NC0024392_Regional Office Historical File Pre 2018 (7)

W AC � Michael E. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
p Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
February 22, 2007
4,.
t
Mr. Gary Peterson
Duke Energy Corporation
McGuire NuclearStation
12700 Hagers Ferry Road
Huntersville, NC 28078 YA A
Dear Mr. Peterson
Staff of the Environmental Sciences Section of DWQ have reviewed the Lake Norman Environmental
Monitoring Program: 2005 Summary Report. The report is required by NPDES permit number
NCO024392 for the McGuire Nuclear Station The water chemistry, phytoplankton, zooplankton, and
fisheries data complied in the report are within the ranges found in prior years of the maintenance
monitoring program, so staff have no major concerns at this time.
Bryn Tracy of the Biological Assessment Unit had these comments, but notes DPC staff and NCWRC are
aware of these issues at the reservoir:
1. In this man-made reservoir, - 0% of the species are introduced:
2. Spatted bass has had an impact on the largemouth bass population as have the alewife and white
perch.
3. The alewife population, based upon fall hydr acou tic and purse seine data, has declined
following` introduction in 1999 and an explosive growth up until 2002.
4. The spring shoreline data continue to show a reservoir numerically dominated by blue ill and
biomass dominated by Largemouth bass:
Sincerely,
lmmte Overton
Chief, Environmental Sciences Section
cc: Susan Wilson, Western NPDES Program
Rob Krebs, MRCS wl rpt
tCara ins
N. C. Environmental Sciences Section 1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1621 Phone [phone]
Internet: www.esb:enr.state.nc.us 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, NC 27607 FAX (91 ) 733-9959
An Equal ClpporturitytAffirnative Action Employer— 50 R cled(10° Past Consumer Paper

uke MCGU#RE NUCLEAR STATION
PDE ` Duke Energy Corporation
12700 Nagers Ferry Rd
Nuntersville, NC 28078
7048754000
January 10, 2007
r. Jimmie R. Overton
North Carolina Department ofEnvironment
and Natural Resources
Environmental Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Subject: McGuire Nuclear Station
Lake Norman Environmental Monitoring Program: 2005 Summary Report
Certified: 7005 00 0004 1363 2472
Dear Mr. Overton:
Enclosed are three copies of the annual Labe Norman Environmental Monitoring Program: 2005
Summary Report, as required by NPDES permit NC0024392.
Results of the 2005 data: were comparable with that of previous years. No obvious short-term or
long-term impacts of station operations were observed in water duality, phytoplankton,
zooplankton, and fish communities. Additionally, 2005 station operation data demonstrates
compliance with pewit thermal limits and cool water management requirements.
Fishery studies continue to be coordinated with the Division of Inland Fisheries of the North
Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission to address Lake Norman fishery management concerns.
If you have any questions concerning this report, please contact John Williamson by phone at
(704)575-594 or by ; ail at jcwvil ° duke-energy.co
Sincerely
Gary R. Peterson
McGuire Site Vice President
cc. Mr. Scott Van Horn - North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission
Ms Susan Wilson -- NGDENR
John Derwort MG03A3
uawt duke-enetgy ro,n

Bill Faris
MG13A3
Duane Harrell
MCG03A3
SherryReid
MG03A3
Roan LewisEC13K
Jahn 'Williamson
MG)1 E - 6 copies (4 for NRC, RGC, EHS)
Y/attch: Record No. -0047'

Puke MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION
ner9ye Duke Energy Corporation
12700 Hagers Ferry Rd.
Huntersville, NC 28078
704 875 4000
wary 10, 2007
7. Scott Van Home
eh Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
42 i-85 Service Road
eedmor, NC 27522
bject: McGuire Nuclear Station
Lake Norman Environmental Monitoring Program: 2005 Summary Report
,rtified: 7005 0390 0004 1363 0164
r. Scott Van Home:
Drt, as required by NPDES permit NCO024392.
ilts of the 2005 data were comparable with that of previous years. No obvious short-term or
,-term impacts of station operations were observed in water quality, phytoplankton,
)Iankton, and fish communities. Additionally, 2005 station operation data demonstrates
pliance with pen -nit thermal limits and cool water management requirements.
ery studies continue to be coordinated with the Division of Inland Fisheries of the North
Mina Wildlife Resource Commission to address Lake Norman fishery management concerns.
iu have any questions concerning this report, please contact John Williamson by phone at
875-5894 or by email at [e-mail]
i C. Williamson
Yuire Nuclear Station
[ronmental, Health & Safety
www.duke

k .
0
FEB 2
LAKE NQ AN
"ARK QUALITY SECTION
2005 SUMMARY
McGuire Nuclear Station. N'DES No. NCOO24392
Principal investigators:
D. Hugh Barwick
,Jahn E. Derwort
William J. Forts
DU ENERGY
Corporate EHS Services
McGuire Environmental Center
13339 Hars Ferry Road
Huntersvlle, NC,` 28078
November 2006

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish ;to express their gratitude to a number of individuals who made significant
contributions to this report. First, we are much indebted to the EHS scientific services field
'staff in carrying out a complex, multiple -discipline sampling effort that provides the
foundation of this report. King Baler, Dave Coughlan, Bole Doby, Duane Harrell, Glenn
Long, and Todd Lynn conducted fisheries collections and sample processing. Jan Williams,
Brandy Starnes, and Glenn Long performed water quality field collections. John Williamson
assembled the plant operating data. Jan Williams, Brandy Starnes Glenn Long, and John
Derwart conducted plankton sampling, sorting, and taxonomic processing:
e would also like to thank the fallowing reviewers for their insightful commentary and
suggestions: Ron Lewis,and Jahn Velte. Sherry Reid compiled this report.
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LISTOF TABLES...:: ........ ...........................__......:+........................................ ix
LISTOF FIGURES... ....................................... .................................... .............................
xi
CHAPTER i- MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION .......................................... I-1
INTRODUCTION............ + ................. ...................+....:«........::...........................1-1
OPERATIONAL DATA FOR 2005 ...............................................+ ......................1-1
CHAPTER - WATER CHEMISTRY............................................................. 2-1
INTRODUCTION...........................+ ... .............+...+ ..+.....:.....+.. ........« ...................2-1
METHODS AND MATERIALS............................:......................« ... ...................2-1
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .............................................
Precipitation and. Air Temperature. .. ......
. 2-3
Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen .............................« .................. + ......+:.,........2-4
Reservoir -wide Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen ....... :..........................................
2-7
Striped Bass Habitat ....... ................................................................ ................
2-
Turbidity and Specific Conductance............ + ................; .........................................
2-
pH and Alkalinity: ..... ... .. .2-10
Major Cations and; Anions ...+..................................... ..............+ .....................
2-10
Nutrients........................................................................................................2-10
Metals........... ....................+ ...+ ......................................................................2-11
FUTURESTUDIES +.................................... ..........+ ......:................. ...........«....+.
-12'
SUMMARY...+.................................................................... , ..........................
2-12
CHAPTER - PHA'TOPLA KTON.............................................................3-1
INTRODUCTION.............. ............................. ......................... ...... ..................3-1
.METHODS AND MATERIALS ..+........................................
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION., ............................................+................................3-2
Standing Crop .............. .................+ .:........a...........................................:.........
3-
Chlorophylla .............:. ......................... + .......................;:..................... ............
3-2
Total Abundance::............................................:........:................... .......:.........
3-4
Seston...................... .....................................................................................................
3-
Secchi Depths. ........ ........ +,........... ..+ .......
3-5
Community Composition +............................... ........................ ....+....................,..
3-5
Species Composition and Seasonal Succession ....... ....... ,............. ................:..........3-0
Phytoplankton index ».................. .... +,. ................«..................:............................3-'7
FUTURE STUDIES .........:......................+ ...... , ..::+>.++ ..............; ......+.........:...........3-
SUMMARY.......................................... .....«+...«.......,...........................:.....,....
3-8

CHAPTER 4- ZOOPLAN TON.................................................................. -1
INTRODUCTION..................... ................................................................4-1
METHODSAND MATERIALS .............................. .:......................... .,....................... -1
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.,........ _..................... ............. ..... .:.......................... 4-
Total. Abundance .................................. ................ _......... .......................................... 4-
CommunityComposition ................................................. ........................ .......... .4-4
Copepoda.................................. ...................,.............................................. 4-5
Cladocera................................................................. ............. ...:................... 4.5
Rotifera.......................................... .............................., ........ .......................4-f
FUTURESTUDIES... ...... ........................................................ .......................;..., 4-6
SUMMARY...................................................................._..... .....:...................... 4-6
CHAPTER5- FISHERIES............................................................................. -1
INTRODUCTION....................... ........................... :..::.:................. .......................5-1
METHODS AND MATERIALS .:.......:. ...................:.....................::................... 5-1
Spring Electrofishing Surveys ..............................................................................5-1
Striped Bass Netting Survey ............................................................................... 5-2
CrappieTrap -net Study............................................................................................ 5-2
Fall Hydroacoustics and Purse Seine ................... ....................................... ,.......... ......5-3
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .................................................. :.................... ......... 5-3
Spring Electrofishing Surveys.......................................................... ............................ 5-
Summer Striped Bass Mortality Surveys ......... :............................. ........................5-5
Striped Bass (and Catfish) Netting Survey ..... ................................. ....................... :.... 5-5
CrappieTrap -net Study........................................................._ .............................. 5-6
Fall Hydroacoustics and Purse Seine .... ....................:........................................... 5-6
FUTURESTUDIES ... ........ ......................................................................................... ..:. 5-7
SUMMARY... ................................ ............. ...... :.......... ............................................... 5-7
LITERATURECITED......................... ............... ........................:..: .......... ...:..........L-I

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In accordance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
number NCO024392 for McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS), the Lake Norman Maintenance
Monitoring Program continued during 2005. No obvious short-term or Long -ten- impacts of
station operations were observed in water quality, phytoplankton, zooplankton, and fish
communities. The 2005 station operation data is summarized and continues to demonstrate
compliance with thermal limits and cool water requirements.
The average monthly capacity factors for MNS during critical summer months was 100.7%
(July), 101.3% (August), and 77.7% (September). Average monthly discharge temperatures
were below the 99.0 °F (37.2 °C) thermal limit for these critical months. The volume of cool
water in Lake Norman was adequate to comply with both the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission Technical Specification requirements and the NPDES discharge water
temperature limits.
Annual precipitation in the vicinity of MNS was 45.6 inches and similar to that measured in
2004 and long-term precipitation averages for this area. Air temperatures in 2005 were
generally warmer than the long-term mean and noticeably wanner than 2004 winter and late -
summer temperatures.
Temporal and spatial trends in 2005 water temperature and dissolved oxygen (DO) were
similar to those observed historically. All data were within the range of previously measured
values. Winter water temperatures in 2005 were generally warmer than those observed in
2004 in both the mixing and background zones. Spring and summer water temperatures in
2005 were generally similar to those observed in 2004 with several exceptions. Water
temperatures in the upper 10 m of the water column in June 2005 were up to 5.2 °C cooler
than in June 2004. July and August water temperatures in the metalimnion (10-15 m) were
also slightly cooler in 2005 than in 2004. Additionally, in September 2005 water
temperatures in the hypolinion (below 20 m) were cooler than in September 2004. Fall and
early winter water temperatures in 2005 were generally similar to those measured in 2004,
and followed the trend exhibited in air temperatures.
Winter and early spring DO values in 2005 were generally equal to or slightly lower than
those measured in 2004 in both the background and mixing zones with one exception. In
January 2005 the mixing zone exhibited slightly higher oxygen concentrations than in
v

January 2004. Spring and summer DO values in 2005 were highly variable throughout the
water column in both the mixing and background zones, similar to patterns observed in
previous years. Considerable differences were observed between.. 2005 and 2004 late summer
and fall DO concentrations in bath the mixing and background zone, especially in the
metatimnion and hypol moron during September and to a lesser extent during October and
November. DO concentrations in September 2005 were notably lower than those observed
during September 2004 while DO values observed in October and November 2005 were
higher than in 2004.
Reservoir -wide isotherm and isopleth information for 2005, coupled with heat content and
hypolimnetic oxygen data, illustrate that Lake Norman thermal and oxygen dynamics are
characteristic of historical conditions and similar to other Southeastern reservoirs of
comparable size, depth, flow conditions, and trophic status. Adult striped bass habitat
conditions were marginally better in 2005 than observed in most previous years and similar in
distribution and amount to 2004. Striped bass mortalities in 2005 (20 fish) were much less
than in 2004 (2610 fish).
All chemical parameters measured in 2005 were similar to 2004, and within the concentration
ranges previously reported for the take during bath preoperational and operational years of
MNS. Metal concentrations in 2005 were low or below the analytical reporting limits.
Cadmium, lead, zinc, and capper values did not exceed the NC water duality standards during
2005. Manganese and iron concentrations in the surface and bottom waters were generally
low in 2005, except during summer and fall when bottom waters became anoxic releasing
forms of these metals into the water column. Iran concentrations did not exceed NC's water
duality standard (1.0 mg/L). Manganese levels, however, exceeded the State standard (200
µg/L) in the bottom waters throughout the lake in the summer and fall. Manganese
concentrations measured in 2005 are characteristic of historical conditions.
Lake Norman continues to support highly variable and diverse phytoplankton communities.
Chlorophyll concentrations during 2005 were generally within historical ranges. Lake -wide
mean chlorophyll a concentrations were most often in the mesotrophic range in 2005 except
in November when mean chlorophyll concentrations were in the oligotrophic range. Lake
Norman is classified as oligo-mesotrophic based on long-term, annual mean chlorophyll
concentrations. The highest chlorophyll value (1.1.12 ltg/L) recorded in 2005 was well below
the NC water duality standard (40 lag/L).
vi

Fhytoplankton densities and biovolumes during 2005 were also within historical ranges and
never exceeded the NC guidelines for algae blooms. In February and May 2005, total
phytoplankton densities and biovolu es were higher than those observed during 2004. In
August and. November, phytoplankton densities and biovolumes were lower than in 2004.
Seston dry and ash -free weights were more often "lower in 2005 than in 2004. Maximum dry
and ash -free weights occurred most often at uptake Location 69.0 while minimum values
were noted mostly downlake at Locations 2.0 through 8.0. The higher proportion of ash -free
dry weights to dry weights in 2005 compared to 2004 indicates an increase in organic
composition.
Secchi depths reflected suspended solids, with shallow depths related to high dry weights.
The lake -wide mean Secchi depth in 2005 was slightly lower than in 2004 and was within
historical ranges recorded since 1992.
The taxonomic composition of phytoplankton communities during 2005 was similar to those
of many previous years and more diverse than any other year of this monitoring program.
Cryptophytes were dominant in February, while diatoms were dominant during May and
November. Green algae dominated phytoplankton assemblages during August. Blue-green
algae were slightly more abundant during 2005 than in 2004, however, their contribution to
total densities seldom exceeded 4%.
The phytoplankton index (Myxophycean) characterized Lake Norman as oligotrophic during
2005, and was the lowest annual index value recorded. Quarterly index values were highest
in May and lowest in November thus reflecting maximum and minimum chlorophyll values.
Location index values tended to reflect increases in chlorophyll and phytoplankton standing
crops from down -lake to mid -lake.
Lake Norman continues to support a highly diverse and viable zooplankton community.
Zooplankton densities, as well as seasonal and spatial trends were similar to historical data,
and no impacts of plant operations were observed. Maximum epilimnetic zooplankton
densities occurred in April at all locations except Location 2.0, where the maximum density
occurred in :May. Minimum zooplankton densities occurred most often in September. Mean
zooplankton densities were generally higher at background locations than at nixing ,zone
locations during 2005 and epilimnetic densities were higher than whole column densities.
vll

This is similar to historical data. Lang -term trends show increasing densities in the mixing
zone during May and higher year-to-year variability at background locations.
Overall relative abundance of copepods decreased from 2004 to 2005. Copepods dominated
only two samples collected during spring and fall. Cladocerans were dominant in five
samples during the summer and showed more year-to-year variability. Rotifers dominated
over 52% of all samples, Microcrustaceans increased slightly in relative abundance since
2004.
Adult copepods rarely accounted for more than 7% of zooplankton densities in 2005. The
most important adult copepod was Tropocyclops.. Bosmina was the predominant cladoceran,
while Bosr inoj)sis dominated most cladoceran populations during the summer. The most
abundant rotifers observed in 2005 were Po yarthra, Conoc°hilus, and Keratella, These
results are consistent with results from previous years.
In accordance with the Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program, monitoring of
specific fish population parameters were coordinated with the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission (NC RC) and continued during 2005. Spring electrofishi g
indicated that numbers and biomass of fish in 2005 were generally similar to those noted
since 1993. Declines in largemouth bass numbers, which were first observed in 2000, appear
to be an exception. Striped bass mortalities declined significantly from summer 2004 to
summer 2005 and the 2005 data were similar to that observed historically. Mean relative
weights (W) for Lake Norman striped bass collected in November and December 2005 was
slightly higher than values measured in 2003 and 2004. Little change was observed in
crappie populations in Lake Norman. The prey fish population estimate was comparable to
values measured from 1997 to 2003 and shows declining percentages of alewife to forage fish`
species composition and a shift in threadfin shad lengths toward smaller size ranges observed
prior to the alewife invasion:
Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring results from 2005 are consistent with results from
previous years, No obvious short-term or long-term impacts were observed in water quality
or biota of Lake Norman,
in

LIST OF TABLES
Table
Title
Page
1-1
Average monthly capacity factors (%) and :monthly average discharge water
temperatures for McGuire Nuclear Station during 2005'........... ,........ .......................
1-2
2-1
Water chemistry program for the McGuire Nuclear Station NPDES
Maintenance Monitoring Program on Lake Norman ..............................................
2-16
2-2
Analytical methods and reporting limits employed in the McGuire Nuclear
Station NPDES Maintenance Monitoring Program. for Lake Norman..... ...... .........
2-17
-3
Heat content calculations for the thermal regime in Lake Norman for 2004
and2005..............................................................................:..........................2-18
2-4
A comparison of areal hypoltmmtic oxygen deficits (AHOD), summer
chlorophyll a (Chl a), Secchi depth, and mean depth of Lake Norman and 18
TVAreservoirs ............. ............... ......,......::.............::..........»:...........................2-19
2-5
Quarterly surface (0.3 in) and bottom. (bottom minus 1 m) water chemistry
for the McGuire Nuclear Station discharge, mixing zone, and background
locations on Lake Norman during 2004 and 200................................ ....................
2- 0
3-1
Mean chlorophyll a concentrations ( g1L) in composite samples and Secchl
depths (m) observed in Lake Norman in 2005......................................................3
11
3-2
Total mean phytoplankton densities (units/mL) and biovolunzes (mm3/m3)
from samples collected in Lake Norman during 2005............... ...:......... ...............
3-12
-3
Total mean sexton dry and ash free dry weights (in mg/L) from samples
collected in Lake Norman during 2005......... ....................................................... ,....
3-12
3-4
Phytoplankton taxa identified in quarterly samples collected in Lake
Norman each year from 1990 to 2005..............:.:.................................................
3-13
3-5
Dominant classes, their most abundant species, and their percent
composition at Lake Norman locations during each sampling period of
2005................ ........................ ......... .......... ............ ,...................................... .............
3-22
4-1
Total zooplankton densities (Number X 10(10/m3) densities of major
zooplankton taxonomic groups, and percent composition of major taxa in 10
m to surface and bottom to surface net tow samples collected from Lake
Norman in April, May, September, and December 2005.................. _....... ..................
4-
4-2
Zooplankton taxa identified from samples collected quarterly on Lake
Norman from 1987 through 2005. .............»....................,................ ...................
4-10
-3
Dominant taxa among copepods (adults), cladocerans, and rotifers, and their
densities as percent composition of their taxonomic groups in Lake Norman
samplesduring 2005........ ..<........:........................................................................
4-1
5-1
Common and scientific names of fish collected in Lake Norman, 2005...... »..............
5-8
ix

LIST OF TABLES, Continued
Table
Title
Page
5-2
Numbers and biomass of fish collected from electrofishing ten 300-m
transects near Marshall Steam Station (MSS), the reference (REF) area
between MSS and McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS), and MNS in Lake
Norman, 2005 ....... — ....... ......... .................. ....................................................
5-9
5-3
Mean total lengths (mm) at age for spotted bass (SP13) and largemouth bass
(LMB) collected from electrofishing ten transects near Marshall Steam
Station (MSS), the reference (REF) area between MSS and McGuire
Nuclear Station (MNS), and MNS in Lake Norman, March 2005 ............ ..............
5-10
5-4
Mean total length (mm) at age for largemouth bass collected from an area
near Marshall Steam Station (MSS), the reference (REF) area between MSS
and McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS), and MNS in Lake Norman..........................
5-10
5-5
Dead or dying striped bass observed in Lake Norman, July -August 2005 ................
5-11
5-6
Lake Norman forage fish densities (Number/hectare) and population
estimates from hydroacoustic surveys in September 2005 ........................................
5-12
5-7
Numbers (N), species composition, and modal lengths (mm) of threadfin
shad collected in purse seine samples from Lake Norman during late
summer or fall, 1993 — 2005. , ................... ..................................... ...................
5-12
x

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Title
Page
2-1
Water quality sampling locations (numbered) for Lake Norman.
Approximate locations of Marshall Steam Station, and McGuire Nuclear
Station are also shown.. ... ........................ ................................... .................. ....
2-23
2-2a
Annual precipitation totals in the vicinity of McGuire Nuclear Station . ..................
2-24
2-2b
Monthly precipitation totals in the vicinity of McGuire Nuclear Station in
2004 and 2005 . ......................................................... .......... _ ...... ............... ...........
2-24
2-2c
Mean monthly air temperatures recorded at McGuire Nuclear Station
beginningin 1989 ....................... ............. ...................................................... .........
2-25
2-3
Monthly mean temperature profiles for the McGuire Nuclear Station
background zone in 2004 and 2005 . .........................................................................
2-26
2-4
Monthly mean temperature profiles for the McGuire Nuclear Station mixing
zonein 2004 and 2005 . ..................... ................................... ....... .........................
2-28
2-5
Monthly surface (0.3 in) temperature and dissolved oxygen data at the
discharge location (loc. 4.0) in 2004 and 2005 . ................................. ......................
2-30
2-6
Monthly mean dissolved oxygen profiles for the McGuire Nuclear Station
background zone in 2004 and 2005 . ........................................................................
2-31
2-7
Monthly mean dissolved oxygen profiles for the McGuire Nuclear Station
mixing zone in 2004 and 2005 ....................................... ........ ................................
2-33
2-8
Monthly reservoir -wide temperature isotherms for Lake Norman in 2005 . ..............
2-35
2-9
Monthly reservoir -wide dissolved oxygen isopleths for Lake Norman in
2005 ................................................................ .................................. .................
2-38
2-1 Oa
Heat content of the entire water column and the hypolimnion in Lake
Normanin 2005. ........ ............... ..................... .............................................. ..........
2-41
2-1 Ob Dissolved oxygen content and percent saturation of the entire water column
and the hypolimnion of Lake Norman in 2005 . ...................................... .......... ......
2-41
2-11
Striped bass habitat in Lake Norman, summer 2005..............................................
2-42
2-12
Lake Norman take levels, expressed in meters above mean sea level (mmst)
for 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. Lake level data correspond to the water
quality sampling dates over this time period ........... .. _ ..... ........ ......... .................
2-44
3-1
Phytoplankton chlorophyll a, densities, biovolumes, and seston weights at
locations in Lake Norman in February, May, August, and November 2005............
3-23
3-2
Total Phytoplankton chlorophyll a annual lake means from all locations in
Lake Norman for each quarter since August 1987..... ..... ................... ...............
3-24
3-3
Phytoplankton chlorophyll a concentrations by location for samples
collected in Lake Norman from February and May 1988 through 2005. ........ _
3-25
3-4
Phytoplankton chlorophyll a concentrations by location for samples
collected in Lake Norman from August and November 1987 through 2005..... ..... _
3-26
xi

LIST OF FIGURES, Continued
Figure Title
Page
3-5
Class composition (mean density and biovolume) of phytoplankton from
euphatic zone samples collected at Location 2.0 to Lake Norman during
2005.................... .................. .............. ................... ............................................::.
3-27
3-E
Class composition (mean density and biovolume) ofphytoplankton from
euphatic zone samples collected at Location 5.0 in Lake Norman during
2005..........................:........................................................... .........................
3-28
3-7
Class: composition (mean density and biovolume) ofphytoplankton from
euphatic zone samples collected at Location 9.5 in Lake Norman during
2005.......... ....................... .......................... ................................. ,........................ .,.3-29
3-8
Class composition (mean density and biovolume) ofphytoplankton from
euphatic zone samples collected at Location 11.0 in Lake Norman during
2005.................................. ................................ ..................... .:..................................
3- 0
3-9
Class composition (mean density and biovolume) ofphytoplankton from
euphatic zone samples collected at Location 15.9 in Lake Norman during
2005.............. ....................... :............................................................................... .....:
3-31
3-10
Myxophycean index values by year, each quarter in 2005, and each location
in Lake Norman during 2005...... ............ _......................... .................... ..................
3-32
4-1
Total zooplankton density by location for samples collected in Lake Norman..
in 2005 ...............::...........:..............:.................................. ...........................4-15
4-2
Zooplankton community composition by month for epilimnetic samples
collected in Lake Norman in 2005..................................... .............. ....... ............ ......
4-16
-3
Total zooplankton densities by location for epilimnetic samples collected in
Lake Norman in spring periods of 1988 through. 2005 ..................... ....................
4-17
4-4
Total zooplankton densities by location for epilinmetic samples collected in
Lake Norman in summer and fall periods of 1987 through 2005 ........................._
4-18
4-5
Zooplankton composition by quarter for epimlimnetic samples collected in
Lake Norman from 1990 through 2005..................................... ......... ..................
4-19
4-6
Annual lake -wide percent composition of major zooplankton taxonomic
groups from 1988 through 2005............................................. ..........................
4-20
4-7
Annual percent composition of major zooplankton taxonomic groups from
mixing zone locations: 1988 through 200.................................................. .............
4-21
4-8
Annual percent composition of major zooplankton taxonomic groups from
background locations: 1988 through 2005...:............................................:,........4-22
5-1
Sampling locations and zones in Lake Norman associated with fishery
- assessments.... ................ ....... .......................................................... .........................
5-13
5-2
Sampling Numbers (a) and biomass (b) of fish collected from electrofishing
ten 300-m transects near Marshall Stearn Station (MSS), the reference
(REF) area between MSS and McGuire Nuclear Station ( S), and MNS
in Lake Norman, 1993-1997 and 1998-2005.......................................................
5-1
xii

LIST OF FIGURES, Continued
Figure Title
Page
5-3
Numbers (a) and biomass (b) of spotted bass collected from electrofishing
ten 300-m transects near Marshall Steam Station (MSS), the reference
(REF) area between MSS and McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS), and MNS
in Lake Norman, 2001-2005............................................................................... ...
5-15
5-4
Size distributions of spotted bass (a) and largemouth bass (b) collected from
electrofishing ten 300-m transects near Marshall Steam Station (MSS), the
reference (REF) area between MSS and McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS),
and MNS in Lake Norman, 2005 . ........................................... ................ ..........
5-16
5-5
Mean relative weights (W,) for spotted bass (a) and largemouth bass (b)
collected from electrofishing ten 300-m transects near Marshall Steam
Station (MSS), the reference (REF) area between MSS and McGuire
Nuclear Station (MNS), and MNS in Lake Norman, 2005 . ................... .................
5-17
5-6
Numbers (a) and biomass (b) of largemouth bass collected from
electrofishing ten 300-m transects near Marshall Steam Station (MSS), the
reference (REF) area between MSS and McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS),
and MNS in Lake Nonnan, 1993-1997 and 1999-2005 ............. ......................... ...
5-18
5-7
Mean total length and mean relative weight (W,) for striped bass collected
from Lake Norman, December 2005 ...................... -- .............. ...............................
5-19
5-8
Zonal and lakewide population estimates of pelagic fish in Lake Norman ...............
5-20
5-9
Size distributions of threadfin shad (TFS) and alewives (ALE) collected in
purse seine surveys of Lake Norman, 2005 ........................ — ........ ....... .................
5-20
xiii

CHAPTER: I
MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION
The following annual report was prepared for the McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS) National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (# NC0024392) issued by North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). This report
summarizes environmental monitoring of Lake Norman conducted during 2005.
OPERATIONAL DATA FOR 2005
Station operational data for 2005 are listed in Table 1-1. The monthly average capacity
factors for MNS were 100.7 101.3 and 77.7% during July, August, and September,
respectively. These are the months when conservation of cool water is most critical and
compliance with discharge temperatures is most challenging. These three months are also
when the thermal limit for MNS increases from a monthly average of 95.0 °F (35.0 °C) to
99.0 °F (37.2 °C). The average monthly discharge temperature was 95.5 °F (35.3 °C) for
July, 98.4 °F (36.9 °C) for August, and 96.1 °F (35.6 °C) for September 2005. The volume
of cool water in Lake Norman was tracked throughout the year to ensure that an adequate
volume was available to comply with both the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Technical
Specification requirements and the NPDES discharge water temperature limits.

