NC0024406_2002 Dan River Summary Report_20031223

PDuke
Powere
A Duke Energy Company
December 23, 2003
3 s. Coleen Sullins, Deputy Director
ivision of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Subject: Belews Creek Steam Station
NPDES Permit No. NCO024406
2002 Dan River Summary Report
Dear Ms. Sullins:
FOSSIL -HYDRO GENERATION
Duke Power
EC11E / 526 South Church Street
Charlotte, NC 28202-1802
4,391r, Db
DEC P 9 2(103
DIV. OF WATER QUALITY
DIRECTORS OFFICE
Enclosed are three copies of the 2002 Dan River summary report, as required by Part I, A.(3.) SPECIAL
CONDITIONS of NPDES permit No. NCO024406 for Belews Creek Steam Station in Stokes County,
North Carolina. The selenium concentration in fish muscle tissue remained well below the 5 µg/g
concentration considered by NCDENR as the maximum safe concentration for human consumption. This
annual .update continues to indicate no detrimental impact to the aquatic. biota in the Dan River from the
discharge of Belews Creek Steam Station ash basin that was initiated in November, 1985.
Following your staff's review of this report, I anticipate scheduling a meeting with members of the
NPDES Unit and the Environmental Sciences Branch of NCDENR in May 2004 to present the
preliminary results of the 2003 monitoring data and discuss potential changes in the monitoring program.
Topics to discuss include a recommendation to discontinue analysis of catfish muscle tissue and the
variability of trace metal concentrations in the macroinvertebrate monitoring data.
If you have any questions concerning this report, please contact me at (980)-373-5710 or Mike Ruhe
(980)-373-3231.
Sincerely,
A�'We &t4'u-'
Ronald E. Lewis, Scientist
Environmental Support
Environmental, Health and Safety
attachments
z
xc: Mr. Bryn Tracy — NCDENR Division of Water Quality - Environmental Sciences Branch
1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
www.duke-energy.com

BELEWS CREEK STEAM STATION
2002 DAN RIVER SUMMARY
DUKE POWER
A DUKE ENERGY COMPANY
DECEMBER 2003
11

•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1-1
CHAPTER 2 - FISH 2-1
MATERIALS AND METHODS 2-1
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 2-1
LITERATURE CITED = 2-4
CHAPTER 3 - MACROINVERTEBRATES 3-1
MATERIALS AND METHODS 3-1
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3-1
LITERATURE CITED 3-6
CHAPTER 4 - WATER AND SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY 4-1
MATERIALS AND METHODS 4-1
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-2
LITERATURE CITED .4-8 '
APPENDIX A - Taxonomic composition of Dan River macroinvertebrates A-1'°
APPENDIX B -Concentration of elements in Dan River macroinvertebrates

• EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As required per the NPDES permit NC0024406 for Belews Creek Steam Station (BCSS),
environmental monitoring upstream and downstream of the BCSS ash basin discharge was
continued in 2002. These data indicate that the ash basin discharge has no significant impact
on biota and water chemistry of the Dan River since discharge from the BCSS ash basin to
the Dan River was initiated in November of 1985.
FISH
Selenium concentrations in muscle tissue of fish collected from the Dan River in 2002
continued to remain well below the 5 µg/g concentration considered by NCDENR as the
maximum safe concentration for human consumption, ranging from 0.103 to 1.520 gg/g,.
Mean selenium concentrations at all locations were generally highest in sunfish, intermediate
in suckers,, and lowest in catfish. Overall, mean selenium concentrations in suckers, catfish,
and sunfish in 2002 have decreased since 2001. Despite the continued drought and record
low flows measured during 2002, the reduced selenium loading from the BCSS ash basin has
is
apparently begun to be reflected in fish tissue concentrations. Since suckers and sunfish have
historically been the only fish collected in the Dan River with selenium concentrations
generally above the range of normal background levels (0.2-0.6 µg/g) for fish muscle tissue,
excluding collection of catfish from the Dan River fish contaminant monitoring program is
recommended.
i
Zinc concentrations in muscle tissue of fish collected from the Dan River in 2002 ranged
from 3.970 to 10.700 µg/g. Mean zinc concentrations at all locations were generally highest
in suckers, intermediate in sunfish, and lowest in catfish (though the differences were not
large). In general, zinc concentrations in fish muscle tissue collected from the Dan River do
not appear problematic. Observed concentrations continue to be lower than concentrations
(16-82 µg/g, wet weight) reported for several taxa of omnivorous freshwater fish from
uncontaminated areas of the United States.
1

