## 2 0 0 6

- 2 0 0 7 I m p i n g e m e n t & E n t r a i n m e n t S t u d y N R G H u n t l e y P o w e r , L L C

. H u n t l e y S t e a m S t a t i o n

S P D E S P E R M I T 

## N O 

## . N Y 0 0 0 1 0 2 3

June, 2007

Submitted by:
NRG Huntley Power, LLC. 3500 River Road Tonawanda, New York 14150

Prepared by: Shaw Environmental, Inc.i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A consecutive 12 month fisheries study was c onducted at the NRG Huntley Station located on the Niagara River in Tonawanda, New York beginning in late March 2006. Data on ichthyoplankton entrainment and fish impingeme nt abundance were coll ected throughout this period. Length and weight data were collected for a representative portion of all species
collected in all months.

Estimates of the numbers of entrained icht hyoplankton were calculate d by life stage and by
month for all taxa collected based on the maxi mum cooling water flow. The design maximum pumping capacity of river water through Cooling Water Intake Structures was calculated at 894.4 million gallons per day through two shoreline in takes. Estimates of the numbers of fish impinged on the traveling screens were also cal culated for each species by month based on maximum cooling water flow. Another factor used in calculating the maximum estimated impingement rates and included a sample collect ion efficiency multiplier based on the results obtained during the impingement sampling.

Using the sample collection f actor and maximum cooling wate r flow provides a calculation baseline estimate of expected impingemen t and entrainment. The calculation baseline information developed as a result of this study wi ll be used as a part of a later Comprehensive Demonstration Study and any subs equent verification studies of the performance criteria and, once any mitigative strategies are in place, to determine whether performance standards have
been met.

During the 2006-2007 study year, 120 entrainment samples and 208 impingement samples were collected. Entrained organisms were only found in samples from April 18 through September 12; impinged fish were collect ed in all 12 months of sampling.ii In entrainment samples, fish eggs and larvae , representing 17 taxa were identified. A few juvenile fish were also collect ed. In impingement collections a total of 35 fish taxa were identified over the study-year. Over the y ear and under maximum flow through both intakes, an estimated total of 231,000,000 ichthyoplankton would have been entrained and an estimated 183,505,462 fish (number adjusted for collection efficiency) would have been impinged.

An estimated 23,500,000 fish eggs, 39,700,000 yolk-sac larvae and 167,000,000 post yolk sac larvae were entrained during the period of sampling in 2006-2007. Rainbow smelt accounted for 89.9 percent of the eggs, while 57.9 percen t of the yolk sac larv ae were white sucker (though collected on a relatively few dates), and the clupeids (h erring species, alewife, and gizzard shad) comprised 89.1 percent of the post larvae entrained. The non-indigenous round goby, though introduced in the drainage relatively recently from Eastern Europe, represented 4.7 percent of all post larvae.

Under maximum cooling water flow the estimat ed entrainment of eggs in the 2006-2007 one year study was less than during a one year st udy conducted at Huntley in 1982-1983, while the numbers of yolk sac and post yolk sa c larvae was greater in 2006-2007.

Emerald shiner, although by far the most abundant fish impinged, represented only 3.1 percent of the entrained post larvae. To some extent th is might have been related to a shift of many potentially entrainable sized emerald shiners to impinged emerald shiner specimens due to the
more recent installation of 0.125 x 0.50-inch mesh traveling screens. These finer meshed screens have the potential to retain smaller si zed fish relative to the Calculation Baseline condition; standard 0.375-in ch3/8” mesh screens.

Emerald shiner accounted for 98.1 percent of all fish impinged with rainbow smelt being the only other species representing more than one pe rcent of the total impingement for the year. Next in order were gizzard shad accounting fo r 0.44 percent of the to tal, alewife at 0.08 percent, and rock bass at 0.05 percent. Emeral d shiner, gizzard shad, rainbow smelt, yellowiii perch, rock bass, and spo ttail shiner were collected in all study months. Relatively fewer fish were collected in July, August and September co mpared to other months. No Federal or New York State listed endangered, threatened or sp ecial concern species were collected during this study.iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................i

1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background ................................................................................................................... ....1

1.2 Facility Description ......................................................................................................... ..3

1.2.1 Facility Location .......................................................................................................... 4
1.2.2 Cooling Water Intake Structure Design ....................................................................... 4

1.3 Study Objectives ............................................................................................................. ..6

2.0 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 10

2.1 Entrainment .................................................................................................................. ...10

2.2 Impingement .................................................................................................................. .12

2.3 Quality Assurance/Quality Control .................................................................................18

3.0 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................... 2 0

3.1 Entrainment .................................................................................................................. ...20

3.2 Impingement .................................................................................................................. .23

4.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 30v LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 Location of the Huntley Steam Station ....................................................... 8
Figure 3-1 Presence of Ichthyoplankton Collect ed by Sample Week, April through September, 2006, at the NRG Huntley Station. ..........................................30
Figure 3-2 Entrained Egg Species Compositio n at Huntley Station 2006-2007 ..........31
Figure 3-3 Entrained Yolk-Sac Larvae at Huntley Station 2006-2007 ........................31
Figure 3-4 Entrained Post Yolk-Sac Larv ae at Huntley Station 2006-2007 ................32
Figure 3-5 Fish species Impinged at Huntley Station 2006-2007 ................................32
Figure 3-6 Monthly Total Impingement at the Huntley Station 2006-2007 .................33
Figure 3-7 Huntley Species Composition for March ....................................................40
Figure 3-8 Huntley Species Composition for April ......................................................41
Figure 3-9 Huntley Species Composition for May .......................................................42
Figure 3-10 Huntley Species Composition for June .......................................................43
Figure 3-11 Huntley Species Composition for July .......................................................44
Figure 3-12 Huntley Species Composition for August ...................................................45
Figure 3-13 Huntley Species Composition for September .............................................46
Figure 3-14 Huntley Species Composition for October .................................................47
Figure 3-15 Huntley Species Composition for November .............................................48
Figure 3-16 Huntley Species Composition for December ..............................................49
Figure 3-17 Huntley Species Composition for January ..................................................50
Figure 3-18 Huntley Species Composition for February ................................................51vi LIST OF TABLES

Table 1-1 Cooling Water Intake Structure Design ...................................................... 8

Table 3-1 Monthly Estimated Entrainment of Ichthyoplankton at the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007

. .....................................................................................34

Table 3-2 Total Number and Percent Compos ition of Ichthyoplankton by Life Stage Entrained at the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007 ..........................35

Table 3-3 Estimated Number and Density (# /100 m3) of Eggs and Yolk Sac Larvae Entrained Monthly at th e NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007 .........36

Table 3-4 Estimated Number and Density (#/1 00 m3) of Post-Yolk Sac Larvae and Juveniles Entrained Monthly at the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007. .....37

Table 3-5 Estimated Total Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007. .............................................................38

Table 3-6 Summary of Collection Efficiency Results, NRG Huntley Station, 2006- 2007.............................................................................................................39

Table 3-7 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, March 2006-2007 ..........................................................................40

Table 3-8 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, April 2006 ......................................................................................41

Table 3-9 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, May 2006 .......................................................................................42

Table 3-10 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, June 2006 .......................................................................................43

Table 3-11 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, July 2006........................................................................................44

Table 3-12 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, August 2006 ...................................................................................45

Table 3-13 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, September 2006 .............................................................................46

Table 3-14 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, October 2006 .................................................................................47vii LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Table 3-15 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, November 2006 .............................................................................48

Table 3-16 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, December 2006 ..............................................................................49

Table 3-17 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, January 2007 ..................................................................................50

Table 3-18 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, February .........................................................................................51viii APPPENDICES

A-List of common and scientific names
B-Sample Dates
C-Entrainment Summary Data
D-Impingement Summary Data
E-Length Frequency Distributions

F- Environmental Conditions
G-Entrainment and Impingement St andard Operating Procedures1 

### 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act (C WA) requires that cooling water intake structures (CWIS) reflect the best technology available (BTA) for minimizing environmental impacts due to the impingement of fish and shellfish on intake structures and the entrainment of eggs and larvae through cooling water systems. Impinged fish are those entrained with cooling water but trapped on facility traveling screens, typically adults and juveniles. Entrainment generally refers to smaller life- stages (including fish eggs and larvae) that pass through the trav eling screens and then through the entire cooling system.

The United States Environmental Protect ion Agency (EPA) published regulations applicable to existing electric generating faci lities (Phase II facili ties) in the Federal Register on July 9, 2004. These regulations, co dified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Chapter 40 Part 125 Subpart J, became effective September 7, 2004, though recent court decisions resulted in suspension of s ections of the regulation. Regardless, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) has been the EPAapproved agency since 1975. The NYSDEC is then responsible for issuing State Pollution Discharge Elimination (SPDES) permits in lieu of the EPA National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits. As the delegated agency for EPA the NYSDEC regulations must be as strict or more so than the Federal regula tions. 6 NYCRR, Section 704.5 of the State code addresses permitting relate d to water intake issues for Huntley.

The EPA 316(b) Phase II regulations esta blish performance sta ndards for CWIS of existing electric generating facilities that wi thdraw more than 50 million gallons per day (mgd) of surface waters and use more than 25% of the withdrawn water for cooling purposes. The performance standards requi re an 80-95% reduction in impingement mortality (IM) and a 60-90% reduction in entr ainment (E). The waterbody type on which2 the facility is located, the cap acity utilization rate, and the magnitude of the design intake flow relative to the waterbody flow determin e whether a facility will be required to meet the performance standards for IM only, or both impingement mortality and entrainment (IM&E).

The EPA 316(b) Phase II regul ation requires that each aff ected facility develop and submit a Proposal for Information Collection (PIC) to the applicable permitting agency prior to implementation of data collection ac tivities. Among the requirements of the PIC, the document must include a sampling plan for any new field studies that are needed to
estimate IM&E.

The PIC for Huntley Steam Station (Huntley) was submitted to the NYSDEC on January 30, 2006. It served as the study plan for a Huntley Comprehensive Demonstration Study (CDS).

Huntley, in Tonawanda, New York, is owne d and operated by NRG Huntley Power, LLC. It is located on the upper Niagara Rive r; which flows between two of the Great Lakes (Lake Erie and Lake Ontario). Even t hough the station uses less than 5% of the annual average flow, for the EPA Phase II Regul ation, the Niagara River is to be treated as a part of the Great Lakes and is theref ore subject to the performance standards for entrainment. The station has a capacity utilizat ion of greater than 15 percent. Therefore, based on these location criteria and the capacity utilization criteria, H untley is subject to the standards for reductions in impingement mortality and entrainment under the rule as published September 7, 2004 as follows or as mandated by the NYSDEC:

• Impingement mortality 80-95%

• Entrainment 60-90%3 Neither impingement nor entrainment abundan ce studies had been conducted at Huntley
since 1984. To address this lack of recent data, NRG included a proposal in the PIC to conduct a one year IM&E study at the station. NRG proposed that 24 hour impingement sampling take place every other week for one year and that entrainment sampling take place on a weekly basis when fish eggs and larv ae were likely to be entrained (i.e. April through mid-September) and once per month duri ng the other months of a one year study. On March 6, 2006 the NYSDEC sent commen ts to NRG on the PIC that included a request that the impingement sampling take place on a weekly basis. NRG agreed with this request and sampling was initiated at the Huntley Station on March 28, 2006.

1.2 Facility Description Huntley began commercial operation in 1916 and has since undergone several design phases. The first of these occurred duri ng the 1916-1931 period. Th e original units, No. 1, 2 and 3, were rated at 20,000 kw each. A fourth unit of 35,000 kw was installed in 1917, followed by a fifth unit of 60,000 kw in 1926, a sixth unit of 75,000 kw in 1928, and a seventh unit of 75,000 kw in 1930. Two additional units, No. 61 and 62 of 80,000 kw each were installed in 1930 and 1931, respectively.

The second phase of construction operation at this site occurred between 1942 and 1955. During this period, Units 63 (100,000 kw), 64 (100,000 kw), 65 (100,000 kw), and 66 (100,000 kw) were brought into commercial operation.

In 1955 the original four un its totaling 95,000 kw we re retired and dismantled to make room for units 67 and 68, which are each ra ted at 200,000 kw. At this time, the nominal station electrical output to taled approximately 1,150,000 kw, all operating with once through Niagara River cooling water.

Units 5, 6, 7, 61 and 62 were retired a nd dismantled during 1962-1963 leaving the remaining four nominal 100,000 kw units a nd two nominal 200,000 kw units for an4 overall station nominal output of 800,000 kw. Huntley draws approximately 613,000 gpm cooling water from the Niagara River for both condenser cooling water and house service water when all six units are oper ating. Units 63, 64, 65 and 66 have not been operating, however the facility is still permitted under the NYSDEC State Pollution Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) pe rmit (NY 000 1023) to operate circulating water pumps for all six generating units and discharge up to 843 million gallons per (mgd) of cooling water.

1.2.1 Facility Location Huntley is located in the Town of Tona wanda, New York on the eastern bank of the Tonawanda Channel of the upper Niagara Rive r, approximately 1.5 miles downstream of the head of Grand Island, New York. The To wn of Tonawanda is located approximately mid-way between the City of Buffalo and the City of Niagara Falls, New York (Figure 1- 1).

1.2.2 Cooling Water Intake Structure Design Cooling water is withdrawn from the Niagara River via a river edge (shoreline) intake
structures. These intake st ructures consist of two scr een houses (Screen House 1 and Screen House 2).

Currently Screen House 1 provides water fo r units 67 and 68 and a relatively small volume to a Dunlop Corporation facility. Water is drawn into the intake structure, which includes a sheet pile forebay and skimmer wall. The wall is designe d to exclude floating debris and ice from the intake forebay. The water continues into the screen house containing bar racks, traveling water screen s, circulating water pumps, and house service water pumps. The pumps are located behi nd the screens on a common intake tunnel system. Units 67 and 68 draw a total of 260,000 gpm (16.41 m 3 /sec) for condenser circulating water and house service water. Screen House No. 1 has 9 screen bays.

However, in 1999, the traveling screens in Bays 1 thru 4 were take n out of service and these bays sealed. Bays 5-9, which had b een vacant and unused were then employed.5 New improved Ristroph-type traveling screens were installed in each of these bays. The traveling screens include fish lifting buckets which were tested and developed by the utility and Bracket-Green Inc. Each screen also includes dual pressure spray systems, separate troughs for collecting fish and de bris washed from the screens, and other
features to enable the screens to remove im pinged fish alive from the screens. A fish return system was installed to return fish a nd debris to the Niagara River. The Huntley facility received a letter from the NYSDEC (June 8, 2000) stating that this screening system was BTA for impingement. All IM&E related sampling in 2006 and 2007 was
conducted in Screen House 1.

Screen House 2 serves units 63, 64, 65 and 66. The total flow drawn by these units for condenser circulating water and house se rvice water is approximately 361,000 gpm (22.78 m 3 /sec). Screen House 2 also provides a limited volume of water for cooling purposes to the FMC Corporation. The design of Screen House 2 is similar to Screen House 1, having a sheet pile forebay with sk immer walls at the forebay entrances and a screen building containing bar racks and traveling water scre ens. Water is drawn through
the screen house into a common intake tunne l system, which conveys the screened water to the circulating water and house service wate r pumps, which are locat ed in an auxiliary building. Screen House 2 has six screen bays, wi th four in service. The traveling screens in Screen House 2 are standard traveling scr eens with no specific f eatures for removing impinged fish and there is no fish return sy stem. Table 1-1 provides a summary of the CWIS design for the two screen houses.

Cooling water from all six units is discharged into the Niagara River to the north of the two screen houses from three adjacent outfall s. Each screen house has a conduit system that can provide re-circulation of heated wate r from the discharge tunnels into the screen wells for ice control during winter months.6 1.3 Study Objectives The primary objective of this study was to de velop an estimate of IM&E at Huntley under a baseline condition (i.e . for the IM&E study calcula ted using maximum cooling water flow for all facility units to provide an estimate of IM&E under maximum design operating conditions).

The ultimate objective is to further refine the IM&E data in the Comprehensive Demonstration Study for presentation in a st andardized format generally known as the facility IM&E baseline cond ition. The USEPA and NYSDEC define a baseline plant configuration to include a shoreline intake and traveling screen s fitted with 0.375-inch mesh. The baseline IM&E numbers are, for ex ample, to be adjusted to correct for any mitigative technologies already in place to m itigate IM&E impacts. The magnitude of IM&E is calculated relative to a facility baseline condition. A fu rther calculation can standardize the number of all sp ecies of fish, eggs and larvae impinged or entrained to the equivalent of age-1 fish. As noted the st andardized numbers are used to demonstrate reductions in IM or E impact (credits) at a facility due to mitigating factors currently installed at a facility, operational changes, and/or via future installation of mitigating technology (e.g., a fish return system). This overall baseline calculation will provide a means of measuring whether th e rule’s required performa nce standards are met through present and/or future operations and technological mitigative measures.

Section 2 provides the field, labo ratory and the data analyses procedures used to develop the entrainment and impingement baseline esti mates. Also included in Section 2 is a description of the quality c ontrol and quality assurance pr ocedures used to provide scientifically defensible data . Section 3 presents the re sults of the study include the baseline estimates of both entrainment and impingement at Huntley.

Appendix A is a list of the common and scientif ic names of the fish collected during this study. Appendix B provides summary tables for each entrainment sampling date. Appendix C contains the 24-hour entrainment cat ch and the volume adjusted entrainment7 estimate by sample period. Appendix D provide s summary tables for each impingement sampling date with an estimate of impingeme nt adjusted for subsampling and number of screens sampled. Appendix E has the length fr equency distribution for selected impinged species. Appendix F lists the environmen tal conditions (air temperature, water temperature, wind speed and direction) reco rded during each sample period. Appendix G is a copy of the final standard operating procedures used in the 2006-2007 sampling

program.8 Figure 1-1 Location of th e Huntley Steam Station.9 Screen House 1

Units 67, 68 Screen House 2 Units 63, 64, 65, 66
Latitude 42 58’ 13 42 58’ 13 Longitude 78 51’ 51 78 51’ 51 Number of screen bays 5 (active) 4 (active) Number of circulating water pumps 4 (2 pumps/unit) 8 (2 pumps/unit) Pump capacity (design) 60,000 gp m each Unit 63- 83,500 gpm Tot. Unit 64- 83,500 gpm Tot. Unit 65- 86,000 gpm Tot. Unit 66- 86,000 gpm Tot.
House service water (total) 20,000 gpm 22,000 gpm Total CWIS capacity (design) 374.4 mgd 520 mgd Maximum cooling water flow 579 cfs 803.6 cfs Trash rack openings 3 inch 3 inch Number of traveling water screens 5 4 Screen type Through-Flow Screens
with Fish return Through Flow Screens

Screen mesh opening 0.5 x 0.125 inch 0.375 inch
Effective mesh area at low water 97 ft 2 /scrn 138 ft. 2 /scrn Approach velocity (calculated) 1.5 fps 1.5 fps Through-screen velocity (calculated) 2.6 fps 2.6 fps

Screen rotation Dual Speed (8 or 16 ft/min). All screens

continuously on. Intermittent (operation varies with debris loading)

Table 1-1 Cooling Water Intake Structure Design10 

### 2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 Entrainment The objective of the entrainment-sampling program was to identify and quantify the ichthyoplankton (fish eggs, larvae, post larvae and juveniles) in th e intake water that passed through the screening systems and were entrained in the Huntley cooling water intake system (CWIS) during plant operati ons. Data collected during this sampling program also was used to identify temporal trends in entrainment abundance and served to develop the calculated baseline.

Entrainment samples were collected for a period of one year (Appendix B). Sampling was initiated on April 11, 2006; however pump clogging problems resulted in voiding the samples collected on that date. Sampling was successfully initiated on April 18, 2006 and continued to April 10, 2007. A total of 120 entrainment samples were collected in 2006-2007. The sampling schedule was set up so weekly sampling was conducted from April to August and in the first two weeks of September, and once a month from October through March. The 24-hour sampling period du ring each sampling event, was divided into four, 6-hour sampling blocks when samples were collected each day. Sampling was typically initiated close to the beginning of each block:

SAMPLE BLOCK START END

1 10:00 hrs 16:00 hrs
2 16:00 hrs 22:00 hrs
3 22:00 hrs 04:00 hrs
4 04:00 hrs 10:00 hrs11 A high capacity trash pump with a 3-inch intake opening was used to collect the samples.
A minimum of 100 m 3 of water was collected for each sample. The intake line was split
into three lines that extended to the water at three depths at one location, one near middepth, and one each approximately 3.5-ft a bove and below mid-depth. A known volume of intake water was filtered through a 300-mi cron-series mesh plankton net. At the conclusion of each sample collection, the cont ents of the plankton net was transferred to sample jars, preserved with an alcohol based preservative solution, la beled, and sent to a laboratory for analysis.

For each sample collected, the following inform ation was obtained and recorded on field
data sheets:

• The calibration time at the beginning and end of each sample;

• Identification of the circulating water pumps in operation at the start and end of the sampling event;

• Intake water temperature;

• Air temperature and weather conditions at the beginning of each 6-hour sampling period

• Date and time of day at initiation an d completion of the sampling event; and

• Names of the collectors.

In the laboratory the sample contents were sieved through a 0.125-in ch mesh to exclude all material that would have been impinged. Fish eggs and larvae collected were then removed from the background material and placed in to small, labeled vials. All fish eggs
and larvae were identified to the lowest taxon reasonable, and enumerated. Larvae were categorized by life stage. The younger larv ae that retained th eir yolk sac were categorized as yolk-sac larvae. Larvae that had completely absorbed their yolk sac but had not developed their full complement of fi n rays were categorized as post larvae. Young of the year fish that had their full complement of fin rays and at least two segments in all soft rays we re categorized as juveniles.12 Total length (TL), to the near est 0.1 mm, was measured with a micrometer for up to 25 larvae per sample by life-stage category and taxon. Frequently, larvae could not be measured due to damage to their head or tail.