Table 1-1. Average monthly capacity factors (%) and monthly average discharge water
temperatures for McGuire Nuclear Station during 2005.
MONTHLY AVERAGE
CAPACITY 1 FACTORS �. aNPDES
MONTHLY AVERAGE
DISCHARGE
TEMPERATURES
1 �
III
� ♦
�
• � A
����jjtt�
� w * i
III.
w �
If � `�
+
� •
1-2

CHAPTER 2
WATER CHEMISTRY
INTRODUCTION
Program are to:
1. maintain continuity in the chemical data base of Lake Norman to allow detection of
any significant station -induced and/or natural change in the physicochemical structure
of the lake; and
. compare, where applicable, these physicochemical data to similar data in other
hydropower reservoirs and cooling impoundments in the Southeast.
This report focuses primarily on 2004 and 2005. Where appropriate, reference to pre-2004
data will be made by citing reports previously submitted to the NCDENR.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
The complete water chemistry monitoring program for 2005, including specific variables,
locations, depths, and frequencies is outlined in Table 2-1. Sampling locations are identified
in Figure -1, whereas specific chemical methods and associated analytical reporting limits,'
along with the appropriate references, are presented in Table 2-2. Measurements of
temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), DO saturation, pH, and specific conductance were
taken, in situ, at each location with a Hydrolab Data -Sonde (Hydrolab t6) starting at the
lake surface (0.3 in) and continuing at one meter intervals to take bottom. Pre- and post -
calibration procedures associated with operation of the Hydrolab were strictly followed, and.
documented in hard -copy format. Hydrolab data were captured and stored electronically., and
following a data validation step, converted to spreadsheet format for permanent filing.
Water samples for laboratory analysis were collected with a Kemmerer water bottle at the
surface (0.3 m), and from one meter above bottom, where specified (Table 2-1). Samples not
requiring filtration were placed directly in single -use polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles
2-1

which were pre -rinsed in the field with lake -water just prior to obtaining a sample. Samples
processed, in the field, by filtering a known volume of water through a 0.45 µ glass -fiber
filter (Gelman AquaPrep 600 Series Capsule) which was pre -rinsed with 500 mL of sample
water. Upon collection, all water samples were immediately preserved and stored in the
dark:, and on ice, to minimize the possibility of physical, chemical, or microbial
transformation.
Water quality data were subjected to various graphical and statistical techniques in an attempt
to describe spatial and temporal trends within the lake, and interrelationships among
constituents. Whenever analytical results were reported to be equal to or less than the
method reporting limit; these values were set equal to the reporting limit for statistical
purposes. Data were analyzed using two approaches, both of which were consistent with
earlier Duke Power Company, and Duke Power studies on the lake (Duke Power Company
1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995,.1996; Duke Power 1997, 1998,
1999 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a and 2005) The first method involved partitioning the
reservoir into mixing, background, and discharge zones, consolidating the data into these
sub -sets, and making comparisons among zones and years. In this report, the discharge
includes only Location 4, the mixing zone, Locations 1 and 5, the background zone includes
Locations 8, 11, and 15. The second approach, applied primarily to the insitu data,
emphasized a much broader take -wide investigation and encompassed the plotting of monthly
isotherms and isopleths, and summer striped bass habitat. Several quantitative calculations
were also performed on the insitu Hydrolab data; these included the calculation of the areal
hypoliinnetic oxygen deficit (AHOD), maximum whale -water column and hypolimnion
oxygen content, maximum whole -water column and hypolimnion heat content, mean
epilimnion and hypolimnion heating rates overthe stratified period, and the Birgean heat
budget.
Heat content (Kcal/cm`), oxygen content (mg/cm2), and mean oxygen concentration (mg/L)
of the reservoir were calculated according to Hutchinson (1957), using the following
equation:
Lt = A 1 •ZM TO + Az • dz
ZO
where;
Lt reservoir heat (Kcal/cm2) or oxygen (mg/cm') content
A0 surface area of reservoir (c`)
2-2

TO = mean temperature (°C) or oxygen content (mg/L,) oflayer z
Az = area (cm') at depth z
dz = depth interval (cm)
zo = surface
z, = maximum depth (m)
Precipitation and air temperature data were obtained from a meteorological monitoring site
established near MNS in 1975. These data are employed principally by Duke Power as input
variables into meteorological modeling studies to address safety issues associated with
potential radiological releases into the atmosphere by MNS (Duke Power 2004b), as required
by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The data also serve to document localized temporal
trends in air temperatures and rainfall patterns. Data on lake level and hydroelectric flows
were obtained from Duke Energy -Carolinas Fossil/Hydroelectric Department, which
monitors these metrics hourly.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Precipitation and Air Temperature
Annual precipitation in the vicinity of MNS in 2005 totaled 45.6 inches (Figures -2a; b) or
1.0 inches more than observed in 2004 (44.6 inches), it was also similar to the long-term
precipitation average for this area (46.3 inches), based on Charlotte, NC airport data.
Monthly precipitation totals were remarkably similar between years except for the months of
September and October which exhibited reverse patterns. In September 2005, rainfall totaled
only 0.16 inches and contrasted markedly with the 7.73 inches recorded. in September 2004.
Hurricanes Frances and Ivan, both of which bypassed the greater Charlotte area, exerted
considerable effect on the North Carolina mountains and foothills, and accounted for the
majority of September 2004 rainfall totals.
Air temperatures in 2005 were generally warmer than the long-term mean, based on monthly
average data; they were also noticeably wanner than 2004 temperatures in the winter, and
late -summer (Figure 2-2c). The temporal differences were most pronounced in January and
August when 2005 temperatures averaged 2.1 'C and 2.4 °C warmer, respectively, than
2004.

Temperature and Dissolved Owizen
Water temperatures measured in 2005 illustrated similar temporal and spatial trends in the
background and mixing zones (Figures -3 and 2-4), as they did in 2004. This similarity in
temperature patterns between zones has been a dominant feature of the thermal regime in
Lake Norman since MNS began operations in 1983..
Winter (January and February) water temperatures in 2005 were generally warmer than those
observed in 2004 in both the mixing and background zones, and paralleled interannual.
differences exhibited in air temperatures (Figures -2c, 2-3, and 2-4). Minimum water
temperatures in 2005 were recorded in early February and ranged from 7.1 °C to 9.6 °C in the
background zone, and from 7.8 °C to 16.1 °C in the mixing zone. Temperature differences
between 2005 and 2004 were most pronounced in the surface waters where maximum delta T
values of 1.9 °C and 4.7 °C were observed in the background and mixing zones,
respectively. Minimum water temperatures measured in 2005 were within the observed.
historical range (Duke Power Company 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992 1993,
1994, 1995, 1996; Duke Power 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005).
Spring and summer water temperatures in 2005 were generally similar to that observed in
2004, with several exceptions. The greatest between -year variability in summer water
temperature was observed in June in both the mixing and background zones, with the primary
differences occurring in the upper 10 in of the water column (Figures 2-3 and 2-4). Water
temperatures in this portion of the water column were up to 5.2 °C cooler in 2005 than 2004,
and the differences appear to be related to the antecedent May air temperatures (Figure 2-2c)
which were the warmest recorded over the last 40 years in May 2004 (unpublished data
Charlotte airport). Similarly, July and August water temperatures in the metalimnion (10-15
in) were also slightly cooler in 2005 than 2004 with the largest difference (4.7 °C) observed
in the mixing zone at a depth of 11 in. Conversely, September 2005 epilimmon temperatures
were up to 3.1 °C warmer than in 2004, and appear to be related to above average air
temperatures in August and September (Figure 2-2c). Minimal differences in hypolimmetie
(below 20 m) temperatures were observed between 2005 and 2004 during the summer. The
lone exception was in September 2005 when the deeper waters were cooler (and the surface
waters were warmer) than observed in 2004, especially in the background zone. These
thermal differences can be explained by differential cooling of the water column in 2005
versus 2004, in response to higher air temperatures in the preceding month of August 2005
(Figure 2-2c).
-4

Fall and early winter water temperatures ({October, November and December) in 2005 were
generally similar to those measured in 2004, and followed the trend exhibited in air
temperatures (Figure 2-3) Some differences were observed between years, and in certain
portions of the water column; but overall cooling of the water column proceeded at a similar
rate in 2004 and 2005.
Temperature data at the discharge location in 2005 were generally similar to 2004 (Figure 2-
5) and historically (Duke Power Company 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, _1991, 1992, 1993,
1994, 1995, 1996; Duke Power 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005).
Temperatures in 2005 were slightly warmer (by a maximum of 3.8 °C) in the spring, and
slightly cooler (by a maximum of 3.6 °C) in the summer than observed in 2004. The warmest
discharge temperature of 2005 at Location 4 occurred in August and measured 37.1 °C, or 1.7
°C cooler than measured in August, 2004 (Duke Power 200).
Seasonal and spatial patterns of DO in 2005 were reflective of the patterns exhibited for
temperature, i.e., generally similar in both the mixing and background zones (Figures 2-6 and
2-7). As observed with water column temperatures, this similarity in DO patterns between
zones has been a dominant feature of the oxygen regime in Lake Norman since MNS began
operations in 1983.
Winter and early spring DO values in 2005 were generally equal to or slightly lower, in both'
the background and mixing zones, than measured in 2004, except in January in the mixing
zone which exhibited slightly higher oxygen concentrations in 2005 versus 2004 (Figures -6
and 2-7). The interannual differences in :DO values measured during February and March
appear to be related predominantly to the warmer water column temperatures in 2005 versus
2004. Warmer water would be expected to exhibit a lesser oxygen content because of the
direct effect of temperature on oxygen solubility, which is an inverse relationship, and
indirectly via a restricted convective mixing regime which would limit water column
reaeration. DO concentrations in March 2005 were about 0.3 mg1L less throughout the water
column in the background zone than measured in 2004, and '0.6 mg/L less than 2004 in the
mixing zone.
Spring and summer DO values in ZOOS were highly variable throughout the water column in
both the mixing and background zones ranging from highs of 6 to 8 mg/L in surface waters to
lows of 0 to 2 mg/L in bottom waters. This pattern is similar to that measured in 2004 and
2-5

earlier years (Duke Power Company 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994,
1995, 1996; Duke Power 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005).
Epilimnetic and metalimnetic DO values in May and June ranged from 0.4 to 2.5 mg/L
higher in 2005 than 2004, and corresponded closely with the cooler water temperatures
measured in this portion of the water column in 2005 relative to 2004. Conversely, August
2005 DO concentrations between 7 and 13 m were less than recorded in 2004 despite being
somewhat cooler (Figures 2-3, 2-4 2-6 and 2-7). This apparent discrepancy can be
explained by between -year differences in the depth of the epilimnion, or the warm and well
oxygenated surface portion of the water column, which was noticeably deeper in 2005 than
2004, especially in the mixing zone (Figures 2-3 and 2-4). l-lypolimnetic DO values
measured during this period were also either equal to or slightly greater than measured in
2004 in both the mixing and background zones. All dissolved oxygen values recorded in
2005 were within the historical range (Duke Power Company 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990,
1991, 1992,1993, 1994, 1995, 1996; Duke Power 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003,
2004a, 2005).
Considerable differences were observed between 2005 and 2004 late summer and fall. DO
values in both the mixing and background zone, especially in the metalimnion and
hypolimnion during the months of September,- and to a lesser extent in October and
November (Figures 2-6 and 2-7). These interannual differences in DO levels during the
cooling season are common in Catawba River reservoirs and can be explained by the effects
of variable weather patterns on water column cooling (heat loss) and mixing. Warmer air
temperatures delay water column cooling (Figure 2-3 and 2-4) which, in turn, delays the
onset of convective mixing of the water column and the resultant reaeration of the
metalimnion and hypolimmon. Conversely, cooler air temperatures increase the rate and
magnitude of water column heat loss, thereby promoting convective mixing and resulting in
higher DO values earlier in the year.
The 2005 late summer and autumn DO data indicate that convective reaeration was
temporally variable in the rate at which it occurred, compared to 2004. Concentrations of DO
in September 2005 were considerably lower than observed in September 2004, especially
below 10 m in the background zone (Figures -6 and 2-7). These between -year differences in
DO corresponded strongly with the degree of thermal stratification which, as discussed
earlier, correlated with interannual differences in air temperatures (Figures 2-2c, -3, and 2-
4). Conversely, DO values in October, and to some extent November 2005, were greater than

in 2004 indicating that reaeration during these months proceeded somewhat faster in 2005
than 2004.
The seasonal pattern of DO in 2005 at the discharge location was similar to that measured
historically, with the highest values observed during the winter and lowest observed in the
summer and early fall (Figure 2-5). The lowest DO concentration measured at the discharge
location in 2005 (4.87 mg/L) occurred in August, and was slightly lower than measured in
2004, but about 0.8 mg/L higher than measured in August 2003 (4.1 mg/L).
Reservoir -wide Temperature and Dissolved Q ygen
The monthly reservoir -wide temperature and DO data for 2005 are presented in Figures 2-8
and 2-9. These data are similar to that observed in previous years and are characteristic of
cooling impoundments and hydropower reservoirs in the Southeast (Cole and Hannan 1985;.
Hannan et al. 1979; Petts 1984). Detailed discussions on the seasonal and spatial dynamics
of temperature and dissolved oxygen during both the cooling and heating periods in Lake
Norman have been presented previously (Duke Power Company 1992, 1993 1994, 195;
1.996),
The seasonal heat content of both the entire water column and the hypolimnion for Labe
Norman in 2005 are presented in Figure 2-1 Oa; additional information on the thermal regime
in the reservoir for the years 2004 and 2005 is found in Table 2-3. Annual minimum heat
content for the entire water column in 2005 (9.57 Kcal/Cm`; 9.74 °C) occurred in early
February, whereas the maximum heat content (29.76 Kcal/cm; 29.00 °C) occurred in early
July. Heat content of the hypolimnion exhibited a somewhat different temporal trend as that
observed for the entire water column. Annual minimum hypolimnetic heat content occurred
in early February and measured 4.75 Kcal/cm2 (7.65 °C), whereas the maximum occurred in
early October and measured 15.69 Kcal/cm2 (248 °C). Heating of both the entire water
column and the hypolimmon occurred at approximately a linear rate from minimum to
maximum heat content. The mean heating rate of the entire water column equaled 0.103
Kcal/cm2/day and 0.045 Kcal/cm2/day for the hypolimnion. The 2005 heat content and
heating rate data were similar to that observed in previous years (Duke Power Company
1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996; Duke Power 1997, 1998,
1999, 000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 005).
-7

The seasonal oxygen content and percent saturation of the whole water column, and the
hypolimmon, are depicted for 2005 in Figure 2-1 Ob. .Additional oxygen data can be found in
Table -4 which presents the 2005 AHOD for Lake Norman and similar estimates for 18
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) reservoirs. Reservoir oxygen content was greatest in
mid -winter when DO content measured 10.5 mg/L for the whole water column and 10.4
mg1L for the hypolimnion. Percent saturation values at this time approached 93% for the
entire water column and 1% for the hypolimnion. Beginning in early spring, oxygen content
began to decline precipitously in both the whole water column and the hypolimnion,and
continued to decline linearly until reaching a minimum in mid summer. Minimum summer
volume -weighted DO values for the entire water column measured 4.4 mg/L (60%
saturation), whereas the minimum for the hypolimnion was 0.06 mg/L (0.8% saturation).
The mean rate of DO decline in the hypolimnion over the stratified period, i.e., the AHOD
was 0.040 mg/cm 2/day (0.063 mg/L/day) (Figure 2-10b), and is similar to that measured in
2004 (Duke Power 2005).
Hutchinson (1938, 1957) proposed that the decrease of DO in the hypolimnion of a
waterbody should be related to the productivity of the trophogenic zone. Mortimer (1941)
adopted a similar perspective and proposed the following criteria for AHODs associated with
various trophic states; oligotrophic - 0.025 mg/cm2/day, mesotrophic 0.026 mg/cm2/day to
0.054 mg/cm2/day, and eutrophic �! 0.055 mg/cm'`/day. Employing these limits, Lake
Norman should be classified as mesotrophic based on the calculated AHOD value of 0.040
mg/cm'`/day for 2005. The oxygen based mesotrophic classification agrees well with the
mesotrophic classification based on chlorophyll a levels (Chapter 3). The 2005 AHOD value
is also similar to that found in other Southeastern reservoirs of comparable depth.., chlorophyll
a status, and Secchi depth (Table 2-4).
Steed Bass Habitat
Suitable pelagic habitat for adult striped bass, defined as that layer of water with temperatures
26 °C and DO levels = 2.0 mg/L, was found take -wide from mid September 2004 through
early July 2005. Beginning in late June 2005, habitat reduction proceeded rapidly throughout
the reservoir both as a result of deepening of the 26 °C isotherm and metalimnetic and
hypolimnetic deoxygenation (Figure 2-11). Habitat reduction was most severe from mid July
through early September when no suitable habitat was observed in the reservoir except for a
thin layer located in the metalimmon and a small, but variable, zone of refuge in the upper,
riverine portion of the reservoir, near the confluence of Lyles Creek with Lake Norman.
2---8

Habitat measured in the upper reaches of the reservoir appeared to be influenced by both
inflow from Lyles Creek and discharges from Lookout Shoals Hydroelectric facility, which
were somewhat cooler than ambient conditions in Lake Norinan. Upon entering Lake
Norman, this water apparently mixes and then proceeds as a subsurface underflow as it
migrates downriver (Ford 195).
An additional refuge was also observed in the hypolimnion near the dam during this period,
but this lasted only until 18 July when dissolved oxygen was reduced to < 2.0 mg/L b
microbial demands. Summer -time habitat conditions for adult striped bass in 2005 were
similar to 2004 when the largest striped bass die -off ever was observed in the reservoir (2610
fish). Conditions were also marginally better than observed in most previous years, including
2003 which exhibited complete habitat elimination for a period of about 30-35 days. Striped
bass mortalities in 2005 totaled 20 fish.
Physicochemical habitat was observed to have expanded appreciably by mid September,
primarily as a result of epilimnion cooling and deepening, and in response to changing
meteorological conditions. The temporal and spatial pattern of striped bass habitat expansion
and reduction observed in 2005 was generally similar to that previously reported in Lake
Norman, and many other Southeastern reservoirs (Coutant 1985; Matthews et al. 1985; (Duke
Power Company 1985,.1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996; Duke
Power 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005).
Turbidijy and Specific Conductance
Surface turbidity values were generally low at the 1v1NS discharge, mixing zone, and mid -lake
background locations during 2005, ranging from 1.0 to 3.2 NTU's (Table 2-5). Bottom
turbidity values were also relatively low over the 2005 study period, ranging from 1.1 to 4.0
NTU's (Table 2-5). Turbidity values observed in 2005, as a whole, were slightly lower than
measured in 2004 (Table 2-5), but well within the historical range (Duke Power Company
1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996; Duke Power 1997, 1998
1999, 000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005).
Specific conductance in Lake Norman in 2005 ranged from 37 to 75 umho/cm, and was
generally similar to that observed in 2004 (Table 2-5), and historically (Duke Power
Company 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993 1994, 1995, 1996; Duke Power
1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 200a, 2005). Specific conductance values in
2-9

surface and bottom waters in 2005 were similar throughout the year except during the period
of intense thermal stratification, i.e.; August through November, when an increase in bottom
conductance values was observed. These increases in bottom conductance values appeared to
be related primarily to the release of soluble iron and manganese from the lake bottom under
anoxic conditions (Table -5). This phenomenon is common in both natural lakes and
reservoirs that exhibit extensive hypolimnetic oxygen depletion (Hutchinson 1957, Wetzel
1975), and is an annually recurring phenomenon in Lake Norman.
pH and Alkalinity
During 2005, pH and alkalinity values were similar among NMS discharge, mixing and
background zones (Table 2-5). Values of were also generally similar to values measured
in 2004 (Table - ), and historically ((Duke Power Company 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990,
1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996; Duke Power 1.997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003,
2004a, 2005). Values of PH in 2005 ranged from 6.8 to 7.6 in surface waters, and from 6.0 to
7.2 in bottom waters. Alkalinity values in 2005 ranged from 11 to 14.5 mg/L, expressed as
CaCO3, in surface waters and from 10.5 to 17.5 mg/L in bottom waters.
Major Cations and Anions
The concentrations of major ionic species in the MNS discharge, mixing, and mid -lake
background zones are provided in Table 2-5. Lake -wide, the major cations were sodium,
calcium, magnesium, and potassium, whereas the major anions were bicarbonate, sulfate, and
chloride. The overall ionic composition of Lake Norman during 2005 was generally similar
to that reported for 2004 (Table 2-5) and previously (Duke Power Company 1985, 1987,
1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992,1.993, 1994, 1995, 1996; Duke Power 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000,
2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 005).
Nutrients
Nutrient concentrations in the discharge, mixing, and mid -lake background zones of Lake
Norman for 2004 and 2005 are provided in Table -5. Overall, nutrient concentrations in
2005 were well within historical ranges (Duke Power Company 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989,.
1990, 1991, 1992, 1993,.1994, 1995, 1996; Duke Power 1997, 1998, 1999 2000, 2001, 2002,
2003, 2004a, 2005). Nitrogen and phosphorus levels in 2005 were low and generally similar
to those measured in 2004 (Duke Power 005). Total phosphorus and orto-phosphorus
2-10

concentrations were typically measured at or below the analytical reporting limits (ARL) for
these constituents, i:e., 5 µg/L.. (Note that the reporting limit for total phosphorus was
lowered from 10 gg/L to 5 µg/L in 2005). For total phosphorus, all 44 samples analyzed in
2005 exceeded the ARL, but most measurements (9 of 44) were :5 10 [.g/L, and the
maximum recorded value was 16 µg/L. For ortho-phosphorus all 44 of the samples assayed
measured 5 5 pg/L. Nutrients in 2005 were generally higher in the upper portions of the
reservoir compared to the lower sections, but the differences were slight and not statistically
significant (p< 0.05). Spatial variability in various chemical constituents, especially nutrient
concentrations; is common in long, deep reservoirs (Soballe et al. 1992).
Nitrite -nitrate and ammonia nitrogen concentrations were low at all locations sampled in
2005 (Table 2-5), and also were generally similar to 2004 and historical values (Duke Power
Company 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996; Duke Power
1997, 1.998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 200, 2004a, 2005).
Metals
Metal concentrations in the discharge, mixing, and mid lake background zones of Lake
Norman for 2005 were similar to those measured in 2004 (Table 2-5) and historically (Duke
Power Company 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996; Duke
:Power 1997,.1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005). Iron concentrations in
surface and bottom waters were generally low (:�- 0.2 mg/L) during 2005, the lone exception
being a 0.30-mg/L value measured in the bottom waters at ;Location 5 in August. Nowhere in
the reservoir in 2005 did iron concentrations exceed. NC's water duality standard (NCDENR
2004) for this constituent (1.0 mg/L), which is unusual Historically, iron concentrations
typically increase in the bottom waters during the late summer, and early fall, in response t
changing redox conditions (see below). It's unclear why this phenomenon was not as
prevalent in 2004 and 2005, as in previous years.
Similarly, manganese concentrations in the surface and bottom waters were generally low
100 µg/L) in 2005, except during the summer and fall when bottom waters were anoxic
(Table 2-5). Manganese concentrations were also appreciably lower in 2005 than 2004
especially in the bottom waters. This phenomenon, i.e., the release of manganese (and iron)
from bottom sediments in response to low redox conditions (low oxygen levels), is common
in stratified waterbodies (Stumm and Morgan 1970, Wetzel 1975). Manganese
concentrations in the bottom waters rose above NC's water quality standard (NCDENR
2-11;

