2006-2007 Impingement &

Entrainment Study

NRG Huntley Power, LLC.

Huntley Steam Station

SPDES PERMIT NO. NY 0001023

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 conducted 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 impingement abundance were collected 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 ichthyoplankton were calculated by life stage and by 

month for all taxa collected based on the maximum 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 intakes. Estimates of the numbers of fish 

impinged on the traveling screens were also calculated 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 collection efficiency multiplier based on the results 

obtained during the impingement sampling. 

Using the sample collection factor and maximum cooling water flow provides a calculation 

baseline estimate of expected impingement and entrainment. The calculation baseline 

information developed as a result of this study will be used as a part of a later Comprehensive 

Demonstration Study and any subsequent 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 collected 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 collected. In impingement collections a total of 35 fish taxa were 

identified over the study-year. Over the year 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 percent of the yolk sac larvae were white sucker 

(though collected on a relatively few dates), and the clupeids (herring 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 estimated entrainment of eggs in the 2006-2007 one 

year study was less than during a one year study conducted at Huntley in 1982-1983, while the 

numbers of yolk sac and post yolk sac 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 this 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 sized fish relative to the Calculation Baseline 

condition; standard 0.375-inch3/8” 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 percent of the total impingement for the year. 

Next in order were gizzard shad accounting for 0.44 percent of the total, alewife at 0.08 

percent, and rock bass at 0.05 percent. Emerald shiner, gizzard shad, rainbow smelt, yellow 
iii 

perch, rock bass, and spottail shiner were collected in all study months. Relatively fewer fish 

were collected in July, August and September compared to other months. No Federal or New 

York State listed endangered, threatened or special 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 ..................................................................................................................... 20

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

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

4.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 30
v 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1-1 Location of the Huntley Steam Station ....................................................... 8 

Figure 3-1 Presence of Ichthyoplankton Collected by Sample Week, April through 

September, 2006, at the NRG Huntley Station. ..........................................30 

Figure 3-2 Entrained Egg Species Composition 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 Larvae 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 ................................................51 
vi 

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 Composition 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 the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007 .........36 

Table 3-4 Estimated Number and Density (#/100 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 .................................................................................47 
vii 

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 .........................................................................................51 
viii 

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 Standard Operating Procedures 
1 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

1.1 Background 

Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) 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 traveling screens and then through the entire 

cooling system. 

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published regulations 

applicable to existing electric generating facilities (Phase II facilities) in the Federal 

Register on July 9, 2004. These regulations, codified 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 sections 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 regulations. 6 NYCRR, Section 

704.5 of the State code addresses permitting related to water intake issues for Huntley. 

The EPA 316(b) Phase II regulations establish performance standards for CWIS of 

existing electric generating facilities that withdraw 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 require an 80-95% reduction in impingement 

mortality (IM) and a 60-90% reduction in entrainment (E). The waterbody type on which 
2 

the facility is located, the capacity utilization rate, and the magnitude of the design intake 

flow relative to the waterbody flow determine 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 regulation requires that each affected facility develop and 

submit a Proposal for Information Collection (PIC) to the applicable permitting agency 

prior to implementation of data collection activities. 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 owned and operated by NRG Huntley Power, 

LLC. It is located on the upper Niagara River; which flows between two of the Great 

Lakes (Lake Erie and Lake Ontario). Even though the station uses less than 5% of the 

annual average flow, for the EPA Phase II Regulation, the Niagara River is to be treated 

as a part of the Great Lakes and is therefore subject to the performance standards for 

entrainment. The station has a capacity utilization of greater than 15 percent. Therefore, 

based on these location criteria and the capacity utilization criteria, Huntley 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 abundance 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 larvae were likely to be entrained (i.e. April 

through mid-September) and once per month during the other months of a one year study. 

On March 6, 2006 the NYSDEC sent comments 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 during the 1916-1931 period. The 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 units totaling 95,000 kw were retired and dismantled to make 

room for units 67 and 68, which are each rated at 200,000 kw. At this time, the nominal 

station electrical output totaled approximately 1,150,000 kw, all operating with once 

through Niagara River cooling water. 

Units 5, 6, 7, 61 and 62 were retired and dismantled during 1962-1963 leaving the 

remaining four nominal 100,000 kw units and two nominal 200,000 kw units for an 
4 

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 operating. 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) permit (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 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 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 structures consist of two screen houses (Screen House 1 and 

Screen House 2). 

Currently Screen House 1 provides water for 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 designed to exclude floating 

debris and ice from the intake forebay. The water continues into the screen house 

containing bar racks, traveling water screens, circulating water pumps, and house service 

water pumps. The pumps are located behind the screens on a common intake tunnel 

system. Units 67 and 68 draw a total of 260,000 gpm (16.41 m3

/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 taken out of service and 

these bays sealed. Bays 5-9, which had been 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 debris washed from the screens, and other 

features to enable the screens to remove impinged fish alive from the screens. A fish 

return system was installed to return fish and 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 service water is approximately 361,000 gpm 

(22.78 m3

/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 skimmer walls at the forebay entrances and a 

screen building containing bar racks and traveling water screens. Water is drawn through 

the screen house into a common intake tunnel system, which conveys the screened water 

to the circulating water and house service water pumps, which are located in an auxiliary 

building. Screen House 2 has six screen bays, with four in service. The traveling screens 

in Screen House 2 are standard traveling screens with no specific features for removing 

impinged fish and there is no fish return system. 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 outfalls. Each screen house has a conduit system 

that can provide re-circulation of heated water 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 develop an estimate of IM&E at Huntley 

under a baseline condition (i.e. for the IM&E study calculated 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 standardized format generally known as the 

facility IM&E baseline condition. The USEPA and NYSDEC define a baseline plant 

configuration to include a shoreline intake and traveling screens fitted with 0.375-inch 

mesh. The baseline IM&E numbers are, for example, to be adjusted to correct for any 

mitigative technologies already in place to mitigate IM&E impacts. The magnitude of 

IM&E is calculated relative to a facility baseline condition. A further calculation can 

standardize the number of all species of fish, eggs and larvae impinged or entrained to the 

equivalent of age-1 fish. As noted the standardized 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 the rule’s required performance standards are met through 

present and/or future operations and technological mitigative measures. 

Section 2 provides the field, laboratory and the data analyses procedures used to develop 

the entrainment and impingement baseline estimates. Also included in Section 2 is a 

description of the quality control and quality assurance procedures used to provide 

scientifically defensible data. Section 3 presents the results of the study include the 

baseline estimates of both entrainment and impingement at Huntley. 