The raw data by life stage was analyzed to allow for relative comparisons among species by month and year. To standardize the abunda nce data to account for differences in sample volumes, the raw number of ichthyoplankton for a 100 m 3 of sample volume was
calculated. In most cases 100 m 3 was the actual volume sampled in the field. If the field sample volume was less than or greater than 100 m 3 the densities of the collected ichthyoplankton was calculated by dividing the number of ichthyoplan kton collected in each sample by the volume of water filtered during the collection of that sample to determine number per m 3 of water. This was then mu ltiplied by 100 to determine the raw number of ichthyoplankton collected in a 100 m 3 sample. Raw numbers per 100 m 3 were then multiplied by the maximum daily plant flow (screen houses 1 and 2) to determine the daily (24 hr) entrainment rate for each species and life stage.

Linear interpolation was used to obtain entrainment densities for unsampled days. The number of ichthyoplankton for a 24-hour maxi mum daily flow period was multiplied the number of sample days within the week of the sample collection to obtain estimates for each unsampled day. The daily entrainment estimates were summed over the week (Sunday to Saturday) to obtain the weekly entrainment estimates and over the month to give the monthly entrainment estimates. Sim ilarly, the daily entrainment estimates were summed over the year to dete rmine the annual estimate.

2.2 Impingement Impingement samples were collected off the traveling screens in Screen House 1 every week for one year. Each sampling event consisted of a 24-hour impingement sampling period. Sampling began on March 28, 2006 a nd continued to March 20, 2007 (Appendix B). A total of 208 impingement sa mples were collected from 2006-2007.13 Impinged fish were collected from the trav eling screen wash ove r a 24-hour period. Sample collection baskets of a mesh confi guration appropriate to sample from fish impinged on 0.5 x 0.125-inch mesh traveling screen s were placed in the sluiceway of the fish return system and from the trash sluices to collect fish and/or tr ash washed from four traveling screens. Due to the proximity of th e traveling screen to the screen house wall, it was not possible to sample from the discha rge of the fifth (southernmost) traveling

screen.

The impingement data for the other four sc reens was used to estimate impingement for the last screen. Depending on the debris and fish load either tw o or four collection baskets were used to trap fish (along with debris); however, in every case the fish from
the return sluice and the trash sluice from all f our screens were collected. The contents of all collection baskets were composited for analyses. If a subsampling routine was required, the 24-hour sampling period was divi ded into four, 6-hour sampling blocks.

SAMPLE BLOCK START END

1 10:00 hrs 16:00 hrs
2 16:00 hrs 22:00 hrs
3 22:00 hrs 04:00 hrs
4 04:00 hrs 10:00 hrs

At the end of each sample period, the contents of the collection baskets were removed and all fish identified to the lowest practi cable taxonomic level, sorted (typically by species), and enumerated. Additional information consisting of individual lengths and weights was determined for 25 individuals of each species, if presen t, in each sample.14 Fish impingement during the initial 24-hour impingement sampling event that was conducted on March 28-29, 2006 at the NRG Huntley Station resulted in over 35,000 fish. The vast majority (over 95 percent) were emerald shiners. This rate of impingement resulted in baskets rapidly cl ogging with fish, partial backwatering of sluices, and the potential for overflow and invali dation of the sample. To avoid this, near continuous monitoring, removal of fish from th e baskets, and on site fish processing was required. Continuous collection also resulted in the sacrifice of all collected fish due to quality control procedures that require d that all fish were retained.

During periods of high fish impingement, NRG requested that the NYSDEC permit a modified subsampling routine based on pr ocedures approved by the NYSDEC for a 1987 impingement study at the NRG Dunkirk Stea m Station. Data collected using this subsampling technique resulted in a valid es timate of impingement abundance. It also provided the benefit of limiting the number of fish collected and destroyed by the sampling during high impingement events.

To initiate this procedure, the number of fish collected in the all of the collection baskets during the first 30 minutes of each 6-hour coll ection period was counted. The duration of the sampling time for that collection period was then based on the following:

Number of Fish Counted Duration of Sample

0-112 6.0 hours
113-225 3.0 hours
226-450 1.5 hours
Greater than 450 45 minutes

Fish collected from the 30 minute timed sample were combined with those collected from the balance of the sample. Collection baskets were removed from the sluices so fish were
returned to the river when co llections are not being made.15 For each 6-hour sample collected, the following information was obtained and recorded
on field data sheets:

• Initial 30 minute count;

• Sample start and end time;

• Identification of the circulating water pumps in operation at the start and end of the sampling event;

• Volume of circulating wate r or flow rate (based on the number of circulating water pumps in operation and the pumping rates);

• Identification of the screens in operation during the sampling event;

• Intake water temperature;

• Air temperature and weather conditions at the beginning of each 6-hour sampling period

• Date and time of day at initiation an d completion of the sampling event; and

• Names of the collectors.

Fish were typically processe d and identified on site then placed in labeled containers (such as plastic bags), reevaluated there by another scientist for identification and count relative to quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures, or frozen and similar reevaluated later in the laboratory.

Collection efficiency tests were conducted to assess the performan ce of the screens and sluice system in removing fish from the wate r flow from the intake, and the effectiveness of the sampling equipment. Collection effi ciency testing was scheduled to occur one time each season (January-March, April-June, July-September, and October-December). Although impingement sampling provided for subsampling based on fish and debris loading, which prevented the sampling e quipment from being overwhelmed and overtopped, collection efficiency te sting required that the samp lers collect for the entire16 24 hour period. Due to frequent extremely high, unanticipated debris loading and the
restriction in the size and mesh that could be used on the impingement samplers, it was very difficult to maintain even the baseline impingement subsampling program. During high debris or fish loading pe riods, collection efficiency test ing could not be performed. For this reason only three collection efficien cy studies could be performed; September 19-20, 2006, December 18-19, 2006, and March 19-20, 2007.

When possible, the fish tested included speci es/sizes that were collected during scheduled impingement sampling. These fish were s upplemented by fish purchased from a bait dealer. Fish were separated by species, bagge d in lots of 100 indivi duals, if available, and frozen. Just prior to testing, the fish we re thawed and marked (fin clip). Up to 100 fish of each species to be test ed were be released upstream of each of the four traveling screens that were sampled for impingement. A unique fin clip was applied to each lot of 100 fish released by screen. The fish slui ces were continuously monitored for 24-hours
for the return of the test fish. For each te st, two species were used ; one that represented the smaller fish that were present during that period and the other that represented the larger individuals. Impingement results were adjusted based on the calculated collection efficiency.

Raw fish numbers (actual fish collected and c ounted) were adjusted first by extrapolating the number of fish collected in a subsamp ling event (if subsampling occurred) to the entire six-hour sample block. This accomplished by multiplying the number of fish in a subsample by the proportion of the six-hour sample period that the subsample time represented (i.e. the number of fish collected in a 3-hour subsample was multiplied by 2)

The number of fish collected in a six-hour sa mple period from four traveling screens was adjusted to account for the fish not collect ed off the fifth (unsampled) screen. The subsample adjusted numbers were multiplied by 1.25 to estimate the number of fish that
would be collected if the fi fth screen was sampled.17 Next the estimated number of fish collected from all screens for an entire collection period was adjusted to account for the numb er of circulating water pumps that were operating during the sample period. Fish numbers were divided by the total flow for that collection period to determine th e number of fish impinged per m 3 . Total flow for a sample period was determined by adding the ma ximum flow rate for each of the number of primary circulating pumps operating at the beginning of the sample period. The number of fish collected per m 3 of flow was multiplied by th e total maximum flow from all pumps (maximum plant flow) for Screen House 1 (1,417,258 m 3 /day) to determine the total number of fish impinged for that period.

The total estimated catch per sample day at maximum plant flow was then adjusted by the Collection Efficiency (CE) value. This was accomplished by multiplying the estimated impingement in Screen House 1 by th e inverse of the average CE value for all species/lengths tested.

Linear interpolation was used to obtain impi ngement densities for unsampled days. The number of fish for a 24-hour maximum daily flow period was multiplied the number of sample days within the week of the samp le collection to obtain estimates for each unsampled day. The daily impingement estimates were summed over the week (Sunday to Saturday) to obtain the weekly impingement estimates and over the month to give the monthly impingement estimates. Similarl y, the daily impingement estimates were summed over the year to dete rmine the annual estimate.

The weekly, monthly, and annul impingement estimates for Screen House 1 were extrapolated to determine the estimated impi ngement for those periods at Screen House 2. Estimated impingement rates at Screen House 1 were multiplied by 1.3888, which is the maximum daily flow differential between Screen House 1 (1,417,258 m 3 ) and Screen House 2 (1,968,414 m 3 ), to determine the estimated impingement in Screen House 2. Daily, weekly, and annual impingement estima tes were then summed for the two screen houses to provide an estimated to tal plant impingement estimate.18 2.3 Quality Assurance/Quality Control The goal of the QA/QC Plan was to ensure that work performance and work products were of the highest quality and provided in a cost-effective, scientifically defensible, and timely manner. All deliverable s were subject to QA/QC guide lines, checks, and reviews.

Immediately after the Impingement and Entr ainment Sampling Plans were approved by the resource agencies, a Standard Operat ing Procedures (SOP) for the Field and Analytical program was developed for each program (Appendix G). This SOP provided a written set of specifications so that:

• Project personnel were using the correct procedures c onsistently throughout the project; and

• It could be used as a basi s for any internal or external QA/QC audits during the performance of the work to verify the procedures were being followed.

The SOP describes procedures for instrume nt calibration, sampling schedule, detailed procedures for each sampling task, pass-fail criteria, sampling handling and disposition (including chain-of-custody procedures), sta ndardized data sheets, personnel training, nonconformance reports and corrective acti ons, safety and accident reporting and documentation, and specimen reference collection.

All sampling was conducted in strict adhere nce to the SOP, which had specific enough procedures to enable an auditor unfamiliar with the program to determine that the activities were being accomplished in a manner that sa tisfied the goals of the study.

A Continuous Sampling Plan (CSP-1), qual ity control protocol used by the US government to verify the acceptability of resu lts was incorporated into the program to insure an average outgoing qua lity limit (AOQL). This procedure calls for an initial complete inspection of a specified number of samples (depends on required AOQL). If19 all of the initially inspected samples were error free, a randomly selected sample within a block of samples was selected. If the random sample passed, a random sample out of the next block was processed. This continued unless a sample failed inspection, after which the plan reverted to complete re-inspecti on until the prescribed number of samples passed.

In the laboratory, independent CSP-1 programs we re used to insure the quality of sample sorting (i.e. separating ichthyoplankton from th e extraneous material) and for counts and identification of the ichthyoplankton. An average outgoing quality limit of less than 10 percent discrepancy was specified fo r all field and laboratory tasks.

The procedure was used to check the accura cy of data inputs. An average outgoing quality limit of less than two percent errors was specified. Field data were recorded on standardized field sheets at the time of samp le collection and analysis and later entered into electronic spreadsheets/databases. The data was subjected to several QA/QC validation procedures. For example, init ial proofs were conducted for review of completeness and reasonableness of the data entries. Additional checks were made to
ensure that the records entered in electronic files for the sampling programs matched the data recorded in the field and laboratory and documented on hard-copy data sheets. On discovery of discrepancies or anomalies, the raw data was compared to the hard-copy data sheets and revised as appropriate. A final data validation was completed after all study data have been entered into the database.20 

### 3.0 RESULTS

General observation and analysis of impinged fi sh data indicate a major component of the fish impinged at Huntley would have been entrained fish under baseline mesh size criteria. The 0.5 x 0.125-inch traveling scre ens impinged many small fish that would have passed through a baseline 0.375-inch mesh and so would have been an entrainment
issue if the station had been equipped with standard 0.375-inch mesh screens. In other
words the 0.5 x 0.125-inch mesh has reduced th e numbers of entrained fish but in so doing increased the numbers of smaller fish im pinged. This is an advantage relative to fish protection since the 0.5 x 0.125-inch mesh retains the older larv al and/or juvenile life-stages that have a great er value relative to age-1 e quivalence, and these smaller impinged specimens should have higher survival rates comparable to adult lifestages. The 0.5 x 0.125-inch traveling screens and fish re turn should then prov ide credits as these screens reduce entrainment numbers and provide a suitable return of live impinged fish back to the Niagara River.

3.1 Entrainment

Fish eggs and larvae representing 17 taxa we re collected in entrainment samples in 2006- 2007 (Table 3-1). Although fish eggs and la rvae were identified to the lowest taxonomic group possible, some specimens could not be id entified due to merist ic similarities (e.g. herrings, minnows, and trout species) or dama ge to key identifying characteristics. Rainbow smelt, common carp, minnows and trout were the only taxa collected as eggs. A few juvenile (based on meri stics) rainbow smelt, brown bullhead and yellow perch that passed through the 0.125 inch prescr eening mesh also were collected.

Under maximum cooling water flow conditions, an estimated 231.0 x 10 6 ichthyoplankton would have been entrained at Huntley (both screen hou ses) (Table 3-1). Although sampling took place over 12 consecuti ve months, entrained organisms were only collected from April 18 through Sept ember 12 (Figure 3-1). No entrainment
occurred in Oct ober through March.21 An estimated 23.5 x 10 6 fish eggs would have been entrained under maximum cooling water flow conditions (Table 3-2). Eggs represented 10.2 percent of the entrained ichthyoplankton. The majority of fish eggs ( 75.7 percent) were entr ained in April at a rate of 525 eggs per 100 cubic meters (Table 3- 3). Eggs were entrai ned at lesser rates in May through September. Of the eggs en trained, 89.9 percent were rainbow smelt, 2.0 percent were minnow species, 1.0 percent co mmon carp, 1.0 percent trout species, and 6.1 percent unidentified e ggs (Figure 3-2).

An estimated 39.7 x 10 6 yolk-sac larvae would have b een entrained under maximum cooling water flow conditions (Table 3-2). Yolk sac larvae repres ented 17.2 percent of the entrained ichthyoplankton. Eleven taxa of ichthyoplankton were present as yolk sac larvae. They were first present in the entr ainment samples in May and were present each month through August (Figure 3-1). Yolk sac la rvae were absent in all other months. In June, 94.6 percent of the annual post yolk sac larval entrainmen t occurred at a rate of 1,110 larvae per cubic meter (Table 3-3). The only species of yolk s ac larvae entrained in May were yellow perch and white sucker, both early season spawners. Eleven taxa were entrained as yolk sac larvae in June. Mi nnow species was the only taxon entrained as yolk sac larvae in July and in August. Although positive species identification was not possible they were likely either spottail shiner or emerald shiner, fish that are late season broadcast spawners and are commonly impi nged as adults at Huntley. During this program, 57.9 percent of the yolk sac larvae en trained were white su cker (Figure 3-2). This was due to high numbers of white su cker yolk sac larvae being entrained on relatively few sample dates. White suckers, minnow species (10.7 pe rcent of the annual total), log perch (7.8 percent), common carp ( 7.2 percent), and gizzard shad (6.9 percent) together contributed to over 90 percent of the entrainment of yolk sac larvae at Huntley.

An estimated 167.1 x 10 6 post yolk sac larvae (p ost larvae) would have been entrained under maximum cooling water flow conditions at Huntley (Table 3-2). Post larvae represented 72.3 percent of th e entrained ichthyoplankton. This relative high number22 compared to eggs and yolk sac larvae is likel y due to the relatively long time that fish remain in the post larval stage compared to the eggs and yolk sac larvae stages that generally last only a few days to a week. F ourteen taxa were entrained as post larvae. Post larvae were first present in the samp les collected on June 19-20 and were present until the September 5-6 sampling event (Figure 3-1). Post larvae were not found in any other month. The majority of post larvae (85.5 per cent) were entrained in July at a rate of 6,613 post larvae per cubic meter of flow (Table 3-4). Clupeids (herring species, alewife, and gizzard shad) comprised 89.1 percent of th e post larvae entrained (Figure 3-4). Note that the ichthyoplankton categor ized as herring species were likely either alewife or gizzard shad that could not be positivel y identified to species due to the close resemblance of these species at certain devel opmental times in this stage or due to some damage to keying characteristics. The non-indigenous round goby that was introduced to the Great Lakes from Eastern Europe in th e late 1980s or early 1990s was also well represented as post larvae (4.7 percent of a ll post larvae entrained). Emerald shiner, although by far the most abundant fish im pinged, represented only 3.1percent of the entrained post larvae.

An estimated 0.7 x 10 6 juveniles would have been entrained under maximum cooling water flow conditions at Huntley (Table 3-4) . Juveniles represen ted 0.3 percent of the
total entrainment. This estimate was based on a total of three fish (one brown bullhead, one yellow perch, and one rainbow sme lt) that passed through the 0.125 inch prescreening mesh. Each of these individuals had just passed from the post larvae into the juvenile stage based on the presence of a full complement of fin with the soft rays having at least two segments each. Two of th ese juveniles were entrained in July and one in August.

Under maximum cooling water capacity the en trainment of eggs in this 2006-2007 one year study was less than during a one y ear study conducted at Huntley in 1982-1983 (Normandeau 1984). While an estimated 23.5 x 10 6 fish eggs would have been entrained in the present study, 75.4 x 10 6 fish eggs would have been entrained in 1982-1983. Of23 note, in the previous study 89.5 percent of the fish eggs were collected in JanuaryFebruary while none were collected in those months in the present study. Since no fish likely to spawn in the Niagara River in the vicinity Huntley reportedly spawn in JanuaryFebruary, the eggs collected during these m onths in the previous study were likely extruded from adults that were passed th rough the entrainment sampling pump and do not represent viable, fertilized eggs.

Under maximum cooling water capacity the entr ainment of yolk sac larvae in this 2006- 2007 one year study was greater than during a one year study conducted at Huntley in 1982-1983 (Normandeau 1984). While an estimated 39.7 x 10 6 yolk sac larvae would have been entrained in the present study, only 3.1 x 10 6 yolk sac larvae would have been entrained in 1982-1983. The large numbers of yolk sac larval suckers that would have been entrained in 2006-2007 (23.0 x 10 6 ) compared to 1982-1982 (0.7 x 10 6 ) accounted for much of his difference, although most other species were also entrained in lesser numbers during the prior study.

Under maximum cooling water capacity the en trainment of post la rvae in this 2006-2007 one year study was greater than during a one year study conducted at Huntley in 1982- 1983 (Normandeau 1984). While an estimated 167.1 x 10 6 post larvae would have been entrained in the present study, only 27.9 x 10 6 fish eggs would have been entrained in 1982-1983. The large numbers of clupeids (e.g. gi zzard shad, alewife) that would have been entrained in 2006-2007 (149.4 x 10 6 ) compared to 1982-1982 (3.7 x 10 6 ) was the primary contributor to the difference.

3.2 Impingement A total of 35 fish taxa were identified in the impingement collections at Huntley in 2006- 2007 (Table 3-5). All taxa were identified to species except for the small redhorse suckers ( Moxostoma sp.) that were identified only to the genus level. The number of species collected was somewhat less than during the 1982-1984 study (39 taxa) (Normandeau 1984). Species collected in this study not collected in the prior study were24 round goby (a species that was not introduced to the Great La kes until the late 1980s of early 1990s), brook silverside , fathead minnow, tessellat ed darter, johnny darter, blacknose dace, creek chub, banded killifish, and mimic shiner. Except for the round goby, these species were very in frequently impinged in the current study. The greatest diversity of fish occurred in April, May and December when 20 species were collected. The lowest diversity occurred in March when only 13 species were collected. Emerald shiner, gizzard shad, rainbow smelt, yellow pe rch, rock bass, and spottail shiner were collected in all study months. No Fede ral or New York State listed endangered, threatened or special concern specie s were collected during this study.

Three collection efficiency (CE) studies, that provided an indication of the rate that impinged fish were collected in the collection baskets, were successfully completed in 2006-2007. A scheduled fourth study could not be completed because of the unanticipated high numbers of fish a nd amounts of the filamentous algae, Cladophora
, that would overwhelm the impingement samplers if they were to cont inuously collect for 24-hours, which is a requirement of collection efficiency testing. Successful tests were conducted on September 18-19, 2006; December 18-19, 2006; and March 19-20, 2007.

In September, 400 golden shiners and 400 fa thead minnows were tested (Table 3-6). These fish were purchased from a local bait dealer since impingement was not high when conditions permitted testing. These fish were se lected since they were representative of the size (golden shiner-mean length of 83mm and fathead minnow-mean length of 51mm) and shape (golden shiner- laterally compressed and fathead minnow-terrate) of the fish impinged at Huntley during the spri ng and summer months. Efficiencies during
this test were the lowest of the three tests. Only 51.5 percent of the fathead minnows and 68.8 percent of the golden shiners were returned (Table 3-6). The extent of the fact that they were dead when tested and that they very rapidly degraded in the warm water and the pressure against the screens had on the low rate of return can not be determined. It was noted that many of the fish were in very poor shape when returned with many25 missing major portions of their bodies. Also some were noted to have been hung up on the traveling screens and on de bris in the screen covers.

In December, 400 juvenile gizzard shad (mean length of 95mm) and 400 juvenile yellow perch (mean length of 78 mm) were tested. Th ese fish were collected at Huntley during impingement sampling. The return rate of gizzard shad was 81.3 percent and 88.8 percent for juvenile yellow perch (Table 3-6). The majority of the test fish were returned in reasonably good shape.

