Post-Impingement Fish Survival

at Huntley Steam Station

Winter and Fall

1999

FINAL REPORT

Prepared for:

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation

300 Erie Boulevard 

Syracuse, NY 13202

Prepared by:

Beak Consultants Incorporated

140 Rotech Drive

Lancaster, NY 14086

April , 2000
,

1.0

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

Background

Huntley Station Description

Methods

1 Low-Pressure Spray System Efficiency Testing

Collection and Handling Mortality Testing

Impingement Sampling

Water Quality Monitoring

Station Operating Conditions

2.4 Analytical Procedures

Results and Discussion

1 Low-Pressure Spray System Efficiency Testing

Collection and Handling Mortality Testing

3 Post-Impingement Survival

January Survival

October Survival

Water Quality Monitoring and Station Operating Conditions

Optimization

Summary

Page

. 3
:

Figure 

LIST OF FIGURES

Collection apparatus as set up at Huntley Station
Table 1:

Table 2:

Table 3:

Table 4:

Table 5:

Table 6:

Table 7:

Table 8:

LIST OF TABLES

Physical characteristics of the newly installed traveling screens at the

Huntley Steam Station.

Summary of collection efficiency results using centrarchids at the Huntley .

Station, January 21 , 1999.

Summary of collection efficiency results using emerald shiner and two sizes of

rainbow smelt at the Huntley Station, January 23 and 26, 1999.

Numbers of naturally impinged fish collected in the fish and debris

troughs at the Huntley Station, January 25- , 1999.

Handling and holding mortality testing results at Huntley Station

January 20- , 1999.

Huntley Station impingement survival testing results, January 21- , 1999.

Huntley Station impingement survival results for ')uvenile" and "adult"

rainbow smelt, January 21- , 1999.

Huntley Station impingement , October 24- , 1999.
1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Beak 

(NMPC) to evaluate the survival of fish impinged on newly installed through-flow Ristroph-type

traveling screens at its Huntley 

manufactured by Brackett Green Incorporated. The screening system was designed to maximize

the survival of , in 

Water Act 

available (BTA) for minimizing 

and results for 

October 1999 for NRG , LLC, who 

1999.

The study objectives were to: 1) pressure spray wash system

for the removal of fish from the 

handling on impingement survival of

commonly impinged species; and 4) determine ways to optimize post-impingement survival.

1.2 Huntley Station Description

The Huntley Steam Station (Huntley) is located on the Niagara River in the Town 

New York. fired and has four units rated for a total of 760 

Five new "Ristroph-type" through-flow traveling screens were installed in the screenhouse that

services Units 67 and 68. , conventional traveling 

Physical characteristics of the new screening system are described in Table 

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April 10, 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley _report fma1.doc
Circulating system water enters the plant perpendicular to the Niagara River 

structure located along a bulkheaded shoreline. Water travels under a 

common forebay before passing through five sets of bar racks. 

located 12 ft behind each set of bar racks. The traveling screens fit into slots 

wide and 20 ft deep. Each 

form an inch by ~-inch "smooth tex

woven stainless steel cloth and has an attached hydraulically-designed fish bucket at the bottom

to collect fish as the buckets 

screen, their contents are washed into a fish 

pressure spray wash headers. The screen is then subjected to a high-pressure spray wash, which

forces remaining debris into a debris trough. 

screens troughs (fish trough inch

diameter pipe, which discharges into the Niagara River approximately 

intake.

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April! 0, 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley_report - final. doc
,,,

METHODS

This section describes the testing 

describes collection efficiency testing designed to evaluate 

system for removal , in

Section 1.0). Section 2.2 describes 

experimental handling (Objective 2), and Section 2. describes post-impingement survival

testing (Objective 

historically impinged at 

importance.

Low-Pressure Spray System 

A mark/recapture study was perfonned to pressure spray

. .

wash system for removal of fish from the screen to the fish return trough. 

on January 21 , 1999 and during post-impingement survival testing (Objective 3) on January 23-

, 1999. 

(two to four fish per 

inside the fish and debris troughs. 

to the configuration of the screenhou~e, the debris trough was not readily accessible for 

, #8 and #9; however, the fish return trough for screens #7, #8 and #9 was 

was almost no debris during 

ft/min), which would be the normal operating speed.

Testing was conducted over a range of spray pressures in order to determine 

pressure for fish removal. The low-pressure spray wash system consists of two inside and two

outside spray wash headers, each of which has multiple spray nozzles. 

wash nozzles appeared to be working properly except at Screen #9, where one of the two outside

NRG Huntley L.L.c. Beak Consultants Incorporated

April 10, 2000 report fmal.doc
low-pressure spray headers was not working. 

clean.

