Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2002-0049-0300
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2003-03-19T05:00Z

§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
1
Chapter
A7:

Entrainment
Survival
INTRODUCTION
To
calculate
benefits
associated
with
entrainment
reduction,
EPA
used
the
assumption
that
all
organisms
passing
through
a
facility's
cooling
water
system
would
experience
100
percent
mortality.
This
assumption
was
recommended
in
EPA's
1977
Guidance
for
Evaluating
the
Adverse
Environmental
Impact
of
Cooling
Water
Intake
Structures
on
the
Aquatic
Environment:
Section
316(
b)
P.
L.
92­
500.
This
is
also
the
basic
assumption
currently
used
in
the
permitting
programs
for
section
316(
b)
in
Arizona,
California,
Hawaii,
Louisiana,
Maine,
Maryland,
Massachusetts,
Minnesota,
Nevada,
New
Hampshire,
Ohio
and
Rhode
Island
(
Chen,
2002;
Colarusso,
2002;
Kimball,
2002;
McCullough,
2002;
McLean
and
Dieter,
2002;
Stuber,
2002).

In
comments
on
the
Proposed
Regulations
to
Establish
Requirements
for
Cooling
Water
Intake
Structures
at
Phase
II
Existing
Facilities;
Proposed
Rule,
a
few
of
those
commenting
stated
that
this
assumption
may
be
incorrect
and
cited
studies
in
which
entrainment
survival
has
been
demonstrated.
These
entrainment
survival
studies
were
conducted
by
facilities
to
demonstrate
that
some
organisms
may
survive
the
passage
through
the
cooling
water
intake
structure,
and
thus
the
assumption
of
100
percent
mortality
may
not
be
justified
at
their
site.

EPA
has
obtained
36
entrainment
survival
studies
conducted
at
21
individual
power
producing
facilities
and
conducted
a
detailed
review.
Twenty
of
these
facilities
are
in­
scope
for
the
section
316(
b)
Phase
II
rule
for
existing
facilities.
These
facilities
represent
3.7%
of
all
section
316(
b)
Phase
II
existing
facilities.
EPA
also
reviewed
a
report
prepared
for
the
Electric
Power
Research
Institute
(
EPRI)
(
EA
Engineering
Science
&
Technology,
2000)
which
summarized
the
results
of
36
entrainment
studies,
31
of
which
were
the
same
studies
reviewed
by
EPA.
The
intent
of
EPA's
review
was
to
determine
the
soundness
of
the
findings
behind
the
entrainment
survival
studies
and
to
evaluate
whether
the
assumption
of
100
percent
entrainment
mortality
is
appropriate
for
use
in
the
national
benefits
assessment
for
the
section
316(
b)
Phase
II
rule
to
compare
to
the
costs
of
installing
the
best
available
technology
for
minimizing
adverse
environmental
impact.

A7­
1
THE
CAUSES
OF
ENTRAINMENT
MORTALITY
A7­
1.1
Fragility
of
Entrained
Organisms
Cooling
water
intake
structures
entrain
many
species
of
fish,
shellfish
and
macroinvertebrates.
These
species
are
most
commonly
entrained
during
their
early
life
stages,
as
eggs,
yolk­
sac
larvae
(
YSL),
post
yolk­
sac
larvae
(
PYSL)
and
juveniles,
due
to
their
small
size
and
limited
swimming
ability.
In
addition
to
having
limited
or
no
mobility,
these
small
life
stages
tend
to
be
very
fragile,
and
thus
susceptible
to
injury
and
mortality
from
a
wide
range
of
factors
(
Marcy,
1975).
For
these
reasons,
entrained
eggs
and
larvae
are
believed
to
experience
high
mortality
rates
as
a
result
of
entrainment.
The
three
primary
factors
contributing
to
the
mortality
of
organisms
entrained
in
cooling
water
systems
are:
thermal
stress,
mechanical
stress,
and
chemical
stress
(
Marcy,
1975).
The
relative
contribution
of
each
of
these
factors
to
the
rate
of
mortality
of
entrained
organisms
can
vary
substantially
among
facilities,
based
on
the
nature
of
their
design
and
operations
as
well
as
the
sensitivity
of
the
species
entrained
(
Marcy,
1975,
Beck
et
al.,
1978,
Ulanowicz
and
Kinsman,
1978).
These
three
primary
factors
are
discussed
in
more
detail
below.
CHAPTER
CONTENTS
A7­
1
The
Causes
of
Entrainment
Mortality
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A7­
1
A7­
2
Factors
Affecting
the
Determination
of
Entrainment
Survival
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A7­
2
A7­
3
Detailed
Analysis
of
Entrainment
Survival
Studies
Reviewed
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A7­
8
A7­
4
Discussion
of
Review
Criteria
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A7­
45
A7­
5
Applicability
of
Entrainment
Survival
Studies
to
Other
Facilities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A7­
49
A7­
6
Conclusions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A7­
49
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
2
March
11,
2003
A7­
1.2
Thermal
stress
Cooling
water
is
used
by
facilities
as
a
means
of
disposing
of
waste
heat
from
facility
operations.
Thus,
organisms
present
in
the
cooling
water
are
exposed
to
rapid
increases
in
temperatures
above
ambient
conditions
when
passing
through
the
cooling
water
system.
This
thermal
shock
can
cause
mortality
or
sub­
lethal
effects
which
may
affect
further
growth
and
development
of
entrained
eggs
and
larvae
(
Schubel
et
al.,
1978;
Stauffer,
1980).
The
magnitude
of
thermal
stress
experienced
by
organisms
passing
through
a
facility's
cooling
system
depends
on
facility­
specific
parameters
such
as
intake
temperature,
maximum
temperature,
discharge
temperature,
duration
of
exposure
to
elevated
temperatures
through
the
facility
and
in
the
mixing
zone
of
the
discharge
canal,
the
critical
thermal
maxima
of
the
species,
and
delta
T
( 
T,
i.
e.,
the
difference
between
ambient
water
temperature
and
maximum
water
temperature
within
the
cooling
system)
(
Marcy,
1975;
Schubel
et
al.,
1978).
The
extent
of
the
effect
of
thermal
stress
can
also
vary
among
the
species
and
life
stages
of
entrained
organisms
(
Schubel
et
al.,
1978;
Stauffer,
1980).

A7­
1.3
Mechanical
stress
Entrained
organisms
are
also
exposed
to
significant
mechanical
stress
during
passage
through
a
cooling
system
which
can
also
cause
mortality.
Types
of
mechanical
stress
include
effects
from
turbulence,
buffeting,
velocity
changes,
pressure
changes,
and
abrasion
from
contact
with
the
interior
surfaces
of
the
cooling
water
intake
structure
(
Marcy,
1973,
Marcy
et
al.,
1978).
The
extent
of
the
effect
of
mechanical
stress
can
depend
on
the
design
of
the
facility's
cooling
water
intake
structure
and
the
capacity
utilization
of
operation.
The
amount
of
physical
damage
from
mechanical
stress
can
also
vary
among
the
species
and
life
stages
of
entrained
organisms
(
Marcy,
1975;
Marcy
et
al.,
1978).
Some
studies
have
suggested
that
mechanical
stress
may
be
the
dominant
cause
of
entrainment
mortality
at
many
facilities
(
Marcy,
1973,
Marcy
et
al.,
1978).
For
this
reason,
it
has
been
suggested
that
the
only
effective
method
of
minimizing
adverse
effects
to
entrained
organisms
is
to
reduce
the
intake
of
water
(
Marcy,
1975).

A7­
1.4
Chemical
stress
Chemical
biocides
are
routinely
used
within
cooling
water
intake
structures
to
remove
biofouling
organisms.
Chlorine
is
the
active
component
of
the
most
commonly
used
biocides
(
Morgan
and
Carpenter,
1978;
Morgan,
1980
).
These
biocides
are
used
in
concentrations
sufficient
to
kill
organisms
fouling
the
cooling
system
structures,
and
thus,
may
also
cause
mortality
to
the
organisms
entrained
during
biocide
application.
The
extent
of
the
effect
of
chemical
stress
can
depend
on
the
concentration
of
biocide
and
timing
of
its
application.
Eggs
may
be
less
susceptible
to
biocides
than
larvae
(
Lauer
et
al.,
1974;
Morgan
and
Carpenter,
1978).
Tolerance
to
biocides
may
also
vary
according
to
species.
However,
most
species
have
been
shown
to
be
affected
at
low
concentrations,
<
0.5
ppm,
of
residual
chlorine
(
Morgan
and
Carpenter,
1978).

A7­
2
FACTORS
AFFECTING
THE
DETERMINATION
OF
ENTRAINMENT
SURVIVAL
There
are
many
challenges
that
must
be
overcome
in
the
design
of
a
sampling
program
intended
to
accurately
establish
the
magnitude
of
entrainment
survival
(
Lauer
et
al.,
1974;
Marcy,
1975;
Coutant
et
al.,
2001).
Samples
are
almost
certain
not
to
be
fully
representative
of
the
community
of
organisms
ultimately
experiencing
entrainment.
Some
species
are
extremely
fragile
and
disintegrate
during
collection
or
when
preserved,
and
are
thus
not
documented
when
samples
are
processed
(
Boreman
and
Goodyear,
1981).
This
may
be
particularly
true
for
the
most
fragile
life
stages,
such
as
eggs
and
yolk­
sac
larvae
of
many
species.
All
sampling
devices
are
selective
for
a
certain
size
range
of
organisms,
so
that
a
number
of
sampling
methods
would
have
to
be
employed
to
accurately
sample
the
broad
size­
range
of
organisms
subject
to
entrainment.
The
relative
ability
of
different
organisms
to
avoid
sampling
devices
also
determines
abundance
and
species
composition
estimated
from
samples
(
Boreman
and
Goodyear,
1981).
This
avoidance
ability
varies
with
the
size,
motility
and
condition
of
the
organisms.
If
dead
or
dying
organisms
tend
to
settle
out,
then
sampling
will
be
selective
for
the
live,
healthy
specimens
(
Marcy,
1975).
If,
on
the
other
hand,
the
healthy,
more
motile
specimens
are
able
to
avoid
sampling
gear,
the
sampling
will
tend
to
be
selective
for
dead
or
stunned
specimens.
The
patchy
distribution
of
many
species
(
Day
et
al.,
1989;
Valiela,
1995)
creates
difficulties
in
developing
precise
estimates
of
organism
densities
(
Boreman
and
Goodyear,
1981).
The
patchier
the
distribution,
the
greater
number
of
samples
required
to
reduce
the
uncertainty
associated
with
the
density
estimates
to
an
acceptable
level.

The
factors
just
discussed
impact
the
ability
to
accurately
establish
the
type
and
abundance
of
organisms
present
at
the
intake
and
discharge
of
a
cooling
water
system.
A
second
suite
of
factors,
superimposed
on
the
first,
impacts
the
ability
to
estimate
the
percentage
of
those
organisms
that
are
alive
and
dead
at
those
two
locations.
The
greatest
challenge
to
be
overcome
is
posed
by
the
fragility
of
the
organisms
being
studied.
The
early
life
stages
of
most
species
are
so
fragile
that
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
3
they
may
experience
substantial
mortality
simply
due
to
being
sampled,
both
from
contact
with
the
sampling
gear
as
well
as
in
being
handled
for
subsequent
evaluation.
For
example,
Marcy
(
1973)
reported
on
the
effects
of
current
velocity
on
percent
mortality
of
ichthyoplankton
taken
in
plankton
nets,
and
found
he
was
able
to
constrain
sampling
mortality
to
18
percent
at
velocities
of
0.3
to
0.6
m/
sec.
The
loss
or
damage
of
organisms
beyond
identification
during
plant
passage
causes
overestimations
of
the
true
fraction
of
live
organisms
in
the
discharge
samples,
because
the
disintegrated
organisms
are
extruded
from
the
sampling
device
(
Boreman
and
Goodyear,
1981).

The
entrainment
survival
studies
addressed
in
this
review
quantified
survival
by
estimating
the
percent
of
organisms
categorized
as
either
alive,
stunned
or
dead
present
in
samples
collected
at
the
intake
and
discharge
locations
of
a
facility.
In
the
studies
reviewed,
a
variety
of
methods
were
used
to
determine
the
physiological
state
of
sampled
organisms,
ranging
from
placing
the
sampled
organisms
in
various
types
of
holding
containers
for
observation
to
the
use
of
devices
specifically
designed
for
assessment
of
larval
survival,
such
as
a
larval
table.
A
variety
of
criteria
were
also
used
in
these
studies
to
categorize
the
physiological
status
of
the
organisms,
such
as
opacity
as
an
indicator
of
a
dead
egg,
and
movement
of
a
larva
in
response
to
being
touched
as
an
indicator
of
being
alive
or
stunned.
The
lack
of
standardized
procedures
applied
for
assessing
physiological
condition
in
all
of
the
studies
reviewed
made
comparisons
of
the
study
findings
to
each
other
difficult.

When
quantifying
entrainment
survival,
these
studies
used
the
estimates
of
the
proportion
dead
from
samples
collected
at
the
intake
as
controls
to
correct
the
samples
at
the
discharge
for
mortality
associated
with
natural
causes,
and
sampling
and
handling
stress.
The
use
of
intake
samples
as
controls
requires
the
assumption
that
sampling­
and
handling­
induced
mortality
rates
be
the
same
at
the
intake
and
discharge,
which,
in
turn,
requires
that
sampling
methods
and
conditions
be
nearly
identical
in
both
locations
(
Marcy,
1973).
This
requirement
is
difficult
to
meet
at
most
facilities
because
of
the
differences
in
the
physical
structures
and
hydrodynamic
conditions
that
exist
at
intakes
and
discharges
(
e.
g.,
frequently
high
velocity,
turbulent
flow
at
discharges
versus
lower
velocity,
laminar
flows
at
intakes).
In
many
cases,
the
location
and
design
of
the
cooling
water
intake
and
discharge
structures
may
preclude
use
of
the
same
type
of
sampling
gear
in
both
locations.
Another
assumption
implicit
in
this
approach
is
that
mortality
due
to
entrainment
is
entirely
independent
of
mortality
due
to
sampling
and
handling
and
that
there
be
no
interaction
between
these
stresses,
an
assumption
that
is
acknowledged
but
never
proven
true
in
the
studies
reviewed.

The
percent
alive
in
the
intake
control
is
frequently
well
below
100
percent
because
these
fragile
organisms
experience
substantial
mortality
from
stresses
caused
by
being
collected.
An
additional
factor
contributing
to
the
less
than
100
percent
alive
in
intake
samples
is
that
some
dead
organisms
may
be
present
in
the
water
column
being
sampled,
due
to
natural
mortality
or
recirculation
of
water
discharged
from
the
cooling
system.
In
many
studies,
the
survival
in
the
intake
sample
is
extremely
low,
for
example
the
intake
survival
for
bay
anchovy
was
zero
percent
in
studies
conducted
at
Bowline
(
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1978),
Brayton
Point
(
Lawler,
Matusky
&
Skelly
Engineers,
1999),
and
Indian
Point
(
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1978
and
1989).
The
studies
reviewed
corrected
their
discharge
survival
estimates
to
account
for
the
control
sample
mortality
by
using
the
percent
alive
in
the
intake
control
samples
in
the
following
manner.
First,
the
proportion
initially
alive
at
the
intake
(
PI)
and
discharge
(
PD)
samples
was
determined,
for
each
species
in
most
cases,
using
the
following
equation:

P
or
P
=
#
of
alive
and
stunned
organisms
Total
number
of
organisms
collected
I
D
Using
the
intake
proportion
as
the
control,
initial
percent
entrainment
survival
(
SI)
was
then
calculated
using
the
following
equation:

S
=
P
P
100
I
D
I






×
When
latent
mortality
was
studied,
a
sample
of
the
alive
and
stunned
organisms
from
the
initial
entrainment
survival
determination
was
observed
for
a
given
period
of
time.
The
latent
survival
rate
calculated
is
the
proportion
of
those
which
remained
alive
after
a
given
period
of
time
from
only
those
which
survived
initially
and
not
the
total
number
sampled.
The
latent
percent
survival
(
SL)
was
determine
using
the
following
equation:
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
4
March
11,
2003
S
=
100
#
of
alive
organisms
after
a
given
time
from
discharge
samples
#
of
organisms
initially
sampled
alive
or
stunned
indischarge
samples
#
of
alive
organisms
after
a
given
time
from
intake
samples
#
of
organisms
initially
sampled
alive
or
stunned
in
intake
samples
L
×












Entrainment
survival
was
then
calculated
by
adjusting
the
initial
entrainment
survival
with
latent
entrainment
survival
using
the
following
equation:

Entrainment
Survival
(%)
=
S
S
I
L
×
A
variation
of
this
formula,
specifically
Abbott's
formula,
is
used
for
acute
toxicity
testing
in
the
Methods
for
Measuring
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
Effluents
and
Receiving
Waters
to
Freshwater
and
Marine
Organisms
(
EPA
­
821­
R­
02­
012,
2002)
and
in
testing
of
pesticides
and
toxic
substances
in
Product
Performance
Test
Guidelines
OPPTS
810.3500
Premises
Treatments
(
EPA,
712­
C­
98­
413),
to
adjust
mortality
for
the
possibility
of
natural
deaths
occurring
during
a
test.
This
formula
is
intended
to
account
for
acceptable
levels
of
unavoidable
control
mortality
in
the
range
of
five
to
ten
percent
(
Newman,
1995).
Abbott's
formula
is
as
follows:

Corrected
mortality
=
1
­
1
­
proportion
dead
in
treatment
1
­
proportion
dead
in
control






This
method
of
correcting
for
control
mortality
is
often
used
in
toxicological
experiments
in
which
organisms
in
concurrent
control
and
experimental
samples
experience
identical
conditions
except
for
the
stressor
that
is
the
subject
of
study,
and,
as
already
noted,
this
method
is
applied
when
control
mortalities,
from
stress
due
to
holding
or
sampling
and
from
natural
causes,
are
generally
low
(
less
than
ten
percent).
In
entrainment
survival
studies,
sampling
conditions
at
the
intake
and
discharge
are
seldom
identical.
Also,
the
initial
mortalities
in
the
intake
samples
are
often
much
higher
than
five
or
ten
percent
and
sometimes
higher
than
the
mortality
in
the
discharge
samples.

In
addition,
the
assumption
that
mortality
due
to
entrainment
is
entirely
independent
of
mortality
due
to
sampling
and
handling
with
no
interaction
between
these
stresses
may
not,
in
fact,
be
true.
The
proportion
of
dead
organisms
observed
in
the
intake
samples
is
comprised
of
organisms
that
have
died
before
sampling
due
to
natural
conditions,
organisms
that
have
died
from
the
stress
of
sampling
and
sorting,
and
possibly
organisms
that
have
died
from
previous
passages
through
the
cooling
water
system
at
facilities
where
recirculation
of
water
occurs.
The
proportion
of
dead
organisms
observed
in
the
discharge
samples
is
comprised
of
organisms
that
have
died
prior
to
passage
through
the
facility
from
natural
conditions,
organisms
that
have
died
from
the
stresses
associated
with
entrainment
as
described
above,
and
organisms
that
have
died
due
to
the
stress
of
sampling
and
sorting.
The
fundamental
difference
between
the
extent
of
the
effect
of
sampling
stress
in
the
intake
and
the
discharge
samples
is
that
the
discharge
samples
are
exposed
to
sampling
stress
after
they
have
been
exposed
to
entrainment
stress.
Thus
the
most
vulnerable
organisms
may
have
already
died
due
to
entrainment
and
would
not
be
alive
at
the
time
of
sampling
to
die
again
from
that
stress.
By
correcting
discharge
samples
for
sampling
and
natural
deaths
using
the
intake
results,
the
assumption
is
made
that
the
mortality
in
the
discharge
sample
is
the
result
of
the
same
probability
of
death
due
to
sampling
as
in
the
intake
sample
and
only
the
additional
mortality
is
due
to
the
stress
of
entrainment.
When
intake
survival
(
PI)
is
less
than
discharge
survival
(
PD),
the
use
of
the
equation
for
entrainment
survival
(
SI)
results
in
a
calculation
of
100
percent
survival
even
though
the
majority
of
organisms
may
be
dead
in
both
samples
(
EA
Engineering
Science
&
Technology,
2000).
However,
in
the
intake
sample
much
of
the
mortality
may
be
due
to
sampling
stress
whereas
in
the
discharge
sample
much
of
the
mortality
may
be
due
to
entrainment
stress.
Additionally,
the
initial
survival
estimates
may
be
overestimations
of
survival
due
to
the
disintegration
of
entrained
organisms
and
their
subsequent
extrusion
through
the
sampling
gear
(
Boreman
and
Goodyear,
1981).
For
all
of
the
reasons
described
above,
the
applicability
of
this
equation
for
determining
entrainment
survival
by
correcting
discharge
survival
with
intake
survival
is
questionable.
Also,
the
statistical
attributes
of
these
calculated
mortality
proportions
are
often
not
addressed.
The
higher
and
more
variable
the
intake
sample
mortality
percentages,
the
greater
the
degree
of
uncertainty
that
would
be
expected
to
be
associated
with
the
resultant
entrainment
survival
estimates.