2004) for this constituent, i.e., 200 µg/L, at various locations throughout the lake in summer
and fall of 2005, and is characteristic of historical conditions (Duke Power Company '1985
1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995 1996; Duke Power 1997, 1998, '199
2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005):
Concentrations of other metals in 2005 were typically low, and often below the analytical
reporting limit for the specific constituent (Table 2-5). These findings are similar to those
observed for earlier years (Duke Power Company 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992
1993, 1994, 1995, 1996; Duke Power 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a
2005). All values for cadmium, lead and zinc were reported as either equal to or below the
reporting limit for each constituents and no NC water quality standard was exceeded. Most
copper concentrations were less than 3 1tg1L, whereas the highest copper concentration
reported was 5.2 µg1L. All copper values reported were below the NC standard of 7 gglL
(NCDENR 2004).
FUTURE STUDIES
No changes are planned for the Water Chemistry portion of the Lake Norman maintenance -
monitoring program.
SUMMARY
Annual precipitation in the vicinity of MNS in 2005 totaled 45.6 inches or 1.0 inches more
than observed in 2004 (44.6 niches) but was similar to the long-term precipitation average for
this area (46.3 inches). Air temperatures in 2005 were generally warmer than measured in
2004, as well as the long-term mean. Temporal differences were most pronounced in
January and August when 2005 temperatures averaged 2.1 " C and 2.4 °C warmer,
respectively, than 2004.
Temporal and spatial trends in water temperature and DO in 2005 were similar to those
observed historically, and all data were within the range of previously measured values.
Winter water temperatures in 2005 ranged from 1.9 °C to 4.7 °C warmer than observed in
2004 in both the mixing and background zones, and paralleled interannual differences
exhibited in air temperatures. Spring and summer water temperatures in 2005 were generally
2-12

similar to that observed in 2004, with several exceptions. Water temperatures in the upper
10 rn of the water column in June 2005 were up to 5.2 °C cooler than in 2004, and the
differences appear to be related to the antecedent May 2004 air temperatures which were the
warmest recorded over the last 40 years. Similarly, July and August water temperatures in
the metalimnion (10-15 ) were also slightly cooler in 2005 than 2004 with the largest
difference (4.7 °C) observed in the mixing zone at a depth of 11 m. Minimal differences in
hypolimmtic (below 20 m) temperatures were observed between 2005 and 2004 during the
summer, the lone exception being September when the deeper waters were cooler (and the
surface waters were warmer) than observed in 2004, especially in the background zone.
These thermal differences can be explained by differential cooling of the water column in
005 versus 2004, in response to higher air temperatures in the preceding month of August
2005. Fall and early winter water temperatures in 2005 were generally similar to those
measuredin 2004, and followed the trend exhibited in air temperatures.
Winter and early spring DO values in 2005 were generally equal to or slightly lower, in both
the background and mixing zones, than measured in 2004, except in January in the mixing
zone which exhibited slightly higher oxygen concentrations in 2005 versus 2004. The
interannual differences in DO values measured during February and March appeared to be
related predominantly to the warmer water column temperatures in 2005 versus 2004.. DO
concentrations in March 2005 were about 0.3 mg/L less throughout the water column in the
background zone than measured in 2004, and 0.6 mg/L less than 2004 in the mixing zone.
Spring and summer DO values in 2005 were highly variable throughout the water column in
both the mixing and background zones ranging from highs of C to 8 mg/L in surface waters to
lows of 0 to 2 mg/L in bottom waters. This pattern is similar to that measured in 2004 and
earlier years. Epilimnetic-and metalinmetic DO values in May and June ranged from 0.4 to
2.5 mg/L higher in 2005 than 2004, and corresponded closely with the cooler water
temperatures measured in this portion of the water column in 2005. Conversely, August
2005 DO concentrations in the waters between 7 and 13 m were less than recorded in 2004
despite being somewhat cooler. This apparent discrepancy can be explained by between -year
differences in the depth of the epilimnion, which was noticeably deeper in 2005 than 2004,
especially in the mixing zone. Hypolinmetic DO values measured during this period were
also either equal to or slightly greater than measured in 2004 in both the mixing and
background zones.
-13

Considerable differences were observed between 2005 and 2004 late summer and fall DO
values in both the mixing and background zone, especially in the metalimmon and
hypolimnion during the months of September, and to a lesser extent in October and
November. Concentrations of DO in September 2005 were markedly lower than observed in
September 2004, especially below 10 in in the background zone, whereas DO values in
October, and to some extent November 2005, were greater than in 2004. These between -year
differences in DO corresponded strongly with the degree of thermal stratification which, in
turn, correlated with interannual differences in air temperatures. All dissolved oxygen values
recorded in 2005 were within the historical ranges.
Reservoir -wide isotherm and isopleth information for 2005, coupled with heat content and
hypolimnetic oxygen data, illustrated that Lake Norman exhibited thermal and oxygen
dynamics characteristic of historical conditions and similar to other Southeastern reservoirs
of comparable size, depth; flow conditions, and trophic status. Availability of suitable
pelagic habitat for adult striped bass in Lake Norman in 2005 was generally similar in
distribution and amount to 2004 when the largest striped bass die -off ever was observed in
the reservoir (2610 fish). Conditions were also marginally better than observed in most
previous years, including 2003 which exhibited complete habitat elimination for a period of
about 30-35 days. Striped bass mortalities in 2005 totaled 20 fish.
All chemical parameters measured in 2005 were similar to 2004, and within the concentration
ranges previously reported for the lake during both preoperational and operational years of
S. Specific conductance values, and all concentrations of cation and anion species
measured, were low. Nutrient concentrations were also low with most values reported close
to or below the analytical reporting limit for that test. Concentrations of metals in 2005 were
low, and often below the analytical reporting limits. All values for cadmium, lead., and zinc
were reported as either equal to or below each constituent's reporting limit, and no NC water
quality standard was exceeded. Most copper concentrations were less than 3 }tg/L, while the
maximum copper concentration reported in 2005 was 5.2 gg/L. All copper values reported
were below the NC standard of 7 µg/L.
Manganese and iron concentrations in the surface and bottom waters were generally low in
2005, except during the summer and fall when bottom waters became anoxic and the release '
of soluble fonns of these metals into the water column was observed. In contrast to historical
observations, at no time during 2005 did iron concentrations exceed NC's water quality
standard (1.0 mg/L). Manganese levels, however, did exceed the State standard. (200 p.g/L) in
-14

the bottom waters throughout the lake in the summer and fall, and are characteristic of
historical conditions.
2-1

Table 2-1. Water chemistry program for the McGuire Nuclear Station NPDES Maintenance Monitoring Program on Lake Norman.
2005 McGU[RE NPDES SAMPLING, PROGRAM
PARAMETERS
LOCATIONS
1
2
4
5
9
9.5
1 t
13
14
15
15.9
62 69 72 8o
16
DEPTH (m)
33
33
5
20
32
23
27
21
10
23
23
15 7 5 4
3
IN -SITU ANALYSIS
Method
Temperature
Hydrolab
Dissolved Oxygen
Hydrolab
In -situ measurements
are collected inonthly
at the above locations
at 1 or 'intervals
from 0 31n to I in above
bottom.
pH
Hydrolab
Measurements
are taken weekly from
July -August for striped
bass habitat.
Conductivity
Hydrolab
NUTRIENT
ANALYSES
Ammonia
AA -Nut
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T'
Q/T,B
Q/`UB
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T',B
Q/T
Q/T;B
QI7',B
Q/T,B
S/T
Nitrate+Nitrite
AA -Nut
Q/T;B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
QCr,B
Q/T,B
QCT,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Sf r
Orthophosphate
AA -Nut
Qfr,B
Q43
QIT'
Q/T,B
Q/T;B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Qrr,B
Q/T,B
S/T
Total Phosphorus
AA-TP;DG-P
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
QfUB
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Qtr;B
QrF,B
Q/TB
S/T
Silica
AA -Nut
Q/'LB
Q/T,B
Qrr
Q,'T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/r,B
Q/T
Q/'LB
QI"T B
Q/T,B
S/T
Cl
AA -Nut
Q/T„B
Q/T,B
Q/T
QJ,13
Q/T',B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
QI ,B
Q(T;B
S/T
TKN
AA-TKN
Qfl',B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T;B
Q/T,B
QJ,B
Q/'r,B
Q/T
Q/T;B
Q/T,B
QrLB
Sri -
Total Organic Carbon
TOC
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Qfr,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Orr
Q/`UB
Q/T.B
Qfl',B
S/T
Dissolved Organic Carbon
DOC
Q/T,B
Q/T.B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q:'T;B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q,fr,B
Q/T,B
Q/T' B
S/T
ELEMENTAL ANALYSES
Aluminum
ICP-MS-D
Q/T,B
S/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
QIr,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
S/T
Calcium
IC'P-24
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
QfT,B
QCI,B
Q/T,B
Q/'r;B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q,`T,B
S/T
Iron
ICP-MS-D
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q.fr
Q'T,13
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T 13
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/TJi
Sfl'
Magnesium
ICP-24
Q/'I',B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/]-,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Qrr
Q,/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
SPI,
Manganese
ICP-MS-D
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/1
Q/-F,B
Q/TM
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Qfr,B
Q/T,B
SIT
Potassium
306-K
Q/T" B
Q/T;B
Q/T
Q/-F' B
Q/T,B
Q/T B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q,'T B
Q/T,B
S/T
Sodium .
ICP-24
QTLB
Q/T,B
Q/T
Qfl',B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Qrr
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
S/T
Zinc
ICP-MS-D
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q{
Q/T B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T;B
Q/T B
Q/`I" B
S/T
Arsenic
IC:P-MS-D
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/'1',B
Qfr;B
Q/T;B
Q/TB
Q/T,B
QIT
Q/'T' B
Q/T;B
Q/T,B
S/'r
Cadmium
ICP-MS-D
Q/T,I3
Qfr,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T;B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
QIT',B
Q/T,B
Qfr,B
S/T
Copper (Total Recoverable)
ICP-MS-D
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
QIT,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Qfl',B
Qfr
Q/UB
Q/T;B
Q/T,B
SIT
Copper (Dissolved)
ICP-MS
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Qfl-,B
Q/T,B
Q/T";B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/'T;B
Q/T,B
S/T
Lead
ICP-MS-D
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
QIT,B
QI"r,B
Q?"LB
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
S/T
Selenium
1CP-MS-D
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Qrl' B
QT B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
S/T
ADDITIONAL ANALYSES
Hardness
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
QIr,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Qfl',B
QIrB
Q/TB
S/T
Alkalinity
T-AI.KT
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
QIT,B
Q/T,B
Q/,r;B
QJT B
Q/T
Q/T B
Qfl',B
Q/T',B
S/T
Turbidity
F-TURB
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
QrLB
Q/T,B
QfF,B
Q/T,B
Q,`T,B
QIT
Q/T,B
Q/'r,B
Q/T,B
S/T
Sulfate
UV SO4
Q/T,B
Q/LB
Q/T
Q/T,B
QIT;B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/'UB
Q/T
QfI',B
Q/T,B
Q/T;B
S/7'
Total Solids
S-TSL
o/'UB
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q'T;B
Q/'LB
QrLB
Q/T
Q/T,B
QI1',B
Q/T,B
S/T
Total Suspended Solids
S-TSSE
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Q/T,B
Q/T'♦B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T,B
Q/T
Qr B
Q/T B
Qfr,B
S/T
CODES: Frequency
r—+
Q = Quarterly (Feb„ May, Aug; Nov)
S = Semi-annually (F eb,Aug)
1' = Top (0,3m)
B — Bottom (I in above bottom)
C5�

Table -2. Analytical methods and reporting limits employed in the McGuire Nuclear Station NP ES Maintenance Monitoring
Program for Lake Norman.
Parameter
Method (EPA/APHA)
Preservation
�,�)�kalinit Total
Total Inflection Point, EPA 310.1
:.•.ium, TotalRecoverable
IC• Mass Spectroscopy, EPA 0�
Chloride
Colorimetric,•. 3252
Copper, Total Recoverable
Copper, Dissolved
ICP Mass Spectroscopy, EPA 200.8
ICP Mass Spectroscopy, EPA 20*.8
O�50/. HNO3
r # .: ,aw•l
• Total Recoverable
Lead, Total Recoverable
P . EPA 20 y
ss Spectrosc2py, EPA
y gy p .
E •.. .
2.0
Nitroqen, Ammonia-
• • • y 350.1�
� #
•••
• • - "a 353.2
'.. •#' • .. '..^ #......
## : a P1 3512a:
## •.
Solids, Total.a1
Atomic Emission/ICP, EPA 200.7
60
.
# •
• • • •- #-#
Gravimetric, EPA 1602+
# •
b
• Chromatography
References: USEPA 1983, and APHA 1995
e

Table 2-3. Heat content calculations for the thermal regime in Lake Norman for 2004 and
2005.
005
2004
Maximum Areal Heat Content (g°cal/Cm2)
29,764
29,718
Minimum Areal Heat Content (g•cal/Cm2)
9,574
7„921
Birgean Heat Budget (g.cal/ Cm2)
20,190
21,797
Epilimnion (above 11.5 m) Heating Rate (°C /day)
0.123
0.122
Hypolimnion (below 11.5 m) Heating Rate (°C /day)
0.076
0.076
-18

Table 2-4. A comparison of areal
hypolinmetic oxygen deficits
(AHOD), summer
chlorophyll a (Chl a), Secchi depth, and mean depth of Lake Norman and 18
TVA reservoirs.
AHOD
Summer Chi a
Secchi Depth Mean Depth
Reservoir
(mg/cm2/day)
(ug/L)
(m)
(m)
Lake Norman (2005)
0.040
5.5
2.2
10.3
TVA a
Mainstern
Kentucky
U12
9:1
1.0
5.O
Pickwick
0.010
3.9
0.9
_ 6.5
Wilson
0.028
5.9
1 A
12.3
W heelee
0.012
4.4
5.3
Guntersville
0.007
4.8
1.1
5.3
Nickajack
0.016
2.8
1.1
6.8
Chickamauga
0.008
3.0
1.1
5.O
Watts Bar
0.012
6.2
1.0
7.3
Fort Landon
O.023
5.9
0.9
7.3
Tributary
Chatugo
0.041
5.5
2.7
9.5
Cherokee
0.078
10.9
1.7
13.9
Douglas
0.046
63
tEi
10.7
Fontana
0.113
4.1
2.6
3T8
Hiwassee
0.061
5.0
2.4
20.2-
Norris
0.058
2.1
3.9
16.3
South Holston
0.070
6,5
2.6
2.4
Tims Ford
0.059
6.1
2A
14.9
atau a
U66
Z9
2.7
24,5
a Data from Higgins at al.
(1980), and Higgins
and Kim (1981)
2-1

a
ibs m
� cr
ro
m
m
m
ro
ca
m
a
m
a
a
o
Z
fcx fa co J.o
w fom N N
h tt> to cn to
mar ix xri o
w o o fn m
o in w N o
0 0 0 0 o
Akiio cn o
A
�iAvl�fAr 'Aw 'nAx
Ott
oIEAi+a,.eNa
caloeow'a
Low
n'AxIN#o'w
�Iaoi en fwnm
O N
his
SH
L Z
I
c A tac
cP�,oWia wl
Qcg
JOE
SEN.-
a
GJ Cl5 C1J
a) v W Gn N
.WOG» to 4
AEG
�"� W
WG,} OLfS i'n G]
A (D !> U J
A AA ;P Ja
A O Cfl A Ch
A QA AA
A? C.} W A
W m �,'PN+'a�j
S35 O C} tT Gft
aldi Qx VW
O Ca O GR ®
ShCACnA..•.•.
Gt Cn m N C4
w
W �N rp
�O O O C? Q
N
C
t+I!W A ems... da
N N IV ti
tp e.D ^.! Z.
A A A Z g
A. ? V1 e" A
-•
W W a'� Z:W
�th
'^d
W Z.wi w V
IVI.A
� to {a5
m N� m
N W Cis
-° �� �•
m�w.
O N
Im O C/} Q
tT�Oa. -. {� fie
V�tT Yak fX} io
l'le tit W (f} -�
()F o iFi O
V .P W
Or�O 6 N
Cn N N
A N
Ak <,il As W
*5 9 1
Am
A
d
1I4 ;
m+
SH
:
A m
O}bE
W'CWit tl O
Gpn .Ty
IliItin
CIANW...
W >iZl
skill
i»I
E Z ct? my
IVICaNu
1 iJs �1i
N C1J O
O (fl �. GRmu.
^W t0 Cn A'
A
t7
..i)i
�A K1
i0
A
�in'v-+cn
:h A to A Z
A W eZ
w -J J
Gn a E
t�3ryA+aA
W
coto
naloWN to
4gh
tnZ
co
o�A A iv to
Olen inoCn
Gn�ia .,.. W i..r
g
ialo o wyr...�.�.:.�
UtAAW
e+r Wea Wra
N® i.n ?A cpD
cnA-
A A A A .n.
w®i.N :ro.
AAAAArNNo-,
wwcAA
....A
cn
Ni .W
skull
Z'L
1111
A
WW
I
J J v
16
vv
NN
:i
ik
O
:o
w
m N
4
'uAi 'eAis 'fAi
'.Ap.�W N 'aAi "fAn
'Au w
'rJ� 'eva
lfane rn ma..N
0 0 0
cn
na
v+�tn Gn en f�''ie
w� .
-N.i� cn
ol=: :a
lJi�o
voi y
x
vi
ik 'J i
W�W f:J W
N o. Z O
Z Z Z Z Z:
I
Qat
IME
J fa wO
�Ch '
d9W
G5WZ�Way���.
VrtoUl
v's
m W C±} efl
Y* VF Cfl VJ OF
W O o A o
A a
p
N -+
u �L-s—s—
LA
as :a] ^J
iz-w
A
La
N
Q
Ut CJf
Ih% V O
� f0
O
CJe
w
Ma
O
Ow
S
K
W{
A�A
Q®9
n V
-A,IItfl m
O Gt
O W A
GOIO O m T
YNie N
A-
.:.j m
A t9'f A A Us
N C] N W .�
LLI n
A A A A A
t
A A A A A
t::
W F� � hS W
�I� m
W N V J J
Awn n
!a Cfl 1Ji W CT
�IG� 14 --
ala o
m
NN O QCT
AiO
G>,I�
iQ
Usi
C
AA A A �
N v v
W tFr �hr
A <a
AA #S+Cn
in. o 've A W
AA AA A
w W nx: A A
N c.s AN-+
fa O yr 'sn ue
m Orr'eT Ch-.�
o m =Y ur 'r..r
O Cfl U+A A
is N a: A eGx
-`-+. Or N V
A o o o o
O
O
�IV
W N W W N
A
W�N CT A. W
IV W W ,-3
fT�N N
05�N
A O} A W
lJ 4T Gh Gt
s V N (<:t
J � tR AA>
Z:�G�.� Z Z
T VS"G1 UY (fl
A�A n
W A hJ W
W
A C
N
(.
11111
n. a..
?:a W
Mal
A(t A..A A A
A A A A
....�T _,
W D •A sa N
J� vvw
'ny �J
Cn�
N ay y �
�.�... .:.:NN
N
Q
p fs
��...
A Sfi A gip: g
A N fse
N iA iT A. No
m A N v
W o w A w
.'
w w u+ A
C
ns t7 in O o
v+ a A
o A w -�.
y
J p o
®i
cn J.
Q R
:.a.'.s .a. _.LL
C15 A
W �� W W N
O -.,
II
Ts Z Z Z. 65
�
A A AA A A
I'x
..a a
GrfN. Cn w W
WEE
C%)I
CA w n
Awn
Gn lfri (.k'1
t N i
W�T N O SaZ
Wj A A 0�
O.
® p
A N W
rn N hJ.
IXt v..1
CIe OT tp
'J Ul V3 Cfl J
A t'.U:ti} -.
A C+f o o O
CT 'J -+ a� ..•
..
O O O N Q
m tCC.iOe'A m
6 3
iie
lm
*
�-J IO
Q
WIV fA0 N
O�m -J* m*. a
G?�O fA n c
A�w t+i c A
�.�Cir. O O O
Vt N A O
fpa m t
O Q:Q

C
0Q
C
_
0
z D nth.
a z Y� 'n c
a z a: >s 'n
z a 'rf y
a Z A..-o-s `n
a z 3
a z 3* 'Fs..-.
a. z 3> 3:
.>
,
s-'"
m
H5
Os
A}.,
V
�
m 0
Q
z
obnoo
00000
A.a cnRR
zljzzz
zzzzz
zzzzz
.P�.
v cn<om
en b w
exs as i.x Ln iv
bs o} m m in
c>.�
acncncncn
acnu,uacn
acnmcnva
N-.iwN.�.
oa.o-
a,cc000
o o ® o
. ..+ b b o
O O Q
1- - - -
w� ea v in
p
om o 0 0
PPP
cN"o 0 o can��
A A A
40.
� v
m�`a w d�
� 25.
d N
O
O
w�rnR
®loop
o O O O b
oo®ow
,pkA A R
...:.,.a
N
z z(6 zz
a to V7 Gn m
Z Z Z z z
a to Cn Sn Cf]
Z Z m Z z
A Y/} Cn tlk Gn
O tD eb N
cn A a A �
V Ln (T O
io cn a
qqxx
Cb CJY O O
-d R N
o w (O co
Q?
-* W N V v
cr
o 0 0 0 o
p
cad o o b
NNNN N
NN NNN
-+ o O- N
00OP0
-----
Nw V N'A
O A N W O
W N(lr
Ch N O d d
mmCOntoff (On
N A 4 W O
A. A A
W a h :P+to
PS A -.! -+ O
m vmm W
V N O w
O.
Cn
N G
N N N N N
d""
N N N N .N
ri. N_I�nZpRIRR�
O O O :", O
A 5t5 N Z
CO N W z 8
RIQzm
O O O z GO
�®z
R R C35 A
Os 6) Z N.
IA to O� Z tli
O N
A
I4
I
I
a
N N N N N
N N N N N
N
O O. O
PIP
I
I
W
v
�AN
N
N�d_wCni+
dm
O
A R A> R
N
N N IV z
N N N N N
CI ® G+. z. O.
N
o R �-.
O O b
m v.R z N
O O o
-•a -� �, z o
m w rn z W
-�
os -v m
®
O
OA
�,��
��
��
�I��0N
czia
o
0
dbdb
bdbbd
d�4dzd
N z
N iVNN.tJNN.NZ
dbdoz.
!A-Poz
a�w
I�R��
vW�,
�I
�b z
�I��
��.z.-�:�,;.z
N�z
d�
b
NNN
NNNNad�d
w�N
®dQ
�N
�bbdb
�6-
N�b®d
A�vn
�N� w
dN�nNA
zlzwzzz
zIzzCz
zlzzwzz
�l_w o
ddb��
VI�1.1.W
RA�A�
N
a rn Cn to to
a vr..cn ra..en
a tri <n cn cn
R6
R v+ o -., a
N ., d en rn
A w b cs A
cn d N co
m
ry N N r,Y ni
o®c do
ouxoo--�
o�.n
olo
in p� �
is
®lob o ®
nsNNr.3 �v
olo 0 0 .
.. cn o cn.
cavN
blw w -,:i en
o o cr
� cn en cn cn
0 0 0
w A' Rea
-alN iv o e.�
w'tn
mis- w m 0
sa
en
_,3
O N
O
ZZz. Z.z
ZZZ Z.Z
z Zz Zz
VIA tD
Ota dzN
Nd N'�-R
I
OIO O O
P V C.n Z.-+
RIA A. A
Cn tTr Co zN
�I...s I
tYi Ln V't Ott.
O07
a crs en ua vx
a cn cn cn cn
a u, en v} rn
eff m rn cn na
v m cn cn cta
N w o en w
w N u7 to N.
N m o rr, rp
.,> o
0
,�.
e�cso oo
p'
ooaacr
I _N N N
o®o
!A. N N N
ooc+-.
O b P p p
G++iriin er�i,rr
ta eo w ca c3
mwvrnN
W-
ax en
8188. a
m un cony'
dcn
c�''n w eo
v w w' c`'a'o
cdri
NNNN�v
NN Nns Nc�eabdo
a1�I��I�
Rcn cn AR
bloob
AI m "b
PI n�I�PIP
m
r:+±
o opao
wo'a La. v
u+v�cn cn
:_fi„
0 0
IV N N
N N N N N
Ib
O O O O d
PIP
R A R A A
�
N IV
olo 000
oc»R
u,l'u, cn inw
rnlc�Onma�
�I�.�Ro
cC°a o ww
o
nc"ilcRo cvn°Y CNv
�INac`''n o
a�
3
odoco
c�obc, ca
R.r�r ,ter.
i �. ' j: _
N
N N N N N
C} Ck O O O
N N Nh:3N
� N C+C3.®
O O O 4 O
Y}t CSC fh Cn fT
_.. O N �.
N A N ip A
a � A•
t0 � O O O
�
Cn R C? Cn O
CP N. R A W
fp R O S_Y
Ui
G CS OOO
OCYOOO
>wlz z z oZW
ZIz Z Z z
'R'IZ Z Z z
RIC O -+ N
NIA 8 2 R
OINN eOJf a�
R A h S R
m1O N O
[SrIm m m A
O�
atn {n U7 rn
aUs fn tn.Cn
acnm Gn Cn
mcnw �..p
oNmo co
o b n�"'i
co mw ax S
cnWto w.m
A
NIN N N N
¢a lKn N to W
O1O Q Ci q
5,pppa
OOIo .8 -+
00000
Ol0 O o C>
Wlta W fig M1]
___ __
mI-J Gn C
@
O
O O Q O O
d N c0 fa O
Cn tT� to to Cn
Nl,�y a
N O'.+ O O
8S th O
U O O O
w w tp Gn O
.A.
_ ^,i R -J Gn
4n jc0
O O
6
0 0 0 0 4,
0 0 p p O
__
zl2 zZ
zlzzzz
zlzzzz
N N m
AI wNN
1
O CJ O 8 6-
GINAOn
O O d d-
E2,,4
PIo OW
W vv v tt
�I__
U N rn
d
R
atnfnozZW
aG/k VSCnCn
a tnCnLn n
- W
R K>rn.—
Rm
N N h1 N YV
N N N N N
d O O Q 0
W O (}S w
--x -4 Q CJ5
S%5 Cn Cn C% V
eet A A '�
C15 LO to C15
O