For testing on , dead centrarchids (bluegill 

with rose bengal (a red biological stain) and placed in groups of 25. 

the nearest mm prior to 

T3:ble A- I). Screen #5 was , 5 , 8 

Screens #6 through #9 were tested with 5 psi.

Additional collection efficiency tests were conducted using a smaller species 

determine if size and fish shape had an effect on collection , stained

dead emerald shiners, ranging in , were 

January 26, stained dead rainbow smelt were tested on Screens #5, #6 and #9. The 

divided into two size groups, juveniles 75-95 mm in length and adults 130- 140 nun in length. All

screens were tested with 5 psi.

On January 25- , the numbers of live

, 

naturally. impinged" 

caught in the wire 

recorded and compared. 

screening system in diverting live fish to the fish return trough rather than to the debris trough.

Collection and Handling Mortality Testing

A test , 1999 to determine the 

handling of test fish on their subsequent 

were used in the study. A total of 49 live fish were introduced into the impingement 

device (handling controls) at a point upstream in the fish return trough. 

the fish were handled as if they were selected for extended survival testing (described in Section

3), i. , their initial hr extended 

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April 10, 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley_report - fmal.doc
observation period.

An additional group of 36 fish (holding controls) were held in the extended survival 

a control for the 

device, these fish were treated as described above.

Impingement Sampling

The intent of 

specimens of each of four target fish species: alewife, emerald shiner, gizzard shad, and rainbow

smelt. The goal of 

sample 

supplement the data on impingement survival for this species, since the sample size obtained in

January (30 fish) was relatively small. 

peak monthly impingement 

studies at Huntley (1982- 1983 and 

collected and tested as available, holding space permitting.

Sampling occurred during an 8-hr period on five consecutive nights on January 21- , 1999 and

again on October 24- , 1999. florv

traveling screens installed in Screenwells # 5 and #6. 

continuously rotated at low speed (8 fpm).

A temporary trough section was installed within the fish return trough between Screens 

#7. This temporary 

collection table (Figure 

Once there, the fish were directed into a brailing device or bucket and lifted out 

brailing device retained a minimum of 4 inches of water in order to 

protect the fish. At no time 

NRG Huntley L.L.c. Beak Consultants Incorporated

April!0 2000 report fmal.doc
At the beginning of each sampling event, a plug was placed in the temporary trough 

divert fish to the collection table. , but

could be shortened due to large numbers of fish. 

move fish when hr sampling event, fish 

collection table to , if selected for survival

evaluation. Fish not selected for survival , the target 

excess) were identified to species and counted, but were not held. 

event, the fish return trough was returned to its normal mode 

within the fish return trough, and blocking flow to the collection table (Figure 

In January gal and 100-gal rectangular 

galvanized steel tanks. gal, 130-gal and 240-

gal round fiberglass or plastic tanks and one 100-gal rectangular fiberglass tank. 

were continuously supplied with water pumped from the intake forebay. through tanks

were set up near the test screens. 

tanks by directing the water flow. 

three to five times per hour. 

water.

Fish were separated according to size, GUld 

the observation period. target groups would result in

more handling, practically all available , unless the 

species for which quotas were well exceeded.

Initial condition was determined for all fish 

classified as live, stressed, or dead according to the following conditions:

Live - No , fish actively 

upright position.

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

AprillO 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley _report fmal.doc
Stressed - Fish with visible physical damage such as missing patches of scales, to~ fins

hemorrhaging or 

maintaining orientation in a normal upright position.

Dead - Fish with no obvious external signs of life and/or severely 

individuals with only slight opercular movement.

Only fish classified as live were transferred to holding tanks. 

omitted from the 

holding tanks were then monitored for 24 hr.

Live fish held for extended-survival (24-hr) observation were observed at 2, 4, 8 and 24 hr after

collection. At , the number of dead fish was recorded, and the dead fish were

removed from the holding tank, identified to species, and measured for total length. At the 24-

observation, all remaining fish were identified to species; characterized as live, dead, or stressed;

and measured to fill a quota of 25 randomly selected fish per species measured per collection.