An
additional
factor
that
was
not
accounted
for
in
all
of
the
studies
reviewed
was
the
fate
of
organisms
discharged
into
receiving
waters
after
passage
through
the
cooling
system.
Latent
mortality
studies
were
intended
to
document
delayed
mortality
of
organisms
that
were
lethally
injured
or
stressed
during
entrainment
but
were
not
killed
immediately.
Some
studies
(
e.
g.,
Lauer
et
al,
1974)
also
reported
that
some
fish
larvae
surviving
entrainment
behaved
normally
when
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
5
maintained
in
laboratory
conditions
for
extended
periods
of
time,
eating
and
growing
normally.
However,
larvae
that
did
not
experience
immediate
mortality
or
lethal
stresses
are
discharged
into
receiving
waters
under
conditions
substantially
altered
from
the
normal
environment
in
which
present
prior
to
entrainment,
conditions
very
dissimilar
to
those
experienced
under
laboratory
conditions.
Any
naturally
occurring
vertical
positioning
of
the
organisms
within
the
water
column
would
be
disrupted
(
Day
et
al.,
1989),
and
the
turbulence
and
velocities
present
in
discharge
locations
would
be
unlike
the
environmental
conditions
they
experienced
prior
to
entrainment.
Under
such
altered
conditions,
their
normal
ability
to
feed
or
escape
predation
might
be
compromised.
In
addition,
thermal
shock
can
disrupt
further
development
of
eggs
and
larvae
even
if
they
survive
entrainment
(
Schubel
et
al.,
1978).
The
potential
for
such
phenomena
to
occur
and
the
magnitude
the
effect
may
have
on
ultimate
survival
of
entrained
organisms
would
be
nearly
impossible
to
confirm
or
refute
through
field
studies.
However,
were
these
phenomena
to
occur,
they
would
result
in
mortalities
beyond
and
in
addition
to
the
initial
and
latent
mortalities
that
were
the
subject
of
the
studies
reviewed.

The
factors
discussed
above
served
as
the
basis
for
EPA's
review
of
the
entrainment
survival
studies.
Table
A7­
1
below
presents
summary
information
collected
directly
from
each
of
the
original
studies
reviewed:
the
facility
where
the
study
was
conducted
and
whether
more
than
one
study
was
conducted
at
the
same
location,
the
month
and
year
of
sampling,
the
total
number
of
samples
and
the
number
of
days
of
sampling,
the
species
for
which
entrainment
survival
was
calculated,
the
total
number
of
that
species
sampled
during
the
entire
study
at
the
intake
location,
the
total
number
of
that
species
sampled
during
the
entire
study
at
the
discharge
location,
whether
the
study
determined
initial
or
latent
survival,
the
range
of
means
of
initial
discharge
survival
for
that
species,
and
the
range
of
means
of
latent
discharge
survival
for
that
species
(
which
is
out
of
the
fraction
of
those
which
survived
originally).
In
the
last
column,
the
value
for
entrainment
survival
presented
is
derived
by
multiplying
the
initial
survival
and
the
latent
survival
after
correcting
the
discharge
survival
with
the
intake
survival
(
serving
as
a
control).

Table
A7­
1:
Summary
of
Entrainment
Survival
Study
Results
Facility
Sampling
Period
Number
of
Samples
and
Days
Species
Number
Sampled
at
Intake
Number
Sampled
at
Discharge
Survival
Study
Initial
Discharge
Survival
Latent
Discharge
Survival
Survival
Estimate
Anclote
September
­
November,
1985
120
samples
8
days
Fish
larvae
Amphipods
Chaetognatha
Crab
larvae
Caridean
shrimp
109
5185
1549
3007
2728
474
4662
1927
6145
1766
initial
and
24
hour
latent
8
­
47%
29
­
58%
28
­
35%
74
­
80%
45
­
66%
­
­
­
­
­
27
­
62%
49
­
73%
67
­
72%
21
­
100%
64
­
81%

Bergum
Power
Station
April
­
June
1976
unknown
#
6
days
smelt
perches
unknown
unknown
322
826
initial
10
­
28%
32
­
74%
­
­
10­
41%
39­
82%

Bowline
Point
June
­
July
1975
unknown
#
unknown
days
striped
bass
white
perch
bay
anchovy
141
122
2134
111
168
1317
initial
and
96
hour
latent
74%
68%
2%
23%
26%
0%
70%
100%
22%

Bowline
Point
May
­
July
1976
unknown
#
10
days
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
bay
anchovy
PYSL
herrings
PYSL
Atlantic
tomcod
PYSL
118
54
148
46
54
207
42
1120
83
17
initial
and
96
hour
latent
54%
33%
0%
20%
29%
23%
21%
0%
1%
12%
26
­
77%
13
­
84%
 
0
­
80%
54%

Bowline
Point
March
­
July
1977
736
samples
46
days
striped
bass
larvae
white
perch
PYSL
bay
anchovy
larvae
herrings
PYSL
silverside
PYSL
228
26
634
37
24
452
38
1524
22
56
initial
and
96
hour
latent
71
­
72%
34%
0
­
2%
23%
16%
55
­
66%
69%
0%
5%
0%
41
­
100%
16
­
62%
 
51%
 
Bowline
Point
March
­
October
1978
609
samples
40
days
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
bay
anchovy
PYSL
herrings
PYSL
646
190
325
271
792
301
763
51
initial
and
96
hour
latent
52
­
63%
19%
0
­
3%
23
­
63%
5
­
46%
0­
5%
0%
0%
76
­
100%
52
­
68%
 
 
Bowline
Point
May
­
June
1979
435
samples
19
days
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
bay
anchovy
PYSL
herrings
PYSL
77
205
181
63
155
191
89
92
initial
and
96
hour
latent
35
­
41%
26
­
35%
0
­
4%
30
­
31%
8­
20%
5­
8%
0%
0­
3%
24
­
42%
32%
 
0
­
58%
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
Table
A7­
1:
Summary
of
Entrainment
Survival
Study
Results
Facility
Sampling
Period
Number
of
Samples
and
Days
Species
Number
Sampled
at
Intake
Number
Sampled
at
Discharge
Survival
Study
Initial
Discharge
Survival
Latent
Discharge
Survival
Survival
Estimate
A7­
6
March
11,
2003
Braidwood
Nuclear
June
­
July
1988
68
samples
3
days
all
species
combined
191
103
initial
59%
­
100%

Brayton
Point
April
­
August
1997
February
­
July
1998
6829
samples
41
days
winter
flounder
tautog
windowpane
flounder
bay
anchovy
american
sand
lance
49
34
58
539
1091
965
401
58
15896
2941
initial
and
96
hour
latent
30
­
38%
4%
29
­
30%
0%
0%
­
­
­
­
­
90
­
100%
98
­
100%
65
­
67%
0%
100%

Cayuga
Generating
Plant
May
­
June
1979
80
samples
24
days
suckers
carps
and
minnows
perches
984
466
108
649
192
66
initial
and
48
hour
latent
75
­
92%
12
­
74
%
43
­
69%
93
­
98%
45
­
100%
44
­
61%
87
­
98%
25
­
86%
19
­
59%

Connecticut
Yankee
June
­
July
1970
102
samples
7
days
alewife
blueback
herring
unknown
unknown
initial
0­
8%
­
0­
25%

Connecticut
Yankee
June
­
July,
1971
and
1972
30
samples
2
days
alewife
blueback
herring
273
795
initial
0
­
24%
­
0­
26%

Contra
Costa
April
­
July,
1976
unknown
#
7
days
striped
bass
637
329
initial
0
­
50%
­
0­
95%

Danskammer
Point
Generating
Station
May
­
November
1975
372
samples
29
days
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
herrings
PYSL
54
36
200
61
55
326
initial
and
96
hour
latent
39%
38%
20%
3%
4%
0%
95%
100%
80
­
87%

Fort
Calhoun
October
1973
­
June
1977
unknown
#
89
days
Ephemeroptera
Hydropsychidae
Chironomidae
2221
3690
2646
2220
4964
2925
initial
18
­
32%
47
­
56%
43
­
66%
­
­
­
92%
92%
84%

Ginna
Generating
Station
June
and
August,
1980
255
samples
20
days
alewife
larvae
rainbow
smelt
larvae
54
31
95
17
initial
and
48
hour
latent
0%
0%
­
­
­
0%

Indian
Point
June
and
July,
1977
unknown
#
7
days
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
bay
anchovy
PYSL
herrings
PYSL
806
158
1254
100
518
67
704
65
initial
and
96
hour
latent
45
­
52%
15
­
43%
3
­
4%
10
­
11%
29
­
36%
15
­
30%
0%
0%
85
­
87%
73
­
89%
18
­
36%
40%

Indian
Point
May
­
July,
1978
unknown
#
22
days
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
bay
anchovy
PYSL
herrings
PYSL
447
227
500
1046
1102
392
820
1104
initial
and
96
hour
latent
0
­
34%
0
­
37%
0%
0
­
8%
0­
19%
6­
15%
0%
0%
0
­
82%
0
­
58%
0%
0%

Indian
Point
Generating
Station
March
­
August
1979
unknown
#
40
days
Atlantic
tomcod
striped
bass
white
perch
herrings
bay
anchovy
266
127
195
254
457
212
153
147
186
485
initial
and
96
hour
latent
14
­
46%
62
­
77%
24
­
70%
28%
6%
15
­
75%
4
­
21%
18%
13%
4%
11
­
64%
59
­
75%
29
­
32%
22
­
31%
3
­
7%

Indian
Point
Generating
Station
April
­
July
1980
unknown
#
44
days
striped
bass
bay
anchovy
white
perch
227
260
113
248
588
176
initial
and
96
hour
latent
50
­
81%
0
­
4%
0
­
90%
60­
72%
0%
73%
55­
81%
2­
4%
50­
90%

Indian
Point
Generating
Station
May
­
June
1985
unknown
#
49
days
bay
anchovy
PYSL
106
274
initial
and
48
hour
latent
6%
0%
0­
24.3%

Indian
Point
Generating
Station
June
1988
unknown
#
13
days
striped
bass
larvae
bay
anchovy
larvae
353
633
2710
7391
initial
and
24
hour
latent
62
­
68%
0
­
2%
24
­
44%
0%
60­
79%
0­
25%
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
Table
A7­
1:
Summary
of
Entrainment
Survival
Study
Results
Facility
Sampling
Period
Number
of
Samples
and
Days
Species
Number
Sampled
at
Intake
Number
Sampled
at
Discharge
Survival
Study
Initial
Discharge
Survival
Latent
Discharge
Survival
Survival
Estimate
March
11,
2003
A7­
7
Indian
River
Power
Plant
July
1975
­
December
1976
46
samples
27
days
bay
anchovy
Atlantic
croaker
spot
Atlantic
menhaden
Atlantic
silverside
unknown
unknown
initial
and
96
hour
latent
unknown
unknown
0
­
100%
0
­
100%
25
­
100%
0
­
100%
0
­
100%

Muskingum
River
Plant
1979
no
samples
none
specified
0
0
none
intermediate
to
high
potential
­
 
Northport
Generating
Station
April
and
July,
1980
162
samples
20
days
American
sand
lance
winter
flounder
bay
anchovy
29
13
7
782
17
11
initial
and
48
hour
latent
17%
35%
0%
2%
17%
0%
2%
10%
 
Oyster
Creek
Nuclear
Generating
Station
February
­
August
1985
28
samples
20
days
bay
anchovy
larvae
winter
flounder
larvae
3396
3935
3474
2999
initial
and
96
hour
latent
0
­
71%
32
­
92%
0%
6
­
66%
0
­
68%
15
­
84%

Pittsburg
Power
Plant
April
­
July,
1976
unknown
#
7
days
striped
bass
196
266
initial
8
­
87%
­
12­
94%

Port
Jefferson
April
1978
94
samples
5
days
winter
flounder
sand
lance
fourbeard
rockling
American
eel
sculpin
36
249
216
107
22
26
191
144
96
17
initial
and
96
hour
latent
0
­
23%
12
­
40%
19
­
21%
94
­
96%
88%
50%
0
­
10%
­
71­
96%
­
65%
25
­
86%
73
­
100%
100%
75%

PG&
E
Potrero
January
1979
25
samples
Pacific
herring
546
716
initial
and
96
hour
latent
16%
­
70%

Quad
Cities
Nuclear
Station
June
1978
unknown
#
5
days
freshwater
drum
minnows
378
278
916
307
initial
and
24
hour
latent
0
­
71%
2
­
75%
­
­
2
­
62%
7
­
63%

Quad
Cities
Nuclear
Station
April
­
June
1984
unknown
#
8
days
freshwater
drum
carp
buffalo
unknown
unknown
unknown
unknown
unknown
unknown
initial
and
24
hour
latent
unknown
unknown
unknown
­
­
­
63%
92
­
97%
94%

Roseton
Generating
Station
May
­
November
1975
672
samples
41
days
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
herrings
PYSL
100
77
471
172
97
833
initial
and
96
hour
latent
62%
29%
26%
6%
1%
0%
38%
­
­

Roseton
Generating
Station
June
­
July
1976
unknown
#
27
days
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
herring
PYSL
93
401
1,054
80
349
645
initial
and
96
hour
latent
14
­
43%
6
­
42%
5
­
29%
­
­
0%
19
­
58%
11
­
79%
10
­
59%

Roseton
Generating
Station
March
May
­
July
1977
unknown
#
unknown
days
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
herring
PYSL
Atlantic
tomcod
YSL
427
251
880
1178
765
266
1344
1345
initial
and
96
hour
latent
3
­
29%
0
­
17%
0
­
5%
16%
18%
27%
0%
40%
6
­
58%
0
­
52%
0­
19%
41%

Roseton
Generating
Station
March
July
­
July
1978
256
samples
30
days
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
herring
PYSL
Atlantic
tomcod
PYSL
123
395
1274
83
211
459
1089
153
initial
and
96
hour
latent
27
­
50%
0
­
35%
0
­
10%
33
­
45%
18%
10%
0%
36%
46%
56­
96%
0%
39%

Roseton
Generating
Station
May
­
July
1980
1431
samples
42
days
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
herring
PYSL
245
194
812
425
366
1252
initial
and
48
hour
latent
46
­
61%
30
­
59%
7
­
31%
48
­
56%
27
­
62%
1
­
3%
88%
67%
23%
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
8
March
11,
2003
A
review
of
the
data
in
table
A7­
1,
above,
shows
that
the
majority
of
the
studies
were
conducted
at
facilities
located
in
a
limited
geographical
region
of
the
country,
with
24
of
the
studies
conducted
in
the
northeastern
region
of
the
United
States.
This
may
explain
why
these
studies
provide
entrainment
survival
estimates
for
relatively
few,
only
24,
species
or
families
of
fish.
The
majority
of
survival
estimates
in
these
studies
were
for
striped
bass,
white
perch,
bay
anchovy,
and
herrings.
Also,
the
majority
of
these
studies
are
over
20
years
old,
with
25
of
the
studies
conducted
in
the
1970'
s.
Thus,
the
results
with
regard
to
species
composition
and
abundance
may
not
be
indicative
of
current
conditions
with
improved
water
quality
due
to
the
enactment
of
the
Clean
Water
Act
in
1972.
Entrainment
survival
in
these
studies
was
also
estimated
with
relatively
short
sampling
periods,
with
the
15
studies
using
sampling
periods
of
approximately
two
months
long.
Also,
the
sampling
periods
did
not
always
correspond
to
peak
egg
and
larval
abundance
in
the
waterbody.
Twelve
of
these
studies
determined
that
sample
sizes
of
less
than
100
individuals
for
a
particular
species
at
the
discharge
station
were
sufficient
to
give
an
accurate
estimation
of
entrainment
survival.
These
small
sample
sizes
may
not
be
sufficient
to
provide
accurate
estimates
of
entrainment
survival
given
that
these
facilities
entrain
organisms
on
the
order
of
millions
to
billions
per
year.
Also,
small
sample
sizes
in
conjunction
with
the
high
variability
of
entrainment
survival
increases
the
uncertainty
associated
with
these
estimations.
The
small
sample
sizes
allowed
for
limited
study
of
latent
survival,
and
no
facility
attempted
to
study
latent
physiological
effects
of
entrainment
on
a
species
such
as
the
possible
effect
on
growth
rates,
maturation,
fertility,
and
vulnerability
to
natural
mortality.
The
nature
of
the
equation
for
entrainment
survival
results
in
estimates
substantially
higher
than
the
proportion
of
survival
in
the
discharge
samples
due
to
its
use
of
a
correction
for
mortality
in
the
intake
samples,
which
is
often
quite
high.
Although
these
studies
indicate
that
entrainment
survival
may
occur
for
certain
species
under
certain
conditions,
the
results
may
only
be
used
to
indicate
the
potential
for
survival,
albeit
most
likely
overestimated,
for
those
species
and
life
stages
under
those
same
conditions
sampled
at
that
particular
facility.
The
fact
that
the
existing
studies
are
characterized
by
high
uncertainty,
high
variability
and
the
potential
for
high
bias
(
Boreman
and
Goodyear,
1981)
complicates
efforts
to
synthesize
the
various
results
in
a
manner
that
would
provide
useful
generalizations
of
the
results
or
application
to
other
particular
facilities.
For
these
reasons,
EPA
believes
that
the
reported
results
do
not
provide
a
clear
indication
as
to
the
extent
of
entrainment
survival
significantly
above
zero
percent
to
be
used
as
a
defensible
assumption
to
calculate
benefits
for
this
rule.

A7­
3
DETAILED
ANALYSIS
OF
ENTRAINMENT
SURVIVAL
STUDIES
REVIEWED
The
following
pages
provide
detailed
summary
descriptions
of
each
of
the
36
studies
reviewed.
EPA
reviewed
these
studies
to
determine
if
they
were
conducted
in
a
manner
that
provides
adequate
representation
of
the
current
probability
of
entrainment
survival
at
the
facility.
The
criteria
EPA
used
to
evaluate
the
studies
focused
on
three
main
themes:
the
sampling
effort
of
the
study,
the
operating
conditions
of
the
facility
during
the
study,
and
the
survival
estimates
determined
as
the
result
of
the
study.
Specifically,
EPA
asked
the
following
questions:

Sampling:
When
were
samples
collected?
With
what
frequency
were
samples
collected?
Were
samples
collected
when
organisms
were
spawning,
or
at
peak
abundance?
What
time
of
day
were
samples
collected?
What
was
the
number
of
replicates
per
sampling
date?
Were
the
intake
and
discharge
samples
collected
at
the
same
time
so
the
results
can
be
compared?
How
long
was
each
sample
collected?
What
method
was
used
to
collect
samples?
At
what
depth
were
samples
collected?
What
was
the
location
of
the
samples
collected
at
the
intake
and
discharge?
Which
water
quality
parameters
were
measured?
Were
dissolved
organic
carbon
(
DOC)
and
particulate
organic
carbon
(
POC)
measured?
What
was
the
velocity
at
the
intake
and
discharge?

Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
How
many
units
at
the
facility
were
in
operation?
How
many
pumps
at
the
facility
were
in
operation?
What
was
the
intake
temperature
range,
the
discharge
temperature
range,
and
the
 
T
range
to
which
organisms
were
exposed?
Were
biocides
in
use?

