.1 3.7 0 8.7 5.3 11.7 7.5 7.5 5.0 7-8 N 59.4 39.2 33.4 0 0 0 22.0 20.6 4.3 24.9 8.4 5.0 32.8 16.0 11.6 0 0 16.0 July B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.4 0.2 Mean 21.2 14.4 12.6 0 1.4 0 8.3 6.9 4.2 12.0 4.0 1.7 13.8 7.1 7.8 2.5 3.6 7.1 S 9.7 38.2 0 0 0 0 8.0 34.0 34.5 4.3 0 0 0 12.1 8.5 0 0 8.6 14 N 5.7 4.7 0 0 0 0 1.7 5.2 4.9 4.9 0 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 1.7 Aug 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 5.2 14.3 0 0 0 0 3..2 13.1 13.1 3.1 0 0 0 4.9 2.8 0 0 3.4 S 21 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 28 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 5 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 14 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean Number per 1000 m3.S -surface, N = mid-depth, B -bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine .Mile Point Station, Unit 1.tI H-So 0 2 0 0J LI-7-7--1.... ..........
| |
| ------ .............
| |
| .... ----------
| |
| ---------
| |
| -
| |
| Table E-9 (Page. 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Morone sp. Prolarvae in Day Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No Morone sp. prolarvae were collected in day samples before June or after August)Sample 20-Ft Contour**
| |
| 40-Ft Contour 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand e Depth 3-West 1 -West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 11/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean NMPP NMPt NMPP Mean Jun S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 M 5.1 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 No Catch No Catch 0.3 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 Mean 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.1 Jun S 12 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Jun S 56.1 36.6 3.6 0 0 0 16.1 9.2 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 7.5 4.6 0 7.8 19 M 5.7 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 11.6 0 37.2 0 5.7 0 9.1 0 0 0 4.0 B 49.4 0 4.7 0 0 5.3 9.9 5.5 5.3 5.6 0 0 0 2.7 0 0 0 5.1 Mean 37.1 12,2 2.8 0 0 1.8 9.0 8.8 1.8 14.2 0 1.9 0 4.5 2.5 1.6 0 5.6 Jun S 0 0 5.0 0 0 0 0.8 4.8 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0.7 26 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 4.4 0.3 B 0 0 0 4.9 0 0 0.8 4.7 4.7 4.9 0 0 0 2.4 0 0 0 1.3 Mean 0 0 1.7 1.6 0 0 0.6 3.2 1.6 1.6 0 0 0 1.1 0 0 1.5 0.7 Jul S 0 0 0 0 0 4.5 0.8 0 4.5 0 4.7 0 0 1.5 0.9 M N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Catch 0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.1 0 10.2 2.7 1.1 Mean 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0.3 0 1.5 0 3.6 0 3.4 1.4 0.7 Jul S 0 0 0 0 4.5 0 0.8 0 0 3.9 0 0.6 10 M 0 0 0 5.0 0 0 0.8 No Catch 0 0 0 0 0.3 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 0 0 0 1.7 1.5 0 0.5 0 0 1.3 0 0.3 Jul S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 17 M 0 4.2 0 0 0 0 0.7 No Catch 0 No Catch 0.3 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 0 1.4 0 0 0 .0 0.2 0 0.1 Ju S 24 M No Catch No Catch No Catch 24 B Mean Nkifer per 1000 m3.S = surface, M mid-depth, B bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.1*U 0 i 0 S S S 5, S S 0.5.6'-a Table E-9 (Page 2 of 2)tr4 a S S 0 a S 6 0 S S a.S S 5 Samle 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80 00-Ft. Grand Dat Deth* 3-estI-Wst1/2-West I1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West I1-West 11/2-West 11/2-East 1I-East 13-East Mean NKP JNKP KNPP Mean S 31 M July B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 M NO CATCH 0 4.1 0 0 0 0 0.7 0.3 Aug B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NO CATCH 0 Mean 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.1.S 14 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 21 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug a.Mean S 28 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 5 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 11 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 18 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 26 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, N = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.A:-I..._._- ..
| |
| Table E-10 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Morone sp. Prolarvae in Night Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 t~j"3 S 0 5.0 S S S a 0 S S 4.5.5.Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| .40-Ft Contour*-
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean N NMPP NMPP Mean 11/2-We60-F 1180-Fts lOFtt 13randMea S 0 0 4.6 0 0 0 0.8 0.3 JUN M No Catch 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 6-7 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 Mean 0 0 1.5 0 0 0 0.3 0.1 JUN S 16.9 33.8 8.7 9.0 14.1 15.6 16.4 12.8 0 0 0 9.7 0 3.8 0 0 3.7 8.3 15-16 M 0 5.1 9.3 0 5.1 25.8 7.6 0 19.5 13.6 0 5.2 0 6.4 0 0 0 5.6 B 0 5A0 0 0 5.3 11.9 3.7 0 0 0 5.3 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 1.8 Mean 5.6 14.6 6.0 3.0 8.2 17.8 9.2 4.3 6.5 4.5 1.6 4.9 0 3.7 0 0 1.2 5.2 JUN S 23.2 80.0 89.4 52.2 18.8 4.4 44.7 13.6 32,9 40.8 0 66.9 0 25.7 25.5 17.4 0 31.0 19;20 N 10.1 42.2 50.3 16.7 31.2 4.8 25.9 0 0 0 0 5.3 0 0.9 0 0 0 10.7 B 9'9 39.4 7.9 36.6 9.9 4.6 18.1 5.1 0 3.9 0 0 4.5 2.3 0 0 4.8 8.4 Mean 14.4 53.9 49.2 35.2 20.0 4.6 29.5 1.2 11.0 14.9 0 24.1 1.5 9.6 8.5 5.8 1.6 16.7 JUN S 0 0 4.7 0 4.4 0 1.5 15.1 0 0 0 0 0 2.5 5.0 0 4.5 2.3 26 M 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 0.8 4.3 9.7 0 0 0 0 2.3 0 0 0 1.3 B 0 4.7 4.8 0 4.8 0 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 1.0 Mean 0 1.6 4.8 0 3.1 0 1.6 6.5 3.3 0 0 0 0 1.6 1.7 0 1.5 1.5 JUL S 0 0 9.1 0 4.0 0 2.2 0 9.1 0 0 0 0 1.5 1.5 5-6 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 Mean 0 0 3.0 0 1.3 0 0.7 0 3.0 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 JUL S 8.3 3.3 0 4.3 4.3 0 3.4 0 10.7 3,9 4.4 0 0 3.2 2.6 12-13 M 5.2 0 0 12.9 5.8 0 4.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 1.6 B 0 4.2 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.3 Mean 4.5 2.5 0 5.7 3.4 0 2.7 0 3.6 1.3 1.5 0 0 1.1 1.5 JUL S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 17-18 M No Catch 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 a 5.2 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.3 Mean 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.1 JUL S 24-25 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-1O (Page 2 of 2)Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| .40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand Date Depth** 3-Westj 1-West 1/2-West I1/2-East 1 -East 3-East Mean 3-West 1]-Wes t 11/2-West 11/2-East 1 -East 13-East Mean NMPIN4PIN4P Mean 31 S July M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH I B Aug Mean S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7-8 N 0 8.7 0 0 0 0 1.5 NO CATCH NO CATCH06 Aug 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 0 2.9 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.2 S 14 14 NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 21 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 28 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 5 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept 8 Mean S 14 I NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean_ __Nimber per 1000 m3.S = surface, N mid-depth, B = bottom.***Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nixe Nile Point Station, Unit 1.N N 0 C I.C 0 0 0 0 S S i[111:II Table E-11 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Rainbow Smelt Prolarvae in Day Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No rainbow smelt prolarvae were collected in day samples after June), Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contourm-60-Ft 8l0-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth".13.est I_-est 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-Westl/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean NMPP NMPP NMPP Mean Apr S 4 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 10 N No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 17 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 24 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 y 4.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 No Catch No Catch 0.3 B 0 0 0 0 0. 0 .0 0 Mean 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.1 May S 8 a No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 0 0 13.1 13.8 0 0 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.8 15 M 0 0 14.4 69.1 0 0 13.9 0 0 4.7 0 0 0 0.8 No Catch 5.9 B 0 0 8.9 59.7 0 0 11.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 4.6 Mean 0 0 12.1 47.6 0 0 10.0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0.3 4.1 May s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 M 0 5.0 0 0 5.0 5.6 2.6 No Catch No Catch 1.0 B 0 0 0 0 0 10.3 1.7 0.7 Mean 0 1.7 0 0 1.7 5.3 1.4 0,6 May S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.8 0 0.2 30 M 0 0 0 0 4.9 0 0.8 0 0 4.9 0 4.4 0 1.6 0 0 0 0.9 B 0 0 0 0 0 9.7 1.6 5.2 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 1.0 Mean 0 0 0 0 1.6 3.2 0.8 1.8 0 1.6 0 1.5 0 0.8 0 1.3 0 0.7* Number per 1000 m 3.S a_0 a IA to S = surface, M = mid-depth, B -bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-11 (Page 2 of 2)Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour* 60-Ft 18pFt 100-Ft. Grand Date Depth* 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean M3-West -West 1/2-West 11/2-East I-East 3-East Mean PP P NMPP Mean JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.1 0.3 M No Catch 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0.3 B 0 5.2 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0.4 Mean 0 1.7 1.6 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 1.4 0.3 JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 N NoCatch 5.6 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.4 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NoCatch 0 Mean 1.9 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.1 JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 19 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 5.4 0 0.9 No Catch No Catch 0.4 Mean 0 0 0 0 1.8 0 0.3 0.1 JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 K 0 0 4.9 0 0 0 0.8 0.3 B No Catch 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Catch 0 Mean 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0.3 0.1 S JUL M No Catch No Catch No Catch 5 B Mean.S JUL M No Catch No Catch No Catch 10 B Mean S JUL N No Catch No Catch No Catch 17 B Mean S JUL M 24 a No Catch No Catch No Catch Mean*Ntumber per 1000 m3.S surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.m**Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.W 0 S 0 a 3 i11,~~~. -.... .I]?~L LI2
| |
| -I .. _Table E-12 Abundance*
| |
| of Rainbow Smelt Prolarvae in Night Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No rainbow smelt prolarvae were collected in night samples after June)Sample 20-Ft Contour*'*
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 0F 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East I-East 3-East Mean 3- -est1/2-West 11/2-East l-Eas 3- ast Mean P Mean JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 4.2 0.7 0.3 6-7 M 0 0 0 0 5.0 0 0.8 No Catch No Catch 0.3 6-7 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 Mean 0 0 0 0 1.7 1.4 0.5 0.2 JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 4.4 4.5 0 0.6 15-16 M No Catch 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 5.5 0 0 0.4 5 5.5 0 4.9 5.3 0 0 2.6 0 5.7 8.5 2.0 Mean 1.8 0
| |
| * 1.6 1.8 0 0 0.9 3.3 3.4 2.8 1.0.JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 19-20 M 0 0 .4.1 0 0 0 0.7 *0.3 B No Catch 0 4.9 0 0 0 0 0.8 No Catch 0.3 Mean 0 1.6 1.4 0 0 0 0.5 0.2 JUN S 26 M No Catch No.Catch No Catch B Mean JUL S 5-6 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean JUL S 12-13 M1 No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean JUL S 17-18 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean JUL S 24-25 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.k*Stations along contours are established within 3-, .l-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit I.U'p a I 0 S S a 0 S S I S t=, 0)p 0 p Table E-13 (Page 1 of 4)Abundance*.of Total Postlarvae (All Species Combined) in Day Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No postlarvae were collected in day samples after November)sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour**
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth" 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 11-West 1/2-West 11/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean Mean Apr S 4 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 10 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 17 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 24 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 M 0 0 0 0 5.4 0 0.9 No Catch No Catch 0.4 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 0 0 0 0 1.8 0 0.3 0.1 May S 8. M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 M 0 0 0 5.3 0 0 0.9 No Catch No Catch 0.4 B 0 0 0 10.0 0 0 1.7 0.7 Mean 0 0 0 5.1 0 0 0.8 0.3 May S 48.6 21.3 35.0 98.9 122.8 45.4 62.0 34.3 16.8 91.2 20.1 33.6 45.1 40.2 37.6 0 0 43.4 22 M 94.1 59.9 34.1 118.4 135.4 61.3 83.9 30.5 21.3 25.8 42.8 35.2 30.5 31.0 27.6 4.9 0 48.1 B 66.8 130.2 24.4 55.4 91.2 87.8 76.0 11.3 15.8 22.6 5.6 52.9 32.7 23.5 5.4 0 0 40.2 Mean 69.8 70.5 31.2 90.9 116.5 64.8 74.0 25.4 18.0 46.5 22.8 40.6 36.1 31.6 23.6 1.6 0 43.9 May S 8.4 0 8.2 4.4 8.4 8.0 6.2 22.6 12.0 4.2 3,6 7.5 3.8 9.0 3.9 11.3 11.0 7.8 30 M 48.7 20.6 10.2 34.2 73.0 24.5 35.2 31.7 25.2 4.9 25.3 39.9 22.0 24.8 14.6 0 4.9 25.3 B 78.8 5.1 19.4 14.1 9.5 24.2 25.2 0 0 0 0 8.7 13.9 3.8 0 0 4.5 11.9 Mean 45.3 8.6 12.6 17.6 30.3 18.9 22.2 18.1 12.4 3.0 9.6 18.7 13.2 12.5 6.2 3.8 6.8 15.0 Number per 1000 m 3.S -surface, M a mid-depth, 8 = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.-i1~: ~
| |
| Table E-13 (Page 2 of 4)-i U C S 0 C Sample Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand Date Depthl 3-West I-West] 1/2-WestI 1/2-East I-Eastj 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 11/2-East 1-East 13-Ea Mean N Mean JUN S 4.8 22.9 16.1 0 9.6 11.2 10.8 51.2 30.6 61.3 9.1 14.0 48.0 35.7 0.7 25.7 16.3 21.4 5 M 5.1 21.5 0 0 0 9.1 6.0 29.2 14.5 48.1 5.0 36.2 26.1 26.5 24.9 30.8 20.4 18.1 B 5.0 21.0 0 0 0 10.3 6.1 31.0 14.8 0 0 5.6 15.5 11.2 14.5 4.9 5.2 8.5 Mean 4.9 21.8 5.4 0 3.2 10.2 7.6 37.1 20.0 36.5 4.7 18.6 29.9 24.5 13.4 20.5 14.0 16.0 JUN S 21.0 17.2 16.8 21.7 9.2 0 14.3 4.5 0 18.0 4.4 26.0 36.0 14.8 29.6 42.5 13.3 17.3 12 M 29.1 10.9 11.5 0 29.1 0 13.4 16.8 5.7 16.5 19.3 72.9 73.0 34.0 39.6 39.5 6.0 24.7 B 23.4 52.0 57.4 20.9 25.3 10.3 31.6 0 21.1 10.1 16.9 29.2 30.2 17.9 5.1 0 10.8 20.8 Mean 24.5 26.7 28.5 14.2 21.2 3.4 19.8 7.1 8.9 14.8 13.5 42.7 46.4 22.2 24.7 27.3 10.1 20.9 JUN S 4.7 5.2 0 4.5 4.4 4.6 3.9 0 5.2 14.2 14.5 28.4 4.4 11.1 7.5 0 4.4 6.8 19 M 11.4 17.3 5.3 11.5 5.7 23.3 12.4 28.9 81.4 15.9 54.4 28.5 58.1 44.5 51.2 0 0 26.2 B 11.0 5.1 14.1 16.0 16.1 21.1 13.9 16.6 5.3 11.1 10.0 11.4 19.6 12.3 4.9 0 5.2 11.2 Mean 9.0 9.2 6.5 10.6 8.8 16.3 10.1 15.2 30.6 13.8 26.3 22.8 27.4 22.7 21.2 0 3.2 14.7 JUN S 0 0 0 0 5.2 9.3 2.4 0 0 0 .0 9.9 4.3 2.4 0 9.7 9.3 3.2 26 M 4.6 0 0 20.0 0 0 4.1 5.0 9.7 0 10.5 9.9 4.6 6.6 0 9.4 4.4 5.2 B 0 0 5.0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 5.2 0 12.4 2.9 0 0 14.8 2.5 Mean 1.5 0 1.7 6.7 1.7 3.1 2.5 1.7 3.2 0 5.2 6.6 7.1 4.0 0 6.4 9.5 3.6 JUL S 203.2 232.9 18.6 21.0 315.3 329.7 186.8 211.8 75.9 9.6 214.4 668.7 473.0 75.6 97.7 49.9 20.6 196.2 5 M 55.2 29.9 0 81.9 234.1 90.7 82.0 5.4 11.1 0 39.3 130.5 41.5 38.0 5.5 0 0 48.3 B 21.6 5.8 6.0 70.1 31.7 30.5 27.6 0 0 43.2 12.1 25.3 10.2 15.1 0 5.3 0 17.5 Mean 93.3 89.5 8.2 57.6 193.7 150.3 98.8 72.4 29.0 17.6 88.6 274.8 174.9 09.6 34.4 18.4 6.9 87.3 JUL S 1268.0 1544.0 139.6 124.7 517.4 98.8 615.4 6207.6 305.6 32.0 1610.3 495.2 256.1 484.5 723.5 1416.2 2588.0 154.9 10 *M 314.4 39.2 36.6 34.8 94.8 27.2 91.2 244.5 64.2 28.5 82.4 31.0 21.4 78.7 127.6 49.9 92.9 86.0 B 522.0 48.5 20.4 21.6 109.6 31.6 125.6 124.5 19.0 231.4 133.9 58.3 32.1 99.9 98.3 165.3 211.2 121.8 Mean 701.5 543.9 65.5 60.4 240.6 52.5 277.4 2192.2 129.6 97.3 608.9 194.8 103.2 554.3 316.4 543.8 964.0 454.3 JUL S 176.4 528.5 825.1 270.1 165.1 327.7 382.2 154.5 106.8 136.5 49.3 670.9 351.6 244.940.5 17 M 103.3 33.2 63.1 126.6 251.9 210.6 131.5 56.4 41.4 117.8 27.7 48.6 85.6 62.9 4.2 17.9 8.5 79.8 8 4.3 300.2 294.9 40.9
| |
| * 138.2 40.4 136.5 8.3 8.0 4.1 7.7 33.2 37.8 16.5 3.6 15.8 18.6 63.7 Mean 94.7 287.3 394.4 145.9 185.1 .192.9 216.7 73.1 52.1 86.1 28.3 250.9 158.3 08.1 16.1 120.0 89.9 145.0 JUL S 83.4 54.5 255.4 948.9 582.4 1519.1 574.0 137.9 163.7 394.5 297.7 980.0 1297.5 545.2 523.7 358.0 513.0 540.6 24 N 110.7 20.5 151.9 972.0 788.9 826.5 478.4 174.3 53.1 137.8 101.7 292.2 81.1 140.0 203.8 49.5 14.0 265.2 B 144.5 68.9 121.6 896.8 497.7 607.5 389.5 283.4 149.3 131.9 188.4 295.4 149.5 199.7 182.4 66.9 52.8 255.8 Mean 112.9 48.0 176.3 939.2 623.0 984.4 480.6 198.5 122.1 221.4 195.9 522.5 509.4 295.0 303.3 158.2 193.3 353.9 Nunber per 1000 m3.S = surface. M = mid-depth.
| |
| B = bottom.Stations alon9 contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit1.
| |
| Table E-13 (Page 3 of 4)U I S 2 C S S S I C S S I 0 2 Sample Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft rn 4apl 0-Ft Cotu -8~I0-t 100-Ft Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1,-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-Eastj 3-East Mean 3-West l-West 1]/2-West 1/2-East 1l-East 13-East Mean NKPPJ N NMPP Mean S 40.3 17.9 40.3 1611.7 330.5 1010.6 508.6 32.2 14.2 71.9 259.3 235.9 1448.2 343.6 171.8 489.0 691.0 431.0 31 M 21.3 8.5 41.0 207.7 43.0 277.1 99.8 41.3 17.3 32.7 74.3 51.3 103.3 53.4 22.6 530.5 20.2 99.5 July 8 8.7 19.9 8.7 174.6 40.9 263.6 86.1 8.3 .8.7 12.3 56.6 13.1 63.1 27.0 18.0 71.8 48.1 54.5 Mean 23.4 15.4 30.0 664.7 138.1 517.1 231.5 27.3 13.4 38.9 130.1 100.1 538.2 141.3 70.8 363.8 253.1 195.0 S 215.8 89.5 76.3 301.2 368.2 189.6 206.8 271.5 92.0 91.6 97.9 844.1 2061.8 576.5 154.5 175.3 170.9 346.7 7 M 373.3 137.0 127.9 48.7 140.9 52.6 146.7 110.6 73.8 46.9 103.0 100.3 309.8 124.1 84.3 30.6 33.7 118.2 Aug B 337.9 144.8 184.1 82.0 282.1 147.2 196.4 41.9 33.6 23.2 218.3 185.9 256.4 126.6 51.2 23.3 21.6 135.6 Mean 309.0 123.8 129.5 143.9. 263.7 129.8 183.3 141.4 66.5 53.9 139.7 376.8 876.0 275.7 96.7 76.4 75.4 200.2 S 998.3 1055.5 174.7 44.4 324.3 213.4 468.4 178.7 279.3 106.0 223.9 1140.8 412.8 390.3 35.9 116.3 95.6 360.0 14 M 700.5 1665.9 309.1 37.3 254.7 241.5 534.8 120.0 224.1 20.3 46.5 100.2 41.7 92.1 0 45.7 17.7 255.0 Aug B 327.7 320.8 193.2 16.2 101.5 112.4 178.6 153.5 142.1 10.6 34.7 93.0 53.8 81.3 15.7 5.2 4.6 105.7 Mean 675.5 1014.1 225.7 32.6 226.8 189.1 394.0 150.8 215.2 45.6 101.7 444.7 169.4 187.9 17.2 55.8 39.3 240.2 S 4.0 15.3 3.8 106.0 545.3 285.4 160.0 13.6 27.1 4.3 36.6 925.2. 166.5 195.6 35.4 56.7 72.5 153.2 21 M 8.8 36.1 13.2 168.7 651.4 189.9 178.0 44.6 4.8 12.7 43.0 157.4 61.9 54.1 22.4 7.5 0 94.8 Aug 8 21.4 8.4 8.7 32.2 147.5 .143.5 60.3 12.2 13.9 4.1 8.1 65.6 46.8 25.1 3.7 0 0 34.4 Mean 11.4 20.0 8.7 102.3 448.1 206.3 132.8 23.5 15.3 7.0 29.2 382.7 91.8 91.6 20.5 21.4 24.2 94.1 S 0 3.9 0 4.3 52.2 28.1 14.8 3.9 4.4 0 28.4 17.2 11.6 10.9 11.4 30.2 0 13.0 28 M 0 4.2 0 8.5 31.6 12.9 9.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.8 Aug B 0 0 4.6 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.3 Mean 0 2.7 1.5 4.3 27.9 13.7 8.4 1.3 1.5 0 9.5 5.7 3.9 3.61 3.8 10.1 0 5.7 S 68.3 80.8 52.6 31.8 97.5 15.9 57.8 12.5 16.3 574.3 38.4 32.5 8.1 113.7 7.2 0 0 69.1 5 M 113.7 86.2 33.4 26.5 13.9 28.5 50.4 13.8 26.1 26.5 4.3 8.4 4.8 14.0 0 4.1 0 26.0 Sept B 10.0 24.4 18.3 0 11.7 0 10.7 4.7 4.5 4.5 5.1 0 0 3.1 5.0 0 0 5.9 Mean 64.0 63.8 34.8 19.4 41.0 14.8 39.6 10.3 15.6 201.8 15.9 13.6 4.3 43.6 4.1 1.4 0 33.7 S 4.0 0 7.6 0 3.9 26.5 7.0 0 0 7.3 0 8.2 8.0 3.9 3.8. 0 0 4.6 11 M 0 0 4.2 0 4.7 24.3 5.5 4.7 0 12.1 0 13.8 0 5.1 0 0 0 4.3 Sept B 0 0 0 4.5 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 Mean 1.3 0 3.9 1.5 2.9 16.9 4.4 1.6 0 6.5 0 7.3 2.7 3.0 1.3 0 0 3.1 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NO CATCH 0 Sept 8 0 0 0 5.0 0 0 0.8 0 .0 0 0 0 4.6 0.8 0.6 Mean 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0.3 0.2 S 0 4.4 0 4.5 0 4.8 2.3 0 0 0 4.9 9 4.4 1.6 0 0 0 1.6 26 M 5.0 0 0 5.0 4.7 10.2 4.2 0 4.9 0 0 25.0 0 5.0 0 0 0 3.7 Sept a 0 0 0 0 0 9.6 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.6 Mean 1.7 1.5 0 3.2 1.6 8.2 2.7 0 .1.6 0 1.6 8.4 1.5 2.2 0 0 0 1.9 Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, 8 bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1..... .................
| |
| Table E-13 (Page 4 of 4)0 5i 3 a S S 0i Sape20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 6- IFt8-Ft O-F Grn Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-Eastj 3-East Mean 3-West I1-West 11/2-West 11/2-East 11-East 13-E-ast IMean NMP[ýNP NP Mean S 0 0 4.5 8.3 4.3 0 2.9 0 4.2 0 0 0 0 0.7 1.4 2 M 5.1 0 5.0 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Catch 0.7 Oct B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 1.7 0 3.2 2.8 1.4 0 1.5 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.7 S 15.7 0 4.1 0 3.8 0 3.9 .0 0 8.5 0 0 14.9 3.9 0 0 0 3.1 9 M 5.3 0 4.8 5.4 4.7 4.7 4.2 0 0 0 5.0 0 0 0.80 0 0 2.0 Oct B 0 0 0 0 0 25.5 4.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.7 Mean 7.0 0 2.9 1.8 2.9 10.1 4.1 0 0 2.8 1.7 0 5.0 1.6 0 0 0 2.3 S 0 3.6 3.6 17.0 0 0 4.0 0 0 26.5 4.0 0 0 5.1 0 0 0 3.6 16 M 0 0 8.5 0 0 0 1.4 0 0 8.5 0 3.9 0 2.1 0 3.9 0 1.7 Oct B 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 Mean 0 1.2 4.1 7.3 0 0 2.1 0 0 11.7 1.3 1.3 0 2.4 0 1.3 0 1.9 S 0 0 0 0 0 4.7 0.8 0 4.1 0 0 0 0 0.7 4.6 0. 0 0.9 24 M 0 0 0.6 0 0 0 0.1 5.2 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0.4 Oct B 0 0 4.9 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 Mean 0 0 1.8 0 0 1.6 0.6 1.7 1.4 0 0 0 0 0.5 1.5 0 0 0.5 S 4.2 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 4.2 0 0 0.7 0.6 30 M 0 0 0 5.5 0 5.9 1.9 4.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 No Catch 1.6 Oct B 5.3 0 0 5.5 0 0 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 Mean 3.2 0 0 3.7 0 2.0 1.5 1.5 0 0 1.4 0 0 0.5 0.8 S 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 6 M 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Nov B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.6 0 0.8 No Catch 0.3 Mean 0 0 0 0 0 1.3 0.2 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 0.3 0.2 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 13 M 0 0 4.5 0 5.0 0 1.6 No Catch 0 No Catch 0.6 Nov B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No0 Mean 0 0 1.5 0 1.7 0 0.5 0 0.2 5 4.1 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0.3 21 M No Catch 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Catch 0 Nov B 0 12.6 0 0 0 0 2.1 0.8 Mean 1.4 4.2 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.4 S.28 B No Catch No Catch No Catch Nov B Mean Number per 1000 m 3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-. 1-. and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-14 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Total Postlarvae (All Species Combined) in Night Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour' Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand ate Depth*I 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Nen 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East IMean .NPP NMPP NMPP .an JUN S 17.6 30.8 28.4 8.0 8.2 21.0 19.0 46.3 3.5 36.5 0 29.5 0 19.3 4.3 11.8 0 16.4 6-7 N 14.5 33.4 22.4 18.8 99.6 9.2 33.0 35.9 31.8 23.6 9.0 35.1 23.2 26.6 4.7 0 0 24.1 B 5.3 20.7 10.0 24.3 35.8 27.7 20.6 4.7 19.1 9.9 14.8 29.1 39.2 19.5 5.0 0 0 16.4 Mean 12.5 28.3 20.3 17.0 47.9 19.3 24.2 29.0 18.2 23.3 7.9 31.2 20.8 21.8 5.0 3.9 0 19.0 JUN S 92.8 152.0 52.1 153.1 46.8 78.0 95.8 29.8 94.0 43.2 25.2 24.1 32.4 41.5 35.3 13.4 18.6 59.4 15-16 N 120.9 108.0 50.9 69.6 41.1 51.7 73.7 19.6 58.6 49.7 33.7 67.0 24.8 42.2 43.6 32.6 31.0 53.5 B 123.9 144.7 48.4 182.8 74.6 106.8 113.5 120.2 132.0 73.6 121.6 116.2 60.4 104.0 87.4 159.1 0 103.5 Mean 112.5 134.9 50.5 135.2 54.2 78.8 94.3 56.5 94.9 55.5 60.2 69.1 39.2 62.6 55.4 68.4 16.5 72.1 S 13.9 4.5 8.1 4.8 0 17.5 8.1 4.5 4.7 11.1 21.9 0 4.0 7.7 0 8.7 8.1 7.5 JUN M 0 4.7 9.1 .5.6 5.2 9.7 5.7 10.2 10.1 20.7 9.6 5.3 19.7 12.6 14.1 14.6 0 9.2 9-20 a 9.9 0 27.7 15.7 4.9 9.2 11.2 25.3 9.7 19.6 0 17.0 4.5 12.7 8.8 18.7 4.8 11.7 Mean 8.0 3.0 15.0 8.7 3.4 12.1 8.4 13.4 8.2 17.1 10.5 7.4 9.4 11.0 7.6 14.0 4.3 9.5 JUN S 45.5 22.7 4.7 4.8 0 3.7 13.6 20.1 18.7 30.8 0 4.2 0 12.3 0 4.7 77.1 15.8 26 M 28.9 19.0 9.7 0 5.3 0 10.5 17.2 14.6 4.3 0 0 5.7 7.0 0 15.4 10.0 8.7 B 5.0 18.9 19.0 0 0 0 7.2 15.4 14.7 34.0 4.5 0 0 11.4 13.7 5.1 0 8.7 Mean 26.4 20.2 11.1 1.6 1.8 1.2 10.4 17.6 16.0 23.0 1.5 1.4 1.7 10.2 4.6 8.4 29.1 11.1 JUL S 776.4 907.5 561.6 37.7 32.3 334.5 441.7 1306.1 635.2 321.9 396.1 93.3 230.3 497.2 329.5 298.2 164.7 428.4 5-6 1 230.7 634,6 113.1 10.8 22.1 39.9 175.2 343.8 309.9 320.5 164.1 338.3 55.2 255.3 239.7 14.3 5.3 1,89.5 8 477.0 465.3 850.1 25.5 38.0 57.4 318.9 342.2 200.9 231.4 15.6 29.1 92.9 152.0 9.7 4.6 18.8 190.6 Mean. 494.7 669.1 508.2 24.6 30.8 143.9 311.9 664.1 382.0 291.3 191.9 153.5 126.1 301.5 193.0 105.7 62.9 269.5 JUL S 2114.8 977.3 176.7 470.0 499.8 901.5 856.7 2059.7 848.9 496.2 890.1 130.8 161.9 764.6 585.5 2000.7 8093.4 1360.5 12-13 4 1244.0 456.3 69.9 90.0 335.1 1029.3 537.4 606.7 187.5 217.5 117.4 132.2 384.8 274A 105.2 168.1 305.0 363.3 8 906.4 257.2 94.3 102.9 275.1 509.8 357.6 154.8 108.0 55.5 70.9 52.7 39.8 803 34.6 98.5 277.1 202.5 Mean 1421.7 563.6 113.6 221.0 370.0 813.5 583.9 940.4 381.5 256.4 359.5- 105.2 195.5 373.1 241.8 755.8 2891.8 642.1 JUL s 555.8 241.6 310.4 66.4 33.6 101.0 218.1 296.9 266.2 236.9 295.3 155.7 3482.3 88.9 301.0 186.8 65.2 439.7 17-18 N 351.0 80.1 172.2 42.5 59.3 10.6 119.3 244.6 342.5 143.6 139.5 366.4 1790.9 04.6 525.6 596.3 249.7 341.0 B 538.2 289.3 97.4 83.7 51.8 81.9 190.4 197.9 76.5 106.3 184.8 396.4 736.7 83.1 113.2 68.4 42.6 204.3 Mean 481.7 203.7 193.3 64.2 48.3 64.5 175.9 246.5 228.4 162.3 206.6 306.2 2003.3 25.5 313.3 283.8 119.1 328.3 JUL S 242.3 504.7 91.5 434.4 525.7 119.3 319.7 174.1 576.0 193.5 1170.5 716.8 404.4 5392 1220.8 1458.4 710.1 569.5 24-25i N 71.1 '234.4 145.0 839.3 583.6 89.8 327.2 961.9 1480.4 869.6 1311.3 681.7 798.2 1017 1]070.8 546.6 290.4 664.9 B 639.3 .432.1 723.3 875.0 687.6 206.3 593.9 135.4 228.8 212.4 396.3 356.2 62.7 32.0 309.9 167.2 97.7 368.7 Mean 317.6 390.4 319.9 716.2 599.0 138.5 413.6 423.8 761.8 425.2 959.4 584.9 421.8 96.1 867.2 724.1 366.1 534.4*i*Number per 1000 03.S = surface, M -mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.0 S 0 J 0 SL Z
| |
| .........
| |
| E.....-14
| |
| .e 2 :f .Table E-14 (Page 2 :of 2)Sample 20-Ft Contour**
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft -F1O0-Ft Grand Date Depth* 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East I -East 3-East Mean 3-West 1--West 1/2-West 11/2-East 1-East 3-EastI Mean ,,M P Mean 31 S 327.3 361.4 26.1 40.1 156.9 29.9 157.0 257.0 36.1 43.5 9.5 5.0 21.8 62. 13'9 9.5 34.6 91.5 July N 199.0 272.2 4.8 53.3 136.3 29.7 115.9 199.2 17.9 35.5 0 30.0 4.7 47. 0 35.7 99.8 74.5 1 B 171.7 321.4 41.2 65.9 219.3 19.9 139.9 102.5 65.5 31.1 8.5 9.3 9.1 37.1 8.2 12.3 60.2 76.4 Aug Mean. 232.7 .318.3 24.0 53.1 170.8 26.5 137.6 186.3 39.8 36.7 6.0 14.8 11.9 49. 7.4 19.2 64.9 80.8 S 158.7 238.4 159.3 924.6 572.7 386.2 406.7 154.2 46.0 181.5 285.3 223.4 2419.5 551.7 428.8 345.0 240.6 450.9 7-8 M 246.7 317.7 350.4 1369.1 458.2 537.4 546.6 342.0 250.7 739.2 611.8 394.8 781.3 520. 208.1 130.3 132.8 458.0 Aug B 812.5 590.3 562.4 1219.2 604.9 55.6" 640.8 59.0 121.4 65.5 127.0 171.8 275.4 136.7 78.9 23.0 87.9 323.7 Mean 406.0 382.2 357.4 1170.9 545.3 326.4 531.4 185.1 139.4 328.7 341.4 263.3 1158.7 402.8 238.6 166.1 153.8 410.9 S 976.6 1026.0 276.1 169.6 203.9 18.3 445.1 412.8 846.3 201.4 289.9 69.5 90.6 318.4 256.0 16.5 93.1 329.8 14 M 1809.0 1248.4 304.6 916.2 80.6 41.5 733.4 1576.7 1418.6 394.8
| |
| * 193.9 51.9 51.7. 614.6 121.8 55.8 85.0 556.7 Aug 8 2433.8 1543.5 666.5 850.7 27.5 23.6 924.3 917.0 543.2 559.9 173.7 38.4 70.0 383.7 54.4 0 47.3 530.0 Mean 1739.8 1272.6 415.7 645.5 104.0 27.8 700.9 968.8 936.0 385.4 219.2 53.3 70.8 438.9 144.1 24.1 75.1 472.1 S 8.6 18.4 12.5 30.6 61.4 144.3 46.0 25.7 51.8 14.0 27.5 140.6 267.4 87.8 76.4 91.4 65.5 69.1 21 M 16.4 9.8 5.4 30.9 117.8 83.5 44.0 41.2 70.1 26.7 113.9 26.2 99.8 63.0 39.4 28.7 36.2 49.7 Aug B 0 5.3 26.5 36.7 317.6 127.1 85.5 177.6 117.8. 137.5 39.8 66.6 53.3 98. 42.2 0 8.4 77.1-Mean 8.3 11.2 14.8 32.8 165.6 118.3 58.5 81.5 79.9 59.4 60.4 77.8 140.2 83.2 52.6 40.0 36.7 65.3 S 201.8 241.1 116.1 114.4 53.8 37.3 127.4 133.2 197.0 255.4 157.9 154.5 107.2 167.5 118,5 145.4 250.1 152.2 28 M 99.0 156.9 38.3 59.2 57.2 15.1 71.0 39.3 29.3 50.6 33.6 68.6 54.3 46.0 4.7 26.2 3.9 49.1 Aug B ' 86.1 32.3 5.6 104.1 42.5 9.1 46.6 5.7 15.5 25L6 10.4 18.0 17.1 15.4 4.8 13.5 8.1 26.6 Mean 129.0 143.5 53.3 .92.6 51.2 20.5 81.7 59.4 80.6 110.5 67.3 80.4 59.5 76.3 42.7 61.7 87.4 76.0 S 84.9 154.7 138.9 1076.1 13.5 8.2 246.1 97.4 70.2 109.6 143.5 4.0 4.2 71.5 42.5 26.4 8.4 132.2 5 M 47.1 90.8 125.1 31.7 8.9 0 50.6 114.6 34.6 25.5 15.8 0 0 31.8 19.5 0 9.9 34.9 Sept B 27.1 87.9 12.2 30.6 0 0 26.3 143.8 48.0 77.5 9.2 0 0 46.4 4.2 25.9 0 31.1 Mean 53.0 111.1 92.1 379.4 7.5 2.7 107.6 118.6 50.9 70.9 56.2 1.3 1.4 49.9 22,1 17.4 6.1 66.1 S 0 4.3 .0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 4.3 0 0 0.7 0.6 14 N 15.3 0 6.0 0 21.7 0 7.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NO CATCH 2.9 Sept 8 0 4.9 0 0 5.1 0 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 Mean 5.1 3.1 2.0 0 8.9 0 3.2. 0 0 0 1.4 0 0 0.2 1.4 Nutber per 1000 0 3.S surface, M = mid-depth.
| |
| 8 bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit I.'I aoS S a Table E-15 (Page 1 of 3)Abundance*
| |
| of Alewife Postlarvae in Day Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No alewife postlarvae were collected in day samples before June or after November)Saese 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour**
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand Date Deptho 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1P/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 1 Mean Jun S 5 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH B Mean Jun S 12 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH B Mean Jun S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 19 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.8 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 4.7 0 0 0.7 a 0 0 4.7 0 0 0 0.8 0 5.3 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0.7 mean 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0.3 1.9 1.8 0 0 0 0 0L. 1.6 0 o 0.5 Jun S 0 0 0 0 5.2 9.3 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.9 4.6 1.6 26 14 0 0 0 20.0 0 0 3.3 0 4.9 0 0 9.9 0 2.5 0 0 0 2.3 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Mean 0 0 0 6.7 1.7 3.1 1.9 0 1.6 0 0 3.3 0 0.8 0 1.6 1.6 1.3 Jul S 203.2 227.7 18.6 21.0 315.3 329.7 185.9 193.8 71.5 9.6 209.7 651.6 453.2 264.9 97.7 45.3 20.6 191.2 5 K 55.2 29.9 0 81.9 234.1 80.1 80.2 5.4 11.1 0 39.3 130.5 36.3 37.1 5.5 0 0 47.3 B 16.2 5.8 6.0 70.1 31.7 30.5 26.7 0 0 0 6.1 25.3 10.2 6.9 0 5.3 0 13.8 Mean 91.5 87.8 8.2 57.6 193.7 146.8 97.6 66.4 27.5 3.2 .85.0 269.1 166.6 103.0 34.4 16.9 6.9 84.1 Jul S 171.2 1471.7 139.6 124.7 499.2 94.5 583.5 6207.6 305.6 32.0 1610.3 482.6 247.3 180.9 715.4 1404.4 2524.5 135.4 10 14 309.0 39.2 36.6 29.8 83.7 21.8 86.7 244.5 64.2 28.5 77.5 25.8 21.4 77.0 110.2 43.7 86.7 81.5 8 522.0 48.5 15.3 21.6 109.6 31.6 124.8 124.5 19.0 244.9 133.9 58.3 26.7 101.2 98.3 165.3 201.1" 121.4 mean 667.4 519.8 63.8 58.7 230.8 49.3 265.0 2192.2 129.6 95.1 607.3 188.9 98.5 n53. 308.0 537.8 937,4 446.1 Jul S 168.7 513.5 780.0 209.1 160.4 322.7 359.1 146.6 102.7 .136.5 49.3 662.8 328.7 237.8 40.5 313.8 242.*6 278.5 17 14 103.3 33.2 63.1 103.2 251.9 210.6 127.6 56.4 37.3 117.8 27.7 48.6 85.6 62.2 4.2 17.9 0 77.4 5 4.3 300.2 294.9 40.9 138.2 40.4 136.5 8.3 8.0 4.1 7.7 29.0 37.8 15.8 3.6 15.8 11.2 63.0 mean 92.1 282.3 379.3 117.7 183.5 191.1 207.7 70.4 49.3 86.1 28.2 246.8 150.7 105.3 16.1 115.8 84.6-139.6 Jul S 83.4 54.5 250.7 935.6 574.8 1493.9 565.5 129.5 163.7 385.8 289.9 968.0 1293.3 538.4523.7 353.7 504.4 33.7 24 14 110.7 20.5 151.9 955.4 778.7 816.1 472.2 174.3 53.1 137.8 101.7 263.0 81.1 35.2193.7 49.5 14.0 260.1 a 131.3 68.9 116.9 882.7 472.2 598.2 378.4 274.1 149.3 131.9 180.3 291.0 149.5 196. 182.4 66.9 48.4 249.6 Mean 108.5 48.0 173.2 924.5 608.6 969.4 472.0 192.6 122.1 218.5 190.6 507.3 508.0 289.0299.9 156.7 188.9 *347.8 Ntuer per 1000 m3.S = surface. M -mid-depth.
| |
| B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and l/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.N S 0 0 0 0 0.0 a 0 0 S ft 0 8*3....... ...------- --------
| |
| Table E-15 (Page 2 of 3)U 9.a S 4 5.Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 3a .n 3-.W.s40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft- 80Ft o100-Ft. Grand Dt Dt* ,1]es l/lS.estl1/2-EastlI.-Fstl3.East Mean 3-West l-Ws 1/12-West 1/2-East -East 13-East Mean NMPP NMPP INMPP Mean S 40.3 17.9 35.8 1448.4 326.1 978.4 474.5 32.2 14.2 71.9 254.5 227.2 1366.8 327.8 168.0 489.0 678.8 410.0 31 M 17.0 8.5 41.0 194.2 43.0 277.1 96.8 36.7 17.3 28.6 60.4 51.3 103.3 49.6 22.6 522.7 20.2 96.3 July 8 8.7 19.9 8.7 174.6 40.9 254.7 84.6 8.3 8.7 12.3 56.6 13.1 63.1 27.0 18.0 68.0 44.7 53.4 Mean 22.0 15.4 28.5 605.7 136.7 503.4 218.6 25.8 13.4 37.6 123,6 97.2 511.1 134.8 69.5 359.9 247.9 186.5 S 211.7 89.5 71.3 301.2 368.2 189.6 205.3 267.7 81.4 87.2 97.9 827.5 2061.8 570. 154.5 175.3 170.9 343.7 7 M 373.3 137.0 121.8 48.7 135.2 47.4 143.9 106.0 73.8 36.5 103.0 100.3 309.8 121.6 84.3 30.6 33.7 116.1 Aug 8 333.5 144.8 172.3 82.0 271.9 147.2 192.0 41.9 33.6 23.2 209.2 185.9 237.1 121. 51.2 23.3 21.6 131.9 Mean 306.2 123.8 121.8 143.9 258.4 128.1 180.4 138.5 62.9 49.0 136.7 371.2 869.6 271. 96.7 76.4 75.4 197.2 S 998.3 992.3 122.8 44.4 290.9 209.3 443.0 170.2 237.0 101.5 214.2 1092.7 396.6 368.7 35.9 116.3 72.8 339.7 14 M 700.5 1638.9 299.6 37.3 254.7 231.9 527.2 115.0 144.4 20.3 46.5 95.2 41.7 77.2 0 45.7 17.7 246.0 Aug B 327.7 307.3 193.2 16.2 86.2 112.4 173.8 153.5 142.1 10.6 34.7 87.6 53.8 80. 15.7 5.2 4.6 103.4 Mean 675.5 979.5 205.2 32.6 210.6 184.5 381.3 146.3 174.5 44.2 98.5 425.2 164.0 175. 17.2 55.8 31.7 229.7 S 0 15.3 3.8 89.7 545.3 260.7 152.5 13.6 27.1 4.3 28.5 921.3 162.4 192.m 31.9 56.7 72.5 148.9 21 N 8.8 36.1 13.2 164.4 632.5 189.9 174.1 44.6 0 12.7 43.0 147.9 57.1 50.9 22.4 7.5 0 92.0 Aug B 21.4 8.4 8.7 32.2 143.1 139.3 58.9 12.2 13.9 4.1 8.1 65.6 46.8 25.1 3.7 0 0 33.8 Mean 10.1 20.0 8.7 95.4 440.3 196.6 128.5 23.5 13.7 7.0 26.5 378.3 88.8 89. 19.3 21.4 24.2 91.6 S 0 3.9 0 4.3 44.1 28.1 13.4 3.9 4.4 0 28.4 17.2 11.6 10.9 7.6 30.2 0 12.2 28 N 0 4.2 0 4.3 31.6 12.9 8.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.5 Aug 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 0 2M 0 2..9 25.2 13.7 7.4 1.3 1.5 0 9.5 5.7 3.9 3.6 2.5 10.1 0 5.3 S 64.0 80.8 48.9 27.2 97.5 15.9 55.7 12.5 16.3 574.3 38.4 32.5 8.1 113.7 7.2 0 0 68.2 5 N 113.7 86.2 33.4 26.5 13.9 23.8 49.6 13.8 26.1 26.5 4.3 8.4 4.7 14. 0 4.1 0 25.7 Sept B 10.0 24.4 18.3 0 11.7 0 10.7 4.7 4.5 4.5 5.1 0 0 3.1 5.0 0 0 5.9 Mean 62.6 63.8 33.5 17.9 41.0 13.2 38.7 10.3 15.6 201.8 15.9 13.6 4.3 43.6 4.1 1.4 0 33.3 S 4.0 0 3.8 0 3.9 26.5 6.4 0 0 7.3 0 8.2 8.0- 3.9 3.8 0 0 4.4 11 N 0 0 4.2 0 4.7 24.3 5.5 4.7 0 12.1 0 13.8 0 5.1 0 0 0 4.3 Sept B 0 0 0 4.5 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 Mean 1.3 0 2.7 1.5 .2.9" 16.9 4.2 1.6 0 6.5 0 7.3 2.7 3.0 1.3 0 0 3.0 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NO CATCH 0 Sept B 0 0 0 5.0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 4.6 0.8 0,6 Mean 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0.3 0.2 S 0 4.4 0 4.5 0 4.8 2.3 0 0 0 4.9 0 4.4 1.6 4.2 0 0 1.8 26 M 5.0 0 0 5.0 4.7 10.2 4.2 0 4.9 0 0 25.0 0 5.0 0 0 0 3.7 Sept 8 0 0 0 0 0 9.6 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.6 Mean 1.7 1.5 0 3.2 1.6 8.2 2.7 0 1.6 0 1.6 8.4 1.5 2.2 1.4 0 0 2.0 Number per 1000 0 3.*S =5 surface. M = mid-depth, B = bottom.**Stations along contours are established within 3-. 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-15 (Page 3 of 3)t21 a I.a S S.0 5.0 S a.S 8'Sale 20-Ft ntour* 4Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth* 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 11/2-Eat st Mean NMPP NMPP NMPP Mean S 0 0 4.5 8.3 4.3 0 2.9 0 4.2 0 0 0 0 0.7 1.4 2 5.1 0 5.0 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oC0.7 Oct B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Catch 0 Mean 1.7 0 3.2 2.8 1.4 0 1.5 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.7 S 15.7 0 4.1 0 3.8 0 3.9 0 0 8.5 0 0 14.9 3.9 0 0 0 3.1 9 N 5.3 0 4.8 5.4 4.7 4.7 4.2 0 0 0 5.0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 2.0 Oct B 0 0 0 0 0 25.5 4.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.7 Mean 7.0 0 2.9 1.8 2.9 10.1 4.1 0 0 2.8 1.7 0 5.0 1.6 0 0 0 2.3 S 0 3.6 3.6 17.0 0 0 4.0 0 0 .26.5 4.0 0 0 5.1 0 0 0 3.6 16 M 0 0 8.5 0 0 0 1.4 0 0 8.5 0 3.9 0 2.1 0 3.9 0 1.7 Oct B 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 Mean 0 1.2 4.1 7.3 0 0 2.1 0 0 11.7 1.3 1.3 0. 2.4 0 1.3 0 1.9 S 0 0 0 0 0 4.7 0.8 0 4.1 0 0 0 0 0.7 4.6 0 0 0.9 24 N 0 0 0.6 0 0 0 0.1 5.2 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0.4 Oct B 0 0 4.9 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 Mean 0 0 1.8 0 0 1.6 0.6 1.7 1.4 0 0 0 0 0.5 1.5 0 0 0.5 S 4.2 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 4.2 0 0 0.7 0.6 30 N 0 0 0 5.5 0 5.9 1.9 4.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 1.1 Oct B 5.3 0 0 5.5 0 0 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NoCatch 0.7 Mean 3.2 0 0 3.7 0 2.0 1.5 1.5 0 0 1.4 0 0 0.5 0.8 S 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 6 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Catch 0 Nov B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.6 0 0.8 0.3 mean 0 0 0 0 0 1.3 0.2 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 0.3 0.2 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 N 0 0 4.5 0 5.0 0 1.6 NoCatch 0 No Catch 0.6 Nov B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 at0 0 mean 0 0 1.5 0 1.7 0 0.5 0 0.2 S 4.1 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0.3 21 N NoCatch 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NoCatch 0 Nov B 0 12.6 0 0 0 0 2.1 0.8 Mean 1.4 4.2 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.4 S 28 M Nov a No Catch No Catch No Catch Mean Number per 1000 i 3.S -surface, N mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.112 21 j': jij ---=~ ~.-..........................................
| |
| ~ ........, ~
| |
| Table E-16 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Alewife Postlarvae in Night Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 gi 0 0m S Sample 20-Ft Contour' 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 8 0-Ft 1l0-Ft. Grand Date Depth" 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1,-West 1/2-West1/2-East 1-East -EastMean I NNJ P Mean Jun S NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH 6-7 M Mean Jun S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.9 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0.3 15-16 14 0 0 0 5.0 5.1 0 1.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.7 B 5.0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 5.8 0 0 0.7 Mean 1.7 0 0 1.7 1.7 0 0.8 0 1.3 0 0 0 0 0.2 1.9 0 0 0.6 Jun S 0 0 0 0 0 4.4 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 n.3 19-20 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0.8 NO CATCH 0.3 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 Mean 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0.2 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0.3 0.2 Jun S 0 18.2 0 4.8 0 3.7 4.5 10.1 4.7 13.2 0 0 0 4.7 0 4.7 54;4 7.6 26 M 4.8 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 12.9 0 0 0 0 0 2.2 0 5.2 0 1.5 B 0 0 4.8 0 0 0 0.8 0 4.9 0 4.5 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0.9 Mean 1.6 6.1 1.6 1.6 0 1.2 2.0 7.7 3.2 4.4 1.5 0 0 2.8 0 3.3 18.1 3.4 Jul S 756.8 871.9 479.4 33.0 24.2 330.4 416.0 1278.3 626.1 318.0 392.3 88.8 230.3 89.0 329.5 137.6 164.7 04.1 5-6 M 216.9 629.6 113.1 5.4 22.1 39.9 171.2 333.2 297.7 306.0 158.9 338.3 55.2 48.2 220.9 9.5 5.3 183.5 B 477.0 450.6 825.9 25.5 38.0 57.4 312.4 326.2 168.3 221.5 15.6 29.0 87.4 41.3 0 4.6 9.4 182.4 Mean. 483.6 650.7 472.8 21.3 28.1 142.6 299.8 645.9 364.0 281.8 189.0 152.1 124.3 92.8 183.5 50.6 59.8 256.7 Jul S 448.7 924.1 168.9 457.2 495.5 884.3 729.8 1044.5 706.8 273.1 881.3 118.9 161.9 31.1 578.0 1931.2 8093.4 1211.2 12-13 N 1212.9 451.6 55.9 77.2 323.5 1018.8 523.3 585.1 93.8 213.2 105.7 126.9 384.8 51.5 95.6 159.4 287.6 346.1 8 888.8 248.9 94.3 102.9 270.1 509;8 352.5 133.3 95.5 42.7 60.0 42.2 34.1 68.0 34.6 86.7 254.0 193.2 Mean 1183.5 541.5 106.4 212.4 363.0 804.3 535.2 587.6 298.7 176.3 349.0 96.0 193.6 283.5. 236.1 725.8 2878.3 583.5 Jul S 543.1 233.3 310.4 66.4 33.6 101.0 214.6 232.4 261.9 233.3 295.3 155.7 3426.3 767.5 301.0 180.3 65.2 429.3 17-18 M 351.0 75.1 172.2 42.5 59.3 10.6 118.5 244.6 342.5 143.6 139.5 361.2 1790.9 503-7 525.6 596.3 249.7 340.3 8 506.5 272.3 92.5 83.7 51.9 81.9 181.9 192.7 58.9 100.9 184.8 390.9 723.6 275.3 102.0 68.4 38.7 196.6 Mean 466.9 193.5 191.7 .64.2 48.3 64.5 171.5 223.2 221.1 159.3 206.6 302.6 1980.3 15.5 309.5 281.7 117.8 322.1 Jul S 228.6 491.0 79.0 372.9 420.5 114.9 284.5 165.4 562.7 193.5 1170.5 679.3 400.2 528.i61160.0 1376.9 668.1 538.9 24-25 M 71.1 221.0 135.3 748.5 531.1 89.8 99.5 892.8 1415.8 858.9 1277.7 670.6 783.1 983.31070.8
| |
| : 5. 285.1 639.9 B 617.7 408.7 663.0 841.5 633.9 206.3 -i561.9 124.6 217.9 212.4 381.0 350.5 62.7 224.9 244.9 1 83.7 347.7 Mean 305.8 373.6 292.4 654.3 528.5 137.0 381.9 394.2 732.1 421.6 943.1 566.8 415.3 578j 825.2 696.9 345.6 508.8*Nuter per 1000 im!.S -surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station. Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-16 (Page 2 of 2)Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 6100-FFt I r-n Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East l-Eastj 3-East Mean 3-West 1l-West 11/2-West 1t/2-East I1-East 13-East Mean lMP MP Mean 31 S 322.4 356.9 21.7 40.1 152.3 29.9 153.9 257.0 32.1 43.5 9.5 5.0 21.8 61.5 13.9 9.5 34.6 90.0 July M 188.5 272.2 4.8 53.3 136.3 29.7 114.1 199.2 17.9 35.5 0 30.0 4.7 47.9 0 35.7 99.8 73.8 1 8 171.7 321.4 41.2 65.9 214.5 19.9 139.1 98.4 65.5 31.1 4.2 9.3 9.1 36.3 8.2 12.3 31.9 73.6 Aug Mean 227.5 316.8 22.6 53.1 167.7 26.5 135.7 184.9 38.5 36.7 4.6 14.8 11.9 48.5 7.4 19.2 55.4 79.2 S 150.4 214.2 119.5 830.6 506.3 372.4 365.6 134.4 46.0 140.7 252.0 201.5 2358.3 522.2 421.0 337.5 225.6 420.7 7-8 M 228.4 300.3 296.2 1318.5 418.8 537.4 516.6 321.4 220.5 714.3 590.9 369.8 729.8 491.1 196.6 126.1 128.8 433.2 Aug 8 812.5 562.2 552.9 1195.9 590.5 55.8 628.3 59.0 107.4 52.4 127.0 171.8 275.4 132.2 70.6 15.3 87.9 315.8 Mean 397.1 358.9 322.9 1115.0 505.2 321.8 503.5 171.6 124.6 302.5 323.3 247.7 1121.2 381.8 229.4 159.7 147.4 389.9 S 962.0 1026.0 258.3 169.6 199.6 18.3 439.0 395.8 811.8 201.4 263.1 69.5 90.6 305.4 256.0 16.5 93.1 322.1 14 M 1786.1 1225.1 289.6 899.2 80.6 41..5 720.4 1504.5 1399.2 394.8 193.9 51.9 41.4 597.6 117.0 55.8 80.6 544.1 Aug B 2428.1 1519.6 635.2 840.1 27.5 17.7 911.4 906.6, 532.9 555.1 168.8 38.4 70.0 378.6 49.9 0 39.4 522.0 Mean 1725.4 1256.9 394.4 636.3 102.6 25.8 690.2 935.7 914.6 383.8 208.6 53.3 67.3 427.2 140.9 24.1 71.0 462.7 S 4.3 18.4 12.5 30.6 61.4 144.3 45.3 25.7 47.1 14.0 27.5 128.9 258.3 83.6 68.3 91.4 61.7 66.3 21 M 10.9 9.8 5.4 25.8 117.8 83.5 42.2 41.2 70.1 26.7 113.9 21.0 99.8 62.1 39.4 28.7 36.2 48.7 Aug B 0 5.3 26.5 36.7 305.7 127.1 83.6 177.6 117.8 137.5 39.8 66.6 53.3 98.8 42.2 0 8.4 76.3 Mean 5.1 11.2 14.8 31.1 161.6 118.3 57.0 81.5 78.3 59.4 60.4 72.2 137.1 81.5 49.9 40.0 35.4 63.8 S 192.9 232.0 106.5 114.4 53.8 37.3 122.8 128.7 188.9 250.6 157.9 154.5 107.2 164.6 113.9 145.4 242.5 148.4 28 M 99.0 156.9 38.3 59.2 57.2 15.1 71.0 39.3 29.3 50.6 33.6 68.6 54.3 46.0 4.7 26.2 3.9 49.1 Aug B 86.1 32.3 5.6 104.1 42.5 9.1 46.6 0 15.5 25.6 5.2 18.0 17.1 13.6 4.8 13.5 8.1 25.8 Mean 126.0 140.4 50.1 92.6 51.2 20.5 80.1 56.0 77.9 108.9 65.6 80.4 59.5 74.7 41.1 61.7 84.9 74.4 S 84.9 154.7 130.0 1071.9 13.5 8.2 243.9 97.4 65.8 109.6 143.5 4.0 4.2 70.8 38.3 26.4 8.4 130.8 5 M 41.9 85.7 125.1 31.7 8.9 0 48.9 114.6 34.6 25.5 10.5 0 0 30.9 19.5 0 9.9 33.9 Sept B 22.6 87.9 12.2 30.6 0 0 25.6 119.9 48.0 73.4 9.2 0 0 41.8 4.2 25.9 0 29.0 Mean 49.8 109.4 89.1 378.1 7.5 2.7 106.1 110.6 49.5 69.5 54.4 1.3 1.4 47.8 20.7 17.4 6.1 64.6 S 0 4.3 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0.3 14 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NO CATCH 0 NO CATCH 0 Sept B 0 4.9 0 0 5.1 0 1.7 A 0.7 Mean 0 3.1 0 0 1.7 0 0.8 0 0.3 MNumer per 1000 m3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-. 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit I.tTj U, U C i C S U S 0 0 U a.S p i... .............
| |
| Table E-17 (Page 1 of 3)Abundance*
| |
| of Morone sp. Postlarvae in Day Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No Morone sp. postlarvae were collected in day samples before May or after August)10 t~j S 0 S 0 0 S 0 I 0 S p a.I S 8*ItOp 3 Ftc Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 00-Ft Grand DateDpth**eI -West 1/2-West 1/2-EastI 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1l-West. 11/2-West 11/2-East 1I-East 13-East Mean NMPP NIFPP t NMPP Mean Apr S 4 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 10 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 17 M No Catch No Catch No Catch.B Mean Apr S 24 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 2 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 8 H No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 15 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 0 0 0 0 0 4.1 0.7 0.3 22 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 No Catch No Catch 0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 0 0. 0 0 0 1.4 0.2 0.1 Nay s 30 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Number per 1000 m 3.S surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-17 (Page 2 of 3)T.S LO T F 0.S Sape 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour*0
| |
| .Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East -East 3-East Mean 3-West 1E -Eat 3Espe 1 Grand-West Oepth''st 112Es [Es 3-atMa MP N N14PP Mean Jun S 0 4.6 0 0 0 0 0.8 5.1 0 4.1 0 0 0 1.5 0 4.3 0 1.2 5 N 5.1 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 4.9 0 4.1 0 0 4.4 2.2 5.0 0 0 1.6 B 0 0 0 0 0 10.3 1.7 0 4.9 0 0 0 0 0.8 O a 5.2 1.4 Mean 1.7 1.5 0 0 0 3.4 1.1 3.3 1.7 3.0 0 0 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.4 1.7 1.4 Jun S 0 0 4.1 0 4.6 0 1.5 0 0 13.5 0 8.7 8.0 5.0 4.2 0 4.4 3.0 12 N 0 5.5 11.5 0 5.8 0 3.8 0 0 5.5 0 0 5.2 1.8 17.0 5.7 6.0 4.2 B 0 5.2 28.7 0 0 5.1 6.5 0 10.5 0 0 0 8.6 3.2 0 0 0 3.9 Mean 0 3.6 14.8 0 3.5 1.7 3.9 0 3.5 6.3 0 2.9 7.3 3.3 7.1 1.9 3.5 3.7 Jun S 4.7 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 4.7 0 0 0 0.8 0.6 19 M 0 5.6 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 NO CATCH 0.4 B 0 5.1 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.3 Mean 1.6 3.6 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0.3 0.4 Jun S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 26 N 4.6 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 NO CATCH 0.3 B 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 12.4 2.1 0.8 Mean 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 4.1 0.7 0.4 Jul S 0.0 0 0 0 4.7 0 0 0.8 0.3 5 M NO CATCH 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 NO CATCH ).0 8 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 ).0 Mean 0.0 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 ).3 ).1 Jul S 4.6 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 3.0 4.1 3.9 0 .8 10 M 0 0 0 5.0 0 0 0.8 NO CATCH 0.0 0 0 0 ).3 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 3.0 0 0 0 ).0 Mean 1.5 0 0 1.7 0 0 0.5 3.0 1.4 1.3 0 }.4 Jul S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 4.1 0 .7 .3 17 M 0 0 0 4.7 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 No CATCH .3 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 ).0 Mean 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 1.4 0 .2 3.2 Jul S 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 4.2 .7 .3 24 M NO CATCH 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 NO CATCH 0.0 B 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 " .0 Mean o.O 0 0 0 0 0- 1.4 .2 ..1* Number per 1000 .3.S = surface, M = mid-depth.
| |
| 8 = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-. 1-. and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1..w ..~ .-li IlLs KL CL12 1 QC) 7Ls ffiL 2 CLLs ~ ~
| |
| Table E-17 (Page 3 of 3)Sample O-Ft Contour***.
| |
| 40-Ft Contour*m*
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft OO-Ft Grand Date Depth- 3-West I1-West 1/ ý2-est 1/2-East I-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-We.st 1/2-West 1/2East I1-East 3-East Mean NipP I 'P P .MPP Mean S 0 0 0 .0 .0 0 V 31 .1M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NO CATCH NO CATCH July 8 0 0 0 0 0 4.5 0.3 0.1 Mean 0 0 0 0 0 1.5. 0.3 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 5.2 0 0 0 0.9 NO CATCH 0.3 Aug B CATCH 0 0 0 4.6 0 0 0.8 0.3 Mean 0 0 1.7 1.5 0 0 0.5 0.2 S 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 NOCATCH 5.0 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 NO CATCH 0'Aug B 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean "1.7 0 .0 0 0 0 0.3 0.1 W I W%0 T F 0 3.21 Aug 28 Aug 5 K 1 Sept S M B Mean S M B Mean S M B Mean S H B.Mean NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH .NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCHýNO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH No CATCH IJ I t -7 18 Sept 26 Sept S M B Mean S'4 B NO CATCH NO CATCH M~~ean j___*Number per 1000 m 3.**S -surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-iele radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-18 (Page 1 of 2)..Abundance*of Morone sp. Postlarvae in. Night Ichthyoplankton Collections Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978.i I I.CD 0 i 2 a S L 0 0.OS 0 Sampe Coto 40-Ft Zntor Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Gr and Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-Eastj 3-East Mean 3-West 1 -West 11/2-West 11/2-Ea~st 1--East_13-East Mean KMP P M.PP "an Jun S 13.2 11.6 20.3 8.0 4.1 0 9.5 4.2 0 27.4 0 8.4 0 6.7 6.5 6-7 N 4.8 0 9.0 18.8 29.9 0 10.4 4.5 9.1 4.7 0 4.4 0 3.8 NO CATCH 5.7 B 0 5.2 5.0 9.7 25.6 13.9 9.9 0 4.8 0 4.9 9.7 5.0 4.1 5.6 Mean 6.0 5.6 11.4 12.2 19.8 4.6 9.9 2.9 4.6 10.7 1.6 7.5 1.6 4.8 5.9 Jun S 12.7 38.0 34.7 27.0 28.1 5.2 !24.3 4.3 11.8 17.3 8.4 14.5 3.6 10.0 0 4.5 0 14.0 15-16 M 15.1 15.4 27.8 5.0 10.3 10.3 14.0 0 0 27.1 4.8 36.1 0 11.3 0 0 0 101 B 14.9 10.0 0 39.5. 0 0 10.7 0 40.6 5.0 0 0 9.3 9.2 0 0 0 8.0 Mean 14.2 21.1 20.8 23.8 12.8 5.2 16.3 1.4 17.5 16.4 4.4 16.9 4.3 10.1 0 1.5 0 I0.7 Jun S 0 4.5 8.1 0 0 0 2.1 4.5 0 0 17.5 0 0 3.7 0 4.4 4.0 2.9 19-20 M 0 0 4.6 0 5.2 0 1.6 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.7 B 5.0 0 4.0 0 0 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 5.7 a 1.0 0 0 0 1.0 Mean 1.7 1.5 5.6 0 1.7 0 1.7 .1.5 0 0 5.8 1.9 0 1.5 0 1.4 1.3 1.5 Jun S 9.1 0 4.7 0 0 0 2.3 5.0 0 4.4 0 0 0 1.6 1.6 26 N 4.8 0 0 0 5.3 0 1.7 0 4.9 0 0 0 0 0.8 NO CATCH 1.0 B 0 4.7 4.8 0 0 0 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0.A 0.6 Mean .4.6 1.6 3.1 0 1.8 0 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.5 0 0 0 0.8 ,1 Jul S 5-6 N NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH B Mean Jul S 0 3.3 0 4.3 0 0 1.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 13.9 0 1.4 12-13 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 5.9 5.3 0 1.9 4.8 0 0 1.1 B 0 0 0 0 5.1 0 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.3 Mean 0 1.1 0 1.4 1.7 0 0.7 0 0 0 2.0 1.8 0 0.6 1.6 4.6 0 0.9 Jul S 17-18 N NO CATCH -NO CATCH NO CATCH B Mean Jul S .0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.0 0 4.4 0 0 0 0 0.7 0.3 24-25 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 NO CATCH .0. 0 B 0 0 5.0 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 5.7 0 1.0 0.7 Mean 0 0 1.7 0 0 0 0.3 0 1.5 0 0 1.9 0 0;.6 .3* Nmer per 1000 .3.surface. M mid-depth, B bottom.*Stations along contours are established withii 3-, 1-, .and 1/2-mdle radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.
| |
| Table E-18 (Page 2 of 2)Date Sie~Ae20-Vt Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour~***an D ote Depth" 3-We 1-West 2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 13-East Mean N Mean 31 S July M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH 1 B Aug Meana S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.7 0 0 0.6 0.2 7-8 M 9.1 0 4.2 0 0 0 2.2 4.1 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 NO CATCH 1.2 Aug B 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 3.1 0 1.4 0 0 0 0.7 1.4 0 0 1.2 0 0 0.4 0.5 S 14 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 21 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 28 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 5 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 14 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept 8 Mean Number per 1000 m3.S = surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station. Unit I.4:-H S a i.a S S S 5.S S a.S 5.
| |
| Table E-19 (Page l of 3)Abundance*
| |
| of Rainbow Smelt Postlarvae in Day Ichthyoplankton Collections Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (NO rainbow smelt postlarvae were collected in day samples before May or after September)
| |
| Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft O0-Ft. Grand Date Depth"* 3-WestT1-West I1/2-West 1(12-East I1-Eastj 3-East Mean 3-West 11-West 11/2-West 11/2-East 11-East 13-East Mean KNP Mean Apr S 4 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 10 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 17 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 24 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 2 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May s 8 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 15 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean may S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 .5.6 0.9 5.1 0 0 0 0 0 0.8 No Catch 0.7 B 0 0 0 5.0 0 5.2 .1.7 0 5.3 0 0 0 0 0.9 1.0 Mean a 0 0 1.7 0 -3.6 0.9 1.7 1.8 0 0 0 0 0.6 1 0.6 May S 8.4 0 8.2 0 0 8.0 4.1 22.6 12.0 0 3.6 3.7 3.8 *7.6 3.9 7.6 11.0 6.2 30 # 43.3 10.3 0 0. 9.7 9.8 12.2 31.7 25.2 4.9 20.3 31.1 22.0 22.5 14.6 0 4.9 15.2 B 78.8 5.1 14.5 14.1 4.8 24.2 23.6 0 0 0 0 8.7 13.9 3.8 0 0 4.5 1.2 Mean 43.5 5.1 7.6 4.7 4.8 14.0 13.3 18.1 12.4 1.6 8.0 14.5 13.2 11,3 6.2 2.5 6.8 00.9 0 C)5.0 S 0 C)S A..4 S 0 Humber per 1000 m3.S -surface, M -mid-depth, B = bottom.*Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1...........................................................................
| |
| Table E-19 (Page 2 of 3)Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 8-Ft 100-Ft. Grand Date ~ ~ _etI3Wet1Wst12Ws 1/2-East 1 I-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 11/2-West 11/2-East 11-East 13-East Mean JNM P PM ea S 4.8 18.3 16.1 0 9.6 0 8.1 46.0 30.6 57.2 9.1 14.0 48.0 34.2 0.7 21.4 16.3 19.5 JUN M 0 21.5 0 0 0 4.5 4.3 24.3 14.5 43.3 5.0 36.2 21.8 24.2 19.3 30.8 20.4 16.1 5 B 5.0 21.0 0 0 0 0 4.3 31.0 9.9 0 0 5.6 15.5 10.3 14.5 4.9 0 7.2 Mean 3.2 20.3 5.4 0 3.2 1.5 5.6 33.8 18.3 33.5 4.7 18.6 28.4 22.9 11.7 19.1 12.2 14.3 s 16.8 12.9 8.4 21.7 4.6 0 10.7 4.5 0 0 4.4 13.0 24.0 7.7 16.9 39.0 8.8 11.7 JU2N 23.3 5.5 0 0 17.5 0 7.7 16.8 5.7 11.0 19.3 72.9 67.8 32.3 22.6 33.9 0 19.8 2 23.4 36.4 23.9 15.7 25.3 5.1 21.6 0 10.5 10.1 16.9 24.3 21.6 13.9 5.1 0 10.8 15.3 Mean 21.1 18.3 10.8 12.4 15.8 1.7 13.3 7.1 5.4 7.0 13.5 36.7 37.8 17.9 14.9 24.3 6.6 15.6 JUN S 0 5.2 0 4.5 4.4 0 2.4. 0 0 0 14.5 23.7 4.4 7.1 7.5 0 4.4 4.6 19 M 11.4 11.5 5.3 11.5 5.7 17.5 10.5 17.3 75.6 10.6 48.9 28.5 58.1 39.8 46.5 0 0 23.2 a 11.0 0 9.4 16.0 16.1 15.8 11.4 16.6 0 11.1 10.0 11.4 19.6 11.5 4.8 0 5.2 9.8 Mean 7.5 5.6 4.9 10.6 8.8 11.1 8.1 11.3 25.2 7.6 24.5 21.2 27.4 19.5 19.6 0 3.2 12.5 JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 9.9 0 1.7 0 0 4.6 1.0 26 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 .5.0 4.9 0 10.5 0 4.6 4.2 0 94 4.4 2.6 8 0 0 4.9 0 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 5.2 0 0 0.9 0 0 14.8 1.7 Mean 0 0 1.7 0 0 0 0.3 1.7 1.6 0 5.2 3.3 1.5 2.2 0 3.2 8.0 1.8 S 0 0 0 0 4.3 0 0.7 0.3 JUL M No Catch 0 0 0 0 0 5.2 0.9 No Catch 0.3 5 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 Mean. 0 0 0 0 1.4 1.7 0.5 0.1 JUL S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 10 0 0 0 0 5.2 0 0.9 0 0 0 0.3 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0 5.0 0.3 Mean 0 0 0 0 1.7 0 0.3 0 0 1.7 0.2 JUL S 17 N No Catch No Catch No Catch 8 Mean S JUL N 24 8 No Catch No Catch No Catch Mean Nuaber per 1000 m 3.S = surface, N = mid-depth.
| |
| B = bottom.***Stations along contours are established within 3-. 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.S C 0 Table E-19 (Page 3 of 3)Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth" 3-Westl1-West 1./2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West I1-West 11/2-West I1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean P, I NMPP Mean S 31 B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH July B Mean S Aug B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Mean S 14 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 21 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Aug B Mean S 0 0 0 0 4.0 0 0.7 0 3.8 0 0 0.5 28 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Aug B 0 0 4.6 0 0 0 0.8 NO CATCH 0 0 0 0 0.3 Mean 0 0 1.5 0 1.3 0 0.5 0 1.3 0 0 0.3 S 0 0 3.8 0 0 0 0.6 0 0.3 5 M 0 0 0 0 0 4.8 0.8 0 0.3 Sept B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NO CATCH 0 NO CATCH 0 Mean 0 0 1.3 0 0 1.6 0.5 0 S NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 18 B NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean S 26 M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH Sept B Mean _a 0 0 S a S o0 *Number per 1000 m 3.S S = surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.S*Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.......... .. .. .. ....... _. 2........
| |
| ...... ....... ..................
| |
| Table E-20 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Rainbow Smelt Postlarvae in Night Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 XI Ln Sample 20-Ft contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour* 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand Date Depth.** 3-West I1-West 1./2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East I1-East 3-East Mean Iean JUN S 4.4 19.3 8.1 0 4.1 21.9 9.5 42.1 3.5 9.1 0 21.1 0 12.6 4.3 11.8 0 9.7.6-7 M 9.7 33.4 13.5 0 69.7 9.2 22.6 31.4 22.7 18.9 9.0 30.7 23.2 22.7 4.7 0 0 18.4 B 5.3 15.6 5.0 14.6 10.2 13.9 10.7 4.7 14.3 10.0 9.9
| |
| * 19.4 34.3 15.4 5.0 0 0 10.8 Mean 6.5 22.7 8.9 4.9 28.0 14.7 14.3 26.1 13.5 12.6 6.3 23.7 19.2 16.9 4.7 3.9 0 13.0 S 63.3 109.8 13.0 121.6 14.1 72.8 65.8 25.5 74.5 25.9 4.2 4.8 21.6 26.1 30.8 4.5 18.6 40.3 JUN M 100.7 87.4 23.1 59.6 25.7 36.2 55.5 14.7 48.8 13.6 19.2 20.6 14.9 22.0 43.6 32.6 26.6 37.8 15-16 B 104.1 134.7 43.6 138.4 63.9 106.8 98.6 114.7 86.3 68.7 116.3 116.2 51.1 92.2 81.6 142.1 0 91.2 Mean 89.4 110.6 26.6 106.5 34.6 71.9 73.3 51.6 69.9 36.1 46.6 47.2 29.2 46.8 52.0 59.7 15.1 56.4 JUN S 13.9 0 0 4.8 0 13.1 5.3 0 4.7 11.1 4.4 0 4.0 4.0 0 4.4 4.0 4.3 19-20 J 0 4.7 4.6 5.6 0 9.7 4.1 10.2 10.1 20.7 0 5.0 19.7 11.0 14.1 14.6 0 7.9 B 0 0 19.8 15.7 0 9.2 7.5 25.3 4.9 19.6 0 11.4 4.5 11.0 8.8 18.7 4.8 9.5 Mean 4.6 1.6 8.1 8.7 0 10.7 5.6 11.8 6.6 17.1 1.5 5.5 9.4 8.7 7.6 12.5 2.9 7.2 JUN S 13.6 0 0 0 0 0 2.3 5.0 9.3 13.2 0 4.2 0 5.3 0 0 22.7 4.5 26 M 4.8 0 9.7 0 0 0 2.4 4.3 4.9 4.3 0 0 5.1 3.1 0 10.3 10.0 3.6 B 0 9.5 4.8 0 0 0 2.4 15.4 4.9 17.0 0 0 0 6.2 13.7 5.1 0 4.7 Mean 6.2 3.2 4.8 0 0 0 2.4 8.2 6.4 11.5 0 1.4 1.7 4.9 4.6 5.1 10.9 4.3 JUL S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.6 0 0 3.8 4.4 0 2.1 0 0 0 0.9 5-6 N 0 0 0 5.4 0 0 0.9 0 6.1 4.9 5.1 0 0 2.7 14.1 4.8 0 2.7 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 4.7 0.7 Mean 0 0 0 1.8 0 0" ?0 '.. .0 1.6 3.0 15S a iL 4-7 1.6 1.6 I .-14 JUL S 0 0 3.9 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0.3 12-13 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 8.7 0.6 3 No Catch 0 4.2 4.3 0 0 0 1.4 0 3.9 3.9 1.1 Mean 0 1.4 2.7 0 0 0 0.7 0 1.3 4.2 0.6 JUL0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17-18 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 No Catch 0 5.9 5.3 0 0 0 1.9 0 0 3.9 1.0 Mean 0 2.0 1.8 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 .1.3 0.3 JUL S 24-25 B4 No Catch No Catch No Catch Mean Number per 1000 m3.S= surface. M = mid-depth.