Water Quality Monitoring

Water quality parameters were measured at the intake during sampling and in randomly selected

extended-survival holding 

taken at a mid-depth location at ~e , and 

(approximately 0, 4 C), pH, dissolved

oxygen (DO) concentration (mg/l), and specific conductance 25 OC). Water 

in the 

concentration were monitored in selected holding tanks at the beginning, middle, and end of each

collection period and extended survival monitoring period

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April! 0, 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley_report - fma1.doc
Station Operating Conditions

Information on , such as 

(CWP) operation, service water pump (SWP) operation, and flow rates, was obtained by direct

observation and was recorded on a daily basis for the duration of the testing. 

are presented in Appendix C.

Analytical Procedures

Estimates were made for the initial survival rates (Si) and extended, 24-hr survival rates (S ) of

the test fish by species and life 

initially live fish (Li) by the sum of those initially determined to be live, stunned (ST ), and dead

(D). The extended 

the number of fish classified as live at the end of the 24-hr observation period (L ) by the total

number of fish observed for extended survival. Post-impingement survival (S) was estimated as

the product of initial and extended survival rates. , fish observed

as being stressed initially or at 24 hr were conservatively treated as being dead.

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April 1 0, 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley_report - fmal.doc
0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

1 Low-Pressure Spray System 

Recovery rates for marked centrarchids ranged from 88% to 100% (Table 

Screen #5, the best results (100% recovery) came with spray pressures of 1.5 and 5 psi. Testing

at Screen #5 also showed that nearly all fish missed by the fish return trough were 

the debris trough. , recovery 

approached 100%, with the exception of Screen #7 (88%).

At Huntley, the lower inside and outside spray nozzles of most screens are directly opposed. The

lower inside spray wash on 

appeared to have weaker 

outside spray may explain the lower , if they 

between the flap seal and the descending screen. 

F or the test , only 37% of the fish 

were recovered in the fish return trough (Table 

the debris trough for a combined efficiency of 

Using dead rainbow smelt, the recovery rates for juveniles (75-95 mm) from Screens #5, #6, and

#9 were 63 , 42 and 52%, 140 mm)

from , #6 and #9 were 98, 86 , respectively. 

efficiency for the fish and debris troughs at Screens #5 and #6 were 89 to 100.

Simultaneous collections of live

, 

naturally impinged fish" from the fish 

troughs downstream of Screens #5 and #6 showed that 83% of the emerald shiners and 

the juvenile and adult rainbow smelt were collected from the fish return trough (Table 4). These

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April10 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley - report- final. doc
high recovery rates in the fish return trough 

shiners and 42 to 63% recovery of juvenile 

releases (Table 3). Therefore, better collection efficiency may be expected for live fish than for

dead fish.

Detailed test results are presented in Appendix Tables A-2 through ACollection and Handling Mortality Testing

During testing on , 1999, none of the 49 

golden shiners (holding controls) held for 24 hr died , no 

impingement mortality 

holding.

3 Post Impingement Survival

January Survival

During January testing, a total of 6 120 fish and 14 species were collected for survival evaluation

during five nights of sampling (Table , 2 20~

emerald shiners, 315 juvenile gizzard, 30 alewife and three adult 

364 fish were collected but not evaluated for extended survival.

Rainbow smelt was the most abundant 

140 mm (Appendix Table B- 1). There , separating

smelt into two size 

impingement survival for rainbow smelt was 84.2% (Table 7). The 

to adults 

dead or stressed at 24 hr, and alive at 24 hr was applied to the total number of fish (measured and

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April 10, 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley - fmal.doc
. 

unmeasured) in each of these three categories to estimate initial and extended survival of juvenile

and adult rainbow smelt. , the extended survival for juvenile and adult 

smelt was estimated to be 74.4% and 94.3%, respectively (Table 7).

Emerald shiner was the second most 

from 48 to 105 mm in a relatively uniform size distribution (Appendix Table B-2). 

survival for emerald shiners was 97.5% (Table 6).

Juvenile gizzard shad was the third most abundant species collected. 

from 86 to 193 mm 3). Overall, impingement survival for juvenile gizzard

shad was 5. 1 % 9% 

collected, ranging in length from 262 to 289 mm. 

collection, and their survival was considered to be zero. 

be a result of cold water temperature, which at the time of the study was near OOC. Gizzard 

in the Niagara River are at the northern limits of their 

have been thermally stressed prior to impingement.

Alewife were not abundant, and only 30 specimens were collected, ranging in length from 89 to

204 mm (Appendix Table B-4). Of these 30 fish, four were dead and 26 were stressed at the time

of collection (Table 6). 

the initial and 

shad, the low survival could be related to water temperature. Alewife are 

their range in the Niagara River and Lake Erie, and typically move to deep water to 

winter temperatures (Smith 1985). In laboratory experiments, adult alewife from Lake Michigan

lost orientation and ceased feeding and schooling at temperatures between 2.0 and 2. 8 oc (35.