ZZ®Z
z
C/5
O
cs�
a
c,
>
4
p
o
0
> o c itm
o c 5" m =�^
a c m
> o c m °'
_ o c '"'
p, 2 Js 'Ti „=:
g
to
co
m
m
na
c-nu
cu a.
> o to
co
mm
m
m
�
m
ry �
rci+
a±
o�
ego
m
rev
m
-C o r
m m C7
O
z
000
uni�inv W'eni cnc�
u(rx+tn as en�.v-
o
'vvi�oo�o
o�o 0000
'000
p�
m
nn
N
a��n
i.s en =�+ iv =a
cnl
®rn cn Gn rn
'r.�x�cro cn o'o
o�0000
'cNn�oaoo
<sa.�'.wp®ao :con
x_-�',.
c' N
n��os z.00
®�cn :n. io v�
in�cn cnoo...
b�i�o ooa
'cNn�000a
o�000a
��.
0
nnacn
NNooO
en N N
N
n n.4.
ur in
.`gym
i"vn>o�
w=-a oac,
c
o
a to o
:r+ to iro cn ®
o en cn to yr
v ur cn c+>
w o ca CO o
w(to O (n 4
a o
n
:a v "ww N'-nt
o'en
o J o 0
0�0
ts+ yr wr
x
0 4�
83
n <»r. cn iv
vwv, u, u,
vven to o:
ollllo orno
wootno
w4avro
n
co m eo w `a�
cx, cn in veer
b oa ca co cx
m a>m
o 4 o a o
:^3mcwn6Nv
ui o 4 0 o
is as o � a
o
yr
cn
c n
n�a rsr n ?
rn� Z
etr' Z�v
N tx> zeonaz
.
�d'lo 0 o Z
o Z
iv Zama rn
is cn of et>cn
caw=.ocn
o00oen
wa4
aOPocn
.c O
n
v
N -
is ^J e0 i.J -J
xJt Kn -ett tnfFi
i.n V _:. O 4
w
o O 4 O O 4
to a O a a
4U to O Cf O
to
't+�ia � ca c+
as �rar en cn xaa
'<.n ice' cn o o
� �o o 0 0
0�0 0 o a
olia o 0 0
N
lw
m
nvwww
cn crr er+eri en
-t+
m v.-�. o
w
wcn 44o
rno000
7-1 a�
o �
0
AJa to 2 n
Gn�
Z _..
�4 tow n
dz� +' Z p
®.�
m :c. ix cl)w
bur yr to to
rav tna
'voo cna
OC73o
oo4tna
n
0
o
N
Nw
N
n n .p n :tom
v v � � b5
cn to cax fn cn
o eo - � a
N _...tom o v
v+ o 4 0 4
N eNo
u o o a o
n>
b� .�
:tom '4 iro o
er
Cif
c
n n w n to
tli
^J
Cn
LJIGY -J hY O
4ltn C£i GP UY
Gn UR to O.O
Cn'O 4 O a
a O O GY 4
� O O O O
n �
��1
lYn
W
W tT � W
to {yj 'in th
CP�v-''a. es O
w'V Q:G: O
fPY�Q O O CS
-ISFt Ci O O
�
O O
C
fn n VY to Yn
VI
CG5
414Y j:.,.,e w
C}t
PP p O O
CL
{p co
�I�n44
�I�en�t,;
�Cv4��
,ey
a1�a44
aI4400
�Io444
nQ
a
3
eo 'ia ixr or `a
ct, to in rncn
'vsmo oo
04040
N
w
000�o
en 'ti cx -. o
N
c»
:c:�isN<o=,.
tia�t'T
o�earcn
o�oo oo
'cvn�0000
o�000a
p
uiotn
rv.ao
m
41'p'cno
'c�_x�rn
o�eC°io
N
N �
u, ur ve
v,�zana cncx
oo
eNsr�oo oo
m�twa c, cso
ton
0 0
c
�
N
�'o
M1i d
caw b ecr
o�tn iir cp e,rr
ix'tn m o o
<.n�o o 0 0
o�o cr cvao
ca .ice o o
� �
lta,v
�p'
o sa
en crr cn cn
cs�rn n> .F o
o�o o o o
�I� o o o
ta� o in cx
coin
H

65
MNS ,Annual Precipitation Totals
60
-------- _ __-_- _
50 --- - — -- __.
45 -- - __
40 - _ _ -------
vs
35 - -
c
30
25
20 w _:
15
105--
0
1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005
Year
Figure 2-2a Annual precipitation totals in the vicinity of McGuire Nuclear Station.
g
MNS Monthly Precipitation Totals
8
L2005... ■ 200A
6
3
t c.
{
5
Y`
l �
} Y
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Figure 2-2b. Monthly precipitation totals in the vicinity of McGuire Nuclear Station in 2004
and 2005.
2-24

9®
ca >
Depth (m) Depth (m)
t„
� z
t�
cn
Q
Depth (m) Depth (m)
u a 8 N 8 ZA a
cn
�;
t�
tfi
XX xK
_
�K
xMXK..
O
C
N
C4
V
N Depth (m) Depth (m)
["5 :=.' h, :'-•', rn -' �., can ® care o cn �. Cx+ o

L-
UR -
Depth (m) Depth (m)
m
Depth (m) Depth (m)
a ch
0
0
cnCZ
rn �,
m
o
�
0
w
co
2'
e�
w
Depth (m) Depth (m)

0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
JAN FEB MAR
Temperature (C) Temperature (C) Temperature (C)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0
5
10
E15
20
25
30
35
0
5
10
15
a
20
25
30
t
35
v
Figure 2-4. Monthly mean temperature profiles for the McGuire Nuclear Station mixing zone in 2004 ( x) and 2005 (♦*),
0
5
10
I15
20
25
30
35
APR MAY JUNE
Temperature (C) Temperature (C) Temperature (C)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0
5
10
e:15
-20
ea
25
30
35
0
5
10
�15
C20
3
25
30
35

Z-
Depth (m) Depth (m)
�s
r
Depth (m) Depth (m)
:o cn c t» n to o cn
cz
ni
cr;
w
ram.
a
0
3
c�
n7
ca,
0
Depth (m) Depth (m)
ra
m
c�

4 _ ._._
-- - _.__ - -� --— -. .� _w _�_. — --_ ___
40
.Q:
35
30
-
CS
m
25
tW
20
p
15
10-
5
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
12
11
10 .E
cra
E
9 _
0,
8
7jj
6
-E
y
0
0
L
5
4 }e
3
2
1
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Figure 2-5.
Monthly surface (0.3 m) temperature and dissolved oxygen data at the discharge
location (lac. 4.0) in 2004 (0) and 2005 (0).
2-0

0
5
10
E16
20
25
30
ar
JAB FEB AFAR
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) Dissolved Oxygen (mglL) Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
a-�
x
x
x
5
x
x
x
x
10
x
x
x
x
x
x
115
x
x
20
w
x
x
25
x
x
30 :.
x
35
APRIL MAY JUNE
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l.) Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) Dissolved Oxygen (mg(L)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 _8 10 12
0
5
10
I15
s
20
cs
25
30
35
0
5
10
115
20
25
30
35
0
5
10
E15
s
20
In
25
30
14r,
0
5
10
15
w 20
x�
25
30
qA
r Figure 2-6. Monthly mean dissolved oxygen profiles for the McGuire Nuclear Station background zone in 2004 (xx) and 2005 (•+)
and 2005.

U-
tro
Depth (m) Depth (m)
try can o v"', o vi o in o c"=, o fl o cn o tr, :a
`x
"
cr
r
0
Q �
r
r
Depth (m) Depth (m)
0
N
a
o
CL
O
to
i-
zt
Depth (m) Depth (m)

Depth (m) Depth (m)
Depth (m) Depth (m)
U� �n o o 8, ca c c n o cn o cn c
yps
xC�Xy�K
�_
uy�M •�KYF aY
.a..
W
U
;A�
o
C7
ew
Depth (m) Depth (m)
0
N
to
c+
0
r
0
2
Q
m
to
21
ER
W
iG
r

ff---'
tra
�s
Depth (m) Depth (m)
0
a
a
cc
Depth (m) Depth (m)
ri u n ri N d w
N
v
c
C>
c+
c
ua
r
Depth (m) Depth (m)

240
24
Sampling Locations
23
1.0 8.0 11.0
13.0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69,0 72.0 50.0
235Z
1.0 8.0
230-
23
- -
22
�..�._ ......
12
11 q'�
21/`
21
Sampling Locations
13.0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69:0 72:0 80.0
19 19
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 54 55 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km) Distance from Gowans Ford Dam (km)
24 24.
Sampling. Locations Sampling Locations
23 1:0 8.0 11,0 13.0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69.0 72.0 80.0 23 1.0 8.0 11,0. 13.0 15e 15.9 62:0 69.0. 72.0 80c
23 / *�\ his ati es a �cs 23�\ hg $ h3 h6 '° -- 14'
22 f'® Jam, f;; s- ,--'^`---_-'"' ,.: 22-
f,
�r
,. 22
aA
w 21 j' ( rf' 21OZ
20 Temperature (deg C) 20 P, Temperature (deg C)
Mar 7, 2005 ___- Apr 8; 2005
ti 1
0 5 10 15 2.0 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
l J Distance from Gowans Ford Dam (km) Distance from Gowans Ford Dam (km)
i
Figure 2-8. Monthly reservoir -wide temperature isotherms for Lake Norman in 2005.

24 24
" Sampling Locations Sampling Locations
23 1,0 8.0 11,0 13:0 MO 15.9 62.0 69.0 72.0 80.0 23 1.0 8.0 11.0 19.0 15.0" 15:9 62.0 69:0 72:0 80:0
J 2t' 23
t�
✓ ~ 225
—
m _ t
21 ___~ /J 21 _
14
a.
20 y8 ,. _ 20
20 Temperature (deg C) 20 r '- Temperature (deg C)
May 2, 2005 Jun 7, 2005
1s 1g
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35... 40 45 50 55 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50.. 55
Distance from :Cowans Ford Dam (km) .Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km)
240 24
Sampling Locations Sampling Locations
23 1.0 8.0 MO 13.0 15.0 Ise 62.0 59.0 7.2.0 80.0 23 1,0 8.0 11.0 13.0 1.50 15.9 62.0 69.0 720 80:0
i 29 r/
22 J _ '
— —
to 21 __ '_.....,._ 4 ., .._- _...�-._ w 21
dam.
20 Temperature (deg C) 20 y .F „~- Temperature (deg C)
_ .~..r„ Jul 5, 2005 -„' Aug 1, 2005
9
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 5 10 15... 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km) Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km)
Figure - . (Continued). tinued).

24
Sampling vocations Sampling Locations
23 1.0 8.0 "11;0 13.0 15.0 15.9 62,0 69.0 72.0 80.0 235 1.0 &0 11:0 13.0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69.0 72.0 80.0
23 ,,` ( 23 225
Sri ` rn c`r'a c"fv,a
-_
22 - 2
/
-26
20 --
16
20Temperature (deg C) - __. - -' - Temperature (deg C)
A- . Sep 6, 2005 -_- Oct 10, 2005
19 19
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 .... 45 50 55 0 5 10 15 AA30 35 40 A. 50 55
" Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km) Distance from Cowans Ford. Dam (km)
24 - 24
Sampling .Locations Sampling Locations
23. 1,0 8.0. 11.0 13.0 Mo 15.9 62.0 69D 72.0 80.0 23 1.0 8:0 11.0 13.0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69.0 72,0 80.0
� L �. .G �
23 -` , \ } f) P? .nr. ,';;.. \` �. o °' i 23 :e' .v- ea, 'a a,
r
I f_ v ` ,
22 If
21 21
I
20
o Temperature (deg C) 20- Temperature (deg C)
Nov 7; 2005 ____ - Dec 8, 2005
o� 1
0 5 10 15 A. A. 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 5 10 15 20 A... 30 35 40 A. 50 55
C Distance. from Cowans Ford Dam (krrr).: Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km):..
t
-` 'a Figure - . (Continued).

24 24
Sampling Locations Sampling Locations
23. 1.0 8.0 11,0 13:0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69.0 72.0 80.0 23 1.o 8.0 11,0 13.0 15.0 15.9 62-0 69:0 72.0 80.0
~ /
22 _ _. 22
ID
21 21 /
205: 205:
20 r„ Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 2 „ . ' Dissolved Oxygen (mgCL)
Jan 12, 2005 —' ---~ Feb 7, 2005
10.. 19. .
0 5 10 15..... 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Distance from Cowans.Ford Dam (km) Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km)
24 24
Sampling Locations Sampling Locations
235 1:0 8.0 11:o 13:0 Mo 15,9 62.0 69.0 72a 80,0 23.. 1.0 8.0 11.0 13:0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69:0 72.0 80:0
-10
225
221
0 21 5 . :/ ;0 21
20 ywrf „ Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 20 'J Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
Mar T 2005 _ __ -'~ - Apr 8, 2005
is
0 5 10 15 20.... 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 5 10 A20 25 AA40 A5 54 55
t "
Distance frorn Cowans Ford Dame (km) Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km)
00 Figure - . Monthly reservoir -wide dissolved oxygen isopleths for Lake Norman in 2005.

-24 24
Sampling Locations Sampling Locations
23 ; 1.0. 8.0 11,0 13D 15,0 15:9 62,O MO 7ZO 80.0 - 23 1.0 8.0 11:0 13.0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69.0 72;O 80:0
220
220
_ E {
E r_' ?
W L..
/r }
200- Dissolved Oxygen m /L - Dissolved Oxygen m /L
-~ 20
May'2, 2005 _ Jun 7, 2005
19 19
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 5 10 15 20... 25 30. 35 40 45 50 55
Distance from rowans Ford Dam (km) Distance from Cowans: Ford Dam (km)
24 24
Sampling Locations Sampling Locations
23 1.0 8.0. 11.0 13:0 15.0 15.9 62:0 69:0 MO 80.0 23 1.0 8.0 11.0 13:0 15.0 15.9 6ZO 69.0 72.0 80.0
23
23 va
75
it a., _ _--_.__.•" C_��
205- 205-
4
20 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
Jul 5, 2005 `=' Aug 1, 2005
is 1g
0 5 10 t6. 20 2530 35 40 45 50 55 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km) Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km). .
Figure 2- . (Continued).

24_.. 24
Sampling Locations Sampling Locations
23 1.0 8.C) 11.0 13:0 15.0 15.9 62,0 69.0 72,0 80.0 23 1:0 8.0 11.0 13.0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69.0 72.0 Mo
230 ,v rri f rx n c 7\.. 23 tx r- w
22 //_ j
-
try \ .-_',��.,r'
�
20 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 20 Dissolved Oxygen (mg1L)
Sep 6, 2005 __. w. Oct 10, 2005
19 99
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 5 10 15 20 A. 30. 35 40 45 50 55
Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km) Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km)
Sampling Locations Sampling Locations
23 1.0 8.0 11,0 13.0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69:0 72.0 80.0 235Z 1.0 8.0 11.0 13.0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69.0 72.0 80.0
22 9 10
22�
p a
20 r Dissolved Oxygen (mg1L) - 20Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
Nov 7_2005 w Dec 8, 2005
19' 19
0 5 10 15 20 -25 30 35 40" 45 50 55 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Distance from Cowans Ford Darn (km) Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (krn)
Figure - . (Continued).

35
30
25
E
20
zr
ua
i�
15
10
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
- Julian Date
Figure -10a. Heat content of the entire water column (■) and the hypolimmon (o) in Lake
Norman in 2005.
12 100
■-'®"® 90
10
�. 80
70
CO
�i CiJ o4 ■ '.+. �a
■■ ■ 60 cc
CCn
6 °.+ 50
X
Q ` 40 W
t > n
30
'i a 20
GG i
10
0 0
1 30 59 88 117 146 175 204 233 262 291 320 349
Julian Date
Figure 2-10b. Dissolved oxygen content ( ) and percent saturation (---) of the entire water
column (■) and the hypolimnion (o) of Lake Norman in 2005.
-41

24
24
LAKE NORMAN STRIPED BASS HABITAT
LAKE NORMAN STRIPED BASS HABITAT
23
1.0 8.0 11:0 13.0 15.0 15.9 62.0 69.0 72.0 80.0
23
1.0
8.0 11<0 13:O 15.0 15.9 62A 69.0 72.0 80.0
230
23OZ
22'22
22
22
26 deg C
9
26 deg C
21,
2 mg/L
21
2 mg/L
Q 21.
M 21
20
Jun 22, 2005
205t
Jul 5, 2005
20
20
19
'19
0
5 10 A 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Distance fromCowans Ford Dam (km)
Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km)
24
'24
LAKE NORMAN STRIPED BASS HABITAT
LAKE NORMAN STRIPED BASS HABITAT
23.
1.0 8.0 71.0 13.0 15.0 15.9: 62:0 69:0 72.0 80.0
235
1.0
8.0 11:0 13;0 :15.0 15.9 62.0 69.0 72.0 80.0
23
23
22
22
26 deg C
E
_ 26 deg C
21
2 mg1L
21
2 mg{L
M 210
21
205.Jul
25, 2005
20
Aug 1, 2005
20 '
20'
19..
19
0
5 10 15 20 A... 30 35 40 45 50 55
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35. 40 45 50 55
Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km).
Distance from. Cowans Ford Dam (km)
Figure 2-1-1.
Striped bass habitat (shaded areas; temperatures :S 26 °C
and dissolved oxygen > 2 mg/L) in Lake Norman, summer
2005.

240
LAKE NORMAN STRIPED BASS HABITAT
23 1.0 8.0 11.0 13.0 15.0 15:9 62.0 69.0 72.0 80.0
23
22
5{ 22
YE8 26 deg C
21 mg/L
21..
2077 Aug 9, 2005
24
LAKE NORMAN STRIPED BASS HABITAT
23 1.0 SA 11:0 13.0 15;0 15.9 62.0 69.0 72:0 80.0
23
22
22
26 deg C
21
2 mgfL
GJ 21
2a Sep 1, 2005
...... . . . . e .. . ... .. . . . ... .. . . .. . . . ... .. .. .. . . e-. . . , e . .. . , .. ..
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
O
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Distance from Cowans Ford Danz (km)
Distance from Cowans Ford Dam (km)
24
24
LAKE NORMAN STRIPED BASS HABITAT
LAKE NORMAN STRIPED BASS HABITAT
23
1.0
8.0 11.0 13.0 15.0 15.9. 62.0 69.0 72.0 80:0
23
1.0
&0 11:0 13.0 15.0 1519 62.0 69.0 72.0 80.0
-23
23
22
225-
220
22
26 deg C
26 deg C
21
2 mg/L
2i
2 mg/L
21
21
205.Sep
15, 2005
20
(act 10, 2005
20
20
__.195
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
19
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Distance .from Cowans :Ford Dam (km)
Distance from Cowans "Ford Darn (km)
e
t4 Figure -11.
(Continued).

232.0..
231.5
Full Pond Qa 231.65 mmsi
-.
231.0
230.5
U
J
.SC
tCi
J
230.0
229.5'
229.0
dt d' et 't It dt 'd' 'd' U') to U7 LO LO to 0 UI) 0 U*) U*) to
O 0 O O O Q C7 C7 K7 .O O Q Ct O O 6 O O O C? C) O C! O O O C5 0,0 CJ O O O
it7 et t+7 tdy ei- V M M N r C`i O M O. M M M �W Imo- GU to to V4y' Ci �1~.' M (5 N N r O O Cfl 67: ` M CLT tt`y tS'y. V' V
N N N N M '0 . .. N N uN7 N hN «Na N NN NN rNN>,r o rca corz -M-�`ux o�:Nr O r r o- r
Figure
-12.
Lake Norman lake levels, expressed in meters above mean sea level (mrnsl) for 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. Lake level
r a
data correspond to the water quality sampling dates over this time period:

CHAPTER 3
PHYTOPLANKTON
INTRODUCTION
Phytoplankton standing crop parameters were monitored in 2005 in accordance with the
NPDES permit for McGuire Nuclear Station ( NS). The objectives of the phytoplankton
section of the Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program are to:
l . Describe quarterly patterns of phytoplankton standing crop and species composition
throughout Lake Norman; and
2. Compare phytoplankton data collected during this study (February, May, August, and
November 2005) with data collected in other years during these months.
In previous studies on Lake Norman considerable spatial and temporal variability in
phytoplankton standing crops and taxonomic composition have been reported (Duke Power
Company 1976, 1985; Menh nick and Jensen 1974; Rodriguez 1982). Rodriguez (1982)
classified the lake as oligo-mesotrophic (low to intermediate productivity) based on
phytoplankton abundance, distribution, and taxonomic composition. Past Maintenance
Monitoring Program studies have confirmed this classification.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Quarterly sampling was conducted at Locations 2.0, 5.0 (mixing zone), 8., 9., 11.0, 13.0,
15 9, and 69.0 in Lake Norman (Figure 2-1). Duplicate grabs from 0. , 4.0, and 8.0 m (i.e.,
the estimated euphotic zone) were taken and then composited at all but Location 69.0, where
grabs were taken at 0.3, 3.0, and 6.0 m due to the depth. Sampling was conducted in
February, May, August; and November 2005. Secchi depths were recorded from all sampling
locations. Pbytoplankton density, biovolume, and taxonomic composition were determiner]
for samples collected at Locations 2.0, 5.0 9.5, 11.0, and 15.9, chlorophyll a concentrations
and sexton dry and ash -free dry weights were determined for samples from all locations.
Chlorophyll a and total phytoplankton densities and biovolumes were used in determining
phytoplankton standing crop. Field sampling and laboratory methods used for chlorophyll a,
3-1

seston dry weights and population identification and enumeration were identical to those used
by Rodriguez (1982). Data collected in 2005 were compared with corresponding data from
quarterly monitoring beginning in August 1987.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Standing Crop
Chlorophyll a
Chlorophyll a concentrations (mean of two replicate composites) ranged from a low of 2.30
ltg/L at Location 2.0 in November, to a high of 11.1 [g/L at Location 15.9 in February'
(Table 3-1 Figure 3-1). All values were below the North Carolina water quality standard of
40 Ltg/L (NCDENR 1991). Lake -wide mean chlorophyll concentrations during all sampling
periods were within ranges of those reported in previous years (Figure 3-2). Based on
quarterly mean chlorophyll concentrations, the trophic level of Lake Norman was in the
mesotrophic (intermediate) range during February, May, and August, and in the oligotrophic
(low) range in November 2005. Over 23% of individual chlorophyll values were less than 4
µg/L (oligotrophic) while all of the remaining chlorophyll concentrations were between 4 and
12 ltg/L (mesotrophic). Lake -wide quarterly mean concentrations of below 4 l.tg/L have been
recorded on eleven previous occasions, while lake -wide mean concentrations of greater than
12 gg/L were only recorded during May of 1997 and 2000 (Duke Power 2001).
During 2005 chlorophyll a concentrations showed a certain degree of spatial variability.
Maximum concentrations were observed at Location 15.9 during all sampling periods.
Minimum concentrations occurred at Location 69.0 in February and May, Location 5.0 in
August, and Location 2.0 in November (Table 3-1). The trend of increasing chlorophyll
concentrations from down -lake to up -lake, which had been observed during many previous
years, was apparent through Location 15.9 during all quarters of 2005 (Table 3-1, Figure 3-1).
Chlorophyll concentrations declined sharply from Location 15.9 to location 69.0. Flow in the
riverine zone of a reservoir is subject to wide fluctuations depending, ultimately, on
meteorological conditions (Thornton, et al_ 190), although influences may be moderated due
to upstream dams. During periods of high flow, -algal production and standing crap would be
depressed, due in great part, to washout. Conversely; production and standing crop would
increase during periods of low flow and high retention time. Over long periods of low flow,
3-2

production and standing crap would gradually decline once more, These conditions result in
the comparatively high variability in chlorophyll concentrations observed between Locations
15.9 and 69.0 throughout the year, as opposed to Locations 2.0 and 5.0 which were usually
similar during each sampling period.
Average quarterly chlorophyll concentrations during the period of record (August 1987 -
November 2005) have varied considerably, resulting in moderate to wide historical ranges.
During February 2005, chlorophyll values at all locations were in the mid to upper historical
ranges (Figure 3-3). Long-term February peaks at Locations 2.0 through 9.5 occurred in
1996, while the Long-term February peak at Location 11.0 was observed in 1991. The highest
February value at location 69.0 occurred in 2001. All locations had higher chlorophyll
concentrations in February 2005 than in February 2004 (Duke Power 2005).
During May chlorophyll concentrations at Locations 2.0 through 9.5 were in the upper
historical ranges, while concentrations at Locations 11.0 through 69.0 were in the mid range
(Figure 3-3). Long-term May peaks at Locations 2.0 and 9.5 occurred in 1992; at Location
.0 in 1991; at Locations 8.0, 11.0, and 13.0 in 1997; at Location 15.9 in 2000; and at
Location 69.0 in 2001. May 2005 chlorophyll concentrations at all locations were higher
than those of 2004 (Duke Power 2005),
August chlorophyll concentrations at Locations 2.0, 11.0, and 15.9 were in the Enid range for
that time of year, while concentrations at Locations 5.0, 8.0, 9.5, and 69.0 were in the low
range for August (Figure 3-4). The concentration at Location 13.0 was in the high range.
Long-term August peaks at Locations 2.0 and 5.0 were observed in 1998, while year-to-year
maxima at Locations 8.0 and 9.5 occurred in 1993. Long-term August peaks at Locations
11.0 and 13.0 were observed in 1991 and 1993, respectively. The highest August chlorophyll
concentration from Location 15.9 was observed in 1998, while Location 69.0 experienced its
long-tenn August peak in 2001. Locations, 11.0, 13.0, and 15.9 had higher chlorophyll
concentrations in August 2005 than in August of the previous year, while concentrations at
other locations were lower than in August 2004 (Duke Power 2005).
During November 2005 all locations had chlorophyll concentrations in the low range for that
month (Figure 3-4). lu fact, the long-term minima for Locations 8.0 and 11.0 were recorded
in November 2005. Long-term November peaks at Locations 5.0, 8.0, and 11.0 through 15.9
occurred in 1996,.while November maxima at Locations 2.0 and 9.5 were observed in 1997.
The highest November chlorophyll concentration at location 69.0 occurred in 1991.
3-