Appendix A is a list of the common and scientific 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 catch and the volume adjusted entrainment 
7 

estimate by sample period. Appendix D provides summary tables for each impingement 

sampling date with an estimate of impingement adjusted for subsampling and number of 

screens sampled. Appendix E has the length frequency distribution for selected impinged 

species. Appendix F lists the environmental conditions (air temperature, water 

temperature, wind speed and direction) recorded 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 the 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 gpm 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 ft2/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 Design
10 

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 the intake water that 

passed through the screening systems and were entrained in the Huntley cooling water 

intake system (CWIS) during plant operations. 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 during 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 hrs
11 

A high capacity trash pump with a 3-inch intake opening was used to collect the samples. 

A minimum of 100 m3 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 above and below mid-depth. A known volume 

of intake water was filtered through a 300-micron-series mesh plankton net. At the 

conclusion of each sample collection, the contents of the plankton net was transferred to 

sample jars, preserved with an alcohol based preservative solution, labeled, and sent to a 

laboratory for analysis. 

For each sample collected, the following information 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 and completion of the sampling event; and 

• Names of the collectors. 

In the laboratory the sample contents were sieved through a 0.125-inch mesh to exclude 

all material that would have been impinged. Fish eggs and larvae collected were then 

removed from the background material and placed into 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 larvae that retained their yolk sac were 

categorized as yolk-sac larvae. Larvae that had completely absorbed their yolk sac but 

had not developed their full complement of fin 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 were categorized as juveniles. 
12 

Total length (TL), to the nearest 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 abundance data to account for differences in 

sample volumes, the raw number of ichthyoplankton for a 100 m3 of sample volume was 

calculated. In most cases 100 m3

 was the actual volume sampled in the field. If the field 

sample volume was less than or greater than 100 m3 the densities of the collected 

ichthyoplankton was calculated by dividing the number of ichthyoplankton collected in 

each sample by the volume of water filtered during the collection of that sample to 

determine number per m3

 of water. This was then multiplied by 100 to determine the raw 

number of ichthyoplankton collected in a 100 m3 sample. Raw numbers per 100 m3 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 maximum 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. Similarly, the daily entrainment estimates were 

summed over the year to determine 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 and continued to March 20, 2007 (Appendix 

B). A total of 208 impingement samples were collected from 2006-2007. 
13 

Impinged fish were collected from the traveling screen wash over a 24-hour period. 

Sample collection baskets of a mesh configuration appropriate to sample from fish 

impinged on 0.5 x 0.125-inch mesh traveling screens were placed in the sluiceway of the 

fish return system and from the trash sluices to collect fish and/or trash washed from four 

traveling screens. Due to the proximity of the traveling screen to the screen house wall, it 

was not possible to sample from the discharge of the fifth (southernmost) traveling 

screen. 

The impingement data for the other four screens was used to estimate impingement for 

the last screen. Depending on the debris and fish load either two 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 four 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 divided 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 practicable 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 present, 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 clogging with fish, partial backwatering of 

sluices, and the potential for overflow and invalidation of the sample. To avoid this, near 

continuous monitoring, removal of fish from the 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 required that all fish were retained. 

During periods of high fish impingement, NRG requested that the NYSDEC permit a 

modified subsampling routine based on procedures approved by the NYSDEC for a 1987 

impingement study at the NRG Dunkirk Steam Station. Data collected using this 

subsampling technique resulted in a valid estimate 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 collection 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 collections 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 water 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 and completion of the sampling event; and 

• Names of the collectors. 

Fish were typically processed 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 performance of the screens and 

sluice system in removing fish from the water flow from the intake, and the effectiveness 

of the sampling equipment. Collection efficiency 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 equipment from being overwhelmed and 

overtopped, collection efficiency testing required that the samplers collect for the entire 
16 

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 periods, collection efficiency testing could not be performed. 

For this reason only three collection efficiency studies could be performed; September 

19-20, 2006, December 18-19, 2006, and March 19-20, 2007. 

When possible, the fish tested included species/sizes that were collected during scheduled 

impingement sampling. These fish were supplemented by fish purchased from a bait 

dealer. Fish were separated by species, bagged in lots of 100 individuals, if available, 

and frozen. Just prior to testing, the fish were thawed and marked (fin clip). Up to 100 

fish of each species to be tested 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 sluices were continuously monitored for 24-hours 

for the return of the test fish. For each test, 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 counted) were adjusted first by extrapolating 

the number of fish collected in a subsampling 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 sample period from four traveling screens was 

adjusted to account for the fish not collected 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 fifth 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 number 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 the number of fish impinged per m3

. Total flow for a 

sample period was determined by adding the maximum 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 m3 of flow was multiplied by the total maximum flow from 

all pumps (maximum plant flow) for Screen House 1 (1,417,258 m3

/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 the inverse of the average CE value for all 

species/lengths tested. 

Linear interpolation was used to obtain impingement 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 sample 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. Similarly, the daily impingement estimates were 

summed over the year to determine the annual estimate. 

The weekly, monthly, and annul impingement estimates for Screen House 1 were 

extrapolated to determine the estimated impingement 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 m3

) and Screen 

House 2 (1,968,414 m3), to determine the estimated impingement in Screen House 2. 

Daily, weekly, and annual impingement estimates were then summed for the two screen 

houses to provide an estimated total 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 deliverables were subject to QA/QC guidelines, checks, and reviews. 

Immediately after the Impingement and Entrainment Sampling Plans were approved by 

the resource agencies, a Standard Operating 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 consistently throughout the 

project; and 

• It could be used as a basis 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 instrument calibration, sampling schedule, detailed 

procedures for each sampling task, pass-fail criteria, sampling handling and disposition 

(including chain-of-custody procedures), standardized data sheets, personnel training, 

nonconformance reports and corrective actions, safety and accident reporting and 

documentation, and specimen reference collection. 

All sampling was conducted in strict adherence 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 satisfied the goals of the study. 

A Continuous Sampling Plan (CSP-1), quality control protocol used by the US 

government to verify the acceptability of results was incorporated into the program to 

insure an average outgoing quality limit (AOQL). This procedure calls for an initial 

complete inspection of a specified number of samples (depends on required AOQL). If 
19 

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-inspection until the prescribed number of samples 

passed. 

In the laboratory, independent CSP-1 programs were used to insure the quality of sample 

sorting (i.e. separating ichthyoplankton from the extraneous material) and for counts and 

identification of the ichthyoplankton. An average outgoing quality limit of less than 10 

percent discrepancy was specified for all field and laboratory tasks. 