37OF) (Colby 1971). Water temperatures during c (Appendix' C).

Ten non-target species were collected, including trout-perch, yellow perch, rock bass, spottail

shiner, white sucker, white perch smallmouth bass, bluntnose minnow, darters 

sucker. No species , except for trout-perch.

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April 10, 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley _report- fmal.doc
October Survival

During October testing, a total of3 258 fish and 

during five nights of 824

rainbow smelt, 628 emerald shiners, 183 alewife, and 65 gizzard shad. Other 

species included spottail shiner (231' fish), rock bass (180 fish), and white bass (127 

The extended (24-hr) survival rate for 

(Table 8). This rate is lower 2%) derived from testing in January for 

and adults combined, and lower than 6%) in 

Rainbow smelt in October ranged in length from 48 rnm to 5), with

a mean length of approximately 65 rnm, compared to a mean length of 88 mm in January.

The estimated survival rate of emerald shiners (97.5%) in October was nearly identical to the rate

(97. %) estimated from testing in 

100 mm (Appendix Table B-6). 

continued to demonstrate high survival rates in 8%) and rock bass

(98.9%).

Most gizzard shad collected and tested in October were juveniles (length frequency data provided

in Appendix Table B-7). Their estimated 24-hr survival rate (96. 9%) was much improved ov~r

the 5. 1 % 

intake during testing ranged from C to 14 oC. 

temperatures that could cause thermal stress for gizzard shad, thus possibly 

higher survival than observed in January.

Alewife, the species targeted for October sampling in order to increase sample sizes, experienced

an improved 24-hr survival rate of 22.4% for a 

survival in January for a sample of 30 fish (Table 6). 

from 79 to 134 rnm (Appendix Table B-8) and most likely included young-of-the-year fish.

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April! 0, 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley - final. doc
Water Quality Monitoring and Station Operating Conditions

Intake temperatures varied little 

ranged from 0 to 2 oC in January (Appendix Table C- 1) and 11.5 to 14 oC in October (Appendix

Table C-3). DO concentrations (Appendix Tables C- 1 and C-3) remained at, or near, saturation.

All circulating and service water pumps remained on line during the study (Appendix Tables Cand C-3). 

intake (Appendix Tables C-2 and C-4).

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April 10, 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley_report final.doc
0 OPTIMIZATION

The traveling 

mortality minimizing features. They Ristroph" fish

buckets with a modified bucket lip to reduce 

debris spray wash systems.

Improvements to collection efficiency have the effect of improving fish 

that fish not captured in either the fish or debris troughs are sent through the cooling system and

experience mortality. 

order to avoid exposure to the high pressure debris sprays. Collection 

few fish are missed by the screens and sent through the plant. 

fish are captured in the fish trough, and a high 

debris trough.

Potential actions to improve collection efficiency. for 

follows.

The gap between the flap seal and the 

measure this gap, but the flap seal did not appear to come into close contact with the 

We recommend that the flap seal be' adjusted and re-tested. Since 

already high, only small improvements are necessary.

Screen # 7 should be examined more closely, particularly the flap seal.

The lower outside spray nozzles are presently being directed towards the 

be forcing fish into the gap between the flap seal and the screen. 

be re-directed.

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April 10, 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley_report - fmal.doc
SUMMARY

The spray wash and collection 

screen to the fish return trough. 

large percentage of the impinged fish are in good condition for return to the river, as reflected by

their condition within the fish return 

spray wash system have positively affected the 24- , post-impingement survival rate of the fish

impinged at , the 24-hr post impingement 

approach or equal 100%. 

considered to be dead. , further refinements in screening system design are not

likely to produce tangible increases in survival.

NRG Huntley L.L.C.

April 10, 2000

Beak Consultants Incorporated

File: Huntley _report fmal.doc
Screen #6

rotation

...

screen,'

\. ... 

return trough

flow 

collection table

Figure 1. Collection apparatus as 
Tab Ie 1. 

at Huntley Steam Station.

General/Site Data

number of travel in 

manufacturer

eratin deck 

desi 

design low water level

channel base level

screenwell width

channel de th

number of screen s eeds

low screen s eed

high screen s eed

Hydraulic Data

screen ca acity

velocity trou 

head loss across mesh

total head loss across screen

roach velocity

Screen Data

effective screen width

number of basket sections

mesh opening size

mesh material

mesh diameter

depth of water in fish bucket

width of water in fish bucket

header

unt ey 

five

Brackett Green

572~5

566.