| |
| B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.0 0 0 0 Table E-20 (Page 2 of 2)Sample 20-Ft Contour**
| |
| 40-Ft Contour**
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth** 3-West I-West 1/2-West I1/2-East -East 3-East mean 3 -West 1, /2-West 11/2-East 1-Eas 3-s MMPP Mean 31 S July M NO CATCH NO CATCH NO CATCH I. B Aug Mean S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7-8 M NOCATCH 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 Aug B 0 0 13.1 0 .0 0 2.2 NOCATCH 0.9 Mean 0 0 4.4 0 0 0 0.7 0.3 S 14 M Aug B NO CATCH NO CATCH. NO CATCH Mean S 0 0 0 0 0 4.5 0.8 0.3 21 N NOCATCH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NOCATCH 0 Aug B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mean 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0.3 0.1 S 4.5 4.5 9.7 0 0 0 3.1 4.4 8.0 4.7 0 0 0 2.9 4.6 0 3.8 2.9 28 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.Aug B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.7 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 0 0 0 0.4 Mean 1.5 1.5 3.2 0 0 0 1.0 3.4 2.7 1.6 0 0 0 1.3 1.5 0 1.3 1.1 S 0 4.4 0 0 0 0 0.7' 0.3 S M NOCATCH 0 *0 0 0 0 0 0 NO CATCH 0 Sept B 24.0 0 0 0 0 0 4.0 1.6 Mean 8.0 1.5 0 0 0 0 1.6 0.6 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.3 0 0 0.7 0.3 14 M 15.3 0 6.0 0 21.7 0 7.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.9 Sept B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NOCATCH 0 Mean 5.1 0 2.0 0 7.2 0 2.4 0 0 0 1.4 0 0 0.2 1.1 Number per 1000 S = surface, M = mid-depth, B bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.tTj 4:-0~S 0 S S 0 a 0 S S a.I U i...........
| |
| Table E-21 (Page 1 of 2)Abundance*
| |
| of Yellow Perch Postlarvae in Day Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No yellow perch postlarvae were collected in day samples before May and after June)Sample 20-Ft Contour` 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft Grand Date Depth", 3-West 1 -West 1.12-West I1/2-East 1 -Eastj 3-East ean 3-West 1 -West 11/2-West 11/2-East 1I-East 13-East Mean NMPP NMPP INMPP Mean Apr S 4 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 10 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean Apr S 17 M No catch No Catch No Catch 8 Mean Apr S 24 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 2 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 8 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean May S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 M 0 0 0 5.3 0 0 0.9 No Catch No Catch 0.4 B 0 0 0 10.0 0 0 1.7 0.7 Mean 0 0 0 5.1 0 0 0.8 o.3 May S 48.6 21.3 35.0 98.9 122.8 41.2 61.3 34.3 16.8 91.2 20.1 33.6 45.1 40.2 37.6 0 0 43.1 22 M 94.1 59.9 34.1 118.4 135.4 55.8 83.0 25.4 21.3 25.8 42.8 30.2 30.5 29.3 27.6 4.9 0 47.1 B 66.8 130.2 24.4 50.3 91.2 82.7 74.3 11.3 10.5 22.6 5.6 52.9 32.7 22.6 5.4 0 0 39.1 Mean 69.8 70.5 31.2 89.2 116.5 59.9 72.8 23.7 16.2 46.5 22.8 38.9 36.1 30.7 23.6 1.6 0 43.1 May S 0 0 0 4.4 8.4 0 2.1 0 0 4.2 0 3.7 0 1.3 0 0 0 1.4 30 M 5.4 10.3 10.2 34.2 63.3 14.7 23.0 0 0 0 5.1 8.9 0 2.3 0 0 0 10.1 B 0 0 4.8 0 4.8 0 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.6 Mean 1.8 3.4 5.0 12.9 25.5 4.9 8.9 0 0 1.4 1.7 4.2 0 1.2 0 0 0 4.0-J S 0 0 0 0 S 0 4 5.0 S 0.I S 5 Number per 1000 m 3.**S -surface, M = mid-depth, B = bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station. Unit I.
| |
| Table *E-21 (Page 2 of 2)ti 41 CI 0L Z Sampe 20-Ft Contour` *-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft 100-Ft. Grand Date Depth** 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East 1-East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 11/2-East 1I-East 13-East Mean NMPP I NMPP Mean JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 11.2 1,9 0.8 5 M 0 0 0 0 0 4.5 0.8 No Catch No Catch 0.3 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.3 Mean 0 0 0 0 0 5.2 0.9 0 0 JUN S 12 M No Catch No Catch No Catch B Mean JUN S 0 0 0 0 0 4.6 0.8 0 0 0 0 4.7 0 0.8 0.6 19 N 0 0 0 0 0 5.8 1.0 0 5.8 5.3 0 0 0 1.9 1.1 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 Mean 0 0 0 0 0 3.5 0.6 0 1.9 1.8 0 1.6 0 0.9 0.6 S JUN N No Catch No Catch No Catch 26 B Mean S JUL M No Catch No Catch No Catch 5 B Mean.S JUL M No Catch No Catch No Catch 10 B Mean S JUL N No Catch No Catch No Catch 17 B Mean S JUL N 24 8 No Catch No Catch No Catch Mean Number per 1000 m3.S -surface, M -mid-depth, B bottom.Stations along contours are established within 3-, 1-. and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit 1.-., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ...... -~ ... ~ .----.....-
| |
| Table E-22 Abundance*
| |
| of Yellow Perch Postlarvae in Night Ichthyoplankton Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No yellow perch postlarvae were collected in night. samples after June)0 0 i.Sample 20-Ft Contour***
| |
| 40-Ft Contour***
| |
| 60-Ft 80-Ft O-Ft. Grand Date Depth* 3-West 1-West 1/2-West I1/2-East -East 3-East Mean 3-West 1-West 1/2-West 1/2-East -East 13- East Mean N1PP IN I lNMPP Mean S JUN M No Catch No Catch No Catch 6-7 B Mean S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 JUN N4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 No Catch 0.0 15-16 0 0 0 4.9 0 0 0.8 0 5.1 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.7 Mean 0 0 0 1.7 0 0 0.3 0 1.7 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.2$ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 JUN M No Catch 0 0 0 4.8 0 0 0.8 0.3 19-2 B 0 4.9 0 0 0 0 0.8 No Catch 0.3 Mean 0 1.6 0 1.6 0 0 0.5 0.2 S JUN M No Catch No Catch No Catch 26 0 Mean S JUL N No Catch No Catch 5-6 B No Catch Mean JUL S 12-13 B No Catch No Catch No Catch Mean S JUL o No Catch B No Catch No Catch Mean IIJUL N No Catch B No Catch No CAtch i24-Z.51 Mean Nunber per 1000 w3.S -surface, M = mid-depth.
| |
| B = bottom.***Stations along contours are established within 3-. l-, and 1/2-mile radii east and west of Nine Mile Point Station, Unit I.
| |
| I-I.I APPENDIX F FISHERIES o Catch Rate Data 9 Length -Frequency 9 Coefficient of Maturity and Fecundity 9 Age* Stomach Contents I-i.A'cec srie dvso Table F-i Time Table for Gill Nets Set at .15-Ft Depth Contour during.the Day, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 4i1 Sampl ing Period N4PW Dur. 2 Date 1 I 0l Apr 14 4-6-78 12.3 4-10-78 12.3 Apr II4 4-18-78 12.3 4-19-78 11.8 May I 5-2-78 13.5 5-3-78 13;0 May II 5-16-78 13.5 5-17-78. 14.0 Jun 1 6-6-78 14.8 6-7-78. 14.3 Jun i1 6-20-78 14.8 6-21-78 14.3 Jul I 7-5-78 14.8 7-6-78 14.5 Jul II 7-18-78 14.3 7-19-78 14.5 Aug I 8-1-78 .13.3 8-2-78 13.5 Aug II 8-16-78 13.3 8-18-78 13.3 Sep I 9-6-78 11.5 9-10-78 10.8 Sep II 9-19-78 11.3 9-20-78 12.0 Oct 1 10-3-78 10.5 10-4-78 11.0 Oct I1 10-17-78 11.0 10-18-78 11.3 Nov I 10-31-78 9.3 11-1-78 9.0 Nov II 11-16-78 8.8 11-17-78 8.8 Dec I 12-6-78 8.8 12-7-78 9.3 Dec 11 1 Plck-up date 2 Dur. -duration in hours 3 Set time and pick-up time 0545-1800 0600-1745 0615-1945 0545-1845 0545-1915 0530-1930 0530-2015 0530-1945 0530-2015 0530-1945 0515-2000 0530-2000 0545-2000 0530-2000 0615-1930 0600-1930 0600-1915 0630-1945 0715-1845 07-15-1800 0700-1815 0615-1815 0745-1815 0715-1815 7 8 Time 3 0545-1800 0545-1800 NMPP Date Dur. Time Date 4-6-78 12.3 0600-1815 4-6-78 4-10-78 12.3 0600-1815 4-10-78 4-18-78 12.5 0545-1815 4-18-78 4-19-78 12.0 0615-1815 4-19-78 5-2-78 13.8 0630-2015 5-2-78 5-3-78 13.3 0615-1930 5ý3-78 5-16-78 13.5 0600-1930 5-16-78 5-17-78 12.8 0630-1915 5-17-78 6-6-78 14.5 0600-2030 6-6-78 6-7-78 13.8 0615-2000 6-7-78 6-20-78 .14.8 0545-2030 6-20-78 6-21-78 14.0 0615-2015 6-21-78 7-5-78 ' 14.5 0545-2015 7-5-78-6-78 14.0 0615-2015 7-6-78 7-18-78 14.5 0600-2030 7-18-78 7-19-78 14.0 0615-2015 7-19-78 8-1-78 13.5 0630-2000 8-1-78 8-2-78 13.3 0645-2000 8-2-78 FITZ Dur,. Time Date 12.3 0545-1800 4-6-78 12.3 0545-1800 4-10-78 12.3 0545-1800 4-18-78 12.3 0545-1800 4-19-78 14.8 0600-2045 5-2-78 12.8 0630-1915 5-3-78 13.5 0545-1915 5-16-78 13.5 0545-1915 5-17-78 14.8 0545-2030 6-6-78 13.8 0615-2000 6-7-78 14.8 0530-2015 6-20-78 14.0 0545-1945, 6-21-78 14.8 0515-2000 7-5-78 14.8 0515-2000 7-6-78 14.0 0600-2000 7-18-78 14.3 0545-2000 7-19-78 13.3 0615-1930 8-1-78 13.8 0545=1930 8-2-78 NMPE Dur.12.5 12.3 12.3 12.0 14.8 13.0 13.3 13.3 14.8 13.5 15.0 13.8 14.5 14.3 14.5 13.5 13.5 12.8 12.8 13.0 12.0 10.3 11.0 12.3 1.0.8 10.5 11.0 10.5 9.8 8.8 8.8 10.3 8.8 9.3 Time 0600-1830 0600-1815 0600-1815 0615-1815 0615-2100.0700-2000 0615-1930 0615-1 930 0600-2045 0700-2030 0545-2045 0615-2000 0545-2015 0615-2030 0615-2045 0645-2015 0630-2000 0715-2000 0630- 1915 0715-2015 0730-1930 0800-1815 0745-1845 0630-1845 0745-1830 0800-1830 0800-1900 0815-1845 0700-1 645 0815-1700 0800-1645 0715-1730 0745-1630 0730-1645 8-16-78 8-18-78 89-6-78 9-10-78 9-19-78 9-20-78 10-3-78 10-4-78 13.5, 0615-1945 8-16-78 14.0 0600-2000 8-16-78 12.5 0730-2000 8-18-78 13.5 0630-2000 8-18-78 11.8 0730-1915 9-6-78 11.8 0715-1900 9-6-78 10.5 0745-1815 9-10-78 10.5 0730-1800 9-10-78 11.0. 0730-1830 9-19-78 "11.0 0915-1815
| |
| ' 9-19-78 12.0 0645-T845 9-20-78 12.0 0615-1815 9-20-78 10.8 0745-1830 10-3-78 .10.8 0730-1815 10-3-78 10.5 0800-1830 10-4-78 10.8 0730-1815 10-4-78 0730-1830 10-17-78 11.0 0745-1845 10-17-78 0715-1830 10-18-78 10.8 0800-1845 10-18-78 0700-1615 10-31-78 9.8. 0715-1700 10-31-78 0730-1630 11-1-78 9.0 .0800-1700 11-1-78 0745-1630 11-16-78' 9.0 0800-1700 11-16-78 0745-1630 11-17-78 8.8 0815-17.00 11-17-78 0715-1600 12-6-78 9.3 0730-1.645 12-6-78 0715-1630 12-7-78 9.0 .0745-1645 12-7-78 10.8 0745-1830 10-17-78 11.0 0730-1830 10-18-78 9.3 0700-1615 10-31-78 8.8 0745-1630 11-1-78 9.0 0800-1700 11-16-78 9.0 0730-1630 11-17-78 8.8 0730-1615 12-6-78 8.5 0800-1630 12-7-78 No samples taken due to weather 4I .first sampling period; II -second sampling period.
| |
| Table F-2 Time Table for Gill Nets Set at 15-Ft Depth Contour during the-Night, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978.K I.NMPW NMPP FITZ IL Z Ix U 0 0.Sampling Period Date 1 Pur.2 Time 3 Date Dur. Time Date Dur. T i Apr 14 4-748 Missed.Sample 5 11.0 1830-0530' 4-7-78 1 1.0 1815 4-11-78 11.5 1800-0530 4-11-78 12.0 1815-0615 4-11-78 11.5 1800 Apr IT4 4-19-78 12.0 1800-0600 4-19-78 12.0 1815-0615 4-19-78 11.5 1800 4-20-78 11.5 1800-0530 4-20-78 11.5 1830-0500 4-20-78..
| |
| 11.5 1800 may I 5-3-78 9.5 2000-0530 5-3-78 9.5 2030-0600 5-3-78 9.8 2045 5-4-78 10.5 1900-0530 5-4-78 10.5 1930-0600 5-4-78 10.5 1915 May II 5-17-78 10.0 '1915-051' 5-17-78 10.0 1945-0545 5-17-78 10.0 1915 5-18-78 9.8 1945-0530 5-18-78 10.8 1915-0600 5-18-78 10.3 1915 Jun I 6-7-78 9.0 2015-0515 6-7-78 9.3 2045ý0600 6-7-78 9.5 2030 6-8-78 13.3 1945-0900 6-8-78 12.8 2000-0845 6-8-78 12.3 2000 Jun II 6-21-78 9.0 2015-051.5 6-21-78 9.0 2045-0545 6-21478 9.0 2015 6-22-78 9.8 1945-0530 6-22-78 9.5 2030-0600 6-22-78 10.5 1945.Jul 1 7-6-78 9.0 2000-0500 7-6-78 9.5 2030-0600 7-6-78 9.0 2000 7-7-78 9.3 2000-0515 7-7-78 9.3 2030-0545 7-7-78 .9.5 2000.Jul IT 7-19-78 9.3 -2000-0515 7-19-78 9.3 2045-0600 7-19-78 9.5 2000 7-20-78 9.5 2000-0530 7-20-78 9.5 2030-0600 7-20-78 9.3 2000 Aug 1 8-2-78 10.3 1930-0545 8-2-78 10.5 2000-0630 8-2-78 10.0 1945 8-3-78 10.0 1945-0545 8-3-78 10.5 2000-0630 8-3-78 10.0 1945 Aug II 8-17-78 T-i0:31 1930-0545 8-17-78 10.8 8-17478 10.0 2000 8-19-78 9.5 1945-0515 8-19-78 9.8 2015-0600 8-19-78 10.0 2015 Sep,1 9-10-78 11.3 1930-0645 9-10-78 11.5 2000-0730 9-10-78 11.3 1945 9-11-78 12.5 1800-0630 9-11-78 12.5 1830-0700 9-11-78 12.8 1800 Sep II 9-19-78 12.8 1800-0645 9-19-78 12.8 1830-0715 9-19-78 14.8 1815 9-20-78 11.8 1830-0615.
| |
| 9-20-78 12.0 1845-0645 9-20-78 12.0 1815 Oct 1 10-4-78 12.8 1815-0700 104-78 13.Q. 1830-0730 10-4-78 12.8 1815 10-5-78 12.3 183040645 10-5-78 12.5 1845-0715 10-5-78 12.5 1815.Oct IT 10-18-78 12.-5 1830-0)00 10-18-78 13.3 1845-0800 10-18-78 12.93 1845 10-19-78 12.3 1830-0645 10-19-78 12.3 1900-0715 10-19-78 12.5 1830 Nov I 11-1-78 14.8 1630-0715 11-1-78 14.8 1700-0745 1:1-178. 15.0 1630-11-2-78 15.0 1630-0730 1.1-2-78 14.8 1700-0745 11-2-78 14.0 1645-Nov II 11-16-78 14,5 1700-0730 11-16-78 14.3 1730-0745 11-16-78 15.0 1700-11-17-78 15.0 1630-0730 11-17-78 15.0 1700-0800
| |
| .11-17-78 14.3 1715.Dec I 12-7-78 15.3 1600-0715 12-7478 15.0 1645-0745 12-:7-78 15.5 1615.12-8-78 15.0- 1630-0730 12-8-78 15.0 1645-0745 12-8-78 15.0 1630.Dec I' No samples taken due to wea.ther 1 Ptck-up date 2 bur. -duration in hours 3 Set time and pick-up time 41 -fi-rst-sam&
| |
| ng period; II second sampling period. 55ample voided dud to damaged net.me-0515-0530-0530-0530-0630-0545-0515-0530-0600-0815-0515-0615-0500-0530-0530-0515-0545-0545-0600-0615-0700-0645--0900-0615-0700-0645-0700-0700-0730-0645-0800-0730-0745-0730 NMPE Date Our.4-7-78 11.8.4-11-78 11.8 4-19-78 12.0 4-20-78 11.5 5-3-78 9.5 5-4-78 10.0 5-17-78 10.5 5-18-78 10.5 6-7-78 9.8 6-8-78 11.0 6-21-78 9.0 6-22-78 10.3 7-6-78 9.0 7-7-78 9.8 7-19-78 9.5 7-20-78. 9.3 8-2 -78 10.3 8-3-78 10.0 8-17-78 10.8 8-19-78 10.0 9-10-78 10.3 9-11-78 13.0 9-19-78 13.0 9-20-78 11.8 10-4-78 13.0 10-5-78 12.8 10-18-78 13.0 10-19-78 12.3 11-1-78 15.3 11-2-78 13.8 11-16-78 '14.5 11-17-78 14.3 12-7-78 14.5 12-8-78 .14.8 Time 1830-0615 1815-0600 1815-0615 1815-0545 2115-0645 2000-0600 1930-0600 1930-0600 2100-0645 2045-0745 2100-0600 2015-0630 2030-0530 2030-0615 2045-0615 2030-0545 2015-0530 2000-0600 1930-0615 2100-0700 2130-0745 1815-0715 1830-0730 1845-0630 1845-0745 1845-0730 1900-0800 1900-0715 1645-0800 1715-0700 1715-0745 1700-0715 1645-0715 1700-0745 Table F-3 Time Table for Gill Nets Set at 20-Ft Depth Contour during the Day, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Sampling Period Apr i4 Apr 1I4 May I May II Jun I Jun II Jul Jul II Aug I Aug 11 Sep I Sep II Oct I Oct II Nov I Nov II Dec I Dec II Date 1 4-6-78 4-18-78 5-2-78 5-1 6-78 6-6-78 6-20-78 7-5-78 7-18-78 8-1-78 8-16-78 9-6-78.9-19-78 10-3-78 10-17-78 10-31-78 11-16-78 12-6-78 NMPW Our, 2 13.0 12.5 16.'0 12.0 12.5 13.0 12.8 12.8 12.5.12.3 11.8 10.5 11.3 13.8.11 .5 10.5 10.8 Time 3 0645-1945 0630-1 900 0730-2330 0630-1830 0645-1915.0630-1 930-0630-1915 0645-1 930 0645-1915 0700-1 915 0815-2100 0900-1 930 0830-1945 0815-2000 0700-1830 0900-1930 0815-1900 Da te 4-6-78 4-18-78 5-2-78 5-16-78 6-6-78 6-20-78 7.-5-78 7-18-78 8-1 -78.8-16-78 9-6-78 9-19-78 10-3-78 10-1.7-78 10-31-78 11-16-78 12-6-78 FITZ Dur.13.3 12.5 15.3 12.0 13.0 13.3 1 2.8 12.5 11.8 12.8 13.3 12.8 1 1.3 11.8 11.5 10.8 10.8 Time 0645-2000.0645-1915 0700-22,15 0700-1900 0645-1945 0630-1945 0630-1915 0700-1 930 0730-1915 0715-2000 0830-2145 0700-1945 0830-1945 0845-2030 0645-1815 0900-1945 0845-1930 Date 4-6-78 4-18-78 5-2-78 5--16-78 6-6-78 6-20-78 7-5-78 7-18-78 8-1-78 8-1 6-78 9-6-78 9-19-78 10-3-78 10-17-78 10-31-78 11-16-78 12-6-78 NMPE Dur.12.8 12.5 12.3 11.8 12.8 13.5 12.5 12.5 11.8 12.3 12.5 10.5 11.0 11.5 11.0 11.0 10.0 I Time 0630-1915 0615-1845 0645-1900 6630-1815 0615-1900 0615-1945 0600-1830 0630-1900 0700-1845 0700-1915 0800-2030 0845-1915 081,5-1915 0830-2000 0630-1730 0745-1845 0815-1815!a a S S*1 5.a.I 0 No samples taken due to weather IPick-up date 2 Dur. = Duration in hours 3 Set time and pick-up time 4, first sampling period; II = second sampling period.
| |
| Table F-4 Time Table for Gill Nets Set at 20-Ft Depth Contour during the Night, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 NMPW FITZ NMPE Sampling Period Date 1 Dur.2 Time 3 Date Dur. Time Date Dur. Time Apr 14 4-7-78 .11.5 1945-0715 4-7-78 11.8 2015-0800 4-7-78 12.0 1930-0730 Apr ii4 4-19-78 12.3 1915-0730 4-19-78 .12.5 1915-0745 4-19-78 12.0 1900-0700 May I 5-3-78 8.0 2345-0745 5-3-78 8.3 2215-0630 5-3-78 12.3 1915-0730 May II 5-17-78 13.3 1845-0800 5-17-78 12.8 1900-0745 5-17-78 12.5 1830-0700 Jun I 6-7-78 12.0 1915-0715 6-7-78 12.3 1945-0800 6-7-78 12.5 1915-0745 Jun II 6-21-78 12.0 1930-Q730 6-21-78 11.5 2000-0730
| |
| .6-21-78 10.8 2000-0645 Jul I 7-6-78 12.3 1930-0745 7-6-78 13.0 1915-0815 7-6-78 12.3 1845-0700 Jul II 7-19-78 12.3 19454d800 7-19-78 12.8 1945-0830 7-19-78 12.5 1900-0730 I Aug I 8-2-78 12.8 1915-0800 8-2-78 13.3 1930-0845 8-2-78 13.3 1845-0800 Aug II 8-17-78 13.5 1915-0845 8-17-78 12.8 2000-0845 8-17-78 12.0 1915-0715 Sep I 9-10-78 10.3 2245-0900 9-10-78 9.0 0115-1015 9-10-78 9.3 2330-0845 Sep II 9-19-78 13.5 1915-0845 9-19-78 11.0 1945-0645 9-19-78 13.3 1915-0830 Oct I 10-4-78 13.0 2000-0900 10-4-78 13.5 2000-0930 10-4-78 13.8 1915-0900 Oct ii 10-18-78 13.8 2015-1000 10-18-78 13.8 2030-1015 10-18-78 13.3 2000-0915 Nov 1 11-1-78 13.8 1845-0830 11-1-78 13,0 1830-0730 11-1-78 13.3 1745-0700 Nov I1 11-16-78 14.0 1900-0900 11-16-78 14.3 1845-0900 11-16-78 .13.5. 1800-0730 Dec I 12-7-78 13.5. 1900-0830 12-7-78 12.8 1945-0830 12-7-78 12.8 1830-0715 Dec 11 No samples taken due to weather lPick-up date.2 Dur. = Duration in hours eL 3 Set time and.pick-up time 4 4I = flrstsampling period; II = second sampling perlod.
| |
| ...........
| |
| .. 7 1 Table F-5 Time Table for Gill Nets Set-at 30-Ft Depth Contour during the Day, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 I.0 S a S CL 0 Sampl ing Period Date 1 Apr 14 4-6-78 4-10-78 Apr I]4 4-18-78 4-19-78.May 1 5-2-78 5-4-78 May II 5-16-78 5-17-78 Jun I 6-6-78 6-7-78 Jun II 6-20-78 6-21-78 Jul I 7w5-78 7-6-78 Jul II 7-18-78 7-19-78 Aug I 8-1-78 8-2-78 Aug I 8-16-78 8-18-78 Sep 1 9-6-78 9-10-78 Sep II 9-19-78 9-20-78 Oct I 10-3-78 10-4-78 Oct II 10-17-78 10-18-78 Nov 1 10-31-78 11-1-78 Nov I1 11-16-78 11-21-78 Dec I 12-6-78 12-7-78 NMPW Dur.2 12.8 9.8 12.5 11.8 16.0 12.3 12.0 11.0.14.3 12.0 12.8 11.5 12.8 11.8 12.8 11.3 12.3 10.8 12.3 9.8 12.5 10.3 10.8 12.0 11.0 10.5 11.5 10.8 11.5 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.5 11.0 Time 3 Date 0645-1930 4-6-78 0700-1645 4-10-78 0630-1900 4-18-78 0730-1915 4-19-78 0715-2315 5-2-78 0715-1930 5-4-78 0630-1830 5-16-78 0745-1845 5-17-78 0645-1900 6-6-78 0715-1915 6-7-78 0630-1915 6-20-78 0730-1900 6-21-78 0615-1 900 7-5.-78 0730-1915 7-6-78 0630-1915 7-18-78 0800-1915 7-19-78 0645-1900 8-1-78 0830-1915 8-2-78 0645-1900 8-16-78 0945-1930 8-18-78 0800-2030 9-6-78 0900-1915 9-10-78 0845-1930 9-19-78 0730-1930 9-20-78 0815-1915 10-3-78 0900-1930 10-4-78 0815-1945 10-17-78 1000-2045 10-18-78 0645-1815 10-31-78 0845-1900 11-1 -78 0845-1900 11-16-78 0645-1700 11-21-78 0815-1845 12-6-78 0815-1915 12-7-78 NMPP Dur.12.5 12.0 12.3 11.8 15.8 11.3 12.0 10.5 12.5 12.3 12.8 11.5 12.5 11.8 12.5 11.5 12.0 11.8 12.3 10.3 12.3 10.3 10.8 11.8 11.0 10.5 11.3 11.3 11.3 11.5 10.5 10.3 10.0 10.0 Time 0630-1900 0630-1830 0615-1830 0700-1845 0700-2245 0645-1800 0600-1800 0730-1800 0615-1845 0645-1900 0615-1900 0700-1830 0600-1830 0700-1845 0615-1845 0715-1845 0630-1830 0715-1900 0630-1B45 0845-1900 Date 4-6-78 4-10-78 4-18-78 4-19-78 5-2-78 5-4-78 5-1 6-78 5-17-78 6-6-78 6-7-78 6-20-78 6-21-78 7-5-78 7-6-78 7-18-78 7-19-78 8-1-78 8-2-78 8-1 6-78 8-18-78 FITZ Dur.13.0 12.0 12.8 11.5 15.0 11.5 12.8 10.8 13.0 11. 5 13.3 11.8 12.8 11.0 12.5 11.0 11.8 10.3 12.8 10.5 13.3 9.3 10.3 12.0 11.3 9.8 11.5 10.8 11.3 10.8 10.8 10.3 10.8 10.3 Time Date 0645-1945 4-6-78.0700-1900 4-10-78 0630-1915 4-18-78 0745-1915 4-19-78 0700-2000 5-2-78 0700-1830 5-4-78 0700-1845 5-16-78 0745-1830 5-17-78 0630-1930 6-6-78 0815-1945 6-7-78 0630-1945 6-20-78 0730-1915 6-21-78 0615-1900 7-5-78 0800-1900 7-6-78 0645-1915 7-18-78 0830-1930 7-19-78 0730-1915 8-1-78 0845-1900 8-2-78 0715-2000 8-16-78 0915-1945 8-18-78 0815-2130 9-6-78 1000-1915 9-10-78 0915-1930 9-19-78 0730-1930 9-20-78 0830-1945 1.0-3-78 0930-1915 10-4-78 0845-2015 10-17-78 1015-2100 10-18-78 0645-1800 10-31-78 0730-1815 11-1-78 0845-1930 11-16-78 0730-1745 11-21-78 0830-1915 12-6-78 0830-1845 12-7-78 NMPE Our.13.0 12.3 12.5 11.8 12.0 11.8 11.8 11.0 12.8 11.8 13.3 12.0 12.3 11.8 12.3 11.8 11.5 11.0 12.0 10.8 12.3 10.5 10.5 12.0 11.0 10.3 11.5 11.5 11.0 11.0 11.0 10.0 10.0 10.5 Time 0615-1915 0630-1845 0615-1845 0700-1845 0645-1845 0730-1915 0630-1815 0700-1800 0615-1900 0730-1915 0615-1930 0645-1845 0600-1815 0700-1845 0630-1845 0715-1900 0700-1830 0745-1845 0700-1900 0830-1915 0800-2015 0830-1900 0830-1900 0715-1915 0800-1900 0845-1900 081 5-1945 0915-2045 0630-1730 0645-1745 0730-1830 0800-1800 0800-1800 0700-1730 0745-2000 9-6-78 0815-1830 9-10-78 0815-1900 9-19-78 0715-1900 9-20-78 0800-1900 10-3-78 0830-1900 10-4-78 0800-1915 10-17-78 0900-2015 10-18-78 0630-1745 10-31-78 0645-1815 11-1-78 0715-1745 11-16-78 0700-1715 11-21-78 0800-1800 12-6-78 0715-1715 12-7-78 Dec II IPick-up date 2 0ur. = duration in hours 3 Set time and pick-up time No samples taken due to Weather 41 = first sampling period; I1 = second sampling period.
| |
| Table F-6 Time Table for Gill Nets Set at 30-Ft Depth Contour during the Night, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 0" p S a S S S 5.S S a.I S 2 Sampl Ing Period Date 1 Apr 14 4-7-78 4-11-78 Apr II4 4-19-78 4-20-78 May 1 5-3-78 5-4-78 May II 5-17-78 5-18-78 Jun 1 6-7-78 6-8-78 Jun II 6-21-78 6-22-78 Jul I 7-6-78 7-7478 Jul II 7-19-78 7-20-78 Aug I 8-2-78 8-3-78 Aug II 8-17-78 8-19-78 Sep I 9-10-78 9-11-78 Sep II 9-19-78 9-20-78 Oct I 10-4-78 10-5-78 Oct II 10-18-78 10-19-78 Nov I 11-1-78 11-2-78 Nov II 11-16-78 11-17-78 Dec 1 12-7-78 12-8-78 NOPW Dur.2 11.5 14.5 12.3 10.0 8.0 12.3 13.3 12.0 11.8 12.3 12.0 12.3 12.3 11.8 12.3 10.5 12.8 12.3 13.0 11.8 9.5 12.8 13.5 12.0 13.0 13.0 13.5 12.0 14.0 12.3 13.8 12.0 13.5 13.3 Time 3 Date 1930-0700 4-7-78 1700-0730 4-11-78 1900-0715 4-19-78 1930-0530 4-20-78 2330-0730 5-3-78 1845-0700 5-4-78 1830-0745 5-17-78 1900-0700 5-18-78 1915-0700 6-7-78 1930-0945 6-8-78 1915-0715 6-21-78 1900-0715 6-22-78 1900-0715 7-6-78 1915-0700 7-7-78 1915-0730 7-19-78 1915-0545 7-20-78 1900-0745 8-2-78 1930-0745 8-3-78 1915-0815 8-17-78 1930-0715 8-19-78 2215-0845 9-10-78 1915-0800 9-11-78 1900-0830 9-19-78 1930-0730 9-20-78 1945-0845 10-4-78 1945-0845 10-5-78 2000-0930 10-18-78 2045-0845 10-19-78 1830-0830 11-1-78 1915-0730 11-2-78 1845-0830 11-16-78 1915-0715 11-17-78 1845-0815 12-7-78 1915-0830 12-8-78 NMPP Dur.11.3 12.5 12.5 11.3 8.3 12.0 12.8 12.5 11.8 13.8 11.8 12.0 12.0 11.8 12.3 12.3 12.8 12.0 13.0 11.5 11.0 13.0 13.3 12.0 13.5 13.0 13.3 11.8 12.8 1.2.0 13.3 13.0 13.0 15.0 Time Date 1900-0615 4-7-78 1830-0700 4-11-78 1830-0700 4-19-78 1900-0615 4-20-78 2245-0700 5-3-78 1830-0630 5-4-78 1815-0700 5-17-78 1800-0630 5-18-78 1845-0630 6-7-78 1900-0845 6-8-78 1900-0645 6-21-78 1845-0645 6-22-78 1845-0645 7-6-7&1845-0630 7-7-78 1845-0700 7-19-78 1845-0700 7-20-78 1830-0715 8-2-78 1990-0700 8-3-78 1845-0745 8-17-78 1915"0645 8-19-78 2115-0815 9-10-78 1830-0730 9-11-78 1845-0800 9-19-78 1900-0700 9-20-78 1900-0830 10-4-78 1915-0815 10'5-78 1930-0845 10-18-78 2015-0800 10-19-78 1745-0630 11-1-78 1830-0630 11-2-78 1745-0700 11-16-78 1745-0645 11-17-78 1800-0700 12-7-78 1715-0815 12-8-78 FITZ Dur.12,0 12.0 12.3 11.3 8.3 12.3 12.8 12.3 12.3 12.5 11.8 12.0 12.5 12.3 12.8 11.3 13.3 12.0 12.0 10.3 9.0 12.5 13.5 11.8 13.5 13.0 13.5 11.0 13.0 13.3 14.3 12.8 13.0 13.8 Time Date 2000-0800 4-7-78 1900-0700 4-11-78 1915-0730 4-19-78 1915-0630 i 4-20-78 2200-0615 5-3-78 1830-0645 5-4-78 1845-0730 5-17-78 1845-0700 5-18-78.1945-0800 6-7-78 1945-0815 6-8-78 1945-0730 6-21-78 1915-0715 6-22-78 1915-0745 7-6-78 1915-0730 7-7-78 1930-0815 7-19-78 1945-0700 7-20-78 1915-0830 8-2-78 1915-0715 8-3-78 2015-0815 8-17-78 1945-0600 8-19-78 0045-0945 9-10-78 1930-0800 9-11-78 1930-0900 9-19-78 1945-0730 9-20-78 1945-0915 10-4-78 1930-0830 10-5-78 2030-1000 10-18-78 2115-0815 10-19-78 1815-0715 11-1-78 1830-0745 11-2-78 1830-0845 11-16-78 1930-0815 11-17-78 1930-0830 12-7-78 1845-0830 12-8-78 NMPE Dur.11.8 11.8 12.0 11.5 12.5 12.3 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 11.0 12.3 12.3 12.5 12.3 11.5 12.8 12.0 12.0 10.3 9.5 12.5 13.3 12.0 13.5 13.0 13.3 11.0 13.0 12.8 13.5 12.3 12.5 14.5 Time 1915-0700 1845-0630 1845-0645 1845-0615 1900-0730 1900-0715 1815-0645 1815-0645 1900-0730 1915-0745 1945-0645 1845-0700 1830-0645 1845-0715 1845-0700 1900-0630 1845-0730 1845-0645 1900-0700 1930-0545 2245-0815 1900-0730 1900-0815 1915-0715 1915-0845 1900-0800 1945-0900 2045-0745 1730-0630 1745-0630 1800-0730 1830-0645 1815-0645 1745-0815 Dec II IPick-up date 2 Dur. = duration in hours 3 Set time and pick-up time No samples taken due to weather 41= first sampling period; II : second sampling period.
| |
| Table F-7 Time Table for Gill Nets Set at 40-Ft Depth Contour during the Day, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Sampling Period Date 1 Apr 14 4-6-78 4-10-78 Apr II4 4-18-78 4-19-78 May I 5-2-78 5-3-78 May II 5-16-78 5-17-78 Jun 1 6-6-78 6-7-78 Jun II 6-20-78 6-21-78 Jul 1 7-5-78 7-6-78 Jul II 7-18-78 7-19-78 Aug 1 8-1-78 8-2-78 Aug II 8-16-78 8-18-78 Sep 1 9-6-78 9-10-78 Sep II 9-19-78 9-20-78 Oct 1 10-3-78 10-4-78 Oct II 10-17-78 10-18-78 Nov 1 10-31-78 11-1-78 Nov II 11-16-78 11-17-78 Dec 1 12-6-78 12-7-78 NMPW Dur. 2 12.3 12.0 12.3 12.0 13.8 13.0 13.8 14.3 14.5 14.3 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.0 13.5 13.5 13.3 12.8 11.5 10.5 11.3 12.0 10.5 11.0 11.0 11.0 9.8 9.3 9.3 8.8 8.8 9.0 Time 3 0600-1815 0600-1800 0545-1800 0600-1800 0615-2000 0600-1900 0545-1930 0530-1945 0545-2015 0545-2000 0545-2015 0530-2000 0530-2000 0545-2015 0545-2015 0600-2000 0615-1945 0615-1945 0615-1930 0700-1945 0730-1900 0730-1800 0715-1830 0630-1830 0745-1815 0730-1830 0730-1830 0745-1845 0700-1645 0730-1645 0730-1645 0800-1645 0730-1615 0730-1630 Date 4-6-78 4-1 0-78 4-18-78 4-19-78 5-2-78 5-3-78 5-16-78 5-17-78 6-6-78 6-7-78 6-20-78 6-21-78 7-5-78 7-6-78 7-18-78 7-19-78 8-1 -78 8-2-78 8-16-78 8-18-78 9-6-78 9-10-78 9-1 9-78 9-20-78 10-3-78 10-4-78 10-17-78 10-18-78 10-31-78 11-2-78 11-16-78 11-17 -78 12-6-78 12-7-78 NMPP Our.12.3 12.0 12;3 12.0 14.0 13.3 13.8 12.5 14.8 14.0 15.0 14.3 14.8 14.0 14.8 14.0 13.5 13.3 13.0 12.5 12.0 10.5 11.0 11.8 10.5 10.5 11.3 10.8 10.0 10.3 9.3 9.5 9.0 8.8 Time 0615-1830 0615-1815 0600-1815 0630-1830 0630-2030 0630-1 945 0600-1945 0645-1915 0600-2045 0615-2015 0600-2100 0615-2030 0545-2030 0630-2030 0600-2045 0630-2030 0630-2000 0700-2015 0630-1 930 0800-2030 0730-1930 0800-1830 0745-1845 0700-1845 0800-1830 0815-1845 0745-1 900 0815-1900 0715-1715 0645-1700 0800-1715 0815-1 745 0745-1645 0800-1645 Date 4-6-78 4-10-78 4-18-78 4-19-78 5-2-78 5-3-78 5-16-78 5-17-78 6-6-78 6-7-78 6-20-78 6-21-78 7-5-78 7-6-78 7-18-78 7-19-78 8-1-78 8-2-78 8-16-78 8-18-78 9-6-78 9-10-78 9-19-78 9-20-78 10-3-78 10-4-78 10-17-78 10-18-78 10-31-78 11-1-78 11-16-78 11-17 -78 12-6-78 12-7-78 FITZ Our.12.5 12.0 12.3 11.8 14.5 12.8 13.3 13.5 14.5 13.8 14.8 13.8 14.5 14.8 14.3 14.0 13.5 13.5 13.8 12.8 11.8 9.0 11.0 12.0 10.8 10.8 11.0 11.0 9.5 8.8 8.8 9.0 9.0 8.5 Time Date 0545-1815 4-6-78 0600-1800 4-10-78 0545-1800 4-18-78 0615-1800 4-19-78 0615-2045 5-2-78 0645-1930 5-3-78 0600-1915 5-16-78 0545-1915 5-17-78 0545-2015 6-6-78 0600-1945 6-7-78 0545-2030 6-20-78 0600-1945 6-21-78 S 2.0 0 S 0 5.0 S a.0 0530-2000 0530-2015 0600-2015 0600-2000 0615-1945 0615-1945 0615-2000 0700-1945 0730-1915 0900-1800 0730-1830 0630-1830 0730-1815 0745-1830 0745-1845 0745-1845 0700-1630 0800-1645 0830-1715 0745-1645 0730-1630 0815-1645 7-5-78 7-6-78 7-18-78 7-19-78 8-1-78 8-2-78 8-16-78 8-18-78 9-6-78 9-10-78 9-19-78 9-20-78 10-3-78 10-4-78 10-17-78 10w18-78.10-31-78 11-1-78 11-16-78 11-17 -78 12-6-78 12-7-78 NUPE Our.12.8 12.0 12.5 12.0 14.8 13.0 12.3 13.3 14.8 13.5 15.0 13.8 15.0 14.3 14.8 13.5 13.8 12.8 13.0 13.3 12.0 10.3 10.8 11.8 11.0 10.5 11.0 10.5 10.0 9.0 9.5 10.0 9.0 9.3 Time 0600-1845 0615-1815 0600-1830 0630-1830 0630-2115 0715-2015 0615-1930 0630-1945 0600-2045 0645-2015 0600-2100 0630-2015 0545-2045 0630-2045 0615-2100 0700-2030 0630-2015 0715-2000 0630-1930 0745-2100 0745-1945 0815-1830 0800-1845 0700-1845 0745-1845 0815-1845 0800-1900 0830-1900 0700-1700 0830-1730 0715-1645 0715-1715 0745-1645 0745-1700 Dec II 1 Pick-up date 2 Dur. = duration in hours 3 Set time and pick-up time No samples taken due to weather 41 = first sampling period; II -second sampling period.
| |
| Table F-8 Time Table for Gill Nets Set at 40-Ft Depth Contour during the Night, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 00 I.Z 0o S S 0 Sampl ing Period Date1 Apr 14 4-7-78 4-11-78 Apr I14 4-19-78 4-20-78 May I 5-3-78 5-4-78 pay II 5-17-78 5-18-78 Jun I 6-7-78 6-8-78 June II 6-21-78 6-22-78 Jul I 7-6-78 7-7-78 Jul II 7-19-78 7-20-78 Aug I 8-.2-78 8-3-78 Aug II 8-17-78 8-19-78 Sep 1 9-10-78 9-11-78 Sep II 9-19-78 9-20-78 Oct I 10-4-78 10-5-78 Oct II 10-18-78 10-19-78 Nov I 11-1-78 11-2-78 Nov II 11-16-78 11-17-78 Dec I 12-7-78 12-8-78 Dec II NMPW Dur.2 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.3 9.5 10.5 10.0 9.5 9.0 13.8 9.0 9.8 9.5 9.5 9.3 11.0 10.3 10.3 10.8 9.8 11.5 12.5 12.8 12.0 12.8 12.5 12.8 12.3 14.8 14.5 14.0 12.8 15.0 15.0 Time 3 1815-0515 1815-0545 1800-0600 1815-0630 2015-0545 1915-0545 1930-0530 2000-0530 2030-0530 2000-0945 2030-0530 2000-0545 2015-0545 2015-0545 2015-0530 2015-0715 1945-0600 1945-0600 1930-0615 2000-0545 1945-0715 1815-0645 1815-0700 1830-0630 1830-0715 1830-0700 1845-0730 1845-0700 1645-0730 1645-0715 1715-0715 1700-0745 1630-0730 1630-0730 Date 4-7-78 4-11-78 4-19-78 4-20-78 5-3-78 5-4-78 5-17-78 5-18-78 6-7-78 6-8-78 6-21-78 6-22-78 7-6-78 7-7-78 7-19-78 7-20-78 8-2-78 8-3-78 8-17-78 8-19-78 9-10-78 9-11-78 9-19-78 9-20-78 10-4-78 10-5-78 10-18-78 10-19-78 11-2-78 11-3-78 11-16-78 11-17-78 12-7-78 12-8-78 NMPP ,Dur.11.0 12.3 12.3 11.5 9.8 10.0'10.5 10.8 9.5 12.3 9.3 9.5 9.5 9.3 9.3 9.8 10.8 11.0 11.5 9.8 11.3 12.8 13.0 12.0 13.3 13.0 13.0 12.0 13.8 14.3 13.5 13.0 14.8 15.0 Time 1845-0545 1815-0630 1815-0630 1830-0600 2030-0615 2000-0600 2000-0630 1930-0615 2045-0615 2030-0845 2100-0615 2030-0600 2045-061.5 2045-0600 2100-0615 2030-0615 2000-0645 2015-0715 1930-0700 2030-0615 2030-0745 1830-0715 1830-0730 1845-0645 1845-0800 1845-0745 1915-0815 1915-0715 1815-0800 1700-0715 1730-0800 1715-0815 1700-0745 1645-0745 FITZ NMPE Date Dur. Time Date Dur.. Time 4-7-78 11.5 1815-0545 4-7-78 11.5 1900-0630 4-11-78 11.8 1800-0545 4-11-78 12.0 1815-0615 4-19-78 12.0 1800-0600 4-19-78 11.8 1830-0615 4-20-78 11.3 1815-0530 4-20-78 11.5 1830-0600 5-3-78 9.8 2100-0645 5-3-78 9.5 2130-0700 5-4-78 10.3 1930-0545 5-4-78 9.8 2030-0615 5-17-78 10.5 1915-0545 5-17-78 10.8 1945-0630 5-18-78 10.3 1930-0545 5-18-78 10.5 1945-0615 6-7-78 9.5 2015-0545 6-7-78 9.8 2045-0630 6-8-78 12.5 2000-0830 6-8-78 11.5 2015-0745 Missed Sample 5 6-21-78 9.5 2100-0630 6-22-78 10.3 2000-0615 6-22-78 10.0 2030-0630 7-6-78 9.3 2015-0530 7-6-78 9.3 2100-0615 7-7-78 9.8 2015-0600 7-7-78 10.3 2045-0700 7-19-78 9.3 2030-0545 7-19-78 9.8 2100-0645 7-20-78 9.3 2015-0530 7-20-78 9.3 2045-0600 8-2-78 10.0 2000-0600 8-2-78 11.0 2015-0715 8-3-78 10.3 1945-0600 8-3-78 10.3 2000-0615 8-17-78 9.8 2015-0600 8-17-78 10.8 1945-0630 8-19-78 10.5 2000-0630 8-19-78 10.3 2100-0715 9-15-78 13.8 1800-0745 Missed Sample 5 9-11-78 12.8 1815-0700 9-11-78 13.3 1830-0745 9-19-78 13.0 1815-0715 9-19478 13.0 1845-0745 9-20-78 12.0 1830-0630 9-20-78 12.0 1845-0645 10-4-78 13.0 1830-0730 10-4-78 13.0 1900-0800 10-5-78 12.8 1830-0715 10-5-78 13.0 1845-0745 10-18-78 12.8 1845-0730 10-18-78 13.0 1915-0815 10-19-78 12.3 1845-0700 10-19-78 12.5 1900-0730 11-1-78 15.0 1645-0745 11-1-78 15.3 1700-0815 11-2-78 13.8 1700-0645 11-2-78 13.5 1745-0715 11-16-78 15.3 1700-0815 11-16-78 13.8 1715-0700 11-17-78 14.3 1730-0745 11-17-78 14.3 1645-0700 12-7-78 15.5 1630-0800 12-7-78 14.8 1645-0730 12-8-78 14.8 1645-0730 12-8-78 14.5 1715-0745 No samples taken due to weather 1 Pick-up date 2 Our. -duration in hours 3 Set time and pick-up time 41 = first sampling period; II'= second sampling period-.L. ._-t -and of f by ...... ,nt.
| |
| 11.'j-Table F-9 Time Table for Gill Nets Set at 60-Ft Depth Contour during the Day, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Sampl ing Period Date 1 Apr 14 4-6-78 4-10-78 Apr II4 4-18-78 4-19-78 May I 5-2-78 5-4-78 May II 5-16-78 5-17-78 Jun 1 6-6-78 6-7-78 Jun 11 6-20-78 6-21-78 Jul I 7-5-78 7-6-78 Jul II 7-18-78 7-19-78 Aug 1 8-1-78 8-2-78 Aug II 8-16-78 8-18-78 Sep I 9-6-78 9-10-78 Sep II 9-19-78 9-20-78 Oct I 10-3-78 10-4-78 Oct II 10-17-78 10-18-78 Nov I 10-31-78 11-1 -78 Nov II 11-16-78 11-21-78 Dec 1 12-6-78 12-7-78 NMPW Dur.2 12.8 11.8 12.3 11.8 16.0 12.5 11.8 10.5 12.5 12.3 12.8 11.8 12.5 11.8 12.5 11.5 12.0 11.3 12.3 10.0 12.3 10.8 10.8 12.0 10.8 10.8 11.5 11.0 11.3 11.3 10.0 10.0 10.3 10.8 Time 3 Date 0630-1915 4-6-78 0700-1845 4-10-78 0630-1845 4-18-78 0715-1900 4-19-78 0700-2300 5-2-78 0700-1930 5-4-78 0630-1815 5-16-78 0745-1815 5-17-78 0630-1900 6-6-78 0700-1915 6-7-78 0615-1900 6-20-78 0700-1845 6-21-78 0615-1845 7-5-78 0715-1900 7-6-78 0630-1900 7-18-78 0730-1900 7-19-78 0645-1845 8-1-78 0745-1900 8-2-78 0645-1900 8-16-78 0915-1915 8-18-78 0800-2015 9-6-78 0830-1900 9-10-78 0830-1915 9-19-78 0715-1915 9-20-78 0815-1900 10-3-78 0845-1930 10-4-78 0800-1930 10-17-78 0930-2030 10-18-78 0645-1800 10-31-78 0715-1830 11-1-78 0830-1830 11-16-78 0645-1645 11-21-78 0800-1815 12-8-78 0815-1900 12-6-78 NMPP Dur.12.5 12.0 12.3 12.0 15,8 11.5 12.0 10.8 12.5 12.3 12.8 12.0 12.5 11.8 12.3 11.8 11.8 11.5 12.0 10.8 12.3 9.0 11.0 12.0 10.8 10.5 11;3 11.3 11.3 10.8 10.5 10.0 10.3 10.0 Time 0615-1845 0630-1830 0615-1830 0645-1845 0645-2230 0630-1800 0600-1800 0700-1745 0615-1845 0630-1845 0600-1845 0630-1830 0545-1815 0645-1830 0615-1830 0645-1830 0630-1815 0700-1830 0630-1830 0815-1900 0730-1945 0945-1845 0800-1900 0700-1900 0800-1845 0815-1845 0800-1915 0845-2000 0615-1730 0630-1715 0700-1730 0715-1715 0745-1800 0700-1700 Date 4-6-78 4-1 0-78 4-18-78 4-19-78 5-2-78 5-4-78 5-16-78 5-17-78 6-6-78 6-7-78 6-20-78 6-21-78 7-5-78 7-6-78 7-18-78 7-19-78 8-1-78 8-2-78 8-16-78 8-18-78 9-6-78 9-10-78 9-19-7 8 9-20-78 10-3-78 10-4-78 10-17-78 10-18-78 10-31-78 11-1-78 11-16-78 11-21-78 12-6-78 12-7-78 FITZ Dur. Time 13.0 0630-1930 12.0 0645-1845 12.5 0630-1900 11.5 0730-1900 14.8 0700-2145 11.5 0645-1815 11.8 0645-1830 11.0 0730-1830 12.8 0630-1915 11.5 0800-1930 13.3 0615-1930 11.5 0730-1900 12.5 0615-1845 11.3 0745-1900 12.3 0645-1900 13.0 0815-1915 11.8 0715-1900 13.3 0815-1900 12.8 0700-1945 10.5 ,0900-1930 13,0 0815-2115 9.5 0945-1915 10.5 0900-1930 12.0 0730-1930 11.3 0815-1930.9.8 0915-1900 11.8 0830-2015 11.0 1000-2100 11.3 0645-1800 10.8 0715-1800 10.3 0845-1900 10.0 0745-1745 10.3 0830-1845 10.0 0830-1830 NMPE Date Dur.4-6-78 12.8 4-10-78 12.3 4-18-78 12.5 4-19-78 12.3 5-2-78 11.8 5-4-78 11.8 5-16-78 11.8 5-17-78 11.0 6-6-78 12.8 6-7-78 11.8 6-20-78 12.8 6-21-78 11.8 7-5-78 12.0 7-6-78 11.8 7-18-78 12.0 7-19-78 11.5 8-1-78 11.5 8-2-78 11.0 8-16-78 12.0 8-18-78 10.8 9-6-78 14.3 9-10-78 9.8 9-19-78 12.8 9-20-78 12.0 10-3-78 11.0 10-4-78 10.3 10-17-78 11.3 10-18-78 11.5 10-31-78 10.8 11-1-78 10.8 11-16-78 11.3 11-21-78 10.0 12-6-78 10.0 12-7-78 10.0 Time 0615-1900 0615-1813 0615-1845 0630-1845 0630-1815 0715-1900 0615-1800 0645-1745 0600-1845 0715-1900 0615-1900 0645-1830 0600-1800 0645-1830-0630-1830 0700-1830 0700-1830 0730-1830 0645-1845 0815-1900 0745-2200 0845-1830 0815-1900 0700-1900 0800-1900 0830-1845 0815-1930 0900-2030 0630-1715 0630-1715 0700-1815 0815-1815 0800-1800 0715-1715 CL Z F 0 3 Dec II IPick-up date 2 Our. = duration in hours 3 Set time and pick-up time No samples taken due to weather 4I = first sampling period; II -second sampling period.
| |
| Table F-10 Time Table for Gill Nets Set at 60-Ft Depth Contour during the Night, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 0 S a i 0 0 U S 4 5.S S 4 0 Sampling Period Date 1 Apr 14 4-7-78 4-11-78 Apr 1I4 4-19-78 4-20-78 May 1 5-3-78 5-4-78 May II 5-17-78 5-18-78 Jun I 6-7-78 6-8-78 Jun II 6-21-78 6-22-78 Jul 1 7-6-78 7-7-78 Jul II 7-19-78 7-20-78 Aug I 8-2-78 8-3-78 Aug II 8-17-78 8-19-78 Sap I 9-10-78 9-11-78 Sep II 9-19-78 9-20-78 Oct I 10-4-78 10-5-78 Oct II 10-18-78 10-19-78 Nov I 11-1-78 11-2-78 Nov II 11-16-78 11-17-78 Dec 1 12-7-78 12-8-78 Dec II NMPW Our.2 11.5 12.5 12.3 11.5 8.0 12.0 13.0 12.5 11.8 14,8 12.0 12.3 12.3 12.0 12.3 12.3 12.8 12.3 13.0 11.3 10.8 12.8 13.3 12.0 12.8 13.0 13.3 11.5 12.8 12.0 13.8 12.3 13.5 13.0 Time 3 Date 1915-0645 4-7-78 1845-0715 4-11-78 1845-0700 4-19-78 1915-0645 4-20-78 2315-0715 5-3-78 1845-0645 5-4-78 1830-0730 5-17-78 1815-0645 5-18-78 1900-0645 6-7-78 1915-1000 6-8-78 1900-0700 6-21-78 1845-0700 6-22-78 1900-0715 7-6-78 1900-0700 7-7-78 1900-0715 7-19-78 1900-0715 7-20-78 1845-0730 8-2-78 1915-0730 8-3-78 1900-0800 8-17-78 1930-0645 8-19-78 2145-0830 9-10-78 1915-0800 9-11-78 1900-0815 9-19-78 1915-0715 9-20-78 1945-0830 10-4-78 1930-0830 10-5-78 1945-0900 10-18-78 2045-0815 10-19-78 1815-0700 11-1-78 1900-0700 11-2-78 1830-0815 11-16-78 1845-0700 11-17-78 1830-0800 12-9-78 1915-0815 12-7-78 NMPP Our.11.0 12.3 12.3 11.5 8.3 11.8 13.0 12.5 11.5 14.3 11.8 12.0 12.0 11.5 12.0 12.0 12.8 13.0 12.8 11.3 10.0 12.8 13.0 12.0 13.3 13.0 13.3 T1.8 12.5 13.0 12.8 12.8 13.0 15.0 FITZ Time Date Dur.1900-0600 4-7-78 12.0 1830-0645 4-11-78 12.0 1830-0645 4-19-78 12.3 1845-0615 4-20-78 11.5 2230-0645 5-3-78 8.0 1830-0615 5-4-78 12.0 1800-0700 5-17-78 12.8 1800-0630 5-18-78 12.5 1845-0615 6-7-78 12.5 1845-0900 6-8-78 13.0 1845-0630 6-21-78 11.8 1830-0630 6-22-78 12.3 1830-0630 7-6-78 12.5 1845-0615 7-7-78 12.5 1830-0630 7-19-78 12.8 1845-0645 7-20-78 11.3 1815-0700 8-2-78 13.3 184540745 8-3-78 12.0 1830-0715 8-17-78 12.0 1900-0615 8-19-78 11.0 2315-0915 9-10-78 9.0 1845-0730 9-11-78 12.8 1845-0745 9-19-78 11.5 1900-0700 9-20-78 11.8 1900-0815 10-4-78 13.5 1900-0800 10-5-78 13.0 1915-0830 10-18-78 13.5 2000-0745 10-19-78 11.0 1730-0600 11-1-78 13.0 1715-0615 11-2-78 13.3 1800-0645 11-16-78 14.0 1730-0615 11-17-78 12.8 1815-0715 12-7-78 13.3 1700-0800 12-8-78 13.8 Time 1945-0745 1900-0700 1900-0715 1900-0630 2200-0600 1830-0630 1830-0715 1830-0700 1930-0800 1930-0830 1930-0715 1900-0715 1900-0730 1900-0730 1915-0800 1930-0645 1900-0815 1900-0700 2000-0800 1945-0645 0030-0930 1915-0800 1915-0845 1930-0715 1930-0900 1915-0815 2015-0945 2100-0800 1800-0700 1815-0730 183070830 1915-0800 1900-0815 1830-0815 Date*4-7-78 4-11-78 4-19-78 4-20-78 5-3-78 5-4-78 5-17-78 5-18-78 6-7-78 6-8-78 6-21-78 6-22-78 7-6-78 7-7-78 7-19-78 7-20-78 8-2-78 8-3-78 8-17-78 8-19-78 9-10-78 9-11-78 9-1 9-78 9-20-78 10-4-78 10-5-78 10-18-78 10-19-78 11-1-78 11-2-78 11-16-78 11-17-78 12-7-78 12-8-78 NMPE Our.11.8 1.2.0 11.8 11.3 13.0 12.5, 12.5 12.5 12.3 13.0 11.5 12.3 12.3 12.8 12.3 11.5 13.0 12.0 11.8 10.3 8.3 12.8 13.0 12.0 13.5 13.0 13.0 11.0 13.0 12.8 12.8 12.0 12.8 14.8 Time 1900-0645 1830-0630 1845-0630 1845-0600 1815-0715 1845-0700 1800-0630 1800-0630 1845-0700 1900-0800 1900-0630 1830-0645 1815-0630 1830-0715 1845-0700 1845-0615 1830-0730 1830-0630 1900-0645 1915-0630 0015-0830 1900-0745 1900-0800 1900-0700 1900-0830 1900-0800 1945-0845 2030-0730 1715-0615 1715-0600 1800-0645 1830-0630 1815-0700 1715-0800 No samples taken due to weather I Pick-up date 2 Dur. = duration in hours 3 Set time and pick-up time 41 = first sampling period; II second sampling period.
| |
| Table F-li Spatial Distribution of Alewife Collected by Gill Net(1), Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Month April May June July August September October November December Annual Mean 15-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0 0 0.25 0 1.03 1.58 0.30 1.73 4.43 34.90 15.93 9.58 51.08 33.53 26.78 58.13 1.28 3.67 2.43 5.03 0 0 0.93 0.25 5.10 1.05 1.93 0 5.35 9.23 11.20 2.90 0 0 0.40 3.10 8.15 9.88 7.05 9.31 30-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0 0 0 0 1.35 0.23 0.80 1.23 2*85 2.68 1.00 1.80 14.88 16.80 1.10 1.38 0.73 4.53 0.13 0.98 0 0.13 0 0.38 1.03 2.60 0.13 0.85 1.73 1.00 2.83 .16.78 0 0 0 2.30 2.66 3.29 0.70 2.89 40-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0.13 0 0 0.13 0.28 0 0.13 2.98 0.75 3.40 0.73 2.18 8.53 9.85 5.78 1.88 1.18 3.85 0.75 1.20 0 0 0 0.13 0.25 0.85 4.73 1.45 1.55 0 4.15 4.30 2.20 2.00 0.60 4.10 1.62 2.23 1.97 1.94 60-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0.13 0 0 0.13 0.78 0.13 2.58 0.98 0.13 0.13 0.25 0.38 5.23 1.13 3.88 1.23 1.85 0.88 3.00 0.25 0 1.70 0 0 0.48 0.35 1.98 0.93 0.13 0 1.35 0.83 1.30 0.70 0.30 0.45 1.10 0.55 1.55 0.58 I (1) Mean Monthly Catch per 12-hr set.S 2.m 0~am 0 Table F-12 (1)Spatial Distribution of Rainbow Smelt Collected by Gill Net ,Nine Mile Point Vicinity 1978 Month April May June July August September October November December Annual Mean 15-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ. NMPE 0 6.30 9.10 3.18 1.01 3.65 1.78 14.58 0.15 0.35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.13 0.23 0.40 0.23 0.85 1.05 9.08 0 0 0.63 1.48 0.20 0 0.20 0.80 0 0.26 1.45 2.62 2.14 30-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0.75 0.78 5.25 1.43 1.10 1.00 4.83 7.65 2.78 1.53 0.38 0.85 0.13 0.38 0.13 0 0 0 0 0 1.40 0.73 0.95 1.75 1.05 0.9 4.73 7.35 0.35 0.13 0.28 3.15 0 0 0 0.30 0.89 0.64 1.95 2.63 40-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0.38 2.10 11.40 1.68 5.30 0.40 2.80 3.78 2.88 0.75 5.18 6.18 0.15 0.58 0 0 0 0.13 0 0 0.85 1.08 3.15 2.85 1.33 1.10 5.30 6.05 0.35 0.10 3.50 2.20 0 0 0 0.85 1.32 0.73 3.74 2.77 60-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 2.23 0.50 4.70 1.38 1.95 0.93 5.13 1.90 0.50 1.35 1.45 0.98 0.13 0.50 0.40 0.25 0.13 0.75 0.38 0.35 2.40 3.03 1.93 3.70 1.80 1.55 3.93 6.35 0.78 0.13 3.78 1.20 0 0.45 0.26 0.85 1.17 1.12 2.57 1.95!Q I-i (1) Mean Monthly Catch per 12-hr set.S 0 0 S 0
| |
| , , ,- " .: ,. .* ' ' i... ... ...". ....-...,.....'.Table F-l3 Spatial Distribution of White Perch Collected by Gill Net 1 , Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Month April May June July August September October November December 15-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 1.00 2.08 1.83 1.30 3.38 25.80 9.22 15.90 1.65 11.10 1.78 4.20 3.15 6.13 3.35 12.80 4.73 7.63 3.30 8.73 0.90 0.25. 2.70 2.43 1.23 4.78 1.23 4.13 0.60 1.13 0.68 0.38 0 0 0 0 30-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0.25 0.28 0.38 0.75 0.25 1.65 1.05 , 1.45 3.10 0.73 0.35 0.85.2.00 2.10 1.45 2.28 1.20 1.65 1.68 2.65 0.28 0.28 0.45 0.55 1.23 1.23 1.18 0.85 0.25 0.25 0.38 0.25 0 0 0.22 0.24 1.01 0.96 0.83 1.15 40-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0.13 0.13 0.25 0.38 0.25 1.45 0.58 0.45 0.48 0.45 0.20 0 0.25 0.63 0.43 .0.15 0.80 1.05 0.25 1.03 0 0 0 0.15 0.13 0.73 1.13 0.85 0.31 0.99 0.10 0.52 0 0.21 0.40 0.41 0.28 0.65 0.37 0.44 60-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0 0.13 0.13 0.25 0 0 0.73 0 0 0 0 0 0.13 0 0 0 0 0.40 0.13 0.15 0 0 0 0 0.58 0.13 0.70 0.78 0.60 0.63 0.34 0.35 0 0 0.45 0.30 0.15 0.15 0.27 0.20 A ZJ F a i Annual Mean 1.97 6.90 2.83 5.87 (1) Mean Monthly Catch per 12-hr set.
| |
| Table F-14 Spatial Distribution of Yellow Perch Collected by Gill Net(1), Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 ( I.Month April May June July August September October November December Annual Mean 15-ft Contour NMPW NMPP. FITZ NMPE 0.25 0 0 0 0.75 1.75 1.35 1.53 2.68 4.45 .205 3.10 4.85 5.28 2.45 5.70 7.53 4.65 6.33 4.48 4.68 3..78 8.83 3.70 2.28 7.18 10.25 9.83 0.20 0.90 1.13 2.73 0 .0 0.20 0 2.77 3.29 3.82 3.66 30-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0 0 0 0 0 0.10 0 0.13 1.10 0.25 0.25 0.35 0.84 0.63 0.73 .2.25 1.20 0.78 0.25 3.45 1.63 0.13 0.30 0.70 5.25 1.80 1.68 3.98 0.78 0.53 1.05 0.45.0 0 0.28 0 1.27 0.50 0.52 1.33 40Lft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0 0.13 0 0.0 0.13 0.15 0.28 0.10 0.20 0.10 0 0.63 0 0.73 1.93 2.33 1.08 1.10 2.17 0.25 0.15 0 0.15 1.83 1.28 0.48 0.68 0.52 0.63 0.10 0.11 0.20 0 1.15 0.87 0.68 0.42 0.38 0.68 60-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.35 0.98 0.50 1.13 0.75 0.75 0.85 0.53 0 0.28 2.55 1.23 0.13 0 0.13 0 0.78 1.20 0.40 0.38 1.55 0.52 0.11 0 0.28 0.53 0.23 0.30 0.44 0.47 0.55 0.40.ls'A 5.a a* S a a S a.5.(1) Mean Monthly Catch per 12-hr set.
| |
| Table F-15 Spatial Distribution of Smallmouth:Bass Collected by Gill Net(1), Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Month April May June July August September October November December Annual Mean 15-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0.13 0.15 0 0.15 0 0.10 0 0.15 0.23 0.93 0.10 0.60 0.13. 0.38 0.13 0.40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.06 0.18 0.03 0.15 30-ft Contour NMPW. NMPP FITZ NMPE No Catch No. Catch 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0.25 0 0.53 0.60 0.63 0.35 0 0.13 0.38 0.10 0 0.58 0 0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.06 0.15 0.15 40-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o.10 0 0.10 0.10 0.55 0..68 0.140 0.50 0.13 0.25 0.28 0.38 0 0 0 .0 0 0.10 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.12 60-ft Contour NMPW NMPP FITZ 0 0 0 0.1.3 0.15 0 0.30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.13 0.28 0 0 0 0 NMPE 0 0 0.55 0 0 0 0 I-n Z a 0 2 0.05 0 0.05 0.06 (1) Mean Monthly Catch per 12-hr set.
| |
| Abundance*
| |
| of Total Table F-16 Catch (All Species Combined) in Bottom Trawl Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 20-Ft Depth Contour 40-Ft Depth Contour 60-Ft Depth Contour NMPP/ NMP/ NMPP/ Daily Date Time NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean Mean 6 Apr Day 0 0 1. 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Apr Night 5 9 8 7.3 0 3 0 1.0 6 3 2 3.7 2.1 25 Apr Day 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 25 Apr Night 1 0 0 0.3 0 3 0 1.0 0 0 0 0 0.3 4 May Day 0 37 7 14. 7 .0 455 0 151.7 0 256 0 85.3 4-5 May Night 0 48 1 16.3 5 14 1 6.7 1 0 1 0.7 45.9 16 May Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15-16 May Night 1 1 1 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0.3 0.2 8 Jun Day 0 0 0** 0 0 0 0** 0 0 2** 0** 0.7 8-9 Jun Night 7 0 0 2.3 22 5 0 9.0 6 164 0 56.7 11.4 22 Jun Day 5. 10 4 6.3 0 1 0 6.3 0 20 0 6.7 22 Jun Night 23 22 0 15.0 20 89 15 41.3 .9 7 0 5.3 12.5 6 Jul Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3. 0 0 0 0 6 Jul Night 3 1 0 1.3 19 0 0 .6.3 43 0 0 14.3 3.7 20 Jul Day o 0 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 2.0 20-21 Jul Night 0 0 0 0 2 2 6 3.3 80 293 0 4.3 21.7 3 Aug Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 3 Aug Night 7 7 0 4.7 20 112 3 45.0 103 41 1 48.3 16.3 22 Aug Day 260 292 0 84.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 19.3 22 Aug Night 53 4 0 19.0 15 13 39 22.3 119 36 162 05.7 58.4 I-I U a i a U S S S a.I U 8~*Catch per 15-mmn effort (i I min).**Reduced tow (1-0 .mln+/- I min) due to weather; numbers adjusted to catch per 15-min effort.~~~~~. .. .... .......- .... -.
| |
| Table F-16 (Page 2 of 2)20-Ft Depth Contour 40-Ft Depth Contour 60-Ft Depth Contour NMPP/ I NMPP/ NMPP/ Daily Date Time NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean NMPW FITZ NMPE. Mean N4PW FITZ NMPE Mean Mean 13 Sep*** Day 4 0 0 1.3 88 0 0 29.3 11 0 0 3.7 15Sep Night 2 5 163 56.7 1 2 9 4.0 6 22 0 9.3 17.4 21 Sep Day 0 55 .0 18.3 171 0 o 57.0 .1 1004 .6 337.0 76.0 20 Sep Night 6 0 0 2.0 10 4 0 4.7 107 4 0 37.0 3Oct Day. 0 1 0 0.3 0 0 1 0.3 0 1 0 0.3 2.1 2 Oct Night 1 4 0 1.7 14 0 2 5.3 7 7 0 4.7 17 Oct Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0.3 16-17 Oct Night 0*** 0 0 0 0"** 0"** 0 0 6*** 0*** 0 2.0 31 Oct Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 30 Oct Night 0 0 0 0. 8 1 0 3.0 3 0 0 1.0 14 Nov Day 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 13 Nov Night 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0.3 6 Dec Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02.2 6-7 Dec Night 0 3 2 1.7 0 0 2 0.7 0 0 32 10.7 Dec Day "
| |
| * NS** NS** NS** 7.6***16 Dec Night 2 4 0 2.0 3 O: 8 3.7 12 22 17 17.0 H S 0 s 0_S*Catch per IS-min effort (+/- mrin).**No samples collected due to weather.***Reduced tow (8 min +/- 1 min) due to weather; numbers adjusted to catth per 15-min effort.****Mean Of night samples only.
| |
| Table F-17 Abundance*
| |
| of Alewife in Bottom Trawl Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 U So 2 a S 0.<20-Ft Depth Contour 40-Ft Depth Contour 60-Ft Depth Contour*Npp/ NMPP/ NMPP/ Daily Date Time NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean NWPW FITZ NMPE Mean NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean Mean 6 Apr Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Apr Night 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 Apr Day 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.25 Apr Night 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 May Day. 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 4-5 May Night 0 1 0 0.3 0 5 0 1.7 1. 0 0 0.3 0.4 16 May Day 0 0 0o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5-16May Night 0 0. 0 0 0 0 ,0 0 0 1 0 0.3 0.1 8 Jun Day 0 0 0** 0 0 0 0** 0 0 0** 0**8-9 Jun Night 2 0 0 0.7 19 3 0 7.3 5 5 0 3.3 1.9 22 Jun Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 5 0 1.7 22 Jun Night 4 5 .0 3.0 2 25 0 9.0 5 3 0 2.7 2.7 6 Jul Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Jul Night 1 0 0 0.3 4 0 0 1.3 1 0 0 0.3 0.3 20 Jul Day 0 0 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0.3:0-21 Jul Night 0 0 0 0 2. 1 1 1.3 0 0 0 0 0.3 3 Aug Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Aug Night 6 7 0 4.3 20 64 3 29.0 1 26 0 9.0 7.1 22 Aug Day 260 292 0, 84.0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0.22 Aug Night 52 4 0 18.7 8 2 34 14.7 11 4 24 13.0 38.4*Catch per 15-min effort (+/- 1 min).**Reduced tow (10 min 1 1 min) due to weather; numbers adjusted to catch per 15-min effort.----------
| |
| -------
| |
| Table F-17 (Page 2 of 2)H'.0 a a S S 0 S S 0.I S 0* 20-Ft Depth Contour " 40-Ft Depth Contour 60-Ft Depth Contour NMPP/ NMPP/ NMPP/ Daily Date Time NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean Mean 13 Sep*** Day 0 0 .0 0. .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9.9 15Sep Night 0 .0 161 .53.7 0 0 9 3.0 1 7 0 2.7 21 Sep Day 0 45 0 1.5.0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 2.6 20 Sep Night 1 0 :0 0.3 0 0 0 0 1 0 "0 0.3 3 Oct Day 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 2 Oct Night 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 2.0 3 3 0 2.0 17 Oct Da5Y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0.16-17 Oct Night 0*** 0 0 0 0*** 0,** 0 0 2*** 0"** 0 o.7 3l Oct Day .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.6 30 Oct Night 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 2.7 3 0 0 1.0 14 Nov Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.1 13 Nov Night 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0.3 6.Dec Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0-7Dec Night 0 0 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 Dec Day NS** NS NS 0.0***16Dec Night 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0*Catch per 15-min effort (- 1 min)..**No samples collected, due to weather.*.**Reduced tow (8 min +/- 1 min) due to weather; numbers adjusted to catch per 15-min effort.****Mean of night samples only.
| |
| Table F-18 Abundance*
| |
| of Rainbow Smelt in Bottom Trawl Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 0 0 I.0 0 U 0 20-Ft Depth Contour 40-Ft Depth Contour 60-Ft Depth Contour NMPP/ NW'P/ NMPP/ Daily Date Time NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean NNPW FITZ NMPE Mean Mean.6 Apr Day a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4Apr Night 2 4 0 2.0 0 2 0 0.7 5 0 1 2.0 0,8 25 Apr Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 Apr Night 1 0 0 0,3 0 3 0 1.0 0 0 0 0 0.2 4 May Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4-5 May Night 0 1 0 0,3 0 1 0 .0,3 0 0 0 0 0.1.16 May Day 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 5-l6 May Night 1 1 1 1,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 8 Jun Day 0 0 0** 0 0 0 0** 0 0 2** 0** 0.7 8-9 Jun Night 3 0 0 1.0 3 0 0 1,0 0 8 0 2.7 0.9 22 Jun Day 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0. 3.0 22 Jun Night 8 6 0 .4,7 16 19 14 16.3 3 3 0 2.0 4.3 6 Jul Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Jul Night 2 0 0 .0,7 15 0 0 5.0 1 0 0 0,3 1.0 20 Jul Day 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1.3 0-21 Jul Night 0 0 0 a 0 0 5 1.7 80 102 0 60.7 10.6 3 Aug Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 3Aug Night 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 2.0 99 15 138.3 6.7 22Aug Day 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 9.3 22 Aug Night 0 0 0 0 6 -11 5 7.3 108 30 138 2.0 19.8.*Catch per 15-min effort (t 1 min).**Reduced tow (10 min +/- I min) due to weather; numbers adjusted to catch .per 15-min effort;I 2 I ,. I I'. I I .3. L.* l 0.I ..