The procedure was used to check the accuracy 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 sample collection and analysis and later entered 

into electronic spreadsheets/databases. The data was subjected to several QA/QC 

validation procedures. For example, initial 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 fish 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 screens 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 the numbers of entrained fish but in so 

doing increased the numbers of smaller fish impinged. This is an advantage relative to 

fish protection since the 0.5 x 0.125-inch mesh retains the older larval and/or juvenile 

life-stages that have a greater value relative to age-1 equivalence, 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 return should then provide 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 were collected in entrainment samples in 2006-

2007 (Table 3-1). Although fish eggs and larvae were identified to the lowest taxonomic 

group possible, some specimens could not be identified due to meristic similarities (e.g. 

herrings, minnows, and trout species) or damage to key identifying characteristics. 

Rainbow smelt, common carp, minnows and trout were the only taxa collected as eggs. 

A few juvenile (based on meristics) rainbow smelt, brown bullhead and yellow perch that 

passed through the 0.125 inch prescreening mesh also were collected. 

Under maximum cooling water flow conditions, an estimated 231.0 x 106 

ichthyoplankton would have been entrained at Huntley (both screen houses) (Table 3-1). 

Although sampling took place over 12 consecutive months, entrained organisms were 

only collected from April 18 through September 12 (Figure 3-1). No entrainment 

occurred in October through March. 
21 

An estimated 23.5 x 106 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 entrained in April at a 

rate of 525 eggs per 100 cubic meters (Table 3-3). Eggs were entrained at lesser rates in 

May through September. Of the eggs entrained, 89.9 percent were rainbow smelt, 2.0 

percent were minnow species, 1.0 percent common carp, 1.0 percent trout species, and 

6.1 percent unidentified eggs (Figure 3-2). 

An estimated 39.7 x 106

 yolk-sac larvae would have been entrained under maximum 

cooling water flow conditions (Table 3-2). Yolk sac larvae represented 17.2 percent of 

the entrained ichthyoplankton. Eleven taxa of ichthyoplankton were present as yolk sac 

larvae. They were first present in the entrainment samples in May and were present each 

month through August (Figure 3-1). Yolk sac larvae were absent in all other months. In 

June, 94.6 percent of the annual post yolk sac larval entrainment occurred at a rate of 

1,110 larvae per cubic meter (Table 3-3). The only species of yolk sac larvae entrained in 

May were yellow perch and white sucker, both early season spawners. Eleven taxa were 

entrained as yolk sac larvae in June. Minnow 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 impinged as adults at Huntley. During this 

program, 57.9 percent of the yolk sac larvae entrained were white sucker (Figure 3-2). 

This was due to high numbers of white sucker yolk sac larvae being entrained on 

relatively few sample dates. White suckers, minnow species (10.7 percent 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 106

 post yolk sac larvae (post larvae) would have been entrained 

under maximum cooling water flow conditions at Huntley (Table 3-2). Post larvae 

represented 72.3 percent of the entrained ichthyoplankton. This relative high number 
22 

compared to eggs and yolk sac larvae is likely 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. Fourteen taxa were entrained as post larvae. 

Post larvae were first present in the samples 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 percent) 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 the post larvae entrained (Figure 3-4). Note 

that the ichthyoplankton categorized as herring species were likely either alewife or 

gizzard shad that could not be positively identified to species due to the close 

resemblance of these species at certain developmental 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 the late 1980s or early 1990s was also well 

represented as post larvae (4.7 percent of all post larvae entrained). Emerald shiner, 

although by far the most abundant fish impinged, represented only 3.1percent of the 

entrained post larvae. 

An estimated 0.7 x 106

 juveniles would have been entrained under maximum cooling 

water flow conditions at Huntley (Table 3-4). Juveniles represented 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 smelt) 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 these juveniles were entrained in July and one 

in August. 

Under maximum cooling water capacity the entrainment of eggs in this 2006-2007 one 

year study was less than during a one year study conducted at Huntley in 1982-1983 

(Normandeau 1984). While an estimated 23.5 x 106 fish eggs would have been entrained 

in the present study, 75.4 x 106 fish eggs would have been entrained in 1982-1983. Of 
23 

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 months in the previous study were likely 

extruded from adults that were passed through the entrainment sampling pump and do not 

represent viable, fertilized eggs. 

Under maximum cooling water capacity the entrainment 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 106 yolk sac larvae would 

have been entrained in the present study, only 3.1 x 106 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 106) compared to 1982-1982 (0.7 x 106) 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 entrainment of post 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 167.1 x 106 post larvae would have been 

entrained in the present study, only 27.9 x 106 fish eggs would have been entrained in 

1982-1983. The large numbers of clupeids (e.g. gizzard shad, alewife) that would have 

been entrained in 2006-2007 (149.4 x 106

) compared to 1982-1982 (3.7 x 106) 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 were 
24 

round goby (a species that was not introduced to the Great Lakes until the late 1980s of 

early 1990s), brook silverside, fathead minnow, tessellated darter, johnny darter, 

blacknose dace, creek chub, banded killifish, and mimic shiner. Except for the round 

goby, these species were very infrequently 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 perch, rock bass, and spottail shiner were 

collected in all study months. No Federal or New York State listed endangered, 

threatened or special concern species 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 and amounts of the filamentous algae, Cladophora, 

that would overwhelm the impingement samplers if they were to continuously 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 fathead 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 selected 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 spring 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 many 
25 

missing major portions of their bodies. Also some were noted to have been hung up on 

the traveling screens and on debris 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. These 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 length 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 the study. Based on this result a multiplier of 

1.319 was applied to impingement results to reflect the collection efficiency. Since tests 

were conducted with dead fish that at times rapidly degraded, how well this return rate 

represents the return rate of living impinged fish is unknown. It is likely that this CE rate 

underestimates the true rate of return of living fish, which would in turn provide an over 

estimate of impingement in 2006-2007. All impingement 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 under 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 the only other species that contributed to 

greater than one percent of the total impingement. Gizzard shad (0.44 percent), alewife 
26 

(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 emerald 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 cross-sectional areas such as emerald shiners. 

In general impingement was heaviest in late 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 percent of the annual impingement took place during 

these six months. Months of high impingement coincided with the presence of large 

numbers of emerald shiners. Only in September (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). Gizzard shad (0.33 percent of the monthly 

impingement) were the next most abundant species. 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 impinged (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 the second most abundant species. 
27 

Total impingement was much lower in May than 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 percent 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 represented less than 0.1 percent of the annual 

impingement. A further reduction in the number of emerald shiners, which contributed to 

96.2 percent of the total, drove the overall 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 few 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 the most abundant species (51.3 

percent of the monthly total), rainbow smelt (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 impinged on the slot mesh traveling screens 

(Appendix E). 

A slight increase in impingement occurred in September, when 72,303 fish (54,775 

unadjusted) would have been impinged (Table 3-13). This again represented less than 
28 

0.1 percent of the annual total. 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 dramatically in October, when 12,291,776 fish 

(9,311,951 unadjusted) would have been impinged (Table 3-14). This represented 6.7 

percent of the annual impingement. Emerald shiner contributed to 98.7 percent of 

October impingement (Figure 3-8). No other species contributed to greater than one 

percent of the total. 