0 MACROINVERTEBRATES
Macroinvertebrate samples collected in 2002 yielded 42 and 30 total taxa, and 16 and 13 EPT
taxa, respectively, at each location upstream and downstream of the BCSS ash basin
discharge. This was low relative to the number collected in previous years which may be
attributed to the extremely low flows throughout the summer and two periods of elevated
flow during the week prior to sampling in 2002. Comparable to the bioclassifications
observed since 1995, macroinvertebrate communities water quality bioclassifications were in
the Good to Good -fair range, respectively, upstream and downstream of the BCSS ash basin
discharge in 2002.
The analysis of selenium bioconcentration data indicated significant location/year
interactions for all the taxa analyzed due to the different year-to-year trends at both locations.
In 2002, selenium concentrations in macroinvertebrates continued to decline downstream of
the BCSS ash basin discharge following the elevated level reported in 1999. The mean
selenium concentration observed in taxa collected downstream of the BCSS ash basin
discharge was approximately equal to that of all taxa collected in 1999 from the Anderson
• Creek reference site samples (1.04 µg/g). Selenium concentrations cited by some researchers
as a level of concern in macroinveterbrates were within the historical range observed at the
Dan River and Anderson Creek reference sites during this study. Concentrations of other
trace elements observed in macroinvertebrate taxa collected from the Dan River were
generally well below reported values considered to be of harm to aquatic macroinvertebrate
communities.
WATER AND SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY
6
Dan River water quality in 2002 remained comparable to that of other Piedmont streams in
the Duke Power service area, as well as similar to historical data. While most water
chemistry indicators and analyte concentrations have remained comparable to those measured
during the baseline period (January 1984 to October 1985), calcium and total alkalinity
concentrations have shown a gradual increasing trend over this reach of the upper Dan River.
During 2002 calcium and alkalinity concentrations remained similar to the previous two
years.
Both storm events and inputs from the Smith River at Eden, NC continue to substantially
impact water quality of the Dan River on a temporal basis. Elevated Smith River
ii

• conductivity, alkalinity, chloride and sodium concentrations continued to affect Dan River
water quality downstream of the confluence of the two rivers.
Dan River water quality immediately upstream (Location A) and downstream (Location B) of
the BCSS ash basin NPDES outfall was similar in 2002. Of all analytes, only slight increases
in conductivity, magnesium and sulfate were observed at the downstream location (B)
relative to the upstream location (A).
Aqueous concentrations of arsenic and selenium remained primarily below the laboratory
reporting limit during 2002. For both of these trace elements, as well as concentrations of
cadmium, lead and zinc, applicable NCDENR water quality standards or action levels were
never exceeded in the quarterly samplings. Copper concentrations ranged from < 2.0 to 9.2
µg/L, exceeding the NCDENR action level in 25% of the 2002 Dan and Smith River samples
(31% of Dan River samples alone). Most elevated copper, zinc and lead concentrations
appeared to be related to increased total suspended solids concentrations.
Selenium mass loading from the BCSS ash basin NPDES permitted outfall returned to lower,
• more typical levels in 2002, following elevated loading due to increased effluent
concentrations during 2000-2001. Various operational issues at BCSS that had lead to the
increased flyash sluicing responsible for the 2000-2001 elevated effluent selenium
concentrations were corrected by mid -2001. The loading rate estimated for 2002, 214 g
Se/day, represented only 85% of the long term (November 1985-2001) average loading rate.
•
Concentrations of arsenic and selenium in Dan River sediment surficial fines (< 63 µm
fraction) in 2002 were representative of historical data. No discernable difference in
sediment trace element concentrations exists for 2002, or in the previous data, between the
sample locations upstream and downstream of the BCSS ash basin outfall.
Water quality and sediment chemistry analyses, combined with biological surveys (Chapters
2 and 3) conducted under this monitoring program since its inception, have proven their
utility in monitoring the effects of the BCSS ash basin discharge to the Dan River. The 2002
receiving water quality and sediment data continues to support the conclusion that the BCSS
ash pond discharge to the Dan River is not having an adverse impact on the receiving stream.
iii

• CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
As required per the NPDES permit NCO024406 for Belews Creek Steam Station (BCSS),
environmental monitoring upstream and downstream of the BCSS ash basin discharge was
continued in 2002. The purpose of this monitoring program is to assess whether the ash
basin discharge has an effect on selected biota and water chemistry of the Dan River.
Discharge from the BCSS ash basin to the Dan River began in November 1985. This action
was initiated as a result of reproductive failure of fish in Belews Lake due to bioaccumulation
of selenium in the lake's biota. Monitoring locations are noted in Figure 1-1. A description
of monitoring methods and frequency, as well as discussion of results follows in each
chapter.
DAN RIVER FLOW CHARACTERIZATION
• The northwestern Piedmont of North Carolina, including the upper Roanoke Basin, continued
to experience a severe hydrological drought through the first three quarters of 2002 (Figures
1-2 and 1-3). During January through September, Dan River monthly median flows as
monitored at the Wentworth, NC USGS station were less than or equal to the lowest fifth
percentile for the period of record, extending back to 1940. Median flows for June and
August 2002 were below the lowest first percentile of monthly median flows for this site,
with the August median of 98 cfs achieving the lowest monthly median flow over the entire
63 -year gauge record. These minimal Dan River flows followed an ongoing hydrologic
deficit attributable to below -normal precipitation patterns in the region extending back to
mid-1998. Spurred by September Gulf Coast tropical storms and the onset of a more typical
winter precipitation pattern, above average precipitation occurred regionally during the last
four months of 2002 (North Carolina Division of Water Resources 2003), bringing partial
drought relief and restoring Dan River flows closer to historical averages. The relationship of
2002 water quality and biological sampling events to the hydrograph is discussed in more
detail in subsequent chapters.
•
1-1

• LITERATURE CITED
North Carolina Division of Water Resources. 2003. 'End of Year 2002 - Status Briefing on
Water Supply in North Carolina", briefing January 6, 2003 by the Drought Monitoring
Council of the North Carolina Division of Water Resources. Presented on the
National Climatic Data Center web site (www.ncdc.noaa.gov).
•
1�1
1-2

e • •
Virginia
North Carolina
N
IRS
Y4 ' N.
C
0
(!1 U
Mayos
Madis� n
f
B
9^�
A o5
BCSS
Ash Basin Belews
BCS Lake
Stokes
-----------------------
--
Forsyth
z0,
-----------------------------------------------
IV c 71�
E plc 700
DRSS
GN
a 2 0 2 4 Miles
ao
2 0 2 4 6 8 Kilometers
----------- Rockingham
-------------------------
-------------------
Figure 1-1. Monitoring locations in Dan River above and below the ash basin discharge of Belews Creek Steam Station, North
Carolina.
w

•
0
0
100,000
10,000
9 1,000
100
10
Figure 1-2. Hydrograph of daily average flows for the Dan River near Wentworth, NC
(USGS Station 02071000) from 1984-2002. For the Dan River, this station
represents an approximate midpoint of the water quality sample locations
described in this report.
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Figure 1-3. Monthly median flows for the Dari River near Wentworth, NC (USGS Station
02071000) from 1984-2002.
1-4