563.

552.

10' 9"

19' 6"

two

8' I min

16' I min

57500 m

2.41 

-:::1 'Isec

9' 7 1/2"

1/8" x 1/2" smooth tex

stainless steel

063" (16 ga.

4 "

9' 7 1/2"

two

two

19/18

10 

10 

262-370
Table 1. Continued.

header

two

9/10

80 

256

gravl

18" I.

350'

6' / sec
Table 2. 

at the Huntley Station, January 21, 

fish return trou2h

spray pressure (psi)

1.5 

fish return & debris troughs

spray pressure (psi)

Screen # 5 100% 100% 94% 92%

98%

88%

100%

Screen # 9 100%

100% 100% 98% 98%

Screen # 6 100%

Screen # 7

Screen # 8

NA = debris trough was inaccessible

HuntcollEF .xls
Table 3. 

and two sizes of rainbow smelt at the 

January 23 and 

Screen # 5

Screen # 6

Screen # 9

HuntcollEF .xIs

fish return trou2h

emerald rainbow smelt

shiner juvenile adult

70-100mm 75-95mm 130-140mm

63% 98%

370/0 420/0 86%

52% 88%

fish return & debris 

emerald rainbow smelt

shiner juvenile adult

70-100mm 75-95mm 130-140mm

89% 100%

1000/0 96% 960/0
Table 4. 

trougbs at tbe Huntley Station, January 25-26, 1999.

size (mm)

number

recovered

from fisb

trou h

number

recovered

from debris

trou b

emerald shiner 70- 100 104

rainbow smelt 75- 140 995

HuntcollEF .xls

percent of

recovered fish

collected in

fisb trou h

83 %

91%
Table 5. , 1999.

initial initial 24- 24- total total

test dead stressed alive survival dead stressed alive survival tested survival

handling controls 100. 100. 100.

holding controls 100.00/0 100. 100.

Dunkirk - spring- sumry.xls
Table 6. , January 21- , 1999.

initial initial 24- 24- total total

species dead stressed alive survival dead stressed alive survival tested survival

rainbow smelt 3357 98.2 o 430 2878 85. 7O 3418 84.2 %

emerald shiner 2168 98.50/0 2146 99. 2201 97.

gizzard shad "juvenile 236 14. 34.00~ 315 1 %trout-perch 100. 100. 100.

alewife 00/0

yellow perch 100. 100. 100.

rock bass 89. 100. 89.

spottail shiner 94.4% 100. 94.

white sucker 100. 100. 100.white perch 37. 100. 37.

gizzard shad" adult" 00/0smallmouth bass 100. 100. 100.

bluntnose minnow 100. 100. 100.

darter 100. 100. 100.

redhorse sucker 100. 100. 100.

Target total 6120

Dunkirk - spring- sumry.xIs
Table 7. juvenile" and " adult" rainbow 

January 21- , 1999.

initial initial 24- 24- total total

species dead stressed alive survival dead stressed alive survival tested survival

rainbow smelt (all) 3357 98. 2 % 430 2878 85. 3418 84.2 %

estimated.:::: 100mm 27.3 24. 1681.2 97.00/0 351.7 40. 1289.3 76. 1733. 74.

estimated ~ 100mm 4.3 1675. 99.50/0 78.3 1588. 94. 1684. 94.

Dunkirk - spring- sumry .xIs
Table 8. 29, 1999.

initial initial 24- 24- total total

species dead stressed alive survival dead stressed alive survival tested survival

rainbow smelt 282 1461 80. 1 % 584 875 59. 1824 48.0%

emerald shiner 621 98. 611 98.4% 628 97.30/0spottail shiner 227 98.3% 226 99. 231 97.

alewife 181 98.90/0 139 22. 183 22.4 %

rock bass 178 98. 178 100. 180 98.

white bass 125 98.4% 124 99. 127 97.

gizzard shad 100. 96. 96.

smallmouth bass 100. 100. 100.

darter 100. 100. 100.

white perch 100. 100. 100.

yellow perch 100. 100. 100.

brook silverside 100. 100. 100.pumpkinseed 100. 100. 100.

goldfish 100. 100. 100.

black crappie 100. 100. 100.

Target species in bold total 3258

Dunkirk _spring- sumry.xls
......

jI80II jI80II

1--4
Table ATable ATable ATable AAPPENDIX A

LIST OF TABLES

Lengths of fish used in collection efficiency testing at Huntley Station

January 21 , 1999.