Survival
Estimation:
How
many
sampling
events
occurred?
What
was
the
total
number
of
samples
collected?
What
was
the
total
number
of
organisms
collected?
How
many
organisms
are
entrained
each
year
at
this
facility?
Did
the
study
take
into
account
fragmented
organisms?
Were
the
number
of
organisms
collected
at
the
intake
and
discharge
comparable?
What
were
the
most
abundant
species
collected?
Were
stunned
larvae
included
with
live
larvae
in
survival
estimates?
Did
the
facility
omit
dead
and
opaque
organisms
from
the
count
of
dead
organisms?
How
was
latent
survival
studied?
Were
data
sampled
from
all
times
and
operating
conditions
combined
to
determine
entrainment
survival?
What
were
the
controls
for
the
study?
What
was
the
range
of
intake
survival
determined
by
the
study?
What
was
the
range
of
discharge
survival
determined
by
the
study?
How
was
entrainment
survival
calculated?
Were
confidence
intervals
or
standard
errors
calculated?
Were
significant
differences
tested
between
intake
and
discharge
survival?
Was
entrainment
survival
calculated
for
species
with
low
sample
sizes,
such
as
less
than
100
organisms?
Was
egg
survival
studied?
Was
there
any
trend
evident
in
larval
survival?
Were
the
raw
data
provided
to
verify
results?
What
was
the
trend
of
survival
with
regard
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
9
to
temperature?
What
was
the
extent
of
mechanical
mortality?
What
quality
control
procedures
were
used?
Was
the
study
peer
reviewed?
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
10
March
11,
2003
Anclote
Power
Plant
Anclote
River,
FL
1985
Study
CCI
Environmental
Services,
Inc.,
1996
Sampling:
Dates:
Sept.
25
­
29,
October
9
­
11,
and
November
1­
2
Samples
collection
frequency:
a
few
days
per
month
Times
of
peak
abundance:
autumn
months
when
densities
maybe
not
the
highest
Time:
mostly
at
night,
some
late
afternoon
to
evening
Number
of
replicates:
varied
between
5
­
25
per
month
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
paired
number,
timing
unknown
Elapsed
collection
time:
20
­
30
minutes
Method:
400
µ
m
mesh
net
with
1
m
diameter
and
5
gallon
plastic
bucket
with
500
µ
m
mesh
side
panels
Depth:
mid­
depth
and
surface
Intake
location:
unknown
Discharge
location:
condenser
discharge
and
point
of
discharge
in
canal
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
pH,
DO,
salinity
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
operated
at
peak
load
to
maximize
 
T,
1
­
2
Units
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
varied
due
to
sampling
location,
0­
4
pumps
Temperature:
Discharge
temperature:
28.8
­
38.3

C
 
T
average:
5.4
­
7.3

C
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
8
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
120
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
41,196
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
approx.
equal
Most
abundant
species:
not
classified
to
species
level
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
24
hours
In
several
replicates,
more
organisms
were
counted
after
24
hours
in
jar
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
64%
for
Fish
larvae
73%
for
Amphipoda
44%
for
Chaetognatha
72%
for
crab
larvae
72%
for
Caridean
shrimp
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
8
­
47%
for
Fish
larvae
29
­
58%
for
Amphipoda
28
­
35%
for
Chaetognatha
74
­
80%
for
crab
larvae
45
­
66%
for
Caridean
shrimp
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Mean
survival
for
each
replicate
was
reported
as
survival
estimate
per
species
Confidence
intervals
(
95%)
and
standard
deviations
were
calculated
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
none
collected
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
hours
of
collection
Raw
data:
were
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
unknown
Mechanical
effects:
unknown
Quality
control:
QA/
QC
officer
oversaw
sorting
and
sample
handling
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
11
Bergum
Power
Station
Bergumermeer,

Netherlands
1976
Study
Hadderingh,
1978
Sampling:
Dates:
April
27
­
June
1
Samples
collection
frequency:
approximately
once
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
coincided
with
abundance
of
larvae
and
juveniles
Time:
unknown
Number
of
replicates:
unknown
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
unclear
if
paired
sampling
Elapsed
collection
time:
3
minutes
Method:
conical
net
with
0.5
mm
mesh
and
0.5
m
diameter
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
unknown
Discharge
location:
in
outlet
before
weir
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
40
cm/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Intake
temperature:
10.8
­
21.6
Discharge
temperature:
16.7
­
24.6

C
 
T
ranged
from
2.4
­
8.0

C
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
6
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
unknown
at
intake,
1148
at
discharge
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
approximately
10
million
organisms
entrained
per
day
in
May
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
unknown
Most
abundant
species:
smelt,
perches
Stunned
larvae:
unknown
if
included
in
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
floating
buckets
in
the
outlet
canal
for
24
hours
5
­
50%
appeared
to
be
dead
in
buckets
floating
in
outlet
canal
However,
latent
survival
was
not
explicitly
studied
Data:
survival
by
sampling
date
and
then
averaged
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
54
­
100%
for
smelt
81
­
96%
for
perches
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
10
­
28%
for
smelt
32
­
74%
for
perches
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
and
standard
deviations
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
no
eggs
collected
Larval
survival:
increased
in
samples
later
in
year,
may
be
due
to
larger
sized
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
not
discussed
Mechanical
effects:
not
discussed
Quality
control:
not
discussed
Peer
review:
work
done
for
facility,
published
in
Applied
Limnology
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
12
March
11,
2003
Bowline
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1975
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1976a
Sampling:
Dates:
June
3
­
July
date
unknown
Samples
collection
frequency:
1
­
4
times
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
sampling
intended
to
coincide
with
peak
densities
Time:
day
or
night
Number
of
replicates:
unknown
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
unknown
if
paired
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
larval
collection
tables
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
in
front
of
intake
Discharge
location:
from
standpipe
connected
to
discharge
pipe
of
Unit
2
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
conductivity,
DO,
pH
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
intake:
1.5
­
2
m/
sec,
discharge
2­
4.6
m/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
 
T
range:
0.5
­
12.1

C
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
37
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
400
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
4643
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
no,
more
at
intake
Higher
percentage
of
larvae
were
collected
at
the
discharge
station
in
the
later
weeks
of
the
collection
period.
Conversely,
a
higher
percentage
of
larvae
were
collected
at
the
intake
at
the
beginning
weeks
of
the
collection
period.
This
discrepancy
in
larval
collection
combined
with
higher
survival
rates
later
in
the
spawning
season
accounts
for
the
bias
which
results
in
higher
survival
rates
at
the
discharge
station.
The
study
acknowledges
this
bias
and
concludes
that
it
is
responsible
for
the
higher
discharge
survival
estimates
Most
abundant
species:
striped
bass,
white
perch
and
bay
anchovy
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion;
most
died
within
hours
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
96
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
81%
for
striped
bass
56%
for
white
perch
9%
for
bay
anchovy
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
74%
for
striped
bass
68%
for
white
perch
2%
for
bay
anchovy
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
(
95%)
were
presented
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
no
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
3
hours
of
collection.
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
too
few
samples
collected
to
establish
relationship
Mechanical
effects:
extent
was
not
discussed
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
13
Bowline
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1976
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1977
Sampling:
Dates:
May
18
­
July
26
Samples
collection
frequency:
approx.
4
nights
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
for
all
species
except
Atlantic
tomcod
Time:
at
night
Number
of
replicates:
stated
average
of
10
per
sampling
trip
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
sorted
simultaneously
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
larval
collection
table
with
4
inch
diameter
trash
pump
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
in
front
of
Unit
1
trash
racks
Discharge
location:
from
standpipes
of
discharge
at
Units
1
or
2
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
conductivity,
pH,
and
DO
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
intake:
0.11
­
3
m/
sec,
discharge:
3
­
4.6
m/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied
between
1
and
2
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
discharge
range:
29.0
­
35.9

C
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
39
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
688
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
2795
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
only
included
in
count
if
>
50%
was
present
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
no,
very
different
Most
abundant
species:
striped
bass,
white
perch
,
atlantic
tomcod,
bay
anchovy,
herrings
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
96
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
81
­
90%
for
striped
bass
62%
for
white
perch
54
­
82%
for
Atlantic
tomcod
7
­
53%
for
bay
anchovy
35%
for
herrings
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
0
­
54%
for
striped
bass
0
­
33%
for
white
perch
29
­
94%
for
Atlantic
tomcod
0
­
10%
for
bay
anchovy
20%
for
herrings
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
(
95%)
were
presented
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
12
hours
of
collection.
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results.
Temperature
effects:
trend
of
decreasing
survival
when
temperatures
>
30

C
Mechanical
effects:
unknown
extent
Quality
control:
color
coded
labels,
immediate
checks
of
sorted
samples,
SOPs
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
14
March
11,
2003
Bowline
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1977
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1978a
Sampling:
Dates:
March
7
­
July
15
Samples
collection
frequency:
5
nights
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
covered
of
peak
densities
of
most
targeted
species
Time:
at
night
Number
of
replicates:
varied
between
2
and
10
per
site
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
paired
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
larval
table
with
pump,
2
pumps
at
intake;
2
tables
at
discharge
ambient
water
injection
system
added
to
reduce
prolonged
temp.
exposure
Depth:
middle
to
bottom
at
intake,
at
standpipes
for
discharge
Intake
location:
in
front
of
Unit
1
trash
rack
Discharge
location
from
standpipes
of
either
Unit
1
or
2,
depending
on
operation
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
conductivity,
pH
and
DO
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
intake:
0.11­
2
m/
sec;
discharge
3
­
4.6
m/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied
between
1
and
2
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
2
pumps
throttled
or
2
pumps
full
Temperature:
Intake
range:
3.7
­
27

C
 
T
range:
not
provided
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
46
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
736
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
4071
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
included
in
count
if
>
50%
of
organism
was
present
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
no,
very
different
Most
abundant
species:
striped
bass,
white
perch,
bay
anchovy,
herrings
and
silversides
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
96
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
74%
for
striped
bass
69%
for
white
perch
0
­
16%
for
bay
anchovy
54%
for
herrings
37%
for
silversides
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
71
­
72%
for
striped
bass
34%
for
white
perch
0
­
2%
for
bay
anchovy
23%
for
herrings
16%
for
silversides
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Standard
errors
were
presented
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Larval
survival:
survival
increased
with
larval
length
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results.
Temperature
effects:
decreased
survival
>
33

C
Mechanical
effects:
unknown
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
15
Bowline
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1978
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1979b
Sampling:
Dates:
March
13
­
October
16
Samples
collection
frequency:
1
­
5
times
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
majority
of
samples
in
June
and
July
Time:
at
night
Number
of
replicates:
varied
between
1
­
10
per
sampling
date.
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
mostly
paired,
not
all
sites
sampled
all
dates
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
pump/
larval
table
combination;
also
floating
larval
table
Depth:
at
bottom
for
intake
and
unspecified
for
discharge
Intake
location:
in
front
of
trash
racks
of
Unit
1
or
2
Discharge
location:
at
either
Unit
1
or
2
in
standpipes
from
discharge
pipe
floating
larval
table
used
for
sampling
at
point
of
discharge
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
salinity,
pH,
DO,
conductivity
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
intake:
0.15
­
0.23
m/
s
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied
between
1
and
2
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
unknown
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
40
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
609
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
unknown
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
varied
Most
abundant
species:
striped
bass,
bay
anchovy,
white
perch
and
herrings
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
holding
jars
for
96
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period.
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
48
­
49%
for
striped
bass
39%
for
white
perch
4%
for
bay
anchovy
19%
for
herrings
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
51
­
63%
for
striped
bass
19%
for
white
perch
0%
for
bay
anchovy
23%
for
herrings
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Standard
error
were
presented
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
12
hours
of
collection
Survival
increased
with
larval
length
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
no
survival
for
YSL
for
any
species
at
temps.
>
30

C
no
survival
for
PYSL
for
any
species
at
temps.
>
33

C
majority
of
samples
collected
at
temperatures
<
30

C
Mechanical
effects:
recirculation
of
water
occurs
Quality
control:
color
coded
labels,
double
checks,
sorting
efficiency
checks
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
16
March
11,
2003
Bowline
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1979
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1981a
Sampling:
Dates:
May
23
­
June
27
Samples
collection
frequency:
3
­
5
days
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
timed
to
coincide
with
peak
densities
Time:
1400
to
2200
hours
Number
of
replicates:
varied
between
0
­
9
per
sampling
date,
generally
7
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
mostly
paired,
initiated
simultaneously
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
intake:
floating
larval
table
or
rear
draw
sampling
flume
discharge:
pumpless
plankton
sampling
flume
or
pumped
larval
table
Depth:
intake:
mid­
depth
(
4.6
m)
discharge:
2
m
below
surface
Intake
location:
in
front
of
trash
racks
Discharge
location:
at
standpipe
and
diffuser
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
conductivity,
pH,
DO
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
intake:
1.5
­
3.0
m/
sec;
discharge
3
­
4.6m/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied,
power
generated
on
only
5
sampling
dates
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
operated
through
sampling
Temperature:
 
T
range:
not
provided
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
19
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
435
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
1212
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
estimated
1.5
million
striped
bass
2.7
million
white
perch
Fragmented
organisms:
included
in
count
if
50%
of
organism
was
present
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
approx.
equal
Most
abundant
species:
white
perch,
bay
anchovy,
striped
bass,
herrings
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
96
hours.
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period.
Controls:
Survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control.
Initial
intake
survival
range:
63
­
71%
for
striped
bass
39
­
63%
for
white
perch
4
­
14%
for
bay
anchovy
56
­
61%
for
herrings
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
35
­
41%
for
striped
bass
26
­
35%
for
white
perch
0
­
4%
for
bay
anchovy
30
­
31%
for
herrings
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Standard
errors
were
presented.
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
determined
by
translucency
and
hatching
success
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
12
hours
of
collection.
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results.
Temperature
effects:
little
survival
at
discharge
temperatures
>
30

C
Mechanical
effects:
due
to
no
power
generation
on
the
majority
of
sampling
dates,
results
give
indication
of
extent
of
mechanical
induced
mortality
This
study
included
analysis
of
diel
patterns
of
ichthyoplankton
abundance
in
comparison
to
diel
patterns
of
plant
generation.
Facility
tends
to
operate
at
85
to
95
percent
of
capacity
in
the
mid­
afternoon
hours
which
results
in
higher
 
T's
and
discharge
temperatures.
Facility
tends
to
operate
at
minimum
level,
20
to
30
percent
capacity,
in
early
morning
when
larval
abundance
is
high
and
entrainment
survival
samples
collected.
Sample
collection
during
the
hours
when
the
facility
is
operating
at
minimum
levels
of
percent
capacity,
and
at
times
with
correspondingly
lower
 
T's
and
discharge
temperatures,
may
add
bias
to
the
results
since
more
organisms
will
be
exposed
to
lower
levels
of
temperature
stress.
The
peak
abundance
for
each
species
is
only
slightly
higher
than
abundance
throughout
the
day.
Thus,
collectively,
more
organisms
may
be
exposed
to
higher
temperatures
and
have
higher
mortality
rates
but
are
not
reflected
in
samples
collected
at
night.
Quality
control:
color
coded
labels,
check
of
sorting
efficiency,
SOPs
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
17
Braidwood
Nuclear
Station
Kankakee
River,
IL
1988
Study
EA
Science
and
Technology,
1990
Sampling:
Dates:
June
1
­
July
5
Samples
collection
frequency:
3
samples
taken
in
35
days
Times
of
peak
abundance:
peak
densities
of
eggs
and
larvae
were
found
in
May
Time:
varied;
day
and
night
at
intake,
only
day
at
discharge
Number
of
replicates:
varied,
8
­
14
per
sampling
date
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
more
discharge
replicates,
not
always
same
day
Elapsed
collection
time:
2
minutes
Method:
plankton
net
with
1.0
m
opening,
net
rinsed
out
in
bucket
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
in
holding
pond
into
which
river
water
was
pumped
Discharge
location:
downstream
of
outfall
in
discharge
canal
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
0.4
­
0.6
ft/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
not
given
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
3
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
62
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
294
Samples,
which
were
collected
after
peak
densities,
contained
fewer
and
larger
organism
which
may
in
turn
have
higher
survival
rates.
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
estimate
5.8
­
11.2
million
eggs/
larvae
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
more
at
intake
Most
abundant
species:
minnows
and
sunfish
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
were
omitted
from
all
calculations
of
survival
Thus
67%
of
those
dead
in
the
intake
samples
and
21%
of
those
dead
in
the
discharge
samples
were
omitted
from
the
survival
proportions
Latent
survival:
not
studied
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control.
Initial
intake
survival
range:
60%
for
minnows
(
17%
including
dead­
opaque)
78%
for
sunfish
(
54%
including
dead­
opaque)
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
no
minnows
collected
80%
for
sunfish
(
76%
including
deadopaque
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Survival
proportions
calculated
by
dividing
number
of
live
larvae
by
number
of
live
plus
dead­
transparent
larvae
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
data
not
given
Larval
survival:
not
studied
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results.
Temperature
effects:
not
studied
Mechanical
effects:
not
studied
Quality
control:
not
discussed
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
18
March
11,
2003
.

Brayton
Point
Mount
Hope
Bay,
MA
1997­
1998
Study
Lawler
Matusky
&

Skelly
Engineers,
1999
Sampling:
Dates:
April
30
­
August
27,
1997
and
February
26
­
July
29,
1998
Samples
collection
frequency:
weekly
Times
of
peak
abundance:
not
discussed
specifically
Time:
varied,
day
or
night
Number
of
replicates:
varied
between
14
and
77
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
not
paired,
2
tables
located
in
discharge
canal
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
pump/
larval
table
combination
Depth:
mid­
depth
for
intake,
2
­
4
m
below
surface
at
discharge
Intake
location:
directly
in
front
of
Unit
3
intake
screens
Discharge
location:
middle
of
discharge
canal
or
from
Unit
4
discharge
pipe
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
conductance
and
salinity
periodically
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
intake
range:
4.5
­
28.0

C
discharge
range:
11
­
45

C
 
T
data
not
provided
Biocide
use:
samples
collected
when
not
in
use
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
41
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
2692
in
1997;
4137
in
1998
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
2256
in
intake;
27,574
in
discharge
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
no.
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
4
­
79X
more
in
discharge
Most
abundant
species:
bay
anchovy,
American
sand
lance
Stunned
larvae:
assumed
stunned
larvae
did
not
survive
due
to
increased
predation
risk
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
holding
cups
in
aquarium
racks
for
96
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
with
both
sampling
years
combined
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
0%
for
American
sand
lance
4%
for
tautog
0%
for
bay
anchovy
44
­
46%
for
windowpane
flounder
32%
for
winter
flounder
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
0%
for
American
sand
lance
4%
for
tautog
0%
for
bay
anchovy
29
­
30%
for
windowpane
flounder
33
­
38%
for
winter
flounder
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
discharge
survival
/
intake
survival
Standard
errors
were
presented
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Larval
survival:
survival
increased
with
larval
length,
decreased
markedly
within
4
hours
of
holding
in
latent
studies
Raw
data:
were
provided
by
species
and
not
by
sample
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
survival
decrease
markedly
at
temps
>
20

C
Mechanical
effects:
unknown
extent
Quality
control:
continuous
sampling
plan
which
included
reanalysis
of
samples
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
19
Cayuga
Generating
Plant
Wabash
River,
IN
1979
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1980a
Sampling:
Dates:
May
17
­
31
and
June
8
­
22
Samples
collection
frequency:
daily
Times
of
peak
abundance:
highest
average
densities
sampled
were
June
8
­
10
Time:
1900
to
0300
hours
Number
of
replicates:
varied
between
0
­
6
per
sampling
date.
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
simultaneous
sampling,
transit
time
=
36
mins
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
pump
/
larval
table
collection
system
Depth:
intake:
2
and
5
m
below
surface,
discharge:
3
­
4
m
below
surface
Intake
location:
in
front
of
intake
structure
Discharge
location:
where
discharge
of
Units
1
and
2
enter
canal
also
cooling
tower
discharge
in
discharge
canal
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
DO
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
varied,
2
­
4
Temperature:
intake
range:
17.6
­
24.3