November 2005 chlorophyll concentrations at all locations were lower than during November
2004 (Duke Power 2005).
Total Abundance
Density and biovolume are measurements of phytoplankton abundance. The lowest density
(575 units/mL) occurred at Location 5.0 in Novemmber, while the lowest biovolume (383
mm3/m3) during 2005 was recorded from Location 2.0 during the same month (Table 3-2,
Figure 3-1). The maximum density (5,168 units/mL) was observed at Location 15.9 in
August and the highest biovolume (4,912 mm3/in3) was recorded from this same location in
May. Standing crop values during February and May 2005 were higher than those of 2004,
while values from. August and November were generally lower than those of the previous
year (Duke Power 005). Phytoplankton densities and biovolumes during 2005 never
exceeded the NC guideline for algae blooms of 10,000 units/mL density or 5,000 mm3/m3
biovolume (NCDEHNR 191). Densities and biovolumes in excess of NC guidelines were
recorded in 1987, 1989, 1997, 1998, 2000, and 2003 (Duke Power Company 1988, 1990;
Duke Power 1998, 1999, 2001, 2004a). During most sampling periods phytoplankton
densities and biovolumes demonstrated a spatial trend similar to that of chlorophyll; that is,
Lower values at down -lake locations verses up -lake locations (Table 3-2, Figure 3-1).
Low chlorophyll concentrations and algae standing crops in November may have been due, in
part, to exceptionally high rainfall during the month before sampling. The rainfall total for
October was over twice the historical average (Figure 2-2b). High rainfall and subsequent
flushing would have caused a depression in algae throughout the system.
Seston
eston dry weights represent a combination of algal matter, and other organic and inorganic
material. Dry weights during all but May 2005 were generally lower than those of 2004,
while dry weights in :May were most often higher than in the previous year. As was observed
in algal standing crops, a general pattern of increasing values from down -lake to up -lake was
observed in all quarters to varying extents (Figure 3-1). From 1995 through 1997 seston dry
weights had been increasing (Duke Power 1998) Values from 18 through 2001
represented a reversal of this trend, and were in the low range at most locations during 1999
through 2001 (Duke Power 2002). Low dry weights during these years were likely a result of
3-

prolonged drought conditions (Figure -2a). Since 2002, dry weights have gradually
increased throughout the lake.
Seston ash -Free dry weights represent organic material and may reflect trends of algal
standing crops. This relationship held tare in 2005, at least through Location 15.9 in the
upper lake? however chlorophyll concentrations dropped drastically between Locations 15.9
and 69.0, while ash -free dry weights generally showed gradual increases between these
locations during all periods (Tables 3-2 and 3-3). This would indicate that the principle
component of ash -tree dry weights from Location 69.0 were non -algal organic :materials.The
proportions of organic material among solids during 2005 were most often higher than in
2004. From 1996 through 2001 there was a trend of decreasing ash -free dry weight to dry
weight ratios, followed by a trend of increasing ratios through 2005, indicating higher organic
contributions to total solids over the last four years (Duke Power• Company 1997; :nuke
Power 1995, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005).
Secchi De the
Secchi depth is a measure of light penetration. Secchi depths were often the inverse of
suspended sediment (seston dry weight), with the shallowest depths at locations 1.0
through 69.0 and deepest from Locations 9.5 through 2.0 down -take. Depths ranged from
0.88 m at Location 69.0 in November, to 2.60 m at Location 9.5 in February (Table -1). The
lake -wide mean Secchi depth during 2005 was slightly lower than in 2004, and was within
historical ranges for the years since measurements were first reported in 1992. The deepest
take -wide mean Secchi depth was recorded for 1999 (Duke Power Company 1993, 1994,
1995, 1996, 1997; Duke Power 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005). lower
overall Secchi depths during 2005 as compared to 2004 were due to relatively low Secchi
depths in May 2005 as compared to May 2004.
Community Composition
One indication of "balanced indigenous populations" in a reservoir is the diversity, or number
of taxa observed over time. Lake Norman typically supports a rich community of
phytoplankton species. This was certainly true in 2005. Ten classes comprising 100 genera.
and 242 species, varieties, and forms of phytoplankton were identified in samples collected.
during 2005, as compared to 90 genera and 210 lower taxa identified in 2004 (Table 3-4).
The 2005 total represented the highest number of individual taxa recorded in any year since
3-5

monitoring began in 1987 (Duke Power 2004a). Fourteen taxa previously unrecorded during
the Maintenance Monitoring Program were identified daring 2005.
Species Composition and Seasonal Succession
The phytoplankton community in Lake Norman may vary both seasonally and spatially
within the reservoir. In addition, considerable variation may occur between years for the
same months sampled.
During February 2005, cryptophytes (C tophyceae) dominated densities at all locations
(Table 3-5, Figures 3-5 through 3-9). During most previous years, cryptophytes; and
occasionally diatoms, dominated February phytoplankton samples in Lake Norman. The
most abundant cryptophyte during February 2005 was the small flagellate Rhodomonas
minuta. R. minuta has been one of the most common and abundant forms observed in Lake
Norman samples since monitoring began in 1987. Cryptophytes are characterized as light
limited, often found deeper in the water column, or near surface under low light conditions,
which are common during winter (Lee 1989).
In May, diatoms (Bacillariophyceae) were dominant at all locations (Table 3-5, Figures -5
through 3-9). The most abundant diatom was the pennate, Fragillaria crotonensis. Diatoms
have typically been the predominant forms in May samples of previous years, however,
cryptophytes dominated May samples in 1988, and were co -dominants with diatoms in May
1990 1992, 1993, and 1994 (Duke Power Company 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994,
1995,.1996, 1997; Duke Power 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005).
During August 2005 green algae (Chlorophyceae) dominated densities at all locations
(Figures 3-5 through 3-9). The most abundant green alga was the small desmid, Cosmarium
asphearrosporum var. strigosarn (Table -7). inuring August periods of the Lake Norman
study prior to 1999, green algae, with blue-green algae (Myxophyceae) as occasional
dominants or co -dominants, were the primary constituents of summer phytoplankton
assemblages, and the predominant green alga was also C. asphearosRorum var. strigosum
(Duke Power Company 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997; Duke Power
1998, 1999). During August periods of 1999 through 2001 Lake Norman phytoplankton
assemblages were dominated by diatoms, primarily the small pennate Anomoeoneis vitrea
(Duke Power 2000, 2001, 2002). A. vitrea has been described as typically periphytic, and
widely distributed in freshwater habitats. It was described as a major contributor to
-6

periphyton communities on natural substrates during studies conducted from 174 through
1977 (Derwort 1982). The passible causes of this significant shift in summer taxonomic
composition were discussed in earlier reports, and included deeper light penetration (the three
deepest lake -wide Secchi depths were recorded from 1999 through 2001), extended periods
of low water due to draw -down, and shifts in nutrient inputs and concentrations (Duke Power
2000, 2001, 2002). Whatever the cause, the phenomenon was lake -wide; and not localized
near MNS or Marshall Steam Station; therefore, it was most likely due to a combination of
environmental factors, and not station operations. Since 2002, taxonomic composition has
shifted back to green algae predominance (Duke Power 2003, 2004a, 2005).
During November 2005, densities at all locations were again dominated by diatoms, although
predominant species varied among locations (Table -5, Figures 3-5 through 3-9). The
dominant species at Locations 2.0 was the penmte diatom, Synedra, planktonic, while at
Location 5.0, the centrate Melosira granulate var. angustissima was the most important
diatom. At Locations 9.5 and 11.0, diatom populations were dominated by the centric forms,
Cyclotella stelligera and Rhyzosolenia spp., respectively. Tabellar is w fenesrrFata, another
common pennate, was the dominant diatom at Location 15.9. All of these diatoms have been
common and abundant in Lake Norman diatom assemblages during the course of monitoring.
Blue-green algae, which are often implicated in nuisance blooms, were never abundant in
2005 samples. Their overall contribution to phytoplankton densities was slightly higher than
in 2004 however, densities of blue -greens seldom exceeded 4% o of totals. Prior to 1991,
blue-green algae were often dominant at up -lake locations during the summer (Duke Power
Company 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992).
Ph goplankton index
Phytoplankton indexes have been used with varying degrees of success ever since the concept'
was formalized by Kolkwitz and. Marsson in 10 (Hutchinson 1967). Nygaard (1949)
proposed a series of indexes based on the number of species in certain taxonomic categories
(Divisions, Classes; and Orders). The Myxophycean index was selected to help determine
long-term changes in the trophic status of Lake Norman. This index is a ratio of the number
of blue-green algae taxa to desmid taxa, and was designed to reflect the "potential" trophic
status as opposed to chlorophyll, which gives an "instantaneous" view of phytoplanktoni
concentrations (Nygaard 199). This index was calculated three ways for Lake Norman
-7

phytoplankton On an annual basis for the entire lake, for each sampling period. of 2005 and
for each location during 2005 (Figure 3-10).
For the most part, the long-term annual Myxophycean index values confirmed that Lake
Norman has been primarily in the oligo-mesotrophic range since 1988 (Figure 3-10). Values
were in the high, or eutrophic; range in 1989, 1990, and 19 2; in the intermediate, or
mesotrophic, range in 1991, 1993, 1994, 1996, 1998 2000, and 2001; and in the low, or
oligotrophic range in 1988, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2002, 2003, and 2004. The index for 2005
fell into the oligotrophic range, and was the lowest annual index value recorded.
The highest index value among sample periods of 2005 was observed in May, and the lowest
index value occurred in November (Figure -10). The index did reflect the annual maximum
and minimum mean chlorophyll concentrations in May and Novel -fiber, respectively,
however, August chlorophyll concentrations were often higher than those of February,
although February had a much higher index value. The index values for locations during
2005 showed a general increase from down -lake to up -Lake locations. This spatial trend was
similar to those observed for chlorophyll and standing crop values.
FUTURE STUDIES
No changes are planned for the phytoplankton portion of the Lake Norman Maintenance
Monitoring Program.
SUMMARY
1n 2005 lake -wide mean chlorophyll a concentrations were Most often in the mesotrophic
range with the exception of November, when chlorophyll concentrations averaged in the
oligotrophic range. Chlorophyll concentrations during 2005 were generally within historical
ranges. Lake Norman continues to be classified as oligo-mesotrophic based on long-terifi,
annual mean chlorophyll concentrations. Lake -wide mean chlorophyll increased from
February to the annual maximum in May, then declined through August to the annual
minimum in November. Some spatial variability was observed in 2005; however, maximum
chlorophyll concentrations were most often observed up -lake at Location 15.9, while
comparatively low chlorophyll concentrations were recorded from mixing zone and mid -lake
3-8

locations. Location 69.0, the location furthest upstream, demonstrated minimum chlorophyll
concentrations in February and May of 2005, and concentrations were always substantially
lower than those at Location 15.9 The highest chlorophyll value recorded in 2005, t L 12
µg/L, was well below the NC water quality standard of 40 µg/L.
Phytoplankton densities and biovolumes during 2005 were within historical ranges. In
February and May 2005, total phytoplankton densities and biovolumes were higher than those
observed during 2004, while the opposite was true in August and November. Ptoplankton
densities and biovolumes during 2005 never exceeded the NC guidelines for algae blooms.
Standing crop values in excess of bloom guidelines have been recorded during six previous
years of the Program. As in past years, high standing crops were usually observed at up -lake
locations; while comparatively low values were noted down -lake.
Seston dry and ash -free weights were more often lower in 2005 than in 2004 and down -lake
to up -lake differences were apparent during all quarters. Maximum dry and ash -free weights
were most often observed at Location 69.0. Minimum values were always noted at Locations
2.0 through 8.0. The proportions of ash -free dry weights to dry weights in 2005 were higher
than those of 2004, indicating an increase in organic composition among 2005 samples.
Secchi depths reflected suspended solids, with shallow depths related to high dry weights.
The lake -wide mean Secchi depth in 2005 was slightly lower than in 2004 and was within
historical ranges recorded since 1992.
Diversity, or numbers of taxa of phytoplankton had increased since 2004, and the number of
individual taxa was the highest yet recorded. The taxonomic composition of phytoplankton
communities during 2005 was similar to those of many previous years. Cryptophytes were
dominant in February, while diatoms were dominant during May and November. Green
algae dominated phytoplankton assemblages during August. Blue-green algae were slightly
more abundant during 2005 than during 2004; however, their contribution to total densities
seldom exceeded 4%.
The most abundant alga, on an annual basis, was the c tophyte Rhodcrmonas minuta. The
most abundant diatom in May was Fragillaria crotvrensis. During November, each location
supported a different dominant diatom. The small desmid, Cosrnar° um asphear osporAum var.
str4vsum was dominant in August 2005. All of these taxa have been common and abundant
throughout the Maintenance Monitoring Program.
-9

The phytoplankton index (Myxophycean) characterized Lake Norman as oligotrophic during
2005, and was the lowest annual index value recorded. Quarterly index values increased
from February to the highest value in May, then declined through August to the lowest in
November. Quarterly values did reflect maximum and minimum chlorophyll concentrations,
but were not indicative of chlorophyll concentrations in February and August. Location
index values tended to reflect increases in chlorophyll and phytoplankton standing crops from
down -lake to mid -lake.
Lake Norman continues to support highly variable and diverse phytoplankton communities.
No obvious short-term or long-term impacts of station operations were observed.
3-10

H
0
r
c�
O 0
O
Cos
rx> to W * csJ W Cn N
OtSJCCdCnG>
E
m
tv —sM M (.n cn 41- �
co
-�
.
to to ao 6 6 W W
wN).014 1Q00 wNCIO
� r�
cnCO V-4-4MCnM
�.
� --
cn W to -4 4— W W -PP,
c�
4
C
�
Gi
MtO01'VCncnW01
�.
00 CV M M 4- W t0 `4
A3
"C9
cu
z
v5
0O
tv
00 0 N) C)
t`�'a

Zl-
#9`0
90' G
9L'O
#9'O
99'0
O9'0
09'0
Z9*O
L£'O
AON
9Z" I.
007
99' I
9 G ` G
C L ° I,
90' G
06'0
ZLI
L G' L
E)nv
#6'0
L9' L
LO'
LV 6
88`0
69`0
9'0
LTO
99'0
AVV4
90` G
8#° I
#9° G
G01
L6'0
98`0
1701
08'0
L8'O
83J
stW !am
p Gail qsv
OLI
8#'#
ZT L
0#' G
Ltl` �
O8' L
?` G
LZ' G
80' 6
AON
8Z'Z
L9'9
66' I
L9` I
#9' G
OZ'Z
OZ' G
6L' If
9ZI
!Dnv
U G
Z L "V
L8' �
LZ`Z
9 I' I
O' L
90' G
L8'0
6 G' L
AVIN
I L'Z
9LT
697
#97
907
9'Z
NJ
CLT
86'Z
88J
U OVq
0'69
6'9 L
O`E G
O' G L
9'6
0`8
0`9
07
WON
stW
tam Q
suoll of
°SOOZ uunp Umuot'Z olu-I ut
poloollo,) soldws tuoij (ZJ uz ut) slg2l;Dm fjp ;D3jj qs-e pu- Xsp uolsos unatu plot
-Z olgvI
99L
L991
9Z9
699 ### c8c
AON
8#9Z
1.9' #
998Z
GZOZ 6##G L OZ
onv
##c
U6#
8068
Z698 89L I 0908
Avvq
Z9# I•
L9LZ
-9Z6 G
M U6 86L
93A
u GW
6'9I
0' G I
9'6 0'9 07
WIUoW
sU0i100
ZZ9
AON
L99
M
9I9 9L9 L69
I ZLB
Mg 9
69##
0998 19 � Z LM
Jflv
MIC
99I tl
98L8
tlz9c 9c9z I Mc
AVIN
09ZZ
Z8L8
Z8#Z
€8L 999 9#9G
88-4
U e"
6'9
0 G
9'6 0'9 07
WtUUW
SUOIIL-01
Al!suacl
'SOOZ
uunp uvuuoN ail-eZ uz popolloo soldwrs
wojj (,tu/ ww) s;DwnloAotq pue (Ztu/sl!un) soillsuop uol)luetdolXgd a-eauz tujo I.
'Z-1 olq j,

Table 3-4. Phytoplankon taxa identified in quarterly samples collected in Lake Norman each
year from 1990 to 2005.
ROMMIMMOR
X. r «unner)Lemm.
inn
MMMMMMMMM
A • # Cord.
®®
MMMMMMMMM
=t
A. octocornis Ehrenberg
A. validus v. increassalatus
A. spp. Ehrenberg
C. gracile Brebisson
C. tumidum Johnson
C. i i
Coelastrum cambricumArcher
C. reticulatum (Dang.) Sinn.
C. sphaericuT Nageli
C. probosci#..urn it #
�®
®�
C. ! • Nageli
®®

Table 3-4. (Continued).
TA ON 90 91 92 93 M94 95 96 if
C, contracturn Kirchner x x x x x
C. mooffiforme (Turp.) Ralfs
C. notabile Brebisson
X
C. phaseolus f, minor Boldt. x x
C. pokornyanum (Gran.) W. & G.S. West
C. polygonum (Nag) Archer x x x
............. Lagerheirn
ii-
-0-01-0-1-FO-2-FO-3-T04
I
05
x
x
x
x
I x
I x
v
v
C. re.nqflii-wille
C. subreniforme Nordstedt
C, tenue Archer
Ifs
C. Unctum v. subretusum Messik,
C, trilobatum v. depressum Printz
C. tumidurn Borge
C. spp. Corda
PLOPUBUMM-4--AM1111 III
C. crucifera (WollelColfins
C, fenestrata Schmidle
C. rectangularis LA. Braun) ay
=PURIM
- - --------------------
D. pulchellum Wood
• VL OCUS Spp, Braun
C—c
ElakatOkfix gda knRsz Wille
u
mum==
9--n"n arnheimiensis Conrad
Euastrum ansatum v, dideltift
ETa p.) EhrenbeLg
E. denticulatum (Kirch.) Gay
E elegans Kutzinq
E. spp. Ehrenber9-- — ----------
Eudorina elegans EhrenbeLg
INION"
w* WWI
P nunho [Prance) Lemm.
9 GM. Smith
Gloeocystis botryoides (Kutz.) Nageli-, ------
G. gigas Kutzing
mqj Gerneck ex, Lernmermann
-Mv,
G. vesciculosa Naegeli MUM
G, as Nageli MMMMMMMMM
Golenkinia paucispina West & West MMMMMMMUM
G. radiata Chodat - IMMMIUM MUMMU
Gonium pectorale Mueller TMMMMM MMU
G. socialeWarming
G.M. Smith

Table 3-4. (Continued).
TAXON 90 91 92 93 94 95
K: lunaris {Kirsh.} Mobiu
K. lunaris v. dianaa Bohlin
K. lunaris v. irrs ularis G.M. Smith
nn n—i n5 n,A nd n
R R st-
+ West
i
• p. Schmidle®�
• #mith
" - -11+
Lauterborne
Monoraphimum contorturn+
Printz
®®..
A—
mum
N. limneticum (G.M, Smith) G.M. Smith
O#.#Snow
.+ #+
®®
mum
Unn
0. parva West r West
0Hansgirg
0- pyriformis Prescott
ittrock
P. morum iw
dupeclatheaturn
+ -
+ #Tum
MM
On
P. • # Meyen
+ # #
Ic IIAIIO P� fl VIA N m�III� II 411�� �aII I IIIIIII�IIII' II �I II II*1 (Kirchner)
Chodat
S. M. Smith
S. + +#+ + Chodat--IMMMIMUM
Wag=.. R #. # �" ##..
MenUnnum
S. t ! Lagerheim
S. brasiliensisBohlin

Table 3-4. (Continued).
its
r
®®®
®
MM®®
S. smithii Telling
spp. MeyenMM
�
MMUMMM
_____MMMH
S. gelatinosa A. Braun
MMMMM
MMMUMMMH
^ # _ Collins
S. westfiG. M. Smith
S. apiculatumBrebisson
S. # . .
�
�®
S. curvaturn W. West
S. cuspidatum Brebisson®®��®
S. dejecturn BrebissonM®M®®®MM®®®
S. dickeiiv. maximum.. + West ::jMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
S. # #Turner _-MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
S. leptocladum Nordstedt®®®®®®®®®--®
S. rnevacia—w—hum Lundell IMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
S. orbiculare Ralfs
®®®®®®®®®®®
S. paradoxum Meyen
S. paradoxurn v, cingulum
paradoxum v. parvurn W. West
S. pentacerum (Wolfe) G, M. Smith
S. tetracerum RalfsS.
S. ^ r

Table 3-4. (Continued):
DI ovaCleve®®®®�
. # +w
®®®®�MM
nsum
E. zasurninensis wi Koerner
Frustulia R # R # ® _ de Tonil
F. # # r #- a. R . + # de T.
G. dh
+ ! . w # # .
o
®
mum
M. distans _ #
Unn
Munn
Munn
qr. . . ' +
MM
®®®®-®IMMMMU
M. w • i + #
Nexigua (Gregory) 0, Muller
N. exigua v. capitata Patrick
N. subtilissima Cleve
Nitzschia acicularis
®�
N. agnita + #
N. finearis W. Smith
N. palea (Kutzing) W. Smith
Pinnularia
biceps Gr_iiP.
spp. Ehrenberg
Stephanodiscus Ehrenberg
�, w Y
S. finearis# w�®®
+ Mayer

Table 3-4. (Continued).
m
.
.,
mi
S. planktonica Ehrenberg
pens Kutzing
S.,qoVens v, scotica Grunow
®®
-®®®®®
& ulna (Nitzsch) Ehrenberg
i #
# . , , . # #
0®®®
T. flocculosa (Roth) Kutzing
CLASS: CHRYSOPHYCEAE
D. cylindricum Imhof
D. divergens Imhof
K. fittorale Lund
a Pascher®�®�®
M. akrokomos (Naumann) Krieger
M. allorgii (Defl.) Conrad
M. caudata Conrad
M. globosa Schiller
M. producta Iwanoff
pseudocoronata
0. spp. Wyss
���
PR # # R.
-®®®®m.®
P. schilleri Conrad
P. tintinabulum Conrad
3-1

Table 3-4. (Continued).
R, spp. Pascher
MINE
I
Stelexomonas dichotorna Lackey
Stokesiella epipyxis Pascher
m7
Syjs�i
jqm_ph�gnicola Koirschkov
S. spinosa Korschikov
mmmmmmmunummm
S. uvella Eh
S. spp, Ehrenberg
Uroglenopsis americana (Caulk.) Lemm.
CLASS: HAPTOPHYCEAE
Chrysochromulina parva Lackey
CLASS: XANTHOPHYCEAE
Characiopsis acuta Pascher
C. dubia Pascher
Dichoto;;ococcus curvata Korschikov
Ophiocytiumcapitatumv.longisp, (M)L
Stipitococcus vas Pascher
CLASS:CRYPTOPHYCEAE
Cryptomonas erosa Ehrenberg
C. erosa v. reflexa Marsson
_q._gracilia Skuja
C. marsonii Skuja
C. obovata Skuja
C. ovata Ehrenberg
C. phaseolus Skuja
C. reflexa Skuja
C. spp� Ehrerjberg
Rhodomonas minuta Skuja
[--CLASS--:—M-Y—X--OPHYCEAE
A. thermale Drouet and Daily
Anabaena catenula (Kutzing) Born.
A. inaequalis (Kutz.) Born.
A. scheremetievi Elenkin
A, wisconsinense Prescott
Anacystis incerta (Lemm.) Druet & Daily
A. sep. Meneqhini
C. limneticus Lemmermann
C. minor Kutzing
C. turgidus (Kutz,) Lemmermann
C. spp, Nageli