Huntley Station screen collection efficiency testing results using marked dead

centrarchids, January 21 , 1999.

Lengths of marked catch efficiency test fish recovered from the debris trough

and flap seal at Dunkirk Station, December 2, 1999.

Collection efficiency testing results using emerald shiner and rainbow smelt at

Huntley Station, January 23 and 26, 1999.
Table A-1. Lengths of 

at Huntley Station, January 21, 

Group Group Group Group

Individual Individual Individual Individual

Fish Length Fish Length Fish Length Fish Length

(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

160 120 133 160

151 117 161 161

157 161 126 121

157 157 121 149

121 114 144 155

135 135 143 154

122 144 120

161 155 150 122

134 126 119 157

134 122 160

150 121 161 130

121 120 160

102 122 156

124 131 122 145

115 122 150 125

144 132 113 132

140 142 129

120 120 150

121 150 131 138

127 154 126

130 121 135

130 159 130 126

123 121 104 114

122 148 114 130

120 104 121 128

Average 130.4 129. 130. 134.4

Minimum

Maximum 161 161 161 161

HuntcollEF .xls
Table A-2. Huntley 

dead centrarchid~, January 21, 1999.

Spray Trial Fish Time Number Number Percent Number Percent

Pressure Number Test Start Released Recovered Recovered Recovered Recovered

(psi) Group From Fish From Fish From Debris From Fish &

Trough Trou2h Trou2h Debris Trough

Screen # 5

1307

1312

Total 100% 100%

1320

1340

Total 92% 98%

1.5 1345

1.5 1400

Total 100% 100%

1404

1420

Total . 47 94% 98%

Screen # 6

1445

1450

Total 98% 100%

Screen # 7

1510 88%

Screen # 8

1527 1000/0

Screen # 9

1535 100%

NA = not available, debris trough was inaccessible

HwitcollEF .xIs
Table A-3. Lengths of marked catch efficiency test fish recovered from the

debris trough at Huntley Station, January 21, 

spray pressure (psi)

trial number

test group

fish collected from

debris trough

len hs 

average I

HuntcollEF .xls

1.5 1.5

154 148 121

121 110
Table A-4. 

January 23 and 26, 

Screen # 5

Species Size Spray Number Number Number Percent

(mm) Pressure Released Recovered Recovered Recovered

(psi) From Fish From Debris From Fish &

Trou h Trou h Debris Trou h

rainbow smelt "juvenilerainbow smelt "juvenilerainbow smelt "juvenile

75-75-75-

rainbow smelt "adult"

rainbow smelt "adult'l

130- 140130-140

63 %

980/0

89%

100%

Screen #6

lemerald shiner 70-100 38 

rainbow smelt "juvenile 75-

rainbow smelt "juvenile 75-

42%. 960,10

rainbow smelt "adult" 130- 140

rainbow smelt "adult" 130- 140

860/0 960,10

Screen #9

Irainbow smelt "juvenile 75- 52 %

Irainbow smelt "adult" 130- 140 25 

NA = not available, debris trough was inaccessible

HuntcoIIEF .xIs
Table B- 1 :

Table B~2:

Table BTable BTable BTable BTable BTable BAPPENDIX B

LIST OF TABLES

Length frequency distribution for rainbow smelt collected at Huntley Station

January 21- , 1999.

Length frequency distribution for emerald shiner collected at Huntley Station

-January 21- , 1999.

Length frequency distribution for juvenile gizzard shad 

Station, January 21- , 1999.

Length frequency distribution for alewife collected at Huntley Station

January 21- , 1999.

Length frequency distribution for rainbow smelt collected at Huntley Station

October 24- , 1999.

Length frequency distribution for emerald shiner collected at Huntley Station

October 24- , 1999.

Length frequency distribution for gjzzard shad collected at Huntley

Station, October 24- , 1999.

Le~gth frequency distribution for alewife collected at Huntley Station

October 24- , 1999.
Table B-1. Length frequency 

Station, January 21-25, 1999.

length

range

from 

101

106

111

116

121

126

131

136

141

146

151

156

161

166

171

176

181

186

191

196

201

206

211

216

221

100

.105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

185

190 .

195

200

205

210

215

220

225

~225

number

low (mm)

high (mm)

median (mm)

mean (mm)

percentage of fish 

legthfrqoutput.xls

initial test end

dead and dead and alive

stressed stressed

combined combined

. 0

347 125

133 140 136

106

101

85. 81.8% 44.
Table B-2. Length frequency 

Station, January 21-25, 1999.

length

range

from 

46.