| |
| Table F-18 (Page 2 of 2)20-Ft Depth Contour 40-Ft Depth Contour 60-Ft Depth Contour NMPP/ NMPP/ NMPP/ Daily Date Time NMPW. FITZ NMPE Mean NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean Mean 13 Sep*** Day 4 0 0 1.3 .86 0. 0 28.7 11 0. .0 3.7 ISSep. Night 1 5 2 2.7 1 2 0 1.0 5 15 0 6.7 7.3 21 Sep Day 0 10 0 3.3 171 0 0 57.0 1 968 6 325.0 68.3 20 Sep Night 5 0 0 1.7 10 4. 0 4.7 50. 4 " 0 18.0 3 Oct Day 0 1 0 0.3. 0 0 1 0.3 0 1 0 0.3 1.4 2 Oct Night 1 4 0 1.7 8 0 2 3.3 4 4 0 2.7 17 Oct Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16-17 Oct Night 0*** 0 0 0 0*** 0"** 0 0 4*** 0*** 0 1.3 0.2 31 Oct Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 30 Oct Night 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 14 Nov Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 Nov Night 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 6 Dec Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.0 6-7 Dec Night 0 2 0 0.6 0 0 2 0.6 0 0 32 10.7 Dec Day NS** NS** NS**16 Dec Night 2 4 0 2.0 3 0 8 3.7 11 21 16 16.0 I-A S 0.T 0 0*0*Catch per 15-min effort (+/- 1 min).**No samples collected due to weather.***Reduced tow (8 min t 1 min) due to weather; numbers adjusted to catch per 15-min effort.****Mean of night samples only..1 Table F-19 Abundance*
| |
| of Threespine Stickleback in Bottom Trawl Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 (No threespine stickleback were collected in bottom trawl after August)20-Ft Depth Contour 40-Ft Depth Contour 60-Ft Depth Contour NHPP/ NM'PP/ NMPP/ Daily Date Time NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean NMPW FITZ NMPE Mean Mean 6 Apr Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 Apr Night 3 5 8 5.3 0 1 0 0.3 1 3 1 1.7 1.2 25 Apr Day 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 25 Apr Night 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 4 May Day 0 37 6 14.3 0 455 0 151.7 0 256 0 85.3 4-5 May Night 0 44 1 15.0 5 8 1 4.7 0 0 1 0.3 45.2 16 May Day 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5-16 May Night 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Jun Day ..0 0** 0 0 0 0** 0 0 0** 0"* 0 8-9 Jun Night 2 0 0 0.7 0 2 0 0.7 1 0 0 0.3 0.3 22 Jun Day 5 10 4 6.3 0 1 0 0.3 0 2 0 0.7 22Jun Night 11 11 0 7.3 2 0 1 1.0 1 1 0 0.7 2.7 6 Jul Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 0 0 0 6Jul Night 0 1 0 0.3 0 0.. 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 20 Jul Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-21 Jul Night 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0.3 0 0 .0 0 0.1 3 Aug Day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 *0 3 Aug Night 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 Aug Day 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 Aug Night 0 " 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S 0 S a S S a 0 S S S S 5*Catch. per 15-min effort (+/- 1 min)."Reduced tow (10 min +/- 1 min) due to weather; numbers adjusted to catch per 15-min effort.* .-. --~.. ..---~. ~S..-.~..-.~..........
| |
| Table F-20 Abundance*
| |
| of Total Catch (All Species Combined) in Seine Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978]1 J i Stations Date NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE Daily Mean 10 Apr 1 2 7 0 2.5 26 Apr 0 0 0 0 0 11 May 3 15 4 27 12.3 24 May 0 0 0 1 0.3 16 Jun 3 3 0 34 10.0 27 Jun 1 1 4 16 5.5 13 Jul 2 2 0 2 1.5 25 Jul 0 0 2 1 0.8 8 Aug 583 18 136 1655 598.0 22 Aug 0 3 2 1 1.5 14 Sep 34 19606 712 39 5097.8 26 Sep 0 1 2 0 0.8 9 Oct 3 2 0 2 1.8 25 Oct 1 4 2 0 .1.8 6 Nov 0 1 0 0 0.3 21 Nov 0 0 0 1 0.3 8 Dec 0 0 0 0 0 Dec NS**Number of fish per haul.No samples collected due to weather.F-23 science services division Table F-21 Abundance*
| |
| of Alewife in Seine Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1-78 Stations Date NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE Daily Mean 10 Apr 0 0 0 0 0 26 Apr 0 0 0 0 0 11 May 0 0 0 0 0 24 May 0 0 0 0 0 16 Jun 0 0 0 0 0 27 Jun 0 0 0 0 0 13 Jul 0 0 0 0 0 25 Jul 0 0 0 0 0 8 Aug 549 11 115 1619 573.5 22 Aug 0 0 0 0 0 14 Sep 0 19575 707 0 5070.5 26 Sep 0 0 0 0 0 9 Oct 0 1 0 1 0.5 25 Oct 0 0 0 0 0 6 Nov 0 0 0 0 0 2i Nov 0 0 0 0 0 8Dec 0 0 0 0 0 Dec NS**Number of fish per haul.No samples collected due to weather.)I T': !-I" F-24 science services division I .1 ii I Table F-22 Abundance*
| |
| of Spottail Shiner in Seine Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 LI)Stations Date NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE Daily Mean 10 Apr 0 0 0 0 0 26 Apr 0 0 0 0 0 11 May 0 1 0 0 0.3 24May 0 0 0 0 0 16 Jun 0 2 0 0 0.5 27 Jun 0 1 0 0 0.3 13 Jul 0 0 0 0 0 25 Jul 0 0 0 0 0 8 Aug 31 0 21 23 18.8 22 Aug 0 0 0 1 0.3 14 Sep 33 30 5 39 26.8 26 Sep 0 0 1 0 0.3 9 Oct 0 0 0 1 0.3 25 Oct 0 2 1 0 0.8 6 Nov 0 0 0 0 0 21 Nov 0 0 0 0 0 8 Dec 0 0 0 0 0 Dec NS**Number of fish per haul.**No samples collected due to weather.I r v i i I Li Li I F-25 science services division Table F-23 Abundance*
| |
| of Yellow Perch in Seine Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Stations Date NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE Daily Mean l0 Apr 0 0 0 0 0 26 Apr 0 0 0 0 0 11 May 0 0 0 0 0 24 May 0 0 0 0 0 16 Jun 2 1 0 0 0.8 27 Jun 0 0 1 2 0.8 13 Jul 0 2 0 0 0.-5 25 Jul 0 0 1 0 0.3 8 Aug 0 1 0 10 2.8 22 Aug 0 0 0 0 0 14 Sep 0 0 0 0 0 26 Sep 0 0 1 0 0.3 9 Oct 0 0 0 0 0 25 Oct 0 0 0 0 0 6 Nov 0 0 0 0 0 21 Nov 0 0 0 0 0 8 Dec 0 0 0 0 0 Dec NS**Number of fish per haul.**No samples collected due to weather.j F-26 science services division I-Table F-24 Abundance*
| |
| of Total Catch (All Species Combined) in Trap Net Collections, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 1 ti.. I'1~ I~ I 4-i Stations Date NMPW NMPP FITZ NMPE Daily Mean 13 Apr 0 0 0 0 0 26 Apr 1 0 1 0 0.5 lO May 0 0 1 0 0.3 24 May 1 2 0 0 0.8 16 Jun 0 3 0 1 1.0 28 Jun 1 3 15 7 6.5 13 Jul 1 7 0 1 2.3 26 Jul 0 5 0 11 4.0 9 Aug 3 0 0 0 0.8.23 Aug 3 6 4 1 3.5 15 Sep 0 1 0 0 0.3 27 Sep 4 9 14 5 8.0 lO Oct 1 0 2 0 0.8 26 Oct I 1 1 3 1.5 7 Nov 1 0 1 0 0.5 22 Nov 0 0 0 0 0 8 Dec 0 0 7 0 1.8 Dec NS**Number of fish per overnight set.No samples collected due to weather.F-27 science services division Table F-25 Length Frequency of Alewife Collected by Gill Net, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Length Range (mm) APR MAY 51- 60 61- 70 71- 80 81- 90 JUN JLY AUG S SEP OCT 2 1 1 NOV DEC 2 91- 100 1 4 I2 2 1 101- 110 4 31 44" 9 1 1 111- 120 18 15 9 iZ- 130 1 8 1 131- 14Q 1 2 2 10 10 1 141- 150 4 19 3 2 48 84 15 151- 160 1 31 60 208 22 41 152 24 161- 170 1 43 161 544 53 8 36 104 16, 171- 180 1. 24 135 284 41 6 38 90 14 181- 190 15 29 76 12 6 24 61 12 191- 200 4 12 15 38 6 1 17 48 13 201- 210 3 4 11 1 15 1 211- 220 2 3 Z~.3 0 0 I.0 S S 5, S S I S 5, 2.. ...--......
| |
| Table F-26 Length Frequency of Rainbow Smelt Collected by Gill Net, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Length RangeAPR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 111- 120 1 121- 130 3 4 131- 140 35. 58 20 4 2 141- 150 109 145' 62 3 2 35 9 4 151- 160 94 108 36 7 1 72 81 14 2 161- 170 35 27 ' 11 52 149 52 2 171- 180 14 12 7 1 14 112 38 4 181- 190 20 29 .2 1 3 40 25 1 191- 200 26 20 .,5 15 14 201- 210 23 22 3 6 9 2 211- 220 19 8 2 8 5 3 2 221- 2.30 4 9 1 2 4 4 1 231- 240 1 1 1 2 1 241- 250 1 1 1 251- 260 1 t'3 S I.0 S S a C S S a, I S i 3 Table F-27 Length Frequency of White Perch Collected by Gill Net, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Length Range (mm) APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 71- 80 1 5 81- 90 5 43 8 2 91- 100 1 1 2 23 11 7 101- 110 1 1 1 13 4 111- 120 1 1 2 12 4 121- 130 1 1 4 2 131- 140 1 3 1 141- 150 1 7 3 2 151- 160 2 2 8 1*161- 170 1 1 15 8 3 171- 180 1 3 3 .1 12 4 181- 190 6 3 11 8 1 4 2 191- 200 .7 4 10 22 1 201- 210 3 28, 21 35 f7 5 1 2 211- 220 12 69 30 42 77 10 10 5 221- 230 8 82 40 60 68 11 10 9 231- 240 6 63 43 74 31 10 9 5 241- 250 -9 42 3.0 48 17 2 9 2 251- 260 10 35 13 14 15 4 2 2 261- 270 8 16 9 7 2 .2 2 1 271- 280 12 25 4 16 2 1 1 281- 290 2 15 5 10 2 1 1 1 291- 300 1 10 3 6 1 301- 310 12 4 3 1 311- 320 3 7 2 1 i 321- 330 1 2 1 1 331- 340 1 1 1 2 1 341- 350 1 1 351- 360 1 361- 370 371- 380 381- 390 1 I~0 S 0 5 2I.................................................
| |
| .......
| |
| Table F-28 Length Frequency of Yellow Perch Collected by Gill Net, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Length Rangei (mm) :APR MAY JUN JLY 'AUG SEP OCT. NOV DEC 81- 90 8 1 1 91- 100 7 49 14 1 1 101- 110 8 42 54 1. 1 I III- Ito 1 4 39 3 "4 1 121-- 130 2 16 5 "5 1 131-140 1 4 56 46 50 11 6 141- 150 1 4 4 31 44 101 26 6 151- 160 '6 3 16 "29 85 30 2 161- 170 1 4 4 9 15 35 8 1 171- 180 6 27 7 16 35 5 i 181- 190 1 10 26 20 4 17 36 5 191- 200 13 19 33 14 10 21 2 201- 210 7 18 26 11 7 7 3 211- 220 1 8 6 17 4 6 6 221- 230 2 8 6 10 3 4 3 231- 240 5 2 8 4 8 1 241- 210 2 4 3 5 9 5 251.- 260 1 8 5 8 8 11 14 261- 270 1 4 -7 13 5 4 12 5 271- 280 3 6 7 2 6 4 28"1- 290 1 2 4 4 1 3 1 291- 300 1 1 301- 310. 1 1 311- 320 1 321- 330 I-.S C T 0 Table F-29 Length Frequency of Smallmouth Bass Collected by Gill Net, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Length Range (mm) APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 81- 90 2 91- 100 1 101- 110 111- 120 121- 130 131- 140 141- 150 151- 160 161- 170 1 171- 180 1 181- 190 191- 200 201- 210 211- 220 221- 230 231- 240 241- 250 4 1 251- 260 4 2 261- 270 4 4 5 1 271- 280 3 1 1 281- 290 4 1 291- 300 1 2 301- 310 2 2 311- 320 2 1 1 321- 330 6 3 4.331- 340 7 3 1 341- 350 4 1 1 351- 360 2 3 361- 370 2 1 371- 380 1 5 1 381- 390 "I 6 3 2" 391- 400 1 1 2 401- TI 1 1 411- 420 1 1 1 421- 430 2 N)p p 0 S 0 0 S A.5.5..777.. ..
| |
| -~ ..-, Table F-30 Length Frequency of Alewife Collected by Trawling in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 Length Range (mam)Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 11-20 2 21-30 144 31-40 104 3 41-50 39 62 51-60 20 36 2 1 61-70 3 8 4 3 71-80 21 1 1 1 81-90 41 6 91-100 11 1 2 1 101-110 2 2 111-120 4 121-130 131-140 1 141-150 1 151-160 1 161-170 5 1 3 171-180 2 2 2 3 6 181-190 1 2 6 1 191-200 1 1 4 1 I!S 0_@.
| |
| Table F-31 Length. Frequency of Rainbow Smelt Collected by Trawling in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point,. 1978 Length Range (ram)Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 11-20 21-30 2 31-40 51 1 41-50 2 112 77 1 3 51-60 2 9 1 17 125 8 43 61-70 16 2 3 49 16 1 41 71-80 1 1 30 9 9 4 1 5 81-90 2 16 18 12 3 91-100 11 32 17 1 101-110 1 23 5 1 111-120 1 12 4 1 121-130 1 2 4 2 2 131-140 2 1 1 1 1 141-150 1 1 2 1 1 151-160 3 1 2 1 1 1 161-170 8 1 1 1 171-180 2 181-190 1 191-200 1.Is S 0 i 2 0 S 0 5.0 S 0.S.5.2 , .... .. ..:....... ..... .... ...-u-- -- ------ ----- -...........
| |
| Table F-32 Length Frequency of Threespine Stickleback Collected by Trawling in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 Length Range (mm).Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 21-30*31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 4 14 1 14 2 11 6 117 49 10 35 16 1 1 U 0 0 0 U 0 S U S U i Table F-33 Length Frequency of Alewife Collected by Seining in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 Length Range (mm)Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 21-30 77 31-40 60 3 1 41-50 1 33 51-60 49 61-70 2 71-80 81-90 91-100 101-110 111-120 121-130 131-140 141-150 a'S 0 0 S 0 8*0 p 0.i 0
| |
| -Table F-34 Length Frequency of Spottail Shiner Collected by Seining in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 Length Range (mm)Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 11-20 21 21-30 18 31-40 I 1 41-50 29 1 51-60 1 55 2 61-70 1 15 3 71-80 9 5 81-90 2 11 91-100 4 1 101-110*111-120 1 121-130 1-4 S 0 I.0 ED S 6 ii 6 S S S i Table F-35 Coefficients of Maturity*
| |
| for White Perch Collected by Gill Net at Control (NMPW AND NMPE)and Experimental (NMPP and FITZ) Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Males Control Transects Experimental Transects Females Control Transects Exi Month April 4.81 +/- 0.99 4.96 +/- 1.13 May 5.98 +/- 1.49 5.95 t 1.31 June 4.38 +/- 1.39 5.30 +/- 2.02 July 3.15 +/- 1.01 3.06 +/- 1.16 August 0.50 +/- 0.40 0.35 +/- 0.38 September 0.79 +/- 0.39 0.69 +/- 0.55 October 2.58 t 1.46 1.56 +/- 1.49 November 3.93 +/- 1.14 3.47 +/- 1.07 December 1.40** NS 00 *Mean monthly coefficient of maturity +/-standard deviation.
| |
| **Based on one specimen.NS = No specimens were processed for coefficients of maturity.i a 0 a, 6.68 + 2.35 8.35 +/- 3.13 7.26 +/- 3.60 3.29 t 1.92 1.19 +/- 0.73 0.86 +/- 0.40 1.25 1 0.74 2.18 +/- 1.50 NS perimental Transects 7.47 t 2.79 8.89 +/- 2.75 6.69 +/- 2.26 2.94 +/- 1.76 0.86 +/- 0.28 0.97 t 0.20 0.68 +/- 0.55 2.20 +/- 1.64 NS Table F-36 Coefficients of Maturity*
| |
| for Yellow Perch Collected by Gill Net at Control (NMPW and NMPE) and Experimental (NMPP and FITZ) Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Males Females Month Control Transects Experimental Transects Control Transects Experimental Transects April May June July August September October November December NS 1.38 +/- 0.98 0.68 +/- 0.36 0.43 +/- 0.34 0.47 +/- 0.28 1.41 +/- 1.78 7.12 +/- 2.04 5.14 +/- 1.38 7.01 +/- 0.02"**6.06**1.19 +/-0.64 +/-0.33 +/-0.38 +/-1.19 +/-6.93 +/-6.09 +/-2.83**0.57 0.50 0.39 0.21 1.23 2.53 1.44 23.45. +/- 4.26***2.44 +/- 0.09 0.87 +/- 0.36 0.76 +/- 0.19 0.55 +/- 0.23 1.10 +/- 0.69 2.20 +/- 1.70 2'65 +/- 3.25 0.59 +/- 0.07 4.84 +/-0.85 +/-0.91 +/-0.50 +/-0.76 +/-1.95 -5.26 +/-5.92 +/-NS 6.13 0.25 1.15 0.26 0.56 1.62 2.87 3.46~zj'.0 S 0 0 S S 0 S S 0.S S 5.*Mean monthly coefficient of maturity +/- standard deduction.
| |
| **Based on one specimen.***Based on two specimens.
| |
| NS = No specimens were processed for coefficients of maturity.Table F-37 Coefficients of Maturity*
| |
| for Smallmouth Bass Collected by Gill Net at Control (NMPW and NMPE) and Experimental (NMPP and FITZ) Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Males Month Control Transects Experimental Transects.Females Control Transects Experimental Transects April May June July August September October November December NS 0.58 +/- 0.05**NS 0.41**0.25 +/- 0.09 0.57 +/- 0.36 0. 46***0.40***NS HS NS NS NS 0.19 +/-. 0.11 0.63 +/- 0.28 0.49 +/- 0.37 NS NS NS NS 4.93 +/- 5.02*"'3.67 +/- 2.66 1.38 +/- 2.10 1.07 +/- 0.58 2.33***3.75***NS NS NS NS NS 1.17 +/- 0.88 0.87 +/- 0.29 1.36 +/- 0.65 NS NS*Mean monthly coefficient of maturity +/- standard deviation.
| |
| **Based on two specimens.
| |
| ***Based on one specimen.NS = No specimens were processed for coefficients of maturity.
| |
| Table F-38 Fecundity of Selected Fish Species Collected by Gill Net in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point, 1978 White Perch Rainbow Smelt Length Weight Yolk Eggs (mm) (g) (No.)Length Weight Yolk Eggs (mm) (g) (No.)204 214 228 230 233 233 236 242 245 253 272 272 273 274 275 282 288 303 321 160.2 157.6 182.3 180.1 228.7 1g0.6 226.1 227.3 281.2 274.0 385.1 374.2 396.4 357.6 420.5 482.5 446 14 478.6 670.3 52,479 84,492 43,863 86,237 86,629 99,470 112,889 249,807 153,041 164,467 292,593 325,367 463,952 445,641 169,031 397,503 295,873 376,693 402,927 129 142 146 146 147 148 151 155 155 158 160 161 162 163 164 175 178 181 191 195 200 201 203 215 226 15.3 17.5 20.4 18.8 19.1 18.4 21.3 23.1 23.4 26.5 25.5 28.1 25.3 27.2 27.3 35.1 37.9 43.1 43.5 51.6 52.4 55.1 54.7 65.7 76.0 9,162 12,631 11,819 12,720 8,258 11 ,039 12,724 15,466 13,555 13,863 12,639 16,374 19,382 15,350 15,819 19,705 21,179 25,025 25,737 31,725 30,664 30,779 28,282 30,617 39,011*1 p I'1~.1 I I¶1 I J Al ewife Length Weight (mm) (g)145 159.160 160 162 164 164 168 170 174 176 182 189 191 195 197 202 33.9 37.1 33.5 36.4 42.1 42.7 43.5 39.0 46.1 40.6 39.6 47.9 54.9 47 3 63.8 71.9 66.3 Yolk Eggs (No.)21,879 10,282 17,597 5,472 5,778 30,494 28,575 29,064 21,048 16,487 24,530 27,679 42,217 28,899 18,058 16,361 44,896 Smailmouth Bass Length Weight Yolk Eggs (mm) (g) (No.)333 379 388 398 587.7 897.3 927.7 978.8 3,444 or 6,008 2,203 7,359 1603 X = 2524 Yellow Perch Length Weight Yolk Eggs (mm) (g) (No.)146 183 270 42.1 70.5 286.5 6,792 9,000 33,777 F-40 science services division Table F-39 Age-Class Distribution of White Perch Collected by Gill Net at Control (NMPW and NMPE) and Experimental (NMPP and FITZ) Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Male Total Length(mm)
| |
| Age Class No. Mean Range Control Transects Experimental Transects Female Total* Male Female Total Length(mm)
| |
| Total Length(mm)
| |
| Total Length(mm)
| |
| Total Length(mm)
| |
| No. Mean Range No. Mean Range No. Mean Range No. Mean Range Total*Total Length(mm)
| |
| No. Mean Range 0 IV III IV IV Vi VI VIII IX XI 0 6 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 125.0 175.0 192.8 223.6 220.1 180-215 197-249 192-240 0 2 3 4 5 3 4 4 2 118.0 161.0 207.0 220.0 239.3 279.0 290.1 312.3 319.3 313.0 7 3 202-212 8 210-229 10 203-273 12 264-301 6 283-305 3 271-386 4 297-336 4*305-321 2 93.6 140.1 175.0 196.4 222.5 232.2 279.2 290.1 312.3 319.3 313.0 84-118 125-161 180-215 197-249 194-273 264-301 283-305 271-386 297-336 305-321 0 2 1 3 6 3 1 3 I 128.5 170.0 201.0 206.8 237.3 233.0 265.7 257.0 92-165 190-208 195-222 227-247 242-285 0 -4 143.8 0 -2 220.0 3 216.0 5 233.4 2 265.0 4 286.3 2 320.0 1 315.0 1 335.0 0 -113-175 210-230 209-221 220-242 258-272 278-300 320-320 7 87.1 7 137.7 1 170.0 5 208.6 9 209.9 9 236.7 3 254.3 7 277.5 3 299.0 1 315.0 1 335.0 0 344.0 80.96 92-175 190-230 195-222 220-251 233-272 242-300 257-320 h 0*Includes fish of undetermined sex.S a (A 0 A Z S S 0 6 a_0 Table F-40 Age-Class Distribution of Yellow Perch Collected by Gill Net at Control (NMPW and NNPE)(NMPP and FITZ) Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 and Experimental Control Transects Female Experimental Transects Female Male Total*Male Total*Total Length(mm)
| |
| Total Length(mm)
| |
| Age Class No. Mean Range No. Mean Range Total Length(nm)
| |
| No. Mean Range Total Length(nmn)
| |
| No. Mean Range Total Length(mm)
| |
| Total Length(mm)
| |
| No. Mean Range No. Mean Range 0 IV III IV V VI VII 0 2 7 2 1 0 135.0 137.0 185.7 235.5 251.0 125,149 140-206 215-256 I 0 2 7 10 11.2 86.0 135.5 173.0 223.1 272.6 253.0 120-151 131-202 184-271 199-323 249-257 2 2 4 15 12 13 4 91.0 116.5 136.3 177.3 225.2 270.0 266.3 86-96 98-135 120-151 131-206 184-271 199-323 249-280 0 2 2 6 6 2 144.0 181.0 166.8 200.3 217.0 271.0 296.0 140-148 176-186 141-196 188-223 213-221 0 6 1 4 10 4 3 0 102.2 184.0 230.3 231.0 237.5 268.7 92-116 184-253 182-274 199-251 260-276 0 10 3 10 16 6 4 l 109.2 182.0 192.2 219.5 230.1 269.3 296.0 92-148 176-186 141-253 182-274 199-251 260-276 S C i.C S 0 S S 0.S 0*Includes fish of undetermined sex...........
| |
| .. ..
| |
| Table F-41 Age-Class Distribution of Smallmouth Bass Collected by Gill Net at Control (NMPW and NMPE)and Experimental (NMPP and FITZ) Transects, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Age Class 0 I II III IV V VI VII VIII Ix X Control Transects Male Female Total*Total Length(mm)
| |
| Total Length(mn ) Total Length(mm)
| |
| No. Mean Range No. Mean Range No. Mean Range 0 0 --1 85.0 0 0 --0 -1 161.0 -0 1- 161.0 3 255.7 252-262 2 255.5 250-261 5 255.6 250-262 4 303.8 264-330 2 274.5 267-282 6 294.0 264-330 5 323.0 278-357 7 305.9 266-342 14 311.9 266-357 1 371.0 -1 411.0 -3 393.3 371.411 1 405.0 -2 401.0 387-415 5 388.6 355-415 1 381.0 -2 380.0 364-396 3 380.3 364-396 2 404.0 380-428 3 375.3 355-388 5 386.8 355-428 1 415.0 -1 408.0 -2 411.5 408-415 Male Total Length(mm)
| |
| No. Mean Range 1 85.0 -0 0 Female Total Length(m)No. Mean Range 0 --1 172.0 0 -Experimental Transects 5 2 9 3 0 262.4 303.0 311.6 336.7 245-276 267-339 243-345 280-385 382-395 3 2 8 3 2 0 248.7 296.0 323.5 382,0 337.0 410.0 382.5 222-274 271-321 285-368 388-424 375-390 Total*Total Length(mn)
| |
| No. Mean Range 2 90.0 85-95 1 172.0 0 -9 257.7 222-276 6 301.2 267-339 18 317.4 243-368 4 348,0 280-385 2 354.5 337-372 5 401.4 382-424 2 382.5 375-390 1 412.0 -1 398.0 -2 388.5 0 -1 412.0 0 -XI 1 398.0*Includes fish of undetermined sex.S 0 0 0
| |
| ( I.Table F-42 Stomach Content Analysis for Smallmouth Bass Collected by Gill Net, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Occurrences No. %Abundance Importance No. % Index Transects Control*(NMPW and NMPE)Experimental**(NMPP and FITZ)Food Item Astacidae Unid. fish Digest matter"Astacidae Unid. fish Unid. fish Digest. matter Life Stage Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined Postlarvae Undetermined 1 3 2 7 3 1 1 20.00 60.00 40.00 100.00 42.86 14.29 14.29 4 2 0 3 1 4 0 66.67 33.33 0.0 37.50 12.50 50.00 0.0 26.67 56.67 16.67 65.79 26.37 2.14 5.70 P4* Size Range (mm) = 250-342; No. of Stomachs Examined = 7; No. of Empty Stomachs = 2.** Size Range (mm) = 250-382; No. of Stomachs Examined = 8; No. of Empty Stomachs = 1.S 0 0 0 S 0 a 0 0 S S 0........ ............................
| |
| ... ...........
| |
| .
| |
| /Table F-43 Stomach Content Analysis for White Perch Collected by Gill Net, Nine Mile Point Vicintiy, 1978 Occurrences Abundance Iimportance Transects Food Item Life Stage No. No. S Index Control- Filament.algae Undetermined 14 66.67 0 0.0 0.74 (NMPW and NNPE) Physa Adult 1 4.76 2 P.05 0.08 Bosminidae Adult 1 4.76 5 0.13 0.03 Chydoridae Adult 2 9.52 2 0.05 0.05 Leptodora luindtil Adult 2 9.52 33 0.US 0.06 Cladocera Larvae 1 4,76 I 0.03 0.08 Cladocera Adult 1 4.76 1 0.03 0.03 Ostracoda Adult 5 23.81 8 0.21 0.29 Cyclopoida Adult 5 23.81 6 0.15 0.19 Cyclopoida Pupae 1 4.76 1 0.03 0.08 Copepoda Undetermined 1 4.76 1 0.03 0.03 Gamnarus fasciatus Adult 18 85.71 3395 67.03 56.94 an etP'oroiu Adult 1 4.76 3 0.08 0.03 Amphipoda Adult 17 00.95 313 8.02 7.61 Astacidae Undetermined 2 9.52 1 0.03 1.52 Astacidae Juvenile 1 4.76 7 0.18 0.97 Heptagenildae Nymph 2 9.52 1 0.03 0.11 Agrauvia sp. Larvae 1 4.76 2 0.05 0.08 H Hydroptilldae Larvae 3 14.29 3 0.08 0.13 Hydroptilidae Pupae 3 14.29 8 0.21 0.19 IHydroptilidane Undetermined 3 14.29 3 0.08 0.26 Athripsodes sp. Ldrvae 5 23:81 10 0.26 0.44 6TlIronum6sn
| |
| : p. Larvae 6 28.57 13 0.33 0.29 CrFot&Fnomous sp. Larvae 4 19.05 4 0.10 0.11 Cricotpyus' s-. Larvae 2 9.52 2 0.05 0.16 ri4afytUra us"s" .Larvae 2 9.52 3 0.08 0.11 i crotn-dipes si. Larvae 4 19.05 7 0.18 0.18%PotinO s p Adult 1 4.76 1 0.03 0.02._ um _sp. Larvae 2 9.52 11 0.28 0.11 b sp. Larvae 4 19.05 4 0.10 0.27 Ab5Tb.svma sp. Undetermined 1 4.76 1 0.03 0.16 SF.i-crt-ndies sP. Larvae 2 9.52 2 0.06 0.16 PFrocxidus up. Larvae I 4.76 1 0.03 0.03 rhaevaPuectra 5sp. Larvae 2 9.52 5 0.13 0.08 Microspectra Larvae 1 4.76 3 0.08 0.03 Chironomidae Pupae 7 33.33 17 0.44 0.29 Cbironemidae Larvae 9 42.86 11 0.28 0.56 Unid. fish Undetermined 5 23.81 3 0.08 10.34 Alewife Postlarvae 1 4.76 I 0.03 3.23 Tessellated darter Adult 1 4.76 1 0.03 1.29 maottled sculpin Juvenile 1 4.76 2 0.05 4.04 Mottled sculpin Juvenile 2 9.52 3 0.08 3.55 Digest matter Undetermined 7 33.33 0 0.0 4.52 Fish scales Undetermined 1 4.76 0 0.0 0,03 Aquat. insect rein. Undetermlned 1 4.76 0 0.0 0.08 Pebbles-stones Undetermined 5 23.81 0 0.0 0.29 Sand Grains Undetermined 4 19.05 0 0.0 0.15{ Experimental.
| |
| Filament.
| |
| algae Undetermined 10 40.00 0 0.0 2.8O (NM4PP and FITZ) Busminidae Adult 6 24.00 63 3.41 0.25 Chydorus sp. Adult 1 4.00 1 0.05 0.05 Chyo-d-aj Adult 4 16.00 29 1.57 0.20 Daphnia sp. Adult 4 16.00 7 0.38 0.17_LTrt6i3,ra kidtLjj Adult I 4.O 1 0.05 0.01 Cladacera Adult 7 29.00 36 1.95 0.26 Cladocera Undetermined 1 4.00 4 0.22 0.06 Ostracoda Adult 7 28.00 31 1.68 0.32 t Calanoida Adult 1 4.00 2 0.11 0.06 Cyclopoida Adult 12 48.00 206 11.15 0.47 Copepoda Undetermined 3 12.00 22 1.19 0.16 Copepoda Adult 1 4,00. 4 0.22 0.01 Asellus sp. Adult 1 4.00 1 Q.05 .0.12 VriiWarus fasciatus Adult 13 52.00 930 50.32 24.34 Amph-po1 Adult 17 68.00 224 12.12 7.85 Astacidae Juvenile 4 16.00 7 0.38 0.67 Stenonena sp. hnymph 1 4.00 1 0.05 0.37 Heptagen--dae Nymph 1 4.00 1 0.05 0.05 Athrisodes sp. Larvae 2 8.00 1 0.05 0.12 Leptoceridae Larvae 1 4.00 1 6.65 0.02 Chironomus sp. Larvae 4 16.00 5 0.27 0.16 Cr7.toinomous 5p. Larvae 1 4.00 1 0.05 0.06 a-ricot-p-up._
| |
| Larvae 1 4.00 1 0.05 0.06 Dicrot .es sp. Larvae 3 12.00 3 0.16 0.12 A PA.FtbesP1fn.-ap.
| |
| Larvae 1 4.00 1 0.05 0.05 PjaevoRsectra sp. Larvae 3 12.00 5 0.27 0.16 ChiUrunomidae Larvae 7 28.00 10 0.54 0.32 Chironovidae Pupae 6 24.00 122 6.60 .0.97 Formicidae Adult 1 4.00 1 0.05 0.55 Pectinatella sp. Statoblast 1 4.00 1 0.05 0.02 P "pjnte-e arens Coloni. 1 4.00 0 0.0 0.02 Invertebrate Egg 2 8.00 5 0.27 0.07 Unid. fish Undetermined 14 56.00 28 1.52 16.31 Unid. fish Postlarvae 3 12.00 15 0.81 10.41 Alewife Egg 2 8.00 33 1.79 0.10 Spottail shiner Juvenile 1 4.00 1 0.05 0.06 Cyprinidae Juvenile 1 4.00 4 0.22 3.10 Tessellated darter Juvenile 3 12.00 32 1.73 7.93 Mottled sculpin Juvenile 2 8.00 2 0.11 4.09 Cottus up. Juvenile 1 4.00 1 0.05 3.10 Digest. matter Undetermined 10 40.00 0 0.0 11.11 Aquat. insect remn. Undetermined 7 28.00 0 0.0 1.52 Pebbles-stones Undetermined
| |
| * 2 8.00 0 0.0 0.04 Sand Grains Undetermined 6 24.00 0 0.0 0.27*Size Range (lin) 142-277; No. of Stomachs Examined -25; No. of Empty Stomachs 4.*Size Range (anm) = 123-282; No. of Stomachs Examined -25; No. of Empty Stomachs 0.F-45 science servioes division r-j 0 Table F-44 Stomach Content Analysis for Yellow Perch Collected Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978 Occurrences I ~1 by Gill Net, Abundance Importance No. % Index i Transects Food Item Life Stage No. %Control*.(NMPW and NMPE)Experimental**(NMPP and FITZ)Filament algae Physa Gastropoda Bivalvia Ostracoda Asellus sp.aimarus fasciatus Amphipoda Astacidae Astacidae Astacidae Hypdroptila sp.Hydroptilidae Hydroptilidae Chironomus sp.Dicrotendipes sp.Microtendipes sp.Chironomidae Chironomidae Unid. fish Unid. fish'Unid. fish Cottus sp.Digest matter Fish scales Aquat. insect remains Pebbles-stones Filament algae Physa Goniobasis sp.Gastropoda phni sp.Ostracoda Gaimmarus fasciatus Amphipoda Astacidae Astacidae Astacidae Hydroptilidae Dicrotendspe sp.Micr~otendipes sp.Pheosectra sp.Chionoidiae Chironomidae Unid. fish Unid. fish Unid. fish Digest. matter Pebbles-Stones Undetermined Adult Adult Undetermined Adult Adult Adult Adult Undetermined Juvenile Adult Larvae Pupae Undetermined Larvae Larvae Larvae Pupae Larvae Undetermi ned Juvenile Juvenile Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined Undetermined' Adult Adult Undetermined Adult Adult Adult Adult Undetermined Juvenile Adult Larvae Larvae Larvae Larvae Larvae Pupae Undetermined Juvenile Juvenile Undetermined Undetermined 7 1 3 1 1 12 2 3 1.2 1 2.1 4 3 6 6 2 3 1 2 4 3 1 1 1 3 15 13 2 4 1 1 2 2 33.33 4.76 14.29 4.76 4.76 4.76 52.38 57.14 4.76 9.52 14.29 4.76 4.76 9.52 4.76 9.52 4.76 19.05 14.29 28.57 28.57 4.76 9.52 14.29 4.76 9.52 28.57 18.18 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 13.64 68.18 59.09 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 9.09 18.18 4.55.4.55 22.73 9.09 0.1 3 0 492 112 3 3 3 1 2 1 1.2 1 3 1 0 15 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 1 3 270 133 0.2 2 1 1 2 5 1 2 0 0 0.0 0.15 0.46 0.0 0.15 0.15 76.16 17.34 0.0 0.46 0.46 0.15 0.31 0.15 0.15 0.31 0.15 0.46 0.15 0.0 2.32 0.15 0.31 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.23 0.23 0.70 0.23 0.70 62.65 30.86 0.0 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.46.0.46 0.23 0.23 0.46 1.16 0.23 0.46 0.0 0.0 0.47 1.01 0.89 0.08 0.07 0.07 32.50 11.44 0.50 1.39 13.76 0.08 0.07 0.22 0.67 0.13 0.08 0.97 0.64 5.50 13,76 0.05 5.70 9.40 0.03 0.10 0.40 0,14 0.08 0.04 0.08 2.01 0.24 42.41 22.17 0.10 1.01 9.05 0.06 0.02 0.08 0.02 2.01 0.18 10.75 0.10 4.22 5.09 0.14.1* Size Range (mm) 102-286; No. of Stomachs Examined " 25; No. of Empty Stomachs 4.** Size Range = 105-285; No. of Stomachs Examined = 25; No. of Empty Stomachs 3.F-46 science services division 1 E~~Io APPENDIX G WATER QUALITY science services division Table G-1 (Page 1 of 9)Weekly Temperature (OC) Profiles at 30-m (100-ft) Contour, Nine- Mile .Point Vicinity,.
| |
| April-December 1978 April 0 p0 Sample Week 1 -4/03/78 Week 2 -4/10/78 Week 3 -4/17/78 Week 4 -4/24/78 Depth (meters) NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE Surface 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.8 1 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.7 1.9 2.1 1.9 1.9 1.8 2 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.8 3 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.8 4 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 5 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 6 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 7 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.7 8 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.8 9 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 10 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 ' 1.3 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 11 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 12 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 13 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 14 0.8 1.0 1.1. 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.0 15 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.7 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.0 16 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.7ý 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.0 17 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.8 2.2 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.0 18 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.8 2.3 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.0 19 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.8 2.4 2.0 2.2 2.0 2.0 20 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.9 2.6 2.0 2.3 2.0 2.0 21 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.9 2.8 2.0 2.4 2.1 2.0 22 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.9 2.8 2.0 2.4 2.2 2.1 23 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.4 1.4 2.1 2.8 2.0 2.5 2.4 2.1 24 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.5 1.4 1.4 2.4 2.9 2.0 2.7 2.4 2.1 25 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.4 2.5 2.9 2.0 2.8 2.5 2.4 26 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.4 2.6 2.9 2.0 2.9 2.6 2.5 27 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.7 2.1 1.4 2.7 2.9 2.0 2.9 2.6 2.5 28 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.8 2.2 1.4 2.8 2.9 2.0 3.1 2.6 2.6 29 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.8 2.3 1.6 2.8 3.0 2.1 3.1 2.6 Z.7 30 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.8 2.4 1.8 2.8 3.0 2.2 3.1 2.6 2.8 Table G-1 (Page.2 of 9)May p a 0 0 0 S 0 0 S I S i Sample Depth Week 1 -5/2 Week 2 -5/8 Week 3 -5/15 Week 4 -5/22 Week 5 -5/30 (meters) NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW- FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE -NMPW FITZ NMPE Surface 2.2 2.5 2.0 2.5 6.2 5.8 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.3 3.9 16.8 14.7 15.5 1 2.1 2.5 2.0 2.5 6.3 5.7 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.3 3.9 16.7 14.7 15.5 2 2.1 2.5 2.0 2.5 6.3 5.7 3.1 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.9 16.6 14.6 12.6 3 2.1 2.5 2.0 2.5 6.3 5.7 3.1 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.9 8.9 11.5 10.5 4 2.1 2.5 2.0 2.5 6.1 5.5 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.9 7.7 9.1 8.6 5 2.1 2.6 2.0 2.4 5.9 4.1 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.9 6.9 7.4 8.3 6 2.1 2.6 2.0 2.4 4.7 3.9 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.-3 3.9 6.4 6.8 7.1 7 2.1 2.6 2.0 2.5 4.3 3.9 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.9 6.3 6.5 7.0 8 2.2 2.6 2.0 2.5 4.1 3.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.9 5.9 6.1 6.8 9 2.2 2.6 2.0 2.5 4.1 3.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.9 5.8 5.9 6.6 10 2.3 2.6 2.0 2.5 4.1 3.7 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.9 5.7 5.8 6.4 11 2.4 2.7 2.0 2.5 4.1 3.7 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.9 5.7 5.8 6.2 12 2.4 2.7 2.1 2.6 4.1 3.7 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.8 5.6 5.7 6.1 13 2.4 2.7 2.1 2.6 4.1 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.8 5.6 5.7 5.9 14 2.4 2.7 2.2 2.7 4.1 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.8 5.5 5.6 5.8 15 2.5 2.8 2.2 2.7 4.0 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.8 5.5 5.6 -5.8 16 2.5 2.8 2.2 2.7 4.0 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.8 5.5 5.5 5.5 17 2.6 2.9 2.2 2.9 3.9 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.8 5.5 5.5 5.5 18 2.7 3.0 2.2 3.0 3.9 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.8 5.5 5.4 5.4 19 2.7 3.0 2.2 3.1 3.9 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.8 5.4 5.1 5.3 20 2.7 3.0 2.2 3.1 3.8 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.3 3.8 5.4 4.9 5.2 21 2.7 3.0 2.3 3.1 3.8 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.2 3.3 3.8 5.4 4.9 5.1 22 2.7 3.0 2.3 3.2 3.8 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.2 3.3 3.8 5.4 4.9 5.0 23 2.7 3.0 2.3 3.2 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.3 3.3 3.8 5.4 4.8 4.8 24 2.9 3.0 2.4 3.2 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.6 3.3 3.8 5.4 4.8 4.8 25 3.0 3.1 2.5 3.2 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.6 3.3 3.8 5.4 4.7 4.8 26 3.0 3-1 2.5 3.2 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.7 3.3 3.8 5.4 4.7 4.7 27 3.1 3.1 2.5 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.7 3.3 3.8 5.3 4.6 4.7 28 3.1 3.1 2.5 3.3 3.7 3.6 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.8 3.3 3.8 5.2 4.6 4.7.29 3.1 3.1 2.5 3.3 3.7 3.6 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.9 3.3 3.8 5.1 4.6 4.6 30 3.1 3.1 2.5 3.4 3.7 3.6 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.9 3.3 3.8 4.3 4.6 4.6 T'._7LL-Table G-1 (Page 3 of 9)June Sample Week 1 -6/5/78 Week 2 -6/12/78 Week 3 -6/19/78 Week 4 -6/26/78 Depth (meters) NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE Surface 10.5 10.1 9.7 12.5 13.1 14.5 12.3 12.9 12.5 15.4 15.2 15.8 1 10.5 10.1 9.6 12.4 13.0 14.3 12.3 12.8 12.5 15.4 15.2 1.5.7 2 10.5 10.1 9.6 12.3 12.9 14.3 12.2 12.8 12.5 14.8 15.1 15.6 3 10.5 10.1 9.6 12.3 12.9 14.3 12.2 12.8 12.5 14.1 14.6 13.6 4 10.4 10.1 9.6 12.1 12.8 14.0 12.2 12.8 12.5 13.4 14.0 13.1 5 10.2 9.9 9.6 12.1 12.3 13.5 12.3 12.7 12.5 13.2 12.8 12.9 6 10.1 9.8 9.5 12.0 12.1 13.1 12.2 12.7 12.5 131.1 12.7 12.8 7 9.4 9.5 9.2 11.6 11.5 12.3 12.2 12.7 12.4 13.1 12.6 12.6 8 8.9 8.6 8.6 11.2 11.4 11.6 12.2 12.7 12.4 12.8 12.6 12.5 9 8.1 7.8 8.1 10.7 11.2 11.2 12.2 12.6 12.4 12.8 12.5 12.5 10 8.0 7.2 7.9 9.8. 10.7 11.0 12.1 12.5 12.4 12.8 12.5 12.4 11 7.5 7.1 7.7 9.4 10.2 10.8 12.0 12.5 12.4 12.8 12.4 12.4 12 7.3 7.0 7.6 8.5 10.0 10.7 11.8 12.4 12.4 12.8 12.4 12.4 13 7.1 6.9 7.6 8.3 9.9 10.5 11.8 12.3 12.4 12.8 12.4 12.2 14 7.1 6.7 7.6 8.2 9.8 10.5 11.6 12.1 12.4 12.2 12.3 12.1 15 7.1 6.6 7.5 8.1 9.8 10.3 11.2 11.8 12.4 11.5 11.6 12.0 16 7.0 6.5 7.5 8.0 9.7 10.0 11.0 11.2 12.4 11.1 11.4 12.0 17 6.9 6.5 7.3 8.0 9.6 9.9 10.8 11.1 12.4 11.0 11.3 11.9 18 6.9 6.4 7.1 7.9 9.0 9.5 10.6 10.6 12.3 10.9 11.2 11.9 19 6.9 6.4 7.1 7.9 8.9 9.5 10.1 10.4 12.3 10.6 11.2 11.9 20 6.9 6.3 7.0 7.9 8.8 9.4 9.8 10.2 12.3 10.4 10.7 11.9 21 6.9 6.3 6.8 7.9 8.7 9.4 9.7 10.1 12.3 10.3 10.6 11.9 22 6.9 6.1 6.6 7.8 8.7 9.4 9.6 10.0 12.2 10.3 10.4 11.9 23 6.9 6.1 6.5 7.8 8.6 9.3 9.4 9.9 12.1 10.2 10.0 11.6 24 6.9 6.0 6.4 7.7 8.6 9.1 9.4 9.9 11.9 10.2 9.8 10.7 25 6.9 -6.0 6.4 7.7 8.5 8.9 9.3 9.8 11.8 10.2 9.7 10.3 26 6.9 6.0 6.4 7.7 8.5 8.9 9.3 9.6 11.8 10.2 9.5 10.2 27 6.9 6.0 6.4 7.6 8.5 ::8.9 9.3 9.6 11.0 10.1 9.3 10.2 28 6.9 6.0 6.4 7.5 8.3 8.8 9.2 9.6 10.5 10.1 9.3 9.5 29 6.9 6.0 6.4 7.4 8.2 8.7 9.3 9.6 9.1 10.0 8.9 9.2 30 6.9 6.0 6.3 7.4 8.1 8.5 9.3 9.5 8.8 9.9 8.4 9.0 U C i C 0 S 0-I S C 0 U S U 8~
| |
| Table G-1 (Page 4 of 9)July Depthe Wee k 1 -7/5/78 Week 2"- 7/10/78 Wee k 3 -7/17/78 Week 4 -7/24/78 Week 5 -7/31/78 (meters) NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE Surface 16.1 17.1 17.1 19.3 19.4 19.9 21.5 20.9 21.1 22.0 22.0 22.4 21.4 21.4 21.9 1 16.1 17.1 17.1 19.3 19.4. 19.9 21 .4 20.9 21.1 22.0 22.0 22.4 21.4 21.4 21.9 2 16.1 17.1 17.1 19.3 1.9.4 19.9 21.3 20.9 21.1 22.0 22.0 22.4 21.4 21.4 21.9 3 16.0 17.0 17.1 19.3 19.4 19.9 20.2 20.9 21.1 22.0 22.0 22.4 21.4 21.4 21.9 4 15.2 15.8 17.1 19.3 19.4 19.9 19.3 20.8 21.0 22.0 22..0 22.4 21.4 21.4 21.,9 5 14.2 14.6 17.0 19.3 19.4 19.7 18.3 20 .4 20.9 22.0 22.0 22.3 21.4 21.4 21.9 6 13.5 13.6 16.8 19.2 19.3 19.5 17.9 20.0 20.8 22.0 22.0 21.9 21.4 21.4 21.7 7 11.9 13.0 16.7 19.2 19.2 19.4 17.7 19.7 20.8 22.0 22.0 21.8 21.4 .21.4 21.4 8 10.9 11.5 16.1 19.1 19.0 19.2 17.5 19.4 20.7 22.0 22.0* 21.8 21.4 21.4 21.4 9 10.7 10.9 15.0 18.2 18.8 19.0 17.4 19.2 20.5 22.0 22.0 21.7 21.3 21.4 21.3 10 10.4 10.7 14.4 16.9 18.2 18.7 17.4 19.0 20.4 22.1 21.9 21.7 21.2 21.4 21.2 11 10.1 10.5 13.6 16.5 17.7 18.3 17.3 18.8 20.2 22.1 21.7 21.7 21.2 21.4 21.2 12 9.7 10.3 13.4 16.1 16.8 17.8 17.3 18.6 19.9 22.1 21.7 21.7 21.2 21.4 21.2 13 9.6 10.2 12.4 15.2 16.0 17.3 17.2 18.4 1 9.4 22.0 21.7 21.7 20.9 21.4 21.2 14 9A. 10.0 12.1 14.1 15.7 17.0 17.1 18.2 19.3 18.7 21.5 21.7 20.9 21.4 21.2 15 9.2 9.8 11.3 12.5 14.8 16.7 17.1 18.1 18.6 17.9 19.8 19.3 20.8 21.4 21.0 16 9.0 9.3 11.0 11.6 13.1 15.6 17.0 18.0 18.4 16.9 18.2 18.0 20.7 21.4 20.8 17 8.9 9.1 10.9 10.9 11.4 14.0 16.9 17.9 18.3 16.5 16.6 16.9 20.6 21.3 20.2 18 8-.8 8.9 10.8 10.6 10.9 12.8 16.8 17.9 18.2 16.3 16.2 15.9 20.4 19.7 19.0 19 8.8 8.8 10.8 10.2 10.4 11.6 16.7 17.8 18.1 15.4 15.7 14.8 20.3 19.3 18.5 20 8.7 8.6 10.5 9.6 9.9 10.7 15.1 17.6 18.0 13.3 15.2 13.9 20.3 18.7 18.2 21 8.6 8.4 10.3 9-.2 '9. 5 9.9 12.6 17.6 17.8 13.2 14.0 13.4 20.2 18.6 17.4 22 8.3 8.3 10.2 9.0 9.4 8.3 11.9 17.4 17.5 12.3 12.4 13.1 20.2 18.6 16.9 23 8.0 8.2 9.8 8.8 9.1 7.0 9.5 17.2 17.4 11.1 11.2 12.7 20.1 17.2 16.6 24 7.8 8.1 9.3 8.5 8.5 6.2 .8.8 17.0 17.2 10.2 10.3 11.9 20.0 16.8 16.4 25 7.6 8.0 8.9 8.4 8.1 6.4 7.3 16.8 17.1 9.0 9.4 11.5 20.0 16.5 16.2 26 7.4 7.9 8.5 7.8 7.9 6.2 6.8 16.6 *16.9 8.4 9.0 8.7 19.9 16.2 16.1 27 7.2 7.8 8.4 7.3 7.7 6.1 6.6 16.3 16.8 7.5 8.2 7.7 19.6 15.5 15.9 28 7.2 7.6 8.1 7.1 7.5 6.0 6.5 1.5.6 16.8 6.1 7.9 7.0 19.6 14.2 15.0 29 7.0 7.3 7.8 6.7 -7.4 5.9 6.5 14.1 16.8 '5.8 6.2 5.7 18.9 12.9 14.8 30 7.0 7.1 7.7 6.5 7.2 5.8 6.1 12.5 16.7 5.4 5.5 5.3 18.8 12.3 13.9 S a S a I S 0 q 4 0 U a.0 I ------- ---irir Table G-1 (Page 5 of 9)August CLf Z 0 2 Sampl e Depth Week 1 -8/7/78 Week 2 -8/14/78 Week 3 -8/21/78 Week 4 -8/28/78 (meters) NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE Surface 22.3 22.5 21.6 22.7 23.2 22.5 22.2 22.5 22.2 18.2 20.7 21.1 1 22.3 22.5 21.6 22.7 23.2 22.4 22.2 22.4 22.3 18.2 20.1 21.2 2 22.3 22.2 21.6 22.9 23.2 22.4 22.2 22.2 22.3 18.2 18.8 20.8 3 22.3 22.2 .21.6 22.9 23.2 22.4 22.2 22.1 22.3 10.4 15.2 15.5 4 21.8 21.7 21.6 22.8 23.2 22.4 22.2 22.1 22.3 9.3 11.1 13.6 5 21.5 21.7 21.3 22.7 23.1 22.3 22.2 22.1 22.3 8.8 10.2 12.1 6 21.3 21.8 21.2 22.7 23.0 22.2 22.1 22.1 22.3 8.4 9.8 11.0 7 21.2 21.7 21.1 22.7 22.7 22.0 22.0 22.1 22.2 8.1 9.4 9.8 8 21.0 21.6 20.9 22.2 22.6 21.8 22.0 22.1 22.2 7.7 9.2 9.1 9 20.9 21.4 20.7 22.1 22.3 21.8 22.0 22.1 22.1 7.5 9.1 8.3 10 20.6 21.3 20.7 22.0 21.8 21.6 22.0 22.1 22.1 6.9 9.1 8.0 11 17.4 21.3 20.7 21.8 21.3 21.6 21.9 22.1 22.1 6.5 8.0 7.8 12 16.2 21.2 20.7 21.7 21.2 21.6 21.9 22.0 22.1 6.1 8.3 7.7 13 15.0 21.0 20.6 21.5 21.1 21.5 21.9 22.0 22.1 5.8 7.8 7.4 14 13.4 20.9 20.5 21.3 21.1 21.4 21.9 21.9 22.1 5.7 7.5 7.2 15 .10.6 20M9 18.3 21.3 21.0 21.2 21.9 21.9 22.1 5.6 7.0 6.5 16 9.0 20.7 15.5 21.2 19.2 21.1 21.9 21.9 22.1 5.6 6.6 6.2 17 7.9 20.3 10.2 20.3 16.1 21.0 21.9 21.8 22.0 5.5 6.5 6.7 18 6.6 17.7 8.6 19.6 12.6 20.1 21.7 21.7 21.9 5.4 6.3 6.3 19 5.5 12.3 7.2 19.1 10.5 17.9 21.6 21.6 21 ..9 5.3 6.2 6.3 20 5.1 10.7 5.6 17.5 9.2 13.7 21.5 21.5 21.8 5.1 6.1 6,3 21 4.6 9.4 4.9 11.5 8.6 11.9 21.5 21.5 21.5 5.1 6.1 6.2 22 4.6 7.6 4.9 10.6 7.5 10.7 21.5 21.5 21.5 5.0 6.1 6.1 23 4.6 6.4 4.9 10.3 6.7 9.8 21.5 21.4 21.1 5.0 6.1 6.0 24 4.5 5.1 4.8 10.1 6.4 7.9 19.6 20.1 21.0 5.0 6.1 5.7 25 4.5 4.9 4.8 9.9 6.1 7.2 18.7 18.4 20.3 5.0 6.1 5.5 26 4.5 4.8 4.8 9.2 5.8 6.9 13.1 16.5 17.1 5.0 6.0 5.4 27 4.5 4.8 4.8 8.8 5.6 6.2 12.3 14.5 13.7 4.9 6.0 5.4 28 4.5 4.6 4.8 7.8 5.2 6.0 12.1 12.8 12.8 4.8 6.0 5.3 29 4.5 4.6 4.7 7.4 5.1 5.9 12.1 11.8 10.3 4.7 5.8 5.0 30 4.5 4.5 4.7 7j. 5.0 5.8 12.0 9.5 9.5 4.6 5.7 4.8 Table G-I (Page 6 of 9)September Sample11 Depth Week 1 -.9/5/78 Week 2 -9/11/78 Week 3 -9/18/78 Week 4 -9/26/78 (meters) NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE C'S S 0 S S S S S a.I S 0.Surface 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16.17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 120.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 16.9 15.8 14.5 13.2 12.2 11.3 10.7 10.2 9.7 9.6 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 20.9 20.9 20.9 20.9 20.9 20.9 20.9 20.9 20.8 19.8 19.1 17.2 15.7 15.2 13.7 13.3 12.8 1.1.7 11.0 10.5 10.4 10.3 20.7 20.7 20.7 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20..6 20.6 20.4 14.5 13.4 13.0 12.0 11.6 11.3 10.8 9.8 9.4 18.1 18.1 18.0 17.9 17.8 17.5 17.4 16.8 16.2 15.3 14.5 13.9 13.6 13.2 12.1 11.2 9.6 9.1 8.7 8.4 8.2 6.7 6.2 5.8 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.1 5.0 4.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.7 17.5 16.1 14.5 13.2 12.5 12.0 11.5 11.4 11.3 11.2 10.9 9.5 9.1 8.3 7.7 7.5 7.2 7.0 6.9 18.4 18.4 18.4 18.4 18.4 18.4 18.4 18.4 18.4 18.3 18.1 16.3 15.8 15.1 14.1 13.7 13.3 13.1 12.2 11.3 10.8 10.6 9.6 8.6 8.0 7.7 7.5 7.2 6.8 6.6 6.5 8,2 8.1 8.0 7.7 7.4 7.3 7.1 6.9 6.4 5.5 5.4 5.0 4.9 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 12.8 12.6 11.5 8.6 8.0 7.2 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.0 5.9 5.8 5.7 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.0 ,4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.8 4.8 12.8 12.8 12.7 12.0 11.2 11.1 7.4 7.2 6.2 5.8 5.7 5.5 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7.3.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.6 13.5 13.5 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.2 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.3 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 12.9 12.9 6.9 Table G-1 (Page 7 of 9)October Samp I epth Week 1 -10/2/78 Week 2 -10/9/78 Week 3 -10/16/78 Week 4 -10/23/78 Week 5 -10/30/78 (meters) NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE Surface 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.1 12.1 12.2 11.1 10.9 11.0 1 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.1 12.1 12.2 11.1 10.9 11.0 2 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.1 12.1 12.2 11.1 10.9 11.0 3 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.1. 12.1 12.2 11.1 10.9 11.0 4 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.1 12.1 12.2 11.1 10.9 11.0 5 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.1 12.1 12.2 11.1 11.0 11.0 6 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.1 12.1 12.2 11.1 11.0 11.0 7 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.1 12.1 .12.2 11.1 11.0 11.0 8 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.1 12.1 12.2 11.1 11.0 11.0 9 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.1 12.1 12.2 11.1 11.0 11.0 10 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.0 12.1 12.2 11.1 11.0 11.0 11 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.7 12.7 12.6 12.0 12.0 12.2 11.1 11.0 11.0 12 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.7 12.7 12.6 11.9 12.0 12.2 11.1 11.0 11.0 13 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.6 12.7 12.6 11.9 12.0 12.2 11.0 11.0 11.0 14 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.6 12.7 12.6 11.9 11.9 12.2 11.0 11.0 11.0 15 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.6 12.7 12.6 11.9 11.9 12.2 11.0 11.0 11.0 16 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.6 12.7 12.6 11.8 11.9 12.2 11.0 11.0 11.0 17 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.6 .12.7 12.6 11.8 11.9 12.1 11.0 11.0 11.0 18 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.6 12.7 12.6 11.8 11.9 12.1 10.9 10.9 11.0 19 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.6 12.7 12.5 11.8 11.9 12.0 10.9 10.9 11.0 20 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.5 12.7 12.5 11.8 11.9 11.9 10.9 10.9 10.9 21 .15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.4 12.7 12.5 11.7. 11.9 11.8 10.9 10.9 10.9 22 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 21.3 12.7 12.5 11.7 11.9 11.8 10.6 10.9 10.9 23 15.2 15.2 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.3 12.7 12.4 11.7 11.9 11.8 10.4 10.9 10.9 24 15.2 15.1 15.1 13.8 .13.8 13.9 12.2 12.7 12.4 11.7 11.9 11.8 10.3 10.9 10.9 25 15.2 15.1 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 12.0 12.7 12.4 11.7 11.9 11.7 10.2 10.9 10.9 26 15.2 15.1 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 11.4 12.7 12.3 11.7 11.8 11.7 10.1 10.9 10.9 27 15.2 15.1 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 11.2 12.7 12.3 11.7 11.8 11.6 10.1 10.7 10.8 28 15.2 15.0 15.1 13.8. 13.8 13.9 11.0 12.7 12.3 11.7 11.8 11.6 10.1 10.6 10.5 29 15.1 14.6 15.1 13.8 13.8 13.9 10.9 12.5 12.3 11.7 11.8 11.6 10.1 10.5 10.3 30 15.1 14.1 14.9 13.8 13.8 13.9 10.8. 12.4 12.3 11.7 11.8 11.6 10.1 10.3 10.1 S a o.
| |
| Table G-1 (Page 8 of 9)November Sample Week 1 -11/6/78 Week 2 -11/14/78 Week 3 -11/21/78 Week 4 -11/27/78 Depth (meters) NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE Surface 10.9 11.2 10.9 9.2 9.9 9.7 8.3 8.5 8.5 7.4 6.8 6.9 1 10.9 11.2 10.8 9.2 9.9 9.7 8.3 8.5 8.5 7.4 6.9 6.9 2 10.9 1-1.2 10.8 9.2 9.9 9.7 8.3 8.5 8.5 7.4 7.0- 7.0 3 10.9 11.1 10.8 9.2 9.8 9.7 8.4 8.5 8.5 7.4 7.0 7.0 4 10.9 11.1 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.7 8.4 8.5 8.5 7.4 7.0 7.0 5 10.9 11.1 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.7 8.4 8.5 8.6 7.4. 7.0 7.0 6 10.9 11.1 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.7 8.4 8.5 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 7 10.9 11.0 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.7 8.4 8.5 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 8 10.9 11.0 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.7 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 9 10.9 11.0 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.7 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 10 10.9 11.0 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.7 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 11 10.9 11.0 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.7 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 12 10.9 11.0 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.7 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 13 10.9 11.0 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.7 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 14 10.9 11.0 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.6 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 15 10.9 11.0 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.6 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 16 10.9 10.9 10.9 9.2 9.8 9.6 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 17 10.9 10.9 10.9 9.1 9.8 9.6 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 18 10.9 10.9 10.9 9.1 9.8 *9.6 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 19 10.9 10.9 10.9 8.8 9.8 9.5 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 20 10.9 10.9 10.9 8.8 9.8 9.5 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 21 10.9 10.9 10.8 7.9 .9.8 9.4 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 22 10.9 10.9 10.8 7.7 9.8 9.4 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 23 10.9 10.9 10.8 7.5 9.8 9.4 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 24 10.9 10.9 10.8 7.4 9.7 9.3 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 25 10.9 10.8 10.8 7.2 9.1 9.3 8.4 8.6 8.6 7.5 7.1 7.0 26 10.9 10.7 10.8 6.9 7.5 9.2 8.4 8.6 8.6* 7.5 7.1 7.0 27 10.8 1.0.7 10.8 6.8 6.5 8.0 8.4 8.6 8.4 7.5 7.1 7.0 28 10.8 10.7 10.7 6.7 5.5 6.0 8.4 8.6 8.3 7.5 7.1 7.0 29 10.8 10.7 10.7 6.0 5.1 5.5 8.4 8.6 8.3 7.5 7.1 6.9 30 10.8 10.7 10.7 4.8 4.8 4.8 8.4 8.6 8.3 7.5 7.1 6.91 S 0 I.0 S_o--..-... ............................... .... .....