Table 3-4. (Continued).
;
MM
MMMMMM
Nunn
-1
R. R «. HansgirgLsOtifisW,
West
«�®®®®®��®
♦ t R . t
m
MMMM
i geminata Meneghini
;!;,;mnetICa Lernmermann
•. subtiliss w
t R s . =MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
P. • • «
®-
Raphidiopsis curvata Fritsch « Rich
MMUMAIM ONE
1L.
�®®��
E. minuta Prescott
._ _-®r®®
P. longicauda (Her.) Dujardin
P. orbicularis Hubner
•r triquter Playfair
P. s R RDujardin
®®
T. = s R _
ensifera Daday
3-0

Table 3-4 (Continued).
T. (Perty) Stein -"MM
T. lemmermanii v. acuminata
r7hispida
sap . Ehrenberg
DINOPHYCEAE
I=
--M
G. palustre (Lemm.) Schiller
G. quadridens (Stein) Schiller__
-®®
MMMMMM===
MOMM
mum
G, spp. (Ehrenberg) Stein
P. cinctum (Muller) Ehrenberg
RinconspicuumLernmermann
P. pusillum (Lenard) Lemmermann
P. umbonatum Stein
P. wisconsinense Eddy
P. # # Ehrenberg
G. semen (Ehrenberg) Diesing
= taxa found during 1987-9 only
3-2 1

Table 3-5. Dominant classes, their most abundant species, and their percent composition (in
parenthesis) at Lake Norman locations during each sampling period of 2005.
LOC
FEBRUARY
MAY
2.0
CRYPTOPHYCEAE (50.3)
BACILLARIOPHYCEAE (51.6)
Rhodomonas minuta (45.3)
Fragillaria crotonensis (23.8)
5.0
CRYPTOPHYCEAE (45.3)
BACILLARIOPHYCEAE (46.2)
R. minuta (42.1)
F. crotonensis (23.7)
9:5
CRYPTOPHYCEAE (41.3)
BACILLARIOPHYCEAE (63.5)
R. minuta (39.0)
F. crotonensis (34.2)
11.0
CRYPTOPHYCEAE (44.1)
BACILLARIOPHYCEAE (55.)
R. minuta (35.4)
F. crotonensis (21.5)
15.9
CRYPTOPHYCEAE (42.4)
BACILLARIOPHYCEAE (49.8)
R. minuta (38.1)
Melosira ambigua (35.6)
AUGUST
NOVEMBER
2.0
CHLOROPHYCEAE (68.7)
BACILLARIOPHYCEAE (50.8)
Cosmarium asphearosporum strig. (36.6)
S nedra planktonica (7.5)
.0
CHLOROPHYCEAE (63.3)
BACILLARIOPHYCEAE (66.9)
C. asphear: strigosum (29.2)
Melosira granulata v. ang.(116)
9.5
CHLOROPHYCEAE (73.1)
BACILLARIOPHYCEAE (47.6)
C. asphear. strig. (40.9)
Cyclotella stelligera (10.7)
11.0
CHLOROPHYCEAE (61.2)
BACILLARIOPHYCEAE (49.4)
C. asphear. strig. (33.7)
Rhizosolenia spp. (5.2)
15.9
CHLOROPHYCEAE (53.6)
BACILLARIOPHYCEAE (47.4)
C. asphear: strig. (27.8)
Tabellaria fenestrata (11.1)
3-22

CHLOROPHYLL a (ug/L) DENSITY (unitsfml-)
12 - --------------------------------------- 6000 - -------------------------------------
10 . .......... 5000 - ---------------------------------- --
8 - ----------------------------- - --- 4000 --------------------- --------- ...
6 ------ --- 3000 - ---------- - ---------------- -----
42— -- ---- ........ ...... 2000 ---------------------- ----------------
4
1000 ------ ..........
0
0 2 i 0 5 0 8 0 95 1 �.O 13.0 15.9 69.0 Z15 O 5.0 9,5 11,0 �9
SESTON DRY WEIGHT (mg/L) BIOVOLUME (MM3jM3)
7 - --------------------------------------- 6000 - ------------------------------------
6 ...................................... 5000 . ..........................
5 . .......................................
4000 . ..........
4 ........................ 3000----------1 --- -------- .. .....
3 - - - - --
....... ........
20004 ..... .. . .... ... .......
2 ........... . .. -- -- --- ---- ....
1000 ....... ..... .. .....
0 0
2.0 &0 8.0 9.5 11 :O 13.0 15.9 69.0 2.0 5.0 9.5 11,0 15.9
LOCATIONS LOCATIONS
FEB MAY AUG NOV
Figure 3-1. Phytoplankton chlorophyll a, densities, biovolumes, and seston weights at
locations in Lake Norman in February, May, August, and November 2005.
3-23

12 --------------------- ....... ... ...... .......__...._.._.._
✓1 t . ^ » ✓
� ^ a
♦ . " a . . .
INV
+ . . . s a
x
44 a
y� a ¥
0
w6 ...... ._.._. . ..... . ......
V y
a r
a w
4
a a
2 - .............................................
Li
FEB MAY AUG NOV
Figure 3-. Total Phytoplanton chlorophyll a annual lake means from all locations in Lake
Non,nan for each quarter since August 1987.
3-2

CHLOROPHYLL a (N9t1)
FEBRUARY
MAY
—4— 2.0 —r— 5.0
2.0 —0— 5.0
30
-----------------------
WING ZONE _
30 --------_.--.,_..-___-
WING ZONE
25
.....................................
25....................................
20
.....................................
20................. ,..................
15
-------------------------------------
15......------------------------..._,-.
10
----------------- .... --m-®.__,_--.-
10 ..._. _ -------- — ..___e_-..,_
5 .......
.. : ...........
5 __
87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
- 8.0 —a - 9.
30
--------------------------------r—
30_.--------_-m_,.._--------:..._:._..
25
-------------------------------------
25
---...._.------_--.....__-----:-----
20
-------------------------------------
20
,_.._:-.-----------.._._,------.___.
15
------------------ --------------- -
15
:,,_._--_-------•---_-w.<.._---------
10
.— ... ..... ..................
10
------- .........
. . .......
0
0
87
89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05"
87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
—*-11.0 13.01
--+-11.0 13.0
30
.....................................
30
25
..........._ ......... . ...............
20
-------------------------------------
20
--------____._
15
....... .......------- .......... ....
15
-- - -- _
-10
._.,, .......,
10--
5-1
.. ........
5-
0-
87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
--+-15.9 • �69:0]
1 15.9 69.0
30
_....,__.._..-.................. ....
30
-------------
20
........................ .:.... ---
20
-----------
15
..... .................... .....
10
.... .._:...............:..:... .....
10
`
5
..._.._._.,...
5
0
0
_ �,
87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
YEARS
YEARS
Figure 3-3.
Phytoplankton chlorophyll ca concentrations by location for samples collected in
Lake Norman from February and May 1988 through 2005.
3-25

CHLOROPHYLL a (pgII)
AUGUST
NOVEMBER
—O— 2.0 --E— 5.0
2.0 —a-•- 5:0
35
-.__.•.-_---`--•------------------
35 ..---__e_.--------------
--•---:.,__-
MINO ZONE
WINO ZONE
30
........... .......
30
........,..........
25
....................................
25....................................
20
---.............a....-..__------ -_•-
20 -._._-_-----------.._..._-----------
15
-----------------------------------
15------..:.._------------------------
-
1p
--------------------- ----®__-_-—
10
-----------.- --------
5,
5 _,...,.
::._._
0
p
87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
87
89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
H&0 --a-- 9.5
1
—1-- 8,0 —0 — 9.5
38
-------------------------------— -.
35-------------------------------
._:._
30
-----------------------------------
30--------------------------------
..-.
25
------------------------------
25--..,-------•-.__...__-.:-r.-.-_.
—
20
-----------------------------------
20 .-._.-
--------------- -----_,:..,.-
15
...................... .............
15 .................
..................
10
,.....: ..........
10.............:..
... ...............
5
..................
5 .
_.. ...#
0
p
87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
87
89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
—�►-11,0—a--13A1
—►— 11.0 —a 1101
35
............................... — -
35
30
--------------------------- — -- _--
30
25
...................................
25
20
..................... .......
20
15
-----------------------------------
15
1p......
----- -- -------- -
5
..
5
0
p
87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
87
89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
—* 15.9—a-69.0 i-4-15.9—a—M0
35
------------------------------------- 35
....................................
30
............................ ...__._. 30
---._.... _-----_,_..__..._.__._-....
25
........... ............... . ....... 25
....-,....-------._,...__..._..-----_
2p...........
............. .......... 20
_.._.-_-_.------------------..-......
15
.,. _-.,.. __ .__..... 15
....... ....... ..................
10
._ e . . . 10
... ... .. ....... .. . ......
5
..................:......._.... 5
.-_.......
0
0
87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05
YEARS YEARS
Figure 3-4. Phytoplan:kton chlorophyll a concentrations by location for samples collected in
Lake Norman from August and November 17 through 2005.
3-26

6000 -
---------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
c3 CHLOROPHYCEAE
o BACILLARIOPHYCEAE
5500 -
----------
EnCHRYSOPHYCEAE
c:CRYPTOPHYCEAE
..............
5000 -
----------
EaMYXOPHYCEAE
DINOPHYCEAE
..............
a OTHERS
4500 .
..........
4000 -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E
3500 .
............................ ........................
............ ..............
3000 -
------------------------- ............
..........................
Z
2500 -
-------------------------
............
--------- ................
w
2000 -
-------------------------
...........
..........................
1500 -
----- ...........
............
..........................
1000 -
-----
...........
............
--------------------------
500 -
-----
...........
............
........... 107
......
0 --ii
-- -
FEB MAY
AUG NOV
5000 -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4500 -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4000 -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3500 ...................................................................................
E
c;—
E
3000 -----------------------
...
...............................................
E
w2500
2
..........................
..............................................
M
-i
R2000
-
-------------------------
............
..........................
0
rn
1500 -
-------------------------
........
... ..........................
1000 ............................
............
................ .........
500-
...........
............
......................
0-1
FEB MA Y
AUG NOV
Figure 3-5.
Class composition (mean density
and biovolume) of phytoplankton from
euphotic zone samples collected at Location 2.0 in Lake Norman during 2005.
3-27

❑ CHLOROPHYCEAE 63BACILLARIOPHYCEAE
5500 _ .. - . - .: HRYSOPHYCEAE O CRYPTOPHYCEAE ... ..... .
5000 ------ ----. 12MYXOPHYCEAE DINOPHYCEAE----------
MOTHERS
4500 . ---- -. ..........
J
4000 ......:... ..........:.....:.....:..:................*------
E
v3500 --_--------- -.-- ..®. .---- ----------------------
C
3000 .. ............------ .......... .................
a2500 - .....---- --- -------------- --------------
w
Q2000- ._....--- _---- .. ........ ......................
1500 ----------- ------. .............
1000- ._.. ......... ......... ......................
500 .. .... .......... .......... _...
0
FEB MAY AUG NOV
4000----.._. .--- .-- _ ----- -------------------------
3500--------..- ------ .. ... ....................
S3000 -------------- _--- ..-.--------_-------- ------
E
2500 ..................... ......................................
-i
0 2000 ----. --- .---- ---- ........ . ....... ....... .
O
m
1500------------------- ......... .....................
1000 ----- :---------- .......... .....................
500 ...... .......... --------- .....
0
FEB MAY AUG NOV
Figure 3-7. Class composition (mean density and biovolume) of phytoplankton from
euphotic zone samples collected. at Location 9.5 in Lake Norman during 2005.
-29

c3 CHLOROPHYCEAE C9 BACLLARIOPHYCEAE m CHRYSOWYCEAE
5500 ..__._®R__._
s CRYPrOPHYCEAE 12 MYXOPHYCEAE m DINOPHYCEAE
■ OTHERS
4500
----------- .......
4000
---------------------------------------------- ..... .: ......._. ..
E
'c
3000
------------------------- ...... ..........................
V)
w
500
2000
------------ ........... — — ........
.........®_ ............ ...............
1500
1000
500
0
5000
4500
4000
3500
E
3000
E
UJ 2500
v
O 2000
0
ao
1500
1000
500 .
0
Figure 3-
----- ........... ............ ----------- 17 ------
FEB WA Y AUGV
FEB MAY AUGNOV
Class composition (mean density and-biovolume) of phytoplankton f1"om
euphotic zone samples collected at Location 11.0 in Lake Norman during
2005.
3-0

8000 _
7000
Rnnn

CHAPTER 4
OOPLANKTON
INTRODUCTION
The objectives of the Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program for zooplankton are to:
I. Describe and characterize quarterly patterns of zooplankton standing crops at selected
locations on Lake Norman and
2. compare and evaluate, where possible, zooplankton data collected during 2005 with
historical data collected during the period 1987-2004.
Previous studies of Lake Norman zooplankton populations, using monthly data, ;have
demonstrated a bimodal seasonal distribution with highest values generally occurring in the
spring, and a less pronounced fall peak. Considerable spatial and year-to-year variability has
been observed in zooplankton abundance in Lake Norman (Duke Power Company 1976,
1985; Hamme 1982; Menhinick and Jensen 1974). Since quarterly sampling was initiated in
August 1987, distinct bimodal seasonal distribution has been less apparent due to lack of
transitional data between quarters.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Duplicate 10 m to surface, and bottom to surface net tows, were taken at Locations 2.0, 5.0,
9.5, 11.0, and 15.9 in Lake Norman (Figure 2-1) in April, May, September, and December
2005. Normally; zooplankton samples are collected during each season (winter: January -
March; spring: April -June; summer: July -September•, fall: October -December); however, due
to scheduling, equipment problems, and inclement weather; sampling was not conducted
during the winter season, and had to be delayed until early spring. Since in all previous years,
winter samples were collected, it will not be possible to interpret April 2005 data in any
detailed historical context. April 2005 data will be discussed primarily with respect to
zooplankton results from 2005.
For discussion purposes the 10 m to surface tow samples are called "epilimnetic" samples
and the bottom to surface net tow samples are called "whole -column" samples. Locations 2.0
4-1

and 5.0 are defined as the mixing zone and. Locations 9.5, 11.0 and 15.9 are defined as
background locations. Field and laboratory methods for zooplankton standing crop analysis
were the same as those reported in Hamme (1982). Zooplankton standing crop data from
2005 were compared with corresponding data from quarterly monitoring begun in August
1987.
!M _ `s"Im
Total Abundance
Maximum epilimnetic zooplankton densities at Lake Norman locations have most often been
observed in the spring, with annual peaks observed in the winter about 25% of the time.
Annual maxima have only occasionally been recorded for summer and fall (Duke Power
2005).
During 2005, typical seasonal variability was observed in epilimmtic samples. Maximum
epilimnetic densities were observed in April at all but Location 2.0, which demonstrated its
yearly maximum in May (Table 4-1, Figure 4-1). The lowest epilimmtic densities occurred
in December at Locations 2.0 and 5.0, in September at Locations 9.5 and 11.0, and in May at
Location 15.9. Epilimnetic densities ranged from a low of 29,379 no,/m3 at Location 5.0 in
December; to a high of 1,042,954 no./m3 at Location 15.9 in April. Maximum densities in all
whole -column samples were also observed in April. Minimum whole -column densities were
observed September at all but Locations 15.9, which exhibited its annual minimum in
December. Whole -column densities ranged from 16,973 no./m3 at Location 2.0 in
September, to 535,956 no./m3 at Location 15.9 in April.
Total zooplankton densities were most often higher in epilimnetic samples than in whole -
column samples during 2005, as has been the case in previous years (Duke Power 2005).
This is related to the ability of zooplankton to orient vertically in the water column in
response to physical and chemical gradients and the distribution of food sources, primarily
phytoplankton, which are generally most abundant in the euphotic zone (Hutchinson 1967).
Although spatial distribution varied among locations from season to season, a general pattern
of lower average densities from the mixing zone as compared to background locationswas
observed during 2005 (Tables 4-1 and 4-2, Figures 4-1 and 4-2). Location 15.9 the
4-2

uppermost location, had higher epilimnetic densities than mixing zone locations during all
sampling periods except May, when zooplankton densities showed a marked decline from
mixing zone to background locations (Table 4-1). In most previous years of the Program,
background locations had higher mean densities than mixing zone locations (Duke Power
Company 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997;.Duke Power 1998,
1999 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005).
Historically, both seasonal and spatial variability among epilimnetic zooplankton densities
have been much higher among background Locations than among mixing zone locations.The
uppermost Location, 15.9, showed the greatest range of densities during 2005 (Table 4-1,
Figures 4-3 and 4-4). Apparently epilimnetic zooplankton communities are more greatly
influenced by environmental conditions at the up -lake locations than at the down -lake
locations. Location 15.9 represents the transition zone between river and reservoir where
populations would be expected to fluctuate due to the dynamic nature of this region of Lake
Norman. At the locations nearest the dam (Locations 2.0 and 5.0), seasonal variations are
dampened and the overall production would be lower due to the relative stability of this area
(Thornton, et at, 1990). A similar trend was observed in the phytoplankton communities
(Chapter 3).
Due to the lack: of data from the winter period of 2005, comparisons with historical data
could not be made. April samples were collected during monthly sampling in the 1970's and
1980's (Duke Power Company, 1976, 1985;.amine 1982). Most often, annual maxima
were observed during April and May periods of these past years. As stated earlier, annual
maxima (bath in the epilimnion and whole -column samples) occurred at most locations
during April 2005; however, densities in excess of 1,000,000/m3, as recorded from Location
15.9 in April, have rarely been reported in any previous Duke Power studies.
Epilimnetic zooplankton densities during 2005 were most often within historical ranges
during spring (May), summer, and fall (figures 4-3 and. -4). The exceptions were Locations
2.0, 5.0, and 9.5, which had record high densities for May.
Long-term maximum densities for the spring period (May) at Locations 2.0, 5.0, and 9.5 were
observed in 2005, while the highest spring values from Locations 11.0 and 15.9 occurred in
002 (Figure 4-3). Long-term summer maxima occurred in 1988 at all but Location 15.9,
which had its highest summer value in 2003 (Figure 4-4). Fall long-term maxima at

Locations 2.0, 5.0 and 9.5 occurred in 1988, and at Locations 1.1.0 and 15.9 in the fall of
1999.
Since 1990, the densities at mixing zone locations in the spring, summer, and fall have shown
a moderate degree of year-to-year variability, and the long-term trend at mixing zone
locations in the spring has been a gradual increase over the last fifteen years with long-tenn
peaks recorded in 2005. The background locations continue to exhibit considerable year-to-
year variability in all seasons (Figures 4-3 and 4-4).
Community Composition
One hundred twenty zooplankton taxi have been identified since the Lake Neuman
Maintenance Monitoring Program began in August 1987 (Table 4-2). Forty-one taxa were
identified during 2005, as compared to 52 taxa recorded during 2004 (Duke Power 2005).
Two previously unreported taxa were identified in 2005: One copepod (Para(( c loj)s
lire bricatus v. popl)ei), and one rotifer (Bract ionirs ca j}ciflorus) were added to the taxa list.
Copepods, which were most often dominant during 2001, snowed a significant decline in
relative abundance during 2002, when they were dominant in only seven August samples
(Duke Power 2002 and 200). During 2003, copepods rebounded considerably, and were
dominant in 13 zooplankton samples collected during all four quarters (Duke Power 2004a).
During 2004, copepod dominance and relative abundance declined slightly, and these
microcrustaceans were dominant in 10 samples collected in the summer and fall (Duke
Power 2005). During 2005, copepods were the least abundant forties, and were dominant in
only two samples from Location 9.5, epilimnion, in the spring, and Location 5.0, whole
column, in the summer (Table 4-1, Figures 4-2, and 4-6 through 4-8). Cladocerans, most
often the least abundant forms in Lake Norman, were dominant in three epilitnetic samples
from Locations 2.0, 5.0, and 9.5 in the summer, and two whole -column samples from
Locations 2.0 and 9.5, also in the summer. Rotiters, were dominant in over 82�'�"�, of all
zooplankton samples collected during 2005. During most years of the Program,
microcrustaceans (copepods and cladocerans) dominated mixing zone samples, but were
somewhat less important among background locations (Figures 4-6 through 4-8). From 1995
through 1998, a trend of increasing relative abundance among microcrustaceans was
observed throughout Lake Norman. Since 2000,-this trend has reversed, with a subsequent
increase in relative abundances of rotifers to the extent that taxonomic composition since
4-4

2002 has been similar to that found during 1995. During 2005, microcrustaceans increased
slightly in relative abundance in all areas of Lake Norman.
Crpep da
Copepod populations were consistently dominated by immature forms (primarily nauplii)
during 2005, as has always been the case. Adult copepods rarely constituted more than 7% o
the total zooplankton density at any location. Tropocyc°laps was the most important
constituent of adult populations in both e ilinm tic and whole -column samples, particularly
during summer and fall (Table 4-3). This was also the case in previous years (Duke Power
2005).
Copepods tended to be more abundant at background locations than at mixing :rune locations
during 2005, and their densities peaked in the spring (May) at mixing zone locations, and at
Location 11.0. The maximum annual copepod density at Location 15.9 was in the summer
(Table 4-1). Copepods showed similar spatial and seasonal trends during 2004 (Figure 4-5).
Historically, maximum copepod densities were most often observed during the spring.
Cladoc=er a
Bosmina was the most abundant cladoceran observed in 2005 samples, as has been the case
in most previous studies (Duke bower 2005, Ilamme 1982). Bosmina often comprised
greater than 5% of the total zooplankton densities in both epilimnetic and whole -column
samples, and was the dominant zooplankter in two samples in the summer and fall (Table 4
3). Bosminopsis was also important among cla ocerans in the summer when it dominated
cladoceran populations in most samples. Similar patterns of Bosminop.sis dominance have
been observed in past years (Duke Power 2005).
Long-ten-ii seasonal trends of cladoceran densities were variable. From 1990 to 1993, peak
densities occurred in the winter, while in 1994, 1995, 1997, 2000, 2004, and 2005, maxima
were recorded in the spring (:Figure 4-). During 1996, 1999, and 2002, peak cladoceran
densities occurred in the spring in the mixing rote, and in the summer among background
locations. Maximum cladoceran densities in 1998 occurred in the summer. In 2001
maximum cladoceran densities in the mixing zone occurred in the winter, while background
locations showed peaks in the fall. During 2003, maximum densities at background locations

occurred in the summer, whip peaks in the mixing zone were observed in the fall. Spatially,
cladocerans were well distributed among most locations (Table 4-1, Figures 4-2 and 4- ).
Rotifercr
Poly>arthr a was the most abundant rotifer in 2005 samples (Table 4-3). This taxon dominated
rotifer populations in the epilimnion at Locations 2.0 and 15.9, and Location 1.9, whole -
column, in April; was dominant at all but Location 15.9, epilimnion, in May, and in whole -
column samples from Locations 1.1.0 and 15.9 in September. In December, Po4yarthra was
the dominant rotifer at all but Location 11.0, whole -column. Conochilus dominated rotifer
populations at Locations 5.0, 9:5, and 11.0, eplilimnion, in April, as well as at Locations 2.0,
9.5 (both tows), and Location 11.0, epilimnion; in September. Keratella was the dominant
rotifer in whole -column samples at all but Location 15.9 in April. It was also dominant in the
epilimnion at Location 15.9 in May, and in the whole -column at Location 11.0 in May and
December Ptygura was the dominant rotifer at Location 5.0 in September. All of these taxa
have been identified as important constituents of rotifer populations, as well as zooplankton
communities, in previous studies (Duke Power ZOOS; Hamme 1982).
Long-term tracking of rotifer populations indicated high year-to-year seasonal variability.
Peak densities have most often occurred in the winter and spring, with an occasional peak in
the summer (Figure 4-5). During 2005, peak densities were observed in the spring.
FUTURE STUDIES
No changes are planned for the zooplankton portion of the Lake Norman Maintenance
Monitoring Program.
SUMMARY
Maximum zooplankton densities occurred in April at all but Location 2.0, which had its
manual epilinmetic maximum in May. Minimum zooplankton densities were most after
noted in September. As in past years, epilimnetic densities were higher than whole -column
densities. Mean zooplankton densities tended to be higher among background locations than
among mixing zone locations during 2005. In the mixing zone, a long-term trend of
4-6

increasing year-to-year densities was observed for May. In addition, long-term trends
showed much higher year-to-year variability at background locations than at mixing ,:zone
locations.
Epilimnetic zooplankton densities were generally within ranges of those observed in previous
years. The exceptions were record high densities for spring (May) at Locations 2.0, 5.0, and
9.5.
One hundred twenty zooplankton to a have been recorded from Lake Norman sine the
Program began in 1987 (41 were identified during 005). Two previously unreported taxa
(one copepod and one rotifer) were identified during 2005.
Overall relative abundance of copepods in 2005 had decreased since 2004, and they were
dominant in only two samples collected during spring and fall. Cladocersns were dominant
in five samples during the summer, while rotifers were dominant in over 2% of all samples.
The relative abundance of microcrustaceans had increased slightly since 2004, and their
relative abundances were somewhat similar to those of 1995. historically, copepods and
rotifers have most often shown annual peaks in the spring, while eladocerans continued to
demonstrate year-to-year variability.
Copepods were dominated by immature forms with adults rarely accounting for more than
7% of zooplankton densities. The most important adult copepod was Tr jcocyctgps, as was
the case in previous years. Bosta ina was the predominant cladoceran, as has also been the
case in most previous years of the Program. Bosminopsis dominated most cladoceran
populations during the summer. The most abundant rotifers observed in 2005, as in zany
previous years, were Po4yarthra, Conochilus, and Krat lla.
Lake Norman continues to support a highly diverse and viable zooplankton community.
Zooplankton densities, as well as seasonal and spatial trends were generally consistent with
historical precedent during 2005, and no impacts of plant operations were observed.
4-7