November impingement would have increased from the prior month, with 33,537,448 

fish (25,407,157 unadjusted) impinged at maximum cooling flow (Table 3-15). This 

represented 18.3 percent of the annual impingement. Emerald shiner contributed to 97.2 

percent of the total (Figure 3-9). Rainbow smelt (2.3 percent) 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 comparable 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 shiners contributed to 97.6 percent 

of the monthly total followed by rainbow smelt, which contributed 2.2 percent (Figure 3-

9). Although as in November, the majority of smelt were those hatched in 2006, a larger 

component of them, based on length, was likely older fish. 

The highest abundance of fish impinged would 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 December emerald shiner was by far the most 
29 

abundant species (98.8 percent) and rainbow smelt (1.1 percent) was the only other 

species that contributed to greater than one percent of the total (Figure 3-9). 

Impingement abundance in February was less 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) impinged in February were emerald shiners (Figure 

3-9). Rainbow smelt, the next most abundant 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 Generating Station July 1982 through June 1984 

Biological Monitoring Studies SPDES permit No. NY 000 1023. Report prepared 

for Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Syracuse, NY.
31 

No Ichthyoplankton Entrained From October through March

Figure 3-1 Presence of Ichthyoplankton Collected by Sample Week, April through September, 2006, at 
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 shiner
33 

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 hb
34 

Figure 3-6.

Monthly Total Impingement at NRG Huntley Station 2006-2007

0

10,000,00020,000,00030,000,00040,000,00050,000,00060,000,000

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

January

February

Number Impinged 
35 

Species Life Stage April May June July August September October November December Jannuary 

Alewife PYSL 0 0 0 37,343,963 3,893,523 0 0 0 0 0 Brown bullhead JUV 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 Common carp YSL 0 0 2,843,965 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Common carp PYSL 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Common carp Egg 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Emerald shiner PYSL 0 0 0 4,739,941 473,994 0 0 0 0 0 Freshwater drum PYSL 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gizzard shad YSL 0 0 2,742,394 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gizzard shad PYSL 0 0 1,185,020 30,911,186 3,385,672 0 0 0 0 0 Goby PYSL 0 0 237,004 5,383,219 2,234,544 0 0 0 0 0 Herring species PYSL 0 0 9,039,744 63,278,211 0 0 0 0 0 0 Logperch YSL 0 0 3,080,962 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minnow species YSL 0 0 3,554,955 372,424 338,567 0 0 0 0 0 Minnow species PYSL 0 0 0 0 169,284 67,713 0 0 0 0 Minnow species Egg 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rainbow smelt YSL 0 0 710,991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rainbow smelt PYSL 0 0 947,989 33,857 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rainbow smelt JUV 0 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 Rainbow smelt Egg 17,774,778 3,317,959 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Sculpin species PYSL 0 0 0 0 169,284 67,713 0 0 0 0 Spottail shiner YSL 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spottail shiner PYSL 0 0 0 1,184,985 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trout perch YSL 0 0 947,988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trout perch PYSL 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trout species Egg 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unknown YSL 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unknown PYSL 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 Unknown Egg 0 0 0 541,708 169,284 710,991 0 0 0 0 White sucker YSL 0 812,561 22,176,152 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 White sucker PYSL 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yellow perch YSL 0 609,421 812,561 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yellow perch PYSL 0 0 473,994 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yellow perch JUV 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total By Month 17,774,778 4,739,941 51,597,684 144,974,477 11,071,148 846,418 0 0 0 0 

Percent by Month 7.7% 2.1% 22.3% 62.8% 4.8% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 

Table 3-1 Monthly Estimated Entrainment of Ichthyoplankton at the NRG Huntley Station, 
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.
37 

Egg 

Species April May June July August Septem. Total 

Rainbow smelt 17,774,778 3,317,959 0 0 0 0 21,092,7Unknown 0 0 0 541,708 169,284 710,991 1,421,9Minnow species 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 473,99Trout species 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 236,99Common Carp 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 236,99Total Numbers 17,774,778 3,317,959 947,988 541,708 169,284 710,991 23,462,7Total / 100m3 525 98 28 16 5 21 693 Monthly % 75.8% 14.1% 4.0% 2.3% 0.7% 3.0% Yolk Sac 

Species April May June July August September Total 

White sucker 0 812,561 22,176,152 0 0 0 22,988,7Minnow species 0 0 3,554,955 372,424 338,567 0 4,265,94Logperch 0 0 3,080,962 0 0 0 3,080,96Common carp 0 0 2,843,964 0 0 0 2,843,9Gizzard shad 0 0 2,742,394 0 0 0 2,742,39Trout perch 0 0 947,988 0 0 0 947,98Yellow perch 0 609,421 812,561 0 0 0 1,421,9Rainbow smelt 0 0 710,991 0 0 0 710,99Unknown 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 473,99Spottail shiner 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 236,99Total Numbers 0 1,421,982 37,580,959 372,424 338,567 0 39,713,9Total / 100m3 0 0 1,110 11 10 0 1,173 Monthly % 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 Larva

Entrained Monthly at the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007. 
38 

Table 3-4 Estimated Number and Density (#/100 m3) of Post-Yolk Sac Larvae, and Juveniles Entrained M

Huntley Station, 2006-2007.

Post-Yolk Sac 

Species April May June July August September T

Herring species 0 0 9,039,744 63,278,211 0 0 72,3Alewife 0 0 0 37,343,963 3,893,523 0 41,2Gizzard shad 0 0 1,185,020 30,911,186 3,385,672 0 35,4Goby 0 0 237,004 5,383,219 2,234,544 0 7,8Emerald shiner 0 0 0 4,739,941 473,994 0 5,2Spottail shiner 0 0 0 1,184,985 0 0 1,1Rainbow smelt 0 0 947,988 33,857 0 0 98Yellow perch 0 0 473,994 236,997 0 0 71Common carp 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 47White sucker 0 0 473,994 0 0 0 47Trout perch 0 0 236,997 0 0 0 23Freshwater drum 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 23Unknown 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 23Sculpin species 0 0 0 0 169,284 67,713 23Minnow species 0 0 0 0 169,284 67,713 23Total Numbers 0 0 13,068,736 143,586,353 10,326,300 135,426 167,Total / 100m3 0 0 386 4,241 305 4 4Monthly % 0.0% 0.0% 7.8% 85.9% 6.2% 0.1% Juvenile 