C
discharge
range:
29.4
­
33.3

C
 
T
ranged
from
8.4
­
11.8

C
Biocide
use:
occurs
daily,
but
ceased
at
least
2
hours
before
sampling
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
24
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
80
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
2556
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
13
­
14.6%
were
damaged
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
more
at
intake
Most
abundant
species:
suckers,
perches,
carps,
temperate
basses
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
48
hour
observation
in
aerated
glass
jars
of
filtered
river
water
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
86
­
98%
for
suckers
28
­
92%
for
carps
and
minnows
50
­
86%
for
perches
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
75
­
92%
for
suckers
12
­
74%
for
carps
and
minnows
43
­
69%
for
perches
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival/
Intake
survival
Confidence
intervals:
were
not
presented;
standard
errors
were
calculated
standard
error
sometime
as
high
as
survival
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Larval
survival:
latent
effects
were
not
seen
until
48
hours
after
collection
Raw
data:
were
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
lower
survival
for
all
species
at
temperatures
above
30
°
C
Mechanical
effects:
survival
decreased
when
number
of
pumps
increased
Quality
control:
sorting
efficiency
checks
and
color
coded
labels
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
20
March
11,
2003
Connecticut
Yankee
Atomic
Power
Company
Connecticut
River,
CT
1970
Study
Marcy,
1971
Sampling:
Dates:
June
30
­
July
29
Samples
collection
frequency:
weekly
Times
of
peak
abundance:
sampling
dates
were
estimated
times
of
peak
larvae
Time:
varied
throughout
day
to
avoid
biocide
application
Number
of
replicates:
sampled
in
triplicate,
data
from
replicates
combined
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
samples
taken
successively
not
all
sites
sampled
on
all
dates
Elapsed
collection
time:
5
minutes
Method:
conical
nylon
plankton
net
with
1
L
plastic
bucket
attached
to
cod
end
portable
water
table
for
maintaining
temperature
during
counting
Depth:
median
depth
at
intake;
surface,
middle
and
bottom
of
discharge
because
dead
fish
in
canal
may
sink
or
float
due
to
immobility
or
changes
in
specific
gravity
of
water,
thus
giving
inconsistent
results
Intake
location:
unknown
Discharge
location:
outfall
weir
and
3
location
in
discharge
canal
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
DO
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
1
­
2
ft/
sec,
may
approach
8
ft/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Discharge
temperature:
28.2
­
41

C
 
T
ranged
from
6
­
12.1

C
Biocide
use:
sampling
avoided
daily
application
of
13%
sodium
hydrochlorite
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
7
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
102
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
2681
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
majority
of
dead
fish
were
mangled
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
unknown
Most
abundant
species:
alewife
and
blueback
herring
Stunned
larvae:
not
discussed
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
not
studied
Data:
all
data
for
all
species
combined,
survival
calculated
for
each
date
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
29
­
100%
for
all
species
combined
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
0
­
7.5%
for
all
species
combined
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
number
live
per
cubic
meter
in
each
discharge
sample/
number
live
per
cubic
meter
in
intake
for
each
day
Confidence
intervals
and
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
July
29
Egg
survival:
not
sampled
Larval
survival:
no
organisms
were
found
alive
at
end
of
discharge
canal
at
temperatures
>
30

C
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
at
discharge
temp.
>
33.5

C,
no
living
organisms
sampled
Mechanical
effects:
not
discussed
Quality
control:
not
discussed
Peer
review:
published
in
notes
of
Journal
Fisheries
Research
Board
of
Canada
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
21
Connecticut
Yankee
Atomic
Power
Company
Connecticut
River,
CT
1971
­
1972
Study
Marcy,
1973
Sampling:
Dates:
June
2
­
24,
1971
and
June
27
­
July
13,
1972
(
mechanical
only)
Samples
collection
frequency:
approximately
once
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
unknown
Time:
afternoons
and
evenings
Number
of
replicates:
three
at
each
station
although
at
three
different
depths
data
were
combined
for
each
station
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
collected
successively
at
the
5
sites
Elapsed
collection
time:
5
minutes
Method:
conical
nylon
plankton
net
with
0.39
mm
mesh
and
1L
plastic
bucket
Depth:
surface,
middle,
and
bottom
Intake
location:
unknown
Discharge
location:
below
weir
and
3
points
along
discharge
canal
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
0.3
­
0.6
m/
sec,
may
approach
2.4
m/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
in
1971,
no
power
generation
in
1972
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Intake
temperature:
16
­
26

C
(
1971);
19.9
­
28

C
(
1972)
Discharge
temperature:
29
­
35

C
(
1971
only)

 
T
ranged
from
9­
13

C
(
1971
only)
Biocide
use:
1972
study,
chemical
mortality
indistinguishable
from
mechanical
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
2
(
1971)
and
7
(
1972)
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
30
(
1971)
and
246
(
1972)
often
2­
3
times
as
many
samples
collected
at
discharge
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
1068
(
1971)
and
10,271
(
1972)
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown,
estimated
entrainment
is
1.7
­
5.8%
of
nonscreenable
fish
which
pass
facility
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
no.
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
4X
more
in
discharge
lower
numbers
collected
at
end
of
canal
may
be
due
to
dead
fish
settling
out
of
water
column
Most
abundant
species:
alewife
and
blueback
herring
Stunned
larvae:
were
included
as
live
unless
they
had
begun
to
turn
opaque
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
only
opaque
organisms
were
counted
as
dead
Latent
survival:
not
studied
Data:
replicate
data
combined;
survival
calculated
per
sampling
day
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
64
­
100%
for
all
species
sampled
(
1971)
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
0%
for
all
species
sampled
(
1971)
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
number
live
per
cubic
meter
in
each
discharge
sample/
number
live
per
cubic
meter
in
intake
for
each
day
Confidence
intervals
and
standard
deviations
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
none
sampled
Larval
survival:
no
survival
anywhere
in
discharge
at
temperatures
>
29

C
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
organisms
exposed
to
elevated
temp.
for
50
­
100
min
estimated
as
causing
20%
of
mortality
most
fish
are
dead
at
the
end
of
the
1.14
mile
canal
Mechanical
effects:
1972
study
indicated
that
72
­
87%
is
mechanical
mortality
Quality
control:
not
discussed
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
22
March
11,
2003
Contra
Costa
Power
Plant
San
Joaquin
River,
CA
1976
Study
Stevens
and
Finlayson,

1978
Sampling:
Dates:
April
28
­
July
10
Samples
collection
frequency:
once
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
unknown
Time:
varied,
about
25%
of
all
samples
collected
at
night
Number
of
replicates:
typically
3
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
paired
at
closest
time
and
temperature
Elapsed
collection
time:
1
­
2
minutes
Method:
505
micron
mech
conical
nylon
plankton
net
with
0.58
m
plastic
collecting
tubes
on
cod
end;
towed
net
on
boat
at
0.6
ft/
sec
Depth:
mid­
depth
Intake
location:
at
intake
for
units
6
and
7
Discharge
location:
at
discharge
for
units
1
­
5
and
units
6­
7
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Intake
temperature:
19
­
30

C
Discharge
temperature
19
­
38

C
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
6
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
966
(
1606
at
north
shore
control)
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
enumerated
in
one
replicate
tow
higher
proportion
of
unidentifiable
fragments
in
discharge
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
more
at
intake
Most
abundant
species:
striped
bass
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
not
studied
Data:
was
summarized
by
mean
larval
length
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
additional
control
on
north
shore
to
determine
background
mortality
control
site
at
north
shore
away
from
intake
had
lower
mortality
rates
Initial
intake
survival
range:
33­
90%
for
striped
bass
recirculated
water
may
be
cause
of
some
intake
mortality
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
0
­
50%
for
striped
bass
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
paired
discharge
survival
divided
by
paired
intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
and
standard
deviations
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Larval
survival:
increased
survival
with
greater
larval
length
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
mortality
increased
with
increase
in
discharge
temperature
higher
mortality
with
discharge
temp.
>
31
and
 
T
>
7

C
linear
regression
showed
that
half
died
at
temps
>
33.3

C
0%
survival
at
temperatures
of
38

C
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
23
Danskammer
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1975
Study
Ecological
Analysts,

Inc.
1976b
Sampling:
Dates:
May
29
­
November
18
Samples
collection
frequency:
varied
from
once
every
2
weeks
to
4
times
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
increased
frequency
during
spawning
Time:
varied,
generally
overnight
Number
of
replicates:
varied,
ranged
from
1
to
12
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
usually
paired
Elapsed
collection
time:
unknown
Method:
pump/
larval
table
Depth:
mid­
depth
for
intake,
unspecified
for
discharge
Intake
location:
in
canal
in
front
of
traveling
screens
Discharge
location:
outlet
of
Unit
3
to
Hudson
River
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
varied
between
1
and
2
Temperature:
Intake
temperature
range:
21
­
26

C
Discharge
temperature
range:
not
provided
 
T
ranged
from
0
­
10

C
Biocide
use
not
used
during
sampling;
noted
that
chlorination
will
reduce
survival
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
29
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
372
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
1655
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
no.
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
/
discharge:
up
to
2X
more
in
discharge
Most
abundant
species:
herrings,
striped
bass
and
white
perch
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
96
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
0
­
50%
for
striped
bass
33
­
100%
for
white
perch
63
­
100%
for
herrings
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
0
­
39%
for
striped
bass
38
­
80%
for
white
perch
20
­
22%
for
herrings
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
and
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Significantly
lower
survival
in
discharge:
herring
PYSL
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
none
collected
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
3
hours
of
collection.
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
significantly
lower
survival
when
 
T
>
10

C
and
discharge
temperature
>
30

C
Mechanical
effects:
not
discussed
Quality
control:
samples
double
checked
and
data
entry
monitored
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
24
March
11,
2003
Fort
Calhoun
Nuclear
Station
Missouri
River,
NE
1973­
1977
study
Carter,
1978
Sampling:
Dates:
October
1973
­
June
1977
Samples
collection
frequency:
5
­
24
times
per
year
Times
of
peak
abundance:
same
frequency
all
year
round
Time:
unknown
Number
of
replicates:
unknown
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
unknown
if
timing
was
paired
Elapsed
collection
time:
unknown
Method:
plankton
net
with
571
µ
m
mesh
and
0.75
m
diameter
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
in
river
near
intake
Discharge
location:
near
discharge
in
river
immediately
downstream
of
intake
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied,
25­
97%
of
full
power
or
shut
down
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Discharge
temperature:
27.0
­
36.9

C
during
summer
samples
 
T
ranged
from
0.6
­
13.5

C
Biocide
use:
unspecified
number
of
samples
collected
during
chlorination
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
89
(
16
when
facility
was
shut
down)
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
24,535
macroinvertebrates
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
no,
varied
Most
abundant
species:
Ephemeroptera,
Hydropsychidae,
Chironomidae
Stunned
larvae:
macroinvertebrates
studied
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
not
studied
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
Survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
12
­
26%
for
Ephemeroptera
42
­
51%
for
Hydropsychidae
35
­
60%
for
Chironomidae
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
18
­
32%
for
Ephemeroptera
47
­
56%
for
Hydropsychidae
43
­
66%
for
Chironomidae
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Average
differential
mortality
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
calculated
but
not
presented
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
collected
Larval
survival:
macroinvertebrates
only
were
studied
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
discussed
but
data
not
presented
Mechanical
effects:
studied
during
16
dates
when
facility
was
shut
down
Quality
control:
unknown
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
25
Ginna
Generating
Station
Lake
Ontario,
NY
1980
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1981b
Sampling:
Dates:
June
11
­
24
and
August
8
­
21
Samples
collection
frequency:
5
times
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
to
coincide
with
peak
densities
of
targeted
species
Time:
late
afternoon
or
early
evening
Number
of
replicates:
unknown
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
simultaneous
sampling
at
both
sites
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
Intake:
pump
to
floating
rear­
draw
sampling
flume
Discharge:
floating
rear­
draw
pumpless
plankton
sampling
flume
Also
used
ambient
water
injection
to
reduce
exposure
to
high
temps.
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
at
screenhouse
intake
after
flow
through
3,100
ft
intake
tunnel
Discharge
location:
discharge
canal
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Discharge
range:
18.5
­
34.4

C
 
T
ranged
from
8
­
10

C
Biocide
use:
sampled
4
hours
after
routine
injections
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
20
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
255
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
664
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
varied
Most
abundant
species:
alewife
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
of
filtered
water
for
48
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
sampling
month
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
16.3%
for
alewife
eggs
39%
for
alewife
larvae
58­
71%
for
rainbow
smelt
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
62.5%
for
alewife
eggs;
16%
hatching
success
0%
for
Alewife
larvae
0%
for
rainbow
smelt
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival/
Intake
survival
In
June,
only
one
larvae
was
found
alive
int
the
discharge
samples
Standard
errors
were
presented
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Too
few
of
many
species
were
collected
at
the
two
sites
(
only
1
or
2
per
site)
to
provide
any
reliable
estimate
of
entrainment
survival
Egg
survival:
determined
by
translucency
and
hatching
success
Raw
data:
were
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
none
survived
at
any
temperature
Mechanical
effects:
none
survived
at
any
temperature
Quality
control:
SOPs,
color
coded
labels,
sorting
efficiency
checks
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
26
March
11,
2003
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1977
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1978c
Sampling:
Dates:
Jun
1
­
July
15
Samples
collection
frequency:
twice
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
expected
to
coincide
with
peak
densities
Time:
1800
­
0200
hours
Number
of
replicates:
varied
between
5
­
7
per
sampling
date.
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
pump/
larval
table
with
ambient
water
injection
to
reduce
temp.
stress
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
at
intake
of
Units
2
and
3
Discharge
location:
discharge
for
Unit
3
and
discharge
common
to
all
Units
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
DO,
pH
and
conductivity
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied
between
2
and
3,
outage
at
Unit
2
from
7/
4
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
6,
at
or
near
full
capacity
Temperature:
Intake
range:
18.8
­
26.4

C
Discharge
range:
22.7
­
34.9

C
 
T
during
study
not
provided
Biocide
use:
unknown
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
7
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
4097
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
specifically,
however,
there
were
115
Morone
spp.
organisms
which
could
not
be
further
identified
to
the
species
level
and
there
were
55
organisms
which
were
mutilated
to
the
point
of
being
unidentifiable
to
even
the
family
level
of
organization.
Entrainment
survival
may
have
been
even
lower
if
these
mutilated
samples
were
included
in
the
assessment.
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
more
at
intake
Most
abundant
species:
striped
bass,
white
perch,
bay
anchovy
and
herrings
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
in
aerated
holding
container
in
ambient
water
bath
for
96
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
0
­
11%
for
bay
anchovy
60
­
77%
striped
bass
66%
for
white
perch
36%
for
herrings
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
3%
for
bay
anchovy
29
­
45%
for
striped
bass
15%
for
white
perch
11%
for
herrings
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Standard
errors
were
presented
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Significantly
lower
survival
in
discharge:
striped
bass
YSL
and
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
bay
anchovy
PYSL
herring
PYSL
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
no
determination
that
temperature
had
a
significant
effect
Mechanical
effects:
unknown
Quality
control:
color
coded
labels
and
immediate
checks
of
sorted
samples
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
27
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1978
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1979c
Sampling:
Dates:
May
1
­
July
12
Samples
collection
frequency:
2
consecutive
days
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
coincided
with
spawning
of
targeted
species
Time:
1800
­
0200
hours
Number
of
replicates:
approximately
6
per
date
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
simultaneous
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
pump/
larval
table
with
ambient
water
injection
Depth:
1
­
3
m
below
surface,
approximately
mid­
depth
Intake
location:
Unit
2
and
3
intake
Discharge
location:
Unit
2
and
3
discharge,
discharge
point
common
to
all
units
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
conductivity,
pH
and
DO
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied
between
1
and
2
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
varied
between
5
­
11,
near
full
capacity
Temperature:
Intake
range:
11.2
­
24.3

C
Discharge
range:
19
­
36

C
 
T
ranged
from
9
­
12

C
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
22
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
4496
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
more
at
discharge
Most
abundant
species:
striped
bass,
white
perch,
bay
anchovy
and
herrings
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
96
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
26
­
48%
for
striped
bass
15
­
48%
for
white
perch
18%
for
herring
2%
for
bay
anchovy
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
0
­
34%
for
striped
bass
0
­
37%
for
white
perch
0
­
8%
for
herring
0%
for
bay
anchovy
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival/
Intake
survival
Standard
errors
were
presented
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Significantly
lower
survival
at
discharge:
striped
bass
YSL,
PYSL
and
juveniles
white
perch
PYSL
herring
PYSL
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
none
were
alive
in
either
the
intake
or
discharge
samples
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
24
hours
of
collection.
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
at
temps.
>
30

C,
no
striped
bass
or
white
perch
survived
also
0%
survived
when
both
Unit
2
and
3
were
running
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
28
March
11,
2003
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1979
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1981c
Sampling:
Dates:
March
12
­
22
and
April
30
­
August
14
Samples
collection
frequency:
March:
4
times
per
week,
rest
was
2
consecutive
days
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
coincided
with
spawning
of
targeted
species
Time:
1700
to
0200
Number
of
replicates:
unknown
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
simultaneous
sampling
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
March
sampling:
two
pump/
larval
table
combination
April­
August
sampling:
rear­
draw
plankton
sampling
flume
at
intake
pumpless
plankton
sampling
flume
at
discharge
Depth:
mid­
depth
for
intake,
1
­
5
m
below
surface
for
discharge
Intake
location:
of
Units
2
and
3
Discharge
location:
in
discharge
canal
for
Unit
3
and
at
end
of
canal
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
conductivity,
pH
and
DO
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
one
unit
not
operating
March
20
­
26
only
one
continuously
April
­
August
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
varied
between
5
and
12
Temperature:
Discharge
range:
12.0
­
21.9

C
in
March;
24
­
32.9

C
 
T
data
not
provided
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
8
in
March;
32
in
April
­
August
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
478
in
March;
2362
April­
August
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
varied
Most
abundant
species:
Atlantic
tomcod,
striped
bass,
white
perch,
herring,
bay
anchovy
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
with
filtered
water
for
96
hours
Data:
sorted
by
discharge
temperature
in
March;
combined
all
April
­
August
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
43
­
68%
for
Atlantic
tomcod
39
­
56%
for
striped
bass
13
­
33%
for
white
perch
23%
for
herrings
10%
for
bay
anchovy
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
14
­
46%
for
Atlantic
tomcod
62
­
77%
for
striped
bass
24
­
70%
for
white
perch
28%
for
herrings
6%
for
bay
anchovies
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
For
the
fish
larvae
samples,
a
difference
in
stress
associated
with
the
different
sampling
techniques
at
the
intake
and
discharge
was
given
as
the
reason
why
discharge
survival
was
higher
than
intake
survival
for
each
taxa
sampled.
Thus,
entrainment
survival
was
not
calculated.
Standard
errors
were
presented
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
determined
by
translucency
and
hatching
success;
33%
hatched
in
discharge
samples;
44%
in
intake
samples
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
3
hours
of
collection.
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results.
Temperature
effects:
no
white
perch
or
striped
bass
survival
at
temps.
>
33

C
Mechanical
effects:
unknown
extent
Quality
control:
sorting
efficiency
checks,
color
coded
labels
and
SOPs
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
29
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1980
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1982
Sampling:
Dates:
April
30
­
July
10
Samples
collection
frequency:
4
consecutive
nights
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
coincided
with
primary
spawning
of
target
species
Time:
1600
­
0200
hours
Number
of
replicates:
unknown
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
initiated
simultaneously
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
intake:
rear­
draw
plankton
sampling
flume
mounted
on
raft
discharge:
pumpless
plankton
sampling
flume
mounted
on
raft
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
Unit
3
intake
Discharge
location:
discharge
port
number
1
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
conductivity,
DO,
pH
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
intake:
0.3
m/
sec;
discharge
3
m/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied
between
1
and
2,
Unit
2
offline
June
4­
11
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
varied
between
5
and
11
Temperature:
intake
range:
11.3
­
25.1

C
discharge
range:
23
­
31

C
 
T
data
not
presented
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
44
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
2355
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
more
at
discharge
Most
abundant
species:
striped
bass,
white
perch,
bay
anchovies
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
96
hours
Data:
combined
by
discharge
temperature
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
95%
for
striped
bass
93%
for
white
perch
32%
for
bay
anchovies
40%
recirculation
can
occur
so
intake
mortality
may
include
organisms
which
were
dead
due
to
a
previous
passage
through
the
facility
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
50­
81%
for
striped
bass
0­
90%
for
white
perch
0­
4%
for
bay
anchovy
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
hatching
success:
82%
in
intake,
47%
in
discharge
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
3
hours
of
collection.
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
little
survival
at
discharge
temps
>
33

C
Mechanical
effects:
unknown
Quality
control:
sorting
efficiency
checks,
color
coded
labels
and
SOPs
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
30
March
11,
2003
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1985
Study
EA
Science
and
Technology,
1986
Sampling:
Dates:
May
27
­
June
29
Samples
collection
frequency:
daily
Times
of
peak
abundance:
sampling
did
not
occur
during
time
of
peak
densities
Time:
daytime,
switched
to
nighttime
after
June
11
due
to
low
sample
sizes
Number
of
replicates:
unknown
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
simultaneous
sampling
Elapsed
collection
time:
13
­
15
minutes
(
200
m3)
Method:
barrel
sampler
with
2
coaxial
cylinders
with
505
µ
m
mesh
one
sampler
at
intake;
2
at
discharge
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
in
front
of
Unit
2
intake
Discharge
location:
in
discharge
canal
downstream
from
Unit
2
discharge
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
salinity,
DO,
pH
and
conductivity
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
discharge:
2.8
­
10
ft/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied
between
1
and
2
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Intake
range:
20.3
­
22.9