101

106

111

116

121

126

131

136

141

146

151

156

161

166

171

176

181

186

191

196

201

206

211

216

221

legthfrqoutput.xls

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

185

190.

195

200

205

210

215

220

225

:::-225

number

low (mm)

high (mm)

median (mm)

mean (mm)

initial test end

dead and dead and alive

stressed stressed

combined combined

125

105
Table B-3. Length frequency 

Huntley Station, January 21-25, 1999.

length

range

from 

101

106

111

116

121

. 126

131

136

141

146

151

156

161

166

171

176

181

186

191

196

201

206

211

216

221

legthfrqoutput.xls

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

185

190 -

195

200

205

210

215

220

225

:::-225

number

low (mm)

high (mm)

median (mm)

mean (mm)

initial test end

dead and dead and alive

stressed stressed

combined combined

133

193 177 156

121 112 115

122 116 117
Table B-4. 

Station, January 21-25, 1999.

length

range

from 

101

106

111

116

121

126

131

136

141

146

151

156

161

166

171

176

181

186

191

196

201

206

211

216

221

legthfrqoutput.xls

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

185

190 -

195

200

205

210

215

220

225

:::-225

number

low (mm)

high (mm)

median (mm)

mean (mm)

initial test end

dead and dead and alive

stressed stressed

combined combined

. 1

204

133

136
Table B-5. Length frequency 

Station, October 24-29, 1999.

length

range

from 

101

106

111

116

121

126

131

136

141

146

151

156

161

166

171

176

181

186

191

196

201

206

211

216

221

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

185

190 -

195

200

205

210

215

220

225

:::-225

number

low (mm)

high (mm)

median (mm)

mean (mm)

percentage offish 

legthfrqoutput.xls

initial test end

dead and dead and alive

stressed stressed

combined combined

124 167

202 145

. 0

277 483 382

135 127

100. 98. 96.
Table B-6. Length frequency 

Station, October 24-29, 1999.

length

range

from 

legthfrqoutput.xls

101

106

111

116

121

126

131

136

141

146

151

156

161

166

171

176

181

186

191

196

201

206

211

216

221

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

185

190 -

195

200

205

210

215

220

225

:::-225

number

low (mm)

high (mm)

median (mm)

mean (mm)

initial test end

dead and dead and alive

stressed stressed

combined combin

235

100
Table B-7. Length frequency 

Huntley Station, October 24-29, 1999.

length

range

from 

legthfrqoutput.xls

101

106

111

116

121

126

131

136

141

146

151

156

161

166

171

176

181

186

191

196

201

206

211

216

221

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

185

190 -

195

200

205

210

215

220

225

:::-225

number

low (mm)

high (mm)

median (mm)

mean (mm)

initial test end

dead and dead and alive

stressed stressed

combined combined

. 0

242

104
Table B-8. Length frequency 

Station, October 24-29, 1999. 

length

range

from 

legthfrqoutputxls

101

106

111

116

121

126

131

136

141

146

151

156

161

166

171

176

181

186

191

196

201

206

211

216

221

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

170

175

180

185

190 -

195

200

205

210

215

220

225

:::-225

number

low (mm)

high (mm)

median (mm)

mean (mm)

initial test end

dead and dead and alive

stressed stressed

combined combined

138

101 134 131

99.4 101.
APPENDIX C

Water Quality and

Plant Operational Data
Table CTable CTable CTable CAPPENDIX C

LIST OF TABLES

Water quality and plant operational data during impingement survival testing at

Huntley Station, January 21- , 1999.

Water quality data for extended survival holding tanks during impingement

survival testing at Huntley Station, January 21- , 1999.

Water quality and plant operational data during impingement survival testing at

Huntley Station, October 24- , 1999.

Water quality data for extended survival holding tanks during impingement

survival testing at Huntley Station, October 24- , 1999.
Table C- Water quality and plant operational data during impingement survival testing at

Huntley Station, January 21-26, 1999.