Species April May June July August September T

Brown bullhead 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 23Yellow perch 0 0 0 236,997 0 0 23Rainbow smelt 0 0 0 0 236,997 0 23Total Numbers 0 0 0 473,994 236,997 0 71Total / 100m3 0 0 0 14 7 0 
39 

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 Huntley 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 

Huntley Species Composition for March 

Emerald shiner

Gizzard shad

Rainbow smelt

Rock bass
42 

Table 3-8 Number and Percent Composition of Fish Impinged 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

Huntley Species Composition for June 

Emerald shiner

Rainbow smelt

Rock bass

Goby

Spottail shiner

Gizzard shad
45 

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 smelt
46 

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 bass
47 

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

Huntley Species Composition September 

Rainbow smelt

Emerald shiner

Alewife

Bluegill

Gizzard shad

Rock bass

Largemouth bass

Spottail shiner

Yellow perch
48 

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

Alewife
49 

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

Alewife
50 

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 shad
51 

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 perch
52 

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 Collected at the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007 
Common 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 Dates at the NRG Huntley Station, 2006-2007 
Impingement 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 Data 
Date

Collection 

Period

Species 

Code Common Name Life Stage Splits

Number 

per 100m3

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 sp. 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 100m3

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 100m3

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 Spp 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 100m3

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 Distributions 
Length Frequency Distribution by Month in 10 mm Groups for Emerald Shiners at Huntley S

Fish March April May June July August September October November December 

Length No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % N

10 20 1 3.4% 30 2 6.9% 9 3.3% 3 1.3% 40 4 1.0% 1 0.5% 10 34.5% 190 69.1% 126 54.8% 17 5.5% 6 1.5% 1 0.3% 50 112 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% 160 188 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% 270 62 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% 880 21 5.3% 55 13.6% 47 9.3% 4 1.9% 3 1.0% 11 2.8% 3 0.8% 90 6 1.5% 8 2.0% 6 1.2% 1 0.5% 4 1.3% 5 1.3% 3 0.8% 

100 4 1.0% 16 4.0% 9 1.8% 8 2.6% 1 0.3% 1 0.3% 110 7 1.7% 1 0.2% 1 0.5% 1 0.3% 120 130 140 2 0.5% 150 1 0.2% 160 170 

Total 397 100% 405 100% 503 100% 207 100% 29 100% 275 100% 230 100% 309 100% 393 100% 396 100% 4
Emerald 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)

Frequency
Emerald 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)

Frequency
Emerald 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)

Frequency
Emerald 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)

Frequency
Emerald 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)

Frequency
Emerald 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)

Frequency
Length Frequency Distribution by Month in 10 mm Groups for Rainbow Smelt at Huntley Sta

Fish March April May June July August September October November December 

Length No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No

10 20 30 40 1 0.8% 1 0.4% 50 1 1.3% 9 100.0% 100 82.0% 62 23.9% 55 16.2% 5 1.3% 60 17 25.4% 2 11.1% 20 16.4% 169 65.3% 98 28.8% 44 11.6% 1 0.3% 2 70 3 3.8% 16 23.9% 9 50.0% 26 10.0% 105 30.9% 136 35.8% 23 6.2% 6 80 3 3.8% 4 6.0% 3 16.7% 1 0.4% 60 17.6% 140 36.8% 99 26.8% 74 90 4 5.0% 1 1.5% 2 11.1% 1 0.8% 16 4.7% 47 12.4% 136 36.8% 18

100 2 2.5% 1 0.9% 3 0.9% 2 0.5% 38 10.3% 60 110 9 11.3% 8 7.1% 1 1.5% 5 1.4% 6 120 26 32.5% 40 35.7% 15 22.4% 1 0.3% 6 1.6% 22 130 28 35.0% 50 44.6% 7 10.4% 2 0.6% 1 0.3% 27 7.3% 31 140 4 5.0% 11 9.8% 4 6.0% 2 11.1% 3 0.8% 14 3.8% 27 150 1 0.9% 1 1.5% 1 0.3% 1 0.3% 8 2.2% 15 160 1 0.9% 6 1.6% 6 170 1 1.5% 4 1.1% 1 180 1 0.3% 190 1 0.3% 200 1 0.3% 

Total 80 100% 112 100% 67 100% 18 100% 9 100% 122 100% 259 100% 340 100% 380 100% 370 100% 43
Rainbow 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)

Frequency
Rainbow 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)

Frequency
Rainbow 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)

Frequency
Rainbow 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)

Frequency
Rainbow 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)

Frequency
Rainbow 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)

Frequency
Length Frequency Distribution by Month in 20 mm Groups for Gizzard Shad at Huntley Sta

Fish March April May June July August September October November December Jan

Length No. % No. % No. % 

No

. % 

No

. % 

No

. % 

No

. % 

No

. % 

No

. % No. % No. 

20 1 40 5 38.5% 33 3 17.6% 60 4 2.2% 7 53.8% 35 10 58.8% 39 51.3% 8 14.8% 80 1 0.3% 1 0.5% 4 23.5% 18 23.7% 11 20.4% 13 8.8% 10 

100 1 0.5% 11 14.5% 18 33.3% 70 

47.6

% 38 

120 4 1.2% 4 2.2% 4 5.3% 16 29.6% 54 36.7 % 26 140 17 17.0% 59 17.1% 57 31.3% 1 33.3% 4 5.3% 1 1.9% 8 5.4% 5 160 52 52.0% 

16

1 46.5% 85 46.7% 2 66.7% 1 7.7% 1 

180 21 21.0% 

10

1 29.2% 24 13.2% 2 

200 9 9.0% 19 5.5% 5 2.7% 220 1 1.0% 1 0.5% 240 1 0.3% 260 280 300 1 0.7% 320 340 360 380 400 1 0.7% 420 440 

Total 

10

0 100% 

34

6 100% 

18

2 100% 3 100% 13 100% 68 

0

% 17 100% 76 100% 54 100% 147 100% 83 
Gizzard 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)

Frequency
Gizzard 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)

Frequency
Gzzard 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)

Frequency
Gizzard 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)

Frequency
Gizzard 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)

Frequency
Gizzard 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)

Frequency
Length Frequency Distribution by Month in 10 mm Groups for Alewife at Huntley Sta

Fish March April May June July August September October November Decembe

Length No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % 

10 20 30 40 4 57.1% 19 16.0% 4 2.2% 5 6.4% 50 2 28.6% 37 31.1% 26 14.1% 23 29.5% 28 12.6% 2 7.760 1 14.3% 21 17.6% 25 13.5% 17 21.8% 115 51.8% 6 23.70 7 5.9% 55 29.7% 16 20.5% 33 14.9% 2 7.780 8 6.7% 28 15.1% 4 5.1% 17 7.7% 7 26.90 18 15.1% 16 8.6% 9 11.5% 26 11.7% 7 26.