In March, 310 adult gizzard shad (mean le ngth of 372 mm) and 400 golden shiners (mean length of 100 mm) were tested. The return rate of adult gizzard shad was 74.8 percent and 89.5 percent for golden shiners (Table 3-6). The majority of test fish were returned in reasonably good shape.

With all tests and species combined, overall CE is 75.8 percent. This represents the range of sizes and shapes of fish impinged during th e study. Based on this result a multiplier of 1.319 was applied to impingement results to refl ect the collection efficiency. Since tests
were conducted with dead fish that at times rapidly degraded, how we ll this return rate represents the return ra te of living impinged fish is unknown. It is likely that this CE rate
underestimates the true rate of return of living fish, which w ould in turn provide an over estimate of impingement in 2006-2007. All im pingement results will be provided with estimates that are adjusted and unadjusted for collection efficiency.

An estimated 183,505,462 fish (number adjusted for collection efficiency) would have been impinged during this one year study unde r maximum cooling water flow conditions at Huntley (Table 3-5). The estimated number of fish unadjusted for collection efficiency (unadjusted) was 139,274,659 fish. Emerald shiner accounted for 98.1 percent of all fish impinged (Figure 3-5). Rainbow smelt was th e only other species that contributed to greater than one percent of the total impingement. Gizzard shad (0.44 percent), alewife26 (0.08 percent) and rock bass ( 0.05 percent) were the next most abundant species on an
annual basis.

Rainbow smelt was the most abundant species impinged during the 1982-1983 (1,765,783 fish) and the 1983-1984 (1,422,200 fish) studies followed by gizzard shad (295,670 and 351,560 fish) and the emer ald shiner (105,761 and 13,717 fish) (Normandeau 1984). The dramatic increase in the number of emerald shiners impinged is at least in part a result of changing the traveling screen mesh from 3/8-inch square conventional mesh to 1/8-inch by 1⁄2-inch slot mesh, which is more effective at screening
out fish with smaller cr oss-sectional areas such as emerald shiners.

In general impingement was heaviest in la te fall, winter and early spring (NovemberApril) with a peak in January when 49,998,970 fish (37,878,007 unadjusted) would have been impinged (Figure 3-6). Ninety percen t of the annual impingement took place during these six months. Months of high impingeme nt coincided with the presence of large numbers of emerald shiners. Only in Sept ember (rainbow smelt) and July (yellow perch) was emerald shiner not the most abundant species.

In March, 18,387,571 fish (113,929,978 unadjusted for CE) would have been impinged. This represented 10.0 percent of the annual impingement (Table 3-7). Of these, 99.6 were emerald shiners (Figure 3-7). Gizza rd shad (0.33 percent of the monthly impingement) were the next most abundant sp ecies. Based on size, the gizzard shad impinged were mostly yearling fish (Appendix E).

Impingement abundances in April were comparable to March. A total of 13,519,646 fish (10,242,156 unadjusted) would have been impinge d (Table 3-8). This represented 7.4 percent of the annual impingement. Emerald shiners were by far the most abundant species and contributed to 95.0 percent of the impingement (Figure 3-7). Again, yearling gizzard shad (4.5 percent) was th e second most abundant species.27 Total impingement was much lower in May th an in the previous month. A total of 6,158,987 fish (4,665,899 unadjusted) would have been impinged (Table 3-9). This represented 3.4 percent of the annual impingement. A reduced number of emerald shiners, which contributed to 98.8 percen t of the total, drove the overall lower impingement (Figure 3- 7).

Impingement was further reduced in June , when 108,481 fish (82,182 unadjusted) would have been impinged (Table 3-10). This re presented less than 0.1 pe rcent of the annual impingement. A further reduction in the number of emerald shiners, which contributed to 96.2 percent of the total, drove the ov erall lower impingement (Figure 3-7).

Only 14,068 fish (10,657 unadjusted) would have been impinged in July (Table 3-11). This represents less than 0.1 percent of the annual total. The majority of these were juvenile yellow perch, smallmouth bass, and largemouth bass (Figure 3-8) that, based on length (Appendix E), hatched in 2006 and had grown sufficiently to become impinged on the slot mesh traveling screens. Very fe w adult fish were impinged in this month.

Impingement abundance remained low in August when only 27,596 fish (20,906 unadjusted) would have been impinged Table 3- 12). This again represented less than 0.1 percent of the annual total. Although emerald shiner was th e most abundant species (51.3 percent of the monthly total), rainbow sm elt (14.4 percent), alewife (10.6 percent), spottail shiner (9.3 percent) and gizzard shad (7.9 percent) were relatively abundant (Figure 3-8). Based on length the alewife and gizzard shad were likely hatched in 2006 and had grown sufficiently to become impi nged on the slot mesh traveling screens (Appendix E).

A slight increase in impingement occu rred in September, when 72,303 fish (54,775 unadjusted) would have been impinged (Table 3-13). This again represented less than28 0.1 percent of the annual tota l. Rainbow smelt was the most abundant species and represented 59.7 percent of the impingement total followed by emerald shiners (26.7 percent) and alewife (10.0 percent) (Figure 3-8).

Impingement abundant increased drama tically in October, when 12,291,776 fish (9,311,951 unadjusted) would have been impinge d (Table 3-14). This represented 6.7 percent of the annual impingement. Emeral d shiner contributed to 98.7 percent of October impingement (Figure 3- 8). No other species contri buted to greater than one percent of the total.

November impingement would have in creased from the prior month, with 33,537,448 fish (25,407,157 unadjusted) impinged at maxi mum cooling flow (Table 3-15). This represented 18.3 percent of the annual impingeme nt. Emerald shiner contributed to 97.2 percent of the total (Figure 3- 9). Rainbow smelt (2.3 percen t) was the only other species that contributed to more than one percent of the monthly total. Although based on length, the majority of the rainbow smelt that were impinged were hatched in 2006; some larger, older fish were also impinged (Appendix E).

Impingement abundance in December was comp arable to November. An estimated 35,478,914 fish (26,877,965 unadjusted) would have been impinged (Table 3-16), which represented 19.3 percent of the annual total. Emerald shiner s contributed to 97.6 percent of the monthly total followed by rainbow sme lt, which contributed 2.2 percent (Figure 3- 9). Although as in November, the majority of smelt were those ha tched in 2006, a larger component of them, based on length, was likely older fish.

The highest abundance of fish impinged w ould have occurred in January, with 49,998,884 fish (37,878,007 unadjusted) (Table 3-17) . This represented 27.2 percent of
the annual total. As in November and D ecember emerald shiner was by far the most29 abundant species (98.8 percent) and rainbow smelt (1.1 per cent) was the only other species that contributed to greater than one percent of the total (Figure 3-9).

Impingement abundance in February was le ss in the previous month. An estimated 13,909,884 fish (10,537,791 unadjusted) would have been impinged under maximum cooling flow conditions (Table 3-18). This represented 7.6 percent of the annual total. Almost all of the fish (99.7 percent) impinge d in February were emerald shiners (Figure 3-9). Rainbow smelt, the next most abunda nt species accounted for only 0.1 percent of
the total.30 

### 4.0 REFERENCES

Normandeau Associates, Inc., (Normandeau). 1984. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation C. R. Huntley Generati ng Station July 1982 through June 1984 Biological Monitoring Studies SPDES permit No. NY 000 1023. Report prepared for Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Syracuse, NY.31No Ichthyoplankton Entrained From October through MarchFigure 3-1 Presence of Ichthyoplankton Collected by Sample Week, April through September, 2006, at the NRG Huntley Station.32 Figure 3-2 Entraine d Egg Spe cies Composition at Huntle y Station 2006-2007 Rainbow smelt

Unknown

M innow species
Trout species

Common Carp

Figure 3-3 Entrained Yolk-Sac Larvae at Huntley Station 2006-2007 White sucker M innow sp ecies Logp erch Common carp Gizzard shad Trout perch Yellow perch Rainbow smelt Unknown Sp ottail shiner33 Figure 3-4 Entrained Post Yolk-Sac Larvae at Huntley Station 2006-2007 Herring sp ecies Alewife Gizzard shad Goby Emerald shiner Sp ottail shiner Rainbow smelt Yellow perch Common carp White sucker Trout perch Freshwater drum Unknown S li i

Figure 3-5 Fish Species Impinged at Huntely Station 2006-2007 Emerald shiner Rainbow smelt Gizzard shad Alewife Rock bass Yellow perch Sp ottail shiner Brook silverside White p erch Smallmouth bass Bluegill Goby Bluntnose minnow L hb34Figure 3-6.Monthly Total Impingement at NRG Huntley Station 2006-2007010,000,00020,000,00030,000,00040,000,00050,000,00060,000,000 April May June July August September October November December January February March

Number ImpingedWith CEWithout CE35Species Life Stage April May June July August September October November December Jannuary February MarchTotal by Species andLifestageAlewife PYSL 0 0 0 37,343,963 3,893,523 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41,237,486Brown bullhead JUV 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236,997Common carp YSL 0 0 2,843,965 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,843,965Common carp PYSL 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 473,994Common carp Egg 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236,997Emerald shiner PYSL 0 0 0 4,739,941 473,994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,213,935Freshwater drum PYSL 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236,997Gizzard shad YSL 0 0 2,742,394 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,742,394Gizzard shad PYSL 0 0 1,185,020 30,911,186 3,385,672 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35,481,878Goby PYSL 0 0 237,004 5,383,219 2,234,544 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,854,766Herring species PYSL 0 0 9,039,744 63,278,211 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 72,317,955Logperch YSL 0 0 3,080,962 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,080,962Minnow species YSL 0 0 3,554,955 372,424 338,567 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,265,946Minnow species PYSL 0 0 0 0 169,284 67,713 0 0 0 0 0 0 236,997Minnow species Egg 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 473,994Rainbow smelt YSL 0 0 710,991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 710,991Rainbow smelt PYSL 0 0 947,989 33,857 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 981,846Rainbow smelt JUV 0 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236,997Rainbow smelt Egg 17,774,778 3,317,959 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21,092,737Sculpin species PYSL 0 0 0 0 169,284 67,713 0 0 0 0 0 0 236,997Spottail shiner YSL 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236,997Spottail shiner PYSL 0 0 0 1,184,985 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,184,985Trout perch YSL 0 0 947,988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 947,988Trout perch PYSL 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236,997Trout species Egg 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236,997Unknown YSL 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 473,994Unknown PYSL 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236,997Unknown Egg 0 0 0 541,708 169,284 710,991 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,421,982White sucker YSL 0 812,561 22,176,152 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,988,713White sucker PYSL 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 473,994Yellow perch YSL 0 609,421 812,561 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,421,982Yellow perch PYSL 0 0 473,994 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 710,991Yellow perch JUV 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 236,997Total By Month 17,774,778 4,739,941 51,597,684 144,974,477 11,071,148 846,418 0 0 0 0 0 0 231,004,446Percent by Month 7.7% 2.1% 22.3% 62.8%4.8% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Table 3-1 Monthly Estimated Entrainment of Ichthyoplankton at the NRGHuntley Station, 2006-2007.36 Species Life Stage Total Number Percent Composition Rainbow smelt Egg 21,092,737 9.1% Unknown Egg 1,421,982 0.6% Minnow species Egg 473,994 0.2% Common carp Egg 236,997 0.1% Trout species Egg 236,997 0.1% Egg Totals 23,462,707 10.2% Brown bullhead JUV 236,997 0.1% Rainbow smelt JUV 236,997 0.1% Yellow perch JUV 236,997 0.1% Juvenile Totals 710,991 0.3% Herring species PYSL 72,317,955 31.3% Alewife PYSL 41,237,486 17.9% Gizzard shad PYSL 35,481,878 15.4% Goby PYSL 7,854,766 3.4% Emerald shiner PYSL 5,213,935 2.3% Spottail shiner PYSL 1,184,985 0.5% Rainbow smelt PYSL 981,846 0.4% Yellow perch PYSL 710,991 0.3% Common carp PYSL 473,994 0.2% White sucker PYSL 473,994 0.2% Freshwater drum PYSL 236,997 0.1% Minnow species PYSL 236,997 0.1% Sculpin species PYSL 236,997 0.1% Trout perch PYSL 236,997 0.1% Unknown PYSL 236,997 0.1% Post Yolk Sac Totals 167,116,815 72.3% White sucker YSL 22,988,713 10.0% Minnow species YSL 4,265,946 1.8% Logperch YSL 3,080,962 1.3% Common carp YSL 2,843,965 1.2% Gizzard shad YSL 2,742,394 1.2% Yellow perch YSL 1,421,982 0.6% Trout perch YSL 947,988 0.4% Rainbow smelt YSL 710,991 0.3% Unknown YSL 473,994 0.2% Spottail shiner YSL 236,997 0.1% Yolk Sac Totals 39,713,932 17.2% Total Ichthyoplankton 231,004,446

Table 3-2 Total Number and Percent Composition of Ichthyoplankton by Life Stage Entrained at the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007.37EggSpeciesAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptem.TotalPercentCompositionRainbow smelt 17,774,778 3,317,959 0 0 0 0 21,092,737 89.90%Unknown 0 0 0 541,708 169,284 710,991 1,421,982 6.06%Minnow species 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 473,994 2.02%Trout species 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 236,997 1.01%Common Carp 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 236,997 1.01%Total Numbers 17,774,778 3,317,959 947,988 541,708 169,284 710,991 23,462,707 100%Total / 100m3525 98 28 16 5 21 693Monthly % 75.8% 14.1% 4.0% 2.3% 0.7% 3.0%Yolk SacSpeciesAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberTotalPercentCompositionWhite sucker 0 812,561 22,176,152 0 0 0 22,988,713 57.89%Minnow species 0 0 3,554,955 372,424 338,567 0 4,265,946 10.74%Logperch 0 0 3,080,962 0 0 0 3,080,962 7.76%Common carp 0 0 2,843,964 0 0 0 2,843,964 7.16%Gizzard shad 0 0 2,742,394 0 0 0 2,742,394 6.91%Trout perch 0 0 947,988 0 0 0 947,988 2.39%Yellow perch 0 609,421 812,561 0 0 0 1,421,982 3.58%Rainbow smelt 0 0 710,991 0 0 0 710,991 1.79%Unknown 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 473,994 1.19%Spottail shiner 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 236,997 0.60%Total Numbers 0 1,421,982 37,580,959 372,424 338,567 0 39,713,932 100%Total / 100m30 0 1,110 11 10 0 1,173Monthly % 0 3.6% 94.6% 0.9% 0.9% 0.0%Table 3-3 Estimated Number and Density(#/100 m3) of Eggs, Yolk Sac Larvae,Post-Yolk Sac Larvae, and JuvenilesEntrained Monthly at theNRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007.38Table 3-4 Estimated Number and Density (#/100 m3) of Post-Yolk Sac Larvae, and Juveniles Entrained Monthly at the NRGHuntley Station, 2006-2007.Post-Yolk SacSpeciesAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberTotalPercentCompositionHerring species 0 0 9,039,744 63,278,211 0 0 72,317,955 43.27%Alewife 0 0 0 37,343,963 3,893,523 0 41,237,486 24.68%Gizzard shad 0 0 1,185,020 30,911,186 3,385,672 0 35,481,878 21.23%Goby 0 0 237,004 5,383,219 2,234,544 0 7,854,767 4.70%Emerald shiner 0 0 0 4,739,941 473,994 0 5,213,935 3.12%Spottail shiner 0 0 0 1,184,985 0 0 1,184,985 0.71%Rainbow smelt 0 0 947,988 33,857 0 0 981,845 0.59%Yellow perch 0 0 473,994 236,997 0 0 710,991 0.43%Common carp 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 473,994 0.28%White sucker 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 473,994 0.28%Trout perch 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 236,997 0.14%Freshwater drum 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 236,997 0.14%Unknown 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 236,997 0.14%Sculpin species 0 0 0 0 169,284 67,713 236,997 0.14%Minnow species 0 0 0 0 169,284 67,713 236,997 0.14%Total Numbers 0 0 13,068,736 143,586,353 10,326,300 135,426 167,116,816 57%Total / 100m30 0 386 4,241 305 4 4,936Monthly % 0.0% 0.0% 7.8% 85.9% 6.2% 0.1%JuvenileSpeciesAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberTotalPercentCompositionBrown bullhead 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 236,997 33.33%Yellow perch 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 236,997 33.33%Rainbow smelt 0 0 0 0 236,997 0 236,997 33.33%Total Numbers 0 0 0 473,994 236,997 0 710,991 100%Total / 100m30 0 0 14 7 0 2139 Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Emerald shiner 179,987,666 136,354,292 98.08% Rainbow smelt 2,321,736 1,758,891 1.27%

Gizzard shad 816,114 618,269 0.44% Alewife 147,288 111,582 0.08% Rock bass 89,266 67,626 0.05% Yellow perch 56,581 42,865 0.03% Spottail shiner 30,987 23,475 0.02% Brook silverside 13,317 10,089 0.01%

White perch 7,554 5,723 0.00% Smallmouth bass 6,357 4,816 0.00% Bluegill 5,734 4,344 0.00%

Goby 4,944 3,746 0.00% Bluntnose minnow 3,417 2,589 0.00%

Largemouth bass 2,538 1,923 0.00% Trout perch 2,235 1,693 0.00% White bass 1,661 1,258 0.00% White sucker 1,412 1,070 0.00% Fathead minnow 1,408 1,067 0.00% Logperch 879 666 0.00% Tessellated darter 800 606 0.00% Pumpkinseed 772 585 0.00% Rainbow darter 303 230 0.00% Brown bullhead 295 223 0.00%

Common carp 286 217 0.00% Eastern blacknose dace 276 209 0.00% Banded killifish 221 167 0.00% Central mudminnow 221 167 0.00% Creek chub 221 167 0.00% Johnny darter 221 167 0.00% Northern pike 221 167 0.00% Black crappie 220 166 0.00% Moxostoma sp 187 141 0.00% Stonecat 166 125 0.00% Golden shiner 110 84 0.00% Mimic shiner 28 21 0.00%

35 Species 183,505,642 139,019,426 100%

Table 3-5 Estimated Total Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007.40 Month Species Mean Length (mm) SE (mm) Number Tested Number Returned Efficiency Highest Efficiency Lowest Efficiency
September 2006 Golden Shiner 83 1.8 400 275 0.6875 0.84 0.49 Fathead Minnow 51 0.4 400 206 0.5150 0.65 0.33

December 2006 Juvenile Gizzard Shad 95 1.6 400 325 0.8125 0.92 0.70 Juvenile Yellow Perch 78 1.4 400 355 0.8875 0.92 0.79

March 2007 Golden Shiner 100 0.8 400 358 0.8950 1.00 0.82 Adult Gizzard Shad 372 5.7 310 232 0.7484 1.00 0.95

Totals: 1600 1161 0.7256

Table 3-6 Summary of Collection Efficiency Results, NRG Hunt ley Station, 2006-2007.41 Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Emerald shiner 18,316,258 13,875,953 99.61%

Gizzard shad 60,981 46,198 0.33% Rainbow smelt 5,950 4,508 0.03% Rock bass 1,269 961 0.01% Bluntnose minnow 1,222 926 0.01% Spottail shiner 1,017 770 0.01% Brook silverside 512 388 0.00% Goby 142 107 0.00% White perch 55 42 0.00% Yellow perch 55 42 0.00%

Logperch 47 36 0.00% Moxostoma sp 32 24 0.00% Smallmouth bass 31 24 0.00% 13 Species 18,387,571 13,929,978 100%

Table 3-7 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, March 2006-2007

Figure 3-7 Huntle y Species Composition for March Emerald shiner

Gizzard shad

Rainbow smelt

Rock bass42 Table 3-8 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Im pinged at the NRG Huntley Station, April 2006

Figure 3-8 Huntley Species Composition for April Emerald shiner

Gizzard shad

Rainbow smelt

Rock bass Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Emerald shiner 12,838,833 9,726,389 94.96%

Gizzard shad 608,283 460,821 4.50% Rainbow smelt 30,464 23,078 0.23% Rock bass 25,687 19,460 0.19% Spottail shiner 10,004 7,579 0.07% Yellow perch 1,501 1,137 0.01% Goby 1,005 761 0.01% White perch 979 741 0.01% Trout perch 469 355 0.00% White sucker 446 338 0.00% Bluntnose minnow 441 334 0.00% Bluegill 280 212 0.00% Logperch 276 209 0.00% Tessellated darter 248 188 0.00% Alewife 231 175 0.00% White bass 221 167 0.00% Brown bullhead 221 167 0.00% Smallmouth bass 35 26 0.00% Brook silverside 16 12 0.00% Moxostoma sp 7 5 0.00%

20 Species 13,519,646 10,242,156 100%43 Table 3-9 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, May 2006

Figure 3-9 Huntley Species Composition for May Emerald shiner

Gizzard shad

Rock bass

Spottail shiner Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Emerald shiner 6,083,792 4,608,934 98.78%

Gizzard shad 37,833 28,661 0.61%

Rock bass 19,634 14,874 0.32% Spottail shiner 6,891 5,221 0.11% Rainbow smelt 5,804 4,397 0.09% Goby 1,733 1,313 0.03% White bass 1,261 955 0.02% White perch 478 362 0.01% Smallmouth bass 263 199 0.00% Fathead minnow 263 199 0.00%