dissolved cond- number number water

oxygen uctivity of circ. of serv. elev. screen

location date time temp o mgIL ~cm pumps pumps feet speed

Intake 21-Jan- 2350 12. 7.3 180 all 562. low

Intake 22-Jan- 310 12. 7.3 200 all low

Iritake 22-Jan- 625 12. not taken 190 all 562. low

Intake 22-Jan- 2300 13.1 7.4 190 all 562. low

Intake 23-Jan- 330 12. 7.4 200 all low

Intake 23-Jan- 705 13. 220 all 563 low

Intake 24-Jan- 13. 270 all 563.4 low

Intake 24-Jan- 325 12.3 7.4 260 all 563. low

Intake 24-Jan- 645 12. 225 all low

Intake 25-Jan- 135 12. not taken 180 all 563. low

Intake 25-Jan- 410 13.1 not taken 160 all 563. low

Intake 25-Jan- 630 13. not taken 180 all 563. low

Intake 25-Jan- 2310 12. not taken 180 all 563. low

Intake 26-Jan- 320 13.5 not taken 170 all 563. low

wqtables.xls
wqtables.xls

Table C- Water quality data for extended survival holding tanks during

impingement survival testing at Huntley Station

January 21-26, 1999.

dissolved

oxygen

location date time temp o mgIL

Tank 6 22-Jan- 12.

Tank 1 22-Jan- 315 12.

Tank 2 22-Jan- 626 12.

Tank 5 22-Jan- 1000 13.

Tank 3 22-Jan- 1300 14.

Tank 2 22-Jan- 2305 12.

Tank 3 23-Jan- 13.

Tank 3 23-Jan- 335 12.

Tank 3 23-Jan- 710 12.

Tank 5 23-Jan- 745 13.

Tank 6 23-Jan- 1215 13.4

Tank 2 24-Jan- 330 11.7

Tank 24-Jan- 642 12.

Tank 6 24-Jan- 910 12.

Tank 5 24-Jan- 1300 12.

Tank 2 25-Jan- 140 12.

Tank 25-Jan- 400 13.

Tank 25-Jan- 632 13.

Tank 5 25-Jan- 1030 13.

Tank 6 25-Jan- 1215 13.

Tank 5 25-Jan- 2315 12.

Tank 5 26-Jan- 325 13.4
Table C- Water quality and plant operational data during impingement survival testing at

Huntley Station, October 24-29, 1999.

dissolved cond- number number water

oxygen uctivity of circ. of servo elev. screen

location date time temp o mgIL ~mlcm pumps pumps feet speed

Intake 24-0ct- 2200 205 563. slow

Intake 25-0ct- 110 205 563. slow

Intake 25-0ct- 432 10.3 205 563. slow

Intake 25-0ct- 2104 10. 205 563. slow

Intake 26-0ct- 10. 202 563.5 slow

Intake 26-0ct- 440 10. 200 563.5 slow

Intake 26-0ct- 2053 . .12 10. 210 563 slow

Intake 27-0ct- 142 10.4 201 563 slow

Intake 27-0ct- 454 10. 211 563 slow

Intake 27-0ct- 2100 11.5 10. 7.4 210 563 slow

Intake 28-0ct- 11.5 10. 7.4 209 563 slow

Intake 28-0ct- 440 11.5 10. 7.4 209 563 slow

Intake 28-0ct- 2058 10. 195 563 slow

Intake 29-0ct- 136 10. 211 563 slow

Intake 29-0ct- 455 10. 210 563 slow

wqtables.xls
wqtables.xls

Table C-4. Water quality data for extended survival holding tanks during

impingement survival testing at Huntley Station,

October 24-29, 1999.

dissolved

oxygen

location date time temp o mgIL

Tank 1 24-0ct- 2210

Tank 3 25-0ct- 105

Tank 4 25-0ct- 435 10.

Tank 2 25-0ct- 835 10.

Tank 4 25-0ct- 1235 10.4

Tank 2 25-0ct- 2108 10.

Tank 3 26-0ct- 10.5

Tank 2 26-0ct- 440 10.

Tank 1 26-0ct- 840 10.

Tank 1 26-0ct- 1220 10.

Tank 9 26-0ct- 2053 10.

Tank 3 27-0ct- 142 10.4

Tabk 2 27-0ct- 454 10.

Tank 10 27-0ct- 854 10.

Tank 1 27-0ct- 1250 10.

Tank 5 27-0ct- 2100 11.5 10.

Tank 9 28-0ct- 11.5 10.4

Tank 1 28-0ct- 440 10.

Tank 2 28-0ct- 840 10.

Tank 11 28-0ct- 1230 10.5

Tank 1 28-0ct- 2058 10.

Tank 10 29-0ct- 136 12.5 10.4

Tank 2 29-0ct- 455 10.

Tank 5 29-0ct- 855 12. 10.

Tank 11 29-0ct- 1230 10.

Tank 1 29-0ct- 2300 10.

Tank 11 29-0ct- 154 10.