100 8 6.7% 21 11.4% 4 5.1% 3 1.4% 1 3.8110 1 0.8% 9 4.9% 1 3.8120 1 100.0% 1 0.5% 130 140 1 100.0% 150 160 170 180 190 200 

Total 0 0% 1 100% 1 100% 0 0% 7 100% 119 100% 185 100% 78 100% 222 100% 26 100
Alewife 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)

Frequency
Alewife 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)

Frequency
Alewife 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)

Frequency
Alewife 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)

Frequency
Length Frequency Distribution by Month in 20 mm Groups for Smallmouth Bass at Huntley S

Fish March April May June July August September October November December Jan

Length No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. 

20 40 60 81.1% 60 12 16.2% 1 11.1% 80 2 22.2% 

100 1 11.1% 1 100.0% 120 1 100.0% 1 11.1% 140 2 40.0% 1 1.4% 160 180 3 60.0% 4 44.4% 200 1 1.4% 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 

Total 0 0% 1 100% 5 100% 0 0% 74 100% 9 100% 1 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 
Smallmouth 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)

Frequency
Smallmouth 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)

Frequency
Length Frequency Distribution by Month in 20 mm Groups for Largemouth Bass at Huntley S

Fish March April May June July August September October November December Januar

Length No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. 

20 40 9 42.9% 1 33.3% 1 10060 11 52.4% 1 12.5% 1 33.3% 80 4 50.0% 1 33.3% 3 75.0% 

100 1 33.3% 1 12.5% 1 33.3% 1 25.0% 120 2 25.0% 140 160 1 4.8% 1 33.3% 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 

Total 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 21 100% 3 100% 8 100% 3 100% 0 0% 4 100% 1 10
Largemouth 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)

Frequency
Largemouth 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)

Frequency
Largemouth 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)

Frequency
Length Frequency Distribution by Month in 10 mm Groups for Yellow Perch at Huntley Stati

Fish March April May June July August September October November December Ja

Length No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. 

20 3 2.9% 30 23 22.3% 6 28.6% 40 71 68.9% 3 14.3% 50 4 3.9% 12 57.1% 60 1 25.0% 2 5.9% 70 1 8.3% 7 28.0% 4 33.3% 9 26.5% 8 80 1 50.0% 1 8.3% 3 75.0% 14 56.0% 7 58.3% 13 38.2% 41 90 1 50.0% 3 25.0% 1 25.0% 3 12.0% 1 8.3% 9 26.5% 31 

100 5 41.7% 3 75.0% 1 50.0% 1 4.0% 7 110 1 2.9% 2 120 1 8.3% 1 50.0% 1 1.0% 1 130 140 150 1 8.3% 1 1.0% 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 

240 

250 

Total 2 100% 12 100% 4 100% 2 100% 103 100% 21 100% 4 100% 25 100% 12 100% 34 100% 90 
Yellow 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)

Frequency
Yellow 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)

Frequency
Yellow 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)

Frequency
Ye 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)

Frequency
Yellow 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)

Frequency
Yellow 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 Data 
Date 

Collection 

Period 

Air 

Temperature 

(Co) 

Water 

Temperature 

(Co) 

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 

(Co) 

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 5 
Date 

Collection 

Period 

Air 

Temperature 

(Co) 

Water 

Temperature 

(Co) 

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 5 
Date 

Collection 

Period 

Air 

Temperature 

(Co) 

Water 

Temperature 

(Co) 

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 20 
Date 

Collection 

Period 

Air 

Temperature 

(Co) 

Water 

Temperature 

(Co) 

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 Procedures 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 1 

Standard Operating Procedures* 

Huntley Station Ichthyoplankton 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 City of Niagara Falls, 

New York. 

Shaw Environmental Inc. (Shaw) has been retained 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 through the traveling screens at 

Huntley during normal plant operations. Data collected 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 associated with the program 

understand and strictly adhere to all the procedures described in this document. No 

variances to this document are permitted without 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 changes 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 specifications (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 collection jars (polypropylene) with caps 

o Thermometer 

o Pencils 

o Fine tip black permanent markers 

Laboratory: 

o SOP 

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

o Dissecting stereozoom microscope 

o Cross polarized light setup for microscope 

o Stage micrometer 

o Ocular micrometer 
Revision-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 (aqueous) 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 refrigerator 
Revision-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 and juveniles) in the intake water that pass 

through the screening systems and are entrained in the Huntley CWIS during normal plant 

operations. Data collected during this sampling 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 entrainment sampling event. 

1. Entrainment samples will be collected for a period of one year. The sampling 

schedule will be weekly from April through August and in the first two weeks of 

September, then once a month from October through March, resulting in 

approximately 30 sampling events. The specific sampling dates will be provided by 

the project manager or assistant project manager. 

2. The 24-hour sampling period during each sampling 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 three depths in the forebay (within the 

surface, midwater, and bottom strata of the 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 height, wind speed and 

direction. 

7. Measure and record on the data form (using the associated specifications) the 

outside air temperature (0.5O C), and water temperature (0.5O C) from the return 

sluice. See Appendix B for the calibration procedures for equipment. Estimate 

wind speed and direction and wave height (omit the latter 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 insure 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 the 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 collection net from the sample container. 

Drain the sampling container and recalibrate the pump using the procedures in Step 

7. Record the time (in seconds) that it takes to fill the sample container. If the 

difference between the start and end calibration 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 contents 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 cup 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 and gently shake to ensure that the 

preservative is thoroughly mixed 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 accuracy. File data sheets in the assigned 

location until transferring to the Tonawanda office. 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 7 

F
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 8 
Revision-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 useable 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 interpretation. 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 Ventral – 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 Ventral – 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 
Revision-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 interpretation. 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 Minnow 
Revision-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 Smelt 
Revision-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 Perch 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 16 

4.0 ENTRAINMENT LABORATORY PROCEDURES 

Fish eggs and larvae collected will be picked and sorted from each entrainment sample. 

Ichthyoplankton will be identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level, measured, and 

counted. Larvae will be categorized by lifestage. 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 equipment is in working order. 

4. To conduct Ichthyoplankton Identification first 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 recorded in the comments, since these would 

constitute the impingement component at this 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 numbers of eggs or larvae (greater 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 plankton 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 the 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 vials are required for each 

species (taxon) and life stage. 

15. Add preservative and store for possible QC. 

16. Inspect data sheets for completeness and accuracy. File data sheets in the assigned 

location. 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 18 

Table 3. Data Form Specifications – Ichthyoplankton 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 retrieve field information are Facility, program, 

year, sample number, and replicate 

 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 19 

5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY 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 cost-effective, scientifically defensible, and 

timely manner. All deliverables are subject to QA/QC guidelines, checks, and reviews. 