Table 4-1. Total zooplankton densities (Number;X 1000/m3), densities of major zooplankton
taxonomic groups, and percent
composition (in parentheses) of major taxa in 10
m to surface (10-S) and bottom to surface (B-) net tow samples
collected from
Lake Norman
in April, May, September, and December 2005.
Sample
Locations
Date T e
Taxon
2®0
.00
9.55
11.0
15.
4/7/ 5 10-
COPEPODA
7:5
3.6
20.2
18.8
18.6'
(3.9)
(2.1)
(9.2)
(4.9)
(1.8)
CLADOCERA
11.1
6.8
25.4
57.0
0
(5.7)
(3.9)
(11.5)
(14.8)
(0)
ROTIFERA
174.7
165.1
174.9
310.5
1,024.3
(90A)
(94.0)
(79.3)
(0.4)
(98.2)
TOTAL
193.3
175.5
220.5
386.3
1,042.9
B-S
Depth (m)
of tow
COPEPODA
7.7
7.2
29.0
7.5
15.2
For each
(5.0)
(4.9)
(12.6)
(3.6)
(2.8)
Location
CLADOCERA
.0
7.0
21.5
24.7
7.0
2.0=30
(5.8)
(4.8)
(9.3)
(11.7)
(1.3)
5.0=19
ROTIFERA
138.1
133.0
180.3
178.1
513.7
9.5=20
(89.2)
(90.3)
(78.1)
(84.7)
(95.9)
11.0=25
15.9=21
TOTAL
154.8
147.2
230.8
210.3
535.9
5/9/05 10-S
COPEPODA
51.2
44.8
85.9
30.6
27. "
(24.8)
(22.5)
(48.1)
(21.4)
(21.7)
CLADOCERA
73.6
20.8
17.2
29.8
23.1
(35.7)
(10.5)
(9.6)
(20.9)
(18.4)
ROTIFERA
81.5
13.3
75.6
82.4
75.3
(39.5)
(67.0)
(42.3)
(57.7)
(59.9)
TOTAL
206.3
198.9
178.7
12.8
125.7
B-S
Depth (m)
Of taw
COPEPODA
21.1
34.7
51.1
27.3
24.5
for each
(9.4)
(24.1)
(44.0)
(30.9)
(27.8
Location
CLADOCERA
18.9
17.0
10.0
22.6
15.7
2.0=30
(26.3)
(11.8)
(8.7)
(25.7)
(17.8)
5.0=20
ROTIFERA
31.8
92.5
55.0
38.3
47.8"
9.=21
(4.3)
(64.1)
(47.3)
(43.4)
(54.2)
11.0=25
15.9=21
TOTAL
71.8
144.2
116.1
88.2
88.2*
4-

Table 4-1..
(Continued).
Sample
Locations
Cute
T e
Taxon
220
50
9.5
11.0
15.9
9/8/05
10-S
Ct PEPODA
9.9
11.2
15.2
14.7
43.4
(26.5)
(29.7)
(29.7)
(30.7)
(28.1)
CLADOCERA
17.3
17.4
26.5
12.6
18.1
(46.1)
(46.)
(51.8)
(26.5)
(11.7
ROTIEERA
10.3
9.1
9.5
20.5
92.8
(27.4)
(24.1)
(18.5)
(42.8)
(60.2)
TOTAL
37.5
37.7
51.2
47.8
154.3
g-S
Depth(m)
of tow
COPEPODA
8.9
12.5
12.5
20A
27.2
for each
(2.)
(43.)
(30.5)
(42.)
(32.9)
Location
CLADOCERA
11.4
10.1
22.3
7.7
14.5
2.0=29
(42.5)
(35.0)
(54.5)
(15.8)
(17.5)
5.0=18
ROT FERA
6.6
6.1
6.1
20.6
41.0
9.5=20
(24.6)
(21.2)
(15.0)
(42.2)
(49.6)
11.0=25
15.9=20
TOTAL
26.9
8. *
40.9
48.7
82.7
12/20/04
10-S
Ct PEPODA
5.6
8.8
16.3
18.1
15.6
(19.0)
(29.9)
(16.4)
(19.)
(12.1)
CLADOCERA
7.7
7.7
9.1
6.7
5.9
(26.3)
(26.2)
(9.1)
(7.0)
(4.6)
ROTIFERA
16.1
12.9
74.2
70.3
107.7
(54.7)
(43.9)
(74.5)
(73.9)
(83.3)
TOTAL
29.4
29.4
99.6
95.1
129.2
B-S
Depth(m)
of tow
COPEPQDA
10.7
5.3
19.1
23.2
12.8
For each
(19.2)
(16.3)
(14.0)
(23.0)
(18.4)`
Location
CLADOCERA
11.6
7.1
10.2
12.1
0.9
2.0=31
(20.9)
(218)
(7.4)
(11.9)
(1.2)
5.0=16
RCTIFERA
33.4
202
107.5
65.9
55.6
9.5= 1
(59.9)
(61.9)
_ (7&6)
(65.1)
(80.4)
11.0=26
15.9= 2
TOTAL
55.7
32.6
136.8
101.2
9.
* Chcro bor us (lnsecta)
observed in bottom
to surface samples
from 15.9 in May (1 5/1 3,
0.22%),
and 5.0 in
September (7 /m , 0.27%).
-9

Table 4-2. Zooplankton taxa identified from samples collected quarterly on Lake Norman
from 1987 through 2005.
IIII IIII IO�I�I
f
•
+
!/.
f+.
!
!
!!.
/
,!
w .. w ia.
Cyclops f ... Forbes
C. vernalis Fischer
Diaptomus birgei Marsh �
D. ,! .Marsh
D. pallidus
D reighardi
D. !•
EpishurafluviatifisHerrick
i�!
i glaI IIIus Epp.
EucyclopsIII . + � ull f� K f )
..
F�u . f If f I . III aI. A. Forbes) " f�ll I li
M. ff
Tropocyclops s�Il�fp� (Fischer)
•• (Fischer)
•fff cof'fff'.
Harpacticoidea
Nauplit
Parasitic cff^ff♦
IIX I I XI
I',
Al .. aird
r tf i. f
Chydows spp.
D.,1. J� •. Coker
! longiremis
*f.•( ! f
D. parvula Fordyce X. X x x x x x x
D. pulex (de Geer) x X
D. pulicaria Sars X
D. refrocurva Forbes x x x x x x x x ?
D, sc udleri Sars
D. s. Mullen x x x x x I X I x X X x x x x X
Diaphanosoma brachyurum x X x I x X
Lievin
4-10

Table 4-2. (Continued).
II-TI II it I
..
.«
•:
**
r r
r
r
r
r
r
s spp, Fischer
Eubosmina spp. (Baird)
H. •! Stingelin
11yocryptus sordidus (1. I
L. !inifer Herrick
spp,Sars
• P • Pkindtii!. -����
Leydigia acanthoceroides
P. spp. Baird
A i ! Gosse®®®
Brachionus calyciflorus
B. bidentata Anderson
will
C. P ! Lauterborne
C. mutabilis• M......®®®®
! Herring
6 ! ...Gastro
R !
•!
4-11

Table 4-2. (Continued).
TAXON
7
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
09
02
03
04
05
Kelliccttia bostoniensis (Rou.)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
K. longispina Kellicott
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
K. spp. Rousselet
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Keratella cochlearis
x
x
x
. taurocephala Myers
X
X
x
x
K. spp. Rory de St, Vincent
X
x
x
x
X
x
X
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Lecane spp, Nitzsch
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Macrochaetus subquadratus P,
x
x
M. spp. Perty
X
X
x
X
X
MSnostyla stenroosi (Meiss.)
x
M. spp. Ehrenberg
x
x
x
x
x
x
Notholca spp. Gosse _
x
x
x
Platyias patulus Harring
x
Ploeosoma hudsonii Brauer
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
x
X
X
x
P. truncatum (Levander)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
X
P. spp. Herrick
x
X
x
X
x
x
x
x
Polyarthra euryptera (Weir.)
X
x
x
P. orator Burckhart
x
x
x
X
x
x:
x
P. vulgaris Carlin
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
P. spp. Ehrenberg
x
I X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Pompholyx spp. Gosse
x
Pty ura libre Meyers
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
P. spp. Ehrenberg
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
x
x
ynchaeta spp. Ehrenberg
x
x
X
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Trichocerca capucina (Weir.)
X
x
x
x
x
T. cyllndrica (Imhof)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
T. longiseta shrank
wxx
T multicrinis (Kellicott)
x
x
x
T porcellus (Gosse)
x
X
x
X
T. pusilla Jennings
X
T. simitis Laark
x
T. spp. Lamark
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
=x
x
Trichotria spp. Bory de St, Vin.
x
x
x
Unidentified Bdelloida
x
x
x
x
X
x
x
x
Unidentified Philodinidae
x
Unidentified Rotifera
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
INSE T i
haoborus spp. Lichtenstein
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
OS'TRACODA (unidentified)
x
x
X
4-1

Table 4- . Dominant taxa among copepods
(adults); cladocerans,
and rotifers, and their
densities as percent
composition (in parentheses) of their
taxonomic groups in
Lake Norman
samples during 2005.
APRIL
MA
SEPTEMBER
DECEMBER
COPEPODA
EPILIMNION
2.0
Tropocyclops (4.3)*
Epishura (7.9)*
Tropocyclops (9.6)*
Tropocyclops (4.0)*
5.0
Epishura (8.4)*
Epishura (3.9.)
Tropocyclops ( .8)*
Tropocyclops (11.8)
9.5
Epishura (3.5)
Tropocyclops (4.1)
Tropocyclops (11.0)*
Tropocyclops (3 6)*
11.0
Cyclops ( ,7)*
Tropocyclops (3.6)
Tropocyclops (6.5)
Tropocyclops (9.1)
15,9
No adults
Cyclops .8
Tro oc clo s 3.8
Tro o clans 1.8
CQPEP ODA
WHOLE -COLUMN
2,0
Tropocyclops (3.5)
Epishura (5.9)
Tropocyclops (17.4)
Tropocyclops (;4)
5.0
Tropocyclops (.)
Epishura (4.4)
Tropocyclops (8.7)*
Tropocyclops (11.2)
9.5
Epishura (.)
Epishura (9.8)
Tropocyclops (7.)
Tropocyclops (1.7)*
11.0
Epishura (4.0)*
Epishura (5:0)
Mesocyclops (9.)
M soc cl ps (19A)
15.9
C clo s 2.0 *
C clo s 9.4
Msoc clo s 13.0
Trcr oc clo s 3:3
CLADOCERA
EPILIMNION
2.0
Bosmina (100,0)
Bosmina (98.9)
Bosminopsis (90.3)
Bosmina (100.0)
5.0
Bosmina (100.0)
Bosmina (96.0)
Bosminopsis (96.7)
Bosmina (96.7)
9,5
Bosmina (98,7)
Bosmina (67.0)
Bosminopsis (7.)
Bosmina (97.1)
11.0
Bosmina (98.8)
Bosmina (82.2)
Bosminopsis (44.3)
Bosmina (95.7)
15.9
No cladocerans
pa hnia 92.1
Bosmina 42.1
Bosmina 100.0
CLADOCERA
WHOLE -COLUMN
2.0
Bosmina (97.0)
Bosmina (96.6)
Bosminopsis (73.2)
Bosmina (100,0)
5.0
Bosmina (97.)
Bosmina (89.7)
Bosminopsis (88A)
Bosmina (100.0)
9.5
Bosmina (96.)
Bosmina (52.8)
Bosminopsis (64,0)
Bosmina (100.0)
11.0
Bosmina (95.0)
Bosmina (65.6)
Bosmina (12.9)
Bosmina (94.9)
15,9
Bcrs i'na 100.0
i?a hula 75:3
Bn ina 4
Bosmina 100.0
4-1

Table 4-3. {Cant nuecl).
APR€L
MAY
SEPTEMBER
DECEMB R
ROTIFERA
EPILIMNION
Z0
Polyarthra (38.9)
Polyarthra (60.1)
Conochilus (46.4)
Polyarthra (48.2)
5.0
Conochilus (41.5)
Polyarthra (66.)
Ptygura (9.9)
Polyarthra (76.)
9.5
Conochilus (43.5)
Polyarthra (71.0)
Conochilus (43.8)
Polyarthra (58.7)
11.0
Conochilus (42.8)
Polyarthra (62.2)
Conochilus (41.9)
Polyarthra (46.6)
15.9
Polyarthra (73.5)
Keratella 26.3
Conochilus 9.0
Pof artlara 39.8
ROTIFERA
WHOLE -COLUMN
2.0
Keratella (41.3)
Polyarthra (70.1)
Conochilus (55,6)
Polyarthra (5.1)
5:0
Keratella (6.)
Polyarthra (76.8)
Ptygura (0.7)
Polyarthra (57.4)
9.5
Keratella (44.7)
Polyarthra (69.0)
Conochilus (29.5)
Polyarthra (55.1)
11.0
Keratella (48.5)
Polyarthra (52,2)
Polyarthra (41.0)
Keratella (39.0)
15.9
Polyarthra 75.6
Polyarthra 28.8
Pol arthra 4 .0
Polyarthra 38.
= Only adults present in samples.
4-14

10m TO SURFACE TOWS
A Pr —air-- Y o SEP--*—DEC
E
0
0
x
0
400--------------------------------- ----------- ._- __.__.---_----
200 .... ....... .........: ...... .........
0
2.0 5.0 9.5 11.o 15;9
600
500
400
c
300
aC
0
z
200
#
0
2.0
Figure 4-1
BOTTOM TO SURFACE TOWS
A -9 Y 0 SEP
a:: +- i i ..............
&0 9.5 11.0 1&9
LOCATIONS
Total zooplankton density by location for samples collected in Lake Norman in
2005.
4-15

1200 _-®._.-. ..- R'L------------------ 300------- -. - MAY
...................
1000 ----------------------------- 250'.-----------.._-..------..------.
800 ............ ...... ..:: :.... 200 - .... ..........................
z400-.-_--- -------------®..... 100--- .... ....
w
n
200 - ...... 50 .. .... ....
0 0
2.0 5.0 9.5 11.0 15:9 2.0 5,0 9.5 11.0 15.9
1$0 SEPTEMBER 180 DE IEM ER
160 ...................................... 160......................................
140 ................................. 140........................................
E120............................... 120 ..................................
;100 ................................. 100 ................... ......
a
'80 ............................... .. 80 ..................
H
60 ............................... 60 ................... ..
ua
0
40 .......... ... 40 t ---------------- .
01-!-
2.
E
Figure 4-2.
17., 17.17.1 11 01 " - 111� 1:1-i I I 17
5.0 M 11.0 15.9 2,0 5.0 9. 11.0 15.9
LOCATIONS
CO EPOD � CLADOCERANS EMROTIFERS
ooplankton community composition by month for ep ti nctic samples
collected in Lake Norman in 2005.
4-16

MIXING
SPRING
175 ...._< ..._®---------------------
M
C
C
125
100
5 _._. _ -------- _ _-- ------ ._.
LL
25 1 ..................__. ._.._:,-_...t.__.
0
87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05
BACKGROUND
--+— 9 5 11.0 15.9
500 ............................ . ...
400
r
c
a
c
too ..... .. .:.. ..
a
87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 86 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05
YEARS
Figure 4- . Total zooplankton densities by location for epilinmetic samples collected in Lake
Norman in spring periods of 1988 through 2005.
4-1

MIXING ZONE
SUMMER FALL
300
= _. _ _ _. - - - - - - _ _ 200
-- 2.0 5.0 175
250
------- -- _ _ _..
15Q
------------
a
200
--
125
x
0
150
- _ ,- _ _ -: 100
-
'=
75
W
100
w
p
50
50 .__.
. -<- _
25
0,
0
87
89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 0
BACKGROUND LOCATIONS
9 5---�-11.0 15.9 li
450
--------- ----- -----_ -_--
250
____.
__ __ __ _._:-- --. __ 400
6
200
_- ---- -____ --_ ___ _s_
'
300
x
�
150
____ _.. _ 250
F
200
as
z10a
-
- _ _ __ _ _ - - - -50
w
0
100
- - -
o
0 4
a
87
89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 0103 05
YEARS YEARS
Figure 4-4. Total zooplankton densities by location for epilimnetic samples collected in Lake
Norman in summer and fall periods of 1987 through 2005.
4-18

COPEPODS
120----- .:.......a._.,...--....._.__..r.-------...._®......._.......
- �h— MING ZONE BACKGROUND LOCATIONS
100----- ...... .....:........m:_--.-...-------- ------------ - - ------ ..
r
80
60 ...
40
20
°
0
CL.ADOCE NS
60 ..... ..... ...... ............. _... _.. ...... ..._. ...........
—► — MIXING ZONE BACKGROUND LOCATIONS
50 .....
M
E° . r
40 r
Q
P
♦ r ,
6 30
_ 1 . v • 20
R.. - -.- a ....r.. ... a ....... . .. _ ...
a a ° • e
1 . t v v r. t
0
350 ........ ....... .... ROTIFERS ...-. , .. _ ..,.
300----- ::;................................. .......... .. :..........,..:.
250 ...... .. .........
150.......... .................
+.. .......�...... .+. .+.. a_.. .... _..r. ... a. .. a. ,L. a.....
♦
100 ........ ...a....:... r..... .»..a. �. r.
50 ........... ..•
0
LO
MG) f33 M M � Off? 67 i7) p�j.. 07 CT} �.... O cop o O O cD
a- z e e
Figure 4-5. Zooplankton composition by quarter for epimlinetic samples collected in Lake
Norman from 1990.through 2005.
4-1

CHAPTER: 5
FISHERIES
INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the NPDES permit for McGuire Nuclear Station (MS), monitoring of
specific fish population parameters in Lake Norman continued during 2005. The components
of this portion of the Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program were:
1. spring electrofishing surveys of littoral fish populations with emphasis on age, growth,
size distribution, and relative weight (W) of spotted bass and largemouth bass. Scientific
names of fish mentioned in this chapter are listed in Table 5-1.
2. summer striped bass :mortality monitoring;
3. cooperative striped bass study with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) with emphasis on age, growth, and W,
4. exploration of the potential for collecting population data on catfish in conjunction with
the striped bass study;
5, cooperative trap -net surveys with NCWRC for white crappies and black crappies; with
emphasis on age and growth,
6. fall hydroacoustic and purse seine surveys of pelagic prey fish to determine their
abundance and species composition.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Spring Electrofishing Surveys
Spring electrofishing surveys were conducted in March at three locations. (1) near Marshall
Steam Station (MSS) in Zone 4, (2) a reference (REF) area located between MNS and MSS
in Zone 3, and (3) near MNS in Zone 1 (Figure 5-1). The locations sampled in 2005 were
identical to historical sites sampled since 1993 and consisted of ten 300-m shoreline transacts
at each location. All transacts included the various types of fish habitat found in Lake
Norman. The only areas excluded were shallow flats where the boat could not access the
area within 3-4 in of the shoreline. All sampling was conducted during daylight, when water
temperatures generally ranged from 15 to 20 °C (59 to 68 °F). Alt stunned fish were
5-1

collected and identified to species. Except for spotted bass and largemouth "bass, all other
fish were counted and. weighed (g) in aggregate by taxon. Individual total lengths (mm) and
weights were obtained for all spotted and largemouth bass collected. Sagittal otoliths were
removed from all bass > 1,25 mm long (all fish < 125 mm were assumed to be age I because
young -of -year bass are not collected in these spring samples) and sectioned for age
determination (Devries and Erie 199). Growth rates were calculated as the mean length for
all fish of the same age. Relative weight was calculated for spotted bass >100 turn long and
largemouth bass >150 mm long, using the formula Wr = (W/ ) x 100, where W = weight of
the individual fish (g) and Ws = length -specific mean weight (g) for a fish as predicted by a
weight -length equation for that species (Anderson and Neumann 1996).
Striped Bass Nettie Survey
Striped bass for age, growth, and Wr determinations were collected in early December by
NCWRC and Duke Energy (DE) personnel. Four monofilament nets (76.2 m Long x 6.1 m
deep), two each containing two 38.1 in panels of 38- and 51-mm mesh (square measure) and
two each containing similar panels of 63- and 76 mm mesh, were set overnight in areas inhere
striped bass had been previously located. Individual total lengths and weights were obtained
for all striped bass collected and sagittal otoliths were removed from a randomly selected
subsample of the total catch. Age, growth, and Wr were determined for these subsampled
fish as well as Wr for all collected fish as described earlier for largemouth bass. In addition,
all catfish collected in these gill nets were identified to species and enumerated...
Crapie Trap-net'Study
White crappie and black crappie populations in Lake Noonan were sampled cooperatively by
the NCWRC and DE in late October and early November using trap nets as described by
Nelson and Dorsey (200). Personnel from DE sampled downlake (below the Highway 150
bridge) and NCWRC personnel sampled uplake. Total length and weight were obtained for
all collected white and black crappies and sagittal otoliths were removed from all crappies for
age and growth determinations.
5-2

Fall Nydroacoustics and Purse Seine
The abundance and distribution of pelagic prey fish in Lake Norman was determined using
mobile hydroacoustic (Brandt 1996) and purse seine (Hayes et al. 199) techniques. The
mobile hydroacoustic survey of the entire lake was conducted in September to estimate
forage fish populations. Hydroacoustic surveys employed multiplexing, side -scan and down -
looking transducers to detect surface -oriented fish and deeper fish (from 2.0 in below the
water surface to the bottom); respectively. Both transducers were capable of determining
target strength directly by measuring fish position relative to the acoustic axis. The lake was
divided into six zones (Figure 5-1) due to its large size, spatial heterogeneity, and multiple
power generation facilities.
Purse seine samples were also collected in September from the lower (Zone 1), mid (Zone 2),
and uplake (Zone 5) areas of the reservoir. The purse seine measured 118 x 9 in with a mesh
size of 4.8-mm. A subsample of forage fish collected from each area was used to determine
taxa composition and size distribution.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Spring Electrofishing Surveys
Electrofishing resulted in the collection of 1,81.4 fish (21 species and 1 hybrid complex)
weighing 116 kg from the MSS area, 2,397 fish (19 species and 2 hybrid complexes)
weighing 99 kg from the REF area, and 2,442 fish (16 species and 2 hybrid complexes)
weighing 69 kg from the MNS area (Table 5-2). A variety of species including alewives,
threadfin shad, whitefin shiners, spottail shiners, white perch, redbreast sunfish, warmouth,
bluegills, redear sunfish, hybrid sunfish, spotted bass, and largemouth bass dominated
samples numerically while alewives, threadfin shad, common carp, redbreast sunfish,
bluegills, redear sunfish, spotted bass, and largemouth bass dominated samples
gravimetrically.
Overall, total numbers of fish collected in spring 2005 were highest in the REF and MNS
areas and lowest in the MSS area. This appeared to be primarily related to the higher
numbers of threadfin shad (and alewives in the MNS area) collected in these areas compared
5-3

to the MSS area. Fish biomass was highest, however„ in the MSS area, intermediate in the
REF area, and lowest in the MNS area. Since 1993, the numbers and biomass of fish
collected in the sampled areas have varied annually with no apparent trend in area catch rates
(Figure 5-).
While numbers of fish collected in the electrofishing samples have fluctuated among areas
and years, fish biomass has remained fairly stable among years. An exception was noted in
2003 when large numbers of common carp were collected in the MSS area that greatly
inflated total fish biomass here over what has been normally observed. Biomass was
generally highest in the MSS area, intermediate in the REF area, and lowest in the MNS area
during most years. This trend in fish biomass continued to support the spatial heterogeneity
theory noted by Siler et al. (196) for fish biomass in Lake Norman. They reported that fish
biomass was higher uptake than downlake due to higher levels of nutrients and productivity
in the uptake area compared to the downlake area. Additional support for spatial
heterogeneity is evidenced by higher concentrations of chlorophyll a, greater phytopla kton
standing drops, and elevated epilimnetic zooplankton densities in uptake compared to
downtake regions of Lake Norman (Chapters 3 and 4).
Spotted bass in Lake Norman were thought to have originated from angler introductions and
were first collected here in the 2001 spring electrofishing samples. They have generally
increased in abundance (both numbers and biomass) in all sampled areas since 2001 (Figure
5-3) and are presently most abundant in the MNS area; intermediate in the MSS area, and
least abundant in the REF area. In 2005, 'small spotted bass (< 150 mm) was the dominant
size range collected in all areas sampled (Figure 5-4) and their growth rate was generally
similar among all areas sampled (Table 5-3). Spotted bass W, ranged from 66 for fish'100-
149 mm long in the MNS area to 93 for fish 300- 49 mm long in the REF area (Figure 5-5).
Values of W, for most sues of spotted bass collected. in 2005 appeared similar among the
three sampling areas.
The numbers of largemouth bass collected in 2005 were similar in the MSS and REF areas,
and considerably higher than noted in the MNS area (Table -2). Largemouth bass biomass
was, however, highest in the MSS area, intermediate in the REF area, and lowest in the MNS
area. Overall, largemouth bass abundance (numbers and biomass) in 2005 was generally
similar to that noted over the past several years (Figure 5-6), with one exception. A decline
was noted in the numbers of largemouth bass collected at the MSS area from 2004 to 2005.
5-4