| |
| 1'-s------~~
| |
| --Table G-1 (Page 9 of 9)December Sampl e Depth Week 1 -Dec.4 Week 2 -Week 3 -Dec.20 Week 4 -(meters) NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE Surface 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.5 1.1 1.5 1 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.5 1.1 1.5 2 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.6 1.2 1.5 3 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.6 1.2 1.5 4 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.6 1.2 1.5 5 6.0 6.2 5.7 No temperatures 1.6 1.2 1.5 No temperatures 6 6.0 6.2 5.7 obtained due to 1.6 1.2 1.5 obtained due to 7 6.0 6.2 5.7 inclement weather 1.6 1.2 1.6 inclement weather 8 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.6 1.2 1.6 9 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.6 1.3 1.6 10 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.6 1.5 1-.6 11 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.6 1.5 1.6 12 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.6 1.4 1.6 13 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.7 1.5 1.5 14 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.7 1.4 1.5 15 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.7 1.3 1.5 16 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.7 1.4 1.5 17 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.7 1.5 1.5 18 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 19 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.7 1.7 1.5 20 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.8 1.7 1.5 21 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.8 1.7 1.6 22 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.8 1.8 1.7 23 6.0 6.2 5.7 1.8 1.9 1.7 24 .6.0 6.2 5.7 1.8 1.9 1.7 25 6.0 6.2 5.6 1.8 2.0 1.7 26 6.0 6.2 5.6 1.8 2.0 1.7 27 6.0 6.2 5.6 1.8 2.1 1.7 28 6.0 6.2 5.6 1.8 2.1 1.8 29 6.0 6.2 5.6 2.0 2.1 1.8 30 6.0 6.0 5.6 2.1 2.1 1.9 S 0m 0 0 0, S 5.S Table G-2 (Page 1 of 2)Monthly Water Quality Parameters from Surface Samples at 20- and 40-ft Contours in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick Power Plants, 1978 IT Ti 20-Ft Contour 40-R Contour o imgi1i NMPW FITZ NMPE NMPW FITZ NMPE 11 Apr 14.5 15.5 15.4 15.1 15.2 15.4 a may 14.8 14.7 14.9 14.9 14.7 14.9 12 Jun 12.1 13.0 13.0 12.2 12.2 12.6 11 Jul 8.5 9.0 9.1 8.7 9.3 9.1 7 Aug 9.6 9.0 9.6 9.2 8.2 9,4 11 Sep 8.6 8.6 8.7 8.6 8.5 8.8 9 Oct 8.9 9.0 8.8 9.0 8.8 8.9 6 Nov 11.1 10.8 11.3 10.8 10.7 11.0 6 Dec 13.7 13.7 13.6 13.8 13.6 13.5 20-Ft Contour Total Solids migml) NMPW FITZ NMPE 11 Apr 236 240 226 8 May 214 419 195 12 Jun 210 206 205 11 Jul 222 171 154 7 Aug 211 185 199 11 Sep 281 316 284 9 Oct 190 199 202 6 Nov 227 218 214 6 U: 220 216 202 40-Ft Contour NMPW FITZ NMPE 213 190 249 Zo1 202 176 225 218 Z20 196 136 111 205 206 188 282 300 261 182 160 9i1 217 215 220 210 212 208 Water Temperature ICo1 11 Apr 4.0 3.4 3.5 5.0 6.0 3.0 8 May 5.3 5.6 7.0 5.3 6.6 5.6 12 Jun 14.6 14.5 14.0 24.7 15.0 .13.0 11 Jul 22.0 22.9 20.1 20.7 21.5 19.8 7 Aug 22.7 23.5 23.4 24.9 22.3 22.5 11 Sep 18.5 18.4 17.8 18.8 18.8 18.1 9 Oct 12.0 14.1 13.5 14.0 12.3 12.5 6 Nov 10.5 12.5 11.0 10.5 12.0 11.0 6'Dec 4.9 5.8 5.6 4.8 5.6 07 TSS lmoh)l1Apr 2.3 2.8 2.8 8May 1.4 0.8 1.0 12 Jun 0.8 0.6 0.4 11 Jul 3.4 5.4 5.2 7Aug 40.1 0.6 0.6 I1 Sep 0.8 1.2 2.2 9Oct 1.2 '0.1 1.0 6 Nov 1.6 0.8 0.8 6 Dec 0.8 0.2 .0.1 3.0 3.5 4.0 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.2 1. ':j 0.6 0.6 '0.1 0.4 '0.1 '0..1 1.4 0.8 2.2 0.2 0.8 <0.1 pH (Units)11 Apr 8.2 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8 May 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 12 Jun 8.6 8.7 8.6 8.6 8.7 8.7 11 Jut 8.5 8.5 8.4 8.5 8.7 8.6 7 Aug 8.6 8.5 8.6 8.5 8.4 8.6 11 Sep 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.4 8.3 8.4 9 Oct 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 6 Nov 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.2 8.2 8.3 6 Dec 7.9 8.0 8.0 7.9 8.0 8.0 Total Phos. tmgli-P)11 Apr 0.048 0.022 0.018 8 May 0.015 0.015 0.013 12Jun 0.019 0.028 0.020 11 Jul 0.044 0.028 0.030 7Aug 0.012 0.013 0. D9 11 Sep 0.013 0.014 0.014 9Oct 0.023 0.024 0.031 6 Nov 0.015 0.012 0.011 6Dec n ni n nin:1 0.032 0.021 0.020 0.011 0.008 0.013 0.021 0.020 0.023 0.030 " 0.022 0.029 0.008 0.012 0.006 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.021 0.021 0.014 0.010 0.009 0.010 nn n nl .n11 I Ili G-10 science services division -
| |
| f-I 0 Table G-2 (Page 2 of 2)20-Ft Contour 40-4 Contour 20-Ft Contour 40-Ft Contour Calcium (mgN-CaNMPW 11 Apr 36.3 8May 36.4 12 Jun 40.5 11 Jul 48.6 7 Aug 43.8 11 Sep 30.7 9Oct 31.7 6 Nov 40.6 6 Dec 29.2 FITZ NMPE 38.8 33.1 37.0 37.7 39.2 40.5 48.5 37.5 41.2 41.9 32.5 34.3 31.9 31.9 38.5 38.5 29.2 28.6 NMPW 38.1 37.7 40.5 53.8 43.8 30.9 30.5 38.5 29.9 FITZ NMPE 37.5 34.3 37.7 37.7 43.0 40.5 43.8 48.8 41.9 41.2 32.1 30.7 31.1 31.7 38.5 35.4 31.8 31.7 Gross Alpha (pCi/) NMPW 11 Apr <1.71 8 May '1.05 12 Jun 40.88 11 Jul <1.27 7 Aug <0.79 11 Sep 40.80 9 Oct 2.97 6 Nov '0.58 6 Dec '1.33 FIITZ NMPE<1.71 <1.71<1.06 <1.04 40.91 <0.94<1.23 '1.21<0.79 <0.79<0.76 <0.70<0.33 0.88'0.58 <0.53'1.28 -1.26 NMPW<1.73'1 .06<0.96'1.23 40.82<0.70<0.33<0.53' 1.31 FITZ NMPE ,1.71 -1.74'1.08 '1.07<0.93 '0.80<1.16 <1.23<0.78 <0.76<0.80 <0.70 0.77 0.99'0.58 <0.56<1.36 '1.31 Sodium (mg/I-Na)11 Apr 12.3 8May 15.6 12 Jun 13.5 11 Jul 20.5 7Aug 20.0 11 Sep 12.9 9Oct 12.0 6Nov 13.3 6Dec 12.7 12.9 12.6 14.6 15.0 13.0 13.1 16.5 16.5 17.2 17.5 14.5 12.0 12.9 13.1 12.8 12.5 13.1 11.0 13.0 17.8 16.0 19.2 17.5 12.0 11.8 13.2 12.0 12.7 12.7 15.3 15.1 13.3 13.5 14.5 19.5 16.2 14.2 14.3 12.0 11.8 12.0 13.0 13.2 12.4 11.2 Gross Beta (pCIlA)11 Apr 8 May 12 Jun 11 Jul 7 Aug 11 Sep 9 Oct 6 Nov 6 Dec 5.54 3. O0 4.08 3.21 2.75 3.11.i2.95 3.38 2.84 4.65 3.18 2.95 3.32 2.82 3.64 5.29 3.34 2.90 2.36 2.98 2.84 3.48 3.02 3.09 2.71 2.08 1.91 4.48 3.10 3.04 3.16 2.78 2.90 3.04 3.55 2.92 4.24 6.77 2.50 6.06 3.31 2.48 4.17 3.26 2.63 2.86 2.92 3.09 2.91 3.63 3.57 3.04 2.33 2.79 Chromium (mg/l-Cr)11 Apr '0.001 8May 0.002 12Jun D0.001 11Jul '0.001 7Aug '0.001 11 Sep 0.002 9Oct <0.001 6Nov 0.001 6Dec 0.002<0.001 '0.001 0.002 0.001 40.001 40.001 40.001 40.001'0.001 '0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002'0.001 0.001'0.001 40.001 40.001 0.002 0.003 0.001 0.002'0.001 '0.001 0.001 0.001<0.001 '0.001<0.001 40.001<0.001 '0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.002 0.003 0.001 0.001 O.n n 0.002 Gamma Spectroscopy (pCI/I)11 Apr BE 0 May B!12 Jun B 11 Jul B!7 Aug B8 11 Sep 8 9 Oct 81 6 Nov B1 6 Dec a LOW DETECTION*
| |
| BLOW DETECTION ELOW DETECTION LOW DETECTION LOW DETECTION 11.W DETECTION:LOW DETECTION ELOW DETECTION ELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION.BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION Sulfate (mgtI-S04)
| |
| I I1Apr 28.0 WMay 27.2 l2Jun 28.3 11 Jul 25.9 7Aug 25.0 11Sep 29.8 9Oct 29.5 6 Nov 30.7 6Dec 26.2 29.5 27.7 27.8 27.7 28.2 29.4 25.0 25.1 24.4 24.4 30.7 29.8 28.2 28.7 30.1 30.2 25.8 26.2 29.1?7.8 30.9 25.8 24.6 28.8 27.9 30.2 26.6 27.7 31.7 28.1 27.7 28.8 29.2 24.5 25.3 24.4 23.7 27.4 24.6 28.4 27.6 29.9 30.0 27.0 26.6 Tritium (pCi/Liter)
| |
| ...11 Apr
| |
| * 193 276 <160 291 191 4160 8 May 375 342 189 297 335 562 12 Jun 141 288 202 269 127 -127 11 Jul 314 223 277 274 344 393 7 Aug 183 176 157 191 160 127 11 Sep 194 326 378 191 276 265 9 Oct 293 213 283 272 253 239 6 Nov 198 178 200 178 180 349 6 Dec 227 '187 '187 '187 '187 185 Minimum Detection Limits (MOL's in pCi/liter) for representative isotopes in Gamma Spectrometric Analysis:
| |
| Mn -54 = 1.0; Fe 3.0; Co -58 = 1.0;Co -60 = 2.0; Zn -65 = 2.0 -3.0; Zr -Nb -95 2.0; 1 -131 = 1.0; Cs -134 = 1.0; Cs -137 = 1.0; Ba -La -140 = 2.0.G-11 science services division t'i I Table G-3 (Page 1 of 3)Semimonthly Water Quality Parameters from Surface Samples at 20- and 60-ft Contours in Vicinity of Nine Mile Point v 1 and James A. FitzPatrick Power Plants, 1978 :.i 20-Ft Contour NMPW NMPP DO (mg/l)11 Apr 14.5 14.6 24 Apr 14.5 14.2 8 May 14.8 14.8 22 May 14.2 14.6 12 Jun 12.1 12.4 26 Jun 14.1 14.3 11 Jul 8.5 9.7 29 Jul 8.4 8.4 7. Aug 8.4 8.4 21 Aug 8.2 8.2 13 Sep 8.6 8.5 27 Sep 10.4 10.8 9 Oct 8.9 9.0 26 Oct 9.4 9.7 6 Nov 11.1 10.7 21 Nov 10.2 10.2 6 Dec 13.7 13.7 20 Dec 13.7 14.0 Water Temperature (CO)11 Apr 4.0 8.5 24 Apr 2.4 7.1 8 May 5.3 9.0 22 May 11.1 10.0 12 Jun 14.6 18.0 26 Jun 15.2 14.8 11 Jut 22.0 23.4 29 Jul 23.6 24.9 7 Aug 22.7 25.4.21 Aug 23.0 26.0 13 Sep 18.5 21.0 27 Sep 14.5 14.0 9 Oct 12.0 15.0 26 Oct 11.5 13.2 6 Nov 10.5 12,5 NMPE 15.4 14.4 14.9 15.3 13.0 14.5 9.1 8.3 8.1 8.4 8.7 11.1 8.8 9.7 10.8 10.4 13.4 13.3 60-Ft Contour NMPW NMPP NMPE 15.2 15.5 15.4 14.6 14.5 14.4 14.9 14.7 15.0 16.7 15.6 16.6 12.0 12.1 12.9 14.2 14.5 14.6 9.0 9.3 9.5 8.4 8.4 8.3 8.4 7.4 9.0 8.2 8.2 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.8 10.0 10.6 11.1 9.0 9.0 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.4 10.7 11.3 11.3 10.2 10.2 10.1 13.6 13.8 13.3 13.7 13.5 13.0 20-Ft Contour NMPW. NMPP NMPE Sp. Cond. (limhost 11 Apr 310 390 380 24 Apr 380 375 335 8 May 410 325 380 22 May 600 510 440 12 Jun 300 350 380 26 Jun , 380 350 390 11 Jul 383 339 360 29 Jul 320 370 300 7 Aug 410 340 320 21 Aug 310 310 330 13 Sep 340 290 320 27 Sep 320 320 330 9 Oct 340 340 350 26 Oct 400 390 380 6 Nov 400 395 400 21 Nov 410 420 390 6 Dec 370 390 355 20 Dec 340 370 360 3.5 2.3 7.0 8.8 14.0 14.0 20.1 23.4 23.4 23.0 17.8 14.0 13.5 11.2 11.0 2.8 2.5 5.3 9.3 15.0 14.5 20.7 24.3 24.5 23.0 18.9 14.0 13.0 11.5 10.5 2.8 2.8 2.5 2.2 5.4 5.7 9.8 7.5 14.5 13.0 14.5 15.2 23.5 20.0 24.4 23.5 22.5 22.6 23.0 23.5 19.5 18.1 14.5 13.0 14.0 12.0 11.7 11.2 12.5 11.5 Turbidity (NTU)11 Apr 3.6 3.1 3.3*24 Apr 1.9 1.5 2.3 8 May 1.4 3.5 2.3 22 May 2.6 3.3 2.3 12 Jun 2.4 2.0 2.7 26 Jun 2.7 3.8 4.4 11 Jul 3.4 2.4 2.1 29 Jul 1.1 1.3 1.9 7 Aug 2.3 2.8 2.7 21 Aug 3.4 3.3 3.0 13 Sep 2.1 2.2 2.7 27 Sep 2.1 2.9 2.6 9 Oct 1.8 1.8 2.7 26 Oct 2.6 2.2 2.2 6 NOV 2.8 2.2 2.2 21 Nov 2.3 2.3 2.2 6 Dec 2.1 2.6 2.1 20 Dec 3.7 5.0 4.0 60-Ft Contour NMPW NMPP NMPE 390 380 390 360 340 350 365 305 390 410 460 390 400 370 360 380 370 430 375 340 345 330 320 340 375 320 320 310 310 330 320 340 320 320 320 320 330 340 340 400 380 380 400 400 400 380 380 380 400 330 325 340 330 335 3.2 3.4 2.6 1.6 1.8 2.3 1.8 2.7 3.3 1.8 2.4 1.6 2.5 2.3 2.1 2.6 4.3 4.4 2.6 2.0 2.0 1.2 1.0 1.0 2.2 2.1 1.9 3.2 2.8 2.8 1.8 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.7 2.3 1.6 2.1 2.4 2.0
| |
| * 2.4 1.9 2.2 2.4 2.7 1.6 2.1 1.4 1.9 1.6 1.5 3.5 3.3 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 !0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 21, Nov 11.5 14.0 11.0 12.5 11.5 11.5 6 Dec 4.9 6.5 5.6 5.3 5.6 5.7 20 Dec 1.0 0.8 0.7 1.4 1.4 1.2 pH (Units)11 Apr 8.2 8.5 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 24 Apr 8.0 8.3 8.1 8.3 8.2 7.7 8 May 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.6 8.5 8.6 22 May 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.6 8.5 8.5 12 Jun 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.5 8.6 8.6 26 Jun 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.5 11 Jul 8.5 8.6 8.4 8.6 8.7 8.7 29 Jul 8.5 8.6 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 7 Aug 8.6 8.4 8.6 8.5 8.5 8.6 21 Aug 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 13 Sep 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.4 8.3 8.3 27 Sep 8.4 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.4 8.4 9 Oct 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 26 Oct 8.2 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 6 t4OV 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 21 Nov 8.1 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 6 Dec 7.9 8.1 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 20 Dec 8.0 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 Carbon Dioxide lmg/t)11 Apr 0.0 0.0 0.2 24 Apr 4.6 0.0 1.6 8 May 2.0 0.0 0.0 22 May 0.0 0.0 0.0 12 Jun 0.0 0.0 0.0 26 Jun 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 Jul 0.0 0.0 0.0 29 Jul 0.0 0.0 0.0 7 Aug 0.0 0.0 0.0 21 Aug o.o .0.0 0.0 13 Sep 0.0 0.0 0.0 27 Sep 0.0 0.0 0.0 9 Oct 0.0 0.0 0.0 26 Oct 0.6 0.0 0.0 6 Nov 0.4 0.6 0.0 21 Nov 0.5 0.4 0.3 6 Dec 0.5 0.3 0.4 20 Dec 0.4 0.2 0.2 G-12 science services division-I
| |
| (-1y Table G-3 (Page 2 of 3)20-Ft Contour Total Phos tmg/I-PtMPW NMPP NMPE 11 Apr 0.024 0.025 0.024 24 Apr 0.018 0.019 0.018 8 May 0.013 0.008 0.008 22 May 12 Jun 26 Jun 11 Jut 29 Jul 7 Aug 21 Aug 13 Sep 27 Sep 9 Oct 26 Oct 6 Nov 21 Nov 6 Dec 20 Dec 0.027 0.025 0.033 0.021 0.019 0.018 0.028 0.022 0.028 0.037 0.030 0.034 0.019 0.019 0.028 0.010 0.010 0.004 0.017 0.016 0.017 0.011 0.014 0.014 0.008 0.016 0.011 0.021 0.036 0.018 0.020 0.020 0.025 0.009 0.009 0.013 0.013 0.011 0.010 0.020 0.037 0.016 0.021 0.047 0.014 60-Ft Contour NMPW NMPP NMPE 0.019 0.027 0.021 0.027 0.016 0.016 0.010 0.008 0.010 0.025 0.030 0.026 0.023 0.021 0.019 0.026 0.031 0.033 0:037 0.028 0.031 0.017 0.017 0.024 0,004 0.005 0.004 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.016 0.009 0.011 D.016 0.016 0.022 0.022 0.028 0.026 0.038 0.011 0.009 0.011 0.009 0.006 0.005 0.012 0.083 0.028 0.008 0.110 0.044 20-Ft Contour NMPW NMPP NMPE Nitrate (mg/I-N)11 Apr 0.33 0.37 0.34 24 Apr 0.28 0.28 0.28 8 May 0.20 0.22 0.20 22 May 0.35 0.34 0.30 12 Jun 0.15 0.16 0.17 26 Jun 0.19 0.20 0.19 11 Jul 0.06 0.05 0.05 29 Jul <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 7 Aug .0.04 <0.04 40.04 21 Aug '0.04 <0.04 '0.04 13 Sep O.o8 0.09 0.10 27 Sep 0.15 0.17 0.16 9 Oct 0.12 0.14 0.12 26 Oct 0.12 0.13 0.12 6 Nov 0.16 0.18 0.15 21 Nov 0.18 0.19 0.18 6 Dec 0.27 0.27 0.27 20 Dec 0.28 0.30 0.30 60-Ft Contour NMPW NMPP NMPE 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.20 0.22 0.21 0.23 0.29 0.26 0.19 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.06 0.06 0.05<0.01 <0.01 10.01<0.04 <0.04 40.04'0.04 '0.04 <0.04 0.05 0.09 0.06 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.18 0.13 0.14 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.28 0.29 Orthophosphorus (mg/l-P)II -Apr "0.007 0.008 0.006 0.008 0.008 0.008 24 Apr 0.017 0.019 0.012 0.009 0.012 0.008 a May 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 22 May .0.018 0.014 0.012 0.012 0.016 0.018 12 Jun 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.005 0.005 0.006 26 Jun 0.004 0.003 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.004 11 Jul 0.004 0.008 0.003 0.006 0.005 0.005 29 Jul <0.002 '0.002 <0.002 <0.002 '0.002 <0.002 7 Aug -0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -0.002 40.002 <0.002 21 Aug 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 13 Sep 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 27 Sep. <0.002 <0.002 '0.002 -0.002 <0.002 <0.002 9 Ot <0.002 '0.002 <0.002 40.002 <0.002 <0.002 26 Oct <0.002 <0.002 40.002 0.003 40.002 <0.002 6 Nov 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 21 Nov 0.005 0.005 .0.006 0.004 0.003 0.002 6 Dec 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.005 <0.003 20 Dec 0.008 0.012 .0.010 0.004 0.003 0.003 Chlorophyll a Itug/)11 Apr 2.84 2.28 2.88 24 Apr 2.95 2.92 2.68 8 May 5.81 3.64 6.01 22 May 32.92. 8.57 7.85 12 Jun 4.53 6.65 7.26 26 Jun 4.70 5.02 6.19 11 Jul 2.56 2.24 1.82 29 Jul 1.48 1.52 3.52 7 Aug 7.96 5.02 2.24 21 Aug 2.67 3.74 6.27 13 Sep 5.18 4.81 7.10 27 Sep 2.99 8.86 7.32 9 Oct 3.56 0.10 3.36 26 Oct 4.78 3.74 4.41 6 Nov 4.48 4.13 6.98 21 Nov 2.60 2.90 2.67 6 Dec 3.52 3.64 3.57 20 Dec 4.86 8.25 4.21 2.24 2.28 2.68 2.72 2.20 3.64 5.49 4.29 4.65 11.29 11.41 10.13 10.01 8.93 6.45 5.23 5ý34 6.30 2.40 1.28 1.52 1.56 1.48 4.37 4.06 4.27 2.35 3.14 3.34 5.14 3.20 4.91 2.78 3.68 4.43 7.85 1.76 2.64 2.08 5.34 3.98 7.18 3.17 3.72 3.78 2.90 3.04 3.57 2.90 2.00 3.10 5.09 5.92 6.79 Silica lmg/I-SiOý 11 Apr 0.44 0.49 0.46 24 Apr 0.31 0.32 0.33 8 May 0.10 0.13 0.10 22 May '0.05 .0.05 '0.05 12 Jun 0.05 40.05 0.05 26 Jun 0.17 0.14 0.16 11 Jul .0.30 0.26 0.26 29 Jul 0.11 0.09 0.16 7 Aug 0.30 0.16 0.16 21 Aug 0.13 0.12 0.14 13 Sep 0.13 0.14 0.15 27 Sep 0.25 0.25 0.27 9 Oct 0.12 0.12 0.10 26 Oct 0.15 0.12 0.17 6 Nov 0.11 0.14 0.11 21 Nov 0.18 0.20 0.19 6 Dec 0.33 0.35 0.33 20 Dec 0.21 0.31 0.26 0.49 0.45 0.44 0.31 0.33 0.29 0.10 0.13 0.11 40.05 40.05 0.06 0.07 0.05 40.05 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.27 0.26 0.27 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.28 0.23 0.17 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.18 0.16 0.19 0.25 0.23 0.24 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.17 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.14 0.14 0.20 0.21 0.25 0.31 0.34 0.33 0.14 0.16 0.21 Phaeophytin a tug/I)11 Apr '0.10 40.10 40.10 24 Apr 0.10 0.33 0.26 8 May 1.06 0.81 40.10 22 May '0.10 0.40 4O.10 12 Jun 1.56 0.53 40.10 26 Jun 1.39 1.45 1.51 11 Jul 1.98 2.07 0.65 29 Jul 0.48 0.89 1.35 7 Aug 0.68 1.90 0.78 21 Aug 1.02 1.07 1.01 13 Sep 0.76 0.46 <0.10 27 Sep 0.90 <0.10 0.46 9 Oct 0.53 4.93 1.29 26 Oct 0.23 0.69 1.84 6 Nov 1.56 0.26 40.10 21 Nov 1.04 0.90 0.58 6 Dec 0.34 0.41 0.54 20 Dec 0.19 <0.10 0.62 40.10 0.20 .0.15'0.10 0.12 40.10<0.10 0.10 0.74 1.71 6.61 40.I0<0.10 '0.10 1.18 1.53 0.90 1.66 2.25 .1.07 1.45 0.34 0.76 1.24 1.32 1.30 0.49 1.82 1.05 0.56 2.10 '0.10 2.98 0.50 <0.10 0.82 1.85 0.30 1.53 0.68 2.08 '0.10 0.75 40.10 2.52 0.90 0.41 0.60 0.33 G-13 science services division Table G-3 (Page 3 of 3)20-Ft Contour 60-Ft Contour Total Solids (moIl) NMPW 11 Apr 242 24 Apr 153 8 May 216 22 May 337 12 Jun 215 26 Jun 216 11 Jul 154 29 Jul 156 7 Aug 213 21 Aug 148 13 Sep 302 27 Sep 203 9 Oct 197 26 Oct 212 6 Nov 214 21 Nov 217 6 Dec 211 20 Dec 217 TSS (1mgI)11 Apr 0.6 24 Apr 0.2 8 May 1.0 22 May 7.6 12 Jun 0.6 26 Jun 2.0 11 Jul 7.4 29 Jul 3.2 7 Aug 1.8 21 Aug 0.4 13 Sep 0.2 27 Sep '0.1 9 Oct 0.4 26 Oct 1.4 6 Nov 0.6 21 Nov 1.0 6 Dec 2.4 20 Dec 10.6 BOD-5 Day (mgil)11 Apr 2.5 24 Apr 2.5 8 May 2.3 22 May 3.8 12 Jun 1.8 26 Jun 1.9 11 Jul 1.5 29 Jul 0.2 7 Aug 1.2 21 Aug 0.2 13 Sep 0.6 27 Sep 1.1 9 Oct 0.4 26 Oct 0.5 6 Nov 0.5 21 Nov 1.5 6 Dec 3.2 20 Dec 3.3 NMPP 248 199 185 336 226 237 139 159 225 168 307 188 193 217 223 236 219 246 NMPE 200 187 189 300 212 242 226 156 201 171 269 170 203 200 222 247 202 239 NMPW NMPP 213 210 173 199 184 273 221 267 251 224 212 167 139 104 151 144 268 215 128 147 260 263 105 180 190 204 212 207 239 220 215 196 202 216 212 178 NMPE 190 181 294 244 215 207.177 174 211 153 214 181 203 207 212 208 190 211 20-Ft Contour COD (mg/Il NMPW NMPP NMPE 11 Apr 1.0 2.8 3.9 24 Apr 4.0 6.5 4.5 8 May 4.8 5.0 5.7 22 May 2.2 <2.0 2.4 12 Jun '2.0 '2.0 42.0 26 Jun 5.4 4.2 3.6 11 Jul 9.0 7.8 8.8 29 Jul 7.3 7.2 8.0 7 Aug 8.2 8.2 8.2 21 Aug 2.6 3.0 2.5 13 Sep 11.0 9.0 14.0 27 Sep 7.4 7.1 7.1 9 Oct 4.0 6.0 6.0 26 Oct 5.2 5.1 6.6 6 Nov 7.8 6.5 7.0 21 Nov 5.7 5.7 5.7 6 Dec 6.5 6.4 6.4 20 Dec <2.0 2.0 2.3 60-Ft Contour NMPW NMPP NMPE 4.0 2.2 4.5 4.2 5.0 4.5 4.7 4.5 6.0'2.0 '2.0 <2.0'2.0 '2.0 Q2.0 4.1 2.2 5.9 8.3 7.5 7.6 7.5 7.1 7.9 8.9 8.1 7.8 2.6 3.0 3.0 15.0 23.0 19.0 6.9 5.3 5.7 6.0 5.0 7.0 7.7 6.9 5.9 6.7 7.2 7.0 5.7 5.7 5.7* 6.3 6.3 6.3 1.4 0.2 0.6 6.6 1.2 1.4 6.6 2.4 0.6 0.8 0.4<0.1 1.2 0.8 1.0 9.4 1.6 15.0 1.4'0.1 1.0 3.4 1.0 2.0 7.2 4.0 1.6 0.6'0.1<0.1 1.2 0.8 1.2 2.6 0.8 15.8 2.0 2.6 0.8 0.4 0.4 15.8 1.6 3.2 1.6 0.8 1.8 1.4 7.0 4.8 0.6 2.0 2.6 4.0 0.8 0.2 0.4 0D2'0.1 <0.1<0.1 0.4 1.0 1.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 0.0 0.2 0.8 21.0 8.6 2.8 1.8 5.8 1 .8 1.2 2.4 6.6 1.6 3.0 0.2'0.1 0.2 1.0 2.6 1.2 1.4 1.6 6.6 TKN 1m9/I-NI 1 Apr 0.12 0.15 0.12 24 Apr 0.30 0.20 0.12 8 May 0.21 0.24 0.16 22 May 0.37 0.36 0.26 12 Jun 0.45 0.39 0.37 26 Jun 0.63 0.47 0.44 11 Jul 0.22 0.29 0.41 29 Jul 0.30 0.27 0.33 7 Aug 0.14 0.17 0.38 21 Aug 0.30 0.40 0.34 13 Sep 0.17 0.32 0.21 27 Sep 0.09 0.06 0.08 9 Oct 0.10 0.08 0.14 26 Oct 0.26 0.18 0.20 6 Nov 0.34 0.38 0.37 21 -Nov 0.25 0.26 0.24 6 Dec <0.03 0.19 0.13 20 Dec 0.10 0.22 0.03 0.18 0.05 0.03 0.22 0.30 0.25 0.19 0.36 0.15 0.07 0.13 0.04 0.46 0.37 0.35 0.39 0.46 0.56 0.38 .0.26 .0.28 0.32 0.20 0.64 0.40 0.39 0.15 0.43 0.41 0.42 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.11 0.11 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.36 0.37 0.41 0.23 0.21 0.19 0.08 0.32 '0.14'0.03 0.21 0.15 11~ I'1 11'I 2.5 2.6 2.2 2.4 2.3 2.4 4.2 4.2 2.4 3.2 2.7 3.3 1.5 1.7 0.2 1.1 0.3 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.9 1.6 1.7 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.6 2.1 1.8 1.0 0.9 3.3 3.2 4.5 3.8 2.7 2.2 3.9 4.3 3.2 2.1 2.4 0.4 0.7 0.0 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.2 1.8 0.1 3.4 3.0 3.1 2.6 2.3 2.4 1.4 1.8 4.0 4.2 2.4 2.6 2.7 3.4 1.1 1.3 0.2 1.5 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.8 1.2 0.8 1.7 0.6 0.4 0,5 0.3 2.2 2.4 1.4 1.0 3.4 3.1 3.3 3.5 Ammonia img/I-N)11 Apr 0.006 0.007 0.004 24 Apr 0.008 0.005 0.004 8 May 0.016 0.025 0.016*22 May 0.067 0.053 0.031 12 Jun 0.014 0.016 0.014 26 Jun 0.033 0.026 0.038 11 Jul 0.051 0.062 0.085 29 Jul 0.032 0.045 0.034 7 Aug 0.028 0,027 0.060 21 Aug 0.027 0.028 0.017 13 Sep 0.011 0.013 0.030 27 Sep '01002 <0.002 <0.002 9 Oct 0.002 <0.002 0.006 26 Oct 0.010 0.017 0.014 6 Nov 0.004 0.002 0.010 21 Nov 0.020 0.037 0.035 6 Dec 0.027 0.040 0.027 20 Dec 0.020 0.047 0.036 0.008 0.009 0.012 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.029 0.055 0.033 0.017 0.016 0.018 0.029 0.036 0.043 0.072 0.046 0.050 0.036 0.041 0.042 0.011 0.006 0.002 0.022 0.027 0.019 0.009 0.023 0.012<0.002 4 <0.002 0.002..0.002 0.008 0.010 0.022 0.017 0.023 0.005 0.012 0.010 0.036 0.015 0.006 0.032 0.046 0.040 0.016 0.037 0.046 science services division G-14 0 Table G-4 (Page 1 of 7)Monthly Water Quality Parameters at 25- and 45-ft Contours on NMPP/FITZ Transect, Nine Mile Point Vicinity, 1978¶1)II.1~c.*1~1.1 25-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 45-R Contour Surface Bottom 25-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 45-Ft Contour Surface Bottom Alktlinity (mg/I)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec Color (APHA units)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec Sp. Cond. lpmhos)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 98 112 94 83 83 98 98 87 100 96 106 97 82 82 98 98 88 103 96 104 95 83 80 99 98 88 101 96 100 97 82 80 99 98 89 101 Total Solids Im19h)24 Apr 194 146 189 209 22 May 299 284 263 229 26 Jun 190 191 188 183 24 Jul 185 165 156 207 21 Aug 147 154 155 164 27 Sep 163 171 173 175 26 Oct 225 214 214 215 21 Nov 285 266 232 257 20 Dec 249 242 227 243 1"S (mg/I)24 Apr 194 146 189 209 22 May 295 280 261 227 26 Jun 187 187 186 181 24 Jul 183 162 155 205 21 Aug 147 153 154 163 27 Sep 163 171 173 175 26 Oct 224 210 213 213 21 Nov 253 258 230 253 20 Dec 230 222 212 ??4 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 350 510.320 365 320 320 340 440 380 360 320 330 340 410 370 36-0 310 320 340 340 380 540 310 320 TSS (mg/I)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec 0.2 4.4 2.6 1.8<0.I 1.0 1.6 18.0 0. 1 4.2 4.0 6.4 1.0 40.1 3.8 7.6 20. 2 0.2 2.0 1.8 0.6 1.2 40.1 1.2 1.8 14.6 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.6 0.6 4.1 1.6 3.6 26 Oct 360 37O 360 370 21 Nov 430 430 380 430 20 Dec 380 380 355 385 Turbidity (NTU)24 Apr 2.8 3.7 2.6 3.4 22 May 2.8 2.5 1.9 1.7 26 Jun 3.3 3.0 2.2 2.6 24 Jul 3.2 2.6 2.4 1.7 21 Aug 3.6 3.4 3.9 3.6 27 Sep 2.0 2.2 1.5 7.8 26 Oct 1..4 2.2 1.4 1.8 21 Nov 2.5 3.3 2.3 6.4 20 Dec 3.6 4.9 4.0 5.4 19.0 20 2 TVS (mg/I)24 Apt 87 68 78 75 22 May 224 157 135 166 26 Jun 165 178 164 163 24 Jul 136. 114 122 98 21 Aug 102 76 83 76 27 Sep 37 .62 56 66 26 Oct 105 93 84 80 21 Nov 83 10 56 14 20 Dec 108 91 88 87 j G-15 science services division Page G-4 (page 2 of 7)25-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 45-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 25-Ft Contour Surtace Bottom 45-Ft Contour Surface Bottom TKN (Mg/-N)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 NOv 20 Dec Organic N (rg/f-N)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec Ammonia (mg/I-N)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 NOv 20 Dec Nitrate (mg/I-N)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec 0.14 0.11 0.43 0.35 0.47 0.08 0.25 0.27 0.16 0.10 0.15 0.66 0.34 0.45 0.07 0.23 0.27 0.33 0.14 0.08 0.44 0.44 0.42 0.11 0.25 0.25 0.18 0.20 0.03 0.50 0.50 0.44 0.10 0.23 0.27 0.14 Total Phos. (mg/I-P)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec 0.005 0.028 0.030 0.037 0.017 0.016 0.044 0.015 0.025 0.006 0.027 0.022 0.026 0.019 0.008 0.040 0.022 0.018 0.016 0.023 0.018 0.030 0.017 0.010 0.044 0.016 0.106 0.14 0.06 0.40 0.32 0.41 0.08 0.22 0.21 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.63 0.31 0.40 0.06 0.19 0.23 0.27 0.14 0.02 0.41 0.41 0.37 0.11 0.22 0.22 0.15 0.20 0.01 0.49 0.46 0.38 0.10 0.21 0.23 0.08 Silica (mg/t-SiO2) 24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec 0.30<0.06 0.12 0.21 0.29 0.23 0.14 0.21 0.33 0.30'0.05 0.16 0.13 0.16 0.24 0.16 0.22 0.37 0.018 0.020 0.027 0.026 0.022 0.020 0.048 0.017 0.077 0.30 0.10 0.14 0.28 0.11 0.24 0.14 0.21 0.36 i q 0.30 40.05 0.11 0.17 0.24 0.25 0.13 0.21 0.23 0.004 0.053 0.026 0.032 0.056<0.002 0.026 0.060 0.084'0.002 0.053 0.026 0.027 0.060 0.009 0.042 0.039 0.060<0.002 0.058 0.033 0.028 0.047 0.003 0.030 0.032 0.032 0.002 0.023 0.011 0.038 0.058 0.005 0.024 0.040 0.062 Orthophosphorus (mg/I-P)24 Apr 0.004 22 May 0.016 26 Jun 0.003 24 Jul 0.005 21 Aug 0.011 27 Sep <0.002 26 Oct 0.002 21 Nov 0,006 20 Dec 0.022 0.004 0.015 0.003 0.004 0.010<0.002 0.006 0.004'0.019 0.010 0.012 0.004 0.004 0.009<0.002 0.002 0.004 0.012 0.009 0.012 0.003 0.006 0.012'0.002 0.002 0.006 0.017 i!0.28 0.30 0.18 0.01'0.04 0.15 0.13 0.22 0.32 0.28 0.29 0.18 0.01<0.04 0.16 0.13 0.21 0.33 0.28 0.25 0.27 0.01'0.04 0.16 o.19 0.19 0.28 0.23 0.17 0.02<0.04 0.16 0.15 0.19.31 0-I 1: G-16 science services division
| |
| ,i}#-0 Table G-4 (Page 3 of 7)11 vi 25-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 45-Ft Contour Surlace Bottom Sodium (mg/l 24 Apr 12.4 13.2 12.6 13.1 22 May 28.6 27.1 21.7 16.3 26 Jun 13.1 12.9 12.9 12.6 24 Jut 15.5 15.8 17.5 13.8 21 Aug 13.0 12.3 12.6 12.1 27 Sep 11.9 12.0 12.0 12.0 26 Oct 13;8 14.2 12.5 12.8 21 NOv 16.2 16.5 13.2 15.8 20 Dec 27.3 27.7 24.1 26.6 Potassium (moJgl 24 Apr 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.52 22 May 1.74 1.74 1.61 1.50 26 Jun 1.51 1.65 1.59 1.65 24 Jul 1.75 1.50 1.63 1.50 21 Aug 1.31 1.37 1.31 1.31 27 Sep 1.40 1.38 1.40 1.40 26 Oct 1.75 1.75 1.85 1.75 21 Nov 1.90 1.90 1.80 1.90 20 Dec 1.20 2.10 2.10 1.70 Calcium (mg/l)24 Apr 37.8 38.4 38.4 37.2 22 May 50.6 50.6 46.1 41.4 26 Jun 45.3 45.3 42.7 41.4 24 Jul 43.7 42.5 43.8 41.2 21 Aug 38.8 '38.8 38.8 38.8 27 Sep 32.8 33.9 33.9 37.8 26 Oct 42.2 50.0 41.1 44.4 21 Nov 43.4 45.8 42.7 47.0 20 Dec 40.3 41.8 40.5 43.0 Aluminum (mg/I)24 Apr 0.071 0.065 0.070 0.073 22 May 0.061 0.050 0.028 0.022 26 Jun 0.092 0.193 0.069 0.141 24 Jul 0.203 0.174 0.268 0.139 21 Aug 0.065 0.100 0.084 0.074 27 Sep 0.051 0.041 0.048 0.177 26 Oct 0.061 0.027 0.034 0.048 21 Nov 0.144 0.230 0.163 0.232 20 Dec 0.275 0.188 0.137 0.126 25-Ft Contour 45-Ft Contour Surface Bottom Surface Bottom I ron (mg/I)24 Apr 0.059 0.0841 0.049 0.035 22 May 0.098 0.097 0.091 0.070 26 Jun 0.016 0.016 0.013 0.006 24 Jul 0.106 0.104 0.100 0.070 21 Aug 0.060 0.106 0.066 0.140 27 Sep 0.154 0.134 0.100 0.220 26 Oct 0.128 0.060 0.040 0.043 21 Nov 0.159 0.167 0.184 0.178 20 Dec 0.100 0.110 0.077 0.082 Nickel 1mg/l)24 Apr 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 22 May 0.007 0.007 0.002 0.001 26 Jun 0.009 0.008 0.010 0.009 24 Jul 0.003" 0.003 0.003 0.003 21 Aug 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 27 Sep 0.009 0.005 0.006 0.006 26 Oct 0.005 0.005 <0.001 0.001 21 Nov 40.001 40.001 <0.001 40.001 20 Dec 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.005 Manganese (mg/Il 24 Apr 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 22 May 0.037 0.027 0.016 0.010 26 Jun <0.001 0,001 40.001 40.001 24 Jul 0.009 0.012 0.008 0.010 21 Aug 0.010 0.013 0.011 0.004 27 Sep 0.025 0.024 0.038 0.070 26 Oct 0.047 0.022 0.007 0.010 21 Nov 0.015 0.020 0.014 0.019 20 Dec 0.012 0.097 0.015 0.021 Magnesium (mg/Il 24 Apr 6.76 7.30 7.09 7.47 22 May 9.93 9.76 9.04 8.63 26 Jun 8.71 8.71 8.71 8.71 24 Jul 8.60 8.50 8.40 8.40 21 Aug 7.95 7.95 7.95 7.95 27 Sep 7.15 7.15 7.15 7.50 26 Oct 8&44 8.83 8.31 8.31 21 Nov 7.00 7.00 6.70 6.80 20 Oec 7.36 .7.12 7.51 7.36 G-17 science services division Table G-4 (Page 4 of 7)ii I'*1~ I 25-Ft Contour 45-Ft Contour Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Cadmium (mg/I)24 Apr o0.001 40.001 40.001 40.001 22 May 40.001 0.001 <0.001 40.001.26 Jun '0.001 <0.001 <0.001 '0.001 24 Jul '0.001 40.001 -0.001 0.,001 21 Aug <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 '0.001 27 Sep <0.001 40.001 40,001 0.001 26 Oct '0.001 '0.001 <0.001 '0.001 21 Nov '0.001 '0.001 40.001 <0.001 20 Dec '0.001 '0.001 '0.00 1 0.001 Chromium 1mgl)24 Apr '0.001 40.001 40.001 0.o001 22 May 40.001 40.001 40.001 <0.001 26 Jun 40.001 4.001 40.001 <0.0o1 24 Jul 40.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 21 Aug '0.001 <0.001 '0.001 <0.001 27 Sep <0.001 <0.001 '0.001 <0.001 26 Oct '0.001 '0.001 <0.001 '0.001 21 Nov 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 20 Dec 0.002 0.002 0.002 0-002 Copper (mgIt)24 Apr 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 22 May 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003.26 Jun 0.007 0.005 0.005 0.002 24 Jul 0.096 0.044 0.052 0,070 21 Aug 0.040 0.036 0.048 0.116 27 Sep 0.007 0.015 0.015 0.014 26 Oct 0.013 0.006 0.010 0.009 21 Nov 0.001 0.004 40.001 <0.001 20 Dec 0.013 0.013 0.009 0.007 Mercury (moil)24 Apr '0.0002 '0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 22 May '0.0003 <0.0003 40.0003 <0.0003 26 Jun <0.0003 40.0003 40.0003 <0.0003 24 Jul <0.0002 .0.0002 '0.0002 40.0002 21 Aug '0.0002 '0.0002 <0.0002 0.0002 27 Sep <0.0005 '0.0005 <0.0005 '0.0005 26 Oct <0.0005 '0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 21 Nov '0.0001 <0.0002 <0.0001 .<0.0003 20 Dec 0.0004 0.0002 <0,0002 '0_000M Silver img/I)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 25-Ft Contour Surface Bottom'0.001 '0.001'0.001 '0.001'0.001 <0.001 45-Ft Contour Surface Bottom<0.001 '0.001'0.001 'o.oei'0.001 <0.001!, r)24 Jul '0.001 <0.001 '0.001 '0.001 21 Aug '0.001 <0.001 <0.001 '0.001 27 Sep '0.001 <0.001 '0.001 '0.001 26 Oct '0.001 <0.001 '0.001 '0.001 21 Nov <0.001 '0.001 <0.001 '0.001 20 Dec 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0 001 Lead Img/I)24 Apr 0.001 0.001 0.001 40.001 22 May '0.001 <0.001 .'0.001 '0.001 26 Jun 0.001 0.002 0.001 <0.001 24 Jul 40.001 40.001 40.001 <0.001 21 Aug o0.001 '0.001 <0.001 <0.001 27 Sep 0.001 <0.001 '0.001 '0.001 26 Oct '0.001 '0.001 0.0O1 <0.001 21 Nov 0.015 0.015 0.006 0.006 20 Dec 0.001 <0.001 0o 00 1 0nnl Zinc (mg/l)24 Apr 40.011 0.008 <0.009 40.009 22 May 0.150 0.150 0.675 0.150 26 Jun 0.040, 0.037 0.034 0.031 24 Jul 0.034 0.036 0.029 0.035 21 Aug 0.004 0.004 0.006 0.011 27 Sep 0.009 0.008 0.007 0.019 26 Oct 0.038 0.036 0.029 0.031 21 Nov 0.012 0.015 0.020 0.017 20 Dec 0.012 0.003 '0.001 0.001 Arsenic lmg/11 24 Apr 40.0002 <0.0002 '0.0002 '0.0002 22 May "0.0002 <0.0002 0.0002 40.0002 26 Jun 0.0016 0.0015 0.0012 0.0016 24 Jul 0.0005 <0.0005 0.0005 <0.0005 21 Aug <0.0005 0.0005 40.0005 0.0005 27 Sep <0.0003 <0.0003 <0.0003 .0.0003 26 Oct 40.0003 0.0003 40.0003 40.0003 21 NOV 0.0006 0.0007 0.0003 0.0004 20 Dec 0,0005 0.0002 0o0001 0-0004-I~~~1'1 I:1.G-18 science services division Table G-4 (Page 5 of 7)25-Fl Contour Surface Bottom 45-Ft Contour S u r face Bottom 25-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 45-Ft Contour Surface Bottom Fluoride (mg/I-F)24Apr 22May 26 j n 2 4 Ju1 2lAug 275ep 260c.21Nov 200cc 0.22 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.09 0.24 0. 08 0.21 0.13 0.23 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.30 0.19 0.21 0.12 0.22 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.14 0.21 0.13 0.24 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.13 0.22 0.12 Chloride tmgA/-CI)24Apr 36.2 32.4 30.2 30.0 22May 64.5 61.8 47.8 37.3 24Jun 29.5 34.3 34.5 31.3 24Jul 35.2 30.8 32.6 28.4 21AUq 29.6 26.5 29.6 26.5 2 7 Sep 27.5 28.2 28.1 28.8 26E-Oct 27.4 27.6 27.1 27.4 21 NoV 46.0 49.4 44.8 51.3 20 Dec 39.8 37.9 33.4 39.9 Sulfate (mg/I-SO 4)24Apr 39.7 39.9 39.9 40.7 2 2 May 42.0 40.7 35.5 30.8 2 6 jun 26.2 26.3 26.2 25.8 2 4 ju1 25.3 24.5 24.b 74.q 21Aug 28.2 27.7 28.1 27.4 27Sep 27.6 27.2 26.1 27.2 2 60ct 28.6 29.7 29.7 29.4 21 Nov 32.2 32.9 31.7 32.9 200ec 29.4 30.8 28.7 29.0 Cyanide lmg/I)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec Ferro CN lmghI)'24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec<0.005'0.005'0.005 40.005<0.005'0.005'0.005<0.005 40.005<0.005<0.005<0.005<0.005'0.005 0.005'0.005<0.005<0.005<O.005<0.005<0.005<0.005 0.005<Z.05<0.005'0.005<0.005.0.005<0.005<0.005<0.005 0.007<0.005<0.005<6. 005<0.04'0.04'0.04'0.04'0.04'0.04'0.04<0.04< f04<0.04'0.04'0.04<0.04 10.04'0.04'0.04<0.04<0 .04'0.04<0.04<0.04'0.04 40.04<0.04<0.04<0.04<0.04<0.04<0.04<0.04<0.04 40.04 40.04<0.04<0.04 Ferrl CN fmg/h)24 Apr <0.04 <0.04 40.04 <0.04 22 May '0.04 '0.04 <0.04 <0.04 26 Jun '0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 24 Jul <0.04 <0.04ý 0.04 '0.04 21 Aug <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 27 Sep '0.04 '0.04 <0.04 <0.04 26 Oct <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 Z1 Nov '0.04 <0,04 i0.04 '0.04 20 Dec '0.04 <0.04 <0.04 '0.04 i !G-19 science services division Table G-4 (Page 6 of 7)25-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 45-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 25-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 45-Ft Contour Surface Bottom Beryllium (rmg1)24 Apr <0.001 <0.001 <3.001 <0.001 22 May <.00oi <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 26 Jun <0.001 <0.001 '0.001 <0.001 24 Jut <0.001 <0.001 40.001 <0.001 21 Aug 40.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 27 Sep <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 26 Oct <0.001 <0.001 '0.001 <0.001 21 Nov 40.001 <0.001 40.001 <0.001 20 Dec <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Barium lmgf)24 Apr 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 22 May 0.034 0.030 0.026 0.026 26 Jun 0.022 0.022 0.021 0.020 24 Jul 0.039 0.038 0.043 0.038 21 Aug 0.036 0.034 0.036 0.036 27 Sep 0.054 0.056 0.058 0.065 26 Oct 0.066 0.066 0.0568 0.057 21 Nov 0.034 0.035 0.032 0.036 20 Dec 0.060 0.063 0.049 0.041 Vanadium (moil)2 4 Apr <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 22 May '0.002 '0.002 <0.002 '0.002 26 Jun <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 24 Jul '0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -0.002 21 Aug '0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 27 Sep. '0.002 <0.002 <0.032 <0.002 26 Oct <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 21 Nov <0.002 -0.002 '0.002 ,6.002 20 Dec '0.002 '0.002 <0.0=2 '0.002 Selenium (mgIl)24Apr <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 22 May '0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 26 Jun '0.0006 <0.0006 <0.0006 <0.0006 24 Jul 0.001t .0.0020 0.0012 0.0015 21 Aug 0.0014 0.0015 0.001.2 0.0020 27 Sep <0.0003 <0.0003 <0.0003 <0.0003 2 6 0ct '0.0003 '0.0003 <0.0003 <0.0003 21 Nov 0.0011 0.0010 0.0011 0.0011 200ec 0.0006 0.0005 0.0005 0.0008 Gross Alpha (pCIfl)24 Apr-22 May 12 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec<1.42'1.63'1.20<1.26'0.64'0.87<0.60'0.74'1.52<1.41<1.61<1.20<1.27<0.64<0,87<0.60'0.74<1.53<1.31< 1.52<.1.25'1.27<0.64<0.92<0.60<0.74'1.63<1.36<1.36<1.23<1.23<0.64'0.15<0.60<0.74'1.59 Gross Beta (pCIIl 2 4 Apr 22 May 1 2 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec<2.81 3.25 2.48 2.37 2.87 2.78 3.77 3.25 2.44<2.81 3.26 3.00 3.33 3.02 3.36 3.17 3.72 3.32<2.81 3.78 2.95 2.60 3.38 2.84 3.27 2.31 2.67<2.81 3.06 2.54 2.41 3.62 8.06 3.19 3.43 2.92 Gamma Spectroscopy (pCI/t)2 4 Apr BELO,'.DETECTION
| |
| *22May BELOW DETEcTION 12Jun BELOW DETECTION 24J1ul BELOW DETECTION 21Aug BELOW OETECTION 27Sep BELOW DETECTION 260ct BELOW DETECTION 21 Nov BELOW DETECTION 200cc BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION BELOW DETECTION Tritium (pC/Il)24Apr 22May 12Jun 357 335 225 403 313 352 367<141 292 380 345 325 2 4 jut 251 240 234 230 2lAug 285 182 <102 <102 2 7 5ep 241 281 221 213 2 6 0ct 234 333 262 241 2lNov 236 254 <183. 378 200ec <177 <177 71A ?99 Minimum Detection Limits (4OL's in pCi/liter) for representative isotopes in Gamea Spectrometric Analysis:
| |
| Mn -54 1.0; Fe -59 = 3.0; Co 1.0;Co -60 = 2.0; Zn -65 = 2.0 -3.0; Zr -Nb -95 = 2.0; 1 -131 ' 1.0; Cs -134 1.0; Cs -137 = 1.0; Ba -La -140 = 2.0.I G-20 science services division G-20 science services division Ii0 Table G-4 (Page 7 of 7)LI)25-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 45-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 25-Ft Contour Surface Bottom 45-Ft Contour Surtace Bottom BOO-5 Day (mgIl)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec 2.3 3.9 3.0 1.1 0.3 1.5 0.3 1.1 2.9 2.4 3.9 1.8 0.6 0.2 1.3 0.3 1.1 3.6 2.0 4.0 2.2 0.8 0.5 1.5 0.2 0.9 2.9 2.1 2.7 2.0 0.0 0.3 2.7 0.4 0.0 3.6 L j COO (mg/t 24 Apr 5.3 5.3 5.8 5.0 22 Mjy 2.:3 2.2 <2.0 <2.0 26 Jun 8.5 6.4 6.1 3.2 24 Jul 8.1 7.4 8.0 7.3 21 Aug 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.8 2 7 Sep 5.9 6.0 8.3 7.3 26 Oct 8.0 8.8 9.6 -76 21 Nov 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 20 Dec' , v2;0 '2.0l 2.0 '2.0 T. Cotlf. (MPN/IO mIt 24 Apr 5 7 2 8 22 May 13 17 240 130 26 Jun '2 8 -8 2 24 Jul 180d0 49 1800 17 21 Aug 23 49 70 13 27 Sep '13 23 49 23 26 Oct 23 17 13 13 21 Nov 348 278 221 900 20 Dec ' 1600 240 350 550 F. Coltf. (MpN/l0O rIom 24 Apr <2 <2 '2 <2 22 May 4 3 33 13 25 Jun '2 '2 '2 <2 24 Jul 550 21 250 2 21 Aug 2 2 5 2 27 Sep 8 8 5 8 26 Oct 4 2 2 5 21 Nov 79 348 94 140 20 Dec 70 80 130 50 Phenols log/It 24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec MBAS (mg/I-LASt 24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun 24 Jul 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec CCE (mag/l)24 Apr 22 May 26 Jun LOJu l 21 Aug 27 Sep 26 Oct 21 Nov 20 Dec'0.005'0.005'0.005<0.005 0.018'0.005 o0.005 10.00S< 0.005<0.005<0.005<0.005<'0.005 0.014'0.005<0.005 10.005< 0.005'0.005'0.005 0.005'0.005 0.013'0.005 ,0.005<O.005 S0.005'0.02'0.02'0.02<0.02'0.02'0.02'0.01'0.02 , 0.02 ,0.02<0.02'0.02'0.02 40.02'0.02'0.01<0.02.0.02 40.02'0.02<0.02 40.02<0.02 4.02 40.01<0.02 ,0.02<0. 02'0.02<0.02<0.02<0.02.0.02 70.01'0.02< 0.02 1.4 2.8 1.1 T.9 0.8 1.3 2.5 1.6 0.2 2.0 0.7 0.8-0.7-0.7 1 .4 1.0 2.0 0.3 1.2 1.0 0.7 1.6 1.0 1.7 1.4 40.2 1.8 1.4 0.4.r-1.4 1.3 1.1 1.7 40.2<0.005'0.005 ,,0.005'0.005 0.018*0.005 0.005 40.005 ,0.005.11-'I G-21 science services division APPENDIX H IMPINGEMENT
| |
| * Nine Mile Point* James A. FitzPatrick science services division Table H-i (Page 1 of 7)Plant Operating Conditions at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Plant Unit 1 during 1978 No. of Circulating Date Water PumpsI 1 Jan 2 Jan 3 Jan 4 Jan 5 Jan 6 Jan 7 Jan 8 Jan 9 Jan 10 Jan 11 Jan 12 Jan 13 Jan 14 Jan 15 Jan 16 Jan 17 Jan 18 Jan 19 Jan 20 Jan 21 Jan 22 Jan 23 Jan 24 Jan 25 Jan 26 Jan 27 Jan 28 Jan 29 30 Jan 31 Jan I Feb 2 Feb 3 Feb 4 Feb 5 Feb 6 Feb 7 Feb 8 Feb 9 Feb 10 Feb 11 Feb 12 Feb 13 Feb 14 Feb 15 Feb 16 Feb 17 Feb 18 Feb 19 Feb 20 Feb 21 Feb 22 Feb 23 Feb 24 Feb 25 Feb 26 Feb 27 Feb 28 Feb 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2.2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 No. of Service Water Pumps 1 1 1 Total Volume ?f Water (m3)1,259,175 1,259,175 1,259,175a 1,324,587a 1,259,175 1,259,175 1,226,470 1,226,470 1,210,117 1,346,391 1,346,391 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,395,450 1,395,450 1,379,097 1,379,097 1,379,097 1,379,097 Mean Electrical Outputs (MWe)471 553 584 585 608 608 609 609 610 609 609 608 602 551 598 609 611 610 610 278b 0 64 215 218 346 537 579 573 577 582 598 Temperature 4 (-C)Discharge Intake 17.7 19.6 18.8 18.5 23.3 22.1 22.5 24.7 22.0 18.7 18.7 19.1 20.5 19.5 18.6 18.8 19.1 19.1 19.5.9.1-0.2 3.3 7.7 8.3 12.1 17.1 18.0 17.6 18.0 18.0 18.6 1.7 1.2 0.3 6.0 0.8 0.9 2.6 4.3 1.6 0.2 0.1 1.6 2.3-0.9 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.8 0.8 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 2.0 1.2 0.5 1.2 2.4 1.5 1.1 0.5 2.2 2.2 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.7 1.9 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.7 1.0 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.4 0.0 0.8 16.0 18.4 18.5 12.5 22.5 21.2 19.9 20.4 20.4 18.5 18.6 17.5 18.2 20.4 18.2 18.6 18.8 18.8 18.7 8.3-0.5 3.0 7.2 8.2 11.3 16.3 17.8 17.4 17.7 17.9 16.6 17.5 18.2 17.9 17.3 18.0 16.9 1.8 12.8 16.5 18.2 18.5 18.4 18.5 18.4 18.6 18.4 18.5 18.5 18.4 18.4 18.6 18.4 18.3 18.4 17.9 17.8 19.8 18.4 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,351,842 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1 ,362,744 11,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 598 599 564 591 594 593 161c 552 584 604 607 608 607 605 604 606 608 609 610 610 610 609 609 610 591 609 607 608 18.7 18.7 19.1 19.7 19.5 18.0*2.3 15.0 18.7 18.9 19.0 18.6 19.0 19.1 20.5 19.2 19.0 18.7 19.1 19.4 19.1 19.2 18.8 19.0 18.7 19.2 19.8 19.2 I H-1 science services division Table H-I (Page 2 of 7)No. of Circulating Date Water Pumps 1 1 Mar 2 Mar 3 Mar.4 Mar 5 Mar 6 Mar 7 Mar 8 Mar 9 Mar 10 Mar 11 Mar 12 Mar 13 Mar 14 Mar 15 Mar 16 Mar 17 Mar 18 Mar 19 Mar 20 Mar 21 Mar 22 Mar 23 Mar 24 Mar 25 Mar 26 Mar 27 Mar 28 Mar 29 Mar 30 Mar 31 Mar 1 Apr 2 Apr 3 Apr 4 Apr 5 Apr 6 Apr 7 Apr 8 Apr 9 Apr 10 Apr II Apr 12 Apr 13 Apr 14 Apr 15 Apr 16 Apr 17 Apr 18 Apr 19 Apr 20 Apr 21 Apr 22 Apr 23 Apr 24 Apr 25 Apr 26 Apr 27 Apr 28 Apr 29 Apr 30 Apr 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 No. of Service Water Pumps 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total Volume of Water Pumped 2 (m3)1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1 ,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,330,048 1,330,038 1,330,038 1,346,391 1,346,391 1,373,646 1,373,646 1,373,646 1,373,646 1,389,999 1,389,999 1 ,389,999 1,389,999 1389,999 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1 ,406,352 1 ,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 Mean Electr cal Outputsi (MWe)607 609 609 609 610 608 607 607 605 606 606 591 605 607 610 607 608 608 610 607 608 606 573 273 414 519 575 596 587 588 579 315 322 494 573 589 585 600 494 556 584 584 587 586 585 585 586 584 592 604 605 605 603.602 604 606 605 604 603 513 566 18.5 19.1 17.9 18.3 20.3 20.0 20.2 20.0 20.0 20.1 20.1 20.0 21.7 20.9 20.2 20.5 22.7 21.1 19.9 20.1 20.5 20.4 19.4 10.9 15.1 18.5 20.6 20.3 20.2 20.5 20.0 12.2 12.6 17.3 30.0 20.5 20.4 21.1 18.7 19.4 20.8 20.6 20.7 21.4 22.3 22.6 21.1 21.1 21.3 22.4 23.2 22.5 21.2 21.5 22.0 22.0 21.2 22.0 23.0 21.5 20.6 1.3 0.8-0.5-0.2 1.7 0.5 1.3 1.3 3.6 2.6 2.3 2.2 3.3 2.3 0.8 2.1 3.6 2.2 1.3 0.9 1.6 1.2 1.3 1.8 1.3 2.6 3.3 1.4 1.4 1.6 2.1 2.3 3.3 2.0 4.0 3.6 2.7 3.5 3.1 2.6 3.2 2.9 2.9 3.3 4.7 5.1 3.6 3.5 3.4 4.6 5.6 4.7 3.4 3.7 4.2 4.2 3.4 4.1 5.1 5.9 3.6 Temperature 4 (°C)Discharge Intake A 17.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 18.6 19.5 18.9 18.7 16.4 17.5 17.8 17.8 18.4 18.6 19.4 18.4 19.1 18.9 18.6 19.2 18.9 19.2 18.1 9.1 13.8 15.9 17.3 18.9 18.8 18.9 17.9 9.9 9.3 15.3 26.0 16.9 17;7 17.6 15.6 16.8 17.6 17.7 17.8 18.1 17.6 17.5 17.5 17.6 17.9 17.8 17.6 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.9 17.9 15.6 17.0 J!J.f-I.3 H:. I i)l 1. 1 Ti U H-2 scien*e Servioes division Table H-i (Page 3 of 7)No. of Circulating Date Water Pumps 1 I May 2 May 3 May 4 May 5 May 6 May 7 May 8 May 9 May 10 May 11 May 12 May 13 May 14 May 15 May 16 May 17 May 18 May 19 May 20 May 21 May 22 May 23 May 24 May 25 May 26 May 27 May 28 May 29 May 30 May 31 May I Jun 2 Jun 3 Jun 4 Jun 5 Jun 6 Jun 7 Jun 8 Jun 9 Jun 10 Jun 11 Jun 12 Jun 13 Jun 14 Jun 15 Jun 16 Jun 17 Jun 18 Jun 19 Jun 20 Jun 21 Jun 22 Jun 23 Jun 24 Jun 25 Jun 26 Jun 27 Jun 28 Jun 29 Jun 30 Jun 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2.2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 No. of Service Water Pumps 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1*1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total Volume of Water Pumped 2 (m3)1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,417,254 1,406,352 1 ,406,352 1 ,406,352 1 ,406,352 1 ,417,254 1,433,607 1,433,607 1,417,254 1,433,607 1,449,960 1,449,960 1,449,960 1,455,411 1,455,411 1,477,214 1,509,920 1,509,920 1,509,920 1,509,920 1,509,920 1,509,920 1,509,920 1,509,920 1,509,920 1,509,920 1,509,920 1,509,920 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1 ,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1 ,357,293 1 ,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 1,357,293 Mean Electrical Outputs 3 (MWe)590 585 470 479 477 475 475 474 476 474 474 481 477 477 478 369 117d 454 429 oe 0 0 0 0 0 304 357 382 419 509 533 553 586 585 578 587 589 592 595 590 499 540 578 595 595 595 586 500 543 550 578 575 576 577 562 492 546 568 571 562 565 24.5 24.5 22.4 20.6 20.3 20.6 20.4 20.4 21.0 22.7 22.8 20.2 20.8 21.3 20.6 16.9 10.1 20.1 20.2 7.3 7.0 7.8 7.7 8.3 8.9 19.8 20.4 20.9 21.6 22.8 24.1 26.4 26.1 28.2 27.8 26.4 28.2 27.7 28.8 29 6 26.5 27.8 30.0 32.1 32.0 32.0 30.4 27.0 29.8 30.5 30.5 30.4 30.8 31.5 31.1 29.1 31.3 34.0 34.8 32.8 33.5 6.9 7.0 7.7 5.8 5.4 5.7 5.8 5.4 6.2 8.1 8.0 5.5 6.3 7.5 6.3 5.8 5.6 6.3 6.4 8.3 8.2 8.9 8.8 9.4 10.1 11 .1 10.3 10.1 9.7 8.8 9.1 10.7 9.6 11.4 11.2 10.9 10.8 10.6 11.1 11.7 11.1 11.2 12.2 13.8 13.8 13.7 12.5 11.4 12.9 13.3 12.6 12.6 13.1 13.5 13.5 13.2 13.7 15.7 16.2 14.8 15.3 Temperature 4 (.C)Discharge Intake 17.6 17.5 14.7 14.8 14.9 14.9 14.6 15.0 14.8 14.6 14.8 14.7 14.5 13.8 14.3 11.1 4.5 13.8 13.8-1.0-1.2-1.1-1.1-1.1-1.2 8.7 10.1 10.8 11.9 14.0 15.0 15.7 16.5 16.8 16.6 15.5 17.4 17.1 17.7 17.9 15.4 16.6 17.8 18.3 18.2 18.3 17.9 15.6 16.9 17.2 17.9 17;8 17.7 18.0 17.6 15.9 17.6 18.3 18.6 18.0 18.2 I.1i H-3 science services division Table H-I (page 4 of 7)No. of Circulating Date Water Pumps]1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9.10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul No. of Service Water Pumps 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Total Volume of Water Pumped 2 (m3)1,335,489 1,351,842 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,362,744 1,400,901 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,422,705 1 ,422,705 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,406,352 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,422,705 1,455,411 1,455,411 1,439,058 1,439,058 1,439,058 1,439,058 1,455,411 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471 ,764 1,471,764 1,471 ,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471 764 1,471 ,764 1,471 764 1,471,764 1,471 764 1 ,471 764 1:471 764 1,471 764 1,471 764 1,471,764 1,471 764 1,471,764 1,471 ,764 1,471,764 1,471 ,764 1,471 764 1,471 764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 Mean Electrical Outputs 3 (MWe)381 488 514 535 556 554 551 549 545 541 544 545 550 541 477 519 533 531 538 538 532 520 461 523 531 533 536 533 534 536 539 538 538 26f 224 438 466 525 532 536 539 535 499 534 533 532 538 533 538 531 493 523 522 525 535 571 541 522 493 488 484 481 Temperature 4 (-C)Discharge Intake 27.2 32.5 31.3 32.0 34.0 35.6 36.1 37.1 37.6 37.9 37.9 36.6 35.4 36.0 34.0 36.1 36.6 37.0 37.1 38.6 39.6 40.3 38.5 39.9 39.4 39.3 39.4 39.5 39.0 39.0 38.1 38.3 38.6 22.2 30.5 35.8 36.9 38.3 38.9 39.3 39.2 39.0 37.9 39.7 40.2 40.3 40.4 40.5 39.6 38.9 38.3 38.6 38.7 39.2 39.6 34.5 38.6 36.3 25.3 34.8 35.8 35.9 16.2 16.4 14.5 14.6 15.8 17.2 17.5 18.6 19.2 19.7 19.3 19.0 17.7 18.5 18.7 19.2 19.6 19.7 19.7 21.0 22.0 22.9 22.7 22.5 21.9 21.7 22.0 22.1 21.6 21.7 20.8 21.0 21.1 20.9 21.5 21.2 21.6 21.4.21.8 22.1 22.1 22.0 21.9 22.6 23.1 23.3 23.4 23.6 22.7 22.2 22.6 22.2 22.3 22.7 23.0 18.4 21.9 20.0 16.2 19.5 20.5 20.7 A 11.0 16.1 16.8 17.4 18.2 18.4 18.6 18.5 18.4 18.2 18.6 17.6 17.7 17.5 15.3 16.9 17.0 17.3 17.4 17.6 17.6 17.4 15.8 17.4 17.5 17.6 17.4 17.4 17.4 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.5 1.3 9.0 14.6 15.3 16.9 17.1 17.2 17.1 17.0 16.0 17.1 17.1 17.0 1.7.0 16.9 16.9 16.7 15.7 16.4 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.1 16.7 16.3 9.1 15.3 15.3 15.2 1 Aug 2 Aug 3 Aug 4 Aug 5 Aug 6 Aug 7 Aug 8 Aug 9 Aug 10 Aug 11 Aug 12 Aug 13 Aug 14 Aug 15 Aug 16 Aug 17 Aug 18 Aug 19 Aug 20 Aug 21 Aug 22 Aug 23 Aug 24 Aug 25 Aug 26 Aug 27 Aug 28 Aug 29 Aug 30 Aug 31 Aug/LI ii 14-4 science services division Table H-i (Page 5 of 7)No. of Circulating Date Water Pumps]1 Sep 2 Sep 3 Sep 4 Sep 5 Sep 6 Sep 7 Sep 8 Sep 9 Sep 10 Sep 11 Sep 12 Sep 13 Sep 14 Sep 15 Sep 16 Sep 17 Sep 18 Sep 19 Sep 20 Sep 21 Sep 22 Sep 23 Sep 24 Sep 25 Sep 26 Sep 27 Sep 28 Sep 29 Sep 30 Sep 1 Oct 2 Oct 3 Oct 4 Oct 5 Oct 6 Oct 7 Oct 8 Oct 9 Oct 10 Oct 11 0ct 12 Oct 13 Oct 14 Oct 15 Oct 16 Oct 17 Oct 18 Oct 19. Oct 20 Oct 21 Oct 22 Oct 23 Oct 24 Oct 25 Oct 26 Oct 27 Oct 28 Oct 29 Oct 30 Oct 31 Oct 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 No. of Service Water Pumps 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2/19 1 1 1 1 1 1 I.I Total Volume of Water Pumped 2 (m3)1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1 ,471,764 1,433,607 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,406,352 1,466,313 615,960 59,961 615,960 1,466,313 1,466,313 1,482,665 1,482,665 1,482,665 1,482,665 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567.1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 Mean Electr cal Outputsi (MWe)482 480 481 482 458 484 480 479 403 499 527 531 348 311 480 536 541 544 543 546 545 539 465 518 531 538 538 539 503 88h Temperature 4 (°C)Discharge Intake 35.9 36.2 36.0 35.0 35.5 35.9 36.0 35.1 31.8 32.1 34.1 30.8 17.3 16.4 21.1 24.7.24.3 22.4 22.2 22.9 25.3 26.2 23.4 26.7 29.4 30.1 30.8 31.3 30.3 15.6 15.3.17.3 18.5 17.0 14.9 18.3 26.5 25.7 26.6 27.8 29.1 29.6 29.8 29.0 26.4 28.4 27.3 27.1 27.4 27.8 27.5 27.3 27.9 27.7 27.5 27.0 26.7 26.8 25.8 26.3 26.3 20.6 21.0 20.8 19.6 20.8 20.6 20.9 20.2 19.7 17.1 19.0 14.8 6.5 5.6 7.5 8.8 8.2 6.3 6.2 6.8 9.2 10.2 9.4 11.3 12.2 14.1 14.7 15.3 15.7 14.9.14.9 15.1 14.9 14.7 14.7 14.6 14.3 13.8 13.8 13.7 13.8 13.8 14.0 13.5 13.1 12.9 11.7 11.3 11.6 12.0 11.9 11.9 12.1 11.9 11.7 11.2 10.8 10.9 11.0 10.7 10.5 15.3 15.2 15.2 15.4 14.7 15.3 15.1 14.9 12.1 15.0 15.1 16.0 10.8 10.8 13.6 15.9 16.1 16.1 16.0 16.1 16.1 16.0 14.0 15.4 17.2 16.0 16.1 16.0 14.6 0.7 0.4 2.2 3.6 2.3 0.2 3.7 12.2 11.9 12.8 14.1 15.3 15.8 15.8 15.5 13.3 15.5 15.6 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.6 15.4 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.9 15.9 14.8 15.6 15.8 2 2/0i 0 0/2J 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0.0 0 0 84 381 390 431 474 521 549 550 543 531 545 551 552 554 551 543 529 550 550 549 554 553 449 511 545 548 ,i)~1 H-5 science services division H-5 science services division f-l 0ýr Table H-I (Page 6 of 7)Ti No. of Circulating Date Water PumpsI 1 Nov 2 Nov 3 Nov 4 Nov 5 Nov 6 Nov 7 Nov 8 Nov 9 Nov 10 Nov 11 Nov 12 Nov 13 Nov 14 Nov 15 Nov 16 Nov 17 Nov 18 Nov 19 Nov 20 Nov 21 Nov 22 Nov 23 Nov 24 Nov 25 Nov 26 Nov 27 Nov 28 Nov 29 Nov 30 Nov 1 Dec 2 Dec 3 Dec 4 Dec 5 Dec 6 Dec 7 Dec 8 Dec 9 Dec 10 Dec 11 Dec 12 Dec 13 Dec 14 Dec 15 Dec 16 Dec 17 Dec 18 Dec 19 Dec 20 Dec 21 Dec 22 Dec 23 Dec 24 Dec 25 Dec 26 Dec 27 Dec 28 Dec 29 Dec 30 Dec 31 Dec No. of Service Water Pumps 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I Total Volume of Water Pumped 2 (m3)1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,477,214 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,493,567 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,460,862 1 ,460,862 1,460,862 1,471,764 1 ,471,764 1 ,471,764 1 ,471,764 1,471,764 1 ,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1 471,764 1 471,764 1 471,764 1 471,764 1 ,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,471,764 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,488,116 1,231,921 1,204,666 1,204,666 1,204,666 1,204,666 1,204,666 1,204,666 1,204,666 1,204,666 1,204,666 1,204,666 1,204,666 1,204,666 Mean Electrical Outputs (MWe)552 551 554 551 552 555 553 551 555 540 551 537 553 551 555 553 554 554 553 553 552 548 548 383 391 422 497 551.555 554 553 554 555 552 552'562 550 547.545 543 545 543 542 540 538 536 532 532 530 526 526 516 523 517 520 518 516 515 509 508 508 Temperature 4 (.C)Discharge Intake 26.6 26.5 26.5 26.6 26.6 26.7 26.7 27.0 26.5 26.0 26.6 23.5 25.1 24.1 25.0 25.5 25.0 24.5 24.0 24.1 24.0 24.0 23.9 19.1 18.7 19.6 21.1 22.2 21.8 20.5 21.0 21.4 20.1 20.6 19.7 20.4 21.1 21.9 21.5 19.7 18.7 19.2 18.1 17.0 17.7 17.7 17.3 16.0 18.1 20.2 19.2 19.8 18.7 19.8 18.9 18.5 17.8 18.0 19.3 20.6 21.6 10.8 10.6 10.7 10.8 11.0 10.8 10.9 11.1 10.7 10.5 10.8 9.9 9.3 8.3 9.1 9.7 9.2 8.7 8.2 8.3 8.2 8.1 8.3 7.5 6.9 7.0 6.7 6.5 5.9 5.3 5.1 5.5 4.3 4.8 3.9 4.6 5.3 6.2 5.9 4.2 3.1 4.8 2.6 1.6 2.3 2.3.1.9 0.9 0.1 2.0 1.5 2.2 0.4 2.4 0.8 0.5 0.0 0.2 1.5 2.9 3.9 15.8 15.9 15.8 15.8 15.6 15.9 15.8 15.9 15;8 15.5 15.8 13.6 15.8 15.8 15.9 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.9 15.6 11.6 11.8 12.6 14.4 15.7 15.9 15.2 15.9 15.9 15.8 15.8 15.8.15.8 15.8 15.7 15.6 15.5 15.6 14.4 15.5 15.4 15.4 15.4 15.4 15.1 18.0 18.2 17.7 17.6 18.3 17.4 18.1 18.0 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.7 17.7*1 TI.1~. I.II~iJ i-i H-6 " science services division Table H-i (Page 7 of 7)CJ FOOTNOTES:
| |
| Plant Operating Conditions at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, during 1978.1 Number of pumps operating based on pump data collected daily from the control room at Nine Mile Point Unit 1.2 Volume of water pumped each day derived from net discharge flow data in Nine Mile Point Unit 1 "401" monthly reports.Power production is daily average (Net MWe) from Nine Mile Point Unit 1 "401" monthly reports.4 Water temperatures during Jan-Mar are average daily lake temperatures from Nine Mile Point Unit I periodic logs. After March, water temperatures are from Nine Mile Point Unit 1 "401" monthly reports.a Flow through intakes reversed to prevent icing from approximately 2300 on 3 Jan to 0500 on 4 Jan..I b Unit down at 1058, 20 Jan to approximately 1530, 22 Jan.c Unit down at 2229, 6 Feb to 1859. 7 Feb.d. Unit down at 1838, 16 May to 1250, 17 May.e Unit down at 0007, 20 May to 0505, 26 May.I fUnit down at 0108, 3 Aug to 0655, 4 Aug.g On 13 Sep, two pumps were operating from 0001 to 1320 and one pump was op-erating from 1320 to 2400.h Unit down from 0251, 30 Sep to 1520, 6 Oct.On 2 Oct, two pumps were operating from 0001 to 0251 and no pumps were operating from 0251 to 2400.J On 4 Oct, no pumps were operating from 0001 to 1455 and two pumps were operating from 1455 to 2400.j.Ht-7 science services division Table H-2 (Page 1 of 8)Plant Operating Conditions at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Plant during 1978 No. of Circulating Date Water Pumps 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb Feb 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3/2c 2/Id 1 1 1 No. of Service Water Pumps 1 l I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 l*1~1 1 1 1 1 1/2-1 1 1 1 1 1/2 1 1 1 1 1 Total Volume ?f Water Pumpede (m3)1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,588,622 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1,621,589 1.621,589 1,033,8685 752,2355 752,2355 752,2355 Mean Electrical Outputs 3 (MWe)819 818 818 818 781 731 783 780 821 823 823 823 820 822 823 823 822 823 823 816 796 821 821 774 493 600 655 721 792 590 705 790 820 762 598 624 627 631 632 633 620 576 630 632 632 633 633 633 634 635 636 636 634 633 304ee 0 0 0 0 Temperature 4 (°C)Discharge Intake II 23.5 24.0 22.6 22.9 22.2 19.8 22.9 23.4 24.1 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.8 22.9 23.0 22.9 22.9 23.1 23.9 22.2 23.2 24.1 23.9 23.4 16.1 18.8 19.8 21.2 23.1 18.7 20.7 23.4 23.9 22.7 19.5 20.3 20.7 20.0 20.0 20.1 19.6 17.8 19.8 19.7 20.0 20.1 20.1 20.0 20.3 20.1 20.2 20.1 20.2 20.3 13.7 5.2 4.5 5.6 4.4 4.8 5.4 3.9 3.8 4.2 2.9 5.3 5.7 5.7 4.3 4.3 4.4 5.3 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.4 5.3 3.7 5.3 5.6 5.4 5.8 3.8 5.0 4.7 5.0 5.4 4.2 4.7 5.4 5.5 5.2 4.7 5.0 5.3 4.6 4.4 4.7 4.4 3.9 4.4 4.4 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.9 4.6 4.8 4.7 4.8 4.8 3.6 2.3 3.2 4.3 3.2 18.7 18.6 18.7 19.1 18.0 16.9 17.6.17.7 18.4 18.7 18.7 18.6 18 5 18.7 18.7 18.7 18.7 18.7 18.6 18.5 17.9 18.5 18.5 17.6 12.3 13.8 15.1 16.2 17.7 14.5 16.0 18.0 18.4 17.5 14.8 15.3 15.4 15.4 15.6 15.4 15.2 13.9 15.4 15.3 15.3 15.5 15.5 15.4 15.4 15.5 15.4 15.4 15.4 15.5 10.1 2.9 1.3 1.3 1.2 1 ii l~.1 I'H-8 science services division Table H-2 (Page 2 of 8)No. of Circulating.
| |
| Date Water Pumps 1 Mar 2 Mar 3 Mar 4 Mar 5 Mar 6 Mar 7 Mar 8 Mar 9 Mar 10 Mar 11 Mar 12 Mar 13 Mar 14 Mar 15 Mar 16 Mar 17 Mar 18 Mar 19 Mar 20 Mar 21 Mar 22 Mar*23 Mar 24 Mar 25 Mar 26 Mar 27 Mar 28 Mar 29 Mar 30 Mar 31 Mar 1 Apr 2 Apr 3 Apr 4 Apr 5 Apr 6 Apr 7 Apr 8 Apr 9 Apr 10 Apr 11 Apr 12 Apr 13 Apr 14 Apr 15 Apr 16 Apr 17 Apr 18 Apr 19 Apr 20 Apr 21 Apr 22 Apr 23 Apr 24 Apr 25 Apr 26 Apr 27 Apr 28 Apr 29 Apr 30 Apr 1 1/2e 2/3f 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3/2g 2/3 h 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3/21 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 k 2 2 2 2 No. of Service Water Pumps 1'1 1 1*1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 Total Volume Water Pgmpedf (m )752,2355 752,2355 819,857 1,338,573 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,338,573 1,043,193 1,043,193 1,338,573.
| |
| 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1,633,952 1 ,633,952 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1.759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,759,641 1,687,9865 1,315,5025 1,315,5025 1,315,5025 1,315,5025 1,687,9865 2,060,4695 2,060,4695 1,687,986 1,315,502 1,315,502 1,315,502 1,315,502 Mean Electrical Outputs 3 (MWe)0 5 383.647 727 812 824 825 825 816 794 825 825 825 825 826 7 5 4 ff 3 450 539 738 777 820 820 822 820 821 819 819 816 783 324 480 550 621 706 787 821 777 820 819 819 628 500 536 741 792 819 6 05g9 0 0 341 658 760 817 819 145hh 0 0 0 0 Temperature 4 (0 C)Discharge Intake 2.9 4.8 18.5 19.8 21.5 24.0 24.2 24.2 24.2 24.0 23.5 24.2 24.5 24.8 24.1 24.1 15.6 3.2 22.4 22.9 24.0 23.0 24.2 24.0 23.7 24.0 24.1 24.3 24.3 24.4 23.6 15.3 16.8 17.5 19.5 22.4 23.4 24.5 24.5 24.7 24.8 25.4 21.5 19.0 21.1 25.5 24.5 23.5 18.7 5.6 6.4 16.9 20.2 21.4 22.9 23.0 5.2 5.6 4.9 8.7 5.5 2.0 0.1 3.9 4.5 5.0 5.9 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.8 5.8 6.0 6.4 5.6 5.6 3.6 1.2 8.2 6.6 7.1 5.4 5.6 5.4 5.1 5.3 5.4 5.8 5.8 5.9 5.8 4.1 4.7 4.1 4.9 6.4 5.7 6.1 7.1 6.2 6.3 6.9 6.4 5.8 7.8 9.0 6.7 4.6 3.3 4.8 4.9 4.8 3.0 3.3 3.4 3.5 4.3 4.6 4.2 5.9 4.2 0.9 4.7 14.6 15.3 16.5 18.1 18.4 18.5 18.5 18.3 17.7 18.4 18.5 18.4 18.5 18.5 12.0 2.0 14.2 16.3 16.9 17.6 18.6 18.6 18.6.18.7 18.7 18.5 18.5 18.5 17.8 11.2 12.1 13.4 14.6 16.0 17.7 18.4 17.4 18.5 18.5 18.5 15.1 13.2 13.3 16.5 17.8 18.9 15.4 0.8 1.5 12.1 17.2 18.1 19.5 19.5 0.9 1.0 0.7 2.8 1.3&I H-9 science services division!.J Table H-2 (Page 3 of 8)No. of Circulating Date Water Pumps 1 1 May 2 May 3 May 4 May 5 May 6 May 7 May 8 May 9 May 10 May 11 May 12 May 13 May 14 May 15 May 16 May 17 May 18 May 19 May 20 May 21 May 22 May 23 May 24 May 25 May 26 May 27 May 28 May 29 May 30 May 31 May 1 Jun 2 Jun 3 Jun 4 Jun 5 Jun 6 Jun* 7 Jun 8 Jun 9 Jun 10 Jun 11 Jun 12 Jun 13 Jun 14 Jun 15 Jun 16 Jun 17 Jun 18 Jun 19 Jun 20 Jun 21 Jun 22 Jun 23 Jun 24 Jun 25 Jun 26 Jun 27 Jun 28 Jun 29 Jun 30 Jun 2/3m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3/2r 2 2/3s 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 No. of Service Water Pumps 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 2 2 21 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 I2n 2 2 2/I 2 2 NA NA 2 q 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2.2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Total Volume of Water Pumped 2 (m3)1,687,986 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,060,469 2,018,678 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 1,831,528 1,504,469 1,831,528 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 Mean Electrical Outputs 3 (MWe)444 703 701 817 813 788 787 782 779 779 778 778 781 779 778 779 780 779 778 779 780 783 782 780 781 781 493 468 529 566 640 679 688 772 813 809 806 805.802 798 798 796 674 793 795 757 782 688 771 804 799..45511 51 632 630 713 788 789 791 798 798 Temperature 4 (0C)Discharge Intake LI 20.1 22.6 25.1 25.2 24.3 23.6 23.9 23.4 23.6 25.1 25.5 23.1 24.0 24.7 23.6 23.4 23.4 23.5 24.4 25.2 25.5 25.6 26.1 27.0 27.4 27.8 22.7 21.6 23.1 24.2 27.7 25.9 25.6 28.4 29.2 29.1 30.0 29.7 30.4 30.3 30.5 30.0 30.5 29.8 31.8 31.3 30.8 27.6 30.9 32.5 31.7 24.4 17.2 29.7 28.4 30.8 32.4 34.6 34.8 33.3 34.5 6.7 6.1 6.8 6.4 5.6 5.4 5.7 5.3 5.6 7.2 7.7 4.9 5.8 6.7 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.3 6.3 7.2 7.5 7.5 8.1 9.1 9.5 10.0 10.5 10.1 10.6 9.8 12.2 10.1 9.6 11.2 10.6 10.5 11.5 11.2 11.8 12.0 12.1 11.7 12.3 12.5 13.7 14.1 13.1 12.0 13.5 14.2 13.5 13.3 13.3 13.7 13.9 14.3 14.5 16.5 16.6 15.1 16.3 A 13.4 16.5 18.3 18.8 18.7 18.2 18.2 18.1 18.0 17.9 17.8 18.2 18.2 18.0 18.2 18.2 18.2 18.2 18.1 18.0.18.0 18.1 18.0 17.9 17.9 17.8 12.2 11.5 12.5 14.4 15.5 15.8 16.0 17.2 18.6 18.6 18.5 18.5 18.6 18.3 18.4 18.3 18.2 17.3 18.1 17.2 17.7 15.6 17.4 18.3 18.2 11.1 3.9 16.0 14.5 16.5 17.9 18,1 18.2 18.2 18.2'1~ I I.VH-10 science services division i.J, I I Table H-2 (Page 4 of 8)No. of Circulating 1 Date Water Pumps 1 Jul 2 Jul 3 Jul 4 Jul 5 Jul 6 Jul 7 Jul 8 Jul 9 Jul 10 Jul 11 Jul 12 Jul 13 Jul 14 Jul 15 Jul 16 Jul 17 Jul 18 Jul 19 Jul 20 Jul 21 Jul 22 Jul 23 Jul 24 Jul 25 Jul 26 Jul 27 Jul 28 Jul 29 Jul 30 Jul 31 Jul I Aug 2 Aug 3 Aug 4 Aug 5 Aug 6 Aug 7 Aug 8 Aug 9 Aug 10 Aug 11 AMg 12 Aug 13 Aug 14 Aug 15 Aug 16 Aug 17 Aug 18 Aug 19 Aug 20 Aug 21 Aug 22 Aug 23 Aug 24 Aug 25 Aug 26 Aug 27 Aug 28 Aug 29 Aug 30 Aug 31 Aug 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3:3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 No. of Service Water Pumpsl 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Total Volume ?f Water (m3)2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,1 58,586 2,158,586 2.158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2.158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 Mean Electrical Outputs 3 (MWe)797 794 795 794 786 776 753 577 662 732 764 784 787 784 782 781 776 775 769 724 427 474 522 642 732 761 757 758 757 757 757 757 752 751 746 745 741 736 732 727 722 713 660 721 716 714 712 707 667 546 577 546 576 581 578 579 582 580 587 583 581 580 Temperature 4 (-C)Discharge Intake 31.9 32.6 31.0 31.0 32.1 33.7 33.9 31.2 33.4 35.2 35.9 35.8 34.4 35.4 36.5 36.3 37.0 36.5 36.3 37.6 37.8 33.0 33.4 34.1 36.0 37.2 37.5 38.1 37.6 37.8 39.1 39.2 39.7 39.1 39.3 39.6 40.0 40.1 39.9 40.2 40.5 40.3 38.9 40.9 41.7 41.8 41.5 41.5 40.3 36.4 37.6 36.6 37.7 38.4 37.9 36.6 36.9 35.3 26.4 34.1 35.4 35.8 16.8 17.5 16.0 16.1 16.8 18.8 18.4 19.2 19.8 20.2 20.3 24.9 18.5 19.4 20.4 20.3 21.2 20.7 20.4 21.8 22.6.23.6 23.3 23.2 22.7 21.7 22.3 22.8 22.2 22.1 21.5 21.5 22.1 21.5 21.7 22.2 22.5 22.6 22.4 22.7 23.0 23.0 22.8 23.5 24.2 24.4 24.1 24.1 23.8 22.9 23.3 23.1 23.4 24.0 23.6 22.4 22.6 22.2 11.6 19.7 20.9 21.2 15.1 15.1 15.0 14.9 15.3 14.9 15.5 12.0 13.6 15.0 15.6 10.9 15.9 16.0 16.1 16.0 15.8 15.8 15.9 15.8 15.2 9.4 10.1 10.9 13.3 15.5 15.2.15.3 15.4 15.7 17.6 17.7 17.6 17.6 17.6 17.4 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.3 16.1 17.4 17.5 17.4 17.4 17.4 16.5 13.5 14.3 13.5 14.3 14.4 14.3 14.2 14.3 13.1 14.8 14.4 14.5 14.6 Ii 71 i J H-11 science services division/ i L_]
| |
| Table H-2 (Page 5 of 8)No. of Circulating, Date Water Pumps 1 Sep 2 Sep 3 Sep 4 Sep 5 Sep 6 Sep 7 Sep 8 Sep 9 Sep 10 Sep 11 Sep 12 Sep 13 Sep 14 Sep 15 Sep 16 Sep 17 Sep 18 Sep 19 Sep ZO Sep 21 Sep 22 Sep 23 Sep 24 Sep 25 Sep 26 Sep 27 Sep 28 Sep 29 Sep 30 Sep 1. Oct 2 Oct 3 Oct 4 Oct 5 Oct 6 Oct 7 Oct 8 Oct 9 Oct 10 Oct 11 Oct 12 Oct 13 Oct 14 Oct 15 Oct 16 Oct 17 Oct 18 Oct 19 Oct 20 Oct 21 Oct 22 Oct 23 Oct 24 Oct 25 Oct 26 Oct 27 Oct?8 Oct 29 Oct 30 Oct 31 Oct 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3/2t 2 2/3'3 3 3 3 3 3/2w 2 2 2 2 2 2/1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 No. of Service Water Pumps 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2/1p 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 Total Volume of Water Pumped 2 (m3)2,158,586 2.158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,158,586 1 ,831,528 1,504,469 1,831,528 2,158,586 2,158,586 2,109,528 2,060,469 2,060,469 1,687,986 1,315,502 1,315,502 1,315,502 1,315,502 1,315,502 1,033,868 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,-35 752,235 Mean Electr cal Outputsi (MWe)579 585 584 582 580 580 578..18533 363 485 497 513.514 517 482 3 7 kk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35.8 36.1 35.9 35.6 36.0 35.5 35.8 26.4 33.5 33.6 31.1 31.1 26.6 21.2 20.0 13.2 9.4 9. 0 6.1 8.1 10.0 11.4 10.8 13.1 16.0 16.3 17.0 17.8 17.7 17.3 17.1 17.2.16.9 16.3 16.2 16.4 17.2 17.0 16.6 16.6 16.5 16.6 16.7 16.2 15.7 15.4 14.8 14.7 14.8 15.1 15.3 15.3 15.5 15.2 15.2 15.8 16.2 14.7 14.5 13.8 13.8 21.4 21.7 21.5 21.2 21.6 21.1 21.4 20.5 20.4 18.1 18.4 18.1 13.4 7.1 6.3 10.2 8.7 8.2 6.4 7.3 9.2 10.7 10.0 11.3 15.2 15.5 16.2 17.0 16.7 16.4 16.2 16.3 16.1 15.5 15.0 15.2 15.9 15.5 15.0 15.1 14.6 15.0 15.2 14.8 14.3 14.1 13.7 13.2 13.3 13.6 13.8 13.9 14.0 13.6 13.6 15.3 15.0 14.5 13.8 13.3 14.6 Temperature 4 (oC)Discharge Intake A 14.4 14.4 14.4 14.4 14.4 14.4 14.4 5.9 13.1 15.5 12.7 13.0 13.2 14.1 13.7 3.0 0.7 0.8-0.3 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.8 1.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 0.5 1.2 0.2 0.7 0.5-0.8.1 I.I (I.I )I 71 ii~1 ii J 11-12 science services division H--12 science services division F'Table H-2 (page 6 of 8)No. of Circulating 1 Date Water Pumps!VA I Nov 2 Nov 3 Nov 4 Nov 5 Nov 6 Nov 7 Nov 8 Nov 9 Nov 10 Nov 11 Nov 12 Nov 13 Nov 14 Nov 15 Nov 16 Nov 17 Nov 18 Nov 19 Nov 20 Nov 21 Nov 22 Nov 23 Nov 24 Nov 25 Nov 26 Nov 27 Nov 28 Nov 29 Nov 30 Nov 41.1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec 1 1 1 1 1/D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 1 O/l1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1l/0 z 1 I 2 bb 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2/3 cc 3 3 3 3/2 dd 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 No. of Service Water Pumps 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Total Volume of Water Pumped 2 (m3)752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 425,176 98,116 98,116 98,116 98,116 98,116 98,116 425,176 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752,235 752 ,235 801 ,293 850,352 850,352 850,352 850,352 850,352 850,352 850,352 850,352 850,352 850,352 850,352 1,177,411 1,504,469 1,504,469 1,504,469 1,504,469 1,504,469 1,504,469 1,504,469 1,504,469 1,504,469 1,504,469 1,504,469 1 ,504,469 1,504,469 1,831,5285 1,845,591 1,845,591 1,565,956 1,504,4695 1,504,4695 1,504,4695 1,504,4695 1,504,4695 1,319,419 1,319,419 1,319,419 Mean Electr cal Outputsi (MWe)okk 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0*0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 20 148 211 258 385 433 512 553 556 31 6 mi.171 439 557 640 588 430 1 4 nn 70 239 232 416 518 587 599 14.0 14.4 15.0 15.0 14.8 15.3 17.1 19.3 19.8 20.2-20.3 20.3 19.8 12.7 11.1 11.1 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.7 8.5 8.8 8.7 9.3 8.4 8.6 7.2 6.6 7.9 8.2 7.5 4.7 4.9 2.8 5.9 7.1 5.1 11.0 11.8 11.1 12.8 16.3 17.3 18.2 19.8 19.5 11.5 7.9 15.2 17.5 19.5 18.9 16.7 1.8 4.9 16.6 14.9 17.2 20.1 23.8 23.5 15.5 14.2 14.6 15.0 13.4 13.6 15.8 18.7 19.1 19.5 19.6 19.5 19.3 11.2 9.8 9.8 9.0 9.0 8.8 8.8 7.6 7.8 7.3 7.8 7.4 7.1 5.8 5.6 6.7 8.1 6.8 5.4 5.2 3.3*5.6 3.9 5.5 6.1 5.8 3.7 3.6 4.0 3.0 2.1 2.9 2.9 2.4 1.4 1.3 1.7 5.2 6.2 2.9 1.7 1.2 4.3 2.1 1.8 3.9 7.1 6.3-1.5 0.2 0.4 0.0 1.4 1.7 1.3 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.5 1.5 1.3 1.3 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.4 1.5 1.0 1.5.1.4 1.0 1.2 0.1 0.7-0.7-0.3-0.5 0.3 3.2-0.4 4.9 6.0 7.4 9.2 12.3 14.3 16.1 16.9 16.6 9.1 6.5 13.9 15.8 14.3 12.7 13.8 0.1 3.7 12.3 12.8 15.4 16.2 16.7 17.2 Temperature 4 (-C)Discharge Intake Uf H{-13 science services division j 0 Table H-2 (Page 7 of 8)FOOTNOTES:
| |
| Plant Operating Conditions at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Plant during 1978.Number of pumps operating based on pump data collected daily from the control room at James A. FitzPatrick Station.2 Volume of water pumpedeach day derived from gross circulating water flow data in James A. FitzPatrick "401" monthly reports. For I Jan through 24 Apr and 20-31 Dec, volumes have been corrected for % tempering when data were available.