All sampling will be conducted in strict adherence to the SOP, which will have specific 

enough procedures to enable an auditor unfamiliar 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 conducted in a scientifically 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 complete understanding of, and 

familiarity with, the tasks conducted by the field sampling crew. This will allow for 

sufficient oversight to ensure strict adherence to standard operating procedures and to 

monitor the accuracy of counts, identifications, and other measurements. This field 

sampling program will be audited at least twice per year by the QA officer or his designee. 

Only fully trained will work in the field on this project. Other applicable components of 

Shaw’s standard QA/QC procedures described in Appendix A will be incorporated into this 

program. 

5.2 Laboratory Ichthyoplankton Sorting QA/QC Procedures 

Beyond the procedures described in Section 4.1 and Appendix A, the following specific 

procedures will be used for the sample 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 sorted from the sample. When the total 

number of specimens initially removed is less than 10, a defect will occur only if the 

recheck shows more than one specimen was missed 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 20 

3. All samples are listed by sample number and assigned QC numbers starting with 

one. Quality control sorting is conducted by a qualified individual other than the 

original sorter. 

4. Initially, all samples will be inspected until 10 consecutive samples are found to be 

within the defined limits. Inspection will 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 this occurs, 100 percent reinspection occurs 

until 10 consecutive nondefective samples are 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 appropriate value is entered on the data form. However 

the sample will only be considered defective if the difference is 10 percent or more. 

A record of all QA/QC checks, results and other pertinent notations will be documented in a 

QA/QC logbook. 

5.3 Laboratory Ichthyoplankton Identification QA/QC Procedures 

Beyond the procedures described in Section 4.1 and Appendix A, the following specific 

procedures will be used for the ichthyoplankton 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 initially removed is less than 10, a defect will 

occur only if the recheck shows more than one specimen was missed. Identification 

errors are considered cumulative 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 stage, 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 conducted by a qualified individual other than 

the original taxonomist. 

5. Initially, all samples will be inspected until 10 consecutive samples are found to be 

within the defined limits. Inspection will then proceed at 10 percent (i.e., one 
Revision-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 this occurs, 100 percent reinspection occurs 

until 10 consecutive nondefective samples are 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 appropriate value is entered on the data form. However 

the sample will only be considered defective 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 Control (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 the reliability, accuracy, and truth of results 

reported through quality assurance procedures and to maintain a required level of reliability 

through quality control (QC) procedures. Quality control procedures are described together 

with quality assurance (QA) procedures in Section 4 of this document. Activities controlled 

by standard operating procedures are described in the Standard Operating Procedures 

document for this project. 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 23 

PROJECT ORGANIZATION 

The project will be conducted on an interdisciplinary 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 team consists of a Project 

Manager, an Assistant Project/Lab Manager, and Task Leaders. A quality assurance officer 

is assigned to monitor the QA program. Technical personnel include senior scientists, 

intermediate scientists, junior scientists, and technicians. Their general responsibilities and 

functions are described below: 

Project Manager has overall administrative, financial and technical responsibilities 

for the project. 

Assistant Project/Lab Manager is internally responsible for the technical and 

budgetary aspects of projects. In concert 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 project manager or assistant to be responsible for 

specific project objectives. They are experienced professional scientists with proven 

abilities for generating technically excellent, timely and cost-effective products. 

Task leaders work with the project manager to coordinate all programs, schedule 

personnel, manage budgets, participate in client conferences, and write reports. 

Along with the project manager they assign intermediate and junior personnel as 

needed to oversee and perform technical aspects of their tasks. 

Senior Personnel provide technical assistance in their areas of specialization as 

required. 

Intermediate Personnel assist the managers and task leaders in the design and 

implementation of studies, data acquisition and analysis, report writing and other 

activities as needed. They are capable of producing high quality data with 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 24 

supervision. They often direct the activities of biologists and technicians performing 

specific tasks. 

Junior-Scientists and Technicians perform most of the field sampling work, and 

laboratory processing under direction of the project managers, task leaders or 

intermediate scientists. They have specialized 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 revisions. All controlled documents delivered 

to NRG will be approved by, and delivered under a cover letter signed 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 controlled document will be established and 

maintained in the quality assurance file. Revisions to controlled documents will be 

numbered sequentially, dated, and 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 controlled 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 document will be approved in the same manner. 

All revisions proposed will be subject 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 through 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 recorded 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 Tonawanda 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 materials 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 biologist responsible for particular 

laboratory analyses for review and examination. These results will be filed in the quality 

assurance files in Tonawanda and Andover. The laboratory task leader will also be 

responsible for archiving processed samples for future reference. Sample storage will be in 

Tonawanda. 

All data sheets will be routed through the assistant project/Lab manager. Data sheets 

originating in Tonawanda will be copied and 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. Any 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 27 

questionable entries will be directed to the appropriate personnel for 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/she. 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 authorized representatives for obvious inconsistencies. 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 maintained in the Andover and Tonawanda offices. A master file 

containing all project materials will be located in the Tonawanda office and will contain 

original copies of all material and correspondence generated throughout the project, 

including data sheets. The Andover office file will contain correspondence, memos, 

documents, and copies of data sheets generated 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 which 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 Safety 
Revision-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 Management 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 30 

EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION 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 routine 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 and repairs performed on all equipment will 

be noted. 

Class I: These are instruments that must be verified and/or calibrated 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 calibrated prior to making measurements. 

Class II: These are instruments that must be verified and/or calibrated on a periodic basis. 

Calibrations are performed by the user, qualified independent technicians, or the 

manufacturers. Reference standards for Class I instruments are included in Class II. 

Verification of such reference standards may 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. Certification of reference standard accuracy is 

provided by the manufacturer, independent calibration service, or personnel performing inhouse calibrations. Purchased standards include evidence of accuracy certified by the 

manufacturer (pH buffers, weight sets, filters, etc.). Calibration 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 calibration requirements after purchase. This 

generally includes volumetric glassware, rulers, thermometers, etc. Such instrumentation is 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 31 

used to the extent that accuracy of the instruments 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. The auditing program is designed to monitor 

the reliability, accuracy, and truth of results reported, 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 percent 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 percent. Reprocessing will be by 

an independent crew. 

Laboratory quality assurance will be accomplished 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, identifications, and other 

measurements will be obtained, and a 10 percent 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 sample is found, 100 percent inspection is resumed. 

All defective samples are replaced 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 Inspection by Senior Staff 

2. Instrument Calibration as required 

Data Processing & Reporting Audits 

The level of accuracy of data files will be assured by file audits and computer error routines. 