Black crappie 220 166 0.00% Moxostoma sp 148 112 0.00% Common carp 148 112 0.00% Yellow perch 147 111 0.00% Tessellated darter 110 83 0.00% Pumpkinseed 110 83 0.00% Brown bullhead 74 56 0.00% Alewife 36 27 0.00% Bluegill 21 16 0.00% Brook silverside 21 16 0.00% 20 Species 6,158,987 4,665,899 100%44 Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Emerald shiner 104,327 79,036 96.17% Rainbow smelt 1,214 920 1.12% Rock bass 1,194 905 1.10% Goby 464 351 0.43% Spottail shiner 339 257 0.31% Gizzard shad 278 211 0.26% Rainbow darter 166 125 0.15% White bass 125 95 0.12% Common carp 110 84 0.10% Yellow perch 83 63 0.08% Bluegill 48 37 0.04% Fathead minnow 42 32 0.04% Smallmouth bass 42 32 0.04% Logperch 27 21 0.03% Brook silverside 21 16 0.02% 15 Species 108,481 82,182 100%

Table 3-10 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, June 2006

Figure 3-10 Huntle y Species Composition for June Emerald shiner Rainbow smelt Rock bass Goby Spottail shiner Gizzard shad45 Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Yellow perch 6,338 4,801 45.05% Smallmouth bass 5,120 3,879 36.40% Largemouth bass 575 436 4.09%

Emerald shiner 510 386 3.62% Spottail shiner 363 275 2.58% Gizzard shad 213 161 1.51% Alewife 193 146 1.37% Rock bass 187 141 1.33% Goby 146 110 1.04% Stonecat 110 84 0.78% Rainbow smelt 91 69 0.64%

White bass 55 42 0.39% White sucker 43 33 0.31%

Logperch 32 24 0.23% Common carp 28 21 0.20% Mimic shiner 28 21 0.20% White perch 16 12 0.11% Bluegill 12 9 0.09% Rainbow darter 8 6 0.06% 19 Species 14,068 10,657 100%

Table 3-11 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, July 2006

Figure 3-11 Huntley Species Composition for July Yellow perch Smallmouth bass Largemouth bass Emerald shiner Spottail shiner Gizzard shad Alewife Rock bass Goby Stonecat Rainbow smelt46 Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Emerald shiner 14,149 10,719 51.27% Rainbow smelt 3,985 3,019 14.44% Alewife 2,915 2,209 10.56% Spottail shiner 2,578 1,953 9.34% Gizzard shad 2,172 1,645 7.87% Yellow perch 725 549 2.63% Goby 454 344 1.64% Smallmouth bass 280 212 1.01% Largemouth bass 79 60 0.29% White perch 59 45 0.21%

Logperch 55 42 0.20% Rock bass 47 36 0.17% White sucker 39 30 0.14% Stonecat 20 15 0.07% Bluegill 20 15 0.07% Rainbow darter 20 15 0.07% 16 Species 27,596 20,906 100%

Table 3-12 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, August 2006

Figure 3-12 Huntley Species Composition for August Emerald shiner Rainbow smelt Alewife Spottail shiner Gizzard shad Yellow perch Goby Smallmouth bass Largemouth bass47 Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Rainbow smelt 43,160 32,697 59.69% Emerald shiner 19,306 14,625 26.70% Alewife 7,201 5,455 9.96% Bluegill 910 690 1.26% Gizzard shad 485 367 0.67%

Rock bass 441 334 0.61% Largemouth bass 229 173 0.32%

Spottail shiner 209 158 0.29% Yellow perch 110 84 0.15% Goby 91 69 0.13% White perch 63 48 0.09%

Stonecat 35 27 0.05% Smallmouth bass 35 27 0.05% Bluntnose minnow 28 21 0.04% 14 Species 72,303 54,775 100%

Table 3-13 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, September 2006

Figure 3-13 Huntle y Species Composition September Rainbow smelt Emerald shiner Alewife Bluegill Gizzard shad Rock bass Largemouth bass Spottail shiner Yellow perch48 Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Emerald shiner 12,132,093 9,190,980 98.70% Rainbow smelt 116,137 87,982 0.94% Alewife 14,808 11,218 0.12% Gizzard shad 10,886 8,247 0.09%

Rock bass 7,911 5,993 0.06% Yellow perch 4,501 3,410 0.04% Bluegill 2,613 1,980 0.02% White perch 631 478 0.01% Largemouth bass 552 418 0.00% Bluntnose minnow 497 376 0.00%

Brook silverside 300 227 0.00%

Spottail shiner 244 185 0.00% Fathead minnow 189 143 0.00% Banded killifish 110 84 0.00% Smallmouth bass 110 84 0.00% Rainbow darter 110 84 0.00% Eastern blacknose dace 55 42 0.00% Goby 28 21 0.00% 18 Species 12,291,776 9,311,951 100%

Table 3-14 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, October 2006

Figure 3-14 Huntley Species Composition October Emerald shiner Rainbow smelt Alewife49 Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Emerald shiner 32,581,101 24,682,652 97.15% Rainbow smelt 781,706 592,201 2.33% Alewife 109,763 83,154 0.33% Rock bass 25,265 19,140 0.08% Gizzard shad 22,017 16,680 0.07% Yellow perch 7,315 5,542 0.02% Brook silverside 4,375 3,314 0.01%

Spottail shiner 2,538 1,923 0.01%

White perch 1,080 818 0.00% Bluegill 505 382 0.00% Trout perch 441 334 0.00% Goby 441 334 0.00% Fathead minnow 252 191 0.00%

Northern pike 158 119 0.00% Logperch 158 119 0.00% Golden shiner 110 84 0.00% Bluntnose minnow 110 84 0.00%

Banded killifish 110 84 0.00% 18 Species 33,537,448 25,407,157 100%

Table 3-15 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, November 2006

Figure 3-15 Huntley Species Composition November Emerald shiner Rainbow smelt Alewife50 Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Emerald shiner 34,615,375 26,223,769 97.57% Rainbow smelt 789,029 597,749 2.22%

Gizzard shad 42,631 32,297 0.12% Alewife 8,388 6,354 0.02% Yellow perch 7,915 5,996 0.02%

Rock bass 4,793 3,631 0.01% Brook silverside 3,942 2,986 0.01%

Spottail shiner 1,608 1,218 0.00% Bluegill 914 693 0.00% Largemouth bass 883 669 0.00% Fathead minnow 662 502 0.00% White perch 441 334 0.00% Pumpkinseed 441 334 0.00% Smallmouth bass 441 334 0.00% Tessellated darter 441 334 0.00% Logperch 284 215 0.00% Eastern blacknose dace 221 167 0.00% White sucker 221 167 0.00% Trout perch 221 167 0.00% Northern pike 63 48 0.00%

20 Species 35,478,914 26,877,965 100%

Table 3-16 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, December 2006

Figure 3-16 Huntley Species Composition December Emerald shiner Rainbow smelt Gizzard shad51 Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Emerald shiner 49,409,097 37,431,134 98.82% Rainbow smelt 527,754 399,813 1.06% Yellow perch 25,541 19,349 0.05% Gizzard shad 18,604 14,094 0.04% Brook silverside 3,752 2,843 0.01% Alewife 3,311 2,508 0.01% White perch 2,869 2,174 0.01%

Rock bass 2,523 1,911 0.01% Spottail shiner 2,365 1,792 0.00%

Trout perch 1,104 836 0.00% Bluntnose minnow 505 382 0.00% Goby 441 334 0.00% Bluegill 410 311 0.00% White sucker 347 263 0.00% Largemouth bass 221 167 0.00%

Pumpkinseed 126 96 0.00%

16 Species 49,998,970 37,878,007 100%

Table 3-17 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, January 2007

Figure 3-17 Huntley Species Composition January Emerald shiner Rainbow smelt Yellow perch52 Species Numbers (with CE) Numbers (without CE) Percent Composition Emerald shiner 13,872,826 10,509,717 99.73% Rainbow smelt 16,444 12,458 0.12%

Gizzard shad 11,730 8,886 0.08% Spottail shiner 2,830 2,144 0.02% Yellow perch 2,349 1,780 0.02% White perch 883 669 0.01% Bluntnose minnow 615 466 0.00% Alewife 441 334 0.00% Brook silverside 378 287 0.00%

White sucker 315 239 0.00%

Rock bass 315 239 0.00% Central mudminnow 221 167 0.00% Creek chub 221 167 0.00% Johnny darter 221 167 0.00% Pumpkinseed 95 72 0.00%

15 Species 13,909,884 10,537,791 100%

Table 3-18 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged at the NRG Huntley Station, February 2007

Figure 3-18 Huntley Species Composition February Emerald shiner Rainbow smelt Gizzard shad

## APPENDIX A

Common and Scientific Names of Fish Colle cted at the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007Common Name Scientific Name Alewife Alosa pseudoharengus Banded killifish Fundulus diaphanus Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus Brook silverside Labidesthes sicculus Brown bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus Central mudminnow Umbra limi Carp Cyprinus carpio Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus Eastern blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides Fathead minnow Pimephales promelas Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum Goby Neogobius melanostomus Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Johnny darter Etheostoma Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Log perch Percina caprodes Mimic shiner Notropis volucellus Moxostoma sp Moxostoma sp Northern pike Esox lucius Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Rainbow darter Etheostoma caeruleum Rainbow smelt Osmerus mordax Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius Stonecat Noturus flavus Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi Trout perch Percopsis omiscomaycus White bass Morone chrysops White perch Morone americana White sucker Catostomus commersonii Yellow perch Perca flavescens

## APPENDIX B Impingement and Entrainment Sample Da tes at the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007Impingement Entrainment Impingement Entrainment Impingement
3/28/2006 4/11/2006 8/15/2006 9/6/2006 1/8/2007 3/29/2006 4/18/2006 8/21/2006 9/11/2006 1/9/2007 4/4/2006 4/19/2006 8/22/2006 9/12/2006 1/15/2007 4/5/2006 4/25/2006 8/28/2006 10/2/2006 1/16/2007 4/11/2006 4/26/2006 8/29/2006 10/3/2006 1/22/2007 4/12/2006 5/1/2006 9/5/2006 11/6/2006 1/23/2007 4/18/2006 5/2/2006 9/7/2006 11/7/2006 1/29/2007 4/19/2006 5/8/2006 9/11/2006 12/11/2006 1/30/2007 4/25/2006 5/9/2006 9/12/2006 12/12/2006 2/5/2007 4/26/2006 5/16/2006 9/18/2006 1/2/2007 2/6/2007 5/1/2006 5/17/2006 9/19/2006 1/3/2007 2/12/2007 5/2/2006 5/22/2006 9/25/2006 2/19/2007 2/13/2007 5/8/2006 5/23/2006 9/26/2006 2/20/2007 2/19/2007 5/9/2006 5/30/2006 10/2/2006 3/5/2007 2/20/2007 5/16/2006 5/31/2006 10/3/2006 3/6/2007 2/26/2007 5/17/2006 6/5/2006 10/9/2006 2/27/2007 5/22/2006 6/6/2006 10/10/2006 3/5/2007 5/23/2006 6/12/2006 10/16/2006 3/6/2007 5/30/2006 6/13/2006 10/17/2006 3/12/2007 5/31/2006 6/19/2006 10/23/2006 3/13/2007 6/5/2006 6/20/2006 10/24/2006 3/19/2007 6/6/2006 6/26/2006 10/30/2006 3/20/2007 6/12/2006 6/28/2006 10/31/2006 6/13/2006 7/5/2006 11/6/2006 6/19/2006 7/6/2006 11/7/2006 6/20/2006 7/10/2006 11/13/2006 6/26/2006 7/11/2006 11/14/2006 6/28/2006 7/17/2006 11/20/2006 7/5/2006 7/18/2006 11/21/2006 7/6/2006 7/24/2006 11/27/2006 7/10/2006 7/31/2006 11/28/2006 7/11/2006 8/1/2006 12/4/2006 7/17/2006 8/7/2006 12/5/2006 7/18/2006 8/8/2006 12/11/2006 7/24/2006 8/14/2006 12/12/2006 7/25/2006 8/15/2006 12/18/2006 7/31/2006 8/21/2006 12/19/2006 8/1/2006 8/22/2006 12/27/2006 8/7/2006 8/28/2006 12/28/2006 8/8/2006 8/29/2006 1/2/2007 8/14/2006 9/5/2006 1/3/2007

## APPENDIX C Entrainment Summary DataDate Collection Period Species Code Common Name Life Stage Splits Number per 100m 3 Numbers at Max Plant Flow Screenhouse 1 Numbers at Max Plant Flow Screenhouse 2 4/19/2006 1 335 Rainbow Smelt 3 1 1 14,173 19,684 4/18/2006 2 335 Rainbow Smelt 3 1 16 226,761 314,946 4/18/2006 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 4/19/2006 4 335 Rainbow Smelt 3 1 8 113,381 157,473

4/25/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 4/25/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 4/25/2006 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 4/26/2006 4 335 Rainbow Smelt 3 1 48 680,284 944,839

5/1/2006 1 335 Rainbow Smelt 3 1 10 141,726 196,841 5/1/2006 2 335 Rainbow Smelt 3 1 4 56,690 78,737 5/1/2006 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 5/2/2006 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

5/8/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 5/8/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 5/8/2006 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 5/9/2006 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

5/16/2006 1 335 Rainbow Smelt 3 1 1 14,173 19,684 5/16/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 5/16/2006 3 617 Yellow Perch 1 1 1 14,173 19,684 5/17/2006 4 617 Yellow Perch 1 1 1 14,173 19,684

5/22/2006 1 335 Rainbow Smelt 3 1 1 14,173 19,684 5/22/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 5/22/2006 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 5/23/2006 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

5/30/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 5/30/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 5/30/2006 3 419 White Sucker 1 1 2 28,345 39,368 5/31/2006 4 617 Yellow Perch 1 1 1 14,173 19,684 5/31/2006 4 419 White Sucker 1 1 4 56,690 78,737

6/5/2006 1 43 Trout sp. 3 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/5/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 6/5/2006 3 617 Yellow Perch 1 1 2 28,345 39,368 6/5/2006 3 617 Yellow Perch 11 0 0 6/5/2006 3 419 White Sucker 1 1 36 510,213 708,629 6/6/2006 4 617 Yellow Perch 1 1 2 28,345 39,368 6/6/2006 4 419 White Sucker 1 1 37 524,385 728,313

6/12/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 6/12/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 6/12/2006 3 335 Rainbow Smelt 1 1 3 42,518 59,052 6/12/2006 3 335 Rainbow Smelt 12 0 0 6/12/2006 3 617 Yellow Perch 1 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/12/2006 3 61 Minnow sp. 1 1 9 127,553 177,157 6/12/2006 3 618 Logperch 1 1 12 170,071 236,210 6/12/2006 3 419 White Sucker 1 1 18 255,106 354,315 6/12/2006 3 999 Unknown Spp 1 1 2 28,345 39,368 6/13/2006 4 61 Minnow s p

. 1 1 4 56,690 78,737 Note: Life Stage 1=yolk sac larvae, 2=post larvae, 3=eggs, 5=juveniles.Date Collection Period Species Code Common Name Life Stage Splits Number per 100m 3 Numbers at Max Plant Flow Screenhouse 1 Numbers at Max Plant Flow Screenhouse 2 6/19/2006 1 365 Common Carp 1 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/19/2006 1 390 Spottail Shiner 1 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/19/2006 2 365 Common Carp 1 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/19/2006 3 365 Common Carp 3 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/19/2006 3 61 Minnow sp. 3 1 2 28,345 39,368 6/19/2006 3 461 Trout Perch 1 1 4 56,690 78,737 6/19/2006 3 461 Trout Perch 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/19/2006 3 294 Gizzard Shad 1 1 3 42,518 59,052 6/19/2006 3 61 Minnow sp. 1 1 2 28,345 39,368 6/19/2006 3 419 White Sucker 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/19/2006 3 365 Common Carp 1 1 2 28,345 39,368 6/19/2006 3 335 Rainbow Smelt 2 1 3 42,518 59,052 6/20/2006 4 365 Common Carp 1 1 8 113,381 157,473 6/20/2006 4 365 Common Carp 2 1 2 28,345 39,368 6/20/2006 4 618 Logperch 1 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/20/2006 4 617 Yellow Perch 2 1 2 28,345 39,368

6/26/2006 1 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/26/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 6/26/2006 3 792 Goby 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/26/2006 3 335 Rainbow Smelt 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 6/26/2006 3 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 4 56,690 78,737 6/28/2006 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

7/5/2006 1 381 Emerald Shiner 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 7/5/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 7/5/2006 3 40 Herring sp. 2 1 267 3,784,079 5,255,665 7/5/2006 3 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 29 411,005 570,840 7/5/2006 3 390 Spottail Shiner 2 1 5 70,863 98,421 7/5/2006 3 792 Goby 2 1 4 56,690 78,737 7/6/2006 4 792 Goby 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 7/6/2006 4 61 Minnow sp. 1 1 1 14,173 19,684 7/6/2006 4 381 Emerald Shiner 2 1 18 255,106 354,315 7/6/2006 4 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 1 14,173 19,684

7/10/2006 1 999 Unknown Spp 3 1 2 28,345 39,368 7/10/2006 1 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 4 56,690 78,737 7/10/2006 1 617 Yellow Perch 5 1 1 14,173 19,684 7/10/2006 2 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 2 28,345 39,368 7/10/2006 3 381 Emerald Shiner 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 7/10/2006 3 792 Goby 2 1 3 42,518 59,052 7/10/2006 3 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 80 1,133,806 1,574,731 7/11/2006 4 617 Yellow Perch 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 7/11/2006 4 700 Freshwater Drum 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 7/11/2006 4 289 Alewife 2 1 16 226,761 314,946

7/17/2006 1 1 0 0 0 7/17/2006 2 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 7/17/2006 3 444 Brown Bullhead 5 1 1 14,173 19,684 7/17/2006 3 792 Goby 2 1 10 141,726 196,841 7/17/2006 3 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 3 42,518 59,052 7/17/2006 3 289 Alewife 2 1 73 1,034,598 1,436,942 7/18/2006 4 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 4 56,690 78,737 7/18/2006 4 289 Alewife 2 1 61 864,527 1,200,733 Note: Life Stage 1=yolk sac larvae, 2=post larvae, 3=eggs, 5=juveniles.Date Collection Period Species Code Common Name Life Stage Splits Number per 100m 3 Numbers at Max Plant Flow Screenhouse 1 Numbers at Max Plant Flow Screenhouse 2 7/24/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 7/24/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 7/24/2006 3 792 Goby 2 1 4 56,690 78,737 7/25/2006 4 999 Unknown Spp 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 7/25/2006 4 289 Alewife 2 1 1 14,173 19,684

7/31/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 7/31/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 7/31/2006 3 792 Goby 2 1 2 28,345 39,368 7/31/2006 3 289 Alewife 2 1 2 28,345 39,368 7/31/2006 3 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 13 184,244 255,894 8/1/2006 4 999 Unknown Spp 3 1 1 14,173 19,684 8/1/2006 4 61 Minnow sp. 1 1 2 28,345 39,368 8/1/2006 4 294 Gizzard Shad 2 1 7 99,208 137,789 8/1/2006 4 289 Alewife 2 1 21 297,624 413,367

8/7/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 8/7/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 8/7/2006 3 381 Emerald Shiner 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 8/8/2006 4 381 Emerald Shiner 2 1 1 14,173 19,684

8/14/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 8/14/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 8/14/2006 3 792 Goby 2 1 5 70,863 98,421 8/15/2006 4 792 Goby 2 1 3 42,518 59,052

8/21/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 8/21/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 8/21/2006 3 335 Rainbow Smelt 5 1 1 14,173 19,684 8/22/2006 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

8/28/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 8/28/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 8/28/2006 3 61 Minnow sp. 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 8/28/2006 3 174 Sculpin sp. 2 1 1 14,173 19,684 8/29/2006 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

9/5/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 9/5/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 9/5/2006 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 9/6/2006 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

9/11/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 9/11/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 9/11/2006 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 9/12/2006 4 999 Unknown S pp 3 1 1 14,173 19,684

Note: Life Stage 1=yolk sac larvae, 2=post larvae, 3=eggs, 5=juveniles.Date Collection Period Species Code Common Name Life Stage Splits Number per 100m 3 Numbers at Max Plant Flow Screenhouse 1 Numbers at Max Plant Flow Screenhouse 2 10/2/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 10/2/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 10/2/2006 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 10/3/2006 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

11/6/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 11/6/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 11/6/2006 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 11/7/2006 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

12/11/2006 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 12/11/2006 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 12/11/2006 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 12/12/2006 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

1/2/2007 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 1/2/2007 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 1/2/2007 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 1/3/2007 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

2/19/2007 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 2/19/2007 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 2/19/2007 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 2/20/2007 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

3/5/2007 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 3/5/2007 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 3/5/2007 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 3/6/2007 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

4/2/2007 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 4/2/2007 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 4/2/2007 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 4/3/2007 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

4/9/2007 1 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 4/9/2007 2 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 4/9/2007 3 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0 4/10/2007 4 NA NA NA 1 0 0 0