•
CHAPTER 2
FISH
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Selenium and zinc concentrations were measured in skeletal muscle tissue of fish collected
from the Dan River in July and August 2002. Fish were collected by electrofishing at
locations upstream (A) and downstream (B and E) of the Belews Creek Steam Station
(BCSS) ash basin discharge (Figure 1-1). Collected fish were placed in labeled polyethylene
bags and remained on ice until returned to the lab. Once at the lab, they were frozen until
processed.
Sample processing in 2002 was similar to that conducted previously. Three replicate samples
were analyzed, consisting of three fish each of golden redhorse (Moxostoma erythrurum),
snail bullheads (Amdurus brunneus), and redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus). The three fish
comprising each composite were selected such that the total length of the shortest fish was
�35% of the length of the longest fish. Muscle tissue was dissected from each fish within
each replicate and composited in an acid -washed polyethylene vial. Selenium and zinc
concentrations (µg/g or ppm, wet weight) were determined by neutron activation analysis at
the North Carolina State University Nuclear Services Lab in Raleigh. Graphical methods
were used to examine the temporal and spatial trends of the selenium and zinc concentrations'
in skeletal muscle.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Drought conditions throughout the Dan River basin (Figure 1-3) resulted in low water levels
but did not impede the collection of fish for trace element analysis. Selenium concentrations
in muscle tissue of fish collected from the Dan River in 2002 ranged from 0.103 to 1.520
µg/g and varied somewhat by taxa and location (Table 2-1). Mean selenium concentrations
at all locations were generally highest in sunfish, intermediate in suckers, and lowest in
catfish. In 2002, mean selenium concentrations in suckers were highest at Location B,
intermediate at Location E, and lowest at Location A (Figure 2-1). While selenium
concentrations in suckers from Locations A and E have remained fairly constant since 1984,
those at Location B rose dramatically in 2000 and 2001. Elevated selenium loading from the
BCSS ash basin in 2000 and 2001 (see Chapter 4), in combination with a prolonged drought,
2-1

resulted in elevated selenium concentrations in suckers at Location B. Selenium
concentrations in suckers at Location B declined in 2002 as selenium loading rates returned
to levels similar to those measured prior to 2000.
In 2002, mean selenium concentrations in catfish were highest at Location B, intermediate at
Location E, and lowest at Location A (Figure 2-2). Mean selenium concentrations in.catfish
at Location B declined relative to the previous year and increased slightly at Locations A and
E. Catfish muscle selenium concentrations at Locations A and E have been fairly constant
since 1984 while exhibiting only a mild increase at Location B throughout the elevated
selenium loading episode noted during 2000 and 2001.
Sunfish mean selenium concentrations in 2002 were variable among locations; the highest
concentration was noted at Location B, the lowest at Location A, and an intermediate value
was measured at Location E (Figure 2-3). Mean selenium concentrations decreased at all
locations in 2002 relative to 2001. Mean selenium concentrations at Location A have
remained fairly constant since the inception of this monitoring program, while those at
Locations B and E have been higher and subject to greater fluctuation.
Overall, mean selenium concentrations in suckers, catfish, and sunfish in 2002 have
decreased since 2001. Despite the continued drought and record low flows measured during
2002 (i.e., flows available for dilution of the ash basin effluent), the reduced selenium
loading from the BCSS ash basin has apparently begun to be reflected in fish tissue
concentrations. Suckers and sunfish at Location B are the only fish collected in the Dan
River where selenium concentrations are generally above the range of normal background
levels (0.2-0.6 gg/g) for fish muscle tissue (Sorensen 1991). All selenium concentrations
noted in the Dan River continue to be well below the 5 µg/g concentration considered by
NCDENR as the maximum safe concentration for human consumption.
Zinc concentrations in muscle tissue of fish collected from the Dan River in 2002 ranged
from 3.970 to 10.700 µg/g (Table 2-1). Mean zinc concentrations at all locations were
generally highest in suckers, intermediate in sunfish, and lowest in catfish (though the
differences were not large). In general, muscle zinc concentrations increased slightly at all
locations relative to 2001 means (Figures 2-4, 2-5, and 2-6). At this time, it does not appear
that zinc concentrations in fish tissue collected from the Dan River are problematic. Observed
• concentrations measured in 2002 continue to be lower than concentrations (16-82 gg/g, wet
2-2