C
Discharge
range:
26.6
­
30.3

C
 
T
range:
4.6
­
8.5

C
Biocide
use:
residual
chlorine
not
measured
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
49
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
457
Cited
low
efficiency
of
sampling
gear
as
part
of
reason
for
low
numbers
of
organisms
sampled
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
no.
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
3X
more
at
discharge
Most
abundant
species:
bay
anchovy
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
48
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
23%
for
bay
anchovy
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
6%
for
bay
anchovy
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
(
95%)
were
presented
No
calculations
of
significance
due
to
small
sample
size
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
none
collected
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
3
hours
of
collection.
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
unknown,
too
narrow
of
temperature
range
sampled
Mechanical
effects:
New
dual­
speed
pumps
installed
in
Unit
2
in
1984,
study
was
conducted
to
determine
whether
extent
of
mechanical
mortality
differed
from
previous
studies.
Quality
control:
SOPs,
reanalysis
of
samples,
double
keypunch
of
all
data
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
31
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1988
Study
EA
Engineering
Science
and
Technology,
1989
Sampling:
Dates:
June
8
­
June
30
Samples
collection
frequency:
unclear
Times
of
peak
abundance:
sampling
not
at
peak
densities
for
targeted
species
Time:
afternoon
and
evening
hours
Number
of
replicates:
varied,
unknown
number
per
day
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
simultaneous
with
twice
as
many
at
discharge
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
rear­
draw
sampling
flumes,
1
at
intake
and
2
at
discharge
Depth:
unknown
at
intake,
surface
at
bottom
at
discharge
Intake
location:
on
raft
in
front
of
Intake
35
Discharge
location:
downstream
from
flow
of
Units
2
and
3
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
salinity,
DO,
pH
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
discharge
2.2
­
10.0
ft/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Intake
range:
20.3
­
23.8

C
 
T
range:
not
provided
Biocide
use:
residual
chlorine
not
monitored
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
13
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
12,333
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
10X
more
in
discharge
Most
abundant
species:
bay
anchovy,
striped
bass,
white
perch
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
24
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period;
discharge
survival
estimates
include
data
from
direct
release
studies
and
combined
surface
and
bottom
samples
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
0
­
8%
for
bay
anchovy
86
­
90%
for
striped
bass
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
0
­
2%
for
bay
anchovy
62
­
68%
for
striped
bass
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
discharge
survival
/
intake
survival
Standard
errors
were
presented
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
none
survived
in
intake
and
discharge
samples
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
hours
of
collection
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
undetermined
effect;
too
narrow
range
tested
Mechanical
effects:
study
was
conducted
to
determine
the
effect
of
the
installation
of
dual
speed
circulating
water
pumps
in
Unit
2
in
1984
and
variable
speed
pumps
in
Unit
3
in
1985;
mechanical
effects
were
determined
to
be
main
cause
of
mortality
when
discharge
temperatures
are
<
32

C
Quality
control:
SOPs,
sampling
stress
evaluation,
reanalysis
of
samples,
double
keypunch
data
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
32
March
11,
2003
Indian
River
Power
Plant
Indian
River
Estuary
1975
­
1976
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1978b
Sampling:
Dates:
July
2,
1975
­
December
13,
1976
Samples
collection
frequency:
once
or
twice
monthly
Times
of
peak
abundance:
samples
not
taken
frequently
enough
to
detect
Time:
mostly
at
night
Number
of
replicates:
varied
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
not
paired
discharge
samples
not
always
collected
Elapsed
collection
time:
approximately
5
minutes
or
until
sufficient
#
collected
Method:
0.5
m
diameter
plankton
sled
with
505
µ
m
net
rinsed
in
10L
of
water
of
unspecified
origin
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
from
foot
bridge
over
intake
canal
Discharge
location:
in
discharge
canal
under
roadway
bridge
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
unknown
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Intake
range:
­
0.2
­
29.2
Discharge
range:
5.4
­
39

C
 
T
ranged
from
5.2
­
9.0

C
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
27
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
25
intake
and
21
discharge
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
unknown
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
unknown
Most
abundant
species:
bay
anchovy,
Atlantic
croaker,
spot,
weakfish,
Atlantic
menhaden
and
Atlantic
silversides
Stunned
larvae:
not
discussed
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
in
holding
containers
in
ambient
water
baths
for
96
hours
Data:
sorted
based
on
discharge
temperature
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control.
Initial
intake
survival
range:
not
provided
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
not
provided
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
not
all
were
counted
for
most
abundant
species,
a
random
sample
was
used
instead
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms:
unknown
Egg
survival:
were
alive
in
either
the
intake
or
discharge
samples.
Larval
survival:
unclear
trend
Raw
data:
in
Appendix
B
not
available
to
EPA
Temperature
effects:
all
species
had
lower
survival
at
discharge
temps
>
20
°
C.
only
Spot
survived
above
35

C
though
linear
regression
Mechanical
effects:
unknown,
however
dye
studies
performed
at
this
facility
and
recirculation
of
discharge
water
has
been
shown
to
occur.
The
extent
to
which
organisms
are
entrained
repeatedly
and
the
effect
this
has
on
the
number
of
organisms
that
were
shown
to
have
died
through
natural
causes
or
from
sampling
is
not
known.
Thus
some
intake
mortality
may
be
due
to
the
organism's
previous
passage
through
the
facility.
Quality
control:
unknown
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
33
Muskingum
River
Plant
Muskingum
River,
OH
Literature
Review
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1979a
Sampling:
no
on
site
sampling
conducted
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
no
sampling
conducted
Survival
Estimation:
analyzed
pressure
regimes
in
circulating
water
system
measured
discharge
temperature
and
 
T
at
the
facility
determined
that
pressure
regimes
were
similar
to
facilities
with
entrainment
survival
studies
determined
that
low
survival
occurs
at
 
T
>
7.8

C
which
occurs
for
a
small
portion
of
entrainment
season
reviewed
documentation
of
survival
at
other
steam
electric
stations
concluded
that
potential
of
survival
at
this
facility
was
intermediate
to
high
Peer
review:
literature
review
prepared
for
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
34
March
11,
2003
Northport
Generating
Station
Long
Island
Sound,
NY
1980
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1981b
Sampling:
Dates:
April
10
­
22
and
July
10
­
23
Samples
collection
frequency:
5
nights
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
attempted
to
coincide
with
peak
abundance
Time:
1700
­
0100
hours
Number
of
replicates:
unknown
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
simultaneous
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
floating
rear­
draw
sampling
flume
with
505
µ
m
mesh
screens
with
ambient
water
injection
system
Depth:
intake:
2­
8
m
below
surface;
discharge:
1.5
m
Intake
location:
immediately
in
front
of
Unit
2
or
3
trash
racks
Discharge
location:
immediately
in
front
of
Unit
2
or
3
seal
well
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
DO,
pH,
conductivity
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Discharge
range:
15.9
­
35

C,
ave
19.9
in
April
and
33.6
in
July
 
T
ranged
from
8.6
­
15.0

C
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
20
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
162
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
884
in
April
and
76
in
July
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
more
at
discharge
Most
abundant
species:
American
sand
lance,
winter
flounder,
northern
pipefish
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
jars
of
filtered
ambient
water
for
48
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
66%
for
American
sand
lance
85%
for
winter
flounder
28%
for
bay
anchovy
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
17%
for
American
sand
lance
35%
for
winter
flounder
0%
for
bay
anchovy
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
discharge
survival
/
intake
survival
Stated
that
survival
estimate
based
on
4
assumptions:
that
the
survival
at
the
discharge
is
the
product
of
the
probabilities
of
surviving
entrainment
and
sampling,
that
the
survival
at
the
intake
is
the
probability
of
surviving
sampling,
that
at
the
discharge
there
is
no
interaction
between
the
two
stresses,
and
each
life
stage
consists
of
a
homogenous
population
in
which
all
individuals
have
the
same
probability
of
surviving
to
the
next
life
stage
Standard
errors
were
presented
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
none
collected
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
6
hours
of
collection.
American
sand
lance
significantly
larger
in
intake
sample
Raw
data:
were
provided
to
verify
results
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
35
Oyster
Creek
Nuclear
Generating
Station
Barnegat
Bay,
NJ
1985
Study
EA
Engineering
Science
and
Technology.,
1986
Sampling:
Dates:
February
­
August
Samples
collection
frequency:
unknown
Times
of
peak
abundance:
smaller
samples
collected
during
peak
densities
Time:
unknown
Number
of
replicates:
unknown
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
discharge
collected
2
minutes
after
intake
Elapsed
collection
time:
approximately
10
minutes
Method:
barrel
sampler
with
2
nested
cylindrical
tanks
with
331
mm
mesh
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
northernmost
intake
groin
west
of
recirculation
tunnel
Discharge
location:
easternmost
condenser
discharge
point
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
DO,
salinity
and
pH
in
latent
studies
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Discharge
range:
13.5
­
39.3

C
 
T
ranged
from
­
0.2
­
12.1

C
Biocide
use:
chlorine
concentration
was
measured,
but
not
detected
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
20
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
13
for
bay
anchovy
eggs,
10
for
bay
anchovy
larvae
and
5
for
winter
flounder
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
60,274
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
619
million
to
15.4
billion
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
no
Most
abundant
species:
bay
anchovy
and
winter
flounder
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion;
as
well
as
damaged
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
in
water
baths
for
96
hours
Data:
grouped
by
3
day
long
sampling
events
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
38
­
91%
for
bay
anchovy
larvae
77
­
96%
for
winter
flounder
larvae
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
0
­
71%
for
bay
anchovy
larvae
32
­
92%
for
winter
flounder
larvae
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
no
Egg
survival:
based
on
translucency
and
hatching
success
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
3
hours
of
collection
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
no
bay
anchovy
larvae
survived
at
discharge
>
35

C
Mechanical
effects:
18.8%
of
mortality
at
discharge
temperatures
25.9
­
27.0

C
Quality
control:
unknown
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
36
March
11,
2003
Pittsburg
Power
Plant
Suisun
Bay,
CA
1976
Study
Stevens
and
Finlayson,

1978
Sampling:
Dates:
April
28
­
July
10
Samples
collection
frequency:
once
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
unknown
Time:
varied,
about
25%
of
all
samples
collected
at
night
Number
of
replicates:
typically
3
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
paired
at
closest
time
and
temperature
Elapsed
collection
time:
1
­
2
minutes
Method:
505
micron
mech
conical
nylon
plankton
net
with
0.58
m
plastic
collecting
tubes
on
cod
end;
towed
net
on
boat
at
0.6
ft/
sec
Depth:
mid­
depth
Intake
location:
in
river
near
intake
Discharge
location:
in
river
near
discharge
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Intake
temperature:
18
­
30

C
Discharge
temperature
27
­
37

C
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
7
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
462
(
585
at
north
shore
control)
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
enumerated
in
one
replicate
tow
higher
proportion
of
unidentifiable
fragments
in
intake
43%
in
intake;
19%
in
discharge
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
more
at
intake
Most
abundant
species:
striped
bass
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
not
studied
Data:
was
summarized
by
mean
larval
length
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
additional
controls
in
center
of
river
and
north
shore
control
site
at
north
shore
away
from
intake
had
lower
mortality
rates
Initial
intake
survival
range:
49
­
93%
for
striped
bass
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
8
­
87%
for
striped
bass
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
paired
discharge
survival
divided
by
paired
intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Larval
survival:
increased
survival
with
greater
larval
length
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
mortality
increased
with
increase
in
discharge
temperature
higher
mortality
with
discharge
temp.
>
31
and
 
T
>
7

C
linear
regression
showed
that
half
died
at
temps
>
33.3

C
0%
survival
at
temperatures
of
38

C
Mechanical
effects:
stated
not
as
much
of
an
effects
as
temperature;
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
37
Port
Jefferson
Generating
Station
Long
Island
Sound,
NY
1978
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
and
Ecological
Analy,
1978
Sampling:
Dates:
April
21
­
26
Samples
collection
frequency:
4
times
in
one
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
unclear
if
sampling
coincided
with
peak
densities
Time:
1800
­
0200
hours
Number
of
replicates:
varied
between
7
­
10
per
sampling
date.
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
simultaneous
collection,
equal
number
at
sites
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
pump
(
2
different
types)
and
larval
table
Depth:
intake:
2
m
below
mean
low
water
mark
discharge:
1
m
below
mean
low
water
mark
Intake
location:
in
front
of
trash
racks
of
intake
of
Unit
4
Discharge
location:
in
common
seal
well
structure
for
Units
3
and
4
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
4
Temperature:
Intake
range:
7
­
9

C
Discharge
range:
10
­
18

C
 
T
ranged
from
2
­
11

C
Biocide
use:
sampling
coincided
with
time
of
no
biocide
use
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
5
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
94
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
1104
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
no,
quite
different
Most
abundant
species:
winter
flounder,
sand
lance,
sculpin,
American
eel,
fourbeard
rockling
eggs
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
in
water
bath
for
96
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
42
­
60%
for
winter
flounder
PYSL
11
­
67%
for
sand
lance
PYSL
33
­
84%
sculpin
PYSL
25
­
100%
American
eel
juveniles
11
­
26%
fourbeard
rockling
eggs
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
0
­
43%
for
winter
flounder
PYSL
12
­
40%
for
sand
lance
PYSL
88%
for
sculpin
PYSL
94
­
96%
for
American
eel
juveniles
19
­
21%
fourbeard
rockling
eggs
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Significantly
lower
survival
in
discharge:
winter
flounder
PYSL
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
classified
by
observation
only,
based
on
transparency
Larval
survival:
no
information
given
on
length
or
other
life
stages
Raw
data:
were
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
no
apparent
relationship
temperature
and
survival;
low
numbers
collected
at
a
narrow
range
of
discharge
temperatures
Mechanical
effects:
assumed
cause
of
all
mortality
Quality
control:
color
coded
labeling,
checks
of
sorted
samples,
and
SOPs
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
38
March
11,
2003
PG&
E
Potrero
Power
Plant
San
Francisco
Bay,
CA
1979
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1980b
Sampling:
Dates:
January
Samples
collection
frequency:
unknown
Times
of
peak
abundance:
unclear
if
sampling
corresponded
with
peak
densities
Time:
unknown
Number
of
replicates:
unknown
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
equal
number
but
timing
unknown
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
2
pumps
and
larval
table
with
filtered
ambient
temperature
water
flow
Depth:
mid­
depth
Intake
location:
directly
in
front
of
intake
skimmer
wall
Discharge
location:
at
point
where
discharge
enters
San
Francisco
Bay
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
unknown
Temperature:
Discharge
range:
18
­
19.5

C
 
T
range
not
presented
Biocide
use:
not
used
during
sampling
events
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
11
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
25
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
1262
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
estimated
for
Units
1­
3:
3
billion
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
approx.
same
Most
abundant
species:
Pacific
herring
Stunned
larvae:
issue
of
stunned
larvae
not
discussed
in
study
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
discussed
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
in
water
baths
for
96
hours
Data:
was
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
22%
for
Pacific
herring
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
16%
for
Pacific
herring
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival/
Intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
no
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Larval
survival:
Based
on
results
of
this
study,
an
estimate
of
75%
entrainment
survival
was
used
for
all
species
and
life
stages
entrained
at
this
facility
under
all
conditions
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
discharge
temps
<
30

C
over
99.5%
of
time
Mechanical
effects:
most
likely
cause
of
mortality
due
to
low
temperatures
Quality
control:
unknown
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
39
Quad
Cities
Nuclear
Station
Mississippi
River,
IL
1978
Study
Hazleton
Environmental
Science
&
Co.,
1978
Sampling:
Dates:
June
19
­
28
Samples
collection
frequency:
varied
Times
of
peak
abundance:
unknown
Time:
afternoon,
evening
or
nighttime
hours
Number
of
replicates:
varied
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
unknown
if
paired
Elapsed
collection
time:
did
not
exceed
60
seconds
Method:
from
boat,
with
0.75
m
conical
plankton
net
with
526
µ
m
mesh
and
an
unscreened
5
L
bucket
attached
Depth:
mid­
depth
at
intake,
near
surface
at
discharge
Intake
location:
intake
forebay
Discharge
location:
in
discharge
canal
common
to
all
units;
held
at
discharge
temp
for
8.5
minutes
to
simulate
passage
through
canal
then
cooled
to
ambient
temp.
plus
3.5

C
before
sorting
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
DO
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
exceed
1
ft/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
completely
open
cycle
mode
Number
of
units
in
operation:
power
output
41
­
99%,
Unit
1
offline
on
June
22
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
all
3
regardless
of
power
load
Temperature:
Intake
range:
21.5
­
26.5

C
Discharge
range:
28.0
­
39.0

C
 
T
ranged
from
5.5
­
14.8

C
Biocide
use:
not
used
during
sampling
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
5
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
2587
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
more
at
discharge
Most
abundant
species:
freshwater
drum
and
minnows
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
assumed
dead
from
natural
mortality
prior
to
collection
and
omitted
from
further
analysis;
27%
of
all
sampled
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
24
hours
on
June
22­
23,
26­
27
Data:
combined
by
%
power
of
station
operation
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
0
­
80%
for
all
species
0
­
100%
for
freshwater
drum
48
­
100%
for
minnows
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
0
­
84%
for
all
species
0
­
71%
for
freshwater
drum
2
­
75%
for
minnows
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival/
Intake
survival
(
minus
dead
and
opaque
individuals)
When
discharge
survival
was
greater
than
intake
survival,
the
study
indicated
that
entrainment
survival
could
not
be
calculated,
rather
than
assume
100
percent
entrainment
survival
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Significantly
lower
survival
in
discharge:
throughout
study
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
presented
Larval
survival:
decreased
with
increasing
power
output
and
discharge
temperature
3%
survival
for
all
species
when
the
facility
operated
near
full
capacity
(
96­
99
percent)
and
discharge
temperatures
exceeded
37.9
°
C
Raw
data:
were
provided
to
verify
results,
however
replicate
sample
data
not
presented
Temperature
effects:
lower
survival
with
higher
discharge
temperatures
>
30

C
Mechanical
effects:
suggest
mechanical
effects
cause
20
­
25%
of
mortality
Quality
control:
not
discussed
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
40
March
11,
2003
Quad
Cities
Nuclear
Station
Mississippi
River,
IL
1984
Study
Lawler
Matusky
&

Skelly
Engineers,
1985
Sampling:
Dates:
April
25
­
June
27
July
sampling
canceled
as
100%
mortality
was
suspected
Samples
collection
frequency:
weekly
Times
of
peak
abundance:
unknown
Time:
unknown
Number
of
replicates:
unknown
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
unknown
if
paired
Elapsed
collection
time:
unknown
Method:
from
boat,
with
0.75
m
conical
plankton
net
with
526
µ
m
mesh
and
an
unscreened
5
L
bucket
attached
Depth:
1.5
m
for
intake,
surface
for
discharge
Intake
location:
intake
forebay
Discharge
location:
in
discharge
canal;
held
at
collection
temperature
for
8.5
min.
then
cooled
to
3.5

C
above
ambient
temperature
with
an
ice
bath,
in
all
held
for
over
20
minutes
before
sorting
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
samples
collected
at
<
0.8
ft/
sec
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
operating
at
40.2
to
50.7
%
capacity
Number
of
units
in
operation:
Unit
1
offline
for
refueling;
both
units
offline
on
May
9
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
all
3
on
all
dates
except
on
May
9
Temperature:
Intake
range:
11
­
24.4

C
Discharge
range:
12
­
37

C
 
T
ranged
from
9.5
to
14.5

C;
1

C
on
May
9
when
offline
Biocide
use:
not
used
during
sampling
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
8
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
3967
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
approx.
same
total
Most
abundant
species:
freshwater
drum,
carp
and
buffalo
Stunned
larvae:
not
discussed
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
omitted
from
analysis;
assumed
dead
before
collection,
2,
979
opaque
individuals
were
collected
(
75%
of
total,
87%
of
all
discharge
sample.
range:
0
to
99%
in
samples)
None
were
found
to
be
dead
and
opaque
in
discharge
on
May
9
when
offline
and
 
T
was
1
°
C.
Latent
survival:
not
discussed
Data:
combined
by
species
and
sampling
date
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
results
not
presented,
only
number
alive
10
­
81%
were
dead
and
opaque
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
results
not
presented,
only
number
alive
24
­
99%
were
dead
and
opaque
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
not
tested
due
to
low
numbers
collected
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Larval
survival:
too
little
information
to
make
any
assumption
of
survival
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results;
totals
collected
per
species
not
presented;
actual
numbers
of
dead
and
opaque
not
provided
Temperature
effects:
no
sampling
in
July
when
discharge
temps
>
37