## APPENDIX D Impingement Summary Data

## APPENDIX E Length Frequency DistributionsLength Frequency Distribution by Month in 10 mmGroups for Emerald Shiners at Huntley StationFishMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryTotalLengthNo.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%Number100201 3.4%1302 6.9% 9 3.3% 3 1.3%14404 1.0%1 0.5% 10 34.5% 190 69.1% 126 54.8% 17 5.5% 6 1.5% 1 0.3% 3 0.6% 4 1.0%36250112 28.2% 27 6.7% 38 7.6% 59 28.5% 1 3.4% 71 25.8% 72 31.3% 132 42.7% 138 35.1% 115 29.0% 106 21.2% 96 24.1%96760188 47.4% 128 31.6% 217 43.1% 109 52.7% 9 31.0% 5 1.8% 27 11.7% 117 37.9% 194 49.4% 221 55.8% 299 59.9% 210 52.8%1,7247062 15.6% 162 40.0% 184 36.6% 32 15.5% 6 20.7%2 0.9% 27 8.7% 38 9.7% 52 13.1% 84 16.8% 74 18.6%7238021 5.3% 55 13.6% 47 9.3% 4 1.9%3 1.0% 11 2.8% 3 0.8% 4 0.8% 4 1.0%152906 1.5% 8 2.0% 6 1.2% 1 0.5%4 1.3% 5 1.3% 3 0.8% 3 0.6% 6 1.5%421004 1.0% 16 4.0% 9 1.8%8 2.6% 1 0.3% 1 0.3%4 1.0%431107 1.7% 1 0.2% 1 0.5%1 0.3%10120013001402 0.5%21501 0.2%116001700Total 397 100% 405 100% 503 100% 207 100% 29 100% 275 100% 230 100% 309 100% 393 100% 396 100% 499 100% 398 100% 4,041Emerald Shiner April n = 405

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)Frequency

Emerald Shiner M ay n = 503

0 50 100 150 200 250

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)FrequencyEmerald Shiner June n = 207

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)Frequency

Emerald Shiner July n = 29

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)FrequencyEmerald Shiner August n = 275

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)Frequency

Emerald Shiner September n = 230

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)FrequencyEmerald Shiner October n = 309

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)Frequency

Emerald Shiner November n = 393

0 50 100 150 200 250

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)FrequencyEmerald Shiner December n = 396

0 50 100 150 200 250

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)Frequency

Emerald Shiner January n = 499

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)FrequencyEmerald Shiner February n = 398

0 50 100 150 200 250

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)Frequency

Emerald Shiner March n = 397

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 Length (mm)FrequencyLength Frequency Distribution by Month in 10 mmGroups for Rainbow Smelt at Huntley StationFishMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryTotalLengthNo.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%Number102030401 0.8% 1 0.4% 250 1 1.3%9 100.0% 100 82.0% 62 23.9% 55 16.2% 5 1.3% 2326017 25.4% 2 11.1% 20 16.4% 169 65.3% 98 28.8% 44 11.6% 1 0.3% 2 0.5% 2 0.5% 35570 3 3.8%16 23.9% 9 50.0% 26 10.0% 105 30.9% 136 35.8% 23 6.2% 6 1.4% 6 1.4% 33080 3 3.8%4 6.0% 3 16.7% 1 0.4% 60 17.6% 140 36.8% 99 26.8% 74 16.9% 74 16.9% 45890 4 5.0%1 1.5% 2 11.1% 1 0.8% 16 4.7% 47 12.4% 136 36.8% 188 42.9% 188 42.9% 583100 2 2.5% 10.9%3 0.9% 2 0.5% 38 10.3% 60 13.7% 60 13.7% 166110 9 11.3% 87.1%1 1.5% 5 1.4% 6 1.4% 6 1.4% 35120 26 32.5%40 35.7% 1522.4% 1 0.3% 6 1.6% 22 5.0% 22 5.0% 132130 28 35.0%50 44.6% 710.4% 2 0.6% 1 0.3% 27 7.3% 31 7.1% 31 7.1% 177140 4 5.0% 119.8% 46.0% 2 11.1% 3 0.8% 14 3.8% 27 6.2% 27 6.2% 92150 10.9% 11.5% 1 0.3% 1 0.3% 8 2.2% 15 3.4% 15 3.4% 42160 10.9%6 1.6% 6 1.4% 6 1.4% 1917011.5% 4 1.1% 1 0.2% 1 0.2% 71801 0.3% 11901 0.3% 12001 0.3% 1Total 80 100% 112 100% 67 100% 18 100% 9 100% 122 100% 259 100% 340 100% 380 100% 370 100% 438 100% 438 100% 2,633Rainbow Smelt April n = 112

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)Frequency

Rainbow Smelt May n = 67

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)FrequencyRainbow Smelt June n = 18

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)Frequency

Rainbow Smelt July n = 9

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)FrequencyRainbow Smelt August n = 122

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)Frequency

Rainbow Smelt September n = 259

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)FrequencyRainbow Smelt October n = 340

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)Frequency

Rainbow Smelt November n = 380

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)FrequencyRainbow Smelt December n = 370

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)Frequency

Rainbow Smelt January n =438

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)FrequencyRainbow Smelt February n = 44

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)Frequency

Rainbow Smelt March n = 80

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)FrequencyLength Frequency Distribution by Month in 20mm Groups for Gizzard Shad at Huntley StationFishMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryTotalLengthNo.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%Number201 1.2% 1405 38.5% 33 3 17.6% 416042.2% 7 53.8% 35 10 58.8% 39 51.3% 8 14.8% 103801 0.3% 10.5% 4 23.5% 18 23.7% 11 20.4% 13 8.8% 1012.0% 581001 0.5% 11 14.5% 18 33.3% 7047.6% 3845.8% 711.9% 145120 41.2%4 2.2% 4 5.3% 16 29.6% 5436.7% 2631.3% 3864.4% 146140 17 17.0% 5917.1%57 31.3% 1 33.3% 4 5.3% 1 1.9% 8 5.4% 5 6.0% 5 8.5% 157160 52 52.0%16146.5%85 46.7% 2 66.7% 1 7.7% 1 1.2% 1 1.7% 303180 21 21.0%10129.2%24 13.2% 2 2.4% 1 1.7% 149200 9 9.0% 195.5%5 2.7% 33220 1 1.0%10.5% 22401 0.3%12601 1.7% 128003001 0.7% 13201 1.7% 13401 1.7% 13602 3.4% 23802 3.4% 24001 0.7% 142004400Total100 100%346 100%182 100% 3 100% 13 100% 680% 17 100% 76 100% 54 100% 147 100% 83 100% 59 100% 1,148Gizzard Shad April n = 346

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)Frequency

Gizzard Shad M ay n = 182

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)FrequencyGizzard Shad June n = 3

0 1 2 3

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)Frequency

Gizzard Shad July n = 13

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)FrequencyGzzard Shad August n = 68

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)Frequency

Gizzard Shad September n = 17

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)FrequencyGizzard Shad October n = 76

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)Frequency

Gizzard Shad November n = 54

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)FrequencyGizzard Shad December n = 147

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)Frequency

Gizzard Shad January n = 83

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)FrequencyGizzard Shad February n = 59

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)Frequency

Gizzard Shad M arch n = 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)FrequencyLength Frequency Distribution by Month in10 mm Groups for Alewife at Huntley StationFishMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryTotalLengthNo.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%Number100200300404 57.1% 19 16.0% 4 2.2% 5 6.4% 32502 28.6% 37 31.1% 26 14.1% 23 29.5% 28 12.6% 2 7.7% 118601 14.3% 21 17.6% 25 13.5% 17 21.8% 115 51.8% 6 23.1% 185707 5.9% 55 29.7% 16 20.5% 33 14.9% 2 7.7% 4 26.7% 117808 6.7% 28 15.1% 4 5.1% 17 7.7% 7 26.9% 649018 15.1% 16 8.6% 9 11.5% 26 11.7% 7 26.9% 5 33.3% 811008 6.7% 21 11.4% 4 5.1% 3 1.4% 1 3.8% 4 26.7% 411101 0.8% 9 4.9% 1 3.8% 2 13.3% 2 100.0% 151201100.0% 1 0.5% 21300140 1100.0%1150016001700180019002000Total 0 0% 1 100% 1 100% 0 0% 7 100% 119 100% 185 100% 78 100% 222100% 26 100% 15 100% 2 100% 656Alewife July n = 7

0 1 2 3 4 5

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)Frequency

Alewife August n = 119

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)FrequencyAlewife September n = 185

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)Frequency

Alewife October n = 78

0 5 10 15 20 25

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)FrequencyAlewife November n = 222

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)Frequency

Alewife December n = 26

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)FrequencyAlewife January n = 15

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)Frequency

Alewife February n = 2

0 1 2 3

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length (mm)FrequencyLength Frequency Distribution by Month in 20 mm Groups for Smallmouth Bass at Huntley StationFishMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryTotalLengthNo.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%Number2004060 81.1% 606012 16.2% 1 11.1% 13802 22.2% 21001 11.1% 1 100.0% 2120 1100.0%1 11.1% 21402 40.0% 1 1.4% 316001803 60.0% 4 44.4% 72001 1.4% 1220024002600280030003200340036003800400042004400Total 0 0% 1 100% 5 100% 0 0% 74 100% 9 100% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0%0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 90Smallmouth Bass M ay n = 5

0 1 2 3 4

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)Frequency

Smallmouth Bass July n = 74

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)FrequencySmallmouth Bass August n = 9

0 1 2 3 4 5

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)FrequencyLength Frequency Distribution by Month in 20 mmGroups for Largemouth Bass at Huntley StationFishMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryTotalLengthNo.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%Number200409 42.9% 1 33.3% 1 100.0% 116011 52.4% 1 12.5% 1 33.3% 13804 50.0% 1 33.3% 3 75.0% 81001 33.3% 1 12.5% 1 33.3% 1 25.0% 41202 25.0% 214001601 4.8% 1 33.3% 218002000220024002600280030003200340036003800400042004400Total 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 21 100% 3 100%8 100% 3 100% 0 0% 4100% 1 100% 0 0% 40Largemouth Bass July n = 21

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)Frequency

Largemouth Bass August n = 3

0 1 2

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)FrequencyLargemouth Bass September n = 8

0 1 2 3 4 5

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)Frequency

Largemouth Bass October n = 3

0 1 2

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)FrequencyLargemouth Bass December n = 4

0 1 2 3 4

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 Length (mm)FrequencyLength Frequency Distribution by Month in 10mm Groups for Yellow Perch at Huntley StationFishMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugustSeptemberOctoberNovemberDecemberJanuaryFebruaryTotalLengthNo.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%No.%Number20 3 2.9% 330 23 22.3% 6 28.6% 2940 71 68.9% 3 14.3% 7450 4 3.9% 12 57.1% 1660 1 25.0% 2 5.9% 370 1 8.3% 7 28.0% 4 33.3% 9 26.5% 8 8.9% 1 10.0% 3080 1 50.0% 1 8.3% 3 75.0% 14 56.0% 7 58.3% 13 38.2% 41 45.6% 1 10.0% 8190 1 50.0% 3 25.0% 1 25.0% 3 12.0% 1 8.3% 9 26.5% 31 34.4% 1 10.0% 50100 5 41.7% 3 75.0% 1 50.0% 1 4.0% 7 7.8% 3 30.0% 20110 1 2.9% 2 2.2% 3120 1 8.3% 1 50.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.1% 4130 0140 0150 1 8.3% 1 1.0% 1 10.0% 3160 1 10.0% 1170 2 20.0% 2180 0190 0200 0210 0220 02400250 0Total 2 100% 12 100% 4 100% 2 100% 103 100% 21 100% 4 100% 25 100% 12100% 34 100% 90 100% 10 100% 319Yellow Perch April n = 12

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 240 250 Length (mm)Frequency

Yellow Perch May n = 4

0 1 2 3 4

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 240 250 260 Length (mm)FrequencyYellow Perch June n = 2

0 1 2

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 240 250
Length (mm)Frequency

Yellow Perch July n = 103

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 240 250 Length (mm)FrequencyYellow Perch August n = 21

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 240 250 Length (mm)Frequency

Yellow Perch September n = 4

0 1 2 3 4

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 240 250 Length (mm)FrequencyYe llow Perch October n = 25

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 240 250 Length (mm)Frequency

Yellow Perch November n = 12

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 240 250 Length (mm)FrequencyYellow Perch December n = 34

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 240 250 Length (mm)Frequency

Yellow Perch January n = 90

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 240 250 Length (mm)FrequencyYellow Perch February n = 10

0 1 2 3 4

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 240 250 Length (mm)Frequency

## APPENDIX F

Environmental DataDate Collection Period Air Temperature (C o ) Water Temperature (C o ) Wind Direction Wind Speed (mph) 3/28/2006 1 4.7 1.9 W 5 3/28/2006 2 5.3 2.6 N 7 3/28/2006 3 3.4 2.6 - 0 3/29/2006 4 8.0 2.4 - 0 4/4/2006 1 5.0 4.7 N 15 4/4/2006 2 8.4 4.9 NW 20 4/4/2006 3 5.6 4.8 W 5 4/5/2006 4 4.0 4.9 N 10 4/11/2006 1 14.2 4.2 S 2 4/11/2006 2 17.1 4.9 S 15 4/11/2006 3 14.5 5.2 - 0 4/12/2006 4 9.5 4.9 S 10 4/18/2006 1 10.4 6.8 N 5 4/18/2006 2 11.1 7.6 N 5 4/18/2006 3 10.3 7.3 N 5 4/19/2006 4 7.6 6.7 N 5 4/25/2006 1 8.5 8.8 NW 5 4/25/2006 2 6.3 9.2 NW 10 4/25/2006 3 4.5 8.8 - 0 4/26/2006 4 1.5 8.3 NW 5 5/1/2006 1 12.2 8.1 S 5 5/1/2006 2 13.7 9.2 E 15 5/1/2006 3 9.7 8.8 E 5 5/2/2006 4 8.9 8.7 E 5 5/8/2006 1 18.5 11.1 - 0 5/8/2006 2 16.0 11.8 SW 5 5/8/2006 3 15.0 11.9 SW 3 5/9/2006 4 14.0 11.3 SW 2 5/16/2006 1 11.3 11.1 NW 5 5/16/2006 2 14.0 11.4 SW 5 5/16/2006 3 11.6 11.4 - - 5/17/2006 4 12.0 11.6 - - 5/22/2006 1 13.0 11.0 NW 5 5/22/2006 2 13.0 11.0 NW 5 5/22/2006 3 13.0 11.0 - - 5/23/2006 4 11.0 11.0 - - 5/30/2006 1 24.5 15.0 - - 5/30/2006 2 24.0 15.0 - - 5/30/2006 3 25.0 16.0 - - 5/31/2006 4 19.0 16.0 - 0 6/5/2006 1 20.0 15.0 - 0 6/5/2006 2 20.5 15.0 SW 3 6/5/2006 3 16.0 15.0 - 0 6/6/2006 4 15.0 15.0 - 0 6/12/2006 1 21.0 15.0 - - 6/12/2006 2 22.0 16.0 NW 2 6/12/2006 3 18.0 15.0 - -Date Collection Period Air Temperature C( o ) Water Temperature (C o ) Wind Direction Wind Speed (mph) 6/13/2006 4 16.0 15.0 - - 6/19/2006 1 26.0 20.0 SW 5 6/19/2006 2 23.0 21.0 SW 5 6/19/2006 3 19.0 20.0 SW 5 6/20/2006 4 18.0 20.0 SW 5 6/26/2006 1 25.0 22.0 - 0 6/26/2006 2 23.0 22.0 SW 5 6/26/2006 3 21.0 20.0 SW 5 6/28/2006 4 21.0 20.0 SW 5 7/5/2006 1 19.5 21.5 NW 5 7/5/2006 2 19.0 21.5 NW 5 7/5/2006 3 17.0 22.0 - 0 7/6/2006 4 15.0 21.0 SW 5 7/10/2006 1 24.0 21.0 SW 5 7/10/2006 2 24.0 21.0 SW 20 7/10/2006 3 23.0 23.0 - 0 7/11/2006 4 16.0 23.0 - 0 7/17/2006 1 25.5 23.5 SW 10 7/17/2006 2 26.0 24.5 SW 10 7/17/2006 3 26.0 24.5 SW 10 7/18/2006 4 22.0 24.0 SW 5 7/24/2006 1 21.0 23.0 SW 5 7/24/2006 2 23.0 23.0 SW - 7/24/2006 3 21.0 23.0 SW 10 7/25/2006 4 21.0 23.0 SW 10 7/31/2006 1 25.5 24.5 SW 15 7/31/2006 2 28.0 24.5 SW 15 7/31/2006 3 24.0 25.0 - 0 8/1/2006 4 25.0 25.0 SW 10 8/7/2006 1 28.0 25.0 NW 5 8/7/2006 2 28.0 25.0 SW 15 8/7/2006 3 26.0 26.0 SW 10 8/8/2006 4 17.0 25.0 WS 5 8/14/2006 1 18.0 22.0 W 10 8/14/2006 2 19.0 23.0 NW 20 8/14/2006 3 20.0 23.0 - 0 8/15/2006 4 17.0 23.0 - 0 8/21/2006 1 18.0 22.0 - 0 8/21/2006 2 23.0 22.0 NW 10 8/21/2006 3 21.0 22.0 N 5 8/22/2006 4 18.0 22.0 N 10 8/28/2006 1 19.5 22.5 NE 8 8/28/2006 2 21.5 22.5 NE 8 8/28/2006 3 18.5 22.5 NE 10 8/29/2006 4 16.0 22.5 NE 10 9/5/2006 1 17.5 16.5 SW 5 9/5/2006 2 16.5 16.5 SW 5 9/6/2006 3 16.0 16.5 SW 5 9/7/2006 4 15.0 16.5 - 0 9/11/2006 1 12.5 17.0 NW 5 9/11/2006 2 17.0 17.0 E 5Date Collection Period Air Temperature (C o ) Water Temperature (C o ) Wind Direction Wind Speed (mph) 9/11/2006 3 17.0 18.0 SE 10 9/12/2006 4 14.0 18.0 SE 10 9/18/2006 1 18.0 19.0 SW 10 9/18/2006 2 25.0 19.5 SW 10 9/18/2006 3 20.0 19.5 SW 5 9/19/2006 4 14.0 19.5 SW 10 9/25/2006 1 12.5 17.0 N 10 9/25/2006 2 15.0 17.5 N 15 9/25/2006 3 17.5 17.5 N 15 9/26/2006 4 11.0 16.0 N 10 10/2/2006 1 13.0 15.5 SW 5 10/2/2006 2 18.0 15.5 SW 5 10/2/2006 3 14.5 15.5 - 0 10/3/2006 4 14.0 15.5 - 0 10/9/2006 1 17.0 15.0 - 0 10/9/2006 2 20.0 15.0 NW 5 10/9/2006 3 15.0 15.0 NW 5 10/10/2006 4 14.0 15.0 NW 5 10/16/2006 1 7.0 12.0 SW 5 10/16/2006 2 15.0 12.0 SW 5 10/16/2006 3 11.0 12.0 SW 5 10/17/2006 4 10.0 12.0 SW 5 10/23/2006 1 7.0 11.0 N 15 10/23/2006 2 6.5 11.0 N 15 10/23/2006 3 4.0 11.0 N 15 10/24/2006 4 3.0 11.0 SW 5 10/30/2006 1 8.5 8.0 NE 10 10/30/2006 2 9.0 8.5 NE 5 10/30/2006 3 10.0 8.0 NE 5 10/31/2006 4 12.0 8.0 NE 5 11/6/2006 1 12.0 11.0 SW 5 11/6/2006 2 17.0 11.0 SW 10 11/6/2006 3 8.0 11.0 SW 15 11/7/2006 4 10.0 11.0 SW 5 11/13/2006 1 5.0 8.0 - 0 11/13/2006 2 6.0 8.0 - 0 11/13/2006 3 6.0 8.0 - 0 11/14/2006 4 5.0 8.0 - 0 11/20/2006 1 1.0 9.0 N 5 11/20/2006 2 3.0 9.0 NW 5 11/20/2006 3 1.0 9.0 - 0 11/21/2006 4 2.0 9.0 - 0 11/27/2006 1 14.5 8.0 SW 5 11/27/2006 2 15.0 8.0 SW 5 11/27/2006 3 13.0 8.0 SW 5 11/28/2006 4 12.0 8.0 - 0 12/4/2006 1 1.0 8.0 SW 10 12/4/2006 2 -1.0 8.0 SW 10 12/4/2006 3 -3.0 8.0 SW 10 12/5/2006 4 -3.0 8.0 SW 5 12/11/2006 1 4.0 4.0 SW 5Date Collection Period Air Temperature (C o ) Water Temperature (C o ) Wind Direction Wind Speed (mph) 12/11/2006 2 7.5 4.5 SW 5 12/11/2006 3 6.0 4.0 SW 5 12/12/2006 4 6.0 4.0 - 0 12/18/2006 1 6.0 5.0 W 5 12/18/2006 2 7.0 5.0 NW 15 12/18/2006 3 3.5 5.0 NW 10 12/19/2006 4 0.5 5.0 NW 10 12/27/2006 1 3.0 5.5 W 10 12/27/2006 2 1.5 5.5 W 10 12/27/2006 3 5.0 5.5 W 5 12/28/2006 4 - 5.5 W 5