| |
| 3 Power production is daily average (Gross MWe) from James A. FitzPatrick "401" monthly reports.4 Average water temperatures reported in James A. FitzPatrick "401" monthly reports.5 Percent tempering data not available.
| |
| Volume of water pumped in from James A. FitzPatrick "401" monthly reports.a Pump change outside sampling period (data not collected).
| |
| b Two pumps operating from 1000 when sampling began on 10 Feb to 1000 on 11 Feb.c On 24Feb, three pumps operating from 0001 to 0920 and two pumps operating from 0920 to 2400.d On 25 Feb, two pumps operating from 0001 to 0448 and one pump operating from 0448 to 2400.e On 3 Mar, one pump operating from 0001 to 0037 and twa pumps operating from 0037 to 2400..On 4 Mar, two pumps operating from 0001 to 0126 and three pumps operating from 0126 to 2400.On 17 Mar, three pumps operating from 0001 to 2208 and two pumps operating from 2208 to 2400.-h On 18 Mar, two pumps operating from 0001 to approximately 2335 and three pumps operating from approximately 2335 to 2400.'1-On 18 Apr, three pumps operating from 0001 to 1800 and two pumps operating from 1800 to 2400.J On 22 Apr, two pumps operating from 0001 to 0905 and three pumps operating from 0905 to 2400.k On 26 Apr, three pumps operating from 0001 to 1152 and two pumps operating from 1152 to 2400.m On 1 May, two pumps operating from 0001 to 1535 and three pumps operating from 1535 to 2400. IJi n On 28 May, one pump operating from 0001 to 1010 and two pumps operating from 1010 to 2400.P Time of pump change not available.
| |
| q On 5 Jun, two pumps operating at the beginning (0001 hrs) of the sample period.H.14 H-14 science services division Table H-2 (Page 8 of 8)ri r On 21 Jun, three pumps operating from 0001 to 1350 and two pumps operating from 1350 to 2400.s On 23 Jun, two pumps operating from 0001 to 0840 and three pumps operating from 0840 to 2400.!! t On 8 Sep, three pumps operating from 0001 to 0735 and two pumps operating from 0735 to 2400.u On 10 Sep, two pumps operating from 0001 to 2055 and three pumps operating from 2055 to 2400.wn w On 16 Sep, three pumps operating from 0001 to 0040 and two pumps. operating from 0040 to 2400.I x On 72 No, twon pump operating from 0001 to 15 and o pump operating from 15 to 2400.1 YOn 30 Nov, one pump operating from 0001 to 1554 and no pumps operating from 1554 to 2400.-z On 1 Nov, one pump operating from 0001 to 1215 and no pumps operating from 1215 to 2400.bb On 6 Dec, one pump operating from 0001 to 1150 and to pumps operating from 1150 to 2400.a On 2 Dec, to pumps operating from 0001 to 1940 and toe pumps operating from 1 940 to 2400.COn 20 Dec, two pumps operating from 0001 to 1940 and three pumps operating from 1940 to 2400. .dd On 24 Dec, three pumps operating from 0001 to 0039 and two pumps operating from 0039 to 2400.ee Unit down from 1515, 24 Feb to 2245,. 2 Mar.Unit down from 2208, 17 Mar to 2335, 18 Mar.gg Unit down from 2226, 18 Apr to 0315, 21 Apr..iih hh Unit down from 1200, 26 Apr to 0259. 1 May.Unit down from 1350, 21 Jun to 1417, 22 Jun.Unit down from 0735, 8 Sep to approximately 0001, 9 Sep.¶ kk Unit down from approximately 0040, 16 Sep to approximately 2000, 8 Dec (scheduled outage for refueling).
| |
| Unit down from 1200, 17 Dec to approximately 1200, 18 Dec.tnn Unit down from 0039, 24 Dec to approximately 1430, 26 Dec.NA = not available 11-15 science services division Table H-3 Numerical Abundance and Percent Composition of Impinged Fish Collected at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Plant Unit 1, Jan-Dec 1978 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total No. % No. % Nu. % No. Z No. % NO. 9o. No.5 No.O No. % No. % No. % No. %Species 631 63.2 692 Alewife American eel Black crappie Bluegill Brook stickleback Brown bullhead Brown trout Burbot Central mudminnow Cisco (lake herring)Cottus sp. (sculpin)Cyprinidae (minnows)Emerald shiner Fathead minnow Freshwater drum Gizzard shad Golden shiner Goldfish Lake chub Largemouth bassop. (sunfish)Longnose dace Longnose gar thus op.Pumpkinseed Rainbow smelt Rainbow trout Rock bass Sslxetinui op. (trout)Sea lamprey Smailmouth bass Spottall shiner Stonecat Tessel lated darter 1 Threespine stickleback Trout-perch Walleye White bass White perch White sucker Yellow perch Unidentified Total No. fish/1000 m32 7 0.1 1 T 7 0.1 4 0.1 I T 1 T 1 T 6. T 1 T 549 3.8 572 6.9 586 4.4 261 3.1 6 T 3 T 2,168 16.3 599 7.2 1 T 14 0.1 17 0.1 8 0.1 1 T 10 0.1 56 0.2 5,114 32.3 856 12.9 60 12.2 58 6 0.1 3 T 5 T 4 0.1 " 2 0.4 1 1 T 11 T 3 T 1 T 2 T 1 T 4 T 1 T 7 1.4 1 0.2 3 1 T 1 T 2 *T 3 0.6 .8 2 T 21 0.1 1 T 84 1.0 207 0.6 312 2.0 55 0.8 28 5.7 11 2 T I T 388 4,8 36 0.1 5 T 1 I T 3 T 2 7 110 1.4 94 0.3 10. 0.1 3 0.1 1 0.2 3 1 T 3 1 1 T 6 0.1 2 T 3 T 12.5 0.2 0.2 0.7 1.7 2.4 0.2 0.7 351 10.5 338 39.8 4 0.1 2 0.2 1 0.1 1 5 30 1 2 T 0.2 0.9 T 0.1 531 53.2 692 1 0.1 15 3 0.3 8 1 0.1 1 0.1 3 1 60 6.0 155 34 1 0.1 35 4.1 28 3.3 53 5.3 1,211 3 2 1 3.9 0.1 T T T 0.9 0.2 6.7 T T T T D.1 81.3 T 0.2 0.1 T 0.4 1.0 T T 0.2 O.l T 0.3 2.5 1.9 ,H C-'2.S a 0 1 T 3,279 24.6 1.480 17.8 719 1 39 0.3 10 0.1 17 21 0.1 5 4 T 1 T 14 0.1 3 T 2 411 3.1 42 0.5 243 12 0.1 1 T 3 T 2,610 19.6 4,636 55.8 5,140 83 0.6 17. 0.2 10p 7 0.1 2 T 1,851 13.9 162 2.0 272 1,428 10.7 502 6.0 944 14 0.1 1 T 3 204 1.5 6 0.1 5 1 T 13,344 8,315 8,065 8.9 T 0.2 0.1 T 3.0 63.7 1.2 3.4 11.7 T 0.1 455 1 86 4 5 34,880 127-11 224 2 18 36,251 1.3 T T 0.2 T T 96.2 0.4 T 0.6 T 0.1 736 2 96 19 87 5,435 507.2 175 3,304 15,827 4.7 T T T 0.6 0.1 0.6 34.3 3.2 T 1.1 20.9 1 0.2 24 373 5.6 9 1.8 304 65.7 2,907 86.6 249 29.3 194 19.4 14,626 1 5 0.1 57 11.6 11 2.4 2 0.1 2 0.2 31 1 0.1 16 7 1.4 1 0.2 1 0.1 5 11 0.2 7 1.4 8 1.7 7 0.2 1 0.1 10 1.0 70 114 1.7 14 2.9 13 2.8 9 0.3 59 6.9 52 5.2. 186 6. 0.1 14 2.9 2 0.4 2 0.1 4 0.4 5 178 2.7 80 16.3 10 2.2 1 T 4 0.6 5 0.5 1 4,838 72.8 108 32.2 2 0.4 114 13.4 17 1.7 27 15W 2.3 2 0.4 2 0.4 7 0.2 4 0.5 3 0.3 20 2 952 3 0.1 7 1.4 11 2.4 22 0.7 2 0.2 17 1.7 449 1 T 21 4.3 3 0.7 8 0.9 3 0.3 2 36 0.5 10 2.0 10 2.2 7 0.2 3 0.4 41 4.1 348 2 0.4 6,642 491 463 3,358 850 999 17,991 8,074 39 1 16 17 28 5 29 28 1 2,098 3 1,312 4 11 4,282 7 18 39 2 1 1 11 25 25,331 2 175 44 20 136 1,325 68 375 57,857 1,027 11 2,350 3:784 58 3,992 3 112,596 7.2 T I T T T T T T T 1.9 T 1.2 T T 3.8 T T T T T T 22.5 T 0.2 T T 0.1 1.2 0.1 0.3 51.4 0.9 T 2.1 3.4 0.1 3.5 T 0.768 0.509 0.433 2.198 0.776 .0.376- 0.027 0.024 0.180 0.048 0.052 1.003 0.517 lncludes tessellated and Johnny darters, previously considered as subspecies and reported under the name of Johnny darter In earlier Nine Mile Point studies.2 t1umber per 1000 m 3 based on Water volumes recorded on 401 Monthly Report for Nine Hile Point Unit No. 1.T = trace Table H-4 Biomass (g) and Percent Composition of Impinged Fish Collected at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Plant Unit 1, Jan-Dec 1978 Jan Feb alr Apr May Ju, J 0 l Aug Sep Oct Nov Oat Tota I 0t U It I l wit"l8tlt A 0 % 5 t S I t I 4t 2 03 2 lt 0 lit I lt Species Aleifeeel Black crappie Bluegill Brook sticklebotV lie. bull1head arove trout Surbot Ceotral ldolteo )tis.o (ItI .herring)Cyprl.tidaeI la sa U isp sulpin toenrld sliner Fathead elesow Freslwater drum Giezard shad tel der shiner GoldOish LukA chub L u.. s. (su..fsh)Lonlnse dace Longnose tar Pepk In seed Ramnbow selt Ralnbee trout Rock bos!rey (trout)Seallnuth bass Spotatll shleer Tessellated darter 1 Toroesplne stickleback Trout-pert Wall."ey hite bass lhit1 perth lihite sucker Yellow perch Totdertllled Total 57 28.7 T 6.9 T 6,049.7 0.9 1.307.7 0.!0.9 T 10.2 2,175.0 0.3 3,442.0 0.5 2S.6 T 1,00.5 0.3 2,197.0 1.5 1.321.8 0.2 700.0 0.1 618,3 0t1 279.8 0.2 79,176.4 03,S 1086,24.6 75.3 1.1 7 218.5 T 245.8 T 40.0 17.9 1 g 76.0 3,105.8 1.9.1.0 8.2 317.5 1,151.5 2,107.5$7,389.3 3839 .403.2 9,684.3 81.0 1,051.8 1,307.9 7.5 7,S34.6 393.3 ,6,24 .8 10,899.2 1,290.8 471.5 0.1?.8 T 0.1 T 0.3 1.0 1.9 B1.4 0.3 0.1 0.7 0.0 1.7 1.4 0.1 6.7 0.4.(.5 14.1 1.2 0.4 26319 1,094.3 19.8 340.8 29.2"99.: 771.9 4.1 115.5 4.2 67,806,0 0.2.16.8 94.5 0.2 188,742.2 75.1 0:1 687.5 0.3 T 4.1 T 0.2 22.2 T T .737.2 0.3 0 .1 4.5 T 0.5 1,045.5 0.4 T 3.2 T 0.1 86.1 T T 11.2 T 43.9 ,0630.8 2.6 0.1 37.4 7 12,512.3 1,410.3 0.8 94.1 2,407.6 140.2 31.0 1,54-.9 3.3 3.4 1,20.1, 2.6 0.2 512.8 1.1 1.8490.t 3.8.1 4,SM.85 9.9 0.4 68.5 0.2 13.0 0.2 680.8 1.9 150.9 0.4 0,:12.5 14.8 12700.2 35.8 29.4 0.1 2,361.4 6.7 141'.7 .3.0 1,9%.9 10.1 0,134.0 1,740.1 6.1 74.1 0.4 88.7 3.0 1 1,328.8 4.4 718.0 1.7 H-S, a i 3 a (.4 7 31,499.9 4.5 13.848.7 9.6 2,023.4 0.4 103.7 0.1 1,8,6.4 0.3.365.1 0.1 154.9 0.1 6,433.5 0.9 1,235.2 0.8 1,201.0 0.2 230.9 0.2 8271. 0.1 83.9 0.1 4.8 T 3,614.4 0,0 6,9a8.6 4.8 4OZ.3 0.1 111.2 0.1 410.5 0.1 220.1 0.2 24.651.2 3.6 2.254.1 1.6 19,990.0 2.8 ,9148.3 3.6 1.024. 0 .28.46 3,165.4 3.8 510.3 0.4 MA 065.7 1.9 6,284.9 4.1 7,091.5 2.8 1,430.2 3.6 27.1 0.1 563.4 1.6 541.3 0.4 1,100.5 3.0 11,461.6 25.2 3,307.5 9.3 6.4 T 159.2 0.1 890.0 2.2 220.1 0.6 950.9 0.6 1,40.17 0.6 7,049.0 17.1 2,174.4 .5.0 28168.8 60.381.3 0.2 511.1 0.2 009.0 2.0 183.8 0.4 04.9 0.2 130.0 0.1 449.9 0.3 P00.9 0.1 945.2 2.1 11:.3 0.3 29.9 T 261.8 0.1 319.4 0.9 371. 3.1 11.4 ¶4,64.,8l 31.5 8,365.4 3.3 8,326.1 21.0 230.7 0.5 1.5 1 877.6 0.6 4,149.8 1.7 679.6 1.7 32.6 0.1 9.4 T.211.1 0.1 361.1 0.1 22,88.6 14.0 22,141.4 8.0 407.3 1.0 1,53:.8 3.4 I1,651.1 4.7 2.007.5 1.4 NA 13,580 34.3 1,227.1 3.5 021.a 0.4 8,414.2 3.3 907.1 2.3 804 1.8 1,119.2 9.3 MA 219.1 6,873.5 101.0 3.0 1.833.1 10.098.8 480.2 1.790.0 99.9 127.8 0.8 28.2 3,948.2 380.3 0.8 24.1 0.4 T 6.4 35.3 1.I 6.3 0.1 0.4 T 0.1 13.9 1.3 597.6 88.6 0.5 1,000.0 3.1 02.0 0.4 162.6 9,774.0 53.4 10,026.7 9.7 M0,613.1 0.2 27.8 2.7 225.3 0.1 1 20.3 74.7 0.7 532.2 122.4 49.0 200,296.0 33.2 20.5 1.3 131.3 102.3 13.4 69,232.0 1,140.0 0.1 193.5 188.3 1.2 1,015.4"0.2 1,781,.8 1.5 1,480.5 1.1 203.5 0.1 0.7 0.1 30.1 0.1 107, 84.8 7. 99.2 2.1 149.0 8.1 10,048.2 3.5 T 0.1 T o.2 T 66.1 T T T 0.1 22.T 0.4 0.l 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 T T 0.I.0.2 3.6 21U,75.Z 17,472.2 7.0 114.7 21.3 2.128. 1 12,477.5 32,404.4 135.9 74.7 7,204.3 7.3 3,456.5 15.5 3,005.6 1.047,236:7 12.3 550.1 28.5 1.3 17.9 131.3 009.3 104.1 155,33.06 1,407.0 22,21.0 4,007.7 3,117.1 27,159.5 6,296.1 3,656.1 712.9 83,021., 6,910.2 715.4 34,304.0 56,05.9 24,160.9 29,055.9 2,658.4 1,398.7 3S2.0 6.4 78.7 23.0 30.9 1.29.5 174.7 14.5 2,958.8 144.1 7.6 2S5.3 40.4 1.9 337.6 247.0 0.1 12.0 0.4 14.1 0.1 15.7 0.2 338.0 0.1 0 10.9 1.7 1,887.0 0.9 T 7 T 0.1 0.3 1.8 7 0.4 T 0.2 0.2 58.7 5,7 T T T T T 7.2 T 7 T 0.4 015 0.3 0.2 1.5 0.3 0 8.5 0.4 1.9 5.2 1.3 1.6 693,609.2 144,175.9 111,609.6 154,294.9 251,440.8 39,714.1 45,489.0 35,328.6 28e473S 10,293.2 22,097.0 303,064.8 1,847,640.8 1'ncludes tessellated and Johnny darters, preoiously cotnsdered as subspectis and reportsd under the nome of Johnny darter in earliet RKit Mile Point studies.8A -danagod specimene.
| |
| eight not avilable.
| |
| Table 11-5 Estimated Numbers and Biomass (g) of Fish Impinged at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1, Jan-Dec 1978 Jan Feb Its Apr may a.n Jul Aug Sep Oct No, Dea Total species NO. 65 No .At No. At No. As no. A a 0 Wo No. wto No. At wo. AoNNo. At loo. 8i No. At 6t. 60 AleIfe 17 80.4 16.1 22 166.3 146 659.8 11,324 417,930.0 1,975 28,874.5 143 3,40.9 138 174.1 10 1942.4 05 4,652.2 .25 4,926.0 ,650 25,308.2 10,252 48,266.American eel 17 14,426.2 9 3,191.3 13 6,877.1 2,735.8 11 1,522.3 9 3,254. 5 2,613.9 2 1,622.4 9 4,534.1 5- 715.7 2 112.4 90 408271.'Blact ora"pie 2 7.2 2 7.2 614l917 k 2 359.8 36 66.3 38 426.1 Br8o ..lok~leIack 2 2.7 2 4.2 80 46.8 7 9. 1 2 2.1 41 66.3 Br to hulllead 2 24.3 4 217.:1 867.0 6 4.2 2 221.6 17 ,222.8 2 605.6 7 1,379.1 19 537.3 65 5,024.1 Brow, trot 2 5,765.57 3.552,1 ? 21,014.5 29,7547.rt 74 8,207.9 23 73.0 2 1,632.4 5 5,5S.0 7 10,732.0 19 30,285.2 12 15,861.9 2 211.3 2 471539 8 76,713.2 Can ar I adf inno 4 18.2 53 249.5 2 10.0 2 7.2 7 48.4 68 333.3 Cisco (l76 herriol) 13 324. 0 178.1 15 502.3 Cootus sp. (sculpln 1,309 4,307.8 1,335 5,126.4 186 703.0 519 1.929.9 641 2,315.0 127 323.5 67 163.3 26 70.1 69 233.1 83 195.5 138 375.2 370 1.269.1 4,919 17,671.9 Cyprlnidae (mie m6 "5 10.3 2 717 17.4 Emerald shiner 1,397 3,152.0 609 1,647.8 859 2,439.0 98 284.8 79 190.7 2 f6 2 6.9 8A 291.9 3,051 8.017.1 Fathead alonn 3 10.0 7 24.8 10 35.5 Fresonater Arm 74 7,474.4 7 a5259 4 4,666.6 09 8,793.9 Giazzrd sed ,170 1.361.118.6
| |
| ,39 253,457,0 244 127,075.6 235 169,517.8 22 74,62,6 7 3,669.5 2 1.879.1 7 5,631.0 5 4,230.2 67 23,309.2 122 24.98.C7 2,888 477,629.8 10,757 2,4B7.522 Goldre shiner 2 " 14.5 3 15.55 32.0 GOldfish 33 521.0 7 840.5 3 42.0 43 1,471.5 Lake slub 41 696.1 19 95.2 5 236.3 7 62,8 7 79.2 79 1,079.6 Larg-eoth bass 5 68.0 5 68.0 Leouis sp, (sunfish) 2 3.1 2 3.2 LO9 e date 2 41.8 2 41.8 Longrose gar 22313.7 2 313.1 Osorhooshos sp. (salaon) 2 2,064.4 12 2,064.Pklnoe .2 5.7 57 363.0 99 366.9 gales w elt 7,079 75,115.3 3,453 32,313.6 1,502 21,443.8 1,138 15.710.3 1,630 15,702.6 801 3,300:1 21 64.6 725 7,343.5 5,766 23,272.6 564 6,338.3 466 6,026.0 34.877 765,293.4 59.566 36669.5 Ralnbow t~rout 2 591.2 2 2,718.5 4 3,329.7 Rock baso 93 6,971.2 23 242.0 38 6,153.6 3 1,353.3 12 2,747.3 136 27,331.6 26 7,872.8 5 1,108.2 5 332.5 74 465.4 415 50573.9 s7lv7.i7us Sp, (trout) 90 6,426.8 71 3,026.8 2 14.2 2 3,335.4 38 449.0 103 77,232.2 e a y 10 870.6 2 361.4 2 357. 5 1 2.31.0 1 546.3 2 6 0 9.2 12 2,421.3 47 7,522.3 Sellouth bass 33 75,341.5 7 2,884.9 3,457'8 3 2,377.3 4 3,114.8 2516,266.9 17 6,49731 19 50,771.8 16 4,1308 2 RA 23 107.1 167 4,277.8 320 63,622.4 Spottall shiner 980 3,001,0 98 538.8 53 1,478.0 219 953.2 213 1,131.7 263 1,866.9 31 437.8 37 754.9 21 92.7 14 1 44.6 1.2. 779.1 444 3,478.0 3,097 14,754.0 Stooncat I 29 1,973,5 9 195.8 10 325.5 42 71439.7 12 670.5 33 0,203.9 5 267.8 5 294.5 9 5700 72 628.3 159 8,566.9 darter 7 70.7 3 638 193 .579.7 413 898.3 91 4 24 27.2 2 1.8 70 20.9 12 29.8 2 717 667 1,631.4 1ak'3 0 8 7hreesplne stlckleback 6,224 8,619.0 10,817 16,260.0 11.389 76,683.8 87,200 121,627.0 12,035 18,523.4 11,169 19,214.1 377 9027 3.8 072 797.7 29 32.5 64 92.3 139,579 201,766.7 Trout-peroh 198 1,149.6 40 273.5 221 870.9 318 2,179.0 7,123 9,788.9 358 7,538.3 5 77.7 5 22.4 16 65.1 10 54.8 7 36.2 48 206.8 2.349 16,743.2 11laye 17 976,9 5 513.6 5 002.7 7 1,694.7 0h0te Stss 4,414 86,783.7 378 5,2659.6 602 13,562.1 28 529.3 6 591.4 124 7.g65,5 5,550 90,537.6 Aht pah 3,405 47,670.5 1,171 12,012.7 2.090 34,753,7 56o 57,151.5 8 49,037.2 7 939.9 17 3,663.5 26 3,938.7 51 9,11.2 5 58 39 781.2 1,071 6,901. .5 830 22643.6h595 sacker 33 2,443.0 " 62,1 7 2,866,2 9 6,273.6 2 66 50 37,171.S 7 2,926.2 719 3,79.4 7 17352,1: 5 1,7861 137 57,66.4 Vellom perch 486 7,548.3 74 1,2024 97 1,044.0 4 6 1,560.5 7.316 17.631.5 83 2,093.3 74 7,979.7 24 0,811.9 75 877.6 7 476.6 95 3.018.2 030 25,66.9 8,667 67,68.0 Unidentified 3 4A 5 HA 7 NA total 31,66 7,653,496.8 19.329 336,478.3 17,655 247,246,6 92,635 3B5,73A.1 35,047 655,7B2.9 75,324 91,647.6 7,977 180,473.4 1,102 94,245.2 7,749 65,78.1 2,27 43,022.9 2,304 50,993. 42,907 722.694.4 267,336 4,347,536.9 I Includes tessellated and Johney darters, preniously consldered a& subspecies and reported under the ae of Johnny darter in earlier Nine Mile Potnt studies.* damaged specamen, not avallable,.
| |
| S C 0 7 Ce Table H-6 Length Frequency of Fish Impinged at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Alewife.Length Range-(__ JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV D4C 31- 40 11 1 4 -5D 4 .5 q1 51- 60 1 1 2 3 68 64 39 18 61- 70 1 2 13. 15 30 22 71 208 117 71- 80 2 3 24 64 157 2 14 120 69 81- 90 2 7 63 113 3 3 2 11 8 91- 100 4 39 46 9 q ., 2 101- 110 1 1 22 26 6 111- 120 1 6 3 1 2 1 2 121- 130 3 1 1 11 131- 140 1 2 2 37 141- 150 10 1 2 1 26 151- 160 4 1 34 2 T 11 161- 170 231 78 8 J 2 15 171- 180 1 342 94 7 1 6 29 131- 190 1 222 46 11 1 8 6 42 191- 200 53 7 2 1 23 201- 210 7 1 17 211- 201 1,=0 3 5..So Table H-7 Length Frequency of Fish Impinged at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Rainbow Smelt Length Range (iiM)JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 31- 40 1 6 2 41- S 6 3 2 4 6 43 99 1 32 51- 60 69 36 22 6 5 28 1 15. 167 25 5 206 61- 70 114 77 33 i8 34 76 1 i 77 24 13 309 71- 80 149 112 54 56 62 113 4 3 25 II 17 235 81- 90 140 101 43 49 121 50 1 32 30 5 15 134 0, 67 43 20 1 0 12 26 24 5 7 33 15 1 / r 7 U3 IU 14 1I U 61 111- 120 17 15 7 4 6 1 1 11 6 3 21 121- 130 *89 37 39 16 15 7 5 4 7 62 131- 140 223 130 76 37 40 9 1 2 11 7 10 123 141- 1.0 ....77.151- 160 109 70 76 531 .64 196 1 15 17 8 58 161- 170 48 35 84 51 49 6 1 8 13 15 171- 180 36 25 39 19 .20 4 1 2 3 11 131- 190 21 17 9 13 11 1 3 5 9 191- 200 -ii1"2 __1_25 6 11 201- 210 I1 2 5 211- 220 1 2 1 2 1 4 221- 230 2 1 231- 21 3 j54 1 iff I C t~3 0 0 a a 0 S S q 5, S S a.S 0....... ...... ........ilL ~ ,~...*I..... .... .. ...... , .............
| |
| : v ... .. .... ......
| |
| * 4 ..
| |
| Table H-8 Length Frequency of Fish Impinged at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Smallmouth Bass S 9.0 U 0 0 S S.S S S 0 U'.ength Range (MM) JAN FEB .MAR APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 7 1- 50 51- 60 4 6 61- 70 1 4 9 71- 80 2 18 81- 90 i2 91- 100 101- 110 111- 120 121- 130 131- 1i0 141- 150 151- 160 161- 170 171- 180 181- 190 191- 200 201- 210 211- 220 221- 230 231- 210 1 241- 250 251- 260 1 261- 270 1 271- 280 281- 290 1 ,291- 300 1 301- 310 311- 320 321- 330 1 331- 340 1 341- 350 351- 360 361- 370 1 371- 380 301- 390 3 1 1 3 391- 400 1 I 401- 410 1 ll- qz4 421- 4130 431- -40 Table H-9 Length Frequency of Fish Impinged at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Threespine Stickleback 49I I Length RangeI .JAN FEB MlAR APR NAY JUN JLY .AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 31- 32 33- 34 35- 36 1. 1 3 1 37- 38 1 39- !0 2 1 8....41- 42 2 2 3 1. 11 2 1 43- 44 9 5 7 5 7 1 15 1 1 45- 46 16 22 17 23 9 11 17 1 6 47-4851 56 54 53 4 27 3 7 3 5 5- 58 56 62 a8 107 77 6 a 12 35 51- 52 94 153 187 170 151 112 8 1 2 5 53- 54 108 152 232 218 184 139 17 3 3 55- 56 101 222 301 210 261 201 19 1 1 57- 58 82 178 235 187 238 200 14 1 1 59- 60 40 105 ,.145 1 3 1 3 205 -118 61- 62 36 69 103 102 073 186 13 63- 64 15 29 62 44 89 83 15*65- 66 8 34 34 26 53 48 6 67- 68 10 14 12 17 39 28 1'9- 70 S 12 14 14 27 17 4 71- 72 7 10 18 10 37 9 73- 74 1 3 10 3 13 6 75- 76 1 4 4 6 5 7 77- 78 5 3 1 1 ,79- 80 1 1 S 0 0 S 0 S 3.
| |
| .- s .' ..-.-..... ..Table 11-10 Length Frequency of Fish Impinged at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 White Perch Length Range (rm) JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 41- 50 11 1 2 51- 60 6'? , )( 4 2 1 27 61- 70 89 8S 42 5 2 1 99 71- 80 161 E 1l5 59 41 14 1 5 123 81- 90 21i 153 113 35 13 1 1 7 92 91- 100 .3 i 22 .1 2 35 101- 110 41 .", 5? 2O 16 12 ill- 1?0 13 4 7 5 121- 150 2 2 1 131- 140 111 i51- 110 1 1 1 161- 170* 2 3 171- 180 2 7 181- 190 1 1 141 191-20 1 15 1 fi-1-f o 3 1 7 4 1 211- 220 4 1 5 10 10 1 1 221- 230 6 9 13 13 2 231- 240 5 1 1 14 9 312 t; n1 1 2 1 251- 260 5 3 10 15 261- 270 3 6 13 1 271- 280 2 5 3 281- 290 3 211-3 311- 320 321- 330 1 331- 343 141- ýnnl 351- 360 361- 370 1 S 0 i U 0 a S I 0 S S op S S 8*U Length Frequency of Fish Impinged Table H-lI at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Yellow Perch Length Range (nn) JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 31- 40 1 1 1 41- 50 1 51- 60 42 61- 70 18 5 265 20 6 71- 80 56 1 73 7 1 1 25 81- 90 27 1 3 2 2 1 1 15 111- 120 24 2 1 11 121- 130 10 1 1 1 2 36 131-140 1 1 2 1 2 8 46 11-1 62_151- 160 12 H6 161- 170 1 1 1 1 7. 22 171- 180 2 1 1 1 1 2 9 181- 190 1 1 1 1 3 1 q 191- 2nn 3 1 2 1 1 1 5 201- 210 1 1 3 1 1 211- 220 1 1 1 2 221- 230 1 1 1 231- 240 2 1 241- 250 1 251- 260 T 261- 270 1 271- 280 1 281- 290 291- 300 301- 310 311- 320 321- 330 331- 340 So a 0 7-Table H-12 Numerical Abundance and Percent Composition of Impinged Fish Collected at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Jan Feb No. % No. %Har Mo. %Apr Nay No. % NO. %Species Alewife American eel Blach crappie Bluegill Bowfin Brook stickleback Brown bullhead Brown trout Burbot.Carp Central mudminnow Channel catfish Cisco (lake herring)Cottus sp. (sculpin)SYprlnidae (minnows)Emerald shiner Fathead minnow Freshwater drum Gizzard shad Golden shiner Goldfish Lake chub Lake chubsucker Logperch Longnose dace Longnose gar Northern pike Pirate perch Pumpkinseed Rainbow smelt Rock bass Salvelinus sp. (trout)S4ealmy Smellmouth bass Spottail shiner Stonecat Tadpole madtom Tessellated darter Threespine stickleback Trout-perch Walleye White bass White perch White sucker Yellow perch Tot.l No. fish/lOGO m3 3 14 0.1 1 T 1 T 1 T I T 9 0.1 2 T 4 T 2 T 1IT 539 3.1 5 T 1,882 10.8 14 0.1 2,795 16.0 2 1 20 0.1 65 0.4 13 T 2 T 2 T I T 2 T 1 T iT 36 0.4 4.772 11.9 1 T 1 T 1 T 27 0.3 2 1 1 T 2 T 1 T 27 0.3 I T 118 1.2 168 0.4 2 T 1 T 25 0.3 11 T 3 T 10 '1 T 87 0.9 1 1 1T I T 1 T 1 T 3 T 4 T Jun Jul Aug Sep No. Z No. % No. % No. %2,634 14.2 2.695 48.0 12.037 85,2 1.591 11.6 1 T 3 0.1 2 1 4 T 1 1 Oct Nov 1 NO. % No. %17 16.5 46 24.7 4.2 1.9 1 T 3 T I T 5 0.1 8 0.1 5 T I T 2 1 218 3.1 233 3.3 2 T 463 6.5 4 0.1 I T 53 0.1 I T 199 0.5 2 T" 162 0.4 1 T 3 T 64 0.3 123 2.2 31 27 0.2 21 0.2 6 5.8 6 1 13 0.1 6 5.8 10 5.4 34 18.3 2,8 6 7 1 T 24 0.2 13 0.1 Dec Total No. N oN. %836 27.4 28,691 15.6 12 T I T 4 T 17 0.1 20 T I T 30 T 4 T 24 1 1 T 21 T 1 1 12 1 I T 56 T 1 1 44 T 2 T 1 T 105 0.6 1,452 0.8 9 T 39 0.2 2,416 1.3 13 T 1 1 20 T 894 16.4 6,497 3.5 13 0.1 17 1 27 T 1 T 81 T 1 T 7 T 10 T 2 1 3 T 1 27 0.2 38 T 57 48.0 31,992 17.4 20 0.7 529 0.3 19 0.1 28 T 4 T 10 1 57 0.3 478 0.3 342 1.9 2,732 1.6 7 T 58 1 S T 2 T 917 0.5 36 0.2 98,347 53.4 14 0.1 1,510 0.8 6 T 20 1 32 0.2 1,197 0.6 06 1.7 2,488 1.4 3 1 72 1 481 1.6 4,403 2.4 4 1 1 T 4 0.1 2 T 1 T I T 2 1 2 T 1 I.0 0 S S 5.3 T 8 0.1 5,451 31.2 1,490 20.9 578 1.5 434 4.3 1%538 3.8 1,109 6.0 225 4.0 988 7.0 11,609 84.9 56 0.3 -2 T 9 T 2 T 10 T 1i 0.1 72 1.3 236 1.7 4 1 6 T 1 T I 1 1 T 2 T 1 T 2 1 1 1 16 0.1 5 T 2 1 10 1 15 0.1 9 0.2 314 2.2 46 0.3 1,212 6.9 41 0.1 158 0.4 74 0.7 134 0.3 84 0.5 155 2.8 251 1.8 259 1.9 14 0.1 7 1 1 T 11 T 1 T 6 0.1 4 T 7 0.1 5 T 10 0.1 1 T 92 0.2 " 188 1.0 604 10.8 14 0.1 4 T Z,844 16.3 4,294 60.2 38,178 96.2 8,903 89,0 28,769 71.8 14,130 76.1 1,175 20.9 6 T 7 0.1 35 0.2 9 0.1 23 0.1 65 0.7 597 1.5 270 1.5 406 7.2 51 0.4 36 0.3 11 0.1 3 T 1,032 5.9 72 1.0 51 0.1 7 0.1 1 T 2 T 1.212 6.9 291 4.1 201 0.5 .166 1.7 288 0.6 7 T 5 0.1 54 0.4 18 0.1 13 0.1 4 0.1 1 T 2 T I T 27 0.5 6 T 5 T 163 0.9 5 0.1 8 T 11 0.1 3,680 9.2 31 0.2 97 1.7 82 0.6 37 0.3 17,444 7,134 39,677 10,002 40,064 18,567 5,617 14,135 13,660 53 51.5 60 32.3 8.4 4 2.1 4 3.9 18 9.7 3 2 1.1 5 4.9 4 3.9 6 5.8 4 2.1 8 4.3 2 103 186 17,6 635 184,244 0.845 0.390 1.927 0.600 1.399 0.680 0.200 0,604 0.666 0.011 0.023 0.946 0.741 IA11 circulating water pumps and traveling screens shut down on three sampling days, November 8, 10, and 13 2]ncludes tessellated and Johnny darters, previously considered as subspecies and reported under the name of Johnny darter in earlier Mine Mile Point studies.3Number per 1000 m3 based on voter volumes recorded on 401 Monthly Report for James A. FitzPatrick power station, and corrected for tempering during the winter months.T -trace Table H-13'Biomass (g) and Percent Composition of Impinged Fish Collected at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Specites Alewife MAcertan eel Black crappie Blue1ili.Brook. stickleback OrOwn bullhead omn trout Ourbot Carp Central eudmeinmov Channel catfish CiSCa (lake hearrie9l Cottos opp. (scolpin)Cpr inid:e (unidentified)
| |
| Eneraid shi er Fathead elenom Freehester dru.1ieard shad AI2de. shiner Goldfish Lake chub Lake chobsuckar LoperCh Loneonse dace Lonnoe gar Northern pike Pirate perch Puecikinseed Ra fnlx. -Iet Bock bass Sei.elinus sp. (trout)Sea lamprey Secllmoth bans 5potti I shiner St-necac Tsdpole I dtma Tessellated darter 1 Threespine stickleback Trout-perc, al leye Ahlte bass White perchte sucker Yellow perth Total Ja.Us -360.2 0.3 350.6 0.0 87.3 IN I 2,300.4 102.1 242.3 0.9 36.2 1.511.1 14.4 4,2571.0 101.4 602 .414.9 18.0 321.1 318.3 Feb Mar Wt l it Ct %Kay 6t 0.2 T 0.6 T T T 0.1 00.3 62.4 T 264.2 0.3 293.9 0.3 37.7 T 104,010.6 3.4 7.4 Jun JO1% Wt % At %i3.6 43,604.4 40.1 61.516.? 47.7 404.2 0.0 213.0 0.2 132.0 0.1 Aug Nt 71,941.1 2,103.8 0.0 Sep Oct Nov Ot S Ct 5 00 13,991.6 33.7 550.5 21.9 905:0 22.0 220 71.4 0.2 1,050.0 41.8 67.5 T 57.6 6,500.0 3.1 3,300.0 1.0 60.3 T 00.0 T 130.5 546.9 0.3 164.0 0.1 50.4 RA -5.4 407.4 0.2 400.8 0.2 00.3 502 004.0 0.3 1,113.0 0.k 1,141.9 1 52,1h2.4 10.i 06,507.1 52.0 00,100.5 16.6 ¶ 1.6 970.7 0.5 446.2 3.5 T 24.1 1 34.0 0.1 0.1 0.6 T I T I 1.0 0.4 T 14.1 1 W04.6 0.3 5.6 7 259. I 630.0 0,7 17,306.3 196.3 0.2 305.1 2.6 T n.2 1.297.2 2.3 539.1 1.3 12.6 20,460,0 i.4 4,381.4 1.1 I 707.5 KA 190 11,481.4 0.9 6,6 30:4 0.2 4.0 3.3 65.9 1 37.4 0.1 6.8 0.3 25.4 0.6 7.6 T 33.6 0.1 31.2 1.2 2,697.4 2.9 923.7 0.7 9,045.0 2.4 3,141.7 7:6 1 1,048.4 2S.5 170 D.c Tot.)ot InMtl ,727.8 44.8 580,593.5 3,863.3 1.9 T 307.5 124.06 460.5 350.8 40.6 108.9 T1 2,430.0 575.8 0.1 51,957.1 ,494.2 0.3 6,013.a 2.5 1 303.1 0.6 0 203.1 g0.3 30.2 276.9 0.1 4,502.7 19.8 140.9 1 5,488.4 30.1 ,367.7 0.3 4,090.0 ,614.6 33.4 1,16a,250.1 24.1 T 1.1 1,144.6 1.8 7 422.3 524.0 2Z.8 53.7 1 103.3 141.3 3,000.0 13.12.9.082.9 2.4 3.474.5 N195. 10.0 150,100.0 ,200 3.2 00,069.4?49.2 0.1 1.760.9 757.4 0.1 1,059.6.505.1 0.5 231,490.3 404.0 5.5 .11005.0 294.0 0.1 1,8034.2 13.0 4.4 1 1.390.2 37.4 T 167,216.6 01.0 T 11.262.0 313.8 0.1 1,446.5:335.3 0.3 10,1:2.1 732.9 2,. 01,447.1 900.0 0.2 2.,372.9 022.0 2.1 39,024.2 4.2 1 21.5 0.1 I T 0.1 1.9 0.2 7 T TT 0.2 0.2 0.2 43.9 0 0.1 IT 7 3. 1 5.0 3.4 o.1 0.6h 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 30.1 0.1 3.0 (.0 1.5 524.0 0.0 2.1.: 1 32.4 T 80.8 T 17.2 1 0'S Da 0i S 37,143.0 5.1 -,970,3 4.3 2,091.0 3,245.0 0.0 00.3 a 1,207.1 50.0 T 14.1 100.0 T 126.8 0.1 93.2 100051.1 1.3 4,039.5 3,536.0 3.5 95.9 T 296.10 27.0 1 13.6 13.4 0.0 1 HA -3,002.5- 0.5 6,258.3 3.0 62.232.7 000,6 P 40.5 0 I10.7 600.0 0.1 13,040.0 1.8 1.024.4 0.5 1,195.9 8,301.4 1.1 2.233.6 1.1 6,340.0 220.1 1 176.2 0.1 24.2 2,041.0 3.4 501.0 0.3 917.2 747.104,7 090.001.0 185.601.1 3.0 0.7 0T 2.2 0.2 T'12.9 0,102.7 473.0 13.2 869.6 172.2 1.6 T 65.7 0.1 1,325.9 0.6 14,006.0 4.9 0,002 .0 0. 270.0 0.0 20,10.4 0 3,0212. 1.1 4,010.0 0.2 10,010.0 10.09 3,230.0 10.9 T 1,052.7 1.1 0.9 0,585.0 2.3 7,766. 8:.3 5,506.0 4.1 192,500.0 0. 6173.0 0.2 608. 0.6 1,011.5 1.3 1,210.0 T 26.1 30,4 T 404.0 0.3 301.0 141.3 0.3 3,.000.0 .2 0.3 0.7 14,030.6 33.0 255.4 10.2 34.0 622.2 1.5 50.5 1,560.6 98 0.3 :004 2.1 33.1 1.3 0.1 0627. 1., 2 442.0 10.8 55 16 22.0 0.0 2 96.4 2.3 2 1.6 T 13, 016.8 21.3 096.0 16.9 10, 210.1 33.5 15,102.2 14.8 54,073.9 0.1 485.3 0.5 50,35.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 142.0 0.0 10,411.2 16.1 210,01.5 344.8 0.3 159.4 1,105.0 1.1 0,471.4 102,011.8 200,430.0 0.1 33".6 0.4 787.2 0.6 31.8 1 7.4 1i.7 23,909.9 25.6 1,732.3 1.3 1.0 1.7 1.9 1,519.1 1.6 0,162.5 1.0 241.4 0.1 02.6 529.8 0.1 420.3 0.3 100.1 0.1 9.3 626.9 0.7 521.2 5.4 6,347.5 1.7 213.1 0.1 1,41E.! !3.4 3,337.1 0.9 11308.3 3,3 113.4 0.1 2,610.7 1.9 9,022.7 2.5 1,014.3 93,572.3 137,130.9 381,202.1 41,488.3 O 4.0 0.4 30.2 0.0 3.3 549.3 2.4 2,510.5 0.2 1.2 4,114.6 510,031.7 2.702.797.2 1Includes tessellated and Johnny darters, Previously considered as subspecies and reported under the nine of Johnny darter In earlier Nine Mile Point studies.T i trace.MA
| |
| * daeaged Welght 0o0 available.
| |
| Liz Table H-14 Estimated Numbers and Biomass (g) of Fish Impinged at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Jan -eb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sco Oct 0ov Dec Species No. Vt No. Wt MO. Wt No. At No. At No. Wt No. Wt Uiec. t U. Wet o. Alt O. WC 00. At 4. 'AAel' 1 '09 9 329 9 62.320562.0go226
| |
| ,370.5,40A1.02 15,32. 2,74221,1722202 2,28.0412,127 100,75. 1152 55,48.64.730225, .5.A-oriean eel 2m7.9 15962.1 58 5,0d1.8 2 162.2 8 5 7.032. i.i 0.14.5 AjocA crapple 734.8 2 1.3 2 4.1 3 766.J Blvengi2 5. 2 1 2 G 39..4 201.5 1 7 2Ii 99611 936. 1 Al.5I A r .e .s t ei ek. ....P 1 .79 9 4.6 .4 .7 l2 2 8roon b6llhiad ? 2 0 109. 3 24.20 31.2 617.9 2 3,293.3 5 ,2.24. 1 59 7 S1 5,747.9 true Arcut ,C 0 7 A.1 29 .16.9 7,302.2 2 2,131.A 2 9,423.0 2 42,26S.9 19 43, 79. : 12373.2 01 122,816.5.
| |
| BOrb t M 4 85.7 1? 77,307. 1 1,501.1 27 24,333.1 C orp _-" 7 r,9 2 2 710 .7 2 2 6.r 1 720.'Central Arinntn 33 207.3 92 37.3 2 27.0 7 2.0 3 4874 Chael cat~fish 2.1 2 7.9." 117.!77 iSco (like herring) ., ,6.1 Sso. (sedlpln) '5'' 5o n ... i 12 364.9 295 2,488.6 3772 1,500.6 142 253.0 ?92 711.1 64 1 57.2 19 .6.3 26.2 37 2.2 250 660.3 1 10.627.: Cyprinivac luinne )u. e. *2 5 12.5 2 o V 47: EMerd d .h.ner :''4+: V 544 ;.137 430 1,015.9 62 275.9 2 4 02.1 7 6.0 24 21.2 2391.5 24 574S 1 6.0 Fathead otnneo a 15.5 22 52.5 93 61.4 Fresteater drue 13 1,572.021
| |
| ,548. 4 7,460.1 2 2.054,0 2 3,269.4 4' 11,802.6 G522ard shod 1,109,00.2 1,.53 112,021.7 269 212,814.2 228 195.273,5 40 20,423.2 20 6,224.9 2 2,22.7 51 21,507.9 90 1.502. 102 3,145.2 6.9021 406,552. 15.168 2.205,680.]
| |
| GOen uhi ner 5 62.9 3 4.0 2 2.0 21 57.5 41 90.0 Lake chub 117 '51.0 2 2.7 7 53.4 a 85.2 9 67.3 ;0 2.. 2 49.6 1 .1,262.5 Lake chubsucker 7 182,9.2 2 1,09.2 Lgprep h 1C 59.1 122D9.2 LonPose dace 5 77.3 2 38.1 :- 59.2Le ese 9V2120.2 2; 243.5 Norgt"hern Pike 2 291.2 6.1 5 326.2 fc) Pirote -orh 3 32.3 7 724.9 trnuonsed
| |
| :I -- 3.Pl5 In d 1I1 3,282.m 64 4.966.9 9 .8290 Rainbo,. 62e01 12,h95 9003.7 3,477 73,13.1 0,280 15,702.6 1,08 4,256.8 3.406 31,146.2 2.019 12,929.5 537 1,6R5.2 2,356 6715.3 26.790 125 629.2 120 2,228.0 27.207 221.6210 20,167 359,080,7 921k bas 210 2,700.0 5 787.6 20 21. 72,2 6 2,984.8 22 7,116.1 42 11.244.9 172 351795.1 563 12.932:.1 9 1.435.8 296 28,310.1 1.22 233,I1.2 (Itns so. (Orout) 1- 129.3 2 31.2 2 25.7 7 3,702.6 05 594.2 3 43.7210 Sea -S 5 5.4 2 295.2 0 )17.0 2 -3.0 is 1.804.1 94 :2,1: 6842n uth bass 660 1 23,96.6 11 2,944.6 5 2,124.0 22 14,581.1 35 )?,926.6 21 13.322.-'
| |
| 749 455.062.'
| |
| 10 .6 .1.0 12 66.0 7 36 S1 .2. 5 4,622.-Setoea1 shter 2.99: 0.032,2 90 273.8 350 656.1 7:5 020.1 292 2,092.2 154 1,192.2 370 4,220.2 593 2,7.9. 598 2,004.0 10 78.9 54 2.2 826 5,974.5 8,099 27,954.9 StewecaS 1i 65.8 16 22.1 3 4.0 24 52.6 2 20.2 94 1120.5 10 127.i 16 1,540.4 17 702.2 1 4,313.2 Tadpol e dsdt 17 32.0 10 32.i T essel.a1ed darter 2 24 21.5 2
| |
| * 204 465.2 434 781.2 1.440 1,877,2 33 23.8 g 22.1 A 5.4 5 10.5 2 1 .27 3,252.9 Threespine sticklcback 6.272 A.067.6 10.519 16,502.7 84.537 137,801.2 22.258 37,755.5 62,723 119,235.3 32,609 55,325.9 2,202 4,132.6 14 0.3 28 3.8 22 9.5 06 09.2 222,833 220,510.0 Troueoerch 713 616.1 21 !14.3 51 256.2 163 1,213.3 1.322 12,252.9 623 3,505.0 960 6,987.5 22 5.0 83 429.4 10 722. 33 291.1 3 98 33~y M8. 43.. 4 7 m79 2S.81.vallee 25. 1,232.1 7 1,702.4 748.3 37 3.449.4'nthte hats 3,2,6 37,503,9 266 2,392.2 113 2,646.2 .26 052.3 2 1,002.3 5 925.5 2 3,214.2 2,003 43,047?2 AIte poreh 2,834 59,793.7 679 7,229.1. 045 20,032. 416 42,028.0 506 59,098.1 %6 1,456.7 2 1,314.9 179 2,130.4 042 493.2 720 32,742 7 5,63 )19,329.5 Whte seter 1 603.9 9 415.21 2 53".8 062.0 2 263.0 64 03,922.1.
| |
| 2 1,985.6 22 3,235.5 2 14I,309.9 22 2.630.u 3 2,167.2 12A 63,2282.9-ellot oer 213 5,299.7 12 1. 2 16 2,030.9 20 2,767.5 8,149 20,972.4 72 261.7 231 6.244.5 196 ?22,94.3 90 24,00.7 70 7,029.o 623 26.808.3 3,222 4 13,57.2 Total 42,595 1,783.206.2 16.646 87,854 410,974.8 25,014 255,030.1 88,712. 633,868.1 42.847 215.935.8 13,392 3227.262.7 33,700 909,022.1 31.570 95,707.3 246 5.986.5 558 12,343.0A 2.32 12.218.139.5 424.183 6.357.647.0
| |
| 'Includes tessel2464d and Johnny darters, previously considered as subspecies and reported under the vnae of Johnny darter in. earlier Nine Mile Point Studies.T
| |
| * troce.DOa..a gee specafn, weight not available.
| |
| 0 Table H-15 Length Frequency of Fish Impinged at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Alewife LemlWt Range-momJAN FE MAR APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 31- 40 fte 29 ,1- 50 129 63 51- 60 3 1 116 119 2 38 61- 70 1 3 9 23 38 2 11, 58 1 ? 77 71- 80 2 5 10 84 193 7 1 8 1 30 11- 90 4 11 76 201 29 1 1 8 2 27 74 62 ,4 2 2 Ii0 10 30 34 3 C'Ill- 120 6 5 8 6 2 121- 130 1 2 1 4 1 18 131- 110 1 2 1 i 07 2 1 26 1 1 i 53 37 67 3 1 1 15 161- 170 1 2 210 139 231 44 10 14 171- 180 1 312 150 336 96 21 2 3 44 181- 190 1 168 68 152 57 16 3 2 "1('nn 3..7 14 33 12 47 201- 210 2 1 7 2 1 25 211- 220 1 1 1 2 221- 250 1 ba 5.S II7 L--
| |
| Table H-16 Length Frequency of Fish Impinged at James A.Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Rainbow Smelt FitzPatrick Length Range (601 , 'Am, IAR APR MAY JUH JNY AUX SSE OCT Snvf nr 41- 2 23 7 1 1 4 133 14 S 51-6 (.Or .33 20 27 4 39 377 8 5 127 61- 70 139 $9 51 f0 48 120 22 2 162 10 5 15?71- 80 125 91 53 77 139 201 35 1 17 2 7 155 81- 90 94 q3 36 59 210 148 46 9 14 4 9S 91' 10 l 2 6t7 541 26 011 23 10 6 3 1 13 7 7 18 Hi 8 111- 120 1Z A 4 2 3 6 5 16 121- 130 42 23 14 3 10 8 3 6 5 1 50 131- 140 118 29 34 18 53 28 2 1 6 1 1 102 41 1- 150 _i2 40 39 35 74 42 2 8 58 51- TO- 63 34 58 53 104 33 2 2 10 2 29 161- 170 40 17 36 36 6- 25 1 2 4 2 21 171- 180 21 19 20 29 q1 11 1 3 1 1 8 131- 190 16 7 13 12 9 7 1 1 7 19...,, 7 2 2 2 1 2 i 2 3 2 -I 2 1 211- 220 2 i 1 2 i 221- 230 3 1 1 231-. 240 1 1 1 1 241- 250 2 251- 260 1 261- 270 271- 280 1 S 0 Table H-17 Length Frequency of Fish Impinged at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Smallmouth Bass Length Range (ri) JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 41- 50 -'7 51- 60 9 6 61- 70 4 13 1 8 71- 80 13 1 8ý1'- go 2 9 91- 500 1Ol- II 111- 120 1 121- 130 131- 140 141- 150 151- 1-60 161- 170 171- 180 181- 190 191- 200 201- 210 1 1 211- 220 1 221- 230 231- 240 2 241- 250 2 251- 260 1 1 2 1 261- 270 2 2 271= 280 231- 290 1 3 0 -g 2 1 2 1 1 1- 10 22 1 4 3117 320 6 311- 330 3 331- 340 2 2 1 3 351- 360 6 361- 370 1 3 3 371- 380 2 381- 390 1 5_191- 2 6 4.01- .410 i 1 5 411- 420 1 1 3 3 421- 430 431- 440 1 451- 470.71- 480 481- 490 1 491- 50 .0 501- 510 511- 520 521- 530 531- 5't0 561- 550_ 560 561- 570I T W S i 0 S (A S aL W 5.m 0m*,--.*f-, .~ p.-..........
| |
| i Table H-18 Length Frequency of Fish Impinged at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dee, 1978 Threespine Stickleback Length Range i (MM) LJAN FEB MAR-- APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV .DEC Z.- Zb 27- 28 29- 30 33- 34, 35- .36 1 37- 382.39- 40 2 3 1 41- 42 12 a 2 5 1 43- 44 16 15 6 7 2 1 1 1 45- 46 64 50 .19 33 17 6 5 2 47- 48 69 62 48 45 36 15 5. 1 5 W4- 50 89 98 94 80 51 31 23 51Z- 52 114 140 153 139 119 62 39 53- 54 90 140 144 146 144 104 39 4 55-. 56 .96 159 185 170 207 ?146 71 57- 58 49 90 108 115 162 158 53 59- 60 6 90 s-47 94 138 168 42 61- 62 22 30 36 62 121 152 44 63- 64 6 23 13 34 75 75 16 65- 66 16 8 16 20 44 .50 14 67- 68 13 7 8 6 33 22 8 7__ 70 6 7; ;3 1.A __71- 72 3 3 5 7 10 15 4 73- 74 1 3 1 9 4 9 2 75- 76 2 2 3 4 4 5 1 77- 78 1 1 3 79- 80 1 ]81- g2 12. 1 83- 84 1.H 0 3 a S 0 S 0 5.0 SI Table H-19 Length Frequency of Fish Impinged at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 White Perch (i 1 Length Range:(AF) .S. rft; V, AAPR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT tOV DEC 21- 311-1 -,0"7- 60 7z 3 , 3 1 12 1 1-- 81 1÷ 12 33 32 21 41 2 4 13- 9o 5 64 N9 2 1 36 CI- M5 0) , 35 46 19 24 -4 Z 121- 11 36 1 10 25 1 1 Ii 1 I ." 4 "4 5 1.1:'1- 133 2 1 1 1 131- 1.0 1 1Iý -!60 1I I.!- 171 2 21- 1 t. 1 4 II- 190 1 3 6 19 -I,9 6 Hi. 2 110Pl. 1 k s 71.'2l- 1 2 -1 2 I0 6 1 5 1-2 30 1 7. 6. 14 1 8 5 231- 240 3 15 18 1 520 4 12 16 __9 25-260 3 2 9 1 261- 270 1 3 13 1 271- 230 3 5 2 2U1- 290.Z.u -30 g , 1 301- 310 2 311- 320 1 1 321- 330 331- 340 1 S 0 0m.. .. .. ....C-S ~ --S
| |
| .-- .......Table H-20 Length Frequency of Fish Impinged at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Jan-Dec 1978 Yellow Perch Length Range (Mo) JAN FER MAR APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 41- 50 1 51- 60 1 1 38 1 1 61- 70" 18 1 265 15 2 6 71- 80 26 1 54 3. 5 2 15 81- 90 25 1 1 3 7 3 14 91- 10o 19 1 3 10 101- 110 ee I 8 1 4 111: 120 23 3 3 34 121- 130 1 2 3 2 11 131- 140 2 4 4 1 16-r, 1 1 1 .3 1 151- 160 "1 4 1 11 161- 170 1 1 1 2 1 5 171- 180 1 1 3 1 7 181- 190 1 1 3 5 2 191- ;an 1 2 1 1 201- 210. 1 2 1 4 211- 220 1 1 3 1 1 221- 230 1 1 4 2 231- 240 1 1 4 241- 25D 12 2 _____________
| |
| 251- 260 4 1 4 261- 270 1 2 271- 280 3 281- 290 1 1 1_ 1 1 311- 310 311- 3201 S a 5.0 S S 0 5.S S a.I S 0 Table H-21 Age Class Distribution of Rainbow Smelt Impinged during Winter (Jan-Mar)at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Male Total Length (mm)Fema 1 e Total Length (mm)Sexes Combined*Total Length (mm)Mean Range Age Class 0 I I1I'III IV No. Mean 0 -7.2 76.0 Range No. Mean Range No.-0 -0 74-78 1 125.0 6 82.5 60-125 5 141.0 122-1 60 0 (A).5-5 151.6 120-173 1 231.0 -4 187.5 180-197 0 --9 120.0 77-160 9 167.6 120-197 1 231.0 -*Includes fish of undetermined sex S 2.a S S 4 S S S S 5.f -.........S-, -t Table 1H-22 Age Class Distribution of Rainbow Smelt during Spring (Apr-Jun)at James A. FitzPatrick.Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Mal e Total Length (mm)Age Class No. Mean Range 0 0 --I 7 114.9 86-147 II 6 163.7 139-1.85 IIl 1 179.0 -IV 0 --V 0 --VI 1 221.0 -*Includes fish of undetermined sex No.0 3 5 1 0 0 Femal e Total Length (mm)Mean Range 104.3 84-132 165.6 135-181 185.0 -175.0 No.0 13 11 2 1 0 1 Sexes Combined*Total Length (mm)Mean Range 105.6 82-147 164.6 135-185 182.0 179-185 175.0 -221.0'-I'S 0 0 I S*1 4 5.S S a.S S i 2 Table H-23 Age Class Distribution of Alewife Impinged during Summer (Jul-Sep)at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Age Class 0 I II Ill IV No.0 1.0 0 Mal e Total Length (mm)Mean Range 107.0 203.0 Female Total. Length (mm)Mean Range No.0 5 2 3 115.0 163.6 174.5 189.0 91 -189 169-180 171-202 No.6 6 7 3 3 Sexes Combined*Total Length (mm)Mean Range 58.2 53-65 101.3 87-115 161.7 91-203 177.3 169-183 189.0 171-202.6 0 i 2 0 0 p S S S 0.0 2*Includes fish of undetemined sex Table 1-24 Age Class Distribution of Alewife and Rainbow Smelt impinged during Fall (Oct-Dec)at James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plnat, 1978 ALEWIFE Age Class No.0 0 I 0 II 0 IIl 3 Mal e Total Length (im)Mean Range No.--1 182.0 176-189 7 Fema I e Total Length (mm)Mean Range No.78.0 -13 132.0 -1 184.0 -1 189.7 173-209 10 Sexes Combined*Total Length (mm)Mean Range 70.9 55-110 132.0 -184.0 -187.4 173-209-J RAINBOW SMELT Mal e Total Length (mm)Mean Range Female Total Length (m)No. Mean Range 0 7 F a 3 Age Class No.0 0 I 4 II 1 III 0 IV 0 144.3 174.0 128-164 0 -.4 171.3 4 203.0 2 234.0 162-186 170-225 228-240 No.5 9 5 4 2 Sexes Combined*Total Length (mm)Mean Range 84.4 77-90 133.1 107-164 171.8 162-186 203.0 170-225 234.0 228-240*Includes fish of undetermined sex Table H-25 Fecundity of Selected Fish Species Collected in James A. FitzPatrick Impingement Samples during 1978 Species White Perch Smallmouth bass Total*Length 2(MM)205 205-213 217 224 234 236 242 246 253 255 259 264 275 282 286 288 291 301 305 209 212 334 339 361 361 366 373 392 411 412 496-Weight 151.3 159..6 161.0 188.6 194.0 232.7 250.3 261.0 265.2 298.8 285.3 297.0 308.7 354.6 442.0 431.3 415.3 398.8 462.3 411.6 405.3 445.9 545.9 603.2 734.2 692.8 589.9 684.2 1033.9 1093.3 1050.3 831.8 Yolk E gs (no.3 56,972 53,868 62,032 53,400 176,840 120,740 109,849 127,648 267,368 35,413 62,860 221,898 143,537 69,388 246,447 131,757 197,308 166,279 197,168 149,694 5,285 7,574 10,936 7,209 15,999 11,247 13,394 15,017 33,791 27,018 11,344 7,838 Species Rainbow smelt Yellow perch Total Length Weight 133 11.3 134 16.5 135 9.9 137 16.1 139 15.5 139 16.8 141 18.3 142 15.4 143 11.5 144 18.7 151 22.5 153 23.7 155 19.1 158 25.0 159 27.3 161 19.5 162 29.2 172 32.8 180 39.5 185 40.7 186 90.8 187 42.8 191 39.2 208 72.7 224 77.7 118 63.9 151 227.1 199 102.1 255 289.9 Yolk E gs (no.?7,099 12 ,775 7,452 10,964 6,054 10,843 11,672 8,703 9,153 9,025 15,916 15,500 16,140 19,776 19,300 11,207 17,107 22,441 23,850 26,051 21,560 20,931 26,714 30,663 24,500 10,599 41,013 14,118 54,684 p ,0 S (0*S p-~
| |
| APPENDIX J ENTRAINMENT AND VIABILITY , James A. FitzPatrick
| |
| -Phytoplankton
| |
| * -Zooplankton science services division
| |
| .... ,.,,,,i, Table J-l (Page 1 of 2)Chlorophyll a Concentration*
| |
| in Whole Water Collections after 7-Hr Incubation Period, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 197,6 Intake Date Time I Ter"C) AT U 0 U S 0 0.16 Jan 16 Jan 24 Jan 24 Jan 06 Feb 06 Feb 20 Feb 20 Feb 06 Mar 06 Mar 20 Mar 20 Mar 04 Apr 04 Apr 18 Apr 18 Apr 10 May 10 May 24 May 24 May 17 Jun 17 Jun 28 Jun 1155 2100 1045 2032 1055 2040 1035 2035 1035 2035 1035 2005 1040 1940 1035 2120 1030 2045 1310 2135 0.8 19.8 0.8 19.8 0.9 21.0 2.4 21.1 1.7 16.8 1.3 16.9 0.8 17.5 0.9 17.5 0.3 21.9 1.6 21.0 1.4 18.3 1.2 18.6 2.0 15.0 2.6 15.6 2.9 18.4 Intake .Discharge 0/I 3* Simulation 3° S/I .2 Simulation 2" S/I Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.EE. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio 1.52 0.03 1.34 0.20 0.88 1.81 0.15 1.19 1.38 0.06 0.91 1.03 0.34 1.40 0.14 1.36 1.26 0.17 1.22 1.66 0.17 1.61 1.25 0.11 1.14 0.04 0.91 1.27 0.22 1.02 1.16 0.02 0.93 1.31 0.09 1.20 0.19 0.92 1.61 0.51 1.23 1.22 0.04 0.93 0.91 0.19 0.80 0.17 0.88 0.87 0.11 0.96 0.99 0.15 1.09 1.29 0.66 1.06 0.09 0.82 0.76 0.00. .0.59 0.85 0.05 0.66 0.47 0.13 0.38 0.04 0.81 0.47 0.09 1O00 0.32 0.15 0.68 0.59 0.13 0.93 0.30 1.58 0.76 0.13 1.29 0.78 0.15 1.32 1.25 0.07 1.31 0.00 1.05 1.06 0.09 0.85 1.25 0.11 1.00 1.52 0.09 0.80 0.63 0.53 1.39 0.04 0.91 1.25 0.24 0.82 6.07 1.09 5.58 0.83 0.92 5.30 0.32 0.87 5.78 0.12 0.95 3.69 1.00 4.09 0.77 1.11 4.92 0.11 1.33 4.98 0.00 1.35 7.91 0.38 5.18 5.08 0.65 7.19 0.19 0.91 5.43 0.14 0.69 6.39 0.62 5.42 0.45 0.85 6.49 1.79 1.02 6.44 0.46 1.01 2.38 0.19 2.70 0.09 1.13 2.66 0.17 1.12 2.43 0.11 1.02 2.59 0.19 2.95 0.38 1.14 2.66 0.00 1.03 2.58 0.13 1.00 12.23 0.59 12.47 0.88 1.02 11.57 0.78 0.95 11.78 0.03 0.96 13.72 0.48 14.07 0.56 1.03 14.58 0.06 1.06 12.79 0.24 0.93 9.52 0.34 9.22 0.16 0.97 9.06 0.62 .95* 11.03 0.06 1.16t 9.24 1.60 8.32 0.13 0.90 9.43 0.00 1.02 8.44 1.97 0.91 6.01 0.03 4.78 0.29 0.80 5.21 1.15 0.87 4.94 1.15 0.82 2.09 1.02 4.86 0.48 2.33 4.73 0.08 2.26 4.19 0.24 2.00 5.07 0.64 2.89 0.06 0.57 7.03 0.46 1.39t 6.46 0.05 1.271 7.32 0.06 3.63 0.27 0.50 5.24 1.02 0.72 5.00 1.85 0.68 4.1 5.3 7.9 15.8 8.4 15.5 8.6 16.0 9.7 16.2 1130 11.9 13.7 2115 12.2 14.3 1400 16.4 16.2 28 Jun 2220 16.3 16.2*Nlcrograms/liter t Samples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated Table J-1 (Page 2 of 2)Intake Tamp Intake Discharge 0/I Date Time (°Ci AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio 3' SimulatLog 3'S/I Mean S.E. Ratio 2.25 0.11 11.26t 2* Simulation 2' S/I Mean S.E. Ratio 1.26 0.89 ,0.76t 0 C 5 C 0 I S*1 4 S.S S a.S 5.12 Jul 1035 13 Jul 2145 26 Jul 1250 26 Jul 2145 09 Aug 1115 09 Aug 2135 23 Aug 1155 23 Aug 2100 14 Sep 1055 14 Sep 2031 26 Sep 1051 26 Sep 2030 10 Oct 1030 10 Oct 2035 25 Oct 1035 25 Oct 2028 07 Nov 1140 07 Nov 2045 28 Nov 1000 28 Nov 2028 12 Dec 1105 13 Dec 2109 29 Dec 1100 29 Dec 2110*Micrograms/litei 19.6 16.3 1.79 18.8 16.0 1.74 22.7 14.5 2.14 21.9 15.5 0.96 22.6 14.7 4.38 22.5 15.0 3.71 23.6 12.5 3.84 24.6 12.4 3.64 5.8 10.8 0.61 5.3 10.8 0.61 13.9 0.5 7.35 14.8 0.6 4.91 14.2 0.4 4.17 14.6 0.2 4.01 11.8 0.4 2.93 12.0 0.4 2.41 11.3 1.4 4.99 11.4 1.5 3.86 7.3 0.1 2.57 6.1 0.4 1.88 4.0 11.6 2.78 2.2 12.4 3.64 1.8 15.6 2.37 2.6 16.5 2.94 0.24 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.67 0.64 0.77 0.06 0.06 0.34 0.10 0.17 0.11 0.27 0.05 0.43 0.21 0.38 0.07 0.42 0.04 0.23 0.40 1.39 0.27 0.78 1.90 0.08 1.09 1.79. 0.24 0.84 0.80 0.16 0.83 4.14 0.24 0.95 3.58 0.38 0.96 4.58 0.17 1.19 4.11 0.24 1.13 0.86 0.19 1.41 0.82 0.02 1.34 7.08 0.14 0.96 4.08 0.54 0.83 3.93 0.14 0.94 3.58 0.22 0.89 3.78 1.04 1.29 2.45 0.34 1.02 4.31 0,20 0.86 4.86 0.20 1.26 2.32 0.55 0.90 2.55 0.32 1.36 2.57 0.04 0.92 3.53 1.85 0.97 2.71 0.17 1.14 2.84 0.04 0.97 1.90 0.14 1.23 0.00 2.51 0.21 4.22 0.70 5.74 0.47 3.64 0.57 0.97 0.17 0.74 0.02 7.28 0.34 5.21 0.34 3.28 0.08 2.80 0.08 4.09 1,31 2.36 0.72 7.26 0.05 3.70 0.30 2.70 0.25 2.55 0.40 2.83 0.09 4.09 0.65 2.54 1.81 3.77 1,30 0.89 1.28 0.57t 1.14 1.49 1.00 1.59 1.21 0.99 1.06 0.79 0.70 1.40 0.98 1.45 0.96 1.05 1.36 1.02 1.12 1.07 1.28 2.70 0.94 2.83 7.83 5.11 4.41 0.70 0.53 7.64 4.64 3.72 3.58 3.58 2.43 4.64 2.43 2.15 1.65 2.77 4.21 3.61 3.94 0.08 1.26 0.03 0.98 0'64 .O.6 5 W 0.67 2.11 0.50 1.33 1.21 1.21 0.49 1.15 0.02 0.87 0.70 1.04 0.17 0.95 0.46 0.89 0.48 0.89 0.42 1.22 0.03 1.01 0.08 0.93 2.33 0.63 0.21 0.84 0.17 0.88 0.11 1.00 0.77 1.16 0.27 1.52 1,60 1,34 0.99 0.11 0657 1.77 0.06 1.02 tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated---I ~ ~2 2~.m 2:.-.> L~~j 271*..........................................................