C
Mechanical
effects:
not
discussed
Quality
control:
100%
reanalysis
quality
control
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
41
Roseton
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1975
Study
Ecological
Analysts,

Inc.,
1976c
Sampling:
Dates:
May
29th
­
November
18th
Collection
frequency:
varied
from
4
times
per
week
to
once
every
2
weeks.
Times
of
peak
abundance:
greater
frequency
of
collection
Time:
varied
but
generally
occurred
between
dusk
and
dawn
Number
of
replicates:
varied
between
3and
14
for
each
date
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
paired
but
timing
not
standardized
Elapsed
collection
time:
not
noted
Method:
pump/
larval
table
Depth:
mid­
depth
at
both
the
intake
and
discharge
Intake
location:
in
front
of
the
trash
rack
Discharge
location:
from
the
seal
well
before
the
end
of
the
discharge
pipe
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
mentioned
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
not
given
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied
between
1
and
2
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
varied
between
2
and
3
Temperature:
 
T
ranged
from
3
to
13

C,
intake
and
discharge
T
not
given
Biocide
use:
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
41
Number
of
samples:
672
Number
of
organisms
collected:
3,667
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
not
discussed
Fragmented
organisms
collected:
not
discussed
Equal
number
collected
from
intake
and
discharge:
differed
by
as
much
as
3.2X
Most
abundant
species:
striped
bass,
white
perch,
alewife
and
blueback
herring
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
mentioned
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
96
hours.
Data:
summarized
and
averaged
over
the
entire
sampling
period
Controls:
survival
in
intake
sample;
no
other
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
57
to
80%
for
striped
bass
0
to
71%
for
white
perch
58
to
65%
for
herrings
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
62%
for
striped
bass
29%
for
white
perch
26%
for
herrings
Calculation
of
entrainment
survival:
Discharge
Survival/
Intake
Survival
Study
noted
that
survival
cannot
be
calculated
with
insufficient
data
or
when
intake
survival
is
very
low
Confidence
intervals/
standard
deviations:
not
presented
Significant
differences:
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Significantly
lower
survival
in
discharge:
striped
bass
YSL
and
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
herring
PYSL
and
juveniles
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
none
alive
in
either
the
intake
or
discharge
samples
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
3
hours
of
collection
Size
effects:
survival
by
larval
length
was
not
studied
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
not
provided
Mechanical
effects:
not
provided
Quality
control:
double
check
after
initial
sorting;
monitoring
of
data
entry
Peer
review:
not
mentioned;
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
42
March
11,
2003
Roseton
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1976
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1978d
Sampling:
Dates:
June
14th
­
July
30th
Samples
collection
frequency:
4
nights
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
coincided
with
Morone
spp.
spawning
season
Time:
1700
to
0300
EST
Number
of
replicates:
actual
numbers
not
give,
an
average
of
12
per
night
stated
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
pairing
unknown
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
pump/
larval
table
combination
Depth:
mid­
depth
for
both
intake
and
discharge
Intake
location:
1
m
in
front
of
trash
rack
Discharge
location:
in
seal
well
near
end
of
discharge
pipe
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
no
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied
between
0
and
2
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
not
given
Temperature:
Intake
temperature
range:
18.7
­
27.5

C
Discharge
temperature
ranged
24
­
37

C
 
T
ranged
from
1­
10

C
Biocide
use:
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
27
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
3,491
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
not
given
Fragmented
organisms:
not
discussed
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
/
discharge:
no,
up
to
5.7X
more
Most
abundant
species:
herrings,
white
perch
and
striped
bass
Stunned
larvae:
were
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
mentioned
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
96
hours
Data:
combined
by
discharge
temperature
range:
34
­
30.5
and
30.6
to
37

C
Controls:
Survival
in
the
intake
samples;
no
other
control.
Initial
intake
survival
range:
74­
100%
for
striped
bass
53­
94%
for
white
perch
49­
68%
for
herrings
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
14
­
80%
for
striped
bass
6
­
56%
for
white
perch
5
­
29%
for
herrings
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
Survival/
Intake
Survival
Data
for
many
taxa
or
life
stages
collected
were
insufficient
for
analysis
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Significantly
lower
survival
in
discharge:
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
and
juveniles
herring
PYSL
and
juveniles
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
data
not
presented
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
3
hours
of
collection.
Size
effects:
survival
by
larval
length
was
not
studied
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
significant
decrease
in
survival
at
discharge
temp
>
30

C
Mechanical
effects:
unknown
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
43
Roseton
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1977
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1978e
Sampling:
Dates:
March
3­
17
and
May
31st
­
July
15th
Samples
collection
frequency:
unknown;
usually
4
nights
per
week
was
stated
Times
of
peak
abundance:
coincided
with
spawning
of
targeted
species
Time:
1700
to
0300
hours
EST
Number
of
replicates:
unknown;
an
average
of
8
to
10
per
night
was
stated
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
unknown
if
samples
were
collected
in
pairs
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
pump/
larval
table
combination
ambient
water
flow
in
table
to
reduce
thermal
exposure
during
sorting
Depth:
mid­
depth
Intake
location:
in
front
of
trash
racks
Discharge
location:
from
seal
well
244
m
from
end
of
discharge
pipe
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
no
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
unknown
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
varied
between
2
and
4
Temperature:
Intake
temperature:
0.5
­
5.5

C
(
March);
11­
27

C
(
June/
July)
Discharge
temperature:
7
­
17

C
(
March);
24
­
36

C
(
June/
July)

 
T
range:
unknown
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
unknown
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
unknown
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
6,973
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
if
>
50%
present,
organism
was
counted
Equal
number
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
up
to
2.3X
more
in
discharge
Most
abundant
species:
atlantic
tomcod,
herrings,
striped
bass,
white
perch
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
mentioned
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
96
hours
Data:
combined
by
discharge
temperature
range,
<
29.9,
30.0
­
32.9,
>
33

C
Controls:
Survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
39%
for
Atlantic
tomcod
0
to
50%
for
striped
bass
0
to
33%
for
white
perch
0
to
59%
for
herrings
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
16%
for
Atlantic
tomcod
0
to
83%
for
striped
bass
0
to
50%
for
white
perch
0
to
14%
for
herrings
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
Survival
/
Intake
Survival
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Significantly
lower
survival
in
discharge:
Atlantic
tomcod
YSL
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
herring
PYSL
and
juveniles
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
number
of
some
taxa
and
life
stage
were
too
low
to
estimate
survival
reliably
Egg
survival:
data
not
presented
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
3
hours
of
collection.
increased
with
larval
length
Raw
data:
were
not
provided
to
verify
results
Temperature
effects:
survival
decreased
at
temperatures
above
30

C
very
low
survival
at
temperatures
>
33

C
(
0
to
3%)
Mechanical
effects:
survival
may
increase
with
number
of
pumps
operating
Quality
control:
color
coded
labels,
immediate
checks
of
sorted
sample,
SOP's
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
44
March
11,
2003
Roseton
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1978
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1980c
Sampling:
Dates:
March
13
­
23
and
June
6
­
July
13
Samples
collection
frequency:
3
­
4
nights
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
coincided
with
spawning
of
targeted
species
Time:
1700
to
0300
EDT
Number
of
replicates:
4
to
10
per
night
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
unknown
if
paired
samples
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
pump/
larval
table
combination
with
fine
mesh
ambient
water
flow
to
table
to
minimize
thermal
exposure
when
sorting
Depth:
mid­
depth
Intake
location:
in
front
of
trash
rack
Discharge
location:
in
seal
well
244
m
from
end
of
discharge
pipe
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied
between
1
and
2
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
varied
between
2
and
3
Temperature:
Intake
temperature:
0.2
­
5.5

C
(
March),
19.8
­
24.0

C
(
June/
July)
Discharge
temperature:
10
­
19

C
(
March),
24
­
37

C
(
June/
July)

 
T
range
was
not
given
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
30
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
256
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
5,308
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
unknown
Fragmented
organisms:
counted
if
>
50%
of
organism
was
present
22%
of
Atlantic
tomcod
could
not
be
identified
to
life
stage
due
to
damage
Equal
number
of
organisms
collected
at
intake
and
discharge:
varied
Most
abundant
species:
herrings,
white
perch,
striped
bass,
Atlantic
tomcod
Stunned
larvae:
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
mentioned
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
96
hours
Data:
combined
by
discharge
temperature
range
<
29.9,
30.0
­
32.9,
>
33

C
also
combined
by
larval
length
Controls:
Survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
75­
84%
for
Atlantic
tomcod
8
­
100%
for
striped
bass
0
­
93%
for
white
perch
0
­
67%
for
herrings
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
23­
33%
for
Atlantic
tomcod
0
­
50%
for
striped
bass
0
­
100%
for
white
perch
0
­
18%
for
herrings
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival/
Intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented
Significant
differences
were
tested
between
the
intake
and
discharge
survival
Significantly
lower
survival
in
discharge:
Atlantic
tomcod
YSL
and
PYSL
striped
bass
PYSL
white
perch
PYSL
herring
PYSL
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
samples
sizes
of
some
taxa
and
life
stages
were
too
small
to
analyze
survival
Egg
survival:
data
not
presented
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
3
­
6
hours
of
collection
increased
with
larval
length
Raw
data:
consolidated
data
by
temp.
and
length
was
provided;
not
by
sample
Temperature
effects:
significant
decrease
in
survival
at
temperatures
>
24

C
very
little
survival
at
temperatures
>
30

C
Mechanical
effects:
lower
tomcod
survival
in
discharge
w/
o
thermal
effects
Quality
control:
color
coded
labels,
checks
of
sorted
samples,
SOP's
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
45
Roseton
Generating
Station
Hudson
River,
NY
1980
Study
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1983
Sampling:
Dates:
May
26
­
July
31
Samples
collection
frequency:
usually
4
nights
per
week
Times
of
peak
abundance:
coincided
spawning
of
striped
bass
and
white
perch
Time:
1600
to
0200
EDT
Number
of
replicates:
varied
between
1
and
10
per
sampling
date
Intake
and
discharge
sampling:
unknown
if
samples
were
paired
Elapsed
collection
time:
15
minutes
Method:
pump/
larval
table
or
plankton
sampling
flume
ambient
water
injection
system
to
minimize
thermal
exposure
Depth:
unknown
Intake
location:
from
the
No.
1B
circulating
water
pump
forebay
Discharge
location:
from
discharge
seal
well
or
submerged
diffuser
port
Water
quality
parameters
measured:
none
DOC
and
POC
measured:
no
Intake
and
discharge
velocity:
unknown
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling:
Number
of
units
in
operation:
varied
between
1
and
2
Number
of
pumps
in
operation:
varied
between
3
and
4
Temperature:
Intake
temperature:
17.0
­
29.0

C
Discharge
temperature:
21.5
­
34.5

C
 
T
range
not
given
Biocide
use
was
not
noted
Survival
Estimation:
Number
of
sampling
events:
42
Total
number
of
samples
collected:
1431
Total
number
of
organisms
collected:
4,965
Number
of
organisms
entrained
per
year:
not
given
Fragmented
organisms:
counted
if
>
50%
of
organism
was
present
7%
of
all
organisms
would
not
be
identified
to
a
life
stage
due
to
damage
Equal
no.
of
organisms
collected
at
intake/
discharge:
more
samples
at
discharge
Most
abundant
species:
herrings,
striped
bass,
white
perch
Stunned
larvae:
were
included
in
initial
survival
proportion
Dead
and
opaque
organisms:
not
mentioned
Latent
survival:
observed
in
aerated
glass
jars
for
48
hours.
Data:
combined
by
larval
length
Controls:
survival
in
the
intake
samples
was
considered
to
be
the
control
Initial
intake
survival
range:
33
­
100%
for
striped
bass
0
­
75%
for
white
perch
30
­
53%
for
herrings
Initial
discharge
survival
range:
23
­
100%
for
striped
bass
0
­
88%
for
white
perch
0
­
31%
for
herrings
Calculation
of
Entrainment
Survival:
Discharge
survival
/
Intake
survival
Confidence
intervals
/
standard
deviations:
were
not
presented.
Significant
differences
were
tested
for
latent
survival
only
Survival
calculated
for
species
with
fewer
than
100
organisms
collected:
yes
Egg
survival:
not
studied
Larval
survival:
decreased
markedly
within
3
­
6
hours
of
collection
survival
increased
with
larval
length
survival
lowest
for
YSL
and
highest
for
juveniles
survival
using
flume
was
very
low
Raw
data:
only
consolidated
data
were
presented,
not
by
sample
Temperature
effects:
data
not
given
Mechanical
effects:
number
of
pumps
may
not
affect
survival
Quality
control:
color
coded
labels,
SOPs
Peer
review:
not
mentioned,
study
was
conducted
for
the
facility
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
46
March
11,
2003
A7­
4
DISCUSSION
OF
REVIEW
CRITERIA
In
this
section,
the
criteria
EPA
used
to
review
the
entrainment
survival
studies
will
be
discussed
in
depth
to
give
a
better
indication
of
the
soundness
of
the
science
behind
a
facility's
estimate
of
potential
survival.

A7­
4.1
Sampling
Design
and
Methodology
These
aspects
of
the
sampling
effort
are
relevant
to
whether
the
samples
collected
are
representative
of
the
community
of
organisms
experiencing
entrainment,
whether
the
estimates
of
densities
and
numbers
are
accurate
and
precise,
and
whether
the
survival
estimates
for
the
intake
and
discharge
can
be
validly
compared
(
Marcy,
1975;
Boreman
and
Goodyear,
1981).
Sampling
should
be
carefully
planned
to
minimize
any
potential
bias
(
Marcy,
1975;
Boreman
and
Goodyear,
1981).
Studies
should
be
conducted
throughout
the
parts
of
the
year
when
substantial
numbers
of
organisms
are
entrained.
Survival
can
be
expected
to
vary
with
factors
that
change
seasonally,
such
as
organism
size
and
life
stage
and
ambient
water
temperature.
Most
studies
attempted
to
collect
samples
during
times
of
peak
abundance,
although
the
sampling
frequency
may
not
have
been
sufficient
to
fully
capture
peak
densities.
Of
those
reviewed
by
EPA,
six
studies
did
not
seem
to
correspond
with
the
timing
of
peak
densities
at
that
location.

Even
if
a
study
is
limited
to
the
early
life
stages
of
particular
fish
or
shellfish,
survival
differences
among
sizes
and
life
stages
and
seasonal
or
temperature­
related
changes
in
entrainment
survival
need
to
be
quantified.
The
timing
of
the
sample
collection
for
an
entrainment
survival
study
can
influence
results
in
a
number
of
ways,
such
that
results
of
studies
collected
during
one
period
may
not
be
representative
of
potential
effects
during
other
periods.
For
instance,
samples
collected
when
the
intake
temperatures
are
low
or
late
in
a
spawning
season
when
larvae
are
larger,
have
the
potential
to
produce
estimates
of
entrainment
survival
which
may
be
higher
than
at
other
times.
Thus,
studies
need
to
be
conducted
throughout
an
entire
spawning
season
to
accurately
characterize
overall
entrainment
mortality,
if
entrainment
survival
is
found
to
vary
with
life
stage
or
size
of
each
species
entrained.
For
the
same
reason,
it
may
not
be
appropriate
to
develop
average
survival
estimates
from
samples
collected
under
different
environmental
conditions
(
in
particular
under
different
temperature
regimes)
and
over
an
entire
spawning
period.

Many
studies
collected
their
samples
at
night
to
ensure
high
numbers
of
organisms
in
their
samples
because
larvae
rise
to
the
surface
to
feed
at
night
to
avoid
predation
(
Marcy,
1975;
Day
et
al.,
1989).
Unfortunately,
this
practice
may
bias
results
because
dead
organisms
do
not
to
rise
to
the
surface
to
feed.
There
is
also
evidence
that
dead
organisms
may
even
sink
to
the
bottom
of
the
water
column
after
entrainment
(
Marcy,
1975).
When
samples
from
the
intake
or
discharge
stations
are
collected
near
the
surface
at
night,
they
may
contain
a
higher
percentage
of
alive
organisms
than
that
which
actually
occurs.
Twenty
four
studies
indicated
that
sampling
occurred
mostly
at
night.
For
many
studies,
the
depth
of
sampling
is
not
noted
and
thus
it
is
unclear
whether
the
samples
were
collected
near
the
surface,
at
mid­
depth
or
near
the
bottom
of
the
water
column
and
any
potential
for
bias
due
to
a
higher
percentage
of
alive
organisms
present
near
the
surface
could
not
be
assessed.

The
method
of
sampling
should
be
selected
to
cause
the
least
amount
of
mortality
as
possible
and
the
mesh
size
should
be
sufficient
to
capture
disintegrated
or
fragmented
organisms.
All
studies
seem
to
have
used
sampling
methods
with
mesh
size
greater
than
or
equal
to
500
µ
m.
This
may
not
be
sufficiently
fine
to
capture
disintegrated
or
fragmented
organisms
in
the
discharge.

Intake
and
discharge
sampling
should
be
paired
to
be
sure
that
the
same
population
of
organisms
is
sampled
and
subsequently
compared.
In
twelve
studies
it
is
unknown
if
the
samples
at
the
intake
and
discharge
were
paired.
In
some
studies
not
all
locations
were
collected
during
all
sampling
events.
In
other
studies,
twice
as
many
samples
were
collected
at
the
discharge
than
at
the
intake.
Also
in
many
instances,
the
intake
samples
were
collected
at
different
units
of
the
facility
than
the
discharge
samples.
Average
elapsed
time
for
sample
collection
is
given,
and
it
is
unclear
if
the
same
elapsed
time
was
used
at
both
locations
to
give
an
accurate
depiction
of
organismal
densities.
The
time
elapsed
during
sample
collection
or
the
volume
of
water
sampled
should
be
identical
in
the
paired
intake
and
discharge
samples
to
insure
valid
comparisons
of
samples.
It
was
not
indicated
in
any
of
the
studies
reviewed
whether
the
same
volume
of
water
was
sampled
in
all
of
the
intake
and
discharge
samples.

The
location
of
the
intake
sampling
is
important
as
it
may
contain
organisms
that
have
already
died
due
to
the
changes
in
velocity
near
the
intake.
Two
studies
collected
intake
samples
after
the
water
had
entered
the
cooling
system.
The
location
of
the
discharge
sampling
is
also
important.
Samples
collected
from
the
end
of
the
discharge
canal
may
not
contain
organisms
that
have
died
from
passage
through
the
facility
due
to
the
tendency
for
dead
organisms
to
settle
out
of
the
water
column
as
they
flow
through
the
discharge
canal.
Samples
collected
from
the
discharge
pipe
may
not
contain
organisms
that
have
died
from
thermal
effects
of
entrainment
because
they
samples
are
collected
before
the
full
effects
of
thermal
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
47
exposure
have
occurred.
Fourteen
studies
collected
discharge
samples
from
the
discharge
pipe.
It
is
also
unknown
if
the
samples
collected
in
the
discharge
canal
or
from
the
receiving
water
contained
organisms
in
the
dilution
water
which
bypassed
the
cooling
water
system.
Five
studies
collected
discharge
samples
in
the
receiving
water
downstream
from
the
discharge
canal
which
may
have
resulted
in
samples
containing
organisms
which
did
not
pass
through
the
cooling
water
system.

Water
chemistry
conditions
also
need
to
be
recorded
to
be
sure
conditions
are
similar
at
all
sampling
locations.
Water
quality
indices
include
measurements
of
dissolved
oxygen,
pH,
and
conductivity
in
the
through­
plant
water,
at
the
discharge
point,
and
in
the
containers
or
impoundments
in
which
the
entrained
organism
are
kept
when
determining
latent
mortality.
Eighteen
studies
gave
some
indication
that
water
quality
parameters
were
measured
during
the
study.
However,
it
is
unclear
whether
measurements
were
collected
at
both
the
intake
and
discharge,
and
only
one
study
indicated
that
water
quality
parameters
were
measured
in
latent
mortality
studies
(
EA
Engineering
Science
and
Technology,
1986).