1/2/2007 1 6.5 5.5 SW 10 1/2/2007 2 6.5 5.5 SW 15 1/2/2007 3 3.5 5.5 SW 10 1/3/2007 4 3.0 5.5 SW 5 1/8/2007 1 4.0 5.0 W 20 1/8/2007 2 3.0 5.5 W 25 1/8/2007 3 0.0 5.0 W 25 1/9/2007 4 0.0 5.0 W 5 1/15/2007 1 1.5 4.0 NW 0 1/15/2007 2 1.0 4.0 NW 5 1/15/2007 3 -2.0 4.0 NW 5 1/16/2007 4 -4.0 4.0 SE 10 1/22/2007 1 -3.0 1.5 NW 5 1/22/2007 2 -3.0 1.5 NW 5 1/22/2007 3 -1.0 1.5 NW 5 1/23/2007 4 -2.0 1.5 - 0 1/29/2007 1 -8.0 1.0 W 10 1/29/2007 2 -4.0 1.0 W 15 1/29/2007 3 -9.0 1.0 NE 15 1/30/2007 4 -9.0 1.0 W 5 2/5/2007 1 -18.0 2.0 NW 20 2/5/2007 2 -12.0 1.0 W 20 2/5/2007 3 -12.0 1.0 W 20 2/6/2007 4 -14.0 1.0 W 20 2/12/2007 1 -4.0 1.0 N 5 2/12/2007 2 -4.0 1.0 N 5 2/12/2007 3 -7.0 1.0 N 5 2/13/2007 4 -8.0 1.0 W 5 2/19/2007 1 -2.5 1.5 SW 5 2/19/2007 2 -2.0 1.5 SW 5 2/19/2007 3 0.0 1.0 SW 5 2/20/2007 4 0.0 1.0 SW 5 2/26/2007 1 3.0 1.0 SW 5 2/26/2007 2 1.0 1.5 SW 5 2/26/2007 3 -2.0 1.0 SW 5 2/27/2007 4 -4.0 1.0 SW 5 3/5/2007 1 -1.0 0.5 N 15 3/5/2007 2 -5.0 1.0 N 20 3/5/2007 3 -10.0 1.0 W 20 3/6/2007 4 -13.0 1.0 W 20Date Collection Period Air Temperature (C o ) Water Temperature (C o ) Wind Direction Wind Speed (mph) 3/12/2007 1 1.5 1.0 SW 5 3/12/2007 2 1.0 1.0 SW 15 3/12/2007 3 5.0 1.0 SW 5 3/13/2007 4 1.0 1.0 SW 5 3/19/2007 1 0.5 1.0 NW 10 3/19/2007 2 1.5 0.5 NW 10 3/19/2007 3 0.0 1.0 NW 5 3/20/2007 4 -3.0 1.0 - 0

## APPENDIX E Standard Operating ProceduresRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 1 

## Standard Operating Procedures*
Huntley Station Ichthyop lankton Entrainment Study March 2006 – March 2007
Revision-1 (June 6, 2006)

1.0 INTRODUCTION The Huntley Steam Station (Huntley) is located in the Town of Tonawanda, New York on
the eastern bank of the Tonawanda Channel of the upper Niagara River, approximately 1.5 miles downstream of the head of Grand Island, New York. The Town of Tonawanda is located approximately mid-way between the City of Buffalo and the C ity of Niagara Falls,
New York.
Shaw Environmental Inc. (Shaw) has been re tained to conduct a one year study at the NRGowned Huntley Steam Station beginning in April 2006. The objective of the entrainment sampling program is to identify and quantify the fish eggs and larvae (ichthyoplankton) that
are entrained into the station’ s cooling water flow and pass th rough the traveling screens at Huntley during normal plant operations. Data coll ected for this project will be sufficient to characterize temporal trends of entrainment abundance and to develop a baseline abundance
estimate.
This Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) document has been prepared to provide a basis to assure that the Entrainment Program at Huntley is conducted in a scientifically defensible manner. It is required that all personnel associat ed with the program understand and strictly adhere to all the proc edures described in this document. No variances to this document are permitted w ithout written permission from the project manager or assistant project manager. A copy of this document is to be available for reference at all locations where components of this study are performed. Revisions to this document may be periodically distributed. It is the responsibility of all people working on the project to ensure that they are working with the most recent copy of the SOP. When a revision is received, the prior document is to be returned to the project manager to destroy.
* Underlined passages represent ch anges from previous revision.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 2 2.0 EQUIPMENT

The following equipment is to be on hand during each entrainment collection effort: Field Collection Site :

o Personal safety gear (safety glasses, work gloves, hard hat, ear protection, safety boots)

o Job Safety Analysis Form

o Current SOP

o Entrainment field data sheets and speci fications (Figure 1, Tables 1 and 2)

o Sampling pump with hoses (installed at site)

o Collection containers

o (2) 0.5-m, 300-micron series mesh plankton net with collection bucket

o Portable sprayer

o Alcohol-propylene glycol solution (2%)

o Nalgene squeeze bottle

o (10) Approximately 1 pint collect ion jars (polypropylene) with caps

o Thermometer

o Pencils

o Fine tip black permanent markers
Laboratory:

o SOP

o Entrainment laboratory data sheets an d specifications (Figure 2, Table 3)

o Dissecting stereozoom microscope

o Cross polarized light setup for microscope

o Stage micrometer

o Ocular micrometerRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 3 o Calipers

o Key counters

o Glass Petri dish

o Dissecting needles

o Forceps, fine tipped

o Rose Bengal stain (aqueou s) in squeeze bottle

o Alcohol-glycerine solution (2%)

o 1/8 x1/2 inch mesh strainer

o 300 micron sieve

o Nalgene squeeze bottles

o Laboratory data forms and specifications

o Sample log book

o Dropper pipettes

o Folsom plankton splitter

o Pencils

o 2- dram vials (several gross)

o Labels for vials

o Labels for jars.

o Ichthyoplankton keys (including Auer)

o Sample storage refrigeratorRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 4 3.0 ENTRAINMENT FIELD COLLECTION PROCEDURES

The objective of the entrainment-sampling program is to identify and quantify the ichthyoplankton (fish eggs, larvae, post larvae an d juveniles) in the in take water that pass through the screening sy stems and are entrained in the Huntley CWIS during normal plant operations. Data collected during this sampli ng program will be used to identify temporal
trends in entrainment abundance and serve as input to the calculated baseline. The following field procedures must be adhered to during each entrai nment sampling event.

1. Entrainment samples will be collected for a period of one year. The sampling schedule will be weekly from April thr ough August and in the first two weeks of September, then once a month from October through March, resulting in approximately 30 sampling events. The speci fic sampling dates wi ll be provided by the project manager or a ssistant project manager.

2. The 24-hour sampling period during each sampli ng event, will be divided into four, 6-hour sampling blocks samples collected each day. Sampling will typically be initiated close to the beginning of each block:

SAMPLE BLOCK START END 1 10:00 hrs 16:00 hrs
2 16:00 hrs 22:00 hrs
3 22:00 hrs 04:00 hrs
4 04:00 hrs 10:00 hrs

3. Prior to the start of each shift, review and sign Job Safety Analysis form.

4. A high capacity trash pump installed in the screen house will be used to collect the samples. The pump will sample from th ree depths in the forebay (within the surface, midwater, and bottom strata of th e water column), using semi-permanently installed pipes. NOTE: FIELD PERSONNEL SHOULD NEVER REMOVE THE GRATING ON THE SCREENHOUSE FLOOR AROUND THE SAMPLING PIPES.

5. Only technicians trained in operating the pump and entrainment sampling equipment are allowed to conduct this sampling.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 5 6. Immediately prior to the beginning of each collection, fill out header information on the entrainment data form. Determine and record the wave hei ght, wind speed and direction.

7. Measure and record on the data form (using the associated specifications) the outside air temperature (0.5 O C), and water temperature (0.5 O C) from the return sluice. See Appendix B fo r the calibration procedures for equipment. Estimate wind speed and direction and wa ve height (omit the latt er when fog, darkness etc. prevent observations)

8. The next step is to calibrate the pump to determine the time it will take to sample 100 cubic meters of water. This will be accomplished as follows:

a) Drain the collection container that is marked to a known volume.

b) Inspect the plankton net and bucket to insu re that there are no rips or tears.

c) Open all necessary valves.

d) Prime the pump, if required, and allow sufficient time for it to establish a consistent flow.

e) Time how long it takes the pump to fill th e container (without the net) to the known volume mark.

f) Calculate (or use calibration table) to determine the time required to pump 100 cubic meters.
g) Place the plankton net into the container and begin sampling.

h) Record calibration information and start time on the data form.

9. At the end of sampling period remove the co llection net from the sample container. Drain the sampling container a nd recalibrate the pump usi ng the procedures in Step 7. Record the time (in seconds) that it take s to fill the sample container. If the difference between the start and end calib ration numbers is greater than 20%, the sample will be voided and retaken if time allows. If time does not allow for another sample to be completed save the sample material and notify the Project Manager.

10. Carefully use the sprayer to wash the cont ents of the net into the collection cup. Wash-down from the outside of the net to avoid damage to, or extrusion of,Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 6 organisms within the net. Remove the c up from the net and transfer the sample contents into sample jar.

11. Carefully rinse the inside of the collection cup into the sample jar, using a squirt bottle. During times of heavy sample loads, multiple sample jars may be needed. Label bottles appropriately (1 of X, 2 of X, etc.) and note on data sheet.

12. Preserve the sample with sufficient ethanol/glycerine solution so the final solution is about 5-15 percent alcohol. Cover a nd gently shake to ensure that the preservative is thoroughly mixe d with the sample contents.

13. Label sample jar and cap and place it in assigned location until transfer to laboratory

14. Inspect data sheets for completeness and accu racy. File data sheets in the assigned location until transferring to the Tonawanda office.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 7Figure 1Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 8Figure 2Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 9 Table 1. Data Form Specifications- Huntley Entrainment Field Sampling

HEADER INFORMATION

Variable Units Comment Facility H1 Huntley Station Date Month- Day- Year Collection Period * Sample Number Sequential through year Start Time 24 hr. clock End Time 24 hr. clock Pump Operation * Screen Operation * Air temperature o Centigrade Water Temperature o Centigrade Wave Height feet Wind Speed MPH Wind Direction Alpha Numeric N, NW, NE, S, SW, SE Coder Alpha Numeric Initials Use * Comments *Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 10 TABLE 2. HUNTLEY MASTER CODE LIST

COLLECTION PERIOD

1 = 10 AM – 4 PM 2 = 4 PM – 10 PM 3 = 10 PM – 4 AM 4 = 4 AM – 10 PM

PUMP OPERATION
0 = Pump not operating 1 = Pump operating

SCREEN OPERATION
0 = Screen not operating 1 = Screen operating 2 = Screen stoplogged

SMALL BASKETS 0=Out 1=In

USE

1 = No Problem 2 = Sampling problems encountered – Data useabl e for analysis other than catch / effort 3 = Field Void 4 = Lab Void 5 = Sampling problems encountered – Data not useable for length frequency analysis 6 = Data Valid but incomplete

COMMENTS
X = Indicates comment will affect data interpreta tion. Also indicates presence of incidental (non-computerized) data on data sheet.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 11 LIFE STAGE

0 = Undetermined 1 = Yolk – sac larva 2 = Post Yolk – sac larva 3 = Egg 4 = Adult 5 = Juvenile 6 = Yearling

MARK
01 = Adipose 02 = Adipose – Left Ventral 03 = Adipose – Right Ventral 04 = Adipose – Left Ve ntral – Right Ventral 05 = Adipose – Left Pectoral 06 = Adipose - Right Pectoral 07 = Adipose – Left Maxillary 08 = Left Pectoral – Right Maxillary 09 = Right Pectoral – Right Maxillary 10 = Left Ventral 11 = Right Ventral 12 = Left Ventral – Right Ventral 13 = Left Pectoral 14 = Right Pectoral 15 = Left Pectoral – Right Pectoral 16 = Left Pectoral – Left Ventral 17 = Left Pectoral – Right Ventral 18 = Right Pectoral – Left Ventral 19 = Dorsal 20 = Dorsal – Left Ventral 21 = Dorsal – Right Ventral 22 = Dorsal – Right Ve ntral – Left Ventral 23 = Dorsal - Left Pectoral 24 = Dorsal – Right Pectoral 25 = Anal 26 = Right Maxillary 27 = Left Maxillary 28 = Dorsal – Adipose 29 = Adipose – Right Maxillary 30 = Left Pectoral - Left MaxillaryRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 12 MARK (continued)
31 = Left Ventral – Left Maxillary 32 = Left Ventral – Right Maxillary 59 = Unspecified Fin Clip (Describe Under Comments) 60 = Unspecified Dye Injection (Describe Under Comments) 70 = Unspecified Brand or Tattoo (Describe Under Comments) 80 = Unspecified Tags (Describe Under Comments) 81 = Numbered Jaw Tag 82 = Numbered Floy Tag 83 = Coded Electromagnetic Tag

CONDITION

0 = Live 1 = Dead 2 = Gas Bubble 3 = Scale Damage 4 = Blackspot 5 = Furunculous 6 = Wound 7 = Fungus 8 = Lamprey Scar 9 = Other 10 = Multiple Diseases: See Comments

COMMENT
X = Indicates comment will affect data interpreta tion. Also indicates presence of incidental (non-computerized) data on data sheet.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 13 NYSDEC FISH SPECIES CODE LIST

Code Common Name

286 Alabama Shad 289 Alewife 270 Alligator Gar 971 Ameiurus sp 206 American Brook Lamprey 276 American Eel 290 American Shad 41 Anchovy sp. 293 Atlantic Herring 292 Atlantic Menhaden 327 Atlantic Salmon 262 Atlantic Sturgeon 296 Atlantic Thread Herring 616 Banded Darter 531 Banded Killifish 593 Banded Sunfish 370 Bigeye Chub 425 Bigmouth Buffalo 386 Bigmouth Shiner 359 Bitterling 426 Black Buffalo 442 Black Bullhead 603 Black Crappie 430 Black Redhorse 388 Blackchin Shiner 316 Blackfin Cisco 389 Blacknose Shiner 622 Blackside Darter 563 Blackspotted Stickleback 313 Bloater 441 Blue Catfish 621 Blue Pike 420 Blue Sucker 285 Blueback Herring 628 Bluebreast Darter 598 Bluegill 592 Bluespotted Sunfish 400 Bluntnose Minnow 271 Bowfin 27 Bowfin sp. 368 Brassy Minnow 382 Bridle Shiner Code

449 Common Name

Brindled Madtom 545 Brook Silverside 561 Brook Stickleback 329 Brook Trout 444 Brown Bullhead 328 Brown Trout 493 Burbot 966 Carpiodes sp 64 Catfish sp. 967 Catostomus sp 340 Central Mudminnow 360 Central Stoneroller 349 Chain Pickerel 445 Channel Catfish 619 Channel Darter 202 Chestnut Lamprey 322 Chinook Salmon 311 Cisco 320 Coho Salmon 378 Comely Shiner 365 Common Carp 385 Common Shiner 961 Cottus sp 406 Creek Chub 421 Creek Chubsucker 367 Cutlip Minnow 325 Cutthroat Trout 314 Deepwater Cisco 873 Deepwater Sculpin 125 Drum sp. 402 Eastern Blacknose Dace 341 Eastern Mudminnow 605 Eastern Sand Darter 369 Eastern Silvery Minnow 381 Emerald Shiner 973 Enneacanthus sp 968 Erimyzon sp 977 Etheostoma sp 956 Exoglossum sp 407 Fallfish 609 Fantail Darter 401 Fathead MinnowRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 14 Code

399 Common Name

Finescale Dace 450 Flathead Catfish 560 Fourspine Stickleback 700 Freshwater Drum 26 Gar sp. 620 Gilt Darter 294 Gizzard Shad 159 Goby sp. 431 Golden Redhorse 377 Golden Shiner 305 Goldeye 361 Goldfish Cyprinidae 364 Grass Carp 346 Grass Pickerel 374 Gravel Chub 433 Greater Redhorse 595 Green Sunfish 606 Greenside Darter 291 Gulf Menhaden 40 Herring sp. 288 Hickory Shad 417 Highfin Carpsucker 375 Hornyhead Chub 957 Hybognathus sp 969 Ictiobus sp 608 Iowa Darter 383 Iron color Shiner 613 Johnny Darter 315 Kiyi 363 Lake Chub 422 Lake Chubsucker 261 Lake Sturgeon 330 Lake Trout 312 Lake Whitefish

2 Lamprey sp. 601 Largemouth Bass 612 Least Darter 974 Lepomis sp 588 Lepomis sp. 618 Logperch 599 Longear Sunfish 621 Longhead Darter 403 Longnose Dace 268 Longnose Gar Code

418 Common Name
Longnose Sucker 958 Luxilus sp 959 Macrhybopsis sp 448 Margined Madtom 975 Micropterus sp 397 Mimic Shiner 61 Minnow sp. 306 Mooneye 42 Mooneye sp. 865 Mottled Sculpin 204 Mountain Brook Lamprey 970 Moxostoma sp 590 Mud Sunfish 48 Mudminnow sp. 532 Mummichog 348 Muskellunge 982 Myoxocephalus sp 564 Ninespine Stickleback 960 Nocomis sp 203 Northern Brook Lamprey 423 Northern Hog Sucker 347 Northern Pike E 398 Northern Redbelly Dace 961 Notropis sp 972 Noturus sp 201 Ohio Lamprey 266 Paddlefish 263 Pallid Sturgeon 408 Pearl Dace 978 Perca sp 109 Perch sp. 979 Percina sp 962 Phoxinus sp 49 Pike sp. 963 Pimephales 319 Pink Salmon 976 Pomoxis sp 387 Pugnose Minnow 380 Pugnose Shiner 596 Pumpkinseed 323 Pygmy 416 Quillback 607 Rainbow Darter 335 Rainbow SmeltRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 15 Code

326 Common Name

Rainbow Trout 594 Redbreast Sunfish 589 Redbreast X Pumpkinseed 345 Redfin Pickerel 396 Redfin Shiner 362 Redside Dace 964 Rhinichthys sp 415 River Carpsucker 376 River Chub 624 River Darter 429 River Redhorse 591 Rock Bass 393 Rosyface Shiner 792 Round Goby 295 Round Herring 324 Round Whitefish 405 Rudd 395 Sand Shiner 960 Sander sp 379 Satinfin Shiner 625 Sauger 174 Sculpin sp. 207 Sea Lamprey 965 Semotilus sp 623 Shield Darter 318 Short jaw Cisco 432 Shorthead Redhorse 310 Shortjaw Cisco 317 Shortnose Cisco 269 Shortnose Gar 260 Shortnose Sturgeon 264 Shovelnose Sturgeon 373 Silver Chub 428 Silver Redhorse 391 Silver Shiner 409 Silverjaw Minnow 287 Skipjack Herring 866 Slimy Sculpin 205 Sliver Lamprey 600 Smallmouth Bass 424 Smallmouth Buffalo 434 Smallmouth Redhorse 44 Smelt sp. 321 Sockeye Salmon Code

332 Common Name
Splake 867 Spoonhead Sculpin 533 Spotfin Killifish 394 Spotfin Shiner 390 Spottail Shiner 611 Spotted Darter 267 Spotted Gar 427 Spotted Sucker 99 Stickleback sp. 446 Stonecat 371 Streamline Chub 577 Striped Bass 534 Striped Killifish 384 Striped Shiner 372 Sturgeon Chub 24 Sturgeon sp. 62 Sucker sp. 108 Sunfish sp. 392 Swallowtail Shiner 610 Swamp Darter 447 Tadpole Madtom 105 Temperate Bass sp. 411 Tench 614 Tessellated Darter 562 Threespine Stickleback 350 Tiger Musky 333 Tiger Trout 366 Tonguetied Minnow 67 Topminnows sp. 461 Trout Perch 43 Trout sp. 999 Unknown Spp 615 Variegate Darter 626 Walleye 597 Warmouth 404 Western Blacknose Dace 540 Western Mosquitofish 516 White Bass 440 White Catfish 602 White Crappie 575 White Perch 419 White Sucker 443 Yellow Bullhead 617 Yellow PerchRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 16 4.0 ENTRAINMENT LABO RATORY PROCEDURES

Fish eggs and larvae collected will be picked and sorted from each entrainment sample. Ichthyoplankton will be identified to the lowe st practical taxonomic level, measured, and counted. Larvae will be categorized by lifesta ge. The following procedures will be used:

1. On receipt of samples, check to see that all samples are properly logged into the laboratory and that the field sheets and bottle labels are correct.

2. Add Rose Bengal solution to each sample, and additional alcohol if needed.

3. Ensure that all laboratory equi pment is in working order.

4. To conduct Ichthyoplankton Identification firs t record the sample number and other header information from the field sheet to the Entrainment Laboratory Form.

5. Place the 1/8 x 1/2 inch screen over the 300-micron series sieve and empty contents of sample bottle for a single sample onto the screen. Gently rinse with tap water to remove excess Rose Bengal and preservative . Any fish retained on the upper screen will be identified to species and record ed in the comments, since these would constitute the impingement component at th is station, which is being assessed via a separate study.

6. Place a portion of the sample in a glass Petri dish.

7. If there are very large numb ers of eggs or larvae (gr eater than 1000; approximately) those organisms may be subsampled (split). CONSULT THE LABORATORY TASK LEADER BEFORE SUBSAMPLING. Subsampling the dominant taxon will occur only after sorting the sample to remove less frequently occurring species or life stages. If there are fewer than 1000 ichthyoplankton in the sample, proceed to Step 8.

a. Dilute the sample with tap water to bring the volume to about 250ml.

b. Pour the sample into the Folsom pla nkton splitter and split the sample into two equal aliquots.

c. Continue splitting until the number of organisms in the subsample is between 100 and 200. Record the number of splits on the data form.

8. Sort the eggs and larvae from the debris and place in Petri dish or vials.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 17 9. Identify and count each species or taxon by life stage (egg, yolk sac larvae, post larvae or juvenile). Place each life stage of each species in a separate Petri dish or vial.

10. Record species, lifestage, and counts on th e data form using the codes on the data specification forms.

11. Strain sample background material though the 300 micron series sieve, return the retained material to the sample bottle, preserve and store for possible QC.

12. Measure (nearest 0.1mm) up to 25 individuals of each species (taxon) and life stage.

13. Depending on size, calipers or ocular micrometers may be used for length
measurements.

14. Record length measurements and place individuals and any unmeasured individuals of the same species/life stage into labeled vials. Separate vial s are required for each species (taxon) and life stage.