Data files will be audited for data input and recording errors by the responsible task leader 

scanning fields of each file and 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 performed 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 representative 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 recommended 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. Additionally, the following records will be kept of 

quality assurance checks: 

• Field Procedures: All quality assurance checks will be documented in a QA field log book. This log will contain a record of 

any observed deviations from standard operating procedures and 

numerical results of auditing procedures 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 procedures will be corrected. In the event errors 

are detected subsequent to issuance of a report, 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 evaluating 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. Differences 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 two percent for each file. 

Reporting

Errors in data tables and any other numerical results may not exceed two percent. 

Nonconformance 

Determination of Nonconformance

The quality assurance officer wi11 be responsible for designating nonconformances. 

He/she will immediately notify the project manager 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 auditing prior to assigning a nonconformance 

designation. In addition, any member of the project team who becomes aware of a 
Revision-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 justification given for this 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 possib1e (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 case, plans for correcting the process which led to 

the nonconformance will be developed and implemented. The quality assurance officer 

will be responsible for actions taken relative to tasks already performed and resolving 

nonconformances. If discrepancies are judged to significantly affect the outcome or 

defensibility of a portion of the project, a copy of the audit memorandum will be 

forwarded immediately to the project manager and NRG representative. 

Follow-up Report

After correcting a nonconformance, the resolution of the problem and actions taken 

relative to tasks already performed will be documented in a memorandum to the quality 

assurance officer within two weeks. A copy of this memo will be sent to the NRG 

representative, the project manager, and one filed with the original 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 manager will work with qualified scientists who 

will be responsible for designated tasks. Resumes of these scientists constitute primary 

evidence of qualification. Additionally, the project 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 Scale 
Revision-1 (6/6/2006) Page 39 
Revision-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 City of Niagara Falls, 

New York. 

Shaw Environmental Inc. (Shaw) has been retained to conduct a one year study at the 

NRG-owned Huntley Steam Station 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 associated with the program 

understand and strictly adhere to all the procedures described in this document. No 

variances to this document are permitted without documented permission from the project 

manager or assistant project manager. A copy of this SOP 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 (e.g.,Rev X) of the SOP. When 

a revision is received, the prior document (appropriate 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 (Figures 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 log 
Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 3 

3.0 PROCEDURES 

3.1 Impingement Sampling 

1. Impingement samples will be collected from the traveling screens 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 divided 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, review and sign Job Safety Analysis Form

4. Determine that the facility’s main cooling water pumps drawing water into 

Screenhouse 1 are operating. 

5. If screens have been operating in the continuous 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. All screens should be operating at the same 

speed during the collection. Note exceptions from normal pump/screen operations 

and screen speed in comments 

6. In general, sampling is initiated by lowering the four collection traps 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 loading times it may not be necessary to use the 

larger traps. Note the start time (24-hr clock). 
Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 4 

7. Near the beginning of each collection period measure the water temperature (nearest 

0.5O C) from the sluice, obtain air temperature, 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, retrieve and count the total number of fish (i.e. all traps 

combined) that are collected during the first 30 minutes of each sampling period. 

Determine the sampling time within a sample period based on the number of fish 

counted and the following table:

Subsampling Decision Criteria for Sampling Based on the Number of Fish Counted in 

30 Minutes

9. Periodically check the traps for clogging and 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 potential 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 becomes 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 likely to clog. DO NOT USE ONLY ONE OF 

THE SMALL TRAPS. Record on the Impingement 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-minutes
Revision-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 the return sluice trap 

into buckets and reset the trap for the next sample period. At the option of the shift 

leader, fish may be processed during a sample period by carefully removing fish 

from the return sluice trap. 

14. Identify all fish collected to the lowest practicable 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 less 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 measured 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 cloudiness of eyes as instructed during training 

program). Record if determined to be dead on data sheet. 

17. Inspect each measured individual for any marks or diseases. If present, record 

according to Table 1. 

18. Fish that cannot be identified in the field are 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 specimen for each species collected will be 

maintained as a reference collection for identification confirmation. Color pictures 

will be used for large specimens. 

19. After processing is complete, place the entire sample into a labeled plastic bag and 

place into a storage freezer for QA/QC procedures as described in Section 4.0. 
Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 6 

IMPINGEMENT MONITORING

(Form Code: IMP-1: 06/07/2006 Revision 2)Facility Sample No. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 

H 1 

Direction Use

. .

Common Name ID No. Condition 

12345678901234567890

Comments: QC Field Data (Date & Coder)

Data Entry (Date & Coder)QC Data Entry (Date & Coder)

Lower

MO DAY YR

Air Water Upper

Temperature Wind

Collection

Period

Sample Period Pump Operation Screen Operatio

Start Time End Time

Speed Wave Height Coder/Crew Coder 

Species Code Total 

Small Baskets Field Data Entry

Length Weight Sex Mark
Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 7 
Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 8 

Table 1. Data Form Specifications 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 Code 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 useable 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 interpretation. 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 Ventral – 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 Ventral – 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 Maxillary 
Revision-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 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 = Skin Ulcers/Furunculous 

6 = Wound 

7 = Fungus 

8 = Lamprey Scar 

9 = Other 

10 = Multiple Diseases: See Comments 

COMMENT

X = Indicates comment will affect data interpretation. Also indicates presence of incidental 

(non-computerized) data on data sheet
Revision-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 Minnow 
Revision-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 Smelt 
Revision-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 Perch 
Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 15 

3.2 Collection Efficiency Testing 

1. Collection efficiency tests will be periodically conducted to assess the performance 

of the screens and sluice system in removing fish from the intake system. Collection 

efficiency testing will occur one time each season (January-March, April-June, JulySeptember, and October-December). The exact dates will be provided by the project 

manager or assistant project manager. 

2. Fish tested will include target species (actual species to be decided; likely to consist 

of frequently impinged species based on previous studies and selected game species) 

that are collected during scheduled 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 and mark the fish with a readily identifiable mark (fin clip 

and/or dye). Each of the four traveling screens 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 traveling 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 species just upstream of each 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 release 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 mark on the collection efficiency return log. 

(Impingement results will be adjusted based on the calculated collection efficiency). 
Revision-0 (6/-7/2006) Page 16 

4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY 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-effective, scientifically defensible, 

and timely manner. All deliverables are subject to QA/QC guidelines, checks, and reviews. 

In addition to the standard QA/QC procedures 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 photographed or preserved and be 

available for reference should any questions 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 proficiency 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 acceptability of results will be incorporated into the 

program to insure an average outgoing quality limit (AOQL). This procedure calls 

for an initial complete inspection of a specified number of samples (depends on 

required AOQL). If all of the 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 project 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 will 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 reinserted as described above. If this 

collection is defective the re-inspection will revert to consecutive sample 

analyses until five (5) consecutive collections pass the described criteria.