Organic
carbon
in
water
occurs
in
dissolved
(
DOC)
and
particulate
(
POC)
forms
(
Valiela,
1995).
Dissolved
organic
carbon
(
DOC)
compounds
include
soluble
carbohydrates,
sugars,
fatty
acids
and
amino
acids
which
have
leached
from
shredded
and
decomposing
organic
matter
(
Schlesinger,
1991;
Valiela,
1995).
DOC
is
differentiated
from
POC
by
its
ability
to
pass
through
filters
of
a
size
of
0.2
­
0.45
µ
m
(
Valiela,
1995).
Changes
in
DOC
and
POC
at
the
intake
and
discharge
may
be
a
suitable
means
for
determining
whether
organisms
are
disintegrated
as
they
pass
through
the
cooling
water
system
and
thus
are
not
captured
in
the
screens
of
the
sampling
device.
None
of
the
studies
reviewed
measured
changes
in
DOC
and
POC
concentrations
in
the
water
column.

The
velocity
at
the
intake
and
discharge
should
also
be
recorded
to
determine
the
potential
to
cause
mortality.
Fourteen
of
the
studies
gave
some
indication
of
the
velocity
at
either
the
intake
or
the
discharge,
or
both.
For
the
ones
that
did
not
give
both
intake
and
discharge
velocities,
it
is
unknown
whether
the
velocities
at
the
two
sampling
sites
were
comparable,
and
thus
whether
the
mortalities
due
to
velocity­
related
sampling
stress
were
comparable
at
the
two
locations.

A7­
4.2
Operating
Conditions
During
Sampling
Mortality
due
to
entrainment
stress
is
affected
by
the
operating
characteristics
of
the
power
facility.
The
conditions
under
which
the
samples
are
collected
are
extremely
important
and
therefore,
the
results
can
only
be
assumed
to
represent
survival
when
the
facility
is
operating
under
those
same
conditions
and
at
that
time
of
year,
and
may
not
represent
the
potential
for
survival
at
all
times.
For
example,
results
of
studies
conducted
when
the
plant
was
not
generating
power
(
and
thus
not
transferring
heat
to
the
cooling
water)
would
not
be
applicable
to
impacts
when
it
was
in
full
operation.
The
magnitude
of
mechanical
stress
may
be
dependent
on
the
design
of
the
facility's
cooling
water
intake
structure.
The
physical
and
operating
conditions
of
the
facility
need
to
be
recorded
to
determine
their
effect
on
entrainment
survival.
The
percentage
of
the
maximum
load
at
which
the
facility
is
operating
needs
to
be
recorded
at
the
time
of
sampling
to
give
an
indication
of
the
extent
to
which
organisms
are
exposed
to
stress.
The
number
of
units
was
highly
variable
or
unknown
in
many
studies
reviewed.
One
study
indicated
that
the
facility
operated
at
peak
load
to
maximize
temperature
stress
during
the
time
of
sampling.
Eight
studies
indicated
that
power
was
generated
during
only
a
portion
of
time
in
the
sampling
period.
To
fully
account
for
the
effects
of
mechanical
stressors
on
entrainment
survival,
the
study
needs
to
reflect
the
speed
and
pressure
changes
within
the
condenser,
the
number
of
pumps
in
operation,
the
occurrence
of
abrasive
surfaces,
and
the
turbulence
within
the
condenser.
In
addition,
it
is
important
to
note
the
number
and
arrangement
of
units,
parallel
or
in
sequence,
which
may
expose
organisms
to
entrainment
in
multiple
structures.
Survival
should
be
studied
under
the
range
of
conditions
that
may
influence
survival,
for
example
intake
flow
or
capacity
utilization
and
ambient
(
intake)
water
temperature
and
delta­
T
(
if
these
vary
substantially).

The
effect
of
temperature
can
be
species­
specific
since
different
fishes
have
different
critical
thermal
maxima.
The
maximum
temperature
to
which
organisms
may
be
exposed
while
passing
through
the
facility
may
cause
mortality
in
some
species
but
not
others.
To
assess
the
effect
on
entrainment
survival
by
thermal
stressors,
the
study
needs
to
determine
the
temperature
regime
of
the
facility.
Specifically,
the
study
needs
to
record
the
temperature
at
intake
and
at
the
discharge
point
for
each
component
of
the
facilities
system:
temperature
changes
within
the
system,
including
the
inflow
temperature,
maximum
temperature,
delta­
T,
rate
of
temperature
change,
and
the
temperature
of
the
water
to
which
the
organisms
are
discharged.
It
is
also
important
to
measure
the
duration
of
time
an
organism
is
entrained
and
thus
exposed
to
the
thermal
conditions
within
the
condenser
and
in
the
mixing
zone
of
the
discharge
canal.
This
information
was
not
provided
in
all
studies.
Also,
in
those
studies
that
attempted
to
relate
survival
to
temperature
stress,
too
few
samples
were
collected
at
different
temperature
ranges
to
give
adequate
representation
of
survival
in
that
range.
The
EPRI
report
sorted
larval
entrainment
survival
data
by
discharge
temperature
and
determined
that
survivability
decreased
as
the
discharge
temperature
increased
(
EA
Engineering,
Science
and
Technology,
2000).
The
lowest
probability
of
larval
survival
occurred
at
temperatures
greater
than
33
°
C.
In
studies
reviewed
by
EPA,
a
substantial
decrease
in
survival
estimates
occurred
at
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
48
March
11,
2003
discharge
temperatures
above
30

C.
The
amount
of
time
that
a
facility
discharges
water
in
different
temperature
ranges
and
survival
estimates
at
that
temperature
range
should
be
weighed
when
attempting
to
determine
the
survival
estimate
throughout
the
year,
rather
than
using
an
average
survival
during
the
sampling
period
which
may
not
adequately
reflect
operating
conditions
throughout
the
year.

To
properly
account
for
chemical
stressors,
the
timing,
frequency,
methods,
concentrations,
and
duration
of
biocide
use
for
the
control
of
biofouling
need
to
be
determined.
The
extent
to
which
biocides
are
used
routinely
at
this
time
is
unknown.
The
studies
reviewed
by
EPA
were
all
conducted
at
times
when
biocides
were
not
in
use,
clearly
because
the
biocide
use
would
be
expected
to
kill
all
organisms.
Thus,
the
results
of
these
studies
do
not
account
for
biocide
impacts
and
the
results
of
these
studies
can
only
reflect
other
times
when
biocides
are
not
in
use
at
the
particular
facility.
A
reduced
survival
estimate
for
the
proportion
of
time
when
biocides
were
in
use
would
have
to
be
incorporated
into
any
estimation
of
annual
mean
entrainment
mortality
value
for
a
facility
for
that
estimate
to
be
valid.

A7­
4.3
Survival
Estimates
Many
of
the
entrainment
survival
studies
reviewed
did
not
account
for
the
extent
to
which
the
most
fragile
life
stages
are
fragmented
and
destroyed
by
both
sampling
and
entrainment.
Only
six
studies
acknowledged
that
the
entrainment
survival
estimates
were
indicative
only
of
alive
and
stunned
identifiable
organisms
which
were
at
least
50
percent
intact.
In
such
circumstances,
an
important
element
of
the
entrained
biological
community
may
be
omitted
from
the
estimate
of
survival.
Entrainment
survival
studies
should
not
include
only
those
organisms
that
are
either
whole
or
50
percent
whole
in
the
sample.
For
those
studies
that
did
not
discuss
the
issue
of
fragmented
organisms,
it
is
unclear
how
the
issue
was
treated.
Several
studies
indicated
that
the
majority
of
the
sample
was
mangled
or
unidentifiable.
There
is
potential
for
an
extremely
large
number
of
dead
organisms
to
be
excluded
from
entrainment
survival
estimates
because
they
are
fragmented
to
the
point
of
being
unidentifiable.
Studies
should
account
for
this
fragmentation
of
organisms
by
either
measuring
unidentifiable
biomass
in
the
samples
or
by
determining
the
change
in
the
levels
of
particulate
organic
carbon
(
POC)
or
dissolved
organic
carbon
(
DOC)
from
the
intake
and
discharge
stations.
Without
taking
these
organisms
into
account,
entrainment
survival
estimates
will
be
biased
extremely
higher
than
that
which
actually
occurs.
There
are
indications
that
the
fragmented
organisms,
which
are
generally
not
included
in
survival
estimates,
may
be
a
substantial
number
which
results
in
an
overestimation
of
entrainment
survival
if
these
fragmented
organisms
are
more
prevalent
in
the
discharge.
In
the
proceedings
of
a
conference
held
in
Providence,
RI
on
January
6,
1972,
entitled
Pollution
of
the
interstate
waters
of
Mount
Hope
Bay
and
its
tributaries
in
the
states
of
Massachusetts
and
Rhode
Island,
the
following
regarding
fragmentation
was
quoted
"...
in
1970
when
we
observed
many
small
transparent
larval
menhaden
in
the
intake.
They
were
most
readily
noted
by
their
black
eyes.
But
in
the
effluent,
all
we
found
were
eyes.
They
were
torn
to
pieces"
(
US
EPA,
1972).
Foam
observed
in
the
discharge
(
Thomas,
2002)
may
indicate
that
fragmentation
is
substantial
and
can
be
verified
by
measuring
the
concentration
change
of
DOC
and
POC
in
the
discharge.
The
data
summary
in
Jinks
et
al.
(
1981)
suggests
that
a
substantial
number
of
fish
larvae
may
be
fragmented
by
mechanical
forces
and
become
unrecognizable,
contributing
to
a
bias
in
estimates
of
survival.
Ten
of
the
studies
reviewed
by
EPA
reported
finding
fragmented
organisms;
others
apparently
did
not
quantify
evidence
of
mutilated
larvae.
High
rates
of
physical
damage
(
15%
to
33%
for
larvae
<
17.5
mm)
and
abundant
larval
fish
fragments
were
reported
by
Stevens
and
Finlayson
(
1978)
at
the
Pittsburg
and
Contra
Costa
power
plant
discharges.
Such
losses
can
contribute
to
a
bias
(
overestimation)
of
entrainment
survival
as
the
number
of
dead
organisms
are
not
properly
enumerated.
In
addition,
the
low
numbers
of
organisms
sampled
in
the
studies
in
relation
to
the
high
annual
entrainment
numbers
gives
further
indication
that
the
sampling
effort
may
not
result
in
a
adequate
representation
of
the
organism
entrained
and
therefore
the
sampling
estimates
may
not
represent
that
which
actually
occurs.

The
inclusion
of
stunned
larvae
in
the
initial
survival
estimates
may
result
in
overestimations
of
survival,
since
the
majority
of
these
organisms
died
in
the
laboratory
latent
survival
studies
and
even
more
may
die
in
the
natural
conditions
of
the
discharge
canal
due
to
predation
or
disrupted
growth
and
development.
Twenty
nine
studies
included
stunned
larvae
in
their
initial
survival
estimates,
and
only
a
few
indicated
that
this
may
tend
to
overestimate
initial
survival
since
many
of
these
stunned
larvae
die
within
hours
of
collection
in
laboratory
latent
survival
studies
and
most
would
be
expected
to
die
due
to
increase
risk
of
predation
after
discharge.
The
remainder
of
the
studies
did
not
discuss
the
treatment
of
stunned
larvae.
Many
studies
only
reported
initial,
acute
mortality.
Both
initial
mortality
and
extended
or
latent
(
96
hour)
mortality
should
be
studied
and
reported
to
ensure
the
most
accurate
overall
survival
estimate.

Dead
and
opaque
organisms
should
not
be
excluded
from
the
enumeration
of
dead
organisms.
The
reason
given
for
why
this
was
done
in
some
studies
is
that
these
dead
and
opaque
organisms
most
likely
died
prior
to
entrainment.
However,
dead
organisms
can
turn
opaque
within
an
hour
which
is
the
same
amount
of
time
which
elapses
during
sampling
collection
and
sorting.
Also,
zero
dead
and
opaque
organisms
were
collected
in
the
samples
of
one
study
when
the
facility
was
not
generating
power.
Three
studies
omitted
dead
and
opaque
organisms
from
the
dead
classification
used
to
estimate
survival.
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
49
This
resulted
in
an
elimination
of
up
to
99%
of
the
organisms
in
the
samples
of
one
study.
On
the
other
hand,
one
study
only
counted
those
organisms
which
were
opaque
as
dead.

The
study
design
should
support
unbiased
estimation
of
survival,
taking
into
account
pertinent
factors
and
the
changing
relative
abundances
of
species
and
life
stages.
Because
entrainment
mortality
changes
with
ambient
and
operating
conditions
and
life
stages,
and
because
the
numbers
of
various
species
and
life
stages
entrained
also
change
diurnally
and
seasonally,
use
of
an
average
value
for
entrainment
survival
could
be
misleading.
Organisms
should
be
counted
and
sorted
by
both
species,
life
stage,
and
size.
Entrainment
survival
should
then
be
calculated
separately
for
each
life
stage
of
each
species.
Entrainment
survival
appears
to
vary
markedly
with
fish
larval
size
(
EA
Science
&
Technology,
1989);
mortality
is
often
high
for
smaller
larvae
and
low
for
larger
ones.
Thus,
survival
measured
for
a
heterogeneous
mixture
of
sizes
will
apply
only
to
that
mixture
under
the
same
conditions,
and
cannot
be
used
to
accurately
estimate
survival
for
the
species
over
the
course
of
even
part
of
a
season.
The
approach
of
modeling
survival
in
relation
to
size
seems
promising
(
EA
Science
&
Technology,
1989).
The
implication
is
that
accurate
assessment
of
entrainment
survival
requires
frequent
samples
throughout
a
season,
to
reflect
the
changing
size
and
species
composition
of
the
ichthyoplankton.
In
most
studies
all
data
from
all
samples
collected
under
varied
times
and
conditions
were
combined
to
give
an
average
entrainment
survival.
However,
bias
could
be
introduced
when
a
disproportionate
number
of
samples
are
taken
under
a
specific
set
of
conditions
which
may
not
accurately
reflect
conditions
throughout
the
year.
Only
16
of
the
35
studies
estimating
entrainment
survival
by
sampling
reported
standard
deviations
or
confidence
intervals
for
the
survival
estimates.
The
apparent
precision
of
estimates
based
on
hundreds
of
organisms,
and
the
estimates
themselves
are
deceptive.
Such
estimates
are
based
on
aggregated
numbers
that
vary
in
size,
and
larval
fish
survival
depends
on
size
(
EA
Science
&
Technology,
1989).
Sizespecific
estimates
of
survival
can
be
made,
with
wider
confidence
intervals.

The
volume
of
water
sampled
should
always
be
reported
with
the
number
of
organisms
counted
in
the
sampled
volume.
This
allows
estimates
of
the
densities
of
organisms
in
the
intake
and
discharge
water.
Density
estimates
provide
an
important
check
on
assumptions.
When
organism
densities
cannot
be
measured
accurately,
a
useful
check
on
disintegration
of
organisms
that
are
never
counted
can
not
be
performed.
Another
check
on
loss
of
organisms
by
disintegration
is
a
count
of
body
parts,
which
was
done
in
only
one
of
the
studies
reviewed,
but
this
will
not
account
for
organisms
rendered
unrecognizable
or
totally
disintegrated.
In
some
studies,
the
number
of
organisms
in
discharge
samples
were
many
times
greater
than
the
number
of
organisms
in
intake
samples
using
the
same
sampling
methods.
In
other
studies,
there
were
many
times
more
organisms
collected
in
the
intake
samples
than
the
discharge
samples.
Such
large
differences
raise
concerns
about
sampling
methodology
and
possible
causes
of
bias
that
need
to
be
investigated
and
accounted.

Control
samples
that
test
the
mortality
associated
with
sampling
gear
should
be
taken
as
far
away
from
the
intake
as
possible.
This
will
ensure
that
the
rates
of
mortality
determined
will
be
solely
from
natural
causes
or
sampling
damage
and
not
from
potential
damage
due
to
increased
velocity
and
turbulence
near
the
intake.
Sampling
mortality
should
be
reduced
to
the
maximum
extent
possible,
using
modern
sampling
techniques
(
EA
Engineering
Science
&
Technology,
2000).
When
control
survival
is
significantly
low
and
less
than
discharge
survival,
no
attempts
should
be
made
to
calculate
entrainment
survival
which
would
give
an
erroneous
survival
result
of
greater
than
100
percent.
The
studies
which
resulted
in
entrainment
survival
estimates
greater
than
100
percent
indicates
that
these
studies'
methods
of
calculating
entrainment
survival
are
flawed
by
methodological
biases.

The
calculation
of
survival
from
the
ratio
of
the
fraction
alive
in
discharge
samples
to
the
fraction
alive
in
intake
samples
requires
assumptions
not
supported
by
the
same
studies.
These
assumptions
are:
(
1)
no
organisms
are
lost
to
counting
by
destruction
in
the
cooling
water
system,
in
other
words,
the
same
density
of
organisms
(
dead
or
alive)
is
observed
in
the
discharge
as
in
the
intake;
(
2)
the
sampling
method
causes
the
same
rate
of
mortality
in
the
discharge
sample
as
in
the
intake
sample.
The
first
assumption
is
without
doubt
violated
for
many
species
and
life
stages.
The
second
assumption
is
also
questionable,
because
any
organisms
alive
in
the
discharge
have
survived
entrainment
and
may
be
more
resistant
to
sampling­
related
mortality.
Because
the
loss
of
organisms
by
disintegration
is
not
measured,
if
a
substantial
number
of
organisms
are
destroyed
and
thus
are
not
counted
in
the
discharge,
it
is
more
likely
that
entrainment
survival
will
be
overestimated.
The
second
assumption
can
be
minimized
if
methods
of
sampling
are
used
that
reduce
sampling
mortality
to
a
minimum
(
EA
Engineering
Science
&
Technology,
2000);
such
methods
(
e.
g.,
rear­
draw
pumping
methods,
pumpless
flume)
were
used
in
only
5
of
the
35
studies
reviewed
above.
The
formula
commonly
used
(
EA
Engineering
Science
&
Technology,
2000)
to
estimate
entrainment
survival,
SI
=
PD
/
PI
,
is
appropriate
in
experimental
situations
in
which
the
number
of
organisms
at
risk
is
verified
to
equal
the
number
counted
(
alive
and
dead)
at
the
end
of
the
study.
It
can
be
applied
in
observational
studies
when
it
is
known
from
other
solid
evidence
that
the
number
at
risk
is
conserved
(
i.
e.
no
organisms
are
lost
in
sampling
or
destroyed
so
they
cannot
be
counted).
The
biases
that
result
from
loss
via
sampling
or
destruction,
and
other
causes,
were
clearly
illustrated
by
Boreman
and
Goodyear
(
1981).
If
Abbott'
s
correction
for
control
mortality
is
applied,
it
requires
the
assumption
that
sampling
mortality
rate
is
the
same
for
the
intake
and
discharge
samples.
This
source
of
bias
was
also
considered
by
Boreman
and
Goodyear
(
1981).
Abbott's
correction
may
contribute
to
overestimation
of
entrainment
survival
because
it
attributes
to
entrainment
only
that
mortality
in
excess
of
the
mortality
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
50
March
11,
2003
attributed
to
sampling.
This
may
overestimate
entrainment
survival
for
two
reasons:
it
is
likely
that
sampling
and
entrainment
mortality
are
not
entirely
additive,
and,
as
noted
above,
it
is
quite
possible
that
the
sampling
mortality
rate
is
less
in
the
discharge
sample
than
in
the
intake
sample
that
is
used
as
the
control.

A7­
5
APPLICABILITY
OF
ENTRAINMENT
SURVIVAL
STUDIES
TO
OTHER
FACILITIES
Due
to
many
factors,
the
potential
for
entrainment
survival
is
facility­
specific.
Therefore,
EPA
does
not
suggest
that
entrainment
survival
estimates
be
applied
to
other
facilities,
as
was
done
in
the
Muskingum
River
Plant
study
(
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.,
1979a).
To
correctly
transfer
the
results,
the
physical
attributes
of
facilities
would
need
to
be
extremely
similar.
Specifically,
the
facilities
would
need
to
have
similar
numbers
of
cooling
water
flow
routes,
similar
lengths
of
flow
routes
in
terms
of
time
and
linear
distance,
similar
mechanical
features
in
terms
of
abrasive
surfaces,
pressure
changes
and
turbulence,
and
similar
number
and
types
of
pumps
used.
In
addition,
there
would
need
to
be
similarity
and
constancy
of
the
flow
rates,
transit
times,
thermal
regimes,
and
biocide
regimes.
The
ecological
characteristics
of
the
environment
around
the
facility
would
also
need
to
be
similar
in
terms
of
ambient
water
temperature,
dissolved
oxygen
level,
and
the
species
and
life
stage
of
organisms
present.
Similarities
or
differences
in
these
aspects
may
profoundly
affect
the
applicability
of
the
study
between
facilities.
The
studies
reviewed
by
EPA
were
unsuitable
for
developing
unbiased
estimates
of
entrainment
survival
over
the
pertinent
courses
of
time
(
diel
and
seasonal)
and
the
typical
environmental
and
operating
conditions
at
the
facilities
conducting
the
studies,
and
thus
cannot
be
used
to
estimate
entrainment
survival
at
section
316(
b)
facilities
nationwide.