15. Add preservative and store for possible QC.

16. Inspect data sheets for completeness and accu racy. File data sheets in the assigned location.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 18 Table 3. Data Form Specifications – Ic hthyoplankton Entrainment Laboratory

HEADER/DETAIL INFORMATION

Variable Units Comment Facility H1 Huntley Station Program * Year Year of collection Sample Number Sequential through year Replicate Coder Initials Use * Species Use fish species code list Sequence number Lifestage * Length mm Nearest 0.1 mm** Splits Number of splits Total number By lifestage & species Comment X Record “X” if comment will affect data interpretation * See Master Code List ** Optional floating decimal point; if present, must occupy its own box Note: Cross reference variables necessary to re trieve field information are Facility, program, year, sample number, and replicateRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 19 5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALIT Y CONTROL (QA/QC) PLAN The goal of the QA/QC Plan is to ensure that work performance and resulting work products are of the highest quality and provided in a co st-effective, scientifically defensible, and timely manner. All deliverables are subject to QA/QC guidelines, checks, and reviews.
All sampling will be conducted in strict adhere nce to the SOP, which will have specific enough procedures to enable an auditor unfamilia r with the program to determine that the activities are being accomplished in a manner that satisfies the goals of the study.

5.1 Field QA/QC Procedures To ensure that the field component is conduc ted in a scientifica lly defensible manner according to the procedures within this document, the quality level of data will be monitored by a senior individual. This individual will have a co mplete understanding of, and familiarity with, the tasks conducted by the field sampling crew. This will allow for sufficient oversight to ensure strict adhere nce to standard operating procedures and to monitor the accuracy of counts, identifications, and other measurements. This field sampling program will be audited at least twi ce per year by the QA officer or his designee.
Only fully trained will work in the field on th is project. Other applicable components of Shaw’s standard QA/QC procedures described in Appendix A will be incorporated into this

program.

5.2 Laboratory Ichthyoplankto n Sorting QA/QC Procedures Beyond the procedures described in Section 4.1 and Appendix A, the following specific procedures will be used for the samp le sorting component of this study:

1. A Continuous Sampling Plan (CSP-1) quality control program will be used to assure that the Average Outgoing Quality Limit (AOQL) is 10 percent

2. A defect will be defined as the sample sorter missing (failing to remove) 10 percent of the total specimens available to be so rted from the sample. When the total number of specimens initially removed is le ss than 10, a defect will occur only if the recheck shows more than one specimen was missedRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 20 3. All samples are listed by sample number and assigned QC numbers starting with one. Quality control sorti ng is conducted by a qualified individual other than the original sorter.

4. Initially, all samples will be inspected un til 10 consecutive samples are found to be within the defined limits. Inspection w ill then proceed at 10 percent (i.e. one sampled randomly selected from the next lot of 10 consecutive samples) frequency until a defective sample is found. When th is occurs, 100 percent reinspection occurs until 10 consecutive nondefective samples ar e found. Then the cycle repeats itself.

5. If the QC value for any re-worked sample is different from the original value, a resolution is made and the a ppropriate value is entered on the data form. However the sample will only be considered defectiv e if the difference is 10 percent or more.

A record of all QA/QC checks, results and othe r pertinent notations will be documented in a QA/QC logbook.

5.3 Laboratory Ichthyoplankton Id entification QA/QC Procedures Beyond the procedures described in Section 4.1 and Appendix A, the following specific procedures will be used for the ichthyopla nkton identification component of this study:

1. A CSP-1 program will be used to assure that the Average Outgoing Quality Limit (AOQL) is 10 percent

2. A sample will be considered defective only if an error of 10 percent or more is made in identifying or counting ichthyoplankton.

3. When the total number of specimens initiall y removed is less than 10, a defect will occur only if the recheck shows more than one specimen was missed. Identification errors are considered cu mulative by life stage. Note: QC for ichthyoplankton life stage will be conducted on a taxon specific basis. When greater than 10 percent of a single taxon is misidentified as to life stag e, then the sample is considered defective only for that taxon.

4. All samples are listed by sample number and assigned QC numbers starting with one. Quality Control identification is conduc ted by a qualified individual other than the original taxonomist.

5. Initially, all samples will be inspected un til 10 consecutive samples are found to be within the defined limits. Inspection w ill then proceed at 10 percent (i.e., oneRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 21 sampled randomly selected from the next lot of 10 consecutive samples) frequency until a defective sample is found. When th is occurs, 100 percent reinspection occurs until 10 consecutive nondefective samples ar e found. Then the cycle repeats itself.

6. If the QC value for any re-worked sample is different from the original value, a resolution is made and the a ppropriate value is entered on the data form. However the sample will only be considered defectiv e if the difference is 10 percent or more.

7. A record of all QA/QC checks, results and other pertinent notations will be documented in a QA/QC logbook.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 22 APPENDIX A GENERAL QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES
SHAW ENVIRONMENTAL INC.

BACKGROUND The quality assurance (QA) and Quality Contro l (QC) program described here will monitor and assure the quality of data and services produced by Shaw Environmental (Shaw) is in fulfillment of the Huntley Impingement and Entrainment Programs being conducted for NRG Huntley Power, LLC (NRG).

The approach taken by Shaw is to monitor th e reliability, accuracy, and truth of results reported through quality assurance procedures and to maintain a required level of reliability through quality control (QC) procedures. Qualit y control procedures are described together with quality assurance (QA) pro cedures in Section 4 of this doc ument. Activities controlled by standard operating procedures are described in the Sta ndard Operating Procedures document for this project.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 23 PROJECT ORGANIZATION The project will be conducted on an interdisci plinary basis and will be administered and managed from Shaw’ Tonawanda office. The project manager is stationed in the office/laboratory at Tonawanda, New York. The management te am consists of a Project Manager, an Assistant Project/L ab Manager, and Task Leaders. A quality assurance officer is assigned to monitor the QA program. Tec hnical personnel include senior scientists, intermediate scientists, junior scientists, and technicians. Their gene ral responsibilities and
functions are described below:

Project Manager has overall administrative, fina ncial and technical responsibilities for the project.

Assistant Project/Lab Manager is internally responsible for the technical and budgetary aspects of projects. In con cert with the project manager he/she is responsible for personnel scheduling, purchasing, data acquisition, report production, and other matters required to fulfill the objectives of the project.

Task Leaders are assigned by the proj ect manager or assistant to be responsible for specific project objectives. They are experi enced professional scie ntists with proven abilities for generating technically excel lent, timely and cost-effective products. Task leaders work with the project mana ger to coordinate all programs, schedule personnel, manage budgets, participate in client conferences, and write reports. Along with the project manager they assi gn intermediate and junior personnel as needed to oversee and perform technical aspects of their tasks.

Senior Personnel provide technical assistance in their areas of sp ecialization as required.

Intermediate Personnel assist the managers and task leaders in the design and implementation of studies, data acquisiti on and analysis, report writing and other activities as needed. They are capabl e of producing high quality data withRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 24 supervision. They often direct the activiti es of biologists and technicians performing specific tasks.

Junior-Scientists and Technicians perform most of the field sampling work, and laboratory processing under direction of th e project managers, task leaders or intermediate scientists. They have special ized training in their areas of primary responsibility.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 25 DOCUMENT CONTROL

Controlled Documents Documents transmitted either internally or to NRG will be controlled by various measures and procedures. These controlled documents will include monthly and quarterly reports and
electronic data files. Control of these documents is necessary to assure the accuracy of information and timely incorporation of any re visions. All controlled documents delivered to NRG will be approved by, and delivered under a cover letter si gned by, the project manager or designated representative.

Control Procedures Each copy of a controlled document will be dated and numbered in order to control its
distribution. A distribution list for each cont rolled document will be established and maintained in the quality assurance file. Revisions to controlled documents will be numbered sequentially, dated, an d issued to persons listed on the applicable document distribution list. Copies of outdated pages or versions of controlled documents will be
maintained and filed. All revisions to cont rolled documents must be signed by the project manager or his designated representative.

Control of the Standard Operating Procedures Document The final version of the Standard Operating Procedures Document will be approved by the Shaw Project Manager. Revisions to this doc ument will be approved in the same manner. All revisions proposed will be su bject to prior review by NRG.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 26 DATA MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL The integrity of samples and data sheets will be controlled thr ough a system of log books and check points. Samples and data sheets will be generated in the field. Whenever practical, data taken in the field will be record ed directly on data forms. These forms will be designed so no further transcription is necessary prior to input of data into the database. Completed forms will be generated for all samples processed at the Tonawanda laboratory. Data forms generated in the field or by the laboratory will be copied and filed in Tonawanda. The copies will be transmitted to Shaw’s Andover, Massachusetts office for backup. Samples to be processed in the Tonawa nda laboratory will be recorded in tracking log books maintained in Tonawanda.

The Assistant Project/Lab Manager in concert with the Project Manager will be responsible for ensuring that all samples, data forms, and related materials pertaining to the project are properly logged in at the Tonawanda office. This log will contain pertinent information regarding the received materials. The materi als received will be forwarded for laboratory processing, data processing, or to the project manager.

The Laboratory Task Leader will have responsibility for control of all samples processed in the Tonawanda laboratory. He/she will record all quality assurance procedures used in the laboratory. He/she will also be responsible for logging out samples to independent laboratories for rework, if required. The results of the reworked samples will be logged in by the laboratory task leader and forwarded to the biologis t responsible for particular laboratory analyses for review and examination. These results will be filed in the quality
assurance files in Tonawanda and Andover. Th e laboratory task le ader will also be responsible for archiving processe d samples for future reference. Sample storage will be in
Tonawanda.

All data sheets will be routed through the assistant proj ect/Lab manager. Data sheets originating in Tonawanda will be copied a nd transmitted to Andover, MA for backup. The responsible field or laboratory supervisor will prepare the data sheets for further processing and will thoroughly review the data sheets for legibility and completeness. AnyRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 27 questionable entries will be directed to th e appropriate personnel fo r clarification. If clarification requires a change to the original entry, the entry will be crossed out so it remains legible, as possible; notes will be made on the sheet explaining the change, and signed/dated by those making the change. The project manager will be notified of a change and a copy of the changed sheet provided to he/s he. A log of corrections to data sheets will
be maintained.

Data will be entered onto the computer using a desktop computer as data entry vehicle. Entry will take place in Tonawanda. A log of data entry will be maintained so that Shaw can provide assurance that all data have been entered. The original data sheets will be filed in the master file of the originating office. Data entries will be manually verified and will be subject to QA/QC procedures. A listing of the input data, identified by a file name and a time and date, will be produced. This listing will be examined closely by the responsible
task leader or their authori zed representatives for obvious in consistencies. A suspicious entry routine will be used to provide flags for data checkers that will help them find potential data errors.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 28 RECORD KEEPING Project files will be mainta ined in the Andover and Tonawa nda offices. A master file containing all project materials will be locat ed in the Tonawanda office and will contain original copies of all mate rial and correspondence gene rated throughout the project, including data sheets. The Andover office file will contain correspondence, memos, documents, and copies of data sheets gene rated from Tonawanda field and laboratory operations. A list of Tonawanda project files is shown in Table 1. A file sign-out system will be used to keep track of materials wh ich are temporarily removed from the files.

Table 1. Huntley Electronic and Hard-Copy Program Files.

Project Files RFP Proposal Technical Specifications SOP's Project Memos Telephone Communications Meeting Notes Correspondence In NRG Correspondence Out NRG Correspondence In Others Correspondence Out Others Management Letters OA/QC Manual QA Data Sheets QA Audit Memos Nonconformance Reports Nonconformance Follow-up Reports Certifications of Expertise Equipment Calibration and Maintenance Log Collector's Permits Resumes Literature Procurement and P.O.'s Invoices and Backup Contract Special Studies and Proposals Health and SafetyRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 29 Table 1 (Continued)
Analysis, Interpretation, Reporting Distribution Lists Quarterly Data Reports Ad Hoc Reports

Data Management Field and Lab Data Sheets by Task and Month. Sample and Data Sheet Log Initial Data Listings by Task and Month Suspicious Entry Output by Task and Month Data File Edits by Task, Chronological Data Analysis Output by Task Outdated Copies by Anything General Data ManagementRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 30 EQUIPMENT CALIBRAT ION AND MAINTENANCE Measurement and analytical instruments used by Shaw as part of this program will be calibrated according to three classifications listed below. A calibration and equipment logbook will be maintained in the Tonawanda laboratory. All routin e and QA spot-check calibrations will be recorded in these log books . Routine servicing and repair of sampling gear, measurement and analytical instruments, and other equipment will be performed. Sampling gear will be inspected at the end of each sampling day, and problems noted in the calibration and equipment log book. Services a nd repairs performed on all equipment will
be noted.

Class I : These are instruments that must be veri fied and/or calibrate d against a reference standard each time they are used. Calibration is the responsibility of the user and all calibrations and adjustments will be recorded in a calibration record book. All instruments
in this class will be calibrate d prior to making measurements.

Class II : These are instruments that mu st be verified and/or calibra ted on a periodic basis. Calibrations are performed by the user, qua lified independent technicians, or the
manufacturers. Reference standards for Cla ss I instruments are included in Class II.
Verification of such reference standards ma y be by replacement (e.g., pH buffers) or by comparison to other independent standards. Reference standards used for calibrating Class
II instruments are identified in Table 2. Certif ication of reference standard accuracy is provided by the manufacturer, independent calib ration service, or personnel performing inhouse calibrations. Purchased standards include evidence of accuracy certified by the manufacturer (pH buffers, weight sets, filters, etc.). Cali bration by independent services restores instruments to original manufacturer 's specifications (e.g., Mettler) or provides correction factors. Calibrations performed by Shaw personnel (e.g., triple beam and spring balances, electronic meters) are recorded in the calibration log book.

Class III : These are instruments having no calibra tion requirements after purchase. This generally includes volumetric glassware, rulers, thermometers, etc. Such instrumentation isRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 31 used to the extent that accuracy of the inst ruments falls within accuracy limits of the procedures. Acceptable instrument calibration tolerances vary with the procedures being performed and the level of accuracy needed in the analysis. Calibration frequencies of instruments used in this program are in the SOP.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 32 AUDITS AND CONTROL LIMITS Shaw has designed a comprehensive auditing program to monitor the quality of data produced throughout the monitoring program. Th e auditing program is designed to monitor the reliability, accuracy, and truth of results re ported, to determine when corrective measures must be undertaken to provide a record of Shaw's quality assurance program and to assure an Average Outgoing Quality (AOQ) of 10 percen t for field and laboratory applications and two percent for data handling. Audits will be conducted by senior biologists or by representatives designated by the QA officer.

Field and Laboratory Procedure Audits In field tasks, the level of reliability will be monitored by placing a senior individual who has complete familiarity with the task into the sampling crew to allow him to monitor adherence to standard operating procedures and to check such things as accuracy of counts, identifications, and other measurements. All field sampling programs will be audited at least twice per year by the QA officer or his designee. Reprocessing of field samples will be conducted for those programs where it is feasible. The reprocessing will be conducted according to a CSP-1 procedure to assure an AOQ of 10 percen t. Reprocessing will be by an independent crew.

Laboratory quality assurance will be accomp lished by independently redoing a portion of the samples analyzed in the laboratory. The reprocessing will be scheduled according to CSP-I. In this way, a measure of validity and reliability in counts, id entifications, and other measurements will be obtained, and a 10 percen t AOQ will be assured. To assure a 10 percent AOQ, 100 percent of all samples will be inspected until 10 consecutive samples are accepted. When 10 acceptable units are found in succession, begin randomly sampling 10 percent of the samples. If a defective samp le is found, 100 percent in spection is resumed. All defective samples are repla ced with good (reworked) data from those samples. Field and laboratory quality control and quality assurance procedures by task are outlined as follows.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 33 Objective 1. Impingement A. Quality Control 1. Field Sampling SOP's
2. Use of Standard Data Sheets
3. CSP-1 Procedure to Assure 10 Percent AOQL B. Quality Assurance 1. Field Inspection by Senior Staff 2. Instrument Calibration as required

Objective 2. Entrainment A. Quality Control 1. Field Sampling SOP's 2. Laboratory Processing SOP's
3. Use of Standard Data Forms
4. CSP-1 Procedure to Assure 10 Percent AOQL B. Quality Assurance 1. Field and Laboratory Insp ection by Senior Staff 2. Instrument Calibration as required

Data Processing & Reporting Audits The level of accuracy of data files will be assure d by file audits and computer error routines. Data files will be audited for data input and r ecording errors by the responsible task leader scanning fields of each file a nd verifying 10 percent of the content of each file with the original data sheets. Computer error checks will be made for all species codes recorded against the species list.

When computer results are generated by programs, those programs will be tested with standard data sets to assure that the program produces accurate results. This will assure that data handling is accomplished successfully and that computer programming errors are absent. Any results from calculations not pe rformed by computer will be subject to a 10 percent spot check.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 34 Reporting The level of data quality in the data base will be monitored by using the above described procedures.

Project Files Project files will be subject to unscheduled audits. Files will be examined for completeness.

Documentation of Audits The quality assurance officer or his designated re presentative will report the results of audits in a memorandum to the project manager. Any non-conformances to the QA program or Standard Operating Procedures and recomme nded corrective actions (or completed actions if only minor corrections are necessary) will be listed in this memorandum. Audit memos will be filed in the quality assurance file. A dditionally, the following records will be kept of quality assurance checks:

• Field Procedures: All quality a ssurance checks will be documented in a QA field log book. This log will contai n a record of any observed deviations from st andard operating procedures and numerical results of auditing pr ocedures such as independent counts and species identifications.

• Laboratory Procedures: A record of all checks, results of quality assurance analysis and other related notations will be documented in a QA laboratory log book.

• Data File Processing Procedures: A log of all audit checks will be maintained. Program documentation will be such that steps will be easily followed by an independent auditor.

Errors which are detected during auditing proce dures will be corrected. In the event errors are detected subsequent to issuance of a repor t, the report will be amended to reflect the necessary changes.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 35 Control Limits and Nonconformances

Control limits
Control limits will be used as criteria for action, or for evaluati ng the significance of variations between duplicate measurements on the same sample.

Field and Laboratory Procedures Any deviations from SOP in field tasks that have not been authorized by the project manager will be considered significant. Diffe rences in counts, percentage agreement in identifications, and other measurement tasks which differ by greater than 10 percent will be considered significant. This 10 percent variation will be the definition of a sample which should be rejected in the CSP-l.

Data File Processing Procedures Any errors resulting from incorrect computer programs will be considered significant. Errors in computerized data files arising from data entry errors or observed by hand calculations may not exceed tw o percent for each file.

Reporting Errors in data tables and any other nume rical results may not exceed two percent.

Nonconformance

Determination of Nonconformance The quality assurance officer wi11 be re sponsible for designating nonconformances. He/she will immediately notify the project mana ger of a nonconformance. In the event that an audit reveals a process that exceeds its control limit, the officer may designate a
nonconformance or order additional auditin g prior to assigning a nonconformance designation. In addition, any member of the project team who becomes aware of aRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 36 deviation from SOP's or any requirement of the QA program shall indicate such to the project manager and quality assurance officer . If the officer determines it to be a
nonconformance he/she will document.

Resolution of Nonconformance If, in the opinion of the responsible staff members, a discrepancy will not significantly affect the outcome or the defensibi1ity of that portion of the project, this opinion will be so noted and written ju stification given for th is opinion, in consultation with the project manager. In this case, no additional action will be taken on already processed data. If discrepancies are judged to significantly affect the outcome of the project, the process wi11 be corrected and repeated where po ssib1e (e. g., samp1es from a nonconforming laboratory process wi11 be reworked, data from a nonconforming data file wi11 be checked in its entirety, etc.). In either cas e, plans for correcting the process which led to the nonconformance will be developed and impl emented. The quality assurance officer will be responsible for actions taken relative to tasks already performed and resolving nonconformances. If discrepanc ies are judged to si gnificantly affect the outcome or defensibility of a portion of the project, a copy of the audit memorandum will be forwarded immediately to the projec t manager and NRG representative.

Follow-up Report After correcting a nonconforman ce, the resolution of the problem and actions taken relative to tasks already pe rformed will be documented in a memorandum to the quality
assurance officer within two weeks. A c opy of this memo will be sent to the NRG representative, the project manager, and one filed with the orig inal audit memorandum.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 37 PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS The resume of the project manager constitutes evidence of experienced qualifications to be responsible for this project. The project mana ger will work with qualified scientists who will be responsible for designated tasks. Resu mes of these scientists constitute primary evidence of qualification. Additionally, the pr oject manager will be sufficiently familiar with the expertise of each scientist to attest to their qualifications.Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 38 APPENDIX B EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION PROCEDURES SHAW ENVIRONMENTAL INC.