| |
| ~
| |
| Table 3-2 (Page 1 of 2)Chlorophyll a Concentration*
| |
| in Whole Water Collections after 24-Hr Incubation Period, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Intake Date Tim Teap Intake Disclppe D/1 3° Simulation 39 S/I 2 q Simulaton 20 S/I.(°C) AT Mean S.E. S.E. Rtio en RatRo Mtn .E. Rtio S*5.01 0*S 5.S S O!16 Jan 1155 0.8 16 Jan 2100 0.8 24 Jan 1045 0.9 24 Jan 2032 2.4 06 Feb 1055 1.7 06 Feb 2040 1.3 20 Feb 1035 0.8 20 Feb 2035 0.9 06 Mar 1035 0.3 06 Mar 2035 1.6 20 Mar 1035 1.4 20 Mar 2005 1.2 04 Apr 1040 2.0 04 Apr 1940 2.6 18 Apr 1035 2.9 18 Apr 2120 4.1 10 May 1030 7.9 10 May 2045 8.4 24 May 1310 8.6 24 May 2135 9.7 17 Jun 1130 11.9 17 Jun 2115 12.2 28 Jun 1400 16.4 28 Jun 2220 16.3.19.8 19.8 21.0 21.1 16.8 16.9 17.5 17.5 21.9 21.0 18.3 18.6 15.0 15.6 18.4 5.3 15.8 15.5 16.0 16.2 13.7 14.3 16.2 16.2 1.35 0.03 1.29 0.26* 1.35 0.03 1.15 0.06 1.40 0.09 1.12 0.02 1.12 0.02 1.10 0.09 0.76 0.09 0.64 0.34 0.66 0.07 0.55 0.04 0.82 0.15 0.97 0.17 0.42 0.21 0.59 0.13 1.37 0.06 1.73 0.09 1.08 0.15 0.74 0.19 6.45 0.28 6.69 0.28 7.33 0.12 5.89 0.76 9.05 0.03 8.23 0.38 9.67 0.59 10.90 1.29 2.77 0.28 3.16 0.25 2.91 0.04 2.55 0.23 12.10 0.73 19.20 7.08 15.28 0.86 12.66 1.29 9.65 0.59 7.86 0.59 8.63 1,11 8.57 0.68 5.74 0.35 4.41 0.30 5.32 0.14 4.76 0.06 4.30 0.67 2.54 0.03 5.26 0.40 3.12 0.08 0.96 0.89 0.03 0.85 1.12 0.15 0.80 1.35 0.09 0.98 1.08 0.03 0.84 1.06 0.05 0.83 0.76 0.00 1.18 1.16 0.15 1.4.0 0.51 0.13 1.26 1.54 0.06 0.69 1.46 0.24 1.04 6.81 0.40 0.80 6.57 0.40 0.91 9.03 0.38 1.13 9.14 0.70 1.14 3.48 0.07 0.88 3.31 0.32 1.59 11.24 0.08 0.83 13.75 3.34 0.81 10.45 0.96 0.99 10.45 0.00 0.77 5.05 0.35 0.89 4.03 0.03 0.59 5.87 0.16 0.59 4.36 0.30 0.66 0.83 0.96 0.96 1.39 1.15 1.41 1.21 1.12 1.35 1.06 0.90 1.00 0.95 1.26 1.14 0.93 0.90 1.08t 1.21 0.88 0.76 1.37t 0.83 1.12 0.20 1.32 0.06 1.42 0.07 1.14 0.04 0.72 0.30 0.33 0.23 0.70 0.15 0.47 0.26 1.48 0.17 1.26 0.00 7.05 0.24 7.69 0.64 8.60 0.54 14.02 1.52 3.23 0.19 2.13 0.15 4.75 4.65 15.22 0.37 11.18 1.08 9.43 0.43 4.57 0.30 3.13 1.05 4.65. 1.18 3.96 0.54 0.83 0.98 1.01 1.02 0.95 0.50 0.85 1.12 1.08 1.17 1.09 1.05 0.95 1.45 1.17 0.73 0.39 1.00 1.16t 1.09 0.80 0.59 1.08t 0.75*Nicrogras/11tar tSamples taken in actual,'discharge plume rather than simulated Table J-2 (Page 2 of 2)Intake Temp Date Time (°C Intake Discharge 0/I 39 Simulation 39S/I 2" Stmuant 2" S/I AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio Nean S.E. Ratio 12 Jul 1035 13 Jul 2145 26 Jul 1250 26 Jul 2145 09 Aug 1115 09 Aug 2135 23 Aug 1155 23 Aug 2100 14 Sep 1055 14 Sep 2031 26 Sep 1051 26 Sep 2030 10 Oct 1030 10 Oct 2035 25 Oct 1035 25 Oct 2028 07 Nov 1140 07 Nov 2045 28 Nov 1000 28 Nov 2028 12 Dec 1105 13 Dec 2109 29 Dec 1100 29 Dec 2110 19.6 18.8 22.7 21.9 22.6 22.5 23.6 24.6 5.8 5.3 13.9 14.8 14.2 14.6 11.8 12.0 11.3 11.4 7.3 6.1 4.0 2.2 1.8 2.6 16.3 2.75 0.40 16.0 2.56 0.16 14.5. 2.11 0.13 15.5 1.04 0.08 14.7 4.14 0.35 15.0 6.09 0.43 12.5 5.11 0.17 12.4 1'4.54 0.27 10.8 0.59 0.04 10.8 0.91 0.15 0.5 6.74 0.40 0.6 4.51 0.17 0.4 4.49 0.22 0.2 3.58 0.11 0.4 3.56 0.36 0.4 1.94 0.25 1.4 5.61 0.70 1.5 4.06 1.06 0.1 2.47 0.49 0.4 2.11 0.59 11.6 3.61 0.19 12.4 2.36 1.16 15.6 1.77 0.37 16.5 3.11 0.17 2.22 0.35 0.81 1.36 0.72 0.53 1.82 0.22 0.86 0.88 0.08 0.85 1.95 0.24 0.47 4.30 0.72 0.71 4.24 0.50 0.83 4.91 0.17 1.08 0.41 0.11 0.69 0.49 0.07 0.54 3.81' 0.00 0.57 4.11 0.37 0.91 3.95 0.16 0.88 3.15 0.00 0.88 2.09 0.11 0.59 2.49 0.13 1.28 4.38 0.88 0.78 5.69 0.08 1.40 2.34 0.23 0.95 2.41 0.26 1.14 3.15 0.75 0.87 3.65 1.01 1.55 1.17 0.10 0.66 2.31 0.44 0.74 2.24 0.32 0.81t 1.98 0.43 0.77 2.16 0.24 1.02 1.23 0.00 1.18 1.45 0.22 0.35t 6.57 0.11 1.08 5.14 0.27 1.01 4.84 0.10 1.07 0.80 0.04 1.36 0.24 0.14 0.26 6.14 0.13 0.91 3.97 0.10 0.88 3.69 0.06 0.82 2.72 0.48 0.76 4.58 0.32 1.29 2.60 0.15 1.34 4.93 1.18 0.88 6.14 0.13 1.51 2.37 0.09 0.96 2.85 0.53 1.35 3.82 0.35 1.06 5.45 0.72 2.31 4.17 1.50 2.36 2.27 0.13 0.73 1.39 0.00 0.51t 2.06 0.24 0.80 2.51 0.80 1.19 1.34 0.27 1.29 1.58 0.19 0.3 8t 6.57 0.11 1.08 5.01 0.07 0.98 4.94 0.07 1.09 1.14 0.59 1.93 0.68 0.05 0.75 7.14 0.40 1.06 4.48 0.07 0.99 3.74 0.59 0.83 3.77 0.35 1.05 3.84 0.13 1.08 2.66 0.00 1.37 4.21 0.61 0.75 5.69 0.28 1.40 2.89 0.32 1.17 2.11 0.09 1.00 1.58 1.37 0.44 4.09 0.57 1.73 1.30 0.03 0.73 1.54 0.41 0.50 S 0 0 0 0*Micrograms/iIter
| |
| **~Sample broken during shipment*tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated a.
| |
| ----.-.'-' .........
| |
| --..Table J-3 (Page 1 of 2)Chlorophyll a Concentration*
| |
| in Whole Water Collections after 48-Hr Incubation Period James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Intake Date Time Temp Intake .,Discharge D/I 3° Simulation 30 S/1 2' Simulation 20 S/I (VC) AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio 16 Jan 1155 16 Jan 2100 24 Jan 1045 24 Jan 2032 06 Feb 1055 06 Feb 2040 20 Feb 1035 20 Feb 2035 06 Mar 1035 06 Mar 2035 20 Mar 1035 20 Mar 2005 04 Apr 1040.04 Apr 1940 18 Apr 1035 18 Apr. 2120 10 May 1030 10 May 2045 24 May 1310 24 May 2135 17 Jun 1130 17 Jun 2115 28 Jun 1400 28 Jun 2220 0.8 0.8 0.9 2.4 1.7.1.3 0.8 0.9 0.3 1.6 1.4 1.2.2.0 2.6 2.9 4.1 7.9 8.4 8.6 9.7 11.9 19.8 1.63 0.14 1.69 0.03 1.04 1.66 19.8 1.49 0.12 1.34 0.20 0.90 0.45 21.0 0.95 0.23 1.20 0.06 1.26 1.29 21.1 1.37 0.11 1.48 0.17 1.08 1.37 16.8 0.80 0.00 0.76 0.17 0.95 0.76 16.9 0.97 0.08 0.70 0.36 0.72 1.01 17.5 0.68 0.05 0.54 0.44 0.79 1.04 17.5 0.61 0.02 0.38 0.00 0.62 0.55 21.9 1.33 0.02 1.35 0.04 1.02 1.90 21.0 1.35 0.09 1.05 0.00 0.78 1.16 18.3 6.69 0.84 6.61 0.12 0.99 6.97 18.6 6.61 0.52 6.33 0.24 0.96 7.65 15.0 10.76 0.13 11.00 1.66 1.02 11.32 15.6 9.80 1.58 9.54 0.30 0.97 11.62 18.4 .4.32 0.40 3.06 0.15 0.71 4.98 5.3 3.31 0.15 2.96 0.30 0.89 2.64 15.8 10.63 0.16 12.58 1.05 1.18 11.40'15.5 3.03 0.45 4.97 4.87 1.64 12.63 16.0 8.94 0.56 8.29 0.16 0.93 10.94 16.2 6.75 4.04 6.04 1.97 0.89 9.40 13.7 4.97 0.27 3.98 0.24 0.80 4.38 0.06 1.02 1.29 0.35 0.30 0.80 0.11 1.36 1.16 0.02 1.00 1.14 0.04 0.95 0.86 0.04 1.04 0.82 0.11. 1.53 1.08 0.00 0.90 0.55 0.09 1.43 1.54 0.57 0.86 1.04 0.40 1.04 7.13 0.60 1.16 7.05 0.64 1.05 9.69 1.85 1.19 9.78 0.76 1.15 3.99 0.32 0.80 2.38 0.88 1.07 11.03 1.79 4.17 12.63 3.67' 1.32t 10.23 0.40 1.39 10.23 0.21 0.88 4.92 0.00 0.62 3.71 1.04 2.191 5.07 0.03 1.03 2.09 0.32 0.70 0.06 0.09 0.19 0.02 0.07 0.04 0.06 0.11* 0.64 0.24 0.40 0.27 0.49 0.02 0.46 4.09 0.31 1.48 0.38 0.51 0.48 0.11 0.79 0.54 1.22 0.83 1.08 0.85 1.59 0.90 1.16 0.77 1.07 1.07 0.90 1.00 0.92 0.72 1.04 4.17 1.1 4 0 1.52 0.99 0.69 I.9 4 0.70 C-4 a Z 12.2 14.3 16.4 16.2 16.3 16.2 5.40 0.06 2.62 0.32 2.99 0.11 3.37 0.11 2.11 0,13 1.87 0.32 0.62 3.36 0.8' 5.74 0.63 -3.07*Micrograms/liter tSamples taken In actual discharge plume rather than simulated Table J-3 (Page 2 of 2)IntakeIntake Discharge 0/I 3' Simulation 39 S/I 2* Simulation:
| |
| 2' S/I Date Time (1C AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio 1.951 0.67 12 Jul 13 Jul 26 Jul 26 Jul 09 Aug 09 Aug 23 Aug 23 Aug 14 Sep 14 Sep 26 Sep 26 Sep 10 Oct 10 Oct 25 Oct 25 Oct 07 Nov 07 Nov 28 Nov 28 Nov 12 Dec 13 Dec 29 Dec 29 Dec 1035 2145 1250 2145 1115 2135 1115 2100 1055 2031 1051 2030 1030 2035 1035 2028 1140 2045 1000 2028 1105 2109 1100 2110 19.6 16.3 2.01 18.8 16.0 1.58 22.7 14.5 2.16 21.9 15.5 0.83 22.6 14.7 3.15 22.5 15.0 4.62 23.6 12.5 2.84 24.6 12.4 3.68 5.8 10.8 0.72 5.3 10.8 1.12 13.9 0.5 6.11 14.8 0.6 3.67 14.2 0.4 4.83 14.6 0.2 3.61 11.8 0.4 4.54 12.0 0.4 1.79 11.3 1.4 4.34 11.4 1.5 5.16 7.3 0.1 2.05 6.1 0.4 1.92 4.0 11.6 3.47 2.2 12.4 3,04 1.8 15.6 3.97 2.6 16,5 2.71 0.14 1.66 0.16 0.83 0.08 1.04 0.03 0.66 0.83 2.38 0.08 1.10 0.08 0.94 0.30 1.13 0.11 3.63 0.11 1.15 0.13 3.66 0.72 0.79 0.17 3.71 0.37 1.31 0.54 4.91 0.37 1.33 0.21 0.70 0.28 0.97 0.11 0.70 0.03 0.63 0.90 6.35 0.74 1.04 0.07 3.84 0.17 1.05 0.24 4.17 0.43 0.86 0.14 3.85 0.06 1.07 0.87 2.87 0.34 0.63 0.99 1.11 1.01 0.62 0.08 5.79 1.18 1.33 0.35 5.19 0.53 1.01 0.28 1.60 0.00 0.78 0.28 2.34 0.53 1.22 0.48 2.11 1.04 0.61 0.32 2.08 0.32 0.68 0.10 3.24 0.44 0.82 0.04 2.87 0.67 1.06*1.95 1 0.67 1.77 0.11 2.19 0.86 1.07 0.22 1.55 0.05 4.62 0.35 2.97 0.03 3.67 0.27 0.85 0.13 0.45 0.35 6.84 0.30 3.57 0.17 3.66 0.78 3.45 0.57 4.16 0.45 2.95 0.34 4.41 0.76 4.59 0.33 2.58 0.09 2.13 0.23 4.35 0.08 2.84 0.76 4.44 1.24 3.84 0.37 0.971 1.36 1.12 1.85 1.01 1.74 1.29 1.50 0.49* e.38 1.00 3.90 1.05 3.07 1.00 3.74 1.18 0.72 0.40 0.49 1.12 6.95 0.97 4.44 0.76 4.41 0.96 3.66 0.92 3.25 1.65 2.57 1.02 4.46 0.89 1.40 1.26 1.82 1.11 1.98 1.25 5.08 0.93 2.40 1.12 4.81 1.42 2.74 0.19. 0.a8t 0.62 1.17 0.08 0.81 0.06 1.81 0.08 0.76t 0.06 0.84 0.07 1.08 0.67 1.02 0.09 1.00 0.19 0.44 0.07 1.14 0.37 1.21 0.35 0.91 0.24 1.01 0.55 0.72 0.38 1.44 1.26 1.03 0.05 0.27 0.13 0.89 0.00 1.03 0.06 1.46 0.00 0.79 0.47 1.21 0.34 1.01 C.'i.0 0 p 0 OI 0p S s*aMpcroarrlste
| |
| .s ei tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated Table J-4 (Page 1 of 2)Chlorophyll a Concentration*
| |
| in Whole Water Collections after 72-Hr Incubation Period, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Intake Date Time Tep Intake Discharae 0/I 30 Simulation 30 S/I 20 Simulation 2* S/I (C) AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio0 0 16 Jan 1155 16 Jan 2100 24 Jan 1045 24 Jan 2032 06 Feb 1055 06 Feb 2040 20 Feb 1035 20 Feb 2035 06 Mar 1035 06 Mar 2035 20 Mar 1035 20 Mar 2005 04 Apr 1040 04 Apr 1940 18 Apr 1035 18 Apr 2120 10 May 1030 10 May 2045 24 May 1310 24 May 2135 17 Jun 1130 17 Jun 2115 28 Jun 1400 28 Jun 2220 0.8 0.8 0.9 2.4.1.7 1.3 0.8 0.9 0.3 1.6 1.4 1.2 2.0 2.6 2.9 4.1 7.9 8.4 19.8 19.8 21.0 21.1 16.8 16.9 17.5 17.5 21.9 21.0 18.3 18.6 15.0 1.18 0.32 0.95 0.32 1.26 0.00 1.58 0.15 1.06 0.47 1.04 0.11 0.99 0.15 0.70 0.11 1.88 0.07 1.44 0.05 7.25 0.20 5.29 1.12 8.81 0.16 1.58 0.09 1.29 0.15 1.11 0.28 1.31 0.13 1.25 0.28 0.85 0.05 0.91 0.15 0.38 0.17 1.50 0.02 0.72 0.21 6.89 0.96 6.69 0.36 8.49 0.27 1.34 1.49 0.06 1.36 1.18 0.09 0.88 1.43 0.1.0 0.83 1.54 0.02 1.18 0.74 0.19 0.82 1.12 0.02 0.92 0.70 0.32 0.54 0.59 0.25 0.80 1.52 0.26 0.50 1.16 0.19 0.95 7.41 1.08 1.26 6.45 0.44 0.96 8,41 1,52 1.14 8.71 0.11 0.86 3.65 0.19 0.82 2.95 0.04 0.94 18.96 0.48 1.07 15.92 1.34 1.26 8.97 1.39 0.59 9.06 0.43 0.95 3.93 0.09 0.79 4.14 0.72 0.88 4.49 1.02 1.00 1.98 0.64 1.26 1.24 1.13 0.97 0.70 1.08 0.71 0.84 0.81 0.81 1.02 1.22 0.95 0.85 1.06 1.11 1.18 1.07 1.34t 0.67 0.94 0.91 1 .9 5t 0.83 1.43 0.06 1.43 0.29 1.25 0.11 1.46 0.15 0.64 0.13 0.93 0.30 1.04 0.28 0.53 0.02 1.41 0.19 1.29 0.07 8.05 0,20 5.89 0.52 8.20 0.62 9.56 0.22 3.56 0.19 2.55 0.06 20.27 1.47 13.59 1.95 10.66 0.80 13.37 1.36 4.41 0.19 3.31 0.75 3.82 0.30 2.14 0.16 1.21 1.51 0.99 0.92 0.60 0.89 1.05 0.76 0.75 0.90 1,11 0.93 0.94 1.03 0.96 1.26 0.92 1.5 9 t 0.99 1.05 0.72 1 .66" 0.89 15.6 10.20 0.48 11.67 0.46 18.4 3.44 0.32 2.97 0.36 5.3 2.66 0.26 2.17 0.19 15.8 16.07 3.95 15.11 6.73 15.5 14.85 2.14 15.86 0.43 8.6 16.0 6.69 0.90 8.44 0.49 9.7 16.2 13.47 0.10 7.89 1.17 11.9 13.7 4.19 0.40 4.00 0.00 12.2 14.3 4.57 0.14 3.63 0.27 16.4' 16.2 2.30 0.80 2.03 0.37 16.3 16.2 2.40 0.00 2.40 0.16*Micrograms/1 iter tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated Table J-4 (Page 2 of 2)Intake Temrp Intake Discharge D/I 32 Simulation 3S/I 2- Simulation 2- S/I Date Time (C AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio 12 Jul 1035 19.6 16.3 1.79 0.13 1.82 0.22 1.02 1.61 0.11 0.90t 1.04 0.13 0.58t" 13 Jul 2145 18.8 16.0 1.52 0.40 2.06 0.30 1.36 1.98 0.11 1.30 1.74 0.41 1.14 26 Jul 1250 22.7 14.5 1.07 0.16 1.53 0.03 1.43 1.01 0.00 0.94 1.26 0.14 1.18 26 Jul 2145 21.9 15.5 0.64 0.11 0.72 0.08 1.13 0.62 0.19 0.97 0.56 0-.08 0.88 09 Aug 1115 22.6 14.7 4.22 0.48 4.27 0.27 1.01 1.69 0.19 0.40t 2.22 0.56 0.53t 09 Aug 2135 22.5 15.0 3.15 0.69 3.44 0.24 1.09 3.50 0.24 1.11 2.89 0.75 0.92 23 Aug 1155 23.6 12.5 3.27 0.20 3.54 0.60 1.08 3.51 0.04 1.07 3.77 0.30 1.15 23 Aug 2100 24.6 12.4 3.04 0.37 3.07 0.33 1.01 3.31 0.04 1.09 2.74 0.40 0.90.14 Sep 1055 5.8 10.8 0.53 0.11 0.68 0.22 1.28 0.49 0.11 0.92 0.78 0.19 1.47 14 Sep 2031 5.3 10.8 0.54 0.44 0.74 0.11 1.37 0.12 0.02 0.22 0.61 0.02 1.13 26 Sep 1051 13.9 0.5 6.24 0.43 5.01 0.07 0.80 5.74 0.53 0.92 6.31 0.17 1.01 26 Sep 2030 14.8 0.6 4.04 1.10 2.54 0.07 0.63 2.47 0.07 0.61 2.91 0.57 0.72 10 Oct 1030 14.2 0.4 4.41 0.08 3.93 0.35 0.89 2.86 0.03 0.65 3.61 0.46 0.82 10 Oct 2035 14.6 0.2 3.34 0.08 2.70 0.51 0.81 1.39 1.02 0.42 3.47 0.21 1.04 L 25 Oct 1035 11.8 0.4 2.43 0.03 3.38 0.34. 1.39 5.27 2.57 2.17 3.29 0.42 1.35 01 25 Oct 2028 12.0 0.4 2.49 0.09 2.81 0.24 1.13 2.76 0.53 1.11 2.87 0.21 1.15 07 Nov 1140 11.3 1.4 3.71 0.86 3.08 0.23 0.83 2.75 0.75 0.74 3.63 0.48 0.98 07 Nov 2045 11.4 1.5 5.64 0.93 4.91 0.20 0.87 5.09 0.63 0.90 5.29 0.73 0.94 28 Nov 1000 7.3 0.1 1.96 0.40 1.44 0.05 0.73 2.91 0.30 1.48 2.55 0.32 1.30 28 Nov 2028 6.1 0.4 2.03 0.30 2.43 0.15 1.20 1.69 0.26 0.83 2.74 0.17 1.35 12 Dec 1105 4.0 11.6 4.78 0.51 4.14 1.15 0.87 5.32 0.19 1.11 3.69 0.33 0.77 13 Dec 2109 2.2 12.4 3.80 0.04 3.16 0.60 0.83 3.48 0.36 0.92 3.64 0.28 0.96 29 Dec 1100 1.8 15.6 3.17 0.50 4.08 0.14 1.29 3.54 0.74 1.12 5.78 0.57 1.82 29 Dec 2110 2.6 16.5 2.94 0.07 2.54 0.60 0.86 2.67 0.40 0.91 3.00 0.20 1.20*Migrogrems/1itar.
| |
| S +/-Samples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated S S S_0 Table J-5 (Page 1 of 2)Phaeophytin a Concentration*
| |
| in Whole Water Collections after 7-Hr Incubation Period, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Intake, Date Time Tempo Intake Discharge D/I 3* Simulation 30 S/I 2* Simulation 2* S/I (oC) MT eMan S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean. S.E. Ratio ?eTan .E. Ratio 16 Jan 1155 16 Jan 2100 24 Jan 1045 24 Jan 2032 06 Feb 1055 06 Feb 2040 20 Feb 1035 20 Feb 2035 06 Mar 1035 06 Mar 2035 20 Mar 1035'20 Mar 2005 04 Apr 1040 04 Apr 1940 18 Apr 1035 18 Apr 2120 10 May 1030 10 May 2045 24 May 1310 24 May 2135 17 Jun 1130 17 Jun 2115 28 Jun 1400 28 Jun 2220 0.8 0.8 0.9 2.4 1.7 1.3 0.8 0.9 0.3 1.6 1.4 1.2 2.0 2.6 2.9 4.1 7.9 8.4 8.6 9.7 11. 9.12.2 16.4 16.3.19.8 1.19 0.03 0.76 0.26 19.8 1.62 0.47 1.00 0.22 21.0 0.46 0.03 0.59 0.06 21.1 0.23 0.01 0.50 0.21 16.8 0.17 0.07 0.15 0.05 S 0 i.0 16.9 0.37 0.27 17.5 0.62 0.09 17.5 0.42 0.19 21.9 0.10 0.00 21.0 0.10 0.00 18.3 0.51 0.41 18.6 0.85 0.75 15.0 <0.l0 0.00 15.6 -0.10 0.00 18.4 <0.10 0.00 5.3 <0.10 0.00 15.8 3.05 0.82 15.5 3.42 0.02 16.0 0.55 0.06 16.2 1.95 1.85 13.7 0.14 0.04 14.3 3.71 3.11 16.2 1.21 0.34 16.2 0.72 0.21<0. 10 0.00 0.66 0.08 0.25 0.15 0.10 0.00 0.85 0.75 0.54 0.44 1.52 1.22 2.10 2.00 0.32 0.02<0.10 0.00<0.10 0.00 1.03 0.66 2.17 0.54 0.52 0.09 1.53 1.43<0.10 0.00 0.11 0.01 1.75 0.20 1.56 0.23 0.64 1.12 0.62 1.29 1.28 0.45 2.17 0.42 0.88 <0.10 0.27 0.47 1.06 0.56 0.60 0.38 1.00 0.10 8.50 0.1o 1.06 0.41 1.79 0.31 21.00 <0.10 3.20 0.43 1.00 0.11 1.00 <0.10 0.34 1.69 0.63 1.20 0.06 0.48 0.07 0.23 0.00 0.05 0.13" 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.10 0.00 0.33 0.01 0.00 0.23 0.51 0.94 0.80 0.98 1.83 0.59 1.27 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.36 1.00 4.30 1.10 1.00 0.55 0.35 0.65 0.40 0.55 1.41 0.45 0.87 0.51 0.08 1.11 0.48 0.09 2.09<0.10 0.00 0.59 0.35 0.03 0.95 0.59 0.08 0.95 0.31 0.00 0.74 0.10 0.00 1.00 0.31 0.21 3.10 0.20 0.10 0.39 0.11 0.01 0.13 0.68 0.58 6.80<0.10 0.00 1.00 0.22 0.12 2.20 0.16 0.03 1.60 1.68 0.59 0.55 3.47 0.65 1.01<0.10 0.00 0.18t 1.39 1.29 0.71 0.89 0.79 6.36 0.93 0.13 0.25 1.16 0.95 0.96'2.93 2.83 4.07 0.95 0.242 %0.14 .0.441 0.78 1.60 0.24 0.82 0.71 0.57 0.47 4.07 0.03 0.57 0.25 0.15 1.45 0.75 0.18 0.62t 2.17 1.63 0.93 2.26*Micrograms/liter t Samples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated Table J-5 (Page 2 of 2)Intake Tea Date Time (°C Intake .tscharqe 0/1 3" Simulation 3S/I 2- Simulation 2' S/I AT Mean S.E. Mean SE. Ratio Mean S.E, Ratio Wean S.E. Ratio CD 0 Z 0 5.0 0.5, 5.12 Jul 13 Jul 26 Jul 26 Jul 09 Aug 09 Aug 23 Aug 23 Aug 14 Sep 14 Sep 26 Sep 26 Sep 10 Oct 10 Oct 25 Oct 25 Oct 07 Nov 07 Nov 28 Nov 28 Nov 12 Dec 13 Dec 29 Dec 1035 2145 1250 2145 1115 2135 1155 2100 1055 2031 1051 2030 1030 2035 1035 2028 1140 2045 1000 2028 1105 2109 1100 19.6 18.8 22.7'21.9 22.6 22.5 23.6 24.6 5.8 5.3 13.9 14.8 14.2 14.6 11.8 12.0 11.3'11.4 7.3 6.1 4.0 2.2 1.8 16.3 1.20 16.0 0.49 14.5 0.70 15.5 0.61 14.7 *1.96 15.0 1.54 12.5 0.81 12.4 0.66 10.8 0.19 10.8 0.29 0.5 0.67 0.6 0.59 0.4 1.13 0.2 0.97 0.4 1.28 0.4 0.68 1.4 0.65 1.5 2.07 0.1 Co0.10 0.4 1.43 11.6 0.88 12.4 1.32 15.6 0.15 0.36 0.56 0.35 0.47 0.00 0.70 0.09 1.43 0.00 0.72 0.06 1.03 0.08, 0.69 0.01 1.13 0.44 1.58 0.10 0.81 0.77 1.40 0.12 0.91 0.04 1.20 0.05 1.48 0.07 0.66 0.14 1.00 0.09 <0.10 0.00 0.53 0.19 <0,10 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.60 0.50 0.90 0.08 0.98 0.87 1.66 0.01 1.20 0.17 1.06 0.22 1.28 0.29 1.32 0.01 0.26 0.16 0.20 0.06 0.53 0.43 0.78 0.55 1.29 0.15 1.98 0.99 0.57 0.47 0.28 0.00 0.67 0.57 6.70 0.30 0.28 0.18 0.20 0.32 1.31 0.27 1.49 0.01 2.44 2.34 1.85 0.05 0,68 0.58 4.53 0.14 0.95 0.13 2.64 1.03 0.61 0.71 0.38 0.71 1.73 0.83 1.13 0.12 0.14 1.23 0.33 1.24 1.48 0.56 0.90 0.10 0.86 0.49 0.89 1,15 2.64 1.69 0.88 0.10 0.42 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.58 0.59 0.34 0.02 0.04 0.57 0.02 0.01 0.21 0.46 0.76 0.00 0.30 0.14 0.62 0.13 0.48 1.59 0.11 0.86 t 0.56 1.24 0.95 1.01 1.14 0.62 0.62 0.36t 1.13 1.12 3.38 1.02 1.67 1.71 1.21 0.63 0.23 0.48 0.32 1.84 0.53 0.56 0.81 1.10 1.30 1.53 0.91 0.44 0.60 1.32 0.91 0.15 2.17 0.42 3.59 4.90 0.73 0.62 1.82 1.31 1.25 2,00 2,55 11.27 0.83 2.44 .0.68 0.22 0.30 0.03 0.12 0.37 0.02 0.36 1.11 0.13 0.03 0.43 0.15 0.11 0.15 0.50 0.14 0.04 2.56 0.49 0.30 0.49 0.40 0.22 0.58 0.47 t 1.94 1.63 1.02 0.58 2.19 2.06 1.83 1.21 1.10 0.79 1.37 1.15 0.94 0.47 1.34 3.34 1.73 7.30 1.27 1.42 1,93 5.53 1.89 29 Dec 2110 2.6 16.5 0.36*Micrograms/liter.
| |
| tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated Table J-6 (Page 1 of 2) .Phaeophytin a Concentration*
| |
| in Whole Water Collections after 24-Hr Incubation Period, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Intake Date Time Temp Intake Discharge D/I 30 Simulation 30 S/I 20 Simulation 20 S/I (C) AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio 16 Jan 1155 0.8 19.8 0.82 0.05 0.62 0.37 0.76 0.36 0.11 0.44 0.71 0.26 0.87 16 Jan 2100 0.8 19.8 0.74 0.05 1.08 0.08 1.46 0.67 0.12 0.91 0.97 0.10 1.31 24 Jan 1045 0.9 21.0 0.46 0.11 0.44 0.13 0.96 0.39 0.12 0.85 0.49 0.02 1.07 24 Jan 2032 2.4 21..1 0.30 0.02 .0.42 0.10 1.40 0.30 0.03 1.00 0.33 0.03 1.10 06 Feb 1055 1.7 16.8 0.22 0.03 0.35 0.25 1.59 <0.10 0.00 0.45 0.31 0.21 1.41 06 Feb 2040 1.3 16.9 <0.10 0.00 0.11 0.01 1.10 <0.10 0.00 1.00 0.48 0.38 4.80 20 Feb 1035 0.8 17.5 0.29 0.19 0.49 0.05 1.69 <0.10 0.00 0.34 0.70 0.39 2.41 20 Feb 2035 0.9 17.5 0.73 0.27 0.62 0.16 0.85 0.62 0.13 0.85 0.66 0.23 0.90 06 Mar 1035 0.3 21.9 0.15 0.05 (0.10 0.00 0.67 <0.10 0.00 0.67 <0.10 0.00 0.67 06 Mar 2035 1.6 21.0 0.16 0.06 0.52 0.42 3.25 <0.10 0.00 0.63 <0.10 0.00 0.63 20 Mar 1035 1.4 18.3 0.25 0.15 0.35 0.03 1.40 0.20 0.10 0.80 0.24 0.07 0.96 20 Mar 2005 1.2 18.6 0.48 0.38 0.15 0.05 0.31 1.45 0.46 3.02 0.54 0.44 1.13 04 Apr 1040 2.0 15.0 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 04 Apr 1940 2.6 15.6 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 0.10 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 18 Apr 1035 2.9 18.4 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 0.13 0.03 1.30 <0.10 0.00 1.00 18 Apr 2120 4.1 5.3 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 0.41 0.30 4.10 10 May 1030 7.9 15.8 2.02 0.46 0.98 0.88 0.49 4.09 2.51 2.02 12.72 11.61 6.30 10 May 2045 8.4 15.5 4.54 0.41 .3.79 0.46 0.83 3.99 .1.98 0.88 3.12 1.03 0.69 24 May 1310 8.6 16.0 0.84 0.54 1.85 0.37 2.20 <0.10 0.00 0.12t 1.30 0.02 1.55ti N 24 May 2135 9.7 16.2 1.43 1.31 0.99 0.64 0.69 1.46 0.05 1.02 1.36 0.26 0.95 17 Jun 1130 11.9 13.7 0.36 0.26 0.77 0.40 2.14 0.73 0.22 2.03 0.40 0.30 1.11 17 Jun 2115 12.2 14.3 0.63 0.13 0.17 0.07 0.27 0.72 0018 1.14 1.76 1.25 2.79 28 Jun 1400 16.4 16.2 0.99 0.57 1.19 0.07 .1.20 1.73 0.44 1.75t 2.76 0.06 2.79t 28 Jun 2220 16.3 16.2 0.40 0.30 0.38 0.28 0.95 1.43 0.24 3.58 1.83 0.35 4.58*Micrograms/1itaer 1 tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated S Table J-6 (Page 2 of 2)Intake Temp ___Intake Discharge D/I Simultio 3S/I 2 Simulation 3- SSI Date Time (C) dT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E0 Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio 12 Jul 13 Jul 26 Jul 26 Jul 09 Aug 09 Aug 23 Aug 23 Aug 14 Sep 14 Sep 26 Sep 26 Sep 10 Oct 10 Oct 25 Oct 25 Oct 07 Nov 07 Nov 28 Nov 28 Nov 12 Dec 13 Dec 29 Dec 29 Dec 1035 19.6 2145 18.8 1250 22.7 2145 21.9 1115 22.6 2135 22.5 1155 23.6 2100 24.6 1055. 5.8 2031 5.3 1051 13.9 2030 14.8 1030 14.2 2035 14.6 1035 11.8 2028 12.0 1140 11.3 2045 11.4 1000 7.3 2028 6.1 1105 4.0 2109 2.2 1100 1.8 2110 2.6 16.3 1.05 16.0 0.75 14.5 0.90 15.5 0.51 14.7 1.66 15.0 2.44 12.5 0.88 12.4 0.91 10.8 0.16 10.8 <0.10 0.5 0.88 0.6 0.73 0.4 1.27 0.2 1.21 0.4 0.78 0.4 1.18 1.4 0.51 1.5 1.61 0.1 0.72 0.4 0.44 11.6 0.71 12.4 3.95 15.6 0.59 16.5 0.29 0.15 0.72 0.12 0.07 0.75 0.34 0.04 0.60 0.07 0.16 0.52 0.02 0.16 0.44 0.21 1.11 2.15 0.42 0.03 0.88 0.20 0.25 0.33 0.07 0.06 0.25 0.02 0.00 0.14 0.04 0.17 0.47'*0.00 0.31 0.64 0.25 0.14 1.34 0.33 0.45 0.94 0.02 0.30 1.24 0.36 0.33 0.63 0.32 0.41 1.16 0.88 1,46 <0.10 0.00 0.57 0.47 0.37 0.34 0.70 0.26 0.13 0.72 0.62 1.59 2.36 0.84 0.08 1.89 0.31 0.19 1.58 0.63 0.69 1.07 1.00 0.79 0.67 0.59 1.02 0.48 0.27 0.61.0.88 2.37 1.00 0.54 0.36 0.60 1.56 0.31 1.40 0.93 0.53 1.20 0.88 0.77 1.06 0.30 0.78 0.70 1.59 <0.10 0.53 0.57 2.27 1.33 0.06 <0.10 0.65 0.80 1.59 0.49 1.01 0.92 0.60 1.40 3.20 0.54 5.45 1.03 0.01 -1.02+ 0.84 0.25 0.80+0.06 1.05 0.81 0.12 1.08 0.23 0.66 0.69 0.30 0.77 0.06 0.94 0.18 0.10 0.35 0.31 0.37l+ 0.91 0.06 0.5e 1.01 0.97 2.22 0.56 0.91 0.44 0.61 0.88 0.11 1.00 0.45 0.66 0.53 0.40 0.58 0.09 1.94 <0.10 0.00 0.63 0.48 9.30 <0.10 0.00 1.00 0.70 1.36 0.89 0.26 1.01 0.06 1.05 0.71 0.02 0.97 0.08 0.24 1.10 0.03 0.87 0.17 0.58 0.66 0.56 0.55 0.00 0.13 0.41 0.31 0.53 0.06 0.48 0.52 0.40. 0.44 1.23 2.61 1.96 0.18 3.84 0.00 0.06 0.70 0.60 0.43 0.01 1.11 0.42 0.32 0.58 0.39 1.11 1.39 0.14 3.16 0.20 1.30 2.56 1.24 3.61 0.67 C.35 2.59 1.07 0.66 0.44 0.92 2.18 0.36 3.69 0.50 3.55 1.72 0,28 5.93 S 2.0 a 0 S 0 5.S 0.I S 0*Micrograms/liter
| |
| "*Sample broken during shipment+Samples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated.............
| |
| ~ .-
| |
| Table J-7 (Page.l of 2)Phaeophytin a Concentration*
| |
| in Whole Water Collections after 48-Hr Incubation Period, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Intake Date Tim Temp Intake Discharge 0/I 3* Simulation 3* S/I 2* Simulation 2* S/I (0 c) AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio. Mean S.E. Ratio M .Ratio 16 Jan 1155 0.8 19.8 0.76 0.25 0.66 0.01 0.87 0.65 0.01 0.86 1.06 0.46 1.39 16 Jan 2100 0.8 "19.8 0.96 0.29 1.14 0.08 1.19 2.82 1.26 2.94 2.34 1.54 2.44 24 Jan 1045 0.9 21.0 0.23 0.13 0.32 0.17 1.39 0.24 0.06 1.04 0.36 0.01 1.57 24 Jan 2032 2.4 21.1 0.42 0.01 0.44 0.08 1.05 0.23 0.13 0.55 0.55 0.12 1.31 06 Feb 1055 1.7 16.8 0.50 0.12 0.64 0.30 1.28 0.53 0.21 1.06 0.39 0.-26 0.78 06 Feb 2040 1.3 16.9 0.13 0.03 0.28 0.18 2.15 <0.10 0.00 0.77 0.13 0.03 1.00 20 Feb 1035 0.8 17.5 0.45 0.35 1.02 0.75 2.27 0.28 0.09 0.62 0.26 0.10 0.58 20 Feb 2035 0.9 17.5 0.36 0.11 0.57 0.12 1.58 0.53 0.02 1.47 0.63 0.07 1.75 06 Mar 1035 0.3 21.9 0.31 0.09 0.14 0.04 0.45 0.10 0.00 0.32 0.11 0.01 0.35 06 Mar 2035 1.6 21.0 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 0.55 0.45 5.50 0.43 0.15 4.30 H 20 Mar 1035 1.4 18.3 0.10 0.00 0.40 0.16 4.00 0.71 0.40 7.10 0.18 0.08 1.80 LO 20 Mar 2005 1.2 18.6 3.21 2.71 1.21 0.18 0.38 0.87 0.21 0.27 0.33 0.05 0.10 04 Apr 1040 2.0 15.0 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 04 Apr 1940 2.6 15.6 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 18 Apr 1035 2.9 18.4 <0..10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 18 Apr 2120 4.1 5.3 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 0.16 0.05 1.60 10 May 1030 7.9 15.8 5.13 0.91 4.79 0.02 0.93 5.76 2.64 1.12 3.57 0.40 0.70 10 May 2045 8.4 15.5 3.66 1.08 16.20 10.63 4.43 1.26 0.48 0.34 1.56 1.46 0.43 F 24 May 1310 8.6 16.0 1.27 0.20 1.66 0.22 1.31 0.39 0.29 0.31t 1.35 0.46 1.06t 24 May 2135 9.7 16.2. 4.25 3.00 2.87 2.34 0.68 1.69 0.57 0.40 1.82 1.72 0.43 17 Jun 1130 11.9 13.7 0.41 0.31 0.87 0.19 2.12 0.97 0.14 2.37 0.68 0.58 1.66 17 Jun 2115 12.2 14.3 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 0.31 0.21 3.10 0.26 0.16 2.60 28 Jun 1400 16.4 16.2 1.38 0.02 1.52 0.06 1.10 1.44 .0.48 1.04 0.62 0.55 0.45 28 Jun 2220 16.3 16.2 1.67 0.39 1.11 0.12. 0.66 1.58 0.12 0.95 1.66 0.27 0.99 MicrogrnS/litar tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated (A I S Table J-7 (Page 2 of 2)Intake Tem Date Time Intake Discharge 0/1 3' Simulation 3OS/I 2' Simulation 20 S/I AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. e E. Ratio C-I (A.I.B C 7 0 0 0 12 Jul 1035 19.6 13 Jul 2145 18.8 26 Jul 1250 22.7 26 Jul 2145 21.9 09 Aug 1115 22;6.09 Aug 2135 22.5 23 Aug 1155 23.6 23 Aug 2100 24.6 14 Sep 1055 5.8 14 Sep 2031 5.3 26 Sep 1051 13.9 26 Sep 2030 14.8 10 Oct 1030 14.2 10 Oct 2035 14.6 25 Oct 1035 11,8 a5 Oct 2028 12.0 07 Nov 1140 11.3 07 Nov 2045 11.4 28 Nov 1000 7.3 28 Nov 2028 6.1 12 Dec 1105 4.0 13 Dec 2109 2.2 29 Dec 1100 1.8 29 Dec 2110 2.6 16.3 0.31 0.21 16.0 0.54 0.03 14.5 0.81 0.03 15.5 0.33 0.12 14.7 1.13 0.29 15.0 2.21 0.23 12.5 1.04 0.16 12.4 1.12 0.15 10.8 <0.10 0.00 10.8 <0.10 0.00 0.5 0.85 0.20 0.6 1.10 0.08 0.4 1.08 0.28 0.2 0.76 .0.12 0.4 0.31 0.21 0.4 1.30 1.04 1.4 1.40 0.09 1.5 0.79 0.69 0.1 0.54 0.01 0.4 0.90 0.11 11.6 0.72 0.01 12.4 0.91 0.04 15.6 0.66 0.37 16.5 0.69 0.20 0.65 0.07 2.10 0.51 0.03 0.94 0.60 0.09 0.74 0.42 0.32 1.27 1.28 0.36 1.13 1.52 0.27 0.69 0.81 0.21 0.78 1.22 0.42 1.09 0.15 0.05 1.50<0.10 0.00 1.00 0.43 0.33 0.51 0.77 0.24 0.70 1.28 0.19 1.19 1.00 0.46 1.32 0.72 0.06 2.32 2.82 1.89 2.17 0.59. 0.49 0.42 1.15 0.13 1.46 0.82 0.12 1.52 0.50 0.40 0.56 1.85 0.93 2.57 1.62 0.30 1.78 1.25 0.02 1.89 1.90 0.39 2.75'0.59 0.50 0.69 0.50 0.84 2.52 0.53 0.72 0.47 0.60 0.80 1.12 1.22 0.52 0.63 0.59 1.87 1.01 0.86 0.77 0.53 0.94 0.89 0.88* 0.49 1.90t 0.62 0.06 0.93 1.67 0.16 0.85 1.01 0.12 1.52 0.51 0.06 0.74" 1.35 0.03 1.14 2.05ý0.22 0.51 0.97 0.27 0.64 0.81 0.12 4.70 0.23 0.49 6.00 0.29 0.19 0.94 1.03 0.05 1.02 0.52 0.49 1.13 0.64 0.41 0.68 0.36 0.53 2.03 0.92 0.49 0.45 0.82 0.26 1.34 1.87 0.45 1.28 4.12 0.12 1.59 1.19 0.21 0.86 0.72 0.43 0.74 1.19 0.45 1.03 1.10 0.36 1.35 1.44 0.32 1.28 1.28 0.26 0.91 0.20 0.01 0.14 0.06 0.23 0.71 0.03 0.19 0.29 0.06 0.36 0.15 0.55 0.23 0.88 0.85 0.06 0.16 0.12 0.31 0.17 0.24 2.001t 3.09 1.25 1.55 1.19t 0.93 0.93 0.72 2.30 2.90 1.21 0.47 0.59 0.47 2.97 0.63 1.34 5.22 2.20 0.80 1.65 1.21 2.18 1.86*Micrograms/1iter tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated z1:L. ~jj: jjjILL 1i..
| |
| r .. ..t , :, .,.,4 .. ... , .' ..... .. ... ...-. --, ..... .... , .....-, .., ... ,. ...... .,... .... , ........Table J-8 (Page 1 of 2)Phaeophytin a Concentration*
| |
| in Whole Water Collections after 72-Hr Incubation Period, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Intake Date Time Tern Intake Discharge D/I 3* Simulation 3* S/I 20 Simulation 20 S/I ( AC) 6T Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio -Meafn S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio L4 fi U1 CL 0 3 16 Jan 1155 16 Jan 2100 24 Jan 1045 24 Jan 2032 06 Feb 1055 06 Feb 2040 20 Feb 1035 20 Feb 2035 06 Mar 1035 06 Mar 2035 20 Mar 1035 20 Mar 2005 04 Apr 1040 04 Apr 1940 18 Apr 1035 18 Apr 2120 10 May 1030 10 May 2045 24 May 1310 24 May 2135 17 Jun 1130 17 Jun 2115 28 Jun 1400 28 Jun 2220 0.8 0.8 0.9 2.4 1.7 1.3 0.8 0.9 0.3.1.6 1.4 1.2.2.0 2.6 2.9 4.1 7.9 8.4 8.6 9.7 11.9 12.2 16.4 16.3 19.8 0.65 0.27 0.93 0.05 19.8 0.22 0.12 0.46 0.36 21.0 0.35 0.14 0.37 0.09 21.1 0.15 0.05 0.29 0.08 16.8 0.19 0.09 <0.10 0.00 16.9 0.27 0.14 0.26 0.06 17.5 0.52 0.18 0.56 0.17 17.5 0.55 0.17 0.62 0.11 21.9 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 21.0 0.12 0.02 0.65 0.54 18.3 0.71 0.37 1.77 1.55 18.6 0.32 0.00 0.17 0.07 15.0 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 15.6 <0.10 0.00 "<0.10 0.00 18.4 0.19 0.09 0.15 0.05 5.3 <0.10 0.00 <0.10 0.00 15.8 3.13 3.03 5.24 5.14 15.5 4.63 1.50 1.39 0.'48 16.0 1.73 0.81 0.88 0.45 16.2 <0.10 0.00 0.64 0.54 13.7 .0.62 0.52 0.31 0.21 14.3 0.18 0.05 0.65 0.06 1.43 2.09 1.06 1.93 0.53 0.96 1.08 1.13 1.00 5.42 2.49 0.53 1 .00 1.00 0.79"1.00 1.67 0.30 0.51 6.40 0.50 3.61 0.86 1.29 0.39 0.21 0.19 0.17 0.74 0.48<0.10 0.12 1.37 0.54 0.35<0.10 40.10 0.13 2.93 2.52'<0.10 1.68 0.24 0.30 0.08 1.32 1.00 0.16 1.54 0.13 5.86 0.92 0.06 4.18 0.14 1.11 0.41 0.10 1.17 0.11 1.40 0.69 0.11 4.60 0.06 1.00 0.26 0.16 1.37 0.07 0.63 0.62 0.46 2.30 0.16 1.42 0.61 0.32 1.17 0.26 0.87 0.63 0.01 1.15 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 0.02 1.00 0.15 0.05 1.25 0.78 1.93 0.30 0.20 0.42 0.04 1.69 1.04 0.94 3.25 0.25 3.50 0.24 0.14 2.40 0.00 1.00 <0.10 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.53 <0.10 0.00 0.53 0.03 1.30 0.17 0.01 1.70 2.18 0.94 <0.10 0.00 0.03 0'22 0.54 2.90 0.35 0.63 0.00 .0.De 1.18 0.77 0.68t 1.12 16,80 <0.10 0.00 1.00 0.10 0.39 0.19 0.09 0.31 0.11 1,67 0.30 0.20 1.67 M.57 0.71t 1.85 0.17 .I.47t: 0.35 1.37 , 1.72 0.14 1.26 16.2 1.26 0.13 0.37 0.12 .0.29 0. o 1.6.2 1.37 0.00 1.32 0,05 0.96 1.88*Microgrzms/liter lSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simul'ated Table J-8 (Page 2 of 2)Intake Temp Intake Discharge 0/i 30 Simulation 3S/I 2° Simulation 2' S/1 Date Time (C) 4T Meean S.E. Mean S.E. Rati Mt o12 Jul 13 Jul 26 Jul 26 Jul 09 Aug 09 Aug 23 Aug 23 Aug 14 Sep 14 Sep 26 Sep 26 Sep 10 Oct 10 Oct 25 Oct 25 Oct 07 Nov 07 Nov 28 Nov 28 Nov 12 Dec 13 Dec 29 Dec 29 Dec.1035 2145 1250 2145 1115 2135 1155 2100 1055 2031 1051 2030 1030 2035 1035 2028 1140 2045 1000.2028 1105 2109 1100 2110 19.6 16.3 0.40 0.04 18.8 16.0 0.59 0.23 22.7 14.5 0.19 0.09 21.9 15.5 0.22 0.08 22.6 14.7 2.36 0.03 22.5 15.0 3.90 1.76 23.6 12.5 0.54 0.13 24.6 12.4 0.73 0.30 5.8 10.8 0.20 0.10 5.3 10.8 0.35 0.25 13.9 0.5 1.07 0.46 14.8 0.6 0.38 0.28 14.2 0.4 0.31 0.15 14,6 0.2 0.79 0.20 11.8 0.4 1.93 0.20 12.0 0.4 0.88 0.38 11.3 1.4 0.33 0.23 11.4 1.5 0.82 0.72 7.3 0.1 0.86 0.51 6.1 0.4. 1.54 0.70 4.0 11.6 1.07 0,52 2.2 12.4 2,56 0.01 1.8 15.6 0.55 0.11 2.6 16.5 0.82 0.05 0.45 0.35 0.67 0.22 0.46 0.10 0.27 0.10 1.04 0.08 1.45 0.06 0.44 0.14 1.11 0.08<0.10 0.00<0.10 0.00 1.00 0.09 0.74 0.07 0.60 0.20 0.99 0.57 0.72 0.62 0.29 0.19 0.45 0.35 0.41 0.31 0.96 0.16 0.81 0.05 1.45 0.46 2.47 0.10 0.69 0.32 1.41 0.39 1.13 1.14 2.42 1.23 0.44 0.37 0.81 1.52 0.50 0.29 0.93 1.95 1.94 1.25 0.37 0.33 1.36 0.50 1.12 0.53 1.36 0.9.6 1.25 1.72 W06 0,01 .1.90t 0.59 0.13 1.00 0.48 0.15 2.53 0.21 0.11 0.95 1.48 0.17 0.6 3 t 1.31 0.23 0.34 0.75 0.11 1.39 0.35 0.25 0.48 1.27 0.36 6.35 1.32 1.21 3.77 1.81 0.33 1.69<0.10 0.00 0.26 0.73 0.03 2.35 2.11 1.00 2.67 0.50 0.40 0.26 0.68 0.58 0.77 0.63 0.18 1.91 1.00 0.90 1.22 0.52 0.41 0.60 2.09 0.34 1.36 0.42 0.32 0.39 2.07 0.08 0.81 1.30 0.23 2.36 1.19 0.20 1.45 0.55 0.51 0.56 0.32 1.19 1.66 0.28 1.05 40.10 0.13 1.22 0.29 0.83 0.78 0.85 0.32 0.53<0.10 0.68 0.36 0.54 2.05 0.42 1.20 0,08 1.38t 0.13 0.86 0.04 2.95 0.18 1.45 0.27 0.50t 0.28 0.43 0.18 0.52 0.50 1.44 0.00 0.50 0.01 0.37 0.36 1.14 0.19 0.76 0.10 2.68 0.26 0.99 0.37 0.44 0.22 0.36 0.15 1.61 0.00 0.13 0.39 0.79 0.26 0.23 0.44 0.50 0.03 0.80 0.32 0.76 0,13 1.46 Si a 0 S1..-.1Micrograms/1 Iter-tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated
| |
| ...........
| |
| ...... i l i l i~ i i i_ ... ... ... ..... .Table J-9 (Page 1 of 2)Primary Production* (C 1 4) in Whole Water Collections after 7-Hr Incubation Period, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Intake Temp Intake Discharge 0/I 3' Simulation 3'S/I 2" Simulation 2* S/I Date Time (C) AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio iin S.E. Ratio 16 Jan 1155 16 Jan 21.00 24 Jan 1045 24 Jan 2032 06 Feb 1055 06 Feb 2040 20 Feb 1035 20 Feb 2035 06 Mar 1035 06 Mar 2035 20 Mar 1035 20 Mar. 2005 04 Apr 1040 04 Apr 1940 18 Apr 1035 18 Apr 2120 10 May 1030 10 May 2045 24 May 1310 24 May 2135 17 Jun 1130 17 Jun 2115 28 Jun 1400 28 Jun 2220 0.8 0.8 0.9 2.4 1.7 1.3 0.8 0.9 0.3 1.6 1.4 1.2 2.0 2.6 2.9 4.1 7.9 8.4 8.6 9.7 19.8 9.04 5.12 6.56 0.88 19.8 5.29 3.07 4.72 0.52 21.0 2.03 1.26 3.14 1.20 21.1 2.58 0.48 3.77 0.63 16.8 3.93 0.23 5.21 1.27 16.9 4.07 0.94 1.29 1.24 17.5 1.68 0.30 4.58 1.04 17.5 4.23 1.85 3.97 3.29 21.9 4.52 0.28 4.06 1.27 21.0 0.00"0.00 0.23 0.00 18.3 17.28 i.79 22.91 1.26 18.6 18.0814.69 15.40 3.92 15.0 44.78 10.73 32.92 2.63 15.6 19.97 5.19 18.90 1.74 18.4 11.38 0.99 6.31 0.35.5.3
| |
| * 5.34 0.56 6.04 0.87 15.8 45.61 6.92 63.23 .9.84 15.5 54.12 10.00 69.38 25.40 16.0 42.65 1.52 24.50 1.94 16.2 48.93 6.64 16.99 2.30 0.73 6.35 1.74 0.89 3.78 1.26 1.55 2.92 0.32 1.46 3.12 0.54 1.33 2.58 1.66 0.32 2.46 0.93 2.73 5.40 1.06 0.94 3.26 0.53 0.90 5.87 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00**1.33 14.20 3.37 0.85 25.01 8.93 0.74 50.70 10.89 0.95 27.92 0.30 0.55 9.16 2.96 1.13 11.00 1.27 1.39 65.19 2.39 1.28 68.97 7.26 0.57 37.11 9.11 0.35 49.02 13.19 0.97 31.84 0.35 0.80 31.96 7.09 0.53 34.17 0.73 0.35 30.47 0.64 0.70 6.46 2.05 0.71 3.29 0.30 1.44 4.22 0.91 1.21 3.18 0.92 0.66 2.73 0.00 0.60 1.85 1.61 3.21 9.49 0.11 0.77 0.45 0.00 1.30 3.50 0.79 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.82 10.95 5.46 1.38 33.96 4.33 1.13 44.64 4.22 1.40 36.66 3.81 0.80 9.62 0.11 2.06 14.13 1.42 1.43 70.99 29.54 1.27 63.89 23.17 0.8 7t 48.30 13.08 1.00 45.25 0.17 1.50 29.00 5.44 0.96 25.86 1.69 1.35t 18.33 0.26 0.84 Z3.15 1.99 0.71 0.62 2.08 1.23 0.69 0.45 5.65 0.11 0.77 0.00 0.63 1.88 1.00 1.84 0.85 2.65 1.56 1. 18 1.13t 0.92 1.36 0.78 0.73't 0.64 U 0*1 11.9 13.7 21.26. 1.98 20.61 7.68 12.2 14.3 33.16 0.10 26.40 7.70 16.4 16.2 25.24 17.35 13.27 2.75 16.3 16.2 36.22 17.51 12.53 2.31*mg C/m 3/incubation period**dark bottle greater than light bottle tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated.
| |
| Table J-9 (Page 2 of 2)Intake Te, Intake Discharge 0/I 39 Simulation 31L/I 2* Simulation 2* L/I Date Time MC AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio I-I S C 0 a S S S S S C.S 0 12 Jul 13 Jul 26 Jul 26 Jul 09 Aug 09 Aug 23 Aug 23 Aug 14 Sep 14 Sep 26 Sep 26 Sep 10 Oct 10 Oct 25 Oct 25 Oct 07 Nov 07 Nov 28 Nov 28 Nov 12 Dec 13 Dec 29 Dec 29 Dec 1035 2145 1250 2145 1151 2135 1155 2100 1055 2031 1051 2030 1030 2035 1035 2028 1140 2045 1000 2028 1105 2109 1100 2110 19.6 18.8 22.7 21.9 22.6 22.5 23.6 24.6 5.8 5.3 13.9 14.8 14.2 14.6 11.8 12.0 11.3 11.4 7.3 6.1 4.0-2.2 1.8 2.6 16.3 16.0 14.5 15.5 14.7 15.0 12.5 12.4 10.8 10.8 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.4 1.4 1.5 0.1 0.4 11.6 12.4 15.6 16.5 21.39 5.45 13.36 0.58 23.95 6.30 11.98 2.22 12.52 4.19 11.17 3.19 8.40 1.47 7.15 1.83 110.31 53.98 44.94 22.29 39.91 13.98 26.13 0.54 45.02 15.08 23.90 0.23 9.53 0.60 7.97 2.67 2.84 0.99 3.21 0.55 1.74 0.02 1.51 0.27 48.38 4.16 45.69 7.09 18.09 3.50 13.17 2.44 17.83 0.37 18.17 5.74 16.51 1.26 16.59 1.55 26.55 0.09 25.32 0.09 9.32 8.63 11.40 0.60 45.94 9.85 35.75 4.88 19.97 0.40 25.54 1.97 14.97 2.12 13.12 3.29 10.16 1.47 15.43 2.90 10.54 0.53 7.08 0.26 4.24 0.25 2.71 0.64 9.61 1.21 12.40 2.90 17.75 5.31 16.17 1.27 0.62 0.26 0.89 0.85 0.41 0.65 0.53 0.84 1.13 0.87 0.94 0.73 1.02 1.00 0.95 1.22 0.78 1.28 0.88 1.52 0.67 0.64 1.29 0.91 25.86 23.28 14.35 10.04 16.72 25.70 25.05 6.13 1.50 1.61 38.76 7.02 20.19 23.18 35.63 9.04 31.58 32.25 12.08 10.10 10.11 6.08 4.46 10.86 3.01 2.74 5.86.1.52 1.591 1.63 10.05 0.51 0.22 0.61 5.99 1.32 6.92.7.91 2.50.0.86 4.17 15.48 1.05 0.07 1.50 2.67 0.62 1.21t 19.59 1:.62 0.92i 0.97 .. 13.75 0.82 0.57 1.15 11.63 0.01 0.93 1.20 10.78 4.24 1.28 0.15t 21.44 3.81 0.19t 0.64 37.13 7.10 0.93 0.56 27.66 1.61 0.61 0.64 9.47 1.95 0.99 0.53 1.83 0.83 0.64 0.93 0.57 '1 0.00 0.33-0.80 48.50 12.70 1.00 0.39 10.48 0.67 0.58 1.13 19.82 1.33 1.11 1.40 17.87 6.59 1.06 1.34 33.00 1.90 1,24 0.97 10.75 0.95., 1.16 0.69 39.40 9.22 0.86 1.61 26.99 12.21 1.35 0.81 9.16 1.03 0.61 0.99 8.18 0.24 0.81 0.96 12.67 2.68 1.20 1.43 6.47 0.04 1.53 0.46 6.41 0.25 0.67 3.48. 0.61 11.52 5.58 0.65*09 C/I3/incubation period t'Samples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated.
| |
| .. .. ... .. ... .
| |
| Table J-10 (Page 1 of 2)Primary Production (C14) in Whole Water Collections after 24-Hr Incubation Period, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Intake Tegp Intake Discharge D/I 39 Simulation Date Time (C) AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E.16 Jan 1155 0.8 19.8 10.04 5.89 10.04. 1.65 16 Jan 2100 24 Jan 1045 24 Jan 2032 06 Feb 1055 06 Feb 2040 20 Feb 1035 20 Feb 2035 06 Mar 1035 06 Mar 2035 20 Mar 1035 20 Mar 2005 04 Apr 1040 04 Apr 1940 18 Apr 1035 18 Apr 2120 10 may 1030 10 May 2045 24 May 1310 24 May 2135 17 Jun 1130 17 Jun 2115 28 Jun 1400 28 Jun 2220 0.8 0.9 2.4 1.7 1.3 0.8 0.9 0.3 1.6 1.4 1.2 2.0 2.6 2.9 4.1 7.9 8.4 8.6 9.7 11.9 12.2 16.4 16.3 19.8 9.65 0.83 12.54 1.48 21.0 9.80 2.22 9.81 1.18 21.1 3.77 0.22 9.68 0.31 16.8 10.67 2.01 12.75 0.77 16.9 15.04 1.13 8.20 2.08 17.5 4.78 1.38 5.04 3.93 17.5 15.94 2.68 11.73 2.17 21.9 15.20 2.70 14.83 5.33 21.0 10.45 1.67 16.49 6.44 18.3 38.46 2.41 50.49 11.26 18.6 55.38 6.61 63.02 4.76 15.0 84.51 3.58 130.53 22.76 15.6 26.33 26.03 58.30 11.29 18.4 30.84 0.00 25.71 0.83 5.3 25.40 6.71 8.32 0.86 15.8 190.93 58.51 217.55 45.88 15.5 217.45 1.15 256.24 55.34 16.0.150.05 27.02 128.49 22.73 16.2 107.34 12.06 50.62 1.47 13.7 78.03 5.26 59.24 22.94 14.3 86.66 1.48 69.04 20.24 16.2 71.47 43.62 15.60 12.56 16.2 97.42 38.94 35.07 0.00 1.00 12.64 0.94 1.30 7.88 1.67 1.00 8.02 0.06 2.57 8.11 0.02 1.19 8.75 2.14 0.55 9.87 1.35 1.05 3.33 0.94 0.74 11.15 5.20 0.98 17.95 3.37 1.58 15.43 2.70.1.31' 44.48. 27.78 1.14 82.63 2.45 1.54 102.10 44.06 2.21 77.93 2.14 0.85 36.18 13:57 0.33 35.05 4.41 1.14 209.88 29.54 1.18 235.80 78.69 0.86 190.75 3.69: 0.47 112.87 28.42 0.76 100.95 2.68 0.80 85.60 27.44 0.22 75.26 22.79 0.36 66.80 11.37 3'S/I 2" Simulation 20 S/I Ratio $ean S.E. Ratio 1.26 14.04 0.99 1.40 0.82 10.31 0.91 1.07 0.82 12.69 0.22 1.29 2.15 7.39 2.14 1.96 0.82 13.30 3.32 1.25 0.66 12.30 1.91 0.82 0.70 9.63 6.82 2.01 0.70 1.42 0.69 0.09 1.18 17.80 3.82 1.17 1.48 22.09 6.21 2.11 1.16 42.59 31.13 1.11 1.49 75.09 25.56 1.36 1.21 94.29 9.16 1.12 2.96 89.92 27.78 3.42 1.17 37.48 3.62 1.22 1.38 17.96 1.72 0.71 1.10 247.17 96.46 1.29 1.08 210.3& 47.80 0.97 1.2 7 t 143.05 7.97 0.95t 1.05 65.79 13.30 0.61 1.29 103.34 18.10 1.32 0.99 72.58 -.3.32 0.84 1.05t 90.41 12.63 1.27 t 0.69 77.94 9.79 0.80 0 0 CL 0 0 S S 5.Si S a.0*mg C/m3/incubation period tSamples taken In actual discharge plume rather than simulated Table J-10 (Page 2 of 2)Intake Temp Intake Discharge D/I 3' Simulation 30L/I 2? Simulation 29 L/I Date Time (C) AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio 0 Uo a 0<a Sm 0U 12 Jul 13 Jul 26 Jul 26 Jul 09 Aug 09 Aug 23 Aug 23 Aug 14 Sep 14 Sep 26 Sep 26 Sep 10 Oct 10 Oct 25 Oct 25 Oct 07 Nov 07 Nov 28 Nov 28 Nov 12 Dec 13 Dec 29 Dec 29 Dec 1035 2145 1250 2145 1151 2135 1155 2100 1055 2031 1051 2030 1030 2035 1035 2028 1140 2045 1000 2028 1105 2109 1100 2110 19.6 18.8 22.7 21.9 22.6 22.5 23.6 24.6 5.8 5.3 13.9 14.8 14.2 14.6 11.8 12.0 11.3 11.4 7.3 6.1 4.0 2.2 1.8 2.6 16.3 99.58 13.37.16.0 108.75 14.59 14.5 59.64 5.32 15.5 46.51 19.15 14.7 142.35 12.58 15.0 96.46 40.60 12.5 87.47 40.99 12.4 20.54 1.77 10.8 10.14 1.88 10.8 4.61 0.61 0.5 112.86 46.19 0.6 43.52 8.01 0.4 45.67 5.00 0.2 39.63 5.15 0.4 67.77 25.09 0.4 16.65 5.25 1.4 104.09 5.82 1.5 58.37 12.48 0.1 42.60 2.93 0.4 15.82 0.26 11.6 49.73 2.22 12.4 .16.55 2.37 15.6 62.63 0.10 16.5 74.46 4.55 32.64 2.16 49.00 1.22 41.91 14.04 23.79 6.34 135.98 8.87 63.18 0.05 59.60 6.63 38.00 11.48 10.94 2.57 6.35 0.05 88.59 5.75 33.09 1.26 42.93 10.87 34.28 5.37 59.66 6.63 23.35 4.35 110.59 24.83 91.94 44.21 36.55 10.70 16.11 0.62 38.51 15.45 25.01 6,46 43.22 3.51 49.19 5.42 0.33 71.98 0.45 65.26 0.70 40.13 0.51 50.54 0.96 57.81 0.65 65.68 0.68 82.95 1.85 27.37 1.08 10.24 1.38 7.10 0.78 69.11 0.76 15.68 0.94 56.69 0.87 34.28 0.88 50.59 1.40 42.23 1.06 71.36 1.58 67.68 0.86 36.26 1.02 23.25 0.77 49.29 1.51 29.57 0.69 24.80 0.66 55.16 14.02 20.94 9.95 1.25 5.33 3.56 24.51 3.87 1.58 1.57 8.45 7.42 11.92 5.19 2.41 34.74 9.77 23.93 12.57 11.76 7.95 11 .05 3.99 13.43 0. 72t 0.60 0.67 1.09 ,0. 41 t 0.68 0.95 1.33 1.01 1.54 0.61 0.36 1.24 0.87 0.75 2.54 0.69 1.16 0.85 1.47 0.99 1.79 0.40 0.74 72.66 20.91 52.58 6.84 49.39 2.72 58.71 22.07 73.52 3.50 96.85 13.68 78.35 9.45 35.05 4.42 10.34 3.04 5.19 1.24 99.50 20.32 30.44 0.24 39.76 9.50 45.79 12.22 48.38 11.32 15.62 0.86 117.72 44.57 71.87 8.20 35.32 0.37 20.51 2.07 68.54 8.86 18.83 7.04 29.37 ; 2.41 55.18 20.19 0.73f 0.48 0.83 1.26 0.52t 1.00 0.90 1.71 1.02 1.13 0.88 0.70 0.87 1.16 0.71 0.94 1.13 1 .23 0.83 1.30 1.38 1.14 0.47 0.74*ag C/m 3/incubatlon period tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than sfmulated~--- ~ --
| |
| .. .. ... ... ...........
| |
| ... ...........
| |
| ..... .... ...... ....... .. ..............
| |
| ... ..... ... ... .. ., .1.:.... ........ ...... .... ...... ... ... .. ..... ..... ..........
| |
| 111 ---,- ,[* -....... ..... ., ; ... ............
| |
| .. ................
| |
| 1ýý Z. ........ .....Table J-ll (Page 1 of 2)Primary Production# (C 1 4) in Whole Water Collections after 48-Hr Incubation Period, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Intake Temp Intake Discharge D/I 3' Simulation 3'S/I 2* Simulation 2" S/I Date Time 6T Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio 16 Jan 1155 0.8 19.8 32.93 7.61 25.02 8.90 0.76 25.13 5.72 0.76 17.33 5.42 0.53 16 Jan 2100 0.8 19.8 14.44 2.28- 23.49 3.23 1.63 22.38 2.64 1.55 15.96 0.22 1.11 24 Jan 1045 0.9 21.6 24.42 6.33 24.81 7.46 1.12 19.72 7.20 3.31 29,69 8.65 1.22 24 Jan 2032 2.4 21.1 13.40 3.11 20.28 1.46 1.51 16.76 2.85 1.25 16.82 1.15 1.26 06 Feb 1055 1.7 16.8 35.70 4.19 21.37 6.27 0.60 25.77 2.49 0.72 36.30 10.23 1.02 06 Feb 2040 1.3 16.9 22.22 2.21 17.68 0.01 0.80 27.11 0.39 1.22 19.81 0.89 0.89 20 Feb 1035 0.8 17.5 23.88 12.30 24.66 9.34 1.03 18.87 11.23 0.79 23.35 2.80 0.98 20 Feb 2035 0.9 17.5 24.91 6.77 14.52 5.09 0.58 21.97 6.60 0.88 3.35 0.19 '0.13 06 Mar 1035 0.3 21.9 22.24 0.56 20.72 6.82 0.93 30.70 7.10 1.38 48.54 24.85 2.18 06 Mar 2035 1.6 21.0 27.21 3.17 13.95 0.26 0.51 31.89 10.96 1.17 32.02 6.78 1.18 20 Mar 1035 1.4 18.3 83.46 36.22 86.34 3.48 1.03 76.24 27.66 0.91 76.34 50.20 0.91 20 Mar 2005 1.2 18.6 83.35 47.94 82.91 2.19 0.99 87.14 4.40 1.05 86.28 12.90 1.04 04 Apr 1040 2.0 15.0 .83.07 8.43 113.90 14.31 1.37 135.84 36.95 1.64 140.61 24.06 1.69 04 Apr 1940 2.6 15.6 157.13 58.97 145.59 52.89 0.93 239.96 85.58 1.53 126.12 17.12 0.80 18 Apr 1035 2.9 18.4 57.18 1.62 26.40 0.53 0.46 53.81 20.14 0.94 50.75 6.58 0.89 18 Apr 2120 4.1 5.3 48.69 11.30 18.82 0.86 0.39 61.09 20.53 1.25 37.42 3.38 0.77 10 May 1030 7.9 15.8 445.35 25.97 179.41 18.08 0.40 286.80 56.40 0.64 286.18 83.42 0.64 10 May 2045 8.4 15.5 165.57 4.21 208.55*0.00 1.26 169.84 33.58 1.03 190.25 10.70 1.15 24 May 1310 8.6 16.0 213.40 5.49 181.22 38.32 0.85 400.43 15.73 1.88t 331.72 52.23 1.55t 24 May 2135 9.7 16.2 115.11 60.48 79.68 14.25 0.69 137.35 44.28 1.19 139.93 15.72 1.22-* 17 Jun 1130 11.9. 13.7 170.24 16.19 113.24 42.98 0.67 163.67 47.02 0.96 165.25 43.37 0.97 2 17 Jun 2115 12.2 14.3 169.26 3.02 119.97 37.95 0.71 143.07 56.63 0.85 125.82 0.12 0.74* 281Jun 1400 16.4 16.2 72,39 58.62 35.49 14.33 0.49 171.92 25.67 2.37t 98.34 20.72 1.36t* 28 Jun 2220 16.3 16.2 189.23 71.17 87.54 30.27 0.46 133.06 23.58 0.70 157.72 11.02 0.83#mg C/m 3/incubation period* *rep 2 not used, dark bottle greater than light U tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated Z U 5.i 2 Table J-1l (Page 2 of 2)* Intake TeZp Intake Discharge D/I Date Time (C) AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio 3* Simulation 30L/! 2 9 Simulation 20 L/I Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio C-06 Z 0 U 12 Jul 13 Jul 26 Jul 26 Jul 09 Aug 09 Aug 23 Aug 23 Aug 14 Sep 14 Sep 26 Sep 26 Sep 10 Oct 10 Oct 25 Oct 25 Oct 7 Nov 7 Nov 28 Nov 28 Nov 12 Dec 13 Dec 29 Dec 29 Dec 1035 2145 1250 2145 1151 2135 1151 2100 1055 2031 1051 2030 1030 2035 1035 2028 1140 2045 1000 2028 1105 2109 1100 2110 19.6 18.8 22.7 21.9 22.6 22.5 23.6 24.6 5.8 5.3 13.9 14.8 14.2 14.6 11.8 12.0 11.3 11.4 7.3 6.1 4.0 2.2 1.8 2.6 13.3 16.0 14.5 15.5 14.7 15.0 12.5 12.6 10.8 10.8 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.4ý1.4 1.5 0.1 0.4 11.6 12.4 15.6 158.44 45.28 287.75 136.33 152.60 95.69 87.52 27.57 386.31 190.40 108.18 8.65 241.50 99.69 30.36 0.13 27.52 3.35 14.11 4.67 185.74 70.69 115.93 59.51 99.55 1.09 37.60 18.41 116.45 65.36 52.13 4.14 58.93 18.16 128.49 20.75 63.74 30.48 232.91 113.15 229.18 59.74 123.07 20.25 33.39 13.01 22.50 9.06 18.17 4.62 161.59 12.26 109.54 6.19 92.28 24.68 19.71 7.60 78.04 15.44 0.33 0.20 0.84 0.73 0.60 2.12 0.51 1.10 0.82 1.29 0.87 0.94 0.93 0.52 0.67 0.88*1.23 1.46 0.57 1.96 1.14 1.19 0.92 137.34 19.59 0.87t 208.18 39.51i 0.72 208.11 135.15 1.36 131.47 1.21 1.50 93.05 7.50 .0.24t 219.07 3.95 2.03 167.80 75.63 0.69 32.07 7.99 1.06 21.38 0.53 0.78 11.12 3.16 0.79 151.28 57.67 0.81 60.39 8.48 0.52 99.98 20.55 1.00 32.11 1.28 0.85 91.93 4.28 0.79 113.73 8.83 147.56 32.20 116.34 49.26 141.13 100.35 110.87 :7.06 147.13 14.65 185.14 20.51 29.07 5.91 17.38 2.93 14.43 0.40 133.48 21.62 81.55 12.59 103.86 47.41 39.98 2.33 104.43 32.87 83.70 15.42 155.18 57.65 195.57 29.62 67.83 24.92 44.05 13.45 101.66 27.76 41.90 1.27 44.70 2.54 0. 72"1 0.51 0.76 1.61 0.29t 1.36.0.77 0.96 0.63 1.02 0.72 0.70 1.04 1.06 0.90 0.95 1.15 1.32 0.84 1.85 1.18 1.07 0.62 88.00 135.20 147.77 80.60 23.80 86.10 39.34 71.94 34.82 77.60 8.81 42.66 165.86 21.36 61.18 215.53 112.75 6.45 45.56 5.91 2.56 46.70 4.26 16.98 98.41 2.27 4.72 46.73 16.51 8.68 66.08 9.69 72.98 189.52 170.15 57.76 41.80* 87.43 38.24 33.05 2.00 52.85 41.63 8.13 7.14 21.07 11.99 4.54 0.83 1.40 1.15 0.72 1.76 1.02 0.97 0.46 16.5 102.88 34.66 82.00 22.30 0.80 115.19 3.86 1.12 91.15 10.03 0.89-mg C/m3/incubation period t Samples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated Li -~
| |
| Table J-12 (Page 1 of 2)Primary Production* (C1 4) in Whole Water Collections after 72-Hr Incubation Period, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear'Power Plant, 1978 Intake Temp Intake Discharge Date Time (°C) AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E.0/I 3° Simulation 39S/I Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio 2* Simulation 20 S/I Mean S.E. Ratio I i.0*S 0 0 0 16 Jan 1155 16 Jan 2100 24 Jan 1045 24 Jan 2032 06 Feb 1055 06 Feb 2040 20 Feb 1035 20 Feb 2035 06 Mar 1035 06 Mar 2035 20 Mar 1035 20 Mar 2005 04 Apr 1040 04 Apr 1940 18 Apr 1035 18 Apr 2120 10 May 1030 10 May 2045 24 May 1310 24 May 2135 17 Jun 1130.17 Jun 2115 28 Jun 1400 28 Jun 2220 0.8 0.8 0.9 2.4 1.7 1.3 0.8 0.9 0.3 1.6 1.4 1.2 2.0 2.6 2.9 4.1 7.9 8.4 8.6 9.7 11.9 12.2 16.4 16.3 19.8 19.8 21.0, 21.1 16.8 16.9 17.5 17.5 21.9 21.0 91.81 22.69 40.83 5.95 30.91 4.11 24.65 12.15 42.88 0.31 51.56 4.77 11.40 2.09 73.54 8.86 60.00 0.51 52.49 9.03 53.95 0.79 54.88 23.62 25.84 2.60 19.32 1.54 64.25 5.02 29.48 4.32 44.11 7.13 38.67 5.10 61.06 18.64 18.57 1.30.18.3 258.49-68.77 183.07 4.14 18.6 460.02 215.88 201.81 5.78 15.0 397.13 54-96403.31-0,00 15.6 298.17 65X2268.81 25.75 18.4 125.85 56.99 71.11 11.25 5.3 104.49 46.78 21.93 1.86 15.8 480.04 122.85 377.07 12.32 15.5 462.84 12.52 216.46 45.96 16.0 389.81 0.07 330.66 30.56 16.2 314.96 104.45 118.33 9.31 13.7 233.00 73.97 207.21 58.62 14.3221.28 21.56 172.05 61,08 16.2 216.94 16.12 84.68 6.01 16.2 182.52 98.33 49.81 13.61 0.59 92.86 28.93 1.34 59.03 10.82 0.84 26.15 0.29 0.78 25.28 0.74 1.50 37.98 0.07 0.57 33.30 8.01 3.87 20.20 5.57 0.53 48.79 8.80 1.02 85.72 20.01 0.35 51.35 12.50 0.71 162.27 49.14 0.44 478.21 25.39 1.02 529.53 235.79 0.90 436.57 69.86 0.57 95.94 15.96 0.21 62.87 8.49 0.79 391.49 31.04 0.47 172.13 42.86 0.85 506.83 40.65 0.38 345.88 73.20 0.89 299.26 1.38 0.78 250.12 42.68 0.39 241.91 54.14 0.27 96.77 62.53 1.01 35.01 17.18 1.45 38.81 9.26 0.85 46.52 2.34 1.03 19.25 1.59 0.89 73.29 16.61 0.65 39.28 1.77 1.77 68.27 14.55 0.66 9.19 0.94 1.43 74.25 36.58 0.98 47.11 5.01 0.63 147.46 86.03 1.04 128.86 127.27 1.33 462.12 67.11 1.46 723.48 14.01 0.76 106.43 7.72 0.60 45.05 11.47 0.82 482.02 158.40 0.37 216.88 72.03 1.30t1478.39 52.70 1.10 246.17 21.15 1.28 309.98 103.08 1.13 333.10 140.83 1.12 t211.78 11.06 0.53 110.24 19.85 0.38 0.95 1.51 0.78 1.71 0.76 5.99 0.12 1.24 0.90 0.57 0.28 1.16 2.43 0.85 0.43 1.00 0.47 1.2 3 t 0.78 1.33 1.51 0.98t 0.60*mg C/m 3/incubation period**Rep 2 light bottle broken during incubation tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated Table J-12 (Page 2 of 2)Intake .Temp Intake Dlscharge D/I 39 Simulation 3'L/I 2* Simulation 2' L/I Date Time (C) AT Mean S.E. Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio Mean S.E. Ratio 12 Jul 1023 19.6 13.3 179.18 13.91 68.22 14.50 0.38 133.10: R9.69 0.7 4 t 146.42 Re6.93 0.82t 13 Jul 2145 18.8 16.0 298.13 49.37 82.24 29.77 0.28 215.50 68.00 0.72 170.56 43.14 0.57 26 Jul 1250 22.7 14.5 645.80 327.97 162.29 86.41 0.25 299.08 180.91 0.46 226.19 129.29 0.35 26 Jul 2145 21.9 15.5 174.02 60.35 112.08 24.38 0.64 380.61 149.60 2.19 360.27 293.60 2.07 09 Aug 1151 22.6 14.7 303.20 66.23 145.17 22.35 0.48 115.42 5.79 0.38t 104.77 5.02 0.35t 09 Aug 2135 22.5 15.0 327.60 136.65 149.91 8.46 0.46 321.24 147.16 0.98 294.05 4.79 0.90 23 Aug 1151 23.6 12.5 307.72 140.73 237.47 16.03 0.77 258.31 12.86 0.84 284.93 63.68 0.93 23 Aug 2100 24.6 12.6 53.52 10.42 61.12 20.99 1.14 44.50 1.13 0.83 55.04 3.63 1.03 T4 Sep 1055 5.8 10.8 40.03 12.47 42.83 13.47 1.07 39.01 0.46 0.97 26.87 2.54 0.67 14 Sep 2031 5.3 10.8 19.76 3.15 17.98 2.12 0.91 19.09 2.60 0.97 17.12 3.96 0.87 C-4 26 Sep 1051 13.9 0.5 182.29 51.49 155.17 4.70 0.85 136.52 26.69 0.75 165.93 46.42 0.91 26 Sep 2030 14.8 0.6 87.79 37.67 122.84 37.60 1.40 62.98 1.51 0.72 83.17 18.66 0.95 10 Oct 1030 14.2 0.4 185.95 13.49 160.56 54.73 0.86 195.09 90.35 1.05 171.70 29.99 0.92 10 Oct 2035 14.6 0.2 112.93 14.25 82.60 0.02 0.73 60.66 11.34 0.54 98.84 31.83 0.88 25 Oct 1035 11.8 0.4 189.82 77.71 122.37 14.19 0.64 175.75 9.63 0.93 135'.00 19.31 0.71 25 Oct 2028 12.0 0.4 148.86 54.96 110.14 0.31 0.74 105.55 32.05 0.71 92.38 16.95 0.62 7 Nov 1140 11.3 1.4 228.24 28.32 255.94 91.52 1.12 207.88 116.24 0.91 186.17 19.80 0.82 7 Nov 2045 11.4 1.5 167.07 34.68 273.71 120.371.64 197.82 73.83 1.18 206.54 71.08 1.24 28 Nov 1000 7.3 0.1 85.31 14.07 66.64 16.58 0.78 106.20 17.57 1.24 104.22 5.39 1.22 28 Nov 2028 6.1 0.4 31.02 5.37 55.44 17.35 1.79 63.97 20.99 2.06 67.86 2.39 2.19 12 Dec 1105 4.0 11.6 127.79 10.51 108.59 32.45 0.85 116.91 36.56 0.91 141.40 32.04 1.11 13 Dec 2109 2.2 12.4 76.78 12.86 70.95 8.95 0.92 96.84 35.72 1.26 112.04 11.16 1.46 C 29 Dec 1100 1.8 15.6 156.65 26.80 111.67 14.99 0.71 73.30 6.74 0.47 76.41 8.15 0.49 29 Dec 2110 2.6 16.5 55.27 8.08 54.02 0.84 0.98 47.98 6.44 0.87 52.68 2.92 0.95 S W9 C/3/fncub~atfo period tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated 0 S......2in Table J-13 (Page 1 of 2)Percent Relative Abundance of Zooplankton (Day) in Entrainment Samples James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Jar. Feb Mar Apr 17 25 7 21 7 21 6 21 11 May Ju2 25 IB 29 13 Jul Aug Sep Oct N- Dec Jan Annual 27 10 24 15 27 12 26 8 29 20 4 Mean Taxa C-4-I CL Z S'a S S_la: 0q Protezoa Ciliata Tintlnni dae Vorticellidae Ciliata uuid.Sucteria Aclnetidae Sucton.a unid.Protozoa anid.Rotifer Brachonedae Keratella cochlearis keratelle crassa ten te Ia Keroaee ahFiennel Ts Keratella cau-drate Koruteolla up.GruTeus anfularis caci o eonus aiY-iluraars Mrachioees reransau Brachienas-o IrIT -~Mr-achleeau up.Eu-chinis dilitate rellI-cottia ienolupie Notoca acuminata NotCoica SF._pua$Lca up..p p sp.ojluis Ir p Coc7ili ucornis unid.Filinia longiseta A n sp.oggha riedenta sp.n~iachoea up.at foorthrayirl P eta op.ltica maltlenrls Trlchecenca Sp.Plnueelautsol Pleue etlucatane o Ple-eunee up.