A7­
6
CONCLUSIONS
EPA's
review
of
the
36
entrainment
survival
studies
described
above
has
revealed
a
number
of
limitations
that
challenge
their
use
in
assessing
the
benefits
of
the
section
316(
b)
Phase
II
Existing
Facilities
Rule.
The
primary
issue
with
regard
to
these
studies
is
whether
the
results
can
support
a
defensible
estimate
of
survival
substantially
different
from
the
value
of
zero
percent
survival
assumed
by
EPA
in
assessing
benefits
of
the
proposed
rule.
Given
the
fact
that
live
organisms
can
be
found
in
the
discharge
canals
of
many
cooling
water
intake
systems,
it
may
be
true
that
not
all
organisms
are
necessarily
killed
as
they
pass
through
the
cooling
systems
of
all
facilities
under
all
operating
conditions.
However,
the
results
of
the
36
studies,
summarized
in
Table
A7­
1,
suggest
that
the
proportion
alive
in
the
samples
is
highly
variable
and
unpredictable
among
species
and
among
facilities.
The
studies
document
that
some
species
(
e.
g.,
herrings,
bay
anchovy)
are
extremely
sensitive
to
entrainment
and
suffer
nearly
complete
mortality,
with
calculated
mortality
rates
of
100
percent
at
most
facilities.
Other
species,
such
as
striped
bass,
may
be
more
resistant
to
entrainment
effects.
However,
even
for
these
apparently
hardier
species,
some
studies
yielded
ranges
of
entrainment
survival
estimates
that
included
zero
and
latent
survival
values
very
close
to
zero.
Multiple
studies
as
the
same
facility
(
e.
g.,
Bowline
Point,
Indian
Point)
yielded
survival
values
for
species
such
as
striped
bass
that
varied
substantially
among
years,
most
likely
due
to
a
combination
of
changes
in
environmental
conditions,
changes
in
plant
operations
as
well
as
changes
in
sampling
and
testing
procedures.
Temperature
seems
related
to
survival,
but
the
effect
may
vary
greatly
depending
on
intake
water
temperature,
plant
design,
fish
species
and
life
stages.
Few
of
the
studies
could
conclusively
document
and
quantify
the
specific
stressors
causing
the
observed
mortalities
and
no
rigorous,
validated
method
or
model
was
put
forward
that
would
allow
survival
rates
to
be
accurately
predicted.
Another
major
constraint
on
the
use
of
these
findings
in
this
rulemaking
process
is
that
they
cover
very
few
species,
primarily
in
a
single
geographical
region
of
the
country,
thus
providing
no
basis
for
prediction
or
projection
of
effects
to
other
species
in
other
parts
of
the
country.
These
studies
as
well
as
other
literature
also
clearly
show
that
findings
from
one
facility
cannot
be
considered
to
be
valid
for
another
facility,
since
many
site­
specific
and
facility­
specific
factors
can
affect
the
magnitude
of
mortality
that
occurs.
The
current
state
of
knowledge
would
not
support
predictions
of
entrainment
survival
for
the
range
of
species,
life
stages,
regions
and
facilities
involved
in
EPA's
benefits
estimates.

The
potential
usefulness
of
all
of
the
findings
of
all
of
the
studies
is
further
compromised
by
the
numerous
factors
that
can
influence
the
representativeness,
accuracy,
and
precision
of
the
survival
estimates
presented
and
that
are
often
not
rigorously
accounted
for
in
the
studies
reviewed.
These
factors
are
described
in
Section
A7­
2,
and
some
of
the
deficiencies
of
the
studies
with
regard
to
these
factors
are
elaborated
on
in
Section
A7­
3.
The
most
frequent
and
serious
deficiencies
noted
(
e.
g.,
high
control
mortalities;
omission
of
fragmented
or
unidentifiable
organisms,
and
uncertainty
regarding
postdischarge
survival)
compromise
the
accuracy
and
precision
of
the
survival
estimates.
In
many
of
the
studies,
the
precision
of
the
survival
estimates
was
not
rigorously
assessed,
and
thus
the
uncertainty
associated
with
the
estimates
is
not
known.
If
the
factors
addressed
in
this
review
were
taken
into
account
in
an
entrainment
survival
study,
EPA
believes
that
the
estimate
of
survival
which
would
result
would
not
be
substantially
different
from
zero.
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
51
EPA
acknowledges
that
some
of
the
studies
performed
at
some
facilities
were
designed
in
a
more
rigorous
manner
than
others
in
order
to
minimize
the
influence
of
factors
that
could
compromise
findings
(
e.
g.,
the
use
of
a
larval
table
for
assessing
physiological
condition)
and
included
comprehensive
sampling
in
an
attempt
to
enhance
the
accuracy
and
precision
of
the
survival
estimates.
However,
while
such
studies
may
have
provided
estimates
for
the
facility
studied
under
the
environmental
and
operational
conditions
that
occurred
at
the
time
the
study
was
performed,
they
do
not
provide
a
basis
for
generalizing
specific
survival
rates
for
all
or
even
the
same
species
at
other
facilities
or
at
the
same
facility
in
other
years.
In
addition,
there
exists
the
possibility
of
additional
post­
discharge
(
latent)
mortality
when
entrained
organisms
are
returned
to
the
receiving
water
body.
Overall,
the
unreliability,
variability
and
unpredictability
of
entrainment
survival
estimates
evident
from
EPA's
review
of
the
entrainment
survival
studies
supports
the
use
of
the
assumption
of
zero
percent
survival
in
the
benefits
assessment
because
there
is
no
clear
indication
of
any
defensible
estimate
of
survival
substantially
different
from
zero
percent
to
use
to
calculate
benefits
for
this
rule.

References
Beck,
A.
D.
and
the
Committee
on
Entrainment.
1978.
Cumulative
Effects:
A
field
assessment.
Power
Plant
Entrainment:
A
Biological
Assessment.
J.
R.
Schubel
and
B.
C.
Marcy
Jr.,
eds.
Academic
Press:
New
York.
Pp.
189­
210.

Boreman,
J.,
and
C.
P.
Goodyear.
1981.
Biases
in
the
estimation
of
entrainment
mortality.
Fifth
National
Workshop
on
Entrainment
and
Impingement:
Issues
Associated
with
Impact
Assessment.
L.
D.
Jensen,
ed.
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.:
Sparks,
Maryland.
pp.
79­
89
Carter,
S.
R.
1978.
Macroinvertebrate
Entrainment
Study
at
Fort
Calhoun
Station.
Fourth
National
Workshop
on
Entrainment
and
Impingement.
EA
Communications:
Melville
NY.
Pp.
155­
169.

CCI
Environmental
Services,
Inc.
1996.
Zooplankton
Entrainment
Survival
Study,
Anclote
Power
Plant,
Pasco
County,
Florida.
CCI,
Palmetto
Fl.
Prepared
for
Florida
Power
Corporation.

Chen,
I.
2002.
Personal
communication
to
D.
Nagle
on
12/
17/
02.

Colarusso,
P.
2002.
Personal
Communication
to
D.
Nagle
on
12/
17/
02.

Coutant,
C.
A.
and
M.
S.
Bevelhimer.
2001.
Comments
on
Lawler,
Matusky
&
Skelly
Engineers,
LLP.
1999
draft
Brayton
Point
Power
Plant
Entrainment
Survival
Study
1997­
1998.

Day,
Jr.,
J.
W.,
C.
A.
S.
Hall,
W.
M.
Hall
and
A.
Yáñez­
Arancibia.
1989.
Zooplankton,
the
drifting
consumers.
Estuarine
Ecology.
John
Wiley
&
Sons:
New
York.
Pp.
311­
337.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1976a.
Bowline
Point
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
and
Abundance
Studies,
Volume
I,
1975
Annual
Interpretive
Report.
Prepared
for
Orange
and
Rockland
Utilities,
Inc.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1976b.
Danskammer
Point
Generating
Station
Impingement
and
Entrainment
Survival
Studies,
1975
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Central
Hudson
Gas
&
Electric
Corporation.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1976c.
Roseton
Generating
Station
Impingement
and
Entrainment
Survival
Studies,
1975
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Central
Hudson
Gas
&
Electric
Corporation.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1977.
Bowline
Point
Generating
Station
Entrainment
and
Impingement
Studies,
1976
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Orange
and
Rockland
Utilities,
Inc.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1978a.
Bowline
Point
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
Studies,
1977
Annual
Interpretive
Report.
Prepared
for
Orange
and
Rockland
Utilities,
Inc.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1978b.
Impact
of
the
Cooling
Water
Intake
at
the
Indian
River
Power
Plant:
A
316(
b)
Evaluation.
Prepared
for
Delmarva
Power
&
Light
Co.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1978c.
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
and
Related
Studies,
1977
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Consolidated
Edison
Company
of
New
York,
Inc.
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
52
March
11,
2003
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1978d.
Roseton
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
Studies,
1976
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Central
Hudson
Gas
&
Electric
Corporation.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1978e.
Roseton
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
Studies,
1977
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Central
Hudson
Gas
&
Electric
Corporation.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1979a.
An
Assessment
of
the
Potential
for
Ichthyoplankton
Entrainment
Survival
at
the
Muskingum
River
Plant.
Prepared
for
American
Electric
Power
Service
Corp.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1979b.
Bowline
Point
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Abundance
and
Survival
Studies,
1978
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Orange
and
Rockland
Utilities,
Inc.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1979c.
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
and
Related
Studies,
1978
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Consolidated
Edison
Company
of
New
York,
Inc.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1980a.
Entrainment
Survival
Studies
at
the
Cayuga
Generating
Plant.
Prepared
for
Public
Service
of
Indiana.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1980b.
Potrero
Power
Plant
Cooling
Water
Intake
Structures
316(
b)
Demonstration.
Prepared
for
Pacific
Gas
and
Electric
Company.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1980c.
Roseton
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
Studies,
1978
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Central
Hudson
Gas
and
Electric
Corporation.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1981a.
Bowline
Point
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Abundance
and
Survival
Studies,
1979
Annual
Report
with
Overview
of
1975­
1979
Studies.
Prepared
for
Orange
and
Rockland
Utilities,
Inc.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1981b.
Entrainment
Survival
Studies.
Prepared
for
Empire
State
Electric
Energy
Research
Corporation.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1981c.
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
and
Related
Studies
1979
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Consolidated
Edison
Company
of
New
York
and
Power
Authority
of
the
State
of
New
York.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1982.
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
and
Related
Studies
1980
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Consolidated
Edison
Company
of
New
York
and
Power
Authority
of
the
State
of
New
York.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
1983.
Roseton
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
Studies,
1980
Annual
Report.
Prepared
for
Central
Hudson
Gas
and
Electric
Corporation.

Ecological
Analysts
Inc.
and
Ecological
Analy.
1978.
Port
Jefferson
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
Study.
Prepared
for
Long
Island
Lighting
Company.

EA
Engineering
Science
and
Technology.
1986.
Entrainment
and
Impingement
Studies
at
Oyster
Creek
Nuclear
Generating
Station
1984­
1985.
Prepared
for
GPU
Nuclear
Corporation.

EA
Engineering
Science
and
Technology.
1989.
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
1988
Entrainment
Survival
Study.
Final.
Prepared
under
contract
with
Consolidated
Edison
Company
of
New
York
Inc.
and
New
York
Power
Authority.

EA
Engineering
Science
and
Technology.
2000.
Review
of
Entrainment
Survival
Studies:
1970­
2000.
Prepared
for
Electric
Power
Research
Institute,
Inc.

EA
Science
and
Technology.
1986.
Indian
Point
Generating
Station
Entrainment
Survival
Study.
1985
Annual
Report.
Prepared
under
contract
with
Consolidated
Edison
Company
of
New
York
Inc.
and
New
York
Power
Authority.

EA
Science
and
Technology.
1990.
Results
of
Entrainment
and
Impingement
Studies
Conducted
at
the
Braidwood
Nuclear
Station
and
the
Adjacent
Kankakee
River.
Prepared
for
Commonwealth
Edison
Company.

Hadderingh,
R.
H.
1978.
Mortality
of
young
fish
in
the
cooling
water
system
of
Bergum
power
station.
Proceedings
International
Association
of
Theoretical
and
Applied
Limnology.
20:
347­
352.
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
March
11,
2003
A7­
53
Hazleton
Environmental
Science
Corporation.
1978.
The
Survival
of
Entrained
Ichthyoplankton
at
Quad­
Cities
Station
1978.
Prepared
for
Commonwealth
Edison
Company,
Chicago,
Illinois.

Jinks,
S.
M.,
G.
J.
Lauer
and
M.
E.
Loftus.
1981.
Advances
in
techniques
for
assessment
of
ichthyoplankton
entrainment
survival.
Fifth
National
Workshop
on
Entrainment
and
Impingement:
Issues
Associated
with
Impact
Assessment.
L.
D.
Jensen,
ed.
Ecological
Analysts
Inc.:
Sparks,
Maryland.
pp.
91­
110
Kimball,
G.
2002.
Personal
communication
to
D.
Nagle
on
12/
26/
02.

Lawler
Matusky
&
Skelly
Engineers.
1985.
2.0
Entrainment
Survival
Studies.
Quad
Cities
Aquatic
Program
1984
Annual
Report
.
Prepared
for
Commonwealth
Edison,
Chicago,
Illinois.

Lawler
Matusky
&
Skelly
Engineers.
1999.
Brayton
Point
Power
Station
Entrainment
Survival
Study,
1997­
1998.
Draft.
Prepared
for
US
Gen
New
England,
Inc.,
Brayton
Point
Station,
Somerset,
MA.

Lauer,
G.
J.,
W.
T.
Waller,
D.
W.
Bath,
W.
Meeks,
D.
Heffner,
T.
Ginn,
L.
Zubarik,
P.
Bibko,
and
P.
C.
Storm.
1974.
Entrainment
studies
on
Hudson
River
organisms.
Proceedings
of
the
Second
Workshop
on
Entrainment
and
Intake
screening,
Report.
15.
EPRI:
Palo
Alto,
CA.
Pp.
37­
82.

Marcy
Jr.,
B.
C.
1971.
Survival
of
Young
Fish
in
the
Discharge
Canal
of
a
Nuclear
Power
Plant.
Journal
Fisheries
Research
Board
of
Canada.
28:
1057­
1060.

Marcy
Jr.,
B.
C.
1973.
Vulnerability
and
Survival
of
Young
Connecticut
River
Fish
Entrained
at
a
Nuclear
Power
Plant.
Journal
Fisheries
Research
Board
of
Canada.
30:
1195­
1203.

Marcy,
Jr.,
B.
C.
1975.
Entrainment
of
organisms
at
power
plants,
with
emphasis
on
fishes
 
an
overview.
Fisheries
and
Energy
Production.
S.
B.
Sailia,
ed.
D.
C.
Heath
and
Company:
Lexington,
MA.
Pp.
89­
106.

Marcy
Jr.,
B.
C.,
A.
D.
Beck
and
R.
E.
Ulanowicz.
1978.
Effects
and
Impacts
of
Physical
Stress
on
Entrained
Organisms.
Power
Plant
Entrainment:
A
Biological
Assessment.
J.
R.
Schubel
and
B.
C.
Marcy,
Jr.
eds.
Academic
Press:
New
York.
Pp.
135­
188.

Mayhew,
D.
A.,
L.
D.
Jensen,
D.
F.
Hanson,
P.
H.
Muessig.
2000.
A
comparative
review
of
entrainment
survival
studies
at
power
plants
in
estuarine
environments.
Environmental
Science
&
Policy
3:
S295­
S301.

McCullough,
M.
2002.
Personal
communication
to
P.
Howe
on
12/
20/
02.

McLean,
R.
I.
and
J.
J.
Dieter.
2002.
State
of
Maryland
Comments
on
Proposed
Regulations
to
Establish
Requirements
for
Cooling
Water
Intake
Structures
at
Phase
Ii
Existing
Facilities;
Proposed
Rule,
Published
Federal
Register,
April
9,
2002.
To
Proposed
Rule
Comment
Clerk
­
W­
00­
32,
dated
August,
5,
2002.

Morgan
II,
R.
P.
1980.
Biocides
and
Fish
Behavior.
Power
Plants:
Effects
on
Fish
and
Shellfish
Behavior.
C.
H.
Hocutt,
J.
R.
Stauffer
Jr.,
J.
E.
Edinger,
L.
W.
Hall
Jr.,
R.
P.
Morgan
II,
eds.
Academic
Press:
New
York.
Pp.
75
­
102.

Morgan
II,
R.
P.
and
E.
J.
Carpenter.
1978.
Biocides.
Power
Plant
Entrainment:
A
Biological
Assessment.
J.
R.
Schubel
and
B.
C.
Marcy,
Jr.
eds.
Academic
Press:
New
York.
Pp.
95­
134.

Newman,
M.
C.
1995.
Quantitative
Methods
in
Aquatic
Ecotoxicology.
Lewis
Publishers:
Boca
Raton,
FL.
Pp.
135­
136.

Schlesinger,
W.
H.
1991.
Rivers
and
Estuaries.
Biogeochemistry:
An
analysis
of
global
change.
Academic
Press:
San
Diego,
CA.
Pp.
226­
253.

Schubel,
J.
R.,
C.
C.
Coutant,
P.
M.
J.
Woodhead.
1978.
Thermal
Effects
of
Entrainment.
Power
Plant
Entrainment:
A
Biological
Assessment.
J.
R.
Schubel
and
B.
C.
Marcy,
Jr.
eds.
Academic
Press:
New
York.
Pp.
19­
93.

Stauffer
Jr.,
J.
R.
1980.
Influence
of
temperature
on
fish
behavior.
Power
Plants:
Effects
on
Fish
and
Shellfish
Behavior.
C.
H.
Hocutt,
J.
R.
Stauffer
Jr.,
J.
E.
Edinger,
L.
W.
Hall
Jr.,
R.
P.
Morgan
II,
eds.
Academic
Press:
New
York.
Pp.
103­
141.

Stevens,
D.
E.
and
B.
J.
Finlayson.
1978.
Mortality
of
Young
Striped
Bass
Entrained
at
Two
Power
Plants
in
Sacramento
 
San
Joaquin
Delta,
California.
Fourth
National
Workshop
on
Entrainment
and
Impingement.
EA
§
316(
b)
Existing
Facilities
Benefits
Case
Studies,
Part
A:
Evaluation
Methods
Chapter
A7:
Entrainment
Survival
A7­
54
March
11,
2003
Communications:
Melville
NY.
Pp.
57­
69.

Stuber,
R.
2002.
Personal
communication
to
D.
Nagle
on
12/
17/
02.

Thomas,
D.
A.
December
30,
2002.
Memo
to
docket,
RE:
Observations
of
foam
in
discharge
canals
of
2
power
plants.

Ulanowicz,
R.
E.
and
B.
Kinsman.
1978.
Purgatorio
 
Two
rather
different
views
of
the
same
event.
Power
Plant
Entrainment:
A
Biological
Assessment.
J.
R.
Schubel
and
B.
C.
Marcy,
Jr.
eds.
Academic
Press:
New
York.
Pp.
245­
253.

U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
1972.
Dr.
Clarence
Tarzwell.
Pollution
of
the
interstate
waters
of
Mount
Hope
Bay
and
its
tributaries
in
the
states
of
Massachusetts
and
Rhode
Island.
Conference
Proceedings,
Providence
RI,
January
6,
1972.
Volume
2,
Washington
DC
NTIS
No.
PB
230
572.
Pp.
591­
623.

U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
1998.
Product
Performance
Test
Guidelines
OPPT
810.3500
Premises
Treatments.
EPA­
712­
C­
98­
413
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
2002.
Methods
for
Measuring
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
Effluents
and
Receiving
Waters
to
Freshwater
and
Marine
Organisms.
Fifth
Edition.
Section
11,
Acute
Toxicity
Analysis.
.
EPA­
821­
R­
02­
012.
Pp.
71­
108.

Valiela,
I.
1995.
Spatial
structure:
Patchiness.
Marine
Ecological
Processes.
Springer:
New
York.
Pp.
325­
353.

Valiela,
I.
1995.
The
carbon
cycle:
Production
and
transformations
of
organic
matter.
Marine
Ecological
Processes.
Springer:
New
York.
Pp.
385­
424.