Pesola Spring ScaleRevision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 39Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 1 

## Standard Operating Procedures*
Huntley Station Fish Impingement Program: March 2006 – March 2007
Revision-1 (6/6/2006)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Huntley Steam Station (Huntley) is located in the Town of Tonawanda, New York on
the eastern bank of the Tonawanda Channel of the upper Niagara River, approximately 1.5 miles downstream of the head of Grand Island, New York. The Town of Tonawanda is located approximately mid-way between the City of Buffalo and the C ity of Niagara Falls,
New York.
Shaw Environmental Inc. (Shaw) has been retained to conduct a one year study at the NRG-owned Huntley Steam St ation beginning in March 2006. The objective of the impingement sampling program is to identify and quantify the fish impinged on the traveling screens at Huntley during normal plant operations . Data collected for this project will be sufficient to characterize temporal trends of impingement abundance and to develop a
baseline abundance estimate.
This Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) document has been prepared to provide a basis to assure that the Impingement Program at Huntley is conducted in a scientifically defensible manner. It is required that all personnel associat ed with the program understand and strictly adhere to all the proc edures described in this document. No
variances to this document ar e permitted without documented permission from the project manager or assistant project mana ger. A copy of this SOP is to be available for reference at all locations where components of this stud y are performed. Revisions to this document may be periodically distributed. It is the res ponsibility of all people working on the project to ensure that they are workin g with the most recent copy (e .g.,Rev X) of the SOP. When a revision is received, the prior document (appr opriate page(s) or entire SOP) is to be returned to the project manager to destroy.
* Underlined passages reflect changes from previous revision.Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 2 2.0 EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS
The following equipment is to be on hand during each impingement sampling event:

o Personal safety gear (safety glasses, hard hat, ear protection, safety boots)

o Job Safety Analysis Form

o Current SOP

o Fish identification taxonomic key(s)

o Impingement monitoring data forms & specifications (Figur es 1 & 2; Tables 1 & 2)

o Impingement master code list

o Fish processing table

o (4) Removable impingement collection traps

o Long handled dip nets

o (10) Collection buckets (2 gallon or larger)

o Watch or clock

o (50) 5-gallon or larger plastic bags

o Pencils

o Fine tip black permanent markers

o Measuring board

o Top loading balance (calibrated)

o Spring balance (calibrated)

o Thermometer

o Measuring board

o Freezer

o Freezer sample logRevision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 3 3.0 PROCEDURES
3.1 Impingement Sampling 1. Impingement samples will be collected from the traveling scr eens in Screenhouse 1 every week for one year, resulting in 52 sampling events. Each sampling event will consist of a 24-hour impingement sampling period. A schedule of dates to be sampled will be provided by the project manager or assistant project manager.

2. The 24-hour sampling period will be divi ded into four, 6-hour sampling blocks:

SAMPLE BLOCK START END
1 10:00 hrs 16:00 hrs

2 16:00 hrs 22:00 hrs

3 22:00 hrs 04:00 hrs

4 04:00 hrs 10:00 hrs

3. Prior to initiation of each shift, revi ew and sign Job Safety Analysis Form

4. Determine that the facility’s main c ooling water pumps drawing water into Screenhouse 1 are operating.

5. If screens have been operating in the c ontinuous mode prior to the beginning of collection initiation, the collection can begin as soon as the return sluice is cleared of any residual fish and debris. If not, the screens must be allowed to operate for a minimum of one (1) screen rotation (typically about 10 minutes) to clear residual fish and debris from the screen surface. Al l screens should be operating at the same speed during the collection. Note excep tions from normal pump/screen operations and screen speed in comments

6. In general, sampling is initiated by lowering the four collection tr aps into the return sluiceways. Two will be placed into the upper fish return sluice (the larger one between Screens 2 and 3 and the smaller one between Screens 4 and 5). The other two traps will be placed in comparable locations in the lower trash return sluice. Note that during low debris and fish loadi ng times it may not be necessary to use the larger traps. Note the start ti me (24-hr clock).Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 4 7. Near the beginning of each collection period measure the water temperature (nearest 0.5 O C) from the sluice, obtain air temp erature, and estimate wind speed and direction, and wave height (omit height when conditions such as fog or darkness prevent observations)

8. From all traps in use, retr ieve and count the total numbe r of fish (i.e. all traps combined) that are collected during the fi rst 30 minutes of each sampling period. Determine the sampling time within a samp le period based on the number of fish counted and the following table:
Subsampling Decision Criteria for Sampling Ba sed on the Number of Fish Counted in 30 Minutes

9. Periodically check the traps for clogging an d verify that the screen or pump operating status has not changed. Note exceptions from normal pump/screen operations and screen speed, along with the time of occurrence, in comments.

10. When debris is removed from the traps, it should be inspected for fish prior to disposal. Retain any fish to be included with the time block sample.

11. If debris loading is high and a there the pot ential for an overtop of sluices because of clogging of the impingement traps, it may become necessary to stop sampling early. If this occurs, the Sample End Time is to be recorded on the data sheet and reason for curtailing the sample is to be noted. The impingement traps are to be cleaned out and fish retained for processing. If it beco mes apparent debris load lessens within the period after trap removal the traps can be put back in if appropriate. Record the total time the traps are effectively fishing in the period.

12. During high debris loads it is permitted to only use the two large traps between screens 2 and 3, since they are less like ly to clog. DO NOT USE ONLY ONE OF THE SMALL TRAPS. Record on the Impi ngement Header Sheet whether small Number of Fish Counted (30 Minutes) Duration of Sample

0-112 6-hours
113-225 3-hours
226-450 1.5-hour

>450 45-minutesRevision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 5 traps are in (1) or out (0). DO NOT CHANGE FROM USE OF THE SMALL TRAPS WITHIN A SAMPLING PERIOD!

13. At the end of each sample period (or subsampled time), clear the fish return and trash sluices. Include these fish in the sample. Place the contents of th e return sluice trap into buckets and reset the trap for the next sample period. At the option of the shift leader, fish may be proce ssed during a sample period by carefully removing fish from the return sluice trap.

14. Identify all fish collected to the lowest pr acticable taxonomic level, sort (typically by species), and enumerate.

15. Determine and record additional information consisting of individual lengths (nearest 1 mm) and weights (nearest 1 g for fish le ss than 100 g, nearest 5 g for fish from 100 g to 2 kg, and nearest 100 g for fish greater than 2 kg) for each individual, or up to 25 randomly selected individuals (whichever is smaller), of each species present in each sample period. Examine each of the meas ured fish for further biocharacteristics as follows:

16. Determine whether each measured fish was alive or likely dead when impinged (base determination on color of gills and/or cloudine ss of eyes as instructed during training program). Record if determined to be dead on data sheet.

17. Inspect each measured individual for any ma rks or diseases. If present, record according to Table 1.

18. Fish that cannot be identified in the field ar e to be placed in a sample jar (or freezer), preserved with a suitable preservative, and taken to the Shaw laboratory for identification. If necessary, fish specimens will be sent to a recognized expert on fish identification. A voucher specime n for each species collected will be maintained as a reference co llection for identification c onfirmation. Color pictures will be used for large specimens.

19. After processing is complete, place the entir e sample into a labeled plastic bag and place into a storage freezer for QA/QC pr ocedures as described in Section 4.0.Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 6IMPINGEMENT MONITORING(Form Code: IMP-1: 06/07/2006 Revision 2)Facility Sample No. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5H 11 ofDirection Use. .Common Name ID No.Condition Comment12345678901234567890Comments:QC Field Data(Date & Coder)Data Entry(Date & Coder)QC Data Entry(Date & Coder)LowerMO DAY YRAir Water UpperWindTemperatureCollectionPeriodPump Operation Screen OperationSample PeriodStart Time End TimeCommentSpeed Wave Height Coder/Crew CoderTotal NumberSpecies CodePageFieldSmall BasketsData EntryMarkLength Weight SexFigure 1Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 7Figure 2Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 8 Table 1. Data Form Specification s Huntley Impingement Monitoring

HEADER INFORMATION

Variable Units Comment Facility H1 Huntley Station Date Month- Day- Year Collection Period * Sample Number Sequential through year Start Time 24 hr. clock End Time 24 hr. clock Pump Operation * Screen Operation * Air temperature o Centigrade Water Temperature o Centigrade Small Baskets Alpha Numeric 1 = In 0 = Out Wave Height feet Wind Speed MPH Wind Direction Alpha Numeric N, NW, NE, S, SW, SE Coder/Crew Alpha Numeric Initials Use * Comments * Species ID Number Unique sequential number assigned within each replicate for each specimen Length millimeter Total length to nearest 1 mm Weight Gram 0-100g: to the nearest 1g 100g-2kg: to the nearest 5g >2kg: to the nearest 100g Mark * Disease Total Number *See Huntley Master C ode List (Table 2.)Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 9 TABLE 2. HUNTLEY MASTER CODE LIST

COLLECTION PERIOD (IMPINGEMENT)

SAMPLE BLOCK START END 1 10:00 hrs 16:00 hrs
2 16:00 hrs 22:00 hrs
3 22:00 hrs 04:00 hrs
4 04:00 hrs 10:00 hrs

PUMP OPERATION
0 = Pump not operating 1 = Pump operating

SCREEN OPERATION
0 = Screen not operating 1 = Screen operating 2 = Screen stoplogged

SMALL BASKETS 0 = Out 1 = In

USE

1 = No Problem 2 = Sampling problems encountered – Data useabl e for analysis other than catch / effort 3 = Field Void 4 = Lab Void 5 = Sampling problems encountered – Data not useable for length frequency analysis 6 = Data Valid but incomplete

COMMENTS
X = Indicates comment will affect data interpreta tion. Also indicates presence of incidental (non-computerized) data on data sheet.Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 10 LIFE STAGE

0 = Undetermined 1 = Yolk – sac larva 2 = Post Yolk – sac larva 3 = Egg 4 = Adult 5 = Juvenile 6 = Yearling

MARK
01 = Adipose 02 = Adipose – Left Ventral 03 = Adipose – Right Ventral 04 = Adipose – Left Ve ntral – Right Ventral 05 = Adipose – Left Pectoral 06 = Adipose - Right Pectoral 07 = Adipose – Left Maxillary 08 = Left Pectoral – Right Maxillary 09 = Right Pectoral – Right Maxillary 10 = Left Ventral 11 = Right Ventral 12 = Left Ventral – Right Ventral 13 = Left Pectoral 14 = Right Pectoral 15 = Left Pectoral – Right Pectoral 16 = Left Pectoral – Left Ventral 17 = Left Pectoral – Right Ventral 18 = Right Pectoral – Left Ventral 19 = Dorsal 20 = Dorsal – Left Ventral 21 = Dorsal – Right Ventral 22 = Dorsal – Right Ve ntral – Left Ventral 23 = Dorsal - Left Pectoral 24 = Dorsal – Right Pectoral 25 = Anal 26 = Right Maxillary 27 = Left Maxillary 28 = Dorsal – Adipose 29 = Adipose – Right Maxillary 30 = Left Pectoral - Left Maxillary 31 = Left Ventral – Left MaxillaryRevision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 11 32 = Left Ventral – Right Maxillary
MARK (continued)
59 = Unspecified Fin Clip (describe under comments) 60 = Unspecified Dye Injection (describe under comments) 70 = Unspecified Brand or Ta ttoo (describe under comments) 80 = Unspecified Tags (describe under comments) 81 = Numbered Jaw Tag 82 = Numbered Floy Tag 83 = Coded Electromagnetic Tag

CONDITION

0 = Live 1 = Dead 2 = Gas Bubble 3 = Scale Damage 4 = Blackspot 5 = Skin Ulcers/Furunculous 6 = Wound 7 = Fungus 8 = Lamprey Scar 9 = Other 10 = Multiple Diseases: See Comments

COMMENT
X = Indicates comment will affect data interpreta tion. Also indicates presence of incidental (non-computerized) data on data sheetRevision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 12 NYSDEC FISH SPECIES CODE LIST

Code Common Name

286 Alabama Shad 289 Alewife 270 Alligator Gar 971 Ameiurus sp 206 American Brook Lamprey 276 American Eel 290 American Shad 41 Anchovy sp. 293 Atlantic Herring 292 Atlantic Menhaden 327 Atlantic Salmon 262 Atlantic Sturgeon 296 Atlantic Thread Herring 616 Banded Darter 531 Banded Killifish 593 Banded Sunfish 370 Bigeye Chub 425 Bigmouth Buffalo 386 Bigmouth Shiner 359 Bitterling 426 Black Buffalo 442 Black Bullhead 603 Black Crappie 430 Black Redhorse 388 Blackchin Shiner 316 Blackfin Cisco 389 Blacknose Shiner 622 Blackside Darter 563 Blackspotted Stickleback 313 Bloater 441 Blue Catfish 621 Blue Pike 420 Blue Sucker 285 Blueback Herring 628 Bluebreast Darter 598 Bluegill 592 Bluespotted Sunfish 400 Bluntnose Minnow 271 Bowfin 27 Bowfin sp. 368 Brassy Minnow 382 Bridle Shiner Code

449 Common Name

Brindled Madtom 545 Brook Silverside 561 Brook Stickleback 329 Brook Trout 444 Brown Bullhead 328 Brown Trout 493 Burbot 966 Carpiodes sp 64 Catfish sp. 967 Catostomus sp 340 Central Mudminnow 360 Central Stoneroller 349 Chain Pickerel 445 Channel Catfish 619 Channel Darter 202 Chestnut Lamprey 322 Chinook Salmon 311 Cisco 320 Coho Salmon 378 Comely Shiner 365 Common Carp 385 Common Shiner 961 Cottus sp 406 Creek Chub 421 Creek Chubsucker 367 Cutlip Minnow 325 Cutthroat Trout 314 Deepwater Cisco 873 Deepwater Sculpin 125 Drum sp. 402 Eastern Blacknose Dace 341 Eastern Mudminnow 605 Eastern Sand Darter 369 Eastern Silvery Minnow 381 Emerald Shiner 973 Enneacanthus sp 968 Erimyzon sp 977 Etheostoma sp 956 Exoglossum sp 407 Fallfish 609 Fantail Darter 401 Fathead MinnowRevision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 13 Code

399 Common Name

Finescale Dace 450 Flathead Catfish 560 Fourspine Stickleback 700 Freshwater Drum 26 Gar sp. 620 Gilt Darter 294 Gizzard Shad 159 Goby sp. 431 Golden Redhorse 377 Golden Shiner 305 Goldeye 361 Goldfish Cyprinidae 364 Grass Carp 346 Grass Pickerel 374 Gravel Chub 433 Greater Redhorse 595 Green Sunfish 606 Greenside Darter 291 Gulf Menhaden 40 Herring sp. 288 Hickory Shad 417 Highfin Carpsucker 375 Hornyhead Chub 957 Hybognathus sp 969 Ictiobus sp 608 Iowa Darter 383 Iron color Shiner 613 Johnny Darter 315 Kiyi 363 Lake Chub 422 Lake Chubsucker 261 Lake Sturgeon 330 Lake Trout 312 Lake Whitefish

2 Lamprey sp. 601 Largemouth Bass 612 Least Darter 974 Lepomis sp 588 Lepomis sp. 618 Logperch 599 Longear Sunfish 621 Longhead Darter 403 Longnose Dace 268 Longnose Gar Code

418 Common Name
Longnose Sucker 958 Luxilus SP 959 Macrhybopsis sp 448 Margined Madtom 975 Micropterus sp 397 Mimic Shiner 61 Minnow sp. 306 Mooneye 42 Mooneye sp. 865 Mottled Sculpin 204 Mountain Brook Lamprey 970 Moxostoma sp 590 Mud Sunfish 48 Mudminnow sp. 532 Mummichog 348 Muskellunge 982 Myoxocephalus sp 564 Ninespine Stickleback 960 Nocomis sp 203 Northern Brook Lamprey 423 Northern Hog Sucker 347 Northern Pike E 398 Northern Redbelly Dace 961 Notropis sp 972 Noturus sp 201 Ohio Lamprey 266 Paddlefish 263 Pallid Sturgeon 408 Pearl Dace 978 Perca sp 109 Perch sp. 979 Percina sp 962 Phoxinus sp 49 Pike sp. 963 Pimephales 319 Pink Salmon 976 Pomoxis sp 387 Pugnose Minnow 380 Pugnose Shiner 596 Pumpkinseed 323 Pygmy 416 Quillback 607 Rainbow Darter 335 Rainbow SmeltRevision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 14 Code

326 Common Name

Rainbow Trout 594 Redbreast Sunfish 589 Redbreast X Pumpkinseed 345 Redfin Pickerel 396 Redfin Shiner 362 Redside Dace 964 Rhinichthys sp 415 River Carpsucker 376 River Chub 624 River Darter 429 River Redhorse 591 Rock Bass 393 Rosyface Shiner 792 Round Goby 295 Round Herring 324 Round Whitefish 405 Rudd 395 Sand Shiner 960 Sander sp 379 Satinfin Shiner 625 Sauger 174 Sculpin sp. 207 Sea Lamprey 965 Semotilus sp 623 Shield Darter 318 Short jaw Cisco 432 Shorthead Redhorse 310 Shortjaw Cisco 317 Shortnose Cisco 269 Shortnose Gar 260 Shortnose Sturgeon 264 Shovelnose Sturgeon 373 Silver Chub 428 Silver Redhorse 391 Silver Shiner 409 Silverjaw Minnow 287 Skipjack Herring 866 Slimy Sculpin 205 Sliver Lamprey 600 Smallmouth Bass 424 Smallmouth Buffalo 434 Smallmouth Redhorse 44 Smelt sp. 321 Sockeye Salmon Code

332 Common Name
Splake 867 Spoonhead Sculpin 533 Spotfin Killifish 394 Spotfin Shiner 390 Spottail Shiner 611 Spotted Darter 267 Spotted Gar 427 Spotted Sucker 99 Stickleback sp. 446 Stonecat 371 Streamline Chub 577 Striped Bass 534 Striped Killifish 384 Striped Shiner 372 Sturgeon Chub 24 Sturgeon sp. 62 Sucker sp. 108 Sunfish sp. 392 Swallowtail Shiner 610 Swamp Darter 447 Tadpole Madtom 105 Temperate Bass sp. 411 Tench 614 Tessellated Darter 562 Threespine Stickleback 350 Tiger Musky 333 Tiger Trout 366 Tonguetied Minnow 67 Topminnows sp. 461 Trout Perch 43 Trout sp. 999 Unknown Spp 615 Variegate Darter 626 Walleye 597 Warmouth 404 Western Blacknose Dace 540 Western Mosquitofish 516 White Bass 440 White Catfish 602 White Crappie 575 White Perch 419 White Sucker 443 Yellow Bullhead 617 Yellow PerchRevision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 15 3.2 Collection Efficiency Testing

1. Collection efficiency tests wi ll be periodically conducted to assess the performance of the screens and sluice system in removi ng fish from the intake system. Collection efficiency testing will occur one time each season (January-March, April-June, JulySeptember, and October-December). The exac t dates will be provided by the project manager or assistant project manager.

2. Fish tested will include target species (actua l species to be decided; likely to consist of frequently impinged species based on prev ious studies and selected game species) that are collected during sche duled impingement sampling.

3. After completion of any required QA/QC tasks these fish will be separated by species, bagged in lots of 100 individuals, if available, and frozen.

4. Additional live specimens may be provided for testing.

5. Just prior to testing, thaw a nd mark the fish with a readil y identifiable mark (fin clip and/or dye). Each of the four traveling sc reens will be tested, so a total of four, 100- fish lots of each species will be marked. A different mark will be supplied by the project manager for each travel ing screen, so each lot of 100 fish will be uniquely marked. This will allow for easy identification of the release point (screen) for each recaptured individual.

6. Release a lot of 100 marked fish of one spec ies just upstream of ea ch of the traveling screens. Make sure that the proper marked lot of fish is released in front of the proper screen. Record the time of releas e and the mark used for each screen. Multiple fish species can be tested at the same time

7. The fish sluice will be monitored for 24-hours for the return of the test fish. Record the fish returned by species and type of ma rk on the collection efficiency return log. (Impingement results will be adjusted base d on the calculated collection efficiency).Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 16 4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALIT Y CONTROL (QA/QC) PLAN
The goal of this QA/QC Plan is to ensure that work performance and resulting work products are of the highest quality and provided in a cost-effectiv e, scientifically defensible, and timely manner. All deliverables are subject to QA/QC guidelines, checks, and reviews. In addition to the standard QA/QC procedur es and safeguards normally instituted in the completion of any sampling program (Appendix A), the following specific procedures will
be instituted.

1. A reference collection of all species of fish found in samples taken during this project will be retained ( photos or preserved specimens). A specimen(s) of each species (of various sizes, if possible) will be photogra phed or preserved and be available for reference should any ques tions of fish identification arise.

2. A thorough system of logging and tracking of data will be instituted and followed.

3. Personnel will be trained and approved to perform required tasks. Included in the approval process is proficienc y to identify Great Lakes fish species, and the ability to use a taxonomic key.

4. A Continuous Sampling Plan (CSP-1), quality control protocol used by the United States Government to verify the acceptabilit y of results will be incorporated into the program to insure an average outgoing qua lity limit (AOQL). This procedure calls for an initial complete inspection of a specified number of samples (depends on required AOQL). If all of th e initially inspected samplings or error free, a randomly selected sample within a block of samples is selected. If the random sample passes, a random sample out of the next block will be processed. This will continue unless a sample fails inspection after which the plan will revert to complete re-inspection until the prescribed number of samples pass.

o The CSP-1 will be used to assure the average outing quality limit (AOQL) for fish processing exceeds 90 percent.

o Prior to impingent collections, the pr oject manager or assistant project manager will select collections that are to be re-inspected for QC, as identified by sample number. The technician(s) will not be aware which collections are subject to QC re-inspection until after processing is complete.Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 17 o Initially, five (5) consecutive collections will be processed twice, the first time in accordance with Section 2 and the second time by a person other than the original sample processor.

o A collection is termed defective if 10 percent or more of the total fish of a particular species has been miscounted or misidentified. When the total number of fish in the sample is less than ten, a collection will be defective if a recount shows that more than one specimen was missed. Discrepancies will be resolved and the data sheets updated as required.

o The 100% re-inspection of collections w ill continue until five (5) consecutive non-defective collections have been examined. A schedule of one QC collection in every four collections will then commence.

o The sample number for the collection to be re-inspected will be randomly chosen from a lot of four consecutive samples.

o The selected collection will be reinse rted as described above. If this collection is defective the re-inspection will revert to consecutive sample analyses until five (5) cons ecutive collections pass th e described criteria.