| |
| eatubills et p.
| |
| up.Rotifera sp.2 T-1 1 2 1 3 5 3 1 T 5 9 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 5 2 *I 2 9 It 1 1 2 2 1 T T T T 1 1 1 1 2 4 T 1. 3 1 3 10 T 10 7 T T T 1 T!1 25 1 19 2 T 1 38 23 6 10 T 4 3 17 5 2 8 4 1 3 1 4 8 7 6 3 1 32 10 44 3 3 1 11 3 3 1 1 9 5 T 4? 1 6 9 3 T T 4 2 T T T T T T 3 5 5 T 2 2 1 10 1 48 2 7 5 T 3 3 4 T I T 3 T T T T T 1 2 1 9 T 18 1 13 28 1s 14 2 T 1 7 2 21 20 3 11 4 6 1 T I 44 T T(1 T 12 9 4 3 56 3 4 T T I 68 24 -4 2t.1 1 T I 0 I T I T 2 T 1 2 1 7 3 1 T 1 i T 3 1 T 6 T T T 2 4 T T T T I 8 3 1 7 12 32 1 I 5 3 5 2 1 3 10 4 1 1 2 1 T 1 I T T 51 3 3 8 2 T T 4 2 T 1 T T TI: I I T 5 3*1 T 7 T T T 1 T 3 1.T: 41 I : 3 14 6 01 1.I.I.T 2 1.T 5 1 T I 1 1 2 1 T 1 T 2 T 3 T T T Table J-13 (Page 2 of 2)Taos Arthropoda Cladocera Bosmina sp.BaosmniUiae unit.Alana up.~ .haerlcus C2hiiu"alataw endotaeretruurva nfllpapspale Pgp_ dauin up.CladocetianuA.d Calaoulda (COpepoda)
| |
| Diapteusn reqanenuis
| |
| * a alias aunt and p~alomits skicl]s Ea tteaora ap.'LloP.Moanus eacruaus Calanad Jvnieund Calanoida adult add.Calanalda nauplii unid.Cyclopoida (Copepoda)
| |
| Pys'o McLuuldatuu touasil o R vaernali u"mooy, Tis -r&.'i"u wxi cane Harpactlcolda (Copepoda)
| |
| Harpactlcoida adult acid.Harpacticolda naup1li unid.Harpactlcofda Juvenile amid.Copepoda nauplil unid.Tartigrada unid.Total density (No./m3)*T 0.6%.Jan Feb 17 25 7 21 1 1 T T 0 Mar Apr Nay Jun 21 6 21 11 25 18 29 13 Jul Aug Sep Oct Foy Dec Jan Annual 27 10 24 15 27 12 26 a 29 20 4 Mean 3 4 2 3 31 28 16 9 16 13 I 1 T 0 T T 1 5 2 T T I I T T 2 5 1 1 3 1 3 T 1 T 1 T 2 3 T T T I T T 9 1 1 5 1 1 8 2 1 T 7 2 24 16 7 91 77 48 22 25 T 10 14 24 4 11 9 13 2 1 T O'i U a1 01 2 T 4 1 T T 1 1 1 T 3 6 T 28 9 3 T 1 T 2 2 10 1 1 1 T T 1 2 4 5 2 19 6 4 9 7 6 7 T T 2 3 2 I T 5 T 1 1 T 1 T T 21 19 38 1 2 15 17 3 9 1A 2 4 3 13 4 13 24 11 6 5 4 2 1 5 6 2,522T 724 3,102 2,206 3,727 2,924 2,221 2,904 18,865 150,916 126,119 782,960 572,571 1,721,938 "355.904 637,725 452,211 16,490 549,322 182,539 90,441 208,455 65,272 90,428 11,959 252,580..........................-.
| |
| ~.' __---4------- ---------
| |
| -~
| |
| Table J-14 (Page 1 of 2)Percent Relative Abundance of Zooplankton (Night) in Entrainment SamplesýJames A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Annual 18 26 8 23 8 22 10 22 12 26 19 30 14 , 27 11 25 17 28 13 27 9 30 21 6 Mean Tax8 Protozoa Ctliat.Tint innidae Vortice llidae Ciliata unid.Suctoria Acinetid e Suctorla unid.Protozoa unid.Roti fer Brachionidae Keratella cochlearis ruteIn ra- sa Kerutella Sp.Brachionus an ularis BrachionusC lcafi urns usc Ffrus Brachionus3 dpA ~ tdenttus-urceolaris Brachionus sp.Erchlani--dilitata Io tTc i n oina Nuholsa ufflnnata t ' p.l p.Woffo l ca sp.Cuuliiinlcomnis Conchilus up.cnicnhiidan wid.Filinia lon mseta sun p.pa urlodonta pjnca up.Vri dniicho tera ru nolyrtnra M0~r 2.0i"Yt17U'iT eurne'tern a'r t r atp tazana rx~ot phac t nt S 0l aeta sp.chocerca multlcrinis Iocerca sp.PTIrf 31o-m-lidsonn Pinununusa nrcau fl'oeosorm ent cu are Pinnusna sp.
| |
| notabilis Odelin up.kotifera unid.6 T 14 T T T T 3 9 15 3 1 12 2 16 13 3 T 1 I T I I 2 1 2 2 2 5 T 2 12 1 I.0 S S 0 T T 12 1 1 1 T 4 5 5 20 23 10 49 58 4 1 3 1 1 11 32 39 11 18 i 1 1 5 13 T 4 8 7 4 35 2 4 2 7 9 8 8 3 1 10 T T T T 4 6 2 1 1 1 T T 1 2 8 3 3 1 1 7 1 T 1 3 1 1 T 1 T T T 1 T 1 T T 2 1 T 2 1 3 4 4 2 3 4 T 1 1 T 1 3 8 3 6 2 0 5 1 T 2 T 1 T 65 T 7 T T T T T I T 2 1 8 7 T T 2 7 T 1 T T T I T 2 T 1 1 1 2 1 I 1 1 T 3 18 9 3 13 6 17 11 14 21 29 34 15 5 6 1 2 15 2 11 23 4 1 1 2 5 3 3 1 1 19 8 17 4 5 1 1 4 T 1 2 T 29 2 T 8 T T 1 1 T 1 1 2 2 T 1 4 18 I T 3 83 32 3 I5 3 1 1 T T T 8 T 3 T 3 1 T T 1 4 1 1 1 I 1 T T 11 3 3 2 T 2 T T T T 1 2 T T T 1 T I T 1 1 1 T 1 T 1 4 5 T T 3 1 1 T 1 T I T 1 6 1 T 2 2 T 1 T 2 1 Taxa Arthropoda Cladocera Bosmena sp.Bosm-nie A and.Alona sp.,&,ndorps sphaeries hy~doPa oP.-a n a galeata onendotae a C a retrocurva lai n .aD Cale SI p.aphni, a ture osp.Cladocera unTd.Calanoida (Copepoda)
| |
| Diantomus ni-esnnenoin 1 atashlaand1 Dantonis -siTii Eureteniora fftins EaFRom.n~ara op.Llmnocalanos nacrurus Ca i nl Calanoida adult unid.Calanoida nauplil unitd.Cyclopoida (Copepoda) yclopppbj9uidatoo thoasi LCylops verna~ils TIop5cinos piao nexicana Cyc Opp 2CT i nMe unid7 Harpacticoida (Copepoda)
| |
| Harpacticoida adult wild.Harpacticoida nauplili unid.Harpacticoida juvenile unid.Copepoda nauplil unid.Tartigrada unild, Total density (No./m 3) 3, Table J-14 (Page 2 of 2)Jan Feb. 14r Apr 2 1 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Annual 18 26 8 23 8 22 10 22 12 26 19 30 14 27 11 26 17 28 13 27 9 30 21 6 Mean 10 10 T 16 10 24 25 6 3 4 27 17 27 5 T T T 4 4 T I T"3 1 1] 1 T T T T 1 1 1 1 1 T 9 30 1 1 T T 9 3 15 T T T T T T T I 3 T 1 2 T T S 1 I T 34 1 3 T I T I T T 26 11 94 55 56 78 1 15 21 2 2.2 10 2 1 T T T T T 2 i T T I T T 6 2 T T I I T 4 T 2 1 T 1 1 T 4 11 12 1 2 5 9 T 12 2) 2 3 1 4 3 T 1 I I T 85 1 1 4 T T 10 1s 18 T 14 13 T 4 12 11 10 2 5 8 10 3 2 7 5 2 2 1 7 I C-4 0 0 U 0 0 0 0i.(A UL 7 269 2,343 1.94S 6,900 2,098 2,644 6,794 7,477 62,731 167,321 660,804 348,243 683,566 882,793 839.746 602,073 87,956 686,066 233,928 196.984 166,841 83.789 90,447 8,553 243.138.. ...... ..
| |
| Table J-15 Number of Total Zooplankton Collected in Entrainment Samples, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 17 Jan 1035 0.4 25 Jan 1100 0.7 07 Feb 1035 1.2 21 Feb 1045 1.0 07 Mar 1150 0.7 21 Mar 1100 1.4 06 Apr 1035 1.8 21 Apr 0955 4.7 11 May 1100 7.2 25 May 1110 10.2 18 Jun 1112 13.3 29 Jun 1235 14.8 13 Jul 1335 17.6 27 Jul 1125 22.2 10 Aug 1115 22.7 24 Aug 1120 23.4 15 Sep 1115 6.0 27 Sep 1200 6.0 12 Oct 1109 14.4 26 Oct 1051 12.3 8 Nov 1100 11.0 29 Nov 1041 6.5 20 Dec 1035 0.9 4 Jan 1000 1.6 20.2 14.3 16.8 16.8 21.9 19.4 19.0 9.5 16.0 15.6 15.0 16.4 15.2 15.6 15.2 12.9 10.9 10.9 14.4 12.3 12.8 6.8 13.9 15.9 3/1 3/I 3/1 3/1 3/1 3/1 3/1 2/1 3/1 3/1 3/2 3/2 3/2 3/2 3/2 3/2 3/1 3/1 1/1 1/1 0/1 1/2 2/2 2/2 3472.9 3100.5 2206.4 3727.3 2924.1 2221.0 2904.3 18865.0 150916.2 126118.6 782959.6 572570.8 1721938.0 355903.9 637724.5 462211.2 16490.3 549322.1 182539.1 90440.6 208454.5 65271.8 90427.8 11958.8 155.4 62.3 238.1 645.8 252.1 34.5 433.3 1209.0 228.5 49484.2 21801.3 26433.9 87660.0 45365.1 18465.6 10994.7 271.6 1442.9 28730.1 8694.7 28349.2 1386.1 10181.1 861.9 18 Jan 0015 0.4 25 Jan 2345 0.4 08 Feb 0000 0.6 23 Feb 0000 1.1 08 Mar 0000 0.9 22 Mar 0005 1.4 10 Apr 0005 2.7 22 Apr 0000 5.5 12 May 0100 5.6 26 May 0000 10.6 19 Jun 2400 13.7 30 Jun 2400 .15.4 14 Jul 2330 20.0 28 Jul 2345 22.6 11 Aug 0005 23.3 25 Aug 0005 22.8 17 Sep 0000 12.5 28 Sep 0000 15.4 13 Oct 0009 14.6 27 Oct 0009 12.3 9 Nov 2400 11.3 30 Nov 0100 7.0 21 Dec 0100 1.6 6 Jan 0000 1.5 20.1 14.7 17.2 17.3 21.7 18.9 19.8 14.2 15.6 15.7 16.3 16.2 10.1 15.6 15.2 12.2 0.2 0.4 14.6 12.3 12.7 7.3 14.0 17.9 3/1 3/1 3/1 3/1 3/1 3/1 3/1 2/1 3/1 3/1 3/2 3/2 3/2 3/2 3/2 3/2 2/1 1/1 1/1 1/1 0/1 1/2 3/2 2/2 3269.0 269.0 2342.9 57.1 1945.2 135.7 6900.2 949.1 2097.9 177.8 2644.2 272.5 6793.9 686.0 7477.2 247.6 62731.1 15074.0 167320.5 16827.1 660803.9 66962.9 348242.6 12052.7 683565.6 11142.7 882793.1 41269.9 839745.7 45079.3 602073.3 21375.6 87956.1 972.2 686065.8 44797.2 233928.1 2182.5 196983.6 20052.9 166840.7 100301.2 83789.2 1448.7 90447.0 8817.5 8552.9 124.3 S 2.a 0 S 0 Sg 4 5.S S 0.S S 8~Circulating pumps -120,000 gpm each; service pumps " 18,000 gpm each.
| |
| Table J-16 (Page 1 of 2)Number of Total Microzooplankton in Viability (Dead vs. Live) Samples, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, 1978 Intake Discharge 30 Simulation 2' Simulation Intake Numberr Total d % Number Total d % Number Total d Total TemD DeadT Cold Deade Dead Coll1d Deade Dead Colld Dead Co1l'da e R-1R-2 R-l R-2 R-1 R-2 R-1 R-2 R-1 R-2 R-1 R-2 Deade R-1 R-2 R-1 R-2 Dead 17 Jan 1035 0.4 20.2 53 35 111 56 52.7 27 28 36 52 62.5 41 77 102 122 52.7 42 114 67 136 75.9 18 Jan 0015 0.4 20.1 51 84 93 175 50.4 139 97 197 149 68.2 82 76 111 111 71.2 119 77 184 156 57.6 25 Jan 1100 0.7 14.3 57 64 83 132 56.3 45 84 75 125 64.5 78 44 115 70 65.9 85 75 131 136 59.9 25 Jan 2345 0.4 14.7 47 36 95 82 46.9 88 68 118 77 80.0 52 80 135 150 46.3 109 90 148 111 76.8 07 Feb 1035 1.2 16.8 39 27 73 80 43.1 105 75 130 124 70.9 61 58 117 109 52.7 34 52 69 85 55,8 08 Feb 0000 0.6 17.2 40 51 100 Ill 43.1 96 140 124 187 75.9 .41 95 59 108 81.4 65 73 105 116 62.4 21 Feb 1045 1.0 16.8 24 24 82 94 27.3 38 77 103 117 52.3 41 47 105 61 53.0 82 29 106 86 57.8 23 Feb 0000 1.1 17.3 15 40 179 144 17.0 26 36 142 156 20.8 30 42 87 123 34.3 26 45 103 157 27.3 07 Mar 1150 0.7 21.9 20 33 127 101 23.2 28 93 180 245 28.5 42 34 163 142 24.9 12 16 224 161 7.3 08 Mar 0000 0.9 21.7 66 42 138 132 40.0 120 177 175 227 73.9 52 65 90 92 64.3 65 64 126 106 55.6 21 Mar 1100 1.4 19.4 36 43 62 98 49.4 131 114 180 156 72.9 70 55 108 79 66.8 62 44 165 81 43.1 22 Mar 0005 1.4 18.9 20 87 103 214 33.8 90 60 124 122 61.0 48 46 161 106 35.2 51 63 122 I11 48.9 06 Apr 1035 1.8 19.0 30 46 94 103 38.6 96 78 145 141 60.8 32 26 93 87 32.2 68 39 133 103 45.3 10 Apr 0005 2.7 19.8 25 29 193 174 14.7 36 120 122 233 43.9 36 49 147 161 27.6 102 57 176 151 48.6 21 Apr 0935 4.7 9.5 36 62 419 472 11.0 60 68 165 253 30.6 46 64 302 319 17.7 114 45 428 265 22.9 22 Apr 0000 5.5 14.2 35 67 194 184 27.0 120 137 224 179 63.8 39 37 181 231 18.4 86 85 238 196 39.4 11 May 1100 7.2 16.0 127 104 459 320 29.7 174 163 308 249 60.5 188 179 310 346 55.ý 216 210 349 473 51.8 12 May 0100 5.6 15.6 48 60 291 288 18.7 86 212 152 330 61.8 57 78 290 385 20.0 62 53 285 249 21.5 25 May 1110 10.2 15.6 113 118 320 299 37.3 141 141 233 262 57.0 94 102 281 288 34.4 139 197 287 438 46.3 26 May 0000 10.6 15.7 154 88 497 254 32.2 97 138 174 249 55.6 87 67 216 219 35.4- 145 92 281 228 46.6 18 Jun 1112 13.3 15.0 271 389 493 639 58.3 284 240 630 488 46.9 257 158 421 300 57.6 406 242 520 393 71.0 19 Jun 0000 13.7 16.3 182 135 367 262 50.4 319 204 427 242 78.2 141 98 328 206 44.8 210 161 390 263 56.8 27 Jun 1305 19.3 13.4 5- -----15 ---113 158 287 362 41.8k 143 103 210 248 53.7_29 Jun 1229 14.8 16.4 85 93 276 340 28.9 142 150 226 217 65.9 ----------30 Jun 0000 15.4 16.2 56 96 194 221 36.6 164 164 289 208 66.0 103 118 224 289 43.1 103 163 250 259 52.3 C-4 0 S a il a aTime of day and night intake samples (2400 hr clock)bIntake temperature before tempering cNumber of dead organisms observed In each sample dTotal number of organisms observed.in each sample ONean % dead equal to total of dead observed in R-1 and R-2 divided by total organisms observed in R-1 and R-2 t Samples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated... .........
| |
| .
| |
| Table J-16 (Page 2 of 2)3 Simulation 2~ Simulation
| |
| -Jntake fli rharn 3* Simulation 2° Simulation Totale Dischareta d Intake Date Timea Number_ Total Ad I OT R- Coll2d- -e AT R.-1 R-2 R-1 R-2 Da NNcsly Totall j!j D -NumbeK TotalA V Numbe C Total d d De ad Co1lIdd ' e Dead' Co1l1d Deade Dead Deade d R R-1 R-2 R-1 R-2 D R-1 R-2 R-i R-2 D -i R-2 R-1 R-2 13 Jul 14 Jul 27 Jul 28 Jul 1335 17.6 15.2 155 2330 20.0 10.1 113 1125 22.2 15.6 88 2345 22.6 15.6 204 232 147 65 154 421 161 143 340 481 42.9 195 73.0 145 53.1 264 59.3 321 326 123 297 319 141 228 241 379 380 84.3 i18 205 330 300 51.3 181 211 299 340 61.3 395 163 83.7 77 47 160 109. 46.1t 42 112 103 138 63.9 129 231 97.5 174 116 290 187 60.8 220 207 364 319 62.5'309 250 96.2 "88 85 116 248 47.5 128 168 239 308 54.1 292 235 91.5 320 242 359 296 85.8 311 183 336 250 84.3 295 250 98.0 70 127 124 166 67.9t 175 131 218 180 76.9t 113 146 89.6 69 60 99 120 58.9 89 112 175 157 60.5 184 165 65.6 101 152 199 204 62.8 83 94 116 139 "69.4 10 Aug 11 Aug 24 Aug 25 Aug 1115 22.7 15.2 0005 23.3 15.2 1120 23.4 12.9 0005 22.8 12.2 153 149 56 56 159 161 78 72 199.178 83 137 195 79,2 260 70.8 157 55.8 176 40.9 286 288 93 125 196 246 139 104 15 Sep 1115 6.0 17 Sep 0000 12.5 27 Sep 1200 15.0 28 Sep 0000 15.4 12 Oct 1109 14.4 13 Oct 0009 14.6 26 Oct 1051 12.3 27 Oct 0009 12.3 10.9 90 0.2 149 0.4 342 0.4 196 101 228 223 184 141 204 392 384 137 68.7 271 79.4 360 75.1 339 56.6 88 93 244 203 117 156 180 197 C-1<U 0 C.Z 0 S S 4 5.S S 0.S 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 143 61 81 69 178 89 106 97 379 224 167 340 355 43.7 208 34.7 202 69.0 435 21.4 125 70 73 102 103 78 77 74 113 141 80.7 136 157 197 242 66.7 113 123 160 197 66.1 118 177 84.4 .258 269 334 308 82.1 185 319 210 435 78.1 384 226 69.5 199 242 284 400 64.5 217 217 286 309 72.9 260 292 72.5 154 180 233 287 64.2 229 223 276 366 70.4 212 149 63.2 137 139 407 372 35.4 156 234 235 404 61.0 109 129 62.2 54 65 132 186 37.4 130 81 217 130 60.8 181 114 50.8 78 70 145 157 49.0 95 103 204 251 43.5 223 407 27.9 184 81 382 324 37.5 70 57 291 260 23.0 142 178 90.0 144 212 308 425 48.6 201 279 253 488 64.8 163 135 74.8 124 127 319 338 38.2 188 183 362 300 56.0 197 251 62.1 132 117 254 207 54.0 142 153 216 398 48.0 210 228 56.2 93 202 221 504 40.7 146 155 280 279 53.8 99 111 65.7 76 94 241 191 39.4 124 136 237 253 53.1 96 123 59.8 89 84 182 243 40.7 159 123 428 247 41.8 78 69 83.7 81 82 149 101 65.2 107 71 122 108 77.4 126 113 77.0 172 115 266 192 62.7 93 88 162 133 61.4 8 Nov 9 NOv 29 Nov 30 Nov 1113 12.8 0013 12.7 1041 6.5 0000 7.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.3 201 119 149 156 193 212 104 142 489 346 386 363 402 44.2 461 41,0 317 36.0 408 38.7 130 130 138 109 158 93 140 137 72 66 20 Dec 21 Dec 4 Jan 1035 0.9 1002 1.6 1000 1.6 13.9 62 12.3 51 15.8 63 72 73 70 276 205 98 288 23.8 201 30.5 91 70.4')£A A1 72 52 61 66 79 62'A'rj~~~~8 101.~JU "' '.6 Jan 0002 1. 179 40 121 12 414 aMilitary time.Intake temperature before tempering.
| |
| cuamber of dead organisms observed in each sample.dTotal number of organism observed in each sample.eemn % dead equal to total of dead observed In R-I and R-9 divided by total organisms observed In R-I and R-2.tSamples taken in actual discharge plume rather than simulated JAFP-06-0167 Docket No. 50-333 Attachment 2 JamesA. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal- Application
| |
| -Amendment 1:Reference for RAI E-1-h-1 ni4i a Pro1de y Y, JAFP-06-0167 Docket No. 50-333 Attachment 2 James A. FitzPatrickNuclear Power Plant* License RenewalApplication -Amendment 1 ,Reference for RAI E-1-h-2 Figure E-1-h-2 Lake Ontarlo Averoged Cunents, 1972-73-unmer 4vV~r Figure E-1-h-2: Lake Ontario water circulation patterns JAFP-06-0167 Docket No. 50-333 Attachment 2 James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant License ,Renewal Application' -Amendment 1 Reference for RAI E-1-h-3 Figure E-1-h-3 Figure E-1 -h-3. Shape and Dimensions of the Hydraulic Zone of Influence for the JAFNPP Cooling Water Intake near nine Mile Point of Lake Ontario.
| |
| jf JAFP-06-0167 Docket No. 50-333 Attachment 2 James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal Application-Amendment 1 Reference for RAI E-1-h-4 HYDRAULIC ZONE OF INFLUENCE (ESTIMATED CALCULATION)
| |
| SUPPORTING THE SAMPLING PLAN INCLUDED WITHIN THE PROPOSAL FOR INFORMATION COLLECTION CLEAN WATER ACT §316(b) PHASE II REGULATIONS JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (SPDES PERMIT No. NY 0020109) LYCOMING, NEW YORK Submitted By Entergy ENTERGY NUCLEAR FITZPATRICK, LLC James A FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant 277 Lake Road East Oswego, New York 13126 Prepared In Consultation with Enercon Services, Inc.and Normandeau and Associates, Inc.25 Nashua Road Bedford, NH 03110-5500 500 Town Park Lane, Suite 275 Kennesaw, GA 30144 8 March 2006 9Design Calculations and Analysis Cover Sheet/$ AI 0 N Form 3.4.1 Revision:
| |
| 2 Effective:
| |
| 6/28/05 Pg. 1 of 1 Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-316 1-01 Revision:
| |
| 0 I Page 1 of 37 Document Title: Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation Project No: 262-0-3161 Project Name: Intake Flow Distribution for Fitzpatrick Electric Power Generation Plant Client: Enercon Engineering Services Incorporated Document Purpose/Summary:
| |
| The purpose of this document is to present the inputs, assumptions, methodology, and results of a single computational fluid dynamics (CFD) calculation.
| |
| This calculation was performed to predict the hydraulic zone of influence (HZOI) for the James A.Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant CWIS (cooling water intake structure) as part of the U.S. EPA's Clean Water Act, Section 316b.Based on the CFD analysis, the HZOI is estimated and shown as iso-surfaces around the CWIS.All software used in the preparation of this calculation was done so in accordance with QAP 3.5, Use of Computer Software and Error rting JAest revision.Preparer Signature:
| |
| Date: iLL7 Design Verification Method: QA Applicability Level: x Design Review -Nuclear Safety Related Alternative Calculation
| |
| __ Quality Significant
| |
| -Qualification Testing _x Nuclear Non-Safety Related Professional Engineer (if required)
| |
| Approval Date Prepared By: Joseph Tezak 3___"_ _ /cD_Printed/Typed Name &,-SE ature Date Revewd y:Timothy Sande A -7 /0 Printed/Typed Name i e Date Approved By: Joseph Smith -" Printed/Tyed Name Sigature " Date REVISION HISTORY LOG ECEDTEOLO Form6.1.3evisEffective Date: Page 1 of 1 A L I O N Form 6.1.3 Revision:
| |
| 0 6/28/05 Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 I Revision:
| |
| 0 Page 2 of 37 Document Title: Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation Revision Description 0 Original Document Issue Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation SCL I ON Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 3 of 37 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGy TABLE OF CONTENTS D esign Calculations and Analysis Cover Sheet ...............................................................................
| |
| 1 Revision H istory Log .............................................................................................................
| |
| 2 Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................
| |
| 3 List of Figures .................................................................................................................................
| |
| 4 D efinitions and A cronym s ..........................................................................................................
| |
| 5 1 Purpose ....................................................................................................................................
| |
| 6 2 D esign Input and A ssum ptions ...............................................................................................
| |
| 7 3 M ethodology
| |
| ...........................................................................................................................
| |
| 8 4 A nalysis ...................................................................................................................................
| |
| 9 4.1 CA D M odel 9....................................................................................................................
| |
| 9 4.2 Com putational M esh ...............................................................................................
| |
| 13 4.3 Boundary Conditions
| |
| ................................................................................................
| |
| 14 4.4 M odeling of the M ass Sink .......................................................................................
| |
| 16 4.5 Turbulence M odeling ..............................................................................................
| |
| 17 4.6 Steady-State Calculation
| |
| ...........................................................................................
| |
| 18 4.7 Graphical Determination of the Hydraulic Zone of Influence
| |
| ...................................
| |
| 19 4.8 CW IS Figures and Results .......................................................................................
| |
| 20 5 Sum m ary and Conclusions
| |
| ................................................................................................
| |
| 36 6 References
| |
| .............................................................................................................................
| |
| 37 A ttachm ent A -D esign Input Em ail #1 ..................................................................................
| |
| A l A ttachm ent B -D esign Input Em ail #2 ..................................................................................
| |
| B 1 A ttachm ent C -D esign Input Em ail #3 ..................................................................................
| |
| Cl WFitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation
| |
| / I. 1 -O0 N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 4 of 37 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 4.1.1 -Intake Structure View From Shore Looking North ............................................
| |
| 9 Figure 4.1.2 -Intake Structure Cut-Away Viewed from the Southeast
| |
| ..................................
| |
| 10 Figure 4.1.3 -Intake Structure Southwest View from Shore .......................................................
| |
| 1I Figure 4.1.4 -Intake Structure Section View from East Toward West ..................................
| |
| 12 Figure 4.2.1 -M esh Configuration
| |
| ............................................................................................
| |
| 13 Figure 4.3.1 -Velocity Boundary Conditions and Problem Setup ..........................................
| |
| 15 Figure 4.4.1 -M ass Sink Location ...........................................................................................
| |
| 16 Figure 4.6.1 -Mean Kinetic EnergyChange Over Time ........................................................
| |
| 18 Figure 4.8.1 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Streamlines, Overhead View ...........................
| |
| 20 Figure 4.8.2 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Streamlines, Front View (North is Into Page) ...... 21 Figure 4.8.3 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Streamlines, Southeast View ...........................
| |
| 21 Figure 4.8.4 -Absolute Lake Velocity Magnitude and Unit Vectors at Bottom of CWIS ..........
| |
| 22 Figure 4.8.5 -Absolute Lake Velocity Magnitude and Unit Vectors at Centerline of CWIS ..... 23 Figure 4.8.6 -Absolute Lake Velocity Magnitude and Unit Vectors Just Above the CWIS ...... 24 Figure 4.8.7 -Absolute Lake Velocity Magnitude and Unit Vectors at Lake Surface ...........
| |
| 25 Figure 4.8.8 -Southwest View of the Velocity Iso-Surfaces Showing the Impingement HZOI (0.5 fps above am bient is blue) ................................................................................................
| |
| 26 Figure 4.8.9 -Front View of the Velocity Iso-Surfaces Showing the Impingement HZOI (0.5 fps above am bient is blue) ..................................................................................................................
| |
| 26 Figure 4.8.10 -Top View of the Velocity Iso-Surfaces Showing the Impingement HZOI (0.5 fps above am bient is blue) ..................................................................................................................
| |
| 27 Figure 4.8.11 -Velocity Iso-Surfaces, Top View ...................................................................
| |
| 28 Figure 4.8.12 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Contours Above Ambient at Lake Bottom (Near C W IS ) ...........................................................................................................................................
| |
| 2 9 Figure 4.8.13 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Contours Above Ambient at Vertical Centerline of L ak e ...............................................................................................................................................
| |
| 3 0 Figure 4.8.14 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Contours Above Ambient at Surface of Lake ..... 31 Figure 4.8.15 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Contours Below Ambient at Lake Bottom ..........
| |
| 32 Figure 4.8.16 -Area in which the Velocity Magnitude is Greater than 5% of Ambient at the L ak e B ottom ..................................................................................................................................
| |
| 33 Figure 4.8.17 -Area in which the Velocity Magnitude is Greater than 5% of Ambient at the C enterline of the C W IS ............................................................................................................
| |
| 34 Figure 4.8.18 -Area in which the Velocity Magnitude is Greater than 5% of Ambient at the L ak e Surface .................................................................................................................................
| |
| 35 VFitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis CalculationL I 0 N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 5 of 37 SCIENCE AND TECHNO -Dou en N :YLO DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS Acronym Definition CAD Computer Aided Drafting CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics CWIS Cooling Water Intake Structure EPA Environmental Protection Agency FPS Feet per Second GPM Gallons per Minute HZOI Hydraulic Zone of Influence JAF James A. Fitzpatrick QA Quality Assurance RNG Renormalized Group Theory STL Stereolithography 0 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation A L I 0 N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 6 of 37 1 PURPOSE The purpose of this document is to present the inputs, assumptions, methodology, and results of a single computational fluid dynamics (CFD) calculation.
| |
| This calculation was performed to predict the hydraulic zone of influence (HZOI) for the James A. Fitzpatrick (JAF) Nuclear Power Plant CWIS (cooling water intake structure) as part of the U.S. EPA's Clean Water Act, Section 316b.The (HZOI) of an intake extends through that portion of a source water body that is affected by the intake flows. In the context of the 316(b) rule, the primary reason for determining an intake's HZOI is to establish where water entering the intake comes from and to use this information to improve the design of biological sampling programs meant to assess the impact of the intake's operation on organisms found in the surrounding areas. For example, the results of the CFD model can be used to determine local velocities in the vicinity of the CWIS. These velocities can, in turn, be compared to sustained and burst swimming speed data for organisms living near the CWIS and the likelihood for the entrainment determined.
| |
| This report defines the HZOI boundary for entrainment and impingement at the JAF intake structure.
| |
| The HZOI boundary for entrainment of fish eggs and larvae is defined in this report as the calculated Lake Ontario nearfield current velocity that is 5% or greater than ambient lake currents due to the influence of the JAF CWIS. The HZOI boundary for impingement of juvenile and older fish is defined in this report as the calculated Lake Ontario nearfield current velocity that is 0.5 feet per second (fps) or more greater than ambient lake currents due to the influence of the JAF CWIS. The ambient conditions and CWIS operating conditions are defined in Section 2.
| |
| 0Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation L I O1 N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 7 of 37 SCIENCE IND TECHNO LOG oumnYN :ALO 2 DESIGN INPUT AND ASSUMPTIONS This section lists the design inputs used in the debris transport analysis, as well as the major assumptions made.1) CAD Input a. The Fitzpatrick CWIS dimensions were obtained from various drawings [1].2) CFD Model a. The water intake flow rate was set to 388,600 gpm [Attachment 2].b. The lake bottom elevation at the intake structure was set as 218.8'. The bottom of the intake opening was set at 222.8'. The top of the intake was set to 232.8'. The water level was set at 246.8', or an elevation of 14' above the top of the intake[Attachment 1].c. The water temperature used for the analysis was 540 F which represents the average measured water temperature for 2004 [Attachment 3]. This temperature gives a fluid density of 62.40 lb/ft 3 and a fluid viscosity of 8.2593x 10-4 slug/ft/sec.
| |
| Experience has shown that a large change in water temperature has little to no effect on the results of the CFD calculation.
| |
| : d. The lake bottom was modeled as a simple grade of 2' from the shoreline out toward the center of the lake [Attachment 2].e. The Fitzpatrick CWIS sits in the southeast portion of Lake Ontario, which has a general counter-clockwise circular flow at an average of 0.29 fps [Attachment 2].Given this, the western and southern boundaries were set as velocity boundary conditions with a velocity of 0.29 fps introduced at an angle of 20' northeast of the east-west centerline.
| |
| Also, the entire fluid domain was initialized at this velocity as well. This will be discussed in greater detail in Section 4.3.
| |
| Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation L I O N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 8 of 37 SCIENCE AND TECHNO Dcuen o:ALO 3 METHODOLOGY The steps taken to accomplish the Fitzpatrick CWIS analysis were: 1. A 3-dimensional model of the Fitzpatrick CWIS was created using computer aided drafting (CAD) software based on building drawings.
| |
| The CAD model was then incorporated into the CFD model.2. The mesh in the CFD model was nodalized to sufficiently resolve the features of the CAD model, but at the same time keep the cell count low enough for the simulation to run in a reasonable amount of time.3. Boundary and initial conditions in the CFD model were defined consistent with the intake location and flow rate and the lake depth, temperature, and velocity.4. At the CWIS intake pipe, a mass sink was added to the model to remove the appropriate amount of water.5. The appropriate turbulence modeling equations were selected for the CFD model.6. A single calculation was carried out to achieve a steady-state condition.
| |
| After running the CFD calculation, the mean kinetic energy was checked to verify that the model had been run long enough to reach steady-state conditions.
| |
| : 7. A graphical determination of the HZOI was made from the velocity fields calculated in the CFD calculations.
| |
| The CFD calculation for the Fitzpatrick CWIS model was performed using Flow-3D Version 9.0. Flow-3D is a commercially available general-purpose computer code for modeling the dynamic behavior of liquids and gasses influenced by a wide variety of physical processes.
| |
| The program is based on the fundamental laws of mass, momentum, and energy conservation.
| |
| It has been constructed for the treatment of time-dependent multi-dimensional problems, and is applicable to most flow processes.
| |
| * Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation I ON Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 9 of 37 SCIENCE AND TEc..OLOGY oum n N :ALO 4 ANALYSIS Following the basic methodology presented in the previous section, the Fitzpatrick CWIS and subsequent flow patterns produced were analyzed.4.1 CAD Model The first step in the analysis was to construct a 3-dimensional CAD model of the CWIS. This was done using Autodesk's Inventor version 10 software based on structural drawings [ 1 ]. The CAD model was built from the bottom (elevation 218.8') to the top (elevation 232.8') of the CWIS. The lake bottom was modeled as a simple grade of 2' from the shoreline out toward the center of the lake. These files were exported to a stereolithography (STL) format to be used as input for the CFD model. Figures 4.1.1 through 4.1.4 show various views of the structural information contained in the STL files.Figure 4.1.1 -Intake Structure View From Shore Looking North 0 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation A.L I O N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 10 of 37 I ý ýNo h 10 FEET Figure 4.1.2 -Intake Structure Cut-Away Viewed from the Southeast 9 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 11 of 37 10 FEET Figure 4.1.3 -Intake Structure Southwest View from Shore
| |
| * Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation L I A ON Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 1 Page: 12 of 37 10 FEET North Figure 4.1.4 -Intake Structure Section View from East Toward West 9 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation
| |
| / .10,N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 13 of 37 SCIENCE AND TECHHO D, oum n N :ALO 4.2 Computational Mesh Four rectangular meshes were defined in the CFD model. The first mesh was set to a resolution of 6" per cell in each direction that was fine enough to resolve the important features of the CWIS and the flow patterns generated by it, but not so fine that the simulation would take a prohibitively long period of time to run. The second mesh was set to a resolution of 1' per cell and bounded the inner mesh. The third mesh was set to 2' per cell and bounded both of the previous two meshes. The F' and 2' meshes are in the problem to provide a transition from the smallest 6" mesh to the largest and final 4' mesh. Without the inner meshes, there would be too large a gap between the mesh sizes, which can cause numerical errors in the calculation.
| |
| The final 4' per cell mesh extends 500 feet in each direction from the intake structure.
| |
| The total number of cells in the problem is 2,943,480 and the computational extents of the problem are shown below in Figure 4.2.1. To summarize, the mesh configuration gives a resolution of 6" (red mesh) in the vicinity of the intake, a 1' resolution (green mesh) out to a distance of 80' in each direction from the intake, a resolution of 2' (blue mesh) out to a distance of 160' in each direction from the intake, and a resolution of 4' (black mesh) out to a distance of 500' in each direction from the intake. The mesh lengths have been labeled in a plan view in Figure 4.3.1.Figure 4.2.1 -Mesh Configuration WFitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation 5CL I O-N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 14 of 37 4.3 Boundary Conditions Boundary conditions are set at the minimum and maximum bounds of the x, y, and z planes. The boundaries of the inner meshes are irrelevant as they are automatically set up as a continuation of the outer mesh. For the outer mesh, the minimum z boundary condition (lake floor) was set to a wall, however this boundary condition is irrelevant as the lake bottom acts as the fluid boundary.The maximum z boundary condition (above the water level) was set as a specified pressure boundary with a null value as the reference pressure for the calculation.
| |
| The maximum x (west)and maximum y (north, away from shoreline) boundaries were set to pressure boundaries so that fluid could enter or leave the problem as needed. The minimum x (east) and minimum y (south, toward shoreline) boundaries were set as velocity boundary conditions to simulate the counter-clockwise flow of Lake Ontario. The boundaries (and entire initial fluid field) were given a velocity of 0.2725 fps in the x direction and a velocity of 0.0992 in the y direction.
| |
| This creates velocity vectors that enter the domain and point to an angle of 200 northeast of the east-west centerline of the problem. This boundary condition is illustrated below in Figure 4.3.1. The colored lines are the same mesh boundaries as defined in Section 4.2.
| |
| 9 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation L..Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 15 of 37 W F S 320 ft Ir -, 1000 ft fps Figure 4.3.1 -Velocity Boundary Conditions and Problem Setup
| |
| * Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation
| |
| ,,,,.CE ..o I,,.O N, Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 16 of 37 4.4 Modeling of the Mass Sink The Fitzpatrick CWIS draws in water at a flow rate of 388,600 gpm. A cylindrical mass sink was placed at the inlet pipe of the model to draw water through the intake and out of the lake. A"cap" was placed over the bottom of the mass sink in order to prevent it from drawing water out of the problem from the bottom of the intake. The mass sink's placement (blue cylinder) in the CWIS is illustrated below in Figure 4.4.1.Figure 4.4.1 -Mass Sink Location WFitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation C L I 0 AN Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 1 Page: 17 of 37 4.5 Turbulence Modeling Several different turbulence modeling approaches can be selected for a Flow-3D calculation.
| |
| The approaches are (ranging from least to most sophisticated):
| |
| * Prandtl mixing length* Turbulent energy model" Two-equation k-E model* Renormalized group theory (RNG) model* Large eddy simulation model The RNG turbulence model was judged to be the most appropriate for this CFD analysis due to the large spectrum of length scales that exist in the lake model. The RNG approach applies statistical methods in a derivation of the averaged equations for turbulence quantities (such as turbulent kinetic energy and its dissipation rate). RNG-based turbulence schemes rely less on empirical constants while setting a framework for the derivation of a range of models at different scales. Sensitivity calculations have shown that Flow-3D calculations utilizing the more sophisticated turbulence models (the RNG model included) give results that differ significantly from calculations utilizing the less sophisticated models. Differences in results between calculations made with the more sophisticated models have been shown to be slight.
| |
| 9 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation
| |
| /- L -..Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 18 of 37 4.6 Steady-State Calculation The CFD calculation was initiated with a velocity condition described previously in Section 4.3.The calculation was run long enough for steady-state conditions to develop in order for the results to remain constant over time so the true effects of the CWIS could be analyzed.
| |
| The time needed for the calculation to reach steady stated amounted to 50 seconds of real time, which took close to 6 days of computer time on a dual Opteron 870 Linux machine. Calculated mean kinetic energy in the flow field as a function of time is shown in Figure 4.6.1. When this parameter stops changing, it is a good indication that steady-state has been achieved and results will remain constant.6.006-02..
| |
| ... .... .... ..4SOE-02 -450602 Steady condition 4 2SOE-02 i-S2.50E-02
| |
| -x 2fOOE-02 I 1.50E-02 1.00OE-02 5.O0E-03 0O00E4W *0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 46 50 Time (s)Figure 4.6.1 -Mean Kinetic Energy Change Over Time L Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation I E I D CHN Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-316 1-01 Rev: 0 Page: 19 of 37 4.7 Graphical Determination of the Hydraulic Zone of Influence The following steps were taken to determine the HZOI for the Fitzpatrick CWIS.* The intake was rendered along with velocity magnitude colored streamlines to illustrate where the water entering the intake was coming from and at what velocity it was being drawn in at.* Colored velocity magnitude maps with x-y velocity unit vectors were created at horizontal elevations throughout the lake to show the velocity and flow direction of the lake.* 3D iso-surfaces bounded by velocity magnitudes were created at various velocity values to show the near-field effects the intake is having on the lake." Velocity magnitude maps with colored contour lines were created at horizontal elevations throughout the lake to show the far-field extents of the effects the intake is having on the lake." Colored computational surfaces were created at various lake elevations that show the HZOI as a green area which is defined as an area which has a velocity magnitude greater than 5% of ambient.
| |
| * Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 20 of 37 SCIENCE AND TtCHNO D oc m ntN : LO 4.8 CWIS Figures and Results Figures 4.8.1 through 4.8.3 show an up close rendering of the CWIS with streamlines.
| |
| The streamlines are seeded on a surface inside the CWIS. These figures show where the intake water is being drawn from. The streamlines are colored by absolute velocity magnitude (not relative to the lake current) where the maximum (red) value is set to 0.5 fps... .. /6 Feet 0.250 (fps)0.125-,L "u e,,"- 0.000 Figure 4.8.1 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Streamlines, Overhead View 9 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation C L I 0 AND Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 21 of 37*0.500 ....0.375 6 Feet 0.250 (fps)0.125 0.000 Figure 4.8.2 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Streamlines, Front View (North is Into Page)0.500 fl ,757 0.250 (fps)0.125 0.000 rs Figure 4.8.3 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Streamlines, Southeast View Figures 4.8.4 through 4.8.7 show horizontal slices of the lake at various elevations.
| |
| The vectors are unit vectors representing the velocity magnitude in the x and y directions.
| |
| The colored surface represents absolute velocity magnitude.
| |
| Note that in Figures 4.8.4 and 4.8.5, the lake bottom slopes up toward the shore (south), this is the reason why the figure seems "cut off'.
| |
| 0 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation 1 0 Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 22 of 37--------------------------V-------------
| |
| ----------------- -- ---------------------------------------
| |
| ------- ---------
| |
| ------ ------ ---------------------
| |
| ----------------------------------- -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0--------------
| |
| --------------------------"W w-----------------N$S 00.500 0.100 (fps)100 Feet Figure 4.8.4 -Absolute Lake Velocity Magnitude and Unit Vectors at Bottom of CWIS 0 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 1 Page: 23 of 37 SCIENCE ANO Do u en N :YL----------------------------------
| |
| -----------------
| |
| ------------
| |
| ------------------
| |
| ------------------------------------------
| |
| ------ ------------------
| |
| --------------
| |
| -----------------
| |
| ------ ----------------
| |
| -----------
| |
| ---------
| |
| -------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| ------------
| |
| ------------------------------Al IV IV I- A V--------------1W A IT I I 17.17 17 -7 1? 1ý I- ;w I-N S 110.500 0.300 0.100 (fps)100 Feet Figure 4.8.5 -Absolute Lake Velocity Magnitude and Unit Vectors at Centerline of CWIS
| |
| * Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation ,L..1 0ON Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 24 of 37-------------------
| |
| -------o ------ý- -- -.F---------------------
| |
| ---------
| |
| ------------
| |
| -----------
| |
| -------------------------
| |
| -----------
| |
| -----------------J-------------------
| |
| -----------------
| |
| ----------------------------------------------0 -W V -F A"F "F .I, IV -IF -41 Al Al AIV 'N' -V .T -ip IF I- IN, 11 IN, It A, "r IF IF ID' I* ýw -1 IN, -7 If _;a, I- IF.W A, .1 IF "F -N, N, IF .1 .0 IF I- IV'W IF -F ,F "r I* IF w V A, A_N' 1 IV -N, 1 -1 IV ý "r ;? 'T P -A A * .0 w 4 i 1. -1 1- 11 IV I- N, IF IM, 11 IV A 11 IV or IV IT ."' .11 1 -1"F .......IV IV "1 1`9 1- 1. A IV IN, IN, IF AF _I? IF "F "0 "W `F -`W 17 -V---------------N w*0.500 0.300 0.100 (fps)100 Feet I I Figure 4.8.6 -Absolute Lake Velocity Magnitude and Unit Vectors Just Above the CWIS 9 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation ,N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 25 of 37------------
| |
| ---------------------------------------------------
| |
| -----------
| |
| -------- -------------------------------
| |
| ---------------
| |
| ---------------------
| |
| ---------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| ----------
| |
| -- -----------------------------------------------------------------W IN ýW 'W ýv V -V M -V V -V -W W ,P w .1 'M v I IV I.-P IV 1ý IV IT A, 'A A,- ý 11-T 'IV .W -W 11 A -V A Aý, 1. 1* 1ý -* A A A A A -V -V -"v R V V A 1ý N IP I- I- I- IV A I- I- I A Iw I* V 'W 'W W la, ý lip '. '. A '.A A A A, I- 1P A A A A A M A -Ar A IV I A -V q * ý -IV IV I* I* A I* IV-W 'At -*I- A -I A A .1 IV 1ý I- I. I- I- IT .1 IV IT I-IV IT ýA IT M N W4 S 0O.500 0.300 0.100 (fps)100 Feet Figure 4.8.7 -Absolute Lake Velocity Magnitude and Unit Vectors at Lake Surface Figures 4.8.8 through 4.8.10 show the CWIS and three iso-surfaces colored by velocity magnitude relative to the lake current. Keep in mind that the lake is flowing in at 0.29 fps toward the east and north of the intake. The inner red surface shows areas where the velocity magnitude is 1 fps or greater than ambient. The middle blue surface shows areas where the velocity magnitude is 0.5 fps or greater than ambient. The outer yellow surface shows areas where the velocity magnitude is 0.4 fps or greater than ambient.
| |
| * Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation L I AN Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 26 of 37 Figure 4.8.8 -Southwest View of the Velocity Iso-Surfaces Showing the Impingement HZOI (0.5 fps above ambient is blue)04 fps or greater than ambient 0.5 fps or greater 10 Feet than ambient f 1.0 fps or greater than ambient Figure 4.8.9 -Front View of the Velocity Iso-Surfaces Showing the Impingement HZOI (0.5 fps above ambient is blue)
| |
| * Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation SCIENCE/AND T,.°L9QO Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 27 of 37 Figure 4.8.10 -Top View of the Velocity Iso-Surfaces Showing the Impingement HZOI (0.5 fps above ambient is blue)Figure 4.8.10 shows the furthest distance from the intake structure for each velocity value. The furthest distance from the intake where the velocity due to the influence of the JAF CWIS is 0.4 fps or higher above ambient is 6 feet. The furthest distance from the intake where the velocity due to the influence of the JAF CWIS is 1 fps or higher above ambient is 1.5 feet. The furthest distance from the intake where the velocity due to the influence of the JAF CWIS is 0.5 fps or higher above ambient is 5 feet.
| |
| 9 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation ,N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 28 of 37 Figure 4.8.11 shows a zoomed out view of the previous 3 figures. The region in purple is the area of the entrainment HZOI, where the current velocities are greater than 5% above ambient Lake Ontario current due to the JAF CWIS. The region in light blue is the area where the current velocities are less than 5% below ambient Lake Ontario currents due to the JAF CWIS. This leaves the grey area which represents the area in which the current velocities are within +/- 5% of the ambient Lake Ontario current.Figure 4.8.11 -Velocity Iso-Surfaces, Top View
| |
| * Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation0D TECHNOLOGY N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 29 of 37 Figures 4.8.12 through 4.8.14 show the entire range of the CFD problem at different elevations within the lake with colored contour lines spaced in .05 fps intervals from the ambient lake velocity of 0.29 fps. These figures show that water to the far west of the intake for the most part moves along at the ambient lake velocity of 0.29 fps or higher. As water approaches the intake from the west, it of course accelerates.
| |
| Water to the immediate east, or downstream, of the intake drops down to a lower velocity as the suction of the intake draws against the current of the lake. This effect becomes less and less pronounced the further the water moves from the intake structure.
| |
| Note that in Figure 4.8.12, the lake bottom slopes up toward the shore (south), this is the reason why the figure seems "cut off'.Figure 4.8.12 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Contours Above Ambient at Lake Bottom (Near CWIS) 0 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation ,tL/ I A O Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 30 of 37 I Figure 4.8.13 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Contours Above Ambient at Vertical Centerline of Lake 0 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation.LDocument No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 31 of 37 r Figure 4.8.14 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Contours Above Ambient at Surface of Lake
| |
| * Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation Af L I O.N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 1 Page: 32 of 37 Figure 4.8.15 examines the low velocity area directly to the east of the intake structure at a higher resolution.
| |
| The lowest velocities are experienced at the lake bottom elevation at the intake structure.
| |
| This area of stall is centered approximately 10 feet east of the intake structure.
| |
| Figure 4.8.15 -Absolute Velocity Magnitude Contours Below Ambient at Lake Bottom 0 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation NC L I T Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 33 of 37 WE ENC A D TCNN m ntN:yL Figures 4.8.16 through 4.8.18 bound the entrainment HZOI (in green) as a value where the velocity magnitude is greater than 5% (0.3045 fps) of the ambient lake velocity (0.29 fps) at various elevation throughout the lake. Note that in Figure 4.8.16 the lake bottom slopes up toward the shore (south), this is the reason why the figure seems "cut off'.Figure 4.8.16 -Area in which the Velocity Magnitude is Greater than 5 % of Ambient at the Lake Bottom Figure 4.8.16 shows that the entrainment HZOI is approximately 30,011 ft 2 of the 1,000,000 ft 2 in the area near the CWIS at the lake bottom, or 3.0% of the total area, with a velocity 5%greater than the ambient velocity (0.29 fps) of the lake.
| |
| 9 Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation 10,N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 34 of 37 Figure 4.8.17 -Area in which the Velocity Magnitude is Greater than 5 % of Ambient at the Centerline of the CWIS Figure 4.8.17 shows that the entrainment HZOI is approximately 163,043 ft 2 of the 1,000,000 ft 2 in the area near the CWIS at the centerline of the CWIS, or 16.3% of the total area, with a velocity 5% greater than the ambient velocity (0.29 fps) of the lake.
| |
| * Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation-C-0 1 .,, Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 35 of 37 Figure 4.8.18 -Area in which the Velocity Magnitude is Greater than 5 % of Ambient at the Lake Surface Figure 4.8.18 shows that the entrainment HZOI is approximately 162,716 ft 2 of the 1,000,000 ft 2 in the area near the CWIS at the surface of the lake, or 16.3% of the total area, with a velocity 5% greater than the ambient velocity (0.29 fps) of the lake.
| |
| Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation SCIENCELAND TEIO N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 36 of 37 5
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| AND CONCLUSIONS The entrainment HZOI (> 0.01 fps above ambient) size varies at various lake elevations.
| |
| At the lake bottom near the CWIS, only 30,011 ft 2 , or 3.0% of the entire domain, has a velocity magnitude greater than 5% of the ambient lake current of (0.29 fps). At the centerline of the CWIS, only 163.043 ft 2 , or 16.3% of the entire domain, has a velocity magnitude greater than 5% of the ambient lake current of (0.29 fps). At the lake surface, only 162.716 ft 2 , or 16.3% of the entire domain, has a velocity magnitude greater than 5% of the ambient lake current of (0.29 fps).Areas of higher velocity magnitude are concentrated directly in front of the intake structure, as would be expected.
| |
| Three higher than ambient velocity values were identified and analyzed.o A small area (red in Figure 4.8.10) that extends out approximately 1.5 ft (at the greatest)in front of the intake structure has a velocity of 1 fps over the ambient velocity of 0.29 fps.o A small area (blue in Figure 4.8.10) that extends out approximately 5 ft (at the greatest)in front of the intake structure has a velocity of 0.5 fps over the ambient velocity of 0.29 fps. This area defines the impingement HZOI.o A small area (yellow in Figure 4.8.10) that extends out approximately 6 ft (at the greatest) in front of the intake structure has a velocity of 0.4 fps over the ambient velocity of 0.29 fps.Areas of lower velocity magnitude are concentrated to the east and west sides directly next to the intake structure.
| |
| This zone would not be a good region to take representative samples of fish near the intake.o The lower velocities are most pronounced at the lake bottom and are less pronounced, or non-existent, as the lake elevation increases.
| |
| o The lower velocity zone to the west of the CWIS can be attributed to the water current being drawn toward, and then stalling in, the "wedge" section of the intake to the northwest of where water is actually entering the structure.
| |
| o The lower velocity zone to the east of the CWIS can be attributed to the suction of the intake slowing the ambient current of the lake that resides in the downstream "shadow." This low velocity area is centered at a distance of 10 feet from the far eastern point of the CWIS.
| |
| Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation 1 ,N Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: 37 of 37 6 REFERENCES
| |
| : 1) Intake Structure General Arrangement Drawing, Drawing Number 11825-FC-43B, Pages 1-4, Rev 3.
| |
| Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation AINL A ON .Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Al of Al ATTACHMENT A -DESIGN INPUT EMAIL #1 The following information should help you develop the model.Lake Bottom Elevation 218.8 Bottom of Intake Opening 222.8 Top of Intake 232.8 Average Water Level 246.8 (14 feet above top of CWIS)I think I need to get you some additional CWIS drawing detail and Bathymetry Data. If I can not get the Bathymetry Data by end of day tomorrow, consider the water vector data as null. If I can not get you additional CWIS Drawing Detail by end of day tomorrow, please do the best that you can to model with assumptions.
| |
| Call me to discuss your assumptions, but we can not let the due date slip.Please give me a call on my cell phone today if you can.Thank you for your effort and patience.Vernon Thompson/
| |
| Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation 5,,ENC AND TEoO Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: BI of BI ATTACHMENT B -DESIGN INPUT EMAIL #2 Joe, This should explain some of the questions that you raised earlier. Use what you feel is appropriate and defendable.
| |
| Key points include" An approximate 4% slope at the intake structure* Structure is Shore facing about 990 feet off shore* Lake Ontario Circulation is approx .08 to .5 feet per second counter-clockwise
| |
| * Additional info on the bar rack configuration.
| |
| The offshore slope at the plant site is steep (5-10% grade) at the beach, flattening to a 2-3% grade at the 15 foot depth contour, then increasing to a 4% slope lakeward.
| |
| Lake Ontario is relatively deep, with an average depth of 283 ft (86 m) and a maximum depth of 802 ft (244 in). Lake Ontario has a volume of approximately 390 mi 3 (1,626 km 3). The CWIS at JAF is a submerged, shore-facing, remote intake with a total design intake flow of 388,600 gallons per minute (gpm). The CWIS is shared primarily by the Circulating Water (CW) and Service Water (SW) systems, and is located about 990 feet from the shoreline of Lake Ontario at coordinates N43°31'37" and E76°23'49".
| |
| The top of the CWIS is at elevation 232.8 feet, approximately 14 feet beneath the lake surface, which typically varies from elevation 244.0 feet to 248.0 feet. The intake consists of four segmented shore-facing openings, each 22 feet wide and 8 feet high, feeding a 14 foot diameter D-shaped intake tunnel that runs beneath the lake bed approximately 1,150 feet to the offshore screenwell and pumphouse.
| |
| The base mat of the CWIS is at elevation 222.8 feet, approximately four feet above the lake bottom elevation of 218.8 feet.The heated bar rack at the remote offshore intake consists of 3 inch by 2 inch rectangular vertical bars on 12 inch centers across each 22 foot by 8 foot intake opening, a total of 88 bars. The design water velocity through the bar rack at the remote intake is 1.2 feet per second with all three circulating water pumps operating (fps; TI 1979).In its simplest form, the largest general circulation of Lake Ontario is counterclockwise with flow to the east along the south shore in a relatively narrow band.At the 19 ft. depth contour, the measured current speed of six-hour duration exceeded with comparable frequency is about 0.2 feet per second (USNRC 1985). Lake currents were measured at selected locations in the vicinity of the Oswego Steam Station (about 6 miles west of Nine Mile Point) for 5 days between 12 October and 19 November 1970. These surface current velocities were mostly alongshore, with speeds ranging from less than 0.08 feet per second (2.5 cm/sec.) to 0.50 feet per second (15 cm/sec.).Please call me with any additional questions.
| |
| Regards, Vernon Thompson Fitzpatrick CWIS CFD Analysis Calculation ,ON Document No: ALION-CAL-ENER-3161-01 Rev: 0 Page: C1 of C1 ATTACHMENT C -DESIGN INPUT EMAIL #3 I don't have an average inlet water temperature per se, but the following may give you some idea of the outer bounds.Intake water temperature recorded at JAFNPP in 2004 ranged from a minimum of 0.6 TC (33.0°F) in early January to a maximum of 23.7 TC (74.6°F) in early October. Intake water temperatures begin to rise in mid-March and peak from mid-July through September.
| |
| This thermal stratification in Lake Ontario, generally extends from late June to October of each year, when the epilimnion averages nearly 70TF (21 'C) and the hypolimnion averages approximately 39 TF (3.9 TC). The timing of the overturn is closely related to the time when the surface water temperatures fluctuate through the temperature of maximum density of fresh water (i.e. 4°C).Let me know if you have any other questions.
| |
| Thanks Vernon JAFP-06-0167 Docket No. 50-333 Attachment 2.James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear'Power Plant* License Renewal Application
| |
| -Amendment 1 Reference for RAI E-1-i-1 POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT 316(a) DEMONSTRATION SUBMISSION PERMIT NO. NY0020109 L-MSE- -/oso30114o/eoop.
| |
| TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES iv LIST OF TABLES vii
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| OF FINDINGS S-I I. INTRODUCTION I-I II. PLANT DESCRIPTION II-1 A. Location and General Features II-i B. Circulating Water System ll-]1. Intake Structure 11-1 2. Discharge Structure 11-2 C. Operating History 11-3 III. BASELINE HYDROGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS lll-1-A. Introduction lll-1 B. General Features of Lake Ontario 111-1 1. Seasonal Temperature Structure III-1 2. Lake Circulation 111-3 3. Perturbations of the General Circulation Pattern 111-4 C. Site Features 111-4 1. Bottom Sediments 111-4 2. Local Currents 111-5 3. Local Lake Thermal Structure 111-6 D. Existing Thermal Discharges in the FitzPatrick Vicinity 111-8 1. Oswego Steam Station Units 1-4, 5 and 6 111-8 2. Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1 111-9 3. Oswego River 111-9 IV. JAMES A. FITZPATRICK THERMAL DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS IV-i-i-TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
| |
| A. Introduction IV-1 B. Review of Physical and Mathematical Models IV-I C. Review of Hydrothermal Field Surveys to Date and Interaction of the Nine Mile Point and James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Plant Thermal Plumes IV-2 D. Plume Time-Temperature History and Velocity Profiles IV-5 E. Water Body Segment for Multi-Plant Effects IV-6 F. Plume Entrainment Volume Ratios IV-7 V V. BIOLOGICAL COMMUNITY V-1 1. Introduction V-1 2. Phytoplankton V-2 3. Total Phytoplankton V-2 4. Diatoms V-3 5. Green Algae V-3 6. Blue-green Algae V-4 7. Zooplankton V-6 8. Benthos V-16 9. Scouring V-22 10. Nekton V-22 11. Conclusions V-24 VI. SELECTION OF IMPORTANT REPRESENTATIVE SPECIES VI-i A. Rationale VI-1 1. Alewife VI-2 2. Brown Trout and Coho Salmon VI-2 3. Rainbow Smelt VI-2 4. Smallmouth Bass VI-2 5. Threesping Stickleback VI-3 6. Yellow Perch VI-3 7. Gammarus sp. VI-3 8. Threatened and Endangered Species VI-3 B. Life Histories of Representative Species VI-4 1. Alewife VI-4 2. Rainbow Smelt VI-8-ii-TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
| |
| Page 3. Yellow Perch VI-12 4. Smallmouth Bass VI-16 5. Threespine Stickleback VI-19 6. Coho Salmon VI- 20 7. Brown Trout VI-21 8. Gammarus Fasciatus VI-22 VII. IMPACT OF THE THERMAL DISCHARGE VII-l A. Introduction VII-1 B. Potential Effects VII-I I. Thermal Effects Coceptual Framework VII-l C. Evaluation of Potential Effects on Representative Important Species VII-3 1i. Direct Thermal Effects VII-3-iii-Figure No.11-1 11-2 11-3 11-4 11-5 11-6 11-7 III-I 111-2 111-3 111-4 111-5 IV-I IV-2 IV-3 IV-4 IV-5 V-I LIST OF FIGURES Title Following Page General Location Map I1-I Plot Plan 11-1 Water Intake and Discharge Arrangement II-1 Intake Structure 11-1 Intake and Discharge Tunnels 11-2 Discharge Structure Typical Diffuser Head 11-2 Frequency Histogram of Daily Average Discharge Temperatures Under Constant Full Flow Operation 11-3 Duration of Lake Ontario Current 111-5 Lake Ontario Current Directions 111-6 Frequency Distribution for Lake Ontario Water Temperatures Measured at Oswego for Summer (June, July, Aug., Sept.) 111-8 Average Surface Temperature Vs. Time 111-8 Location of Intake and Discharge Structures 111-8 Surface Flow Pattern and Temperature Profiles With No Natural Lake Current -Model Tests IV-l Surface Flow Pattern and Temperature Profiles With Eastward Lake Current -Model Tests IV-I Surface Flow Pattern and Temperature Profiles With Westward Lake Current -Model Tests IV-I Time-Temperature History for the Near Field Plume IV-6 Velocity at Plume Centerline Vs. Distance From Diffuser IV-6 Fish Sampling Stations V-i-iv-Figure No.V-2 V-3 V-4 V-5 V-6 V- 7 V-8 V-9 V-10 V-1l V-12 V-13 VI-'VI-2 VI-3 VI-4 LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
| |
| Title Benthos Sampling Stations Plankton Sampling Stations Ratio of Plume Vs. Intake Primary Production Ratio of Plume Vs. Intake Chlorophyll a Ratio of Lake Vs. Intake Chlorophyll a Intake and Plume Simulation Mortality of Total Microzooplankton Intake and Plume Simulation Mortality of Protozoa Intake and Plume Simulation Mortality of Rotifera Intake and Plume Simulation Mortality of Total Copepoda Intake and Plume Simulation Mortality of Cladocera Abundance of Fish Eggs Abundance of Total Fish Larvae Comparison of the Calculated Growth of Male Alewives Among Five Age Classes for Fish Collected By Gill Nets And Trawls Comparison of the Calculated Growth of Female Alewives Among Six Age Classes for Fish Collected By Gill Nets And Trawls Comparison of the Calculated Growth of Male Rainbow Smelt Among Five Age Classes for Fish Collected By Gill Nets And Trawls Comparison of the Calculated Growth of Female Rainbow Smelt Among Six Age Classes for Fish Collected By Gill Nets And Trawls Following Page V-1 V-i V-5 V-5 V-6 V-11 V-i1 V-il V-l1 V-li V-15 V-15 VI-5 VI-5 VI-10 VI-IO LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
| |
| Figure No. Title Following Page VI-5 Comparison of the Calculated Growth of Male Yellow Perch Among Five Age Classes for Fish Collected By Gill Nets And Trawls VI-13 VI-6 Comparison of the Calculated Growth of Female Yellow Perch Among Five Age Classes for Fish Collected By Gill Nets And Trawls VI-13 VI-7 Comparison of the Calculated Growth of Male Smallmouth Bass Among Eight Age For Fish Collected By Gill Nets and Trawls VI-17 VI-8 Comparison of the Calculated Growth of Female Smallmouth Bass Among Nine Age For Fish Collected By Gill Nets and Trawls VI-17 VII-l Maximum Sustained Swimming Speeds of Fish Acclimated to Constant Temperatures VII-3-v 1 Table No.II-1 11-2 III-I 111-2 111-3 IV-I IV-2 IV-3 V-i V-2 V-3 V-4 V-5 V-6 V-7 V-8 V-9 LIST OF TABLES Title Plant Electrical Output Outages Between July 1, 1975 and September 30, 1976 Discharge Characteristics for Oswego Units 1-6, Nine Mile Unit 1, and FitzPatrick Unit Anticipated Maximum Seasonal Loads Record of Monthly Capacity Factors Summary of Hydrothermal Field Survey Data Characteristics of the Water Body Segment Maximum Heated Water Flow Within 3 and 2'F Isotherms Phytoplankton Species Inventory Collection and Analyses Methods for Phyto-plankton and Microzooplankton Abundance and Biomass of Whole Water Phytoplankton at 40-Ft Depth Contour By Transect Statistical Analysis of Phytoplankton Abundance at 40-Ft Stations Statistical Analysis of Phytoplankton Biomass at 40-Ft Stations Plant Load and Temperature Rise at Time of Sampling Microzooplankton Species Inventory Abundance of Microzooplankton at Fitz-40 Ft Station Abundance of Microzooplankton at 40 Ft Depth Contour By Transect Following Page 11-3 11-3 111-9 111-9 111-9 IV-3 IV-7 IV-9 V-2 V-2 V-2 V-3 V-3 V-4 V-6 V-6 V-8-vi i-LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
| |
| Table No. Title Following Page V-10 Statistical Analysis of Microzooplankton Abundance at Fitz-40 Ft Station V-9 V-11 Macrozooplankton Species Inventory V-12 V-12 Abundance of Selected Macrozooplankton at v13 40 Ft Depth Contour V-14 V-13 Ichthyoplankton Species Inventory V-15 V-14 Benthos Species Inventory V-16 V-15 Abundance and Biomass of Selected Macro-invertebrates at 40-Ft Depth Contour By Transect V-17 V-16 Fish Species Inventory V-22 VI-l Catch Per Effort of Selected Fish Species in Gill Net Collections at 40-Ft Depth Contour VI-5 VI-2 Statistical Analysis of Selected Fish Species in Gill Net Collections at 40-Ft Depth Contour VI-5 VI-3 Average Calculated Total Length and Standard Error at Annulus Formation of Alewives VI-5.VI-4 Comparison of Growth Rate of Alewife From Lake Ontario and its Vicinity VI-5 VI-5 Percent Composition of Rainbow Smelt in V Bottom Gill Net Collections By Season VI-8 VI-6 Statistical Analysis of Selected Fish Species in Gill Net Collections at 40-Ft Depth Contour VI-8 VI-7 Average Calculated Total Length and Standard Error at Annulus Formation of Rainbow Smelt VI-8 VI-8 Comparison of Growth Rate of Rainbow Smelt from Lake Ontario and its Vicinity VI-10 VI-9 Statistical Analysis of Selected Fish Species in Gill Net Collections
| |
| *at 40-Ft Depth Contour VI-12-vi i i-LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
| |
| Table No. Title Following Page VI-IO Average Calculated Total Length and Standard Error at Annulus Formation of Yellow Perch VI-12 VI-II Comparison of Growth Rate of Yellow Perch from Lake Ontario and its Vicinity VI-14 VI-12 Statistical Analysis of Selected Fish Species in Gill Net Collections at 40-Ft Depth Contour VI-17 VI-13 Average Calculated Total Length and Standard Error at Annulus Formation of Smallmouth Bass VI-17 VI-14 Gut Contents of Smallmouth Bass VI-18 VII-1 Summer Lethal Threshold Temperatures For Representative Important Species VII-3 VII-2 A Summary of Upper Incipient Lethal Temperatures
| |
| ('C) For Fish VII-3 VII-3 Avoidance Temperatures of Fish as Determined in A +/- Choice Apparatus VII-4 VII-4 A Summary of Critical Thermal Maxima (°C)For Fish Acclimated To Constant Temperatures VII-4 VII-5 A Summary of Preferred Temperatures For Fish Acclimated to Constant Temperatures VII-ll-ix-
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| OF FINDINGS The major findings of this document in regard to the effect of thermal discharge from the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAF)on the aquatic community in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point are sum-marized below. Discharge effects on major trophic levels and representa-tive important species were assessed.
| |
| The demonstration follows the procedures provided in the draft document "316(a) Technical Guidance -Thermal Discharges," dated September 30, 1974 and is a Type III Demonstration.