Since about 2000, larger fish (e.g., 300-49, 350-39, and 400-449 mm size groups) have
dominated the largemouth bass population in all three sampling areas (Duke Power 2001
2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005), and this continued in 2005 (Figure 5-4). The low abundance of
small or young fish in the population appears to indicate that largemouth bass recruitment
continues to be a concern in 2005. While displacement of largemouth bass by spotted bass in
the lower lake is apparent, it remains difficult to determine if largemouth bass recruitment
has been impacted solely by spotted bass or in combination with introduced alewives and
white perch.
It is also difficult to determine if these introductions have affected growth or Wr for
largemouth bass in 2005. In 2005, age I largemouth bass growth was highest for fish in the
MSS area and somewhat lower but similar in the REF and MNS areas (Table 5-3). At age 2
mean lengths for fish in the MNS area were much higher than noted in the MSS and REF
areas, but these differences were not as noticeable in older fish. Mean lengths for age l
largemoutb bass from the MSS and REF areas in 2005 were similar to previously collected
data from these areas (Table 5-4). However, mean length for age l fish from the MNS area
was the lowest noted since 1971-78 (Table 5-4). Mean lengths for ages 2, 3, and
largemouth bass collected from the MSS and REF areas in 2005 were similar to that noted in
2003-2004, but were somewhat higher than noted in these areas in 1974-78 and 199-94
Mean lengths for age 2, 3, and 4 fish from the MNS area were higher than noted:' here
previously. Largemouth bass Wr was similar for all sizes of fish in all sampled areas in 2005
(Figure 5-5) and similar to that noted in 2003 and 2004 (Duke Power 2004a, 2005).
Summer Striped Bass Mortality Surveys
In 2005, a total of 20 dead striped bass were collected during the July -August surveys (Table
5-5). This total was less than I% of the 2,610 dead striped bass that were collected during
this same period in 2004 (Duke Power 200), but similar to that noted in 2003 when 10 fish
were reported (Duke Power 2004). Most of the dead fish in 2005 were collected in Zone I
from August 3 to August 16.
Striped Bass and. Catfish) NettinSurve
In December 2005, 224 striped bass were collected for age, growth, and Wr determinations
and 131 of these fish were aged by sectioned otolith. Mean total length at age was 518 542

549, 526, 564, 613, and 533 mm at ages 1-8, respectively (Figure 5-7). Growth of Lake
Norman striped bass was slow after age 3 as noted previously (Duke Power 2004a, 2005) and
W,for the aged fish was generally highest for young fish and lowest for older fish. Overall,
mean Wr for all fish (224) in 2005 was 84 and was slightly higher than the 81 noted in 2003
(Duke Power 2004a) and the 79 in 2004 (Duke lower 2005).
In addition to the collection of striped bass in the December gillnetting, 34 catfishwere
collected. Blue catfish (1) dominated the catch, followed by flathead catfish (9) and
channel catfish (6). These data were shared with the NCWRC.
Cr ie Tra-D-net Study
Duke Energy personnel collected 162 crappies (2 white and 160 black crappies) in 59 trap -net
sets from Lake Norman in 2005. These data and the collected otoliths were delivered to the
NCWRC for summarization
Fall Hvdroacoustics and Purse Seine
Average forage fish densities in the six zones of Lake Norman ranged from 367 to 7,584
fish/ha in September 2005 (Table 5-6). Forage fish densities were highest in Zone 5
intermediate in Zones 1, 2, 3 and 4, and lowest in Zone 6. The limited amount of available
habitat for sampling (i.e., shallow water where physical damage to the transducers by
collision with the bottom is a high probability) in Zone 6 complicated any discussion of fish
densities in this uppermost zone of Lake Norman. The lakewde population estimate in
September 2005, approximately 73.2 million fish, was comparable to values measured from
1997 to 2003 when estimates ranged from 64.3 to 9L3 million fish (Figure 5-8). The 2005
population estimate was well above the low estimate of 47.1 million recorded in 2004. No
trends have been noted in zonal or lakewide population pelagic fish estimates in Lake
Norman from 1997 through 2005.
Purse seine sampling in 2005 indicated that the forage fish sampled by hydroacoustics were
98.1%o threadfin shad and 1.9% alewives (Table 5-7). No gizzard shad were collected in the
purse seine samples. Threadfin shad lengths primarily ranged from 31 to 70 mm while
alewife lengths averaged approximately 75 mm (Figure 5-9). The modal length of threadfin
shad was between 36 and 45 mm in 2005. Results from purse seining have undergone
dramatic shift in recent years (Table 5-7). From 1993 through 1999, purse seine samples
5-6

were dominated by small threadfin shad (typically <- 55 rum long). Alewives were first
detected in 1999 in low numbers and increased to approximately 25% of the open water
forage fish community in 2002, and their presence was accompanied by a concurrent wider
size range of individuals with a lamer modal length class. The percent contribution from
alewives has declined since 2002 and was approximately 1.9% of the forage fish catch in
2005. The decline in the percent composition of alewife has been accompanied by a
progressively narrower size range of fish and a decline in modal length class of forage
individuals towards value measured prior to the alewife invasion.
FUTURE STUDIES
The only suggested change to the fish portion of the .Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring
Program is to implement a cooperative fall electrofishi g program with the NCW 2C to
sample young -of -year black bass.
SUMMARY
In accordance with the Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program for the NPDLS
permit for MNS; specific fish monitoring programs were coordinated with the NCRC and
continued during 2005. Spring electrofishing indicated that 16 to 21 species of fish and 2
hybrid complexes comprised fish populations in the 3 sampling areas, and numbers and
biomass of fish in 2005 were generally similar to those noted since 1993. Declines in
largemouth bass numbers, which were first observed in 2000, appear to be an exception.
During summer 2005, low numbers (20) of striped bass mortalities were observed; this was a
significant decline from the 2,610 fish observed during summer 2004 but similar to historical
observations. Mean WT for Lake Norman striped bass collected in November and December
2005 was 84 and slightly higher compared to values measured in 2003 and 2004. Trapnetting
indicated little change in the crappie populations in Lake Norman in 2003-2004.
Hydroacoustic sampling resulted in a prey fish population estimate comparable to values
measured from 1997 to 2003. Purse seine sampling has continued to show declining
percentages of alewife to the forage fish species composition and a shift in threadfin shad
lengths back to the smaller size ranges observed prior to the alewife invasion.
5-7

Table -1. Common and scientific names offish collected in Lake Norman, 2005.
Common name
Scientific name
Alewife
Al sa pseudoharengus
Grizzard shad
Dorosoma cepedianum
Threadfin shad
Dorosoina petenense
Creenfin shiner
_ Cvprinellci chloristia
hitefin shiner
Cypa inella nivea
Common carp
Cyprinus carpio
Spottail shiner
Notropis hudsonius
Quillback
Carpiodes cyprinus
White catfish
Amehirus catits
Blue catfish
ktalurus furcatus
Channel catfish
lctalurus punctatus
Flathead catfish
Pylodictis olivaris
White perch
Morone americana
Striped bass
Morone saxatilis
Redbreast sunfish
Lepomis auritus
Green sunfish
Lepomis cyanellus
Warmouth
Lepomis gulosus
Bluegill
Lepomis macroch rus
Redear sunfish
Lepomis mierolophus
Hybrid sunfish
Lepomis hybrid
Spotted bass
Micropterus punctulatus
Largemouth bass
Micropterus salmo des
Hybrid black bass
Micropterus hybrid
White crappie
Poinoxis annularis
Black crappie
Pvrnoxis nigromaculatus
Yellow perch
Perea.flavesce rs
5-S

Table 5-. Numbers and biomass of fish collected from electrofishin ten 300-m transacts
near Marshall Steam Station (MSS),
the reference (REF) area between MSS and
McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS), and,MNS in Lake
Norman,
2005.
IVISS
REF
3YINS
Taxa
N
Kg
N
Kg
N
Kg
Alewife
4
0.032
368
3.051
Gizzard shad
9
0:043
9
4.247
15
2.603
Threadfin shad
127
0.296
328
1.082
465
1.506
Greenfin shiner
7
0.055
1
0.003
9
0.025 ;
Whitefin shiner
92
0.503
116
0.503
12
0.101
Common carp
7
18.741
4
8.527
3
7205
Spottail shiner
30
0.81
57
0.491
10
0.101
Quillback
1
1.80
2
3.279
White catfish
1
0.316
Channel catfish
5
1.732
7
4.764
1
0.51
Flathead catfish
1
0.076
3
0.267
2
0.076
White perch
6
0.34
17
0.798
46
1„651
Striped bass
1
1.032
Redbreast sunfish
13
4.178
344
6.97
343
5.322
Green sunfish
2
0.036
Warmouth
41
0.321
59
0.391
46
0.300
Bluegill
925
9.889
1,024
11.070
800
7.153
Redar sunfish
133
13.528
188
8.516
111
3.121
Hybrid sunfish
75
2.373
93
2.712
_82
1`.763
Spotted bass
58
8.577
39
6.002
95
11.523
Largemouth bass
90
47.933
92
35.450
33
21.599
Hybrid black bass
1
0.018
1
0.910
Black crappie
8
2.724
8
3.774
Yellow perch
2
0.028
1
0.029
Total
1,814
115.716
2,397
98.892
2,442
68.541
5-

Table 5-3. Mean total lengths (mm) of age for spotted bass (SPB) and largemouth bass
(LMB) collected from electrofishing
ten transects near
Marshall Steam Station
(MSS), the reference (REF) area between MSS and.
McGuire Nuclear Station
(MNS), and MNS in Lake Norman, March 2005.
Age
Taa Location 1 2
3 4 5 6
7
8 9
SPB MSS 128 322
352
REF 128 325
378
MNS 118 317
376 442
LMB MSS 190 314
38 36 395 398
447
REF 139 307
357 386 392 430
461
MNS 136 342
359 429 437 419
414
447
Table 5-4. Mean total length (mm)
at age for largemouth bass collected
from an area near
Marshall Stearn Station
(MSS), the reference (REF)
area between MSSand
:McGuire Nuclear Station
(MNS), and MNS in Lake Norman.
Data from 1971-
78, 1993-94, and 003-04 are from Siler (1981), :Duke
Power
unpublished data,
and Duke Power (2004a,
2005), respectively.
Age
Location and year 1
2
3
MSS 1974-78 170
266
310
377
MSS 1993 170
277
314
338
MSS 1994 164
273
308
332
MSS 2003 216
317
39
378
MSS 204 176
_309
355
367
MSS 2005 190
314
358
36
REF1993 157
242
279
330
REF 1994 155
279
326
344
REF 2003 139
296
358
30
REF 2004 143
288
364
415
REF 2005 139
307
357
386
MNS 1971-78 134
257
325
36
MNS 193 176
256
316
34
MNS 1994 169
256
298
37
MNS 2003 17
315
248
39
MNS 204 170
276
335
370
MNS 2005 136
342
359
42
5-10

Table 5-5. :Dead or dying striped bass observed in Lake Norman, July -August 2005.
Date
Number
Zone
Range ►n total length mm
6-Jul
1
1
59
1
2
675
-14-Jul
1
1
502
0-Jul
1
4
402
21-Jul
1
1
540
29-Jul
1
3
602
-Aug
5
1
536-621
11-Aug
3
1
484-559
1
3
366
4
562-635
16-Aug
3
1
51-519
5-11

Table 5-6. Lake Norman forage fish densities (Number/hectare) and population estimates
from hydroacoustic surveys in September 2005.
Zane
Density (N/ha)
Population
Estimate
1
5,167
11,785,927
2
5,783
17,823,784
3
5,955
20,577,622
4
5,540
6,819,740
5
7,584
15,971,904
6
367
175,426
Lakewide total
73,154,403
95% LCL
68,207,036
95% UCL
78,101,769
Table 5-7.
Numbers (N), species composition, and
modal lengths (mm) of threadfin shad
collected in purse
seine samples from Lake Norman during late summer or fall,
1993 -- 2005.
Threadfin shad modal
Species Composition
Year
N
Threadfin Gizzard
Alewife
length class (mm)
1993
13063
100.00% 0.00%
0.00%
31-35
1994
1619
99.94% 0.06%
0.00%
36-40
1995
4389
99:95% 0.05%
0.00%
31-35
1996
4465
100.00% 0.00%
0.00%
41-45
1997
6711
99.99%m 0.01%
-0.00%Q
41-45
1998
5723
99.95% 0.05%
0.00%
41-45
1999
5404
99.26% 0.26%
0.48%
36-40
2000
4265
87.40% 0.22%
12.37%
51-55
2001
9652
76.47% 0.01 %0
23.52%Q
56-60
2002
10134
74.96% 0.00%
25.04%
41-45
2003
33660
82.59% 0.14%
17.27%o-
46-50
2004
21158
86.55% 0.24%
13.20%
51-55
2005
23147
98.10% Q.00%
1.90%®
36-45
5-1

Legend
Spring Eleotrofthing Locations
0 F is hHeath Assess mentLoaations
Zone
..,
Purse Seineocations
r�
Zone 5
Marshall
Steam"
Statics
bane
Zane
Zone
S iv'
Zo
0 1 2 3 Miles
Cowans Ford
_
Hydra
McGuire
Nuclear
Station
Figure 5-1. Sampling locations and zones in Lake Norman associated with fishery
assessments.
5-13

00 _
®MSS
000 ■ REF
2500 ® MNS
E
0
2000
CO)
-42 1500
6
z
1000
500 - i
0 - T _ ri
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Years
450
400
I
MSS
350 -! ®REF
❑ MNS
E 300
c 250
Ce)
200 -
a
150
100 -
50
oT_ T. T_ T _
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Years
Figure 5-2. Sampling numbers (a) and biomass ( )cif fish collected from electrofishin ten
300-m transects near Marshall Steam Station (MSS), the reference (REF) area
between MSS and McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS), and MNS in Lake o an,
1993-1997 and 1999-2005.
-14

100 1
90 -I
80
._m
aE MSS
11®
70
REF
C,
0
❑ MNS
ca
50
0
40
a
z
30 -
20
10
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Years
14 ..
12
b
-
® MSS
10
■ REF
E
❑MNS
0
8
cr7
4
6
c
4
2
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Years
Figure 5-3.
Numbers (a) and biomass () of spatted bass collected from electrofrshin ten
300-m transects near Marshall Stearn Station (MSS), the reference (REF); area
between MSS and. McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS), and MNS in Lake Norman,
2001-2005.
5-15

70 1
0 -I
'M
SS
50 _ S
E
c 40
�s
cs 30 _
c�
20
10
<150 150-199 200-249 250-299 300-349 350-399 400-449
Length groups (mm)
35
3® MSS
0
■ REF
® MNS
25
E
Q
15
10
CO
5
0-
<150 150-199 200-249 250-299 300-349 350-399 400-449 >450
Length groups (mm)
Figure 5-4. Size distributions of spotted bass (a) and largemouth bass (b) collected from
electrofish ng ten 300-m transects near Marshall Steam Station (MSS); the
reference (REF) area between MSS and McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS); and
MNS in Lake Norman, 2005.
5-1

100
® MSS
go -
■ REF
I®MNS
80 .J
70
60 -
crs
ca
-
50
za
0
40
c�.
CO
30
20
10 --
0
100-14 150-199 200-249 250-299 300- 49 350-399 400-449
Length groups (mm)
120
b ®MSS
■ REF
100
❑ MNS
80
cn —
�n
ro
c
60
0
E
(D
21
cc
40
20
0
150-19 200-249 250-299 300-349 350-399 400-449 >450
Length groups (mm)
Figure 5-5.
Mean relative weights (Wg) for spotted bass (a) and largemouth bass (b) collected
from electrotishing ten 00-m transacts near Marshall. Steam Station (MSS), the
reference (REF) area between MSS and McGuire Nuclear Station(NMS), and
S in Lake Norman, 2005.
5-17

300
250
®MSS
10 REF
E 200 ©MNS
S
c�
I
150
,—.
0
6 100 -i
i
50 .
0
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Years
70
60 ® MSS
I ■ REF
5©CI MNS j
40a
30
0
20
10 1
0--
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Years
Figure 5- . Numbers () and biomass (b) of largemouth bass collected from electrofishin
ten 300-m transacts near Marshall Steam Station (MSS), the reference (REF)
area between MSS and McGuire Nuclear Station (MNS), and MNS in Lake
Norman, 1993-1997 and 1999-2005.
-1

620 .- __ 90
TLC
88
600 _ --- W r
86
580
84
E
560 s — 82
Lo___
0 8
Ci
4
r 78
ME
itt rsFa Ds Y3 Cf, i
7
#, ...t>
f t
..,,. ,.,.. ,�,,.,„> : ,,r::
500 t- — � —� � � " �. r , � 74
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Age
Figure 5-7. Mean total length and mean relative weight (Wr) for striped bass collected from
Lake Norman, December 2005. Numbers of fish associated with mean length
are inside the bars.
5-19

100
90
80
174
0
60
50
s
40
E
30
0
10
0
2
3
-e-- 4
5
6
i — Lakewide
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Figure 5- . Zone and lakewide population estimates of pelagic fish in Lake Norman.
400 -
350
300
250 ❑ A
E 200:
150
100 .;
50
Figure 5-
__
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 10 130 140 10
Length Group (mm)
9. Size distributions ofthrea fin shad (TICS) and alewives (ALE) collected in purse
seine surveys of Lake Norman, 2005
5-20

LITERATURE CITED
American Public Health Association (APHA). 1995. Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater. 19"' Edition. APHA, Washington, DC.
Anderson, R. A., and R. M. Neumann. 1996. Length, weight, and associated structural
indices. Pages 447-482 in B. R. Murphy and D. W. Willis, (ed.). Fisheries
Techniques. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
Brandt, S. B. 1996. Acoustic assessment of fish abundance and distribution. Pages 385-42
in B. R. Murphy and D. W. Willis, (ed.). Fisheries Techniques. American Fisheries
Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
Cole, T. M. and H. H. Hannan. 1985. Dissolved Oxygen Dynamics. in Reservoir
Lininology: Ecological Perspectives. K. W. Thornton, B. L. Kimmel and F. E. Payne
(ed.). John Wiley & Sons. New Fork.
Courant, C. C. 1985. Striped Bass, Temperature, and Dissolved Oxygen: A Speculative
Hypothesis for Environmental Risk. Trans. Amer. Fisher. Soc.. 114:31 _h1.
Derwort, J. E, 1982. Periphyton, p 279-314. in J. E. Hogan and W. D. Adair (eds.). Labe
Norman Summary, vol. 11. Dike Power Company, Technical Report DUKE PWR/82-
02. Duke Power Company, Production Support Department, Production
Environmental Services, Huntersville, NC.
Devries, D. R., and R. V. Frie. 1996. Determination of age and growth. Pages 483-512 in
Duke Energy Company. in B. R. Murphy and D. W. Willis, (eds.). Fisheries
Techniques. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland,
Duke Power. 1997. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program. 1996 Summary.
Duke Energy Corporation, Charlotte, NC,
Duke Power. 1998. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring; Program: 1997 Summary.
Duke Energy Corporation, Charlotte, NC.
Duke Power. 1999. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 1998 Summary.
Duke Energy Corporation, Charlotte, NC.
Duke Power. 2000. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 1999 Summary.
Duke Energy Corporation, Charlotte, NC.
Duke Power. 2001. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 2000 Summary. Duke
Energy Corporation, Charlotte, NC.
L-1

Duke
Power. 2002. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 2001 Summary.
Duke Energy Corporation, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power. 2003. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 2002 Summary.
Duke Energy Corporation, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power. 2004a. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program.. 2003 Summary.
Duke Energy Corporation, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power. 2004b. McGuire Nuclear Station. Updated Final Safety Analysis Report.
Duke Energy Corporation, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power. 2005. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program. 2004 Summary.
Duke Energy Corporation, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power Company. 1976. McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Environmental
Report, Operating License Stage. 6th rev. Volume 2. Duke Power Company,
Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power Company. 1985. McGuire Nuclear Station, 16(a) Demonstration. Duke
Power Company, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power Company. 1987. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 1986
Summary. Duke Power Company, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power Company. 1988. bake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 1987
Summary. Duke Power Company, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power Company. 1989. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 1988
Summary. Duke Power Company, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power Company. 1990..Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program. 1989
Summary. Duke Power Company, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power Company. 1991. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 190
Summary. Duke Power Company, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power Company. 1992. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 1991'
Summary. Duke Power Company, Charlotte, NC.
Duke
Power Company. 1993, Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 1992
Summary. Duke Power Company, Charlotte, NC.
Dube
Power Company. 1994. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program. 199
Summary. Duke Power Company, Charlotte, NC.
L-

Duke Power Company. 1995. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 1994 `
Summary. Duke Power Company, Charlotte, NC.
Duke Power Company. 1996, Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 1995
Summary. Duke Power Company, Charlotte, NC.
Duke Power Company. 1997. Lake Norman Maintenance Monitoring Program: 1996
Summary. Duke Power Company; Charlotte, NC.
Ford, D. E. 1985. Reservoir Transport Processes. in Reservoir Linology: Ecological
Perspectives. K. W. Thornton, B. L. Kimmel and F. E. Payne (eds.). John Wiley &
Sons. New York.
Hamme, R. E. 1982. Zooplankton, in J. E. Hogan and W. D. Adair (eds.). Lake Norman
Summary, Technical Report DLIKEPWR/-02. p. 3-353, Duke Power Company,
Charlotte, NC.
Hannan, H. H., 1. R. Fuchs and D. C. Whittenburg. 1979 Spatial and Temporal Patterns o
Temperature; Alkalinity, Dissolved Oxygen and Conductivity in an Oligo-
mesotrophic, Deep -storage Reservoir in Central Texas. Hydroiologia 51 (30), 209-
21.
Hayes, D. B., C. P. Ferrier, and W. W. Taylor. 1996. Active fish capture methods. Pages
19 -220 in B. R. Murphy and D. W. Willis, (eds.). Fisheries Techniques. American
Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
Higgins, J. M. and B. R. Kim. 1981. Phosphorus Retention Models for Tennessee Valley
Authority Reservoirs. Water Resources Research, 17.571-576.
Higgins, J. M., W. L. Poppe, and M. L. Iwanski.. 1950. Eutrophication Analysis of TVA
Reservoirs. in Surface Water Impoundments. H. G. Stefan, (ed.. Am. Soc. Civ.
Eng., NY, pages 412-423.
Hutchinson, G. E. 1938. Chemical Stratification and Lake Morphometry. Proc. Nat. Acad.
Sci., 24:63-69.
Hutchinson, G. E. 1957. A Treatise on Linm logy, Volume I Geography, Physics and
Chemistry. John. Wiley & Sons, Inc. NY.
Hutchinson, G. E. 1967. A Treatise on Limnology. Vol. 11. Introduction to Lake Biology
and the Limnopla kton. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. NY, 1115 pp.
Hydrolab Corporation. 1986. Instructions for Operating the Hydrolab Surveyor Datas nde.
Austin, T. 105p.
L-

Lee, R. E. 1989. Phycology (2nd. Ed.). Cambridge University Press. 40 West 20th. St., New
York, NY.
Matthews, W. J., L. G. Hill, D. R. Edds; and F. P. Gelwick. 1985. Influence of Water
Quality and Season on Habitat use by Striped Bass in a Large southwestern Reservoir.
Trans. Amer. Fisher. Soc 1.18. 243-250.
Menhinick, E. F. and L. D. Jensen. 1974. Plankton populations, p. 120-1 8 in L. D. Jensen
(ed.). Environmental responses to thennal discharges from Marshall Steam Station,
Lake Nonnan, NC. Electric Power Research Institute, Cooling Water Discharge
Project (RP-49) Report No. 11. Johns Hopkins Univ., Baltimore MD.
Mortimer, C. H. '1941. The Exchange of Dissolved Substances Between Mud and Water in
Lakes (Parts I and 11). J. Ecol., 29.280-329.
Nelson, C., and L. Dorsey. 2005. Population characteristics of black crappies in Lake
Norman 2004. Survey Report, Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Project F-23-S. North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Environment, and Natural Resources, Division of
Environmental Management (DEM), Water Quality Section. 1991. 1990.Algal Bloom
Report:
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 2004. _ Red Book.
Surface Waters and Wetland Standards. NC Administrative Code: 15a NCAC
028.0100; .0200 and .0300. August 1, 2004. t33pp.
Nygaard, G. 1949. Hydrological studies of some Danish ponds and lakes 11. K. danske
Vilensk. Selsk. Biol. Skr.
Petts G. E., 1984. Impounded Rivers. Perspectives For Ecological Management. John
Wiley and Sons. New York. 326pp.
Rodriguez, M. S. 1982. Phytoplankton, p. 154-260 in J. E. Hogan and W. D. Adair (eds.).
Lake Norman summary. Technical Report DUK:EPWR/82-02 Duke Power Company,
Charlotte, NC.
Siler, J. R. 1981. Growth of largemouth bass, bluegill, and yellow perch in Lake Norman,
North Carolina --A summary of 1975 through 1979 collections. Research Report
PES/81-6. Duke Power Company, Huntersville, NC.
L-4

iler, J. R., W. J. Foris, and M. C. Mclnerny. 1.986. Spatial heterogeneity in fish parameters
within a reservoir. Pages 122-136 in G. E. Mall and M. J. Van Den Avyle, (eds.).
Reservoir Fisheries Management: Strategies for the 80's. Reservoir Committee;
Southern Division American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
Soballe, D. M., B. L. Kimmel, R.H. Kennedy, and R. F. Gaugish. 1992. Reservoirs. in
Biodiversity of the Southeastern United States Aquatic Communities. John Wiley 8&
Sons, Inc. New York.
Stumm, W. and J. J. Morgan. 1970. Aquatic Chemistry: An Introduction Emphasizing
Chemical Equilibria in Natural Waters. Wiley and Sans, Inc. New York, NY. Sapp,
Thornton, K. W., B. L. Kimmel, F. E. Payne. 1990. Reservoir Linmology. John Wiley and
Sons, Inc. New York., NY.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1983. Methods for the Chemical Analysis
of Water and Wastes. Environmental Monitoring and Support Lab. Office of
Research and Development, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Wetzel, R. G. 1975. L.imnology. W. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
743pp.
L-5