| |
| : 1. The James A. Fitzpatrick Plant Nuclear Power Plant (JAF) has a flow of 22.23 m /sec (785 cfs) and a maximum plant temperature rise of 17.5%C (31.5 0 F). The heated water is discharged through a multiport, high velocity diffuser at a depth of 8 m (25 ft)directly offshore from the plant.2. JAF operated at a 50% power level or greater from July through October 1975 and was placed in commercial operation on July 28, 1975. The power levels sustained throughout the summer of 1975 combined with the operation of Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1 (NMP-l) were sufficient to produce observable effects on the trophic levels being studied had any occurred.3. The JAF diffuser was designed to produce rapid dilution of the thermal effluent and to minimize the surface area which experiences significant temperature increases.
| |
| Mathematical analysis of the near-field plume (before plume surfacing) indicates a decrease in temperature above intake temperatures from 31.5 to 13.5'F (17.5 to 7.5 0 G) in one second and a further decrease to 9*F (5*c) four seconds after discharge.
| |
| : 4. Hydrothermal field surveys confirmed the rapid dilution of the thermal effluent and indicated a miximrm surface area extent of the 3°F (1.7°C) isotherm of 1,196 x 10 ft when the isotherm was present. Most of the year the areal extent of the surface 3°F isotherm will be reduced (at times to zero) because of natural temperature differences between the surface and bottom near the outfall. Interaction of the JAF plume with that of NMP-l was documented.
| |
| Under conditions causing near field plume interaction, JAF's discharge was found to reduce surface temperatures due to the NMP-l discharge.
| |
| : 5. An analysis of the abundance of major phytoplankton groups in 1975 yielded no evidence of plant-induced depression or enhancement of total phytoplankton, diatoms, green algae, or blue-green algae.Analysis of primary production and chlorophyll a concentrations from entrainment samples indicated that primary production was S-1 increased somewhat in the plume during the period of study and that it was not possible to detect trends in chlorophyll a concentra-tions. The lack of trends in chlorophyll a indicates that plant operation is not affecting phytoplankton standing crop and mortal-ity due to plume entrainment is not indicated in the data.6. Comparisons of abundances of microzooplankton between plant and control transects in 1975 indicated neither statistical nor observ-able differences in abundances.
| |
| The mortality data for microzoo-plankton collected at the plant intake, from the plume, and from exposure to simulated plume conditions did not show an increase in mortality attributable to temperature increases encountered during L. plume entrainment.
| |
| : 7. The abundances of the macrozooplankters Leptodora kindtii and Gammarus fasciatus were compared for plant and control transects in 1975. No differences in abundance attributable to plant operation 1' were found.8. Ichthyoplankton in the study area was low in abundance with the exception of alewife larvae. This low abundance of larvae of most species suggests that the area around JAF's discharge is not a major spawning ground.9. Local scouring and deposition due to the action of the high velo-city diffuser has been observed in the discharge a~ea 2 The area of scour and deposition was estimated to be 44.9 x 10 m-. Benthic habitat has been lost in the area of scour, while in the area of deposition, recolonization and benthic production will resume. The loss of benthic habitat is small and unimportant in relation to benthic production in the Nine Mile Point vicinity.10. The fish community at Nine Mile Point has a species composition typical of Lake Ontario and a seasonal pattern of distribution and abundance that is not influenced by the presence of the thermal discharge.
| |
| : 11. Voluntary exposure to the thermal plume by representative important species of fish will not cause mortalities because the velocity field of the plume will not permit species to maintain themselves in an area of elevated temperature above their upper incipient lethal temperature.
| |
| Avoidance responses to unsuitable temperatures by representative species of fish will'insure that mortalities will not occur.12. Exposure to the thermal plume due to entrainment could result in mortality of the juveniles and adults of some representative species if it is assumed that individuals do not avoid the plume S-2 and that they are entrained into the plume at the point of dis-charge. It was demonstrated that representative important species entrained at the point of discharge would be in safe temperature increases in less than one second which makes the possibility of plume entrained mortality for all life history stages very remote.13. The velocity field of the JAF diffuser will preclude acclimation to temperatures above ambient which could produce a cold shock situation.
| |
| : 14. The lethal thresholds for Gammarus spp. are well above any time/temperature regimes they will experience if entrained into the JAF plume, therefore, no mortalities will occur.15. The effects of shear forces, reduced dissolved oxygen levels, pressure changes, and temperature/chemical interactions in the plume were analyzed and found to have no effect on organisms.
| |
| : 16. The analyses in this document demonstrate that the current mode of discharge at JAF, which is the alternative thermal effluent limita-tion previously requested, will not harm the biological community in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point.S-3 I. INTRODUCTION On May 22, 1974, the staff for Region II of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAF). On June 30, 1974 the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY), pursuant to Section 316(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), requested the Regional Administrator impose alternative thermal effluent limitations to those designated in the draft permit. On February 27, 1975, EPA issued a final NPDES Permit for the FitzPatrick Plant which did not contain the requested alterna-tive thermal effluent limitations.
| |
| In the memorandum transmitted with the Final Permit, EPA deferred a decision on PASNY's request for alternative thermal effluent limita-tions until a demonstration is made pursuant to 316(a) of FWPCA that those alternative thermal effluent limitations are sufficient to protect the balanced indigenous community.
| |
| In meetings and corres-pondence between PASNY and EPA subsequent to issuance of the Final Permit, the scope for a 316(a) Demonstration was discussed and a Type III Demonstration was confirmed in a letter dated November 9, 1976 from Mr. Gerald Hansler (EPA) to Mr. Scott Lilly (PASNY).The Representative Important Species for JAF were indicated in a letter dated August 11, 1975 from Mr. Gerald Hansler (EPA) to Mr. George Berry (PASNY).This document follows the procedures presented in the draft document entitled "316(a) Technical Guidance Thermal Discharges," dated September 30, 1974 and addressed specific points discussed at meetings between PASNY and EPA. Extensive references are made to study results previously submitted to EPA. This document includes descriptions of the plant and the site baseline hydrography.
| |
| The baseline biological community description summarizes available data from the site and includes biological data for the various trophic levels while the plant was in operation.
| |
| More specific impact evaluations based on both site data and published literature are provided for the designated representative important species to support conclusions made in this document.Appended to this document are the temperature data available for the representative important species and a description of the thermal bioassay conducted for this demonstration.
| |
| Also included in the Appendix are the relevant water quality communications.
| |
| il ....
| |
| II. PLANT DESCRIPTION A. LOCATION AND GENERAL FEATURES The James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAF) is located in the Town of Scriba, New York on the south shore of Lake Ontario (Figures II-I and 11-2). The plant is a single generating unit with a boiling water reactor producing 821 MWe (net output). It is located approxi-mately 3000 ft east of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Station and approximately 7 mi east of the Oswego Steam Station.B. CIRCULATING WATER SYSTEM JAF uses once-through cooling to dissipate waste heat from the main condensers and auxiliary cooling systems. Circulating water is with-drawn from Lake Ontario through a submerged inlet, circulated through the main condensers and auxiliary systems, and returned to the lake through a submerged jet diffuser (Figure 11-3).When operating 5o maximum power output, the plant requires j total flow of 23.36 m /sec (825 cfs). Of the total flow, 22.23 m /sec (785 cfs) are for ths main condensers which raise the temperature 18.0°C (32.4*F), and 1.13 m /sec (40 cfs) are for service water requirements which produce a 7.5%C (13.5°F) rise in temperature.
| |
| The combined condenser and service water discharge flow has a temperature rise of 17.5 0 C (31.5 0 F). These cooling water characteristics remain essentially the same throughout the year. The seasonal temperature variation of the cooling water flow at the intake is approximately 0 0 C (32 0 F) to 25 0 C (77 0 F).The total heat rejected to the lake is a function of electrical load;heat rejection increases with an increase in electrical load. With the exception of NRC imposed limitations, the Power Authority expects to operate the plant at full load except when maintenance or refueling is required.
| |
| 9The heat rejection rate at 100% load is calculated to be 5.714 x 10 Btu/hr.I. Intake Structure The intake structure is located on the lake bottom 274.3 m (900 ft)offshore of the plant in 7.9 m (26 ft) of water at the average controlled lake surface level of 75 m (246 ft). The structure is 20.9 m (68.5 ft)across at its widest point and 4.3 m (14 ft) high (Figure 11-4). There are four intake openings on the south side of the structure and a solid wall on the north side. This configuration was designed to prevent any recirculation of heated water from the discharge structure located 82.3 m (270 ft) farther out in the lake.II-i GENERAL LOCATION MAP 0 WATERTOWN So:0 20 SCALE C. Y.;LS
| |
| * JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT 2 ,z NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION OSWEGO STEAM STATION (<p 4.V 0 RO.ME ONEWARK~TJ'-4 C~)'-4 PLOT PLAN JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT ROWA3TE:~~ ~ ......T.- .-. ........." ...<--
| |
| GENERATOR '...... .....REACTOR" cio PUMPING SC )c,.... ME. °DIESE ' "6" " " " ": SWTHYR::Cx )-.": " -" ':'- " -' '" "0., o..-.T ISM WATER INTAKE AND DISCHARGE ARRANGEMENT JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DIrFUSER 4lrAD tlfb*W) tTYPIC:AL lSTUCLII r"'1 IS)) DATUM 1-'4 FIANCH INTAKE STRUCTURE JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT AVERAGE CONTROLLED L&AE LEVEL ( .LAKE LEVEL EL. 246" INTAKE' ° " L AK LE E EL 2 6'K -p-,gSTO A- StCVtONCONCRETE TRU INLET OVERBURDENM HEATED SECTIONS"LTBBAR RACKS -OVERBURDEN A frcP Of MAT.EL220 EL.2Z2 .......IL INTAKE SHAFT .IT E\E L .IE 6. .5 -'7. E L .1 6 2.5 'z'rSECTION A-A wTR 4 jB INTAKE STRUCTURE 0 20 40 ELEVATION SCALE -FEET8 H C, The four intake openings are 2.4 m (8 ft) high with a maximum width of 6.7 m (22 ft) at the bar racks. There is a total horizontal clear opening of 21.3 m (70 ft). The intake openings are 0.9 m (2.8 ft) above Ithe lake bottom and the entire structure is covered by a solid roof.The intake cover restricts flow to a primarily horizontal direction.
| |
| A bar rack system covers the entire open area of the intake structure to prevent the entry of large debris. In addition, the bar racks are Li. heated to prevent ice formation.
| |
| The calculated intake velocity through the bar racks is 0.43 m/sec (1.4 ft/sec).After passing through the intake openings the water flows down a 4.6 m (15 ft) diameter vertical shaft to a horizontal tunnel 18.3 m (60 ft)gi below the lake bottom (Figure 11-5). The water passes through the tunnel at 1.4 m/sec (4.7 ft/sec) and then rises in a vertical shaft to the onshore screenwell forebay. In the forebay the water passes through three separate bays, each equipped with bar racks and vertical traveling screens. The vertical traveling screens have 0.95 cm (0.375 in) square wire mesh. Behind the traveling screens is a well from which the main circulating pumps withdraw water.2. Discharge Structure The multiport discharge structure is located 356.6 m (1170 ft) offshore of the plant (Figure 11-5). The discharge tunnel extends from the onshore screenwell to two branch tunnels positioned approximately parallel to the shoreline.
| |
| Each branch tunnel has three diffuser heads spaced 45.7 m (150 ft) apart, with two discharge nozzles at each head, directed away from the shoreline.
| |
| The submergence of the diffuser heads varies from 7.0-8.5 m (23-28 ft); depth of submergence increasing from east to west along the branch tunnels. The nozzles of each pair are separated by a horizontal angle of 420 and each nozzle has a 0.76 m (2.5 ft) diameter opening (Figure 11-6). The circulating water system is designed to produce a 4.3 m/sec (14 ft/sec) exit velocity.The NPDES permit for JAF places the following limitations on the discharge effluent: (1) The discharge temperature shall not exceed 44.5%G (112*F).(2) The discharge-intake temperature*
| |
| difference shall not exceed 17.8 0 C (32.4 0 F).*During those periods when intake water tempering occurs, the intake temperature shall be considered that temperature existing after tempering.
| |
| 11-2 INTAKE AND DISCHARGE TUNNELS JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT-X, wAT ER NC t t.3 *' 23!ý oTOP_/ ---.... .EL 2 .... -w PROFILE OF DISCHA RGE TUN NEL XL 6._________..,_______,_EL IE.ELEVATION LOOKING WEST~SEE FIGURE 11-3 FOR LOCATION OF SECTIONS A-A AND B-ýB.L lioo 200 ,6-. .- B 0- SCALE -FEET A-A 1 ll+EL 246 (AVERAGE CONTROLLED LEVEL)oIFFCSER E,2 " z El "EOVRB.-DENl
| |
| 'OVWZW HEAD t EL 2 2 -30' t --- tEL ZZIO' 0 --7-'-t INS ...L~ ~ EEVTO LOOIN WESTEL .o 00 z- SCLEG LIFE$T p*L~ 6ZkE 12230..EL
| |
| ..N -" 2"0 -,EL 161,-------, -- ,---E(I le. 0-/ ,,.;:' \I L .,_ V- "~ iL SP,.,)4,1 +. .''-, -.+ ..- ,\\ T , v- jt i" -5'm +,. ' -,. T ... -T -'+-/A,;- W , t TUN%". L I--4 ELEVATION LOOKING SOUTH PROFILE ALONG BRANCH TUNNEL XOTE'ALL [LEATIONS 6AntOO 04 UNITED 0 0 STA7T S LAX[ SA v ef y i A UM -* 0 _ _ 1_ 1)SCALE -FEET I-U, DISCHARGE STRUCTURE TYPICAL DIFFUSER READ JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT BENDLOD RAI 3US DIS. V L "ARIES NO Z Z L E FOR MfLI CONC TET'i.0 'OWA OVEReUROEN I I Nc VITERED STEEL COONCEETE PLAN STI C E%INTO SHAFT DISCHARGE STRUCTURE DIFFUSER HEAD NOTE: ALL ELEVATIONS BASED ON UNITED STATES LAKE SURVEY 1935 DATUM FRONT ELEVATION SIDE ELEVATION 0 5 tO SCALE -FEET 1.5 (3) The net rate of addition of heat to the receiving water shall not exceed 1.44 billion Kcal/hr. (5.72 billion BTU/hr.).(4) The pH shall not be less than 6.5 nor greater than 8.5 at any time.*(5) No algicides shall be added to the condenser and auxiliary cooling water.C. OPERATING HISTORY JAF achieved criticality in November, 1974 and began commercial opera-tion on July 28, 1975. Between these dates the plant went through a period of start-up testing during which there was intermittent opera-tion at increasingly higher power levels.Table II-1 summarizes the plant electrical output (gross MWe) from July 1, 1975 to September 30, 1976. During this interval the plant was consistently above 500 MWe gross output when the unit was on line.Figure 11-7 provides a frequency histogram of daily average discharge temperatures for the fall of 1975 and the spring and summer of 1976.There were a total of 18 outages with durations ranging from less than 24 hrs to all or part of 68 days (Table 11-2). During two outages there was a brief resumption of generation.
| |
| However, each outage was counted as a single event because the plant did not reach a high power level for a sustained period. The circulating water systems were in operation during outages, and except for 7 days du~ing the outage in December 1975, the average flow was at least 8.7 m /sec (307.5 cfs)averaged over one day periods.*The pH of the discharge shall not exceed 8.5 unless the pH of the intake water is greater than this value; in this case, the pH of the discharge shall not exceed the pH of the intake by more than 0.1 pH unit.11-3 TABLE II-1 PLANT ELECTRICAL OUTPUT*JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT -JULY 1, 1975-SEPTEMBER 30, 1976_________________1975 JULY AUGUST SETMER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER DATE MIN MAX AVC MIN MAX AVG ý MIN EEMAX AVG MIN MAX AVG MIN MAX AVG MIN MAX AVG 1 126 638 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 675 749 718 2 191 645 0 0 498 180 0 0 0 757 780 773 3 194 572 0- 496 632 541 0 0 0 770 776 773 4 201 0 0 596 633 622 0 492 303 771 801 779 5 201 163 0 624 631 625 504 590 543 799 814 805 6 254 402 0 625 633 625 595 700 658 796 801 797 7 322 480 157 624 628 624 705 780 744 800 802 688 8 6 548 363 625 627 626 771 779 774 0 0 0 9 8 622 525 626 632 628 772 778 775 0 0 0 10 326 672 524 629 633 631 775 780 776 0 0 0 11 467 665 161 266 636 512 0 779 350 0 0 0 12 542 674 0 480 521 483 0 382 102 0 0 0 13 607 686 0 528 538 535 0 0 0 0 348 237 14 635, 693 0 549 629 612 0 0 0 0 451 314 15 592 696 0 611 628 620 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 460 175 28 626 639 633 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 471 387 623 641 633 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 .21 492 541 636 641 635 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 361~ 607 628 639 661 638 0.295 65 0 0 0 20 462 680 702 653 755 702 295 561 443 0 0 0 21 565 701 742 682 794 773 534 584 555 0 0 0 22 622~ 498 743 0 795 457 557 563 560 0 0 0 23617 517 739 0 168 24 560 562 561 0 0 0 24616 .520 748 175 590 446 560 563 563 20 290 115 25 607 521 750 594 706 658 554 567 562 60 370 2781 26 611 515 749 705 796 770 556 559 558 10 330 1031 27 614 511 609 384 792 761 553 559 554 330 780 398 28. 616 509 719 562 794 765 554 557 555 510 620 547 29 624 515 748 0* 793 692 550 583 558 620 690 660 30 633 553 418 0 0. 0 613 692 670 680 690 687 31 634 434 0 0 0 540 690 598.*Cross MWe TABLE II-1 (Continued)
| |
| PLANT ELECTRICAL OUTPUT*______ ______ _____ ______ ______ _____1976_
| |
| _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _JANUARY I FEBRUARY 1 MARCH T APRIL MAY JUNE DATE IMIN MAX AVG MIN MAX AVG MIN MAX AVG- MIN MAX AVG MIN MAX AVG MIN MAX AVG 1 548 560 550 0 0 0 0 0 0 410 590 509 530 690 665 770 780 775~ý2 440 570 498 0 0 0 0 0 0 520 620 582 690 750 722 770 780 771 3 480 530 514 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 630 553 730 750 743 770 780 771 4 510 520 514 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 600 361 670 750 728 0 770 351 5 510 610 560 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 570 459 730 750 741 0 0 0 6 580 600 585 0 0 0 0 0 0 590 620 604 740 760 747 30 430 295'7 570 590 580 0 0 0 0 0 0 590 610 601 740 760 751 430 500 480 8 570 590 580 0 0 0 0 0 0 590 660 614 740 760 750 490 600 516 9 579 657 618 0 0 0 0 0 0 640 700 671 730 750 747 640 750 693 10 654 726 687 0 0 0 0 0 0 680 720 706 730 750 743 740 780 764 11 730 783 755 0 0 0 0 0 0 700 730 716 730 750 739 750 780 767 12 788 805 799 0 0 0 0 0 0 710 720 715 730 740 737 770 780 776 13 797 805 801 0 0 0 0 0 0 690 720 712 0 750 315 780 780 780 14 798 803 801 0 0 0 0 0 0 690 710 700 0 0 0 770 790 778 15 799 803 800 0 0 0 0 0 0 560 710 684 30 160 13 780 800 785 16 0 803 473 0 0 0 0 0 0 640 700 671 240 420 353 770 790 782 17 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 680 700 690 420 580 513 770 790 775 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 680 690 688 590- 680 631 0 780 139 19 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0O 0 680 700 687 680 740 719 0 460 198 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 680 700 697 730 750 741. 460 630 554 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 710 676 730 760 746 640 760 710 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 490 600 558 600 770 727 760 780 '773 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 580 690 648 680 740 704 0 783 446 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 180 29 700 720 707 740 790 770 0 681 505 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 310 184 700 720 712 780 790 781 670 760 714 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 310 360 331 710 730 718 780 790 781 770 780 774 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 350 450 408 710 730 723 770 790 782 750 760 753 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 450 510 466 720 740 733 770 790 778 740 760 751 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 510 540 430 720 740 726 770 780 776 740 760 755 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 220 580 507 520 730 692 770 780 776 0 500 215 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 280 550 501 .770 780 778*Gross MWe TABLE II-I (Continued)
| |
| PLANT ELECTRICAL OUTPUT*_________________1976 JULY J AUGUST DATE MIN MAX AVG MIN MAX AVG 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 150 580 700 750 760 760 760 740 770 690 760 750 0 0 0 0 0 350 596 678 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 420 610 580 690 770 770 770 780 780 780 600 770 780 780 780 0 0 0 330 600 672 759 780 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 620 660 248 633 743 762 767 771 773 769 750 751 765 765 715 0 0 11 503 6037 672 4621 06 0 0 0 0~0 73 543 6350 740 740 740 740 740 560 560 670 750 760 760 770 620 760 780 780 780 780 780 690 770.780 780 780 780 780 600 600 730 0 670 760 760 760 750 750 750 680 750 780 780 780 790 800 790 790 790 790 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 790 790 730 790 790 730 750 751 748 747 747 725 632 718 7 6'9 771 771 783 777 785 788 788 788 792 791 785 788 786 786 792 789 786 763 622 775 650 695 SEPTEMBER MIN MAX AVG 470 680 603 680 760 723 760 780 772 780 790 780 770 790 779 770 790 782 780 790 786 780 790 785 770 790 782 590 790 723.710 740 735 720 740 735 730 740 735 730 740 731 720 740 733 720 740 731 620 740 72 4 720 740 733 720 740 729 730 740 730 730 740 732 730 740 730 730 740 735 650 740 730 720 740 733 720 740 733 730 740 733 730 740 733 730 740 730 730 740 730 0 430 157*Gross MWe I C.
| |
| FIGURE I1-7 FREQUENCY HISTOGRAM OF DAILY AVERAGE DISCHARGE TEMPERATURES UNDER CONSTANT FULL FLOW OPERATION*
| |
| JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT -1975-1976 45OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER 1975 40 35 30-25 20?" I5 I I I i I ' i l I I I i l [ I I I I ...w ci: I-4 w w (D w (D X LLI-j 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 APRIL, MAY, JUNE 1976 IIYI Ii I I AUGUST, I I ISI I JULY, AUGUST, SEPTEMBER 1976 II i I II I I *I I lI'I I I I 'I I I i.01 .05 .I .2 .SI 2 5 10 20 0 4560 70SO 90 95 9S99 9198 g9.9 99.99 PERCENT OF DAILY AVERAGE DISCHARGE TEMPERATURES
| |
| _t STATED VALUE Discharee Temneratures Calculated bv Addition of 17.80C to 1975-76 TABLE 11-2 OUTAGES BETWEEN JULY 1, 1975 AND SEPTEMBER 30, 1976 JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT NUMB__ER START DATE END DATE DURATION IN DAYS*1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 JUL 4 AUG 1 SEP 12 1 OCT 22 29 11 NOV 8 DEC 16 JAN 13 MAY 4 JUN 18 23 30 13 JUL 21 30 AUG 17 JUL 4 AUG 6 SEP 15 2 OCT 23 4 NOV 19 23 DEC 23 MAR 14 MAY 5 JUN 19 24 30 17 JUL<1<1 6 4< 2<2< 7< 9 16<68< 2< 2< 2< 2< I< 5<8< 2 U.-17 18 28 31 AUG*Dates are inclusive in the outage. An outage could span two consecutive dates but have a total duration ranging from less than three hours to more than 45 hours. Incident number 8, for example, could be a little more than 7 days but could not exceed 9 days.i:
| |
| III. BASELINE HYDROGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS A. INTRODUCTION The discharge of JAF is designed to minimize the impact of the plant's thermal discharge on the biological and thermal characteristics of Lake Ontario in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point. Lake Ontario temperature characteristics, general circulation and local current patterns, lake bed topography, and existing water uses were the important design criteria used in the development of the circulating water system. The selection of a water body segment for multiplant impact analysis was based on hydrographic characteristics of the southeast section of Lake Ontario. The baseline hydrographic characteristics of Lake Ontario relevant to the assessment of the thermal discharge from the FitzPatrick Plant are discussed in the following sections.B. GENERAL FEATURES OF LAKE ONTARIO i. Seasonal Temperature Structure a. Spring Warming and the Thermal Bar Lake Ontario is a large temperate lake which experiences sea-sonal changes in its thermal structure.
| |
| Natural warming of the lake begins in mid-March and continues until mid-September.
| |
| At the onset of warming the surface water temperature in the shal-low littoral zone rises more rapidly than in regions just off-shore. By May this difference has created a sharp horizontal temperature gradient with inshore water temperatures above 4VC (39°F) and the offshore water below 4°C (39°F). There is a conver-gence zone where water from the relatively warm inshore region mixes with the cold offshore water (Rodgers, 1966). As a consequence of the nonlinear temperature/density relationship of fresh water, the mixed water produced in this transition zone is heavier than the water on either side and sinks, setting up a bar that may reduce free exchange of water between the shallow littoral zone and the deeper part of the lake. The thermal bar moves gradually and steadily offshore with spring warming of the lake until it dissi-pates in late June. It is estimated that the spring thermal bar may exist for as long as 8 weeks (Sweers, 1969).As the thermal bar moves offshore, the inshore water continues to warm and a thermocline develops which separates the warm surface water from the cold deep water. The thermocline restricts vertical mixing to the epilimnion, but in mid-lake on the offshore side of III-1 the thermal bar mixing extends from surface to bottom. About four weeks after emergence of the bar the inshore area constitutes approximately half the area of the lake (Sweers, 1969).b. Summer Stratification The disappearance of an offshore surface temperature of 4°C (39.2*F)in late June defines the start of the summer season in the lake.In general, vertical stratification is established over the entire basin by the combined effects of lake warming and the advection of the warmer, nearshore water. The sporadic appearance of surface temperature minima during summer are related to upwellings.
| |
| As warming continues, stratification intensifies and the thermocline is Fr' more sharply defined, with vertical temperature gradients in excess of 1lC/m (0.6 0 F/ft). As a consequence of stratification, heat transfer and mixing are confined largely to the epilimnion.
| |
| The lake's mean surface temperature reaches 21%C (69.8 0 F), and the hypolimnion temperature varies with depth, ranging between 3.8 and 4.0%C (38.00 and 39.2°F) (Sweers, 1969). The thermocline forms near the surface in early summer but descends due to continued warming and reaches a characteristic depth of approximately 21 m (70 ft)(Casey et al., 1965).c. Fall Cooling In late September the warming process ends, the lake's mean surface temperature rapidly drops below 17%C (62.6°F) and the rate of descent of the thermocline increases.
| |
| The vertical temperature gradient decreases as the surface layer and deeper water effectively mix. Mixing is the consequence of convection caused by cooling at the surface and is enhanced by the weaken-ing of the thermocline which permits wind-induced turbulence to extend to greater depths.The fall cooling process resembles spring warming. When near-shore water cools below the temperature of maximum density, a."reverse" thermal bar develops separating colder inshore water from warmer offshore water. The fall thermal bar has a weaker thermal gradient than the spring thermal bar.d. Winter Cooling The breakdown of stratification throughout the lake marks the onset of the winter season. The offshore water mass is well mixed, attaining a nearly isothermal condition.
| |
| The date of overturn differs from year to year depending on the occurrence of storms.The lake surface is cooled below 4°C(39°F) and surface isotherms 111-2 tend to be parallel to shore. As cooling continues and surface temperatures drop below 4*C (39°F), vertical stratification is again produced with colder buoyant water above the warmer 4°C (39*F) water at depth. Vertical circulation at times extends as deep as 100 m (328 ft) (Sweers, 1969). With continued cooling ice forms in the nearshore region. Under normal climatic conditions the greatest extent of ice cover is found in the east end of the lake in mid-March, while in a severe winter ice covers about 25% of the lake surface (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1975).2. Lake Circulation The large scale circulation of Lake Ontario is counter-clockwise (cyclonic flow) with flow to the east along the south shore in a relatively narrow band and a somewhat less pronounced flow to the west along the north shore. The conceptual model that explains this general circulation is presented here as follows.A cool mound of water extends from surface to bottom in spring and from below the thermocline to the bottom in summer and fall (Sweers, 1969). The baroclinic flow resulting from the horizontal temperature differences is initially directed outward from mid-lake towards the shore. Although the Coriolis effect is acting to turn the flow to the right (clockwise), its effect is diminished due to bottom friction.This outward flow brings water to the inshore area where it begins to pile up. A surface slope, higher inshore than in mid-lake, develops into a barotropic current initially directed lakeward.
| |
| The barotropic current tends to the right because of the Coriolis effect. The result is that Coriolis effect and the barrier effect of the coastline trap the flow against the shoreline.
| |
| The flow continues along the shoreline in a counter-clockwise direction as long as the surface slope is maintained.
| |
| Inflow from the Niagara River causes the western end of the lake surface to be higher than the eastern end (on the average).
| |
| The resulting flow down the gradient is held against the lake's south shore by the Coriolis effect, thereby enhancing the already existing barotropic flow along the south shore. Wind stress averaged over the year tends further to accelerate the flow to the east and dece'lerate the flow to the west.The general circulation in winter is less well documented.
| |
| In late fall after overturn has occurred, the lake is essentially isothermal, thereby permitting a free exchange of water from surface to bottom. Wind direction in winter is primarily from the west-northwest.
| |
| The net surface flow that results is eastward with westward return flow develo-ping below the surface. The surface layer in the western end is advected to the east and is replaced by subsurface water (Sweers, 1969). This large scale upwelling at the upwind end of the lake and downwelling at the downwind end mixes the surface and subsurface water on a scale that is not likely to occur during the rest of the year, 111-3
| |
| : 3. Perturbations of the General Circulation Pattern The general circulation described above is documented by observations collected over long periods (months).
| |
| The circulation patterns that are observed at any given time, however, are more complex as a result of the lake's response to the shifting winds. At times a major wind shift can alter the currents in a matter of hours, while at other times some features of the current pattern have continued even with an opposing wind (Csanady, 1972). The response time of the currents to a shift in wind distribution is partially related to the scale of the current; large offshore longshore currents respond sluggishly and with longshore currents nearer to shore the response is more rapid, six hours or less. In addition, the deeper the current, the more slowly it responds.Two important examples of wind-induced changes in the general circulation are upwelling and internal oscillations.
| |
| Upwelling occurs when a water mass is forced from depth to the surface, and is observed to some degree in all lakes during all seasons (Mortimer, 1971); however it is more conspicuous during seasons of stratification when the upwelled water is much colder than the surface water that it displaces.
| |
| Wind stress and associated currents depress the thermocline to below equili-brium level at the downwind end of the basin, while at the upwind end the thermocline is displaced upward and may intersect the surface.Upwelling motions are strongly influenced by the Coriolis force.Depression of the thermocline is greatest to the right of the downwind end of a basin and upwelling is strongest to the left of the upwind end (Mortimer, 1971); For example, in Lake Ontario, a west wind causes upwelling along the northwest shore, and the thermocline is deepest along the southeast shore.A variety of mechanisms have been proposed to account for the observed L periodic displacement of the thermocline.
| |
| The most direct explanation is that an upwelling event displaces the thermocline from equilibrium by converting kinetic energy of the wind to potential energy of the thermo-cline position.
| |
| When the wind stress is removed, internal waves are set in motion and contribute to the dissipation of this energy. Internal waves incease in amplitude after storms, and in Lake Ontario the oscil-lations have a period near 17.5 hours, roughly three complete oscillations every two days. These oscillation events are a common feature of lake temperature records and are prominent in the intake temperature records at many power plants.C. SITE FEATURES 1. Bottom Sediments A number of observations of the bottom sediments have been made along the south shore of Lake Ontario. Sutton et al. (1970) made 111-4 observations of nearshore bottom sediments (0-33 m, 0-108.3 ft) in 1968 and 1969 between Rochester and Stony Point. Among their con-clusions the following are relevant to the FitzPatrick site: a. There is generally a west-to-east transport of sediment.b. Sites of sediment accumulation occur in nearshore shallow areas where the shoreline is irregular and where there are local deviations from the above transport pattern.c. In general, the coarser sands, boulders, pebbles, and cobbles lie in the beach or nearshore area, and finer sediments are found lakeward.d. Several small patches of sand occur offshore between Oswego and Mexico Bay, and it is hypothesized that these originate from the Oswego River.Visual observations made in the Nine Mile Point vicinity during the 1974 sampling period corroborate some of the earlier observations of Sutton et al. (1970). The two western transects, NMPW and NMPP, are dominated by more bedrock and rubble than sand and silt, whereas the FITZ and NMPE transects have bedrock and rubble near shore with sand and silt prevalent beyond the 6.1 m (20 ft) depth contour. The presence of a finer grained sediment to the east probably corresponds to the dominance of patchy sand deposits in Mexico Bay. The irregularity of the shoreline at Nine Mile Point could possibly be the cause of minor sand and silt deposition at that point and eastward.
| |
| In general, finer grained sediments are more dominant farther offshore.2. Local Currents In the course of preoperational studies for JAF, current measurements were made off the Nine Mile Point promontory from May to October 1969, and from July to October 19.70. Two fixed underwater towers were placed in the lake, one in 7.3 m (24 ft) of water, and one in 14.0 m (46 ft) of water, and provided average hourly current speed and direction.
| |
| In addition, two drogue surveys were conducted in 1969 to obtain the overall current pattern at the site. These studies were reported by Gunwaldson et al. (1970) and the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY) (1971). Figure III-i presents frequency-duration data derived from these studies. The data obtained are consistent with wind-induced current frequencies reported by Palmer and Izatt (1970) for a similar water depth near Toronto.The field data clearly illustrate a correlation between summer currents 111-5 FIGURE III-i DURATION OF LAKE ONTARIO CURRENT 240 200 0 w w C.c, L&J 0 z 0 zr D a-160 120 80 40 0 120 80 40 0 0 10 20 30 PERCENT OF 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 TOTAL TIME OF RECORD 110 and wind speed. The correlation is an accepted principle of hydrody-namics as theorized by Ekman (1928) and subsequently verified by numer-ous oceanographers (Neumann and Pierson, 1966). Measurements of wind currents at lightships (Haight, 1942) have been analyzed to determine the ratio of current speed to wind speed. Reported values of this ratio, commonly called the "wind factor," range between .005 and .030.The wind speed frequency data indicate that over the year a speed in excess of 32 km/hr (20 mph) occurs 21.6% of the time, based on readings averaged over a 6-hour period. For the summer months, June through September, winds in excess of 32 km/hr (20 mph) occur 13.9% of the time. The current speed of 6 hour duration exceeded with comparable frequency in 14 m (46 ft) of water is about 15 cm/sec (0.5 fps) (see Figure 111-2). For a persistence of 24 hours, the current speed exceeded 13.9% of the time is 13.7 cm/sec (0.45 fps).The predominant direction of currents in the studies described above is alongshore, as dictated by continuity.
| |
| On those occasions when onshore or offshore currents were observed, their magnitudes were substantially less than those for alongshore currents, The reported frequencies of various current directions during the summer are presented in Figure 111-2. This figure indicates that currents alongshore from the west or east are equally frequent at 35% of the time for each, Onshore and offshore currents each account for 5% of the observations.
| |
| The remaining 30% of the observations were below the meter threshold, 0.05 knots (2.5 cm/sec, 0.09 fps). At the 6.4 m (21 ft) depth in 14.0 m (46 ft) of water, the mean onshore current speed was 3.0 cm/sec (0.09 fps) and the mean offshore current. speed was 6.0 cm/sec (0.2 fps). On the other hand, alongshore currents from the west and east averaged 9 cm/sec (0.3 fps).Vertical profiles of currents have been recorded in several lake studies. Current profiles with depth, however, are sensitive to the turbulent momentum exchange coefficient and ambient stratification.
| |
| A theoretical profile was computed for the homogeneous shallow waters found near the Nine Mile Point site and indicates the absence of any significant Ekman spiral.Lake currents were measured at selected locations in the immediate vicinity of the Oswego Steam Station on five days between 12 October and 19 November 1970. These surface current velocities were mostly along-shore with speeds that ranged from very low-(less than 2.5 cm/sec, 0.08 fps) up to 15 cm/sec (0.50 fps). This is in general agreement with the measurements at Nine Mile Point.3. Local Lake Thermal Structure Data on the thermal structure of the lake in the vicinity of Nine Mile 111-6 LAKE ONTARIO CURRENT DIRECTIONS CURRENT DIRECTION (DEGREES MAGNETIC)112.5 135.0 157.5 180.0 202.5 2250 247.5 270.0" 1o --0 10 a r--0 0 c-J w 0 w I--0 I-0 z n.-0 cx: LAJ a.20 0 I0 20 30 C 511 1-4'-4 Point are available from studies conducted offshore of JAF 1969 and 1970, from temperature data recorded in the existing intake for Oswego Units 1-4 (see Figure 111-5 for location) from 1968 through 1972, and from studies conducted offshore of the Oswego-Nine Mile Point area during 1973. A short description of each of these studies is presented in subsequent paragraphs.
| |
| These data were used to determine the verti-cal temperature variations and the surface temperatures in the vicinity of JAF.In conjunction with the lake current studies carried out in 1969 and 1970 as part of the preoperational surveys for JAF (PASNY, 1971), water temperatures were also recorded.
| |
| Three types of temperature measurements were made: a. intermittent vertical profiles obtained in 18.3 and 30.5 m (60 and 100 ft) of water, b. continuous temperature recordings, using seven self-contained underwater instruments mounted on the two underwater towers, obtained at various depths,* c. surface temperatures measured by airborne infrared radiometry.
| |
| ... The 1970 studies offshore of Oswego consisted of the collection of weekly temperature data at four locations near the discharge of Oswego Unit 6. Temperatures were measured at 1-meter increments from surface to lake bottom for seventeen consecutive weeks from July through November 1970 (QLM, 1972).Temperature data in the Oswego-Nine Mile Point area were obtained during 1973 from west of Oswego to east of Nine Mile Point. Vertical tempera-ture profiles were obtained weekly from June through mid-December 1973 along five transects (QLM, 1974).Data from these studies were used to evaluate the vertical temperature structure and to determine whether or not persistent stratification exists in this, area. Vertical temperature profiles revealed the exis-tence of transient thermal gradients equal to or greater than 1IC per meter (l.69F per 3.2 ft) throughout the study area. The gradients appeared to be seasonal since they existed primarily in the summertime.
| |
| They were not "seasonally stable," since they were generated and des-troyed by surface heating and cooling and mixing within the water column over periods dependent upon meteorological conditions.
| |
| Although gra-dients were observed on sequential weeks for up to a three week period, the gradients observed were at different temperatures and at different depths from week to week and, therefore, were not persistent.
| |
| In 111-7 addition, when the gradients were observed, they appeared to be uniform from station to station. A more complete discussion is presented in the documents previously submitted to the EPA (LMS, 1976).These data were also used to determine the surface temperature in the area. During 1970 the maximum surface temperature recorded was 25.5%C (77.9 0 C). The temperature data recorded in the existing intake of the Oswego Steam Station were statistically analyzed and are shown in Figure 111-3. Since the lake is generally isothermal in the top 6 m (20 ft), the temperature obtained at the intake depth of 4.9 m (16 ft) can be considered to be'representative of the surface water teperatures.
| |
| The analysis shows that temperatures in excess of 23.3C .(74 0 F) occurred only 10% of the time during the summer months and less than 1% of the time on an annual basis.Figure 111-4 shows the average surface temperature throughout the V 1973 survey period for the stations in water depths of 6 and 30.5 m (20 and 100 ft.). As shown in this figure, temperatures at both stations were approximately 12%C (54 0 F) on 4 June, rose to a maximum temperature of approximately 24%C (75.2*F) on 13 August, and then declined to approximately 6%C (43°F) on December.
| |
| A drop in the average surface temperatures of between 3 and 50C (5.4 and 9°F) seems to have occurred during the week between 11 and 18 June. This drop in tempera-ture can be attributed to "upwelling" generated by wind from the south, D. EXISTING THERMAL DISCHARGES IN THE FITZPATRICK VICINITY 1. Oswego Steam Station Units 1-4, 5 and 6 The Oswego Steam Station's Units 1-4, which were constructed during the period 1938 to 1959, have a maximum generating capacity of 3407 megawatts, The combined cooling water flow for these units is 21.58 m /sec (762 cfs) when they are operating at maximum capacity.
| |
| The common intake of the circulating water system's is located 76.2 m (250 ft) north of the northwestern tip of the Oswego Harbor breakwater (see Figure 111-5 for location of intake and discharge structures at Oswego). The cooling water flow for Units 1-4 is discharged to the "western leg" or turning basin of Oswego Harbor at a maximum temperature of 6.8%C (12.4°F) above intake temperature.
| |
| The circulating water systems for Oswego Units 5 and 6 are independent of the Units 1-4 systems, each having submerged intake and discharge structures in the lake offshore of the station (See Figure 111-5 for location of intake and discharge structures at Oswego). Oswego Unit 5 began operation in 1975 and has a maximim net output of 850 MWe.Its maximum cooling water flow of 17.98 m /sec (635 cfs) is taken from the lake approximately 414.5 m (i360 ft) offshore of the site. The flow 111-8 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR LAKE ONTARIO WATER TEMPERATLPR,?A1 2.,EASU,-ZUD AT OSWEGO FOR SUMMER (JUNE, JULY, AUG., SEPT. ) 19E:3-I0,2
| |
| ° 7 0 --- -I ...Li I 'L 60~L-' 60 WATER TEMP. DATA FROt OSWEGO STEAM STATCON*I EXISTING INTAKE L/i WATER DEPTH 16 FEE-7T-- 5 ..THERMISTOR SENSITIVE TO I OF 50 ' -: i 404 II 0 I 0 O 20.3.4.0.0.080 9 95:.PFRCENT OF TIME WATER TEMPERATURE WAS EOUALI Fn) oR I I-; Thyi Lli w F.11 25 9 23 6 20 3 17 I 15 29 12 JUNE JULY AUG SEPT. OCT. NOV.TIME -(-WEEK.0 24 DEC.bI 1973.
| |
| -7 77M 777 -7 7-7 LOCATION OF INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTURES OSWEGO STEAM STATION-UNIT 6 SHORELINE N E LAKE UNIT 5 DISCHARGE N1,261,680 E 512,920 UNIT 6 DISCHARGE.N 1262,550 E 512,200 UNIT 5 INTAKE N 1,261,260 E 512,950 C.W. INTAKE TUNNEL 0 ON A ARIO C.W. DISCHARGE TUNNEL OSWEGO HARBOR 0 200 400 SCALE IN FEET-Iq C)rn-is returned to the lake at a temperature increase up to 15.9%C (28.6°F)above intake temperature through a high-speed, submerged difuser de-signed to achieve rapid dilution.Oswego Unit 6, presently under construction, will have a miximum net output of 850 MWe, a maximum cooling water flow of 17.98 m /sec (635 cfs) and a maximum temperature increase over intake temperature of.. 15.9 0 C (28.6 0 F). Table III-1 indicates the hydraulic and thermal characteristics of generating units in the vicinity of the FitzPatrick plant.The plant flows and temperature rises presented for the units at Oswego are maximum conditions for full generating capacity, however, these units will operate at less than full capacity much of the time. There-fore, an assessment of impact should be based on an estimate of actual plant loads. Seasonal plant operating loads have been estimated for Oswego Units 5 and 6 and are presented in Table 111-2. A similar I estimate is not available for Oswego Units 1-4, but because these are relatively old units, it is anticipated that they will operate at substantially less than maximum rated capacity.2. Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1 Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1 (NMP-I) has been in operation since 1969 and has a maximum let capacity of 610 MWe. The maximum cooling water flow of 16.94 m /sec (597 cfs) for this unit is taken from the lake approximately 259.1 m (850 ft) offshore of the site. This flow is returned to the lake at temperatures up to 17.3 0 C (31.2 0 F)higher than intake temperature through a submerged discharge in the lake. The discharge is located approximately 11.3 km (7 mi) east of the Oswego Steam Station and approximately 914.4 m (3000 ft) west of JAF discharge.
| |
| Monthly capacity factors for Nine Mile Unit I are presented in Table 111-3.3. Oswego River 3 The Oswego River discharges an annual average flow of 174.2 m /sec (6137 cfs) (based on the 33-year period, 1933-1967) into Oswego Harbor from the south, where the river flow mixes with the Oswego Units 1-4 discharge and waste treatment plant discharges, and enters Lake Ontario at the harbor mouth.The maximum flow on record was 1064.2 m 3/sec (37,500 cfs), which occurred on 28 March 1936. The minimum daily flow of 10.02 m /sec (353 cfs) was recorded on 14 August 1949, but the minimum average seven-consecutive-day flow, having a once-in-ten-year frequency (MA7CD/10) is 20.43 m (720 cfs).111-9 TABLE III-I DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS FOR OSWEGO UNITS 1-6 NINE MILE UNIT i, AND FITZPATRICK UNIT OSWEGO UNITS 1-4 OSWEGO UNIT 5 414.5 m 1360 ft OSWEGO UNIT 6 Length of main tunnel from existing shoreline 688.8 m 2260 ft NINE MILE UNIT 1 160.9 m 528 ft 8 fps 2.44 m/sec FITZPATRICX UNIT 384 m 1260 ft Tunnel velocity 4.7 fps 1.43 m/sec 235.9 m 774 ft Length of diffuser Number of duffuser ports Number of diffuser ports/riser Inside diameter of diffuser ports Port spacing 79.3 m 260 ft 12 2 0.61 m 2 ft 12.2 m 40 ft 81.4 m 267 ft 12 12 2 2 0,61 m 2.0 ft 12.2 m 40 ft 0.76 m 2.5 ft 45.7 m 150 ft Initial discharge velocity Angle between ports Total diffuser flow 5.12 m/sec 16.8 fps 200 17.98 m 3/sec 635 cfs 16.8 fps 5.12 m/sec 200 17.98 m3 /sec 635 cfs 1.22 m/sec 4 fps 16.94 m 3/sec 597 cfs 4.27 m/sec 14 fps 420 3 23.36 m /se, 825 cfs 21.58 m3 /sec 762 cfs Average depth of port centerline below mean low water Average depth of lake bottom below mean low water at discharge Maximum Port temperature 6.9 0 C rise above lake ambient 12.4 0 F 6.4 m 21 ft 7.92 m 26 ft 15. 9 0 C 28.6OF 10.4 m 34 ft 11.9 m 39 ft 15, 9°C 28. 6 0 F 4.9 m 16 ft 5.5 m 18 ft 17. 3 0 C 31. 2 0 F 7.62 m 25 ft 9.14 m 30 ft 17. 5 0 C 31. 5 0 F-Does not apply
| |
| ~r.v TABLE 111-2 ANTICIPATED MAXIMUM SEASONAL LOADS OSWEGO STEAM STATION UNITS 5 AND 6 -1981*SEASON SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING PERCENTAGE MAX. LOAD 53.4 70.2 48.7 30.0 UNIT UNIT OUTPUT (MWe)453.9 596.7 414.9 255.0 5 HEAT DISCHARGE (BBtu/hr)2.244 2.765 2.052 1.443 CONDENSER AT (OF)18.3 22.5 17.4 11.8 DISCHARGE AT ("F)16.4 20.0 15.7 10.8 UNIT 6 SUMMER 53.4 453.9 2.244 18.3 16.4 FALL 70.2 596.7 2.765 22.5 20.0 WINTER 48.7 414.9 2.052 17.4 15.7 SPRING 30.0 255.0 1.443 11.8 10.8*Anticipated year of maximum usage..
| |
| TABLE 111-3 RECORD OF MONTHLY CAPACITY FACTORS*NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT I MONTH 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 MEAN VJAN -79.3 77.9 94.8 94.9 70.3 83.4 FEB -98.4 89.0 60.8 93.9 56.8 79.8 MAR 100.0 82.6 94.6 77.2 79.2 86.7 APR 6.4 0.8 30.8 0.0 83.7 24.3 MAY 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 88.5 18.1 JUN -51.3 22.5 27.9 0.0 86.9 37.7 JUL 45.8 75.7 75.2 81.9 69.8 69.7 AUG 86.1 88.0 80.1 83.6 91.1 -85.8 SEP 87.0 52.6 54.6 84.4 94.1 -74.5 OCT 64.8 12.7 68.9 66.6 78.8 -58.4.NOV 89.4 93.3 77.2 68.0 90.4 -83.7 DEC 44.8 94.6 95.2 89.0 47.1 -74.1 MEAN 62.8 60.3 65.2 61.4 64.7*Based on 500 MWe prior to July 1971 and 610 MWe after July 1971.
| |
| Previous investigations have shown that temperatures in the Oswego River are normally higher than those at the surface of the lake.The 1970 survey data indicate that the river warms more rapidly than the lake and is warmer throughout the summer months. The National Field Investigations Center (Anonymous, 1975) report of a thermal survey conducted by infrared radiometry demonstrates a plume in the lake that results from the river discharge.
| |
| ii., III-10 REFERENCES CITED CHAPTER III Anonymous.
| |
| 1975. Remote sensing report, Lake Ontario: A study of thermal discharges from Ginna Nuclear Power Station, Oswego Steam Power Station, and Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Station. National Field Investigation Center, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.88p.Casey, D.J., W. Fisher, and C.O. Klevano. 1965. Lake Ontario environmental summary -1965. U.S. Environ. Protection Agency, Region II (Rochester, New York) EPA-902/9-73-002.
| |
| Csanady, G.T. 1972. The coastal boundary layer in Lake Ontario.II. The summer-fall regime. J. Physical.
| |
| Oceanogr.
| |
| 2:168-176.
| |
| Ekman, V.W. 1928. Eddy viscocity and skin friction in the dynamics of winds and ocean currents.
| |
| Mem. Roy. Met. Soc. 2(20).Gunwaldsen, R.W., B. Brodfeld, and G.E. Hecker. 1970. Current and temperature surveys in Lake Ontario for James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant. Proc. 13th Conf. Great Lakes Res. 1970: 914-926.Haight, F.J. 1942. Coastal currents along the Atlantic Coast of United States. Dept. of Commerce, Coast and Geodetic Survey, Special Publ. 230.Lawler, Matusky and Skelly, Engineers.
| |
| 1976. 1975 Nine Mile Point Aquatic Ecology Studies. Report to Niagara Mohawk Power Corpora-tion, May 1976.Mortimer, C.H. 1971. Large scale oscillatory motions and seasonal temperature changes in Lake Michigan and Lake Ontario. I.Center for Great Lakes Res., Univ. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Spec.Rept. 12: lllp.Neumann, G., and W.J. Pierson. 1966. Principals of physical oceanography.
| |
| Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.Palmer, M.D., and J.B. Izatt. 1970. Lakeshore two-dimensional dispersion.
| |
| Proc. 13th Conf. Great Lakes Res. 1970(1):495-507.
| |
| Power Authority of the State of New York. 1971. Environmental report for James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant. Prepared for United States Atomic Energy Commission.
| |
| REFERENCES CITED (Continued)
| |
| Quirk, Lawler and Matusky Engineers.
| |
| 1972. Effect of circulating water system on Lake Ontario: water temperature and aquatic biology. [Oswego Steam Station Unit 61. Prepared for Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.Quirk, Lawler and Matusky Engineers.
| |
| 1974. 1973 Nine Mile Point aquatic ecology studies. Prepared for Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. and Power Authority of the State of New York.Rodgers, G.K. 1966. The thermal bar in Lake Ontario, spring 1965 and winter 1965-66. Great Lakes Res. Div. Publ. [Proc. 9th ji Conf. Great Lakes Res. (1965)] 15:369-374.
| |
| Sutton R.G., T.L. Lewis, and D.L. Woodrow. 1970. Near shore sediments in Southern Lake Ontario, their dispersal patterns and economic potential.
| |
| Proc. 13th Conf. Great Lakes Res:308-318.
| |
| Sweers, H.E. 1969. Structure, dynamics and chemistry of Lake Ontario: investigations based on monitor cruises in 1966 and 1967. Mar. Sci. Branch, Dept. of Energy, Mines and Resources, Ottawa, Canada, Manuscript Rept. Ser. 10: 227p.U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
| |
| 1975. Great Lakes-St.
| |
| Lawrence Seaway navigation season extension program: demonstration program, fiscal year 1976 [draft]. U.S. Army District, Detroit.
| |
| IV. JAMES A. FITZPATRICK THERMAL DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS A. INTRODUCTION This chapter describes the characteristics of the thermal plume resul-ting from the JAF plant discharge which are pertinent to the evaluation of biological impact. Information on the characteristics of the plume resulting from the thermal discharge is available from threesources:
| |
| i) hydraulic model results; 2) analytical model results; and 3) the results of three hydrothermal field surveys conducted during the summer and fall of 1976.The hydraulic model tests were conducted primarily to evaluate, prior to construction, the performance of the diffuser system in the near-field vicinity of the discharge.
| |
| A combination of the hydraulic model results and an analytical far-field model was used to predict temperature distributions outside the near-field area. The hydrothermal field surveys were designed to measure the three-dimensional temperature distributions resulting from the joint operation of NMP-1 and the JAF plants and to evaluate the performance of JAF diffuser based on the dilution of dye released into the discharge.
| |
| B. REVIEW OF PHYSICAL AND MATHEMATICAL MODELS A total of five different hydraulic models were constructed and tested in order to select the final diffuser configuration and evaluate its performance (PASNY, 1971). Models 1 and 2 were used primarily to select the optimum diffuser configuration and orientation.
| |
| Models 3 and 4 were undistorted models of the diffuser structure at scales of 1/50 and 1/81, respectively, and were used to evaluate the diffuser performance under various ambient lake conditions.
| |
| Model 5 was constructed to assist in determining the thermal effects produced by NMP-l at the site of JAF discharge.
| |
| Figures IV-l, IV-2, and IV-3 show surface flow patterns and excess temperature contours in the vicinity of the discharge resulting from hydraulic model tests with no lake current, 0.8 fps eastward lake-current', and 0.7 fps westward lake current, respectively.
| |
| The maximum excess surface temperatures measured during the three test conditions were 2.8 0 F with no lake current, and 4.0 and 4.4°F for the eastward and westward current conditions, respectively.
| |
| These temperature rises correspond to dilutions of the discharge flow by ambient water of 11.6:1, 8.1:1, and 7.4:1. The near-field hydraulic model results indicated that the dilution of the discharge achieved at the lake surface decreased with increasing ambient cross currents.
| |
| It should be noted, however, that the lake current conditions simulated in the above model tests (0.8 and 0.7 fps) have both a low probability of occurrence IV- 1 SURFACE FLOW PATTERN AND TEMPERATURE PROFILES WITH NO NATURAL LAKE CURRENT--MODEL TESTS'JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT A NOMINAL LIMIT OF FLOW REGION (oF)8T I, I" '04 400 400 zoo 0 Zom 400 4 DISTANCE ALONG LINE 0-0 tFT)I.-I.-0S I.J 0 rk, w N. -- 9'. l --SURFACE TEMPERATURE PROFILES NOTE$: DISTANCE IS MEASURED FROM THE CENTER OF DISCHARE STRUCTURE.
| |
| DASHED LINES ARE (XTRAPOLATED FROM MODEL DATA.w x.J o Ia z-J"-" 0--...--WARM WATER------COLD WATER JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FLOW PATTERN 1-4*PASNY, 1971 FLOW PATTERN AND TEMPERATURE PROFILES WITH WESTWARD LAKE CURRENT -MODEL TESTS*JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT AT T (F)01I 800 t0o 400 200 0 ZOO 400 DISTANCE ALONG LINE *-a (FT)NOMINAL LIMIT OF FLOW REGION WESTWARD CURRENT--_- -0S_--C-z 0 in 0 I--J_1 0n-J I-I.-2-j 0 2 0 4 l.A U 2 4 I-VA a I.-.4 WARM WATER---COLD WATER SURFACE TEMPERATURE PROFILES NOTES: DISTANCE IS MEASURED FROM THE CENTER Of DISCHARGE STRUCTURE, DATA ARE BASED ON 0.7 FT/SEC LAKE CURRENT.DASHED LINES ARE EXTRAPOLATED FROM MODEL DATA.JAMES A FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FLOW PATTERN<: P-FLOW PATTERN AND TEMPERATURE PROFILES WITH EASTWARD LAKE CURRENT -MODEL TESTS*JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT aT (*F)2 2 -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _I----- _ _/400 too 0 o00 400 goo aC DISTANCE ALONG LINE a -( tFT.)4 NOMINAL LIMIT OF FLOW REGION EASTWARD CURRENT l.J I-RI, 0[N.2\V a-.N.I..2 8 iTAKE.0...SURFACE TEMPERATURE PROFILES NOTES: WARM WATER DISTANCE I$ MEASUREO FROM THE CENTER OF OISCHARGE STRUCTURE.
| |
| "------C~OLD WAT[R DATA ARC BASED ON 0.0 FT/SEC LAxE CURRENT.CASHED LINES ARE ETRAPOLATED FROM MODEL DATA.JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT L2T FLOW PATTERN 4-nfl n.n, ~. fl~I1 and short duration time in the lake (Figures III-i and 111-2). The 0.8 fps speed has a frequency of occurrence of less than 5% at 12 hours duration.
| |
| Figures IV-2 and IV-3, which illustrate the maximum excess temperatures of 4.0 and 4.4'F, respectively, show that those temperature rises decrease rapidly within approximately 200 ft of the discharge, indicating the occurrence of additional rapid dilution of the discharge waters in that region.Temperature distributions outside the near-field area were predicted by an analytical model which used the near-field hydraulic model results to define a line source for the intermediate and far-field plume. Surface temperature distributions were predicted for ambient currents ranging from no lake current to 0.8 fps eastward current and 0.7 fps westward current. The results obtained from the analytical model studies indi-cated that as the ambient lake current increased, dilution along the plume centerline occurred less rapidly, and the surface area bounded by a given isotherm increased.
| |
| Geometrically, the plumes became in-creasingly elongated in the direction of the simulated current as the velocity increased, with the far-field plume centerline approximately paralleling the shoreline at the higher along shore velocities.
| |
| Plumes resulting from easterly currents were found to be similar to plumes resulting from westerly currents, outside of the near-field zone.It should be noted that all of the above hydraulic and analytical modeling was done under conditions that would be expected to render the results conservative.
| |
| The hydraulic model tests did not simulate certain field conditions usually associated with lake currents, such as the presence of winds and waves, which would induce some additional heat dissipation and mixing in the prototype.
| |
| The model tests used an earlier estimated plant temperature rise of 32.4°F, which is 0.9'F above the design value. In addition, the model tests did not evaluate the effect of ambient lake stratification on the temperature rises produced by the diffuser in the near field. The initial colder dilution waters entrained into the jets from the lower depths under stratified ambient conditions would reduce the excess surface temperatures relative to surface ambient. Hence, since the nearshore waters of Lake Ontario are stratified during most of the spring, summer and early fall months, the effect of the JAF discharge on surface temperatures during these seasons would be reduced from those predicted under isothermal conditions.
| |
| C. REVIEW OF HYDROTHERMAL FIELD SURVEYS TO DATE AND INTERACTION OF THE NINE MILE POINT AND JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR PLANT THERMAL PLUMES Triaxial hydrothermal field surveys of JAF thermal plume were conducted during June, August and October of 1976 (Stone and Webster, 1976a, 1976b, 1976c). Briefly, the surveys included simultaneous triaxial measurements of temperature and dye concentration along fixed transects in the vicinity of the JAF and NMP-l plants. Lake currents at three IV-2 depths, lake level, and wind speed and direction were also continuously monitored before and during each survey. The following represents a summary of the triaxial surveys.Table TV-I contains a summary of the pertinent plant operating data and prevailing lake conditions during each of the 13 triaxial surveys, along with measurements of the observed surface plumes. The surveys were conducted under plant generating loads ranging between 725 and 793 MWe (88 and 97% of capacity), with a mean of 773 MWe (94% of capacity).
| |
| Lake currents during the surveys were predominantly westward, with only the two 7 October surveys conducted during eastward currents.
| |
| Current velocities were generally low, as evidenced by the fact that currents exceeded 0.5 fps during only one of the 13 surveys.The presence of natural thermal gradients (both horizontal and vertical)in the vicinity of the discharge, as well as possible interaction with NMP-I plume, complicate the determination of an ambient temperature
| |
| * from which plume temperature rises can be calculated.
| |
| The vertical stratification observed at the JAF intake (Table IV-I) during each of the surveys is an example of such a complicating factor. In those cases$ .where an ambient temperature was determined, it was obtained by averag-ing temperatures in the vicinity of the diffuser along transects outside the dye plume. The degree of natural temperature variation and the presence of NMP-I plume in the vicinity of JAF discharge prevented the determination of ambient temperature by this method for all but one of the August surveys (Table IV-l).The ambient temperature determined for the single 4 June survey was 53.3 0 F while ambient on the 13th of June decreased during the day from 51.7 to 47.3 0 F. The maximum surface temperature rise observed during the June surveys was 2.3*F, and thus no 3*F temperature rise isotherm was present. The minimum dilution of the dye observed at the surface during the June surveys (Table IV-l) would yield maximum surface tem-perature rises between 3.4 and 4.2*F if applied to the plant T under isothermal lake conditions.
| |
| However, the vertical stratification in the vicinity of the discharge reduces the observed surface temperature rise since the dilution water entrained by the jet is from the lower depth, which is cooler than surface water. The degree to which surface temper-ature rises are affected by vertical stratification is dependent on both the magnitude and the distribution of vertical temperature differences.
| |
| The sizes of the observed dye plumes during the June surveys increased with increasing current velocity, the largest areal extent of the 10:1 dilution being observed on 4 June when lake currents were approximately 0.25 fps. Substantial reductions of the areal extent of the same dilution contour were observed on 13 June, under low (< 0.1 fps) lake currents.IV-3 TABLE IV-l
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| OF HYDROTHERMAL FIELD SURVEY DATA JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT -1976 PLANT PLANT LAKE CURRENTA VERTICAL ýT MAXKIMUM MAXIMUM OBSERVED SURFACE AREA SUR.?SACE AR.L4 OF DATE OF LOAD pT DISCHARGE VELCTY- AT INTAKE OBSERVEDAT AT DILUTION FACTOR OF 3;F 2 1SOjE.TYX 10 TC' I DILIT1OJ SU._._;_Y TIM_ (0We) ('F) TEMP (°F) (fps) DIRECTION
| |
| (*F) SURFACE (*F) AT SURFACEc (ft2 C X0 FACTORc (ft-x0)4 Jr t; 0657-0618 779 29.0 81.0 0.25 SW 3.0 2.3 7.1 NO 1398 i I3 JUN.1 0638-OEO1 782 29.0 78.5 <0.05 W 3.0 0.8 8.6 NO 44 /'1032-1152 762 23.8 75.5 <0.05 W 2.1 1.7 6.9 NO 164 1446-1623 780 28.5 74.0 0.08 SW 1.7 2.2 7.4 NO 312 ,7'19 AUG Olth- ,- 9 788 29.5 99.0 0.46 WSW 1.1 2.6 8.5 NO 28 ""-'9-1 33 793 29.5 100.0 0.33 W 5.1 ND 7.5 ND 226 1603-1743 791 28.5 101.3 0.26 SW 5.4 ND 9.6 ND 27 20 AUG 0118-U949 793 29.5 100.0 0.17 SW 4.2 ND 8.9 ND 6 1231-1344 792 27.5 100.0 0.24 W 2.5 ND 8.2 ND 888 16i0-1722 791 29.0 101.0 0.25 W4 2.9 ND 8.4 ND 15 -7 OCT 082E-li)o0 726 26.5 89.0 0.74 E 2.1 4.3 5.5 139 818 1502-i615 726 26.0 89.0 <0.10 E 4.0 4.2 NA 1196 NA 8 OCT L642-1759 725 26.0 87.5 0.50 W 0.0 3.6 5.9 232 989 'aLake current, at !0 ft depth b ..bt,.n tLoo 2 ft C.and bottom 2 ft of water column W 51:,! Oil dJyL: C :), :,.!l) t L .i ml -aSurementr ml b -A b}riC tC.:.I.,:tature not d'.terinined l.A- jit ;uv:,i 14 The ambient temperature determined for the first 19 August survey was 68.9*F, and the corresponding maximum surface temperature rise was 2.6*F. The degree of thermal stratification in the discharge area was low during the first survey period, as indicated by the l.1F difference between surface and bottom temperatures (Table IV-l). It is of interest to note that the minimum observed dye dilution of 8.5 at the surface would produce a 3.5 0 F temperature rise under isothermal conditions, and that the maximum observed temperature rise (2.6°F) plus the observed verticalAT (I.1F) yields a similar temperature rise of 3.7°F. This indicates that the main portion of the entrained dilution water origi-nated in the cooler bottom waters. No 3 0 F surface isotherm was observed during the first August survey.The influence of the NMP-l plume in the vicinity of the JAF discharge (note the increase in verticalAT) prevented the determination of an ambient temperature for the remainder of the August surveys. The minimum dye dilution values applied to the existing plant T's would yield maximum surface temperature rises between 3.0 and 3.9F' under isothermal conditions.
| |
| The calculated maximum temperature rises based on the dye data were less than the observed vertical T at the intake in three of the five August surveys for which ambient temperature could not be determined in the near field. This would indicate that the JAF discharge actually had a cooling effect on the surface waters in the vicinity of the discharge during the three surveys. The plume chartings (Stone and Webster, 1976b) also showed this effect. Thus, the inter-action of the NMP-I plume with the JAF plume under these conditions resulted in a reduction of the temperature in the NMP-I plume through dilution with the cooler JAF plume. The maximum temperature rise attributable to the JAF discharge during the last two August surveys (Table IV-l) would be 3.4 0 F based on dye dilution, but the temperature rise relative to the surface waters in the vicinity would be reduced by the observed vertical stratification during these surveys.The surface areal extents of the 10:1 dilution factor contours observed during the August surveys are given in Table IV-I. These would corres-pond to the approximate extents of the 3=F isotherm under capacity operation (plant&T equal to 31.5 0 F) and isothermal lake conditions.
| |
| The survey results listed in Table IV-I show that both the highest maximum surface temperature (4.3 0 F) and lowest minimum dilution factor (5.5) for all 1976 surveys occurred during the October surveys. Both of these values were recorded during the first 7 October survey which had the highest observed current velocity of all surveys and was also the only survey during which significant easterly currents were observed.
| |
| A low minimum dilution (5.9) was also observed during the 8 October survey at a current velocity of 0.5 fps to the west.IV-4 In summary, the field survey results show maximum surface temperature rises of 4.3'F based on recorded temperature data and 4.8.*F based on dye dilution and assuming isothermal lake conditions.
| |
| During periods of vertical stratification in the vicinity of the discharge resulting from either natural causes or the influence of the NMP-l discharge, the surface temperature rises attributable to the JAF discharge are reduced and it may, under conditions of NMP-l plume interaction, actually reduce temperatures in the NMP-l plume. The survey data do indicate that increasing lake velocities can decrease the dilution achieved by the diffuser, and can increase the areal extent of the intermediate field isotherms.
| |
| D. PLUME TIME-TEMPERATURE HISTORY AND VELOCITY PROFILES In order to determine the time-temperature history of plume waters it is necessary to know the spatial distribution of velocities and tempera-tures in the plume. The time of travel through the temperature distri-bution can then be determined by integrating the velocity distribu-tion over distance.
| |
| The high velocities and high levels of turbulence in the near-field jet region of a submerged discharge preclude the measurement of these distributions in the submerged jet region, thus necessitating a theoretical determination using the known discharge velocity and temperature (u and T , respectively) and measured values from field data at t~e of jet surfacing.
| |
| Abramovich
| |
| ([-'1963])
| |
| has shown that the dissipation of velocity is related to the dilution of temperature.
| |
| A variety of expressions are available to describe this relationship, but one that is in common usage is, S= (T)b (IV-l)If b = 1, the temperature and velocity are diluted equally. However, usually b>l, as evidenced by plume deflection in an ambient current, until the plume no longer shows the effect of discharge momentum, although noticeable temperature elevations remain. This is explained by the fact that the discharge momentum has gone to increase the level of turbulent motion in the plume, while the decay of heat is primarily a result of exchange to the atmosphere; that is, the decay of heat and momentum are distinctly different processes.
| |
| It remains then to describe the temperature dilution distribution.
| |
| Previous studies (LMS, 1975) have indicated that the dilution of temperature along the centerline of the plume is proportional to the centerline distance raised to same power or, T(s) I (IV-2)To Sa IV-5 By substitution of Equation IV-2 into Equation IV-I and integration of the resulting expression for velocity over centerline distance, a time/temperature relationship can be determined.
| |
| Substitution of the initial discharge conditions and conditions at some centerline distance downstream yields values of a and b of 0.41 and 1:12 respectively.
| |
| The substitution values selected for this determination were the initial discharge velocity of 14.0 fps, the initial AT of 31.5 0 F, and the velocity and temperature at a centerline distance of 300 ft of 1.0 fps and 3.0°F, respectively.
| |
| The resulting time/temperature distribution for travel along the plume centerline is shown in Figure IV-4. Figure IV-4 applies only to the near-field portion of the plume where discharge momentum dominates the hydrodynamics of the plume. Figure IV-4 illus-trates the rapid dilution of the discharge temperature achieved by the diffuser in the near field, with the initial temperature rise of 31.5°F being reduced to less than a 7 0 F temperature rise within ten seconds of discharge to the lake. It should be noted that since the time/temperature relationship shown in Figure IV-4 is along the centerline of* the plume, it represents the maximum exposure.
| |
| Waters flowing in the plume but not at the centerline would be diluted more quickly and therefore would be subjected to smaller temperature rises.The velocity (u) versus distance (s) can be derived from the temperature distribution using Equation IV-I. The resulting estimated centerline velocity is described by Figure IV-5 for the near-field region.In the far-field plume, velocities are dominated by lake currents; thus the centerline time of travel can be computed by dividing the centerline distance to a specified isotherm by the magnitude of lake current. The far-field model results for lake currents between 0.2 and 0.8 fps indicate that the maximum travel time to the 2°F isotherm would be 2.5 hours and would occur at lake currents of 0.5 fps. Lake currents less than 0.5 fps would yield lower travel times since dilution along the centerline occurs more rapidly. The use of lake current to compute far-field travel time is conservative in that the average velocities along the centerline would be higher than the lake currents due to convective spreading and discharge momentum.It should be pointed out that a distribution of possible time/tempera-ture exposures exists which could be experienced by an entrained or-ganism; these exposures range from a low temperature rise for a short time period to the maximum exposures given above. Only a small percent-age of the organisms would experience either the maximum or minimum exposures.
| |
| E. WATER BODY SEGMENT FOR MULTI-PLANT EFFECTS A water body segment encompassing the discharges of Oswego Units 1-6, Nine Mile Point Unit 1, the James A. FitzPatrick Plant and the Oswego IV-6 FIGURE IV-4 TIME- TEMPERATURE HISTORY FOR THE NEAR FIELD PLUME JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR, POWER PLANT AND VICINITY 102.,, w 101 100 AT (OF)
| |
| FIGURE IV-5 VELOCITY AT PLUME CENTERLINE vs.DISTANCE FROM DIFFUSER JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT 102 I 0.w w w z w Q-100 I0-I I I I I I I I S I I I1I t1 0 10 I I I I I I1 00 IOO 1000 PLUME CENTERLINE DISTANCE (ft.)
| |
| River was chosen for consideration of multi-plant effects. Based on an analysis of ambient lake current persistences, it is expected that 95%of the currents of 0.1 knots will have an excursion distance shorter than half the water body segment length. That is, for the characteris-tic speed, a persistence in excess of 96 hours would be required before a floating organism would leave the water body segment, which extends approximately 10.6 km (6.6 mi) offshore and stretches along the shore for a distance of 36 km 4223 5 mi). Th~ivolime of water contained in this segment is 9.6 x 10 m (3.4 x 10 ft ). The cross-ssct~onal area normgl t2 the longshore flow is approximately 2.7 x 10 m (2.9 x 10 ft ) (see Table IV- 2 ). The selected segment includes 0.59% of the volume of Lake Ontario.F. PLUME ENTRAINMENT VOLUME RATIOS In order to evaluate the effect of the thermal discharge on the water body segment, it is desirable to quantify the fraction of the total flow through the water body that is entrained into the plume at selected temperature rises.It has been shown by many investigators that'a Gaussian distribution is a good approximation of the horizontal and vertical temperature varia-tions for submerged and surface jets. Therefore, it can be assumed that temperature in a cross section, normal to the plume centerline, de-creases exponentially with the square of the horizontal distance, r, and vertical distance, z, from the centerline.
| |
| This temperature, T(s,r,z) is described by: T(s,r,z) = T* (s) Exp -+ r.._(IV-3)
| |
| [2a, 2a2/z r Where a and a are the standard deviations of the temperature distributions and T*(s) is the centerline temperature.
| |
| If ur is assumed to be different for both the left and right side of the plume.cross section, plume asymmetry is also accounted for.Equation IV-3 describes a full elliptical cross section for each iso-therm in the submerged portion of the jet and a half elliptical section for the plume after jet surfacing (z>0). The cross-sectional area within any isotherm of value T after jet surfacing can be shown to be: T*(s) (IV-4)A = T' l iI r z T IV-7 TABLE IV-2 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE WATER BODY SEGMENT Water Body Segment Distance to offshore boundary Depth at offshore boundary Distance along shore Surface area Volume within bounds Cross sectional area 10.6 km-140 m 36 km 382 km 2 9.6 x 109 m3 2.7 x 105 m2 6.6 mi-450 ft 22.5 mi 147.5 mi 2 3.4 x 10 ft3 2.9 x 106 ft2 Solving Equation IV-4 for temperature as a function of area enclosed yields: r T = T*(s) Exp -liAo0:.1 (IV-5)and by substitution from Equation IV-I: u = u T*s) Exp -The principle of heat conservation dictates conditions the heat flux at any plume cross total flux at the diffuser ports or: H= /0PC T dA = H AC n Tr 2 u T p 0 p o o (IV-6)that under steady-state section be equal to the (IV-7)Where: H = heat flux at any plume cross section H = heat at diffuser ports input= density of water C = heat capacity of water np= number of diffuser ports r = radius of diffuser ports Substitution for T and u from Equations IV-5 and IV-6 and evaluation of the integral in Equation IV-7 yields: r1b+ 1 crr = nr (b + 1) (Iv-8)as a necessary condition for heat conservation at any cross section after jet surfacing.
| |
| A similar analysis for the submerged portion of the jet yields the necessary condition:
| |
| 2 'ý + T \b +1I rz o 2 UT S7))(IV-9)The total flow through an isotherm T with area A(T) is defined by: A(T)Q =,fu(A)dA (IV-IO)which after substitution for (A) from Equation IV-6 and evaluation of the integral yields: ub Q(T) = u ( T TO r V" [i- (Ts)) b](IV-I1)IV-8 where the~ -,-` product is specified by equation IV-8.wr h z Substitution for r < from Equation IV-ll yields: r z 00\b )[ I-12)T*- s) -(IV for the flow through the cross section bounded by isotherm T, after jet surfacing.
| |
| Similar analysis for the submerged portion of the jet also leads to Equation IV-12. Differentiating equation IV-12 with respect to T*(s), solving for T*(s) when Q is maximum, and back substitution into Equation IV-12 yields: o (T) 0 T (IV-13)QMAX(r-T(b + 1)for the maximum flow through the isotherm T.The beauty of equation IV-13 is that it allows the maximum flow to be computed without requiring prior determination of where in'the plume it occurs. It should be noted that the Q MA resulting from equation IV-13 is a conservative estimate of the entrained flow since it is the sum of some portion of the discharged flow and the entrained flow contained within the particular isotherm.
| |
| Thus, the actual maximum flow entrained through the particular isotherm would be less than QMAX by the portion of the original discharge flow still inside the isb~erm at the location where QMAX occurs.Equation IV-13 was used to calculate the maximum flows within the 2°F and 3*F isotherm for the JAF plume and for the other generating stations in the selected water body segment. The results of the analysis and a comparison of the entrained flows with the total flow in the water body segment are given in Table IV-3. All flow rates shown in Table IV-3 are based on capacity operation of all stations.
| |
| If seasonal load factors were applied in the analysis the given isotherm flows would be substan-tially reduced.IV-9 TABLE IV-3 MAXIMUM HEATED WATER FLOW WITHIN 3 AND 2*F ISOTHERMS JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT AND VICINITY ISOTHERM Q x RATIO OF Q TO PLANT (OF) (M(cX) Q IN WATER BO XSEGMENTa FITZPATRICK 3 5001 0.0103 2 7502 0.0154 b ALL PLANTS 3 15576 0.0320 2 23365 0.0479 iQ in water body segment equals 13800 m 3/sec DIncludes Oswego Units 5 and 6, Nine Mile Point Unit I, FitzPatrick REFERENCES CITED CHAPTER IV Abramovich, G.N. [19631. The theory of turbulent jets. [Trans-lated by Scripta Tech.] Edited by Leon H. Schindel.
| |
| Massachu-setts Inst. Tech. Press, Cambridge.
| |
| Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers.
| |
| 1975. 316(a) demonstration submission:
| |
| Oswego Unit 5, NPDES Permit #070 OX2 2 000632 NY (0003212).
| |
| Prepared for Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.Power Authority of the State of New York. 1971. Environmental report: Environmental statement to the United States Atomic Energy Commission pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act -James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant. AEC Docket No.50-333.Stone and Webster. 1976a. June 1976 postoperational hydrothermal survey for James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant. Prepared for Power Authority of the State of New York.Stone and Webster. 1976b. August 1976 postoperational hydrothermal survey for James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant. Prepared for Power Authority of the State of New York.Stone and Webster. 1976c. October 1976 postoperational hydrothermal survey for James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant. Prepared for Power Authority of the State of New York.}}
| |