•
•
weight) reported for several taxa of omnivorous freshwater fish from uncontaminated areas
of the United States (Moore and Ramamoorthy 1984).
PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
Our review of the data assembled to date indicate that collection and analysis of catfish for
trace elements may be providing no appreciable'benefit. Selenium concentrations in catfish
skeletal muscle have typically been the lowest of the three taxa analyzed. Catfish muscle
selenium levels were fairly unresponsive to known increases in selenium loading that
occurred in 2000 and 2001, relative to the responses measured in suckers and sunfish.
Additionally, catfish muscle samples generally demonstrate the lowest concentrations of zinc;
an element that appears to be of minimal accumulation potential in the -Dan River at present.
Based on these observations and the 20 years of data collected (we have already collected and
shipped the 2003 samples and will report that data next year), we request that catfish no
longer constitute a part of the Dan River fish contaminant monitoring program for the BCSS
ash basin discharge.
2-3

® LITERATURE CITED
Moore, J. W. and S. Ramamoorthy. 1984. Heavy metals in natural waters. Springer -Verlag,
New York, New York.
Sorensen, E. M. 1991. Metal poisoning in fish. CRC Press, Incorporated. Boca Raton,
Florida.
0
•
2-4

•
•
•
Table 2-1. Concentrations (gg/g, wet weight) of selenium and zinc in fish muscle tissue
collected from three locations in the Dan River, 2002.
B Golden Redhorse 280, 254, 259
Golden Redhorse 322, 293, 313
Golden Redhorse 366, 351, 357
Snail Bullhead
Snail Bullhead
Snail Bullhead
Redbreast
Redbreast
Redbreast
Mean
187, 192, 188
206, 215, 202
198, 195, 187
Mean
163, 166, 138
126, 121, 122
113, 117, 120
Mean
1.060
1.110
0.943
1.038
0.269
0.353
0.614
0.412
1.430
0.932
1.520
1.294
5.700
7.570
8.550
7.273
3.970
8.600
6.480
6.350
7.930
6.010
6.930
6.957
E Golden Redhorse
328, 302, 293
(Ng/g)
10.700
Location Species
Total length (mm)
Selenium
Zinc
A Golden Redhorse
331, 335, 324
0.242
8.430
Golden Redhorse
317, 308, 307
0.315
6.670
Golden Redhorse
370, 373, 355
0.214
7.940
Snail Bullhead
223, 233, 238
Mean 0.257
7.680
Snail Bullhead
231, 227, 250
0.113
5.730
Snail Bullhead
246, 255, 255
0.139
5.190
Snail Bullhead
190, 202, 204
0.103
4.225
Redbreast
136, 137, 136
Mean 0.118
5.048
Redbreast
126, 122, 113
0.544
8.335
Redbreast
143, 135, 138
0.282
5.400
Redbreast
110, 102, 104
0.335
6.520
Mean 0.387
6.752
B Golden Redhorse 280, 254, 259
Golden Redhorse 322, 293, 313
Golden Redhorse 366, 351, 357
Snail Bullhead
Snail Bullhead
Snail Bullhead
Redbreast
Redbreast
Redbreast
Mean
187, 192, 188
206, 215, 202
198, 195, 187
Mean
163, 166, 138
126, 121, 122
113, 117, 120
Mean
1.060
1.110
0.943
1.038
0.269
0.353
0.614
0.412
1.430
0.932
1.520
1.294
5.700
7.570
8.550
7.273
3.970
8.600
6.480
6.350
7.930
6.010
6.930
6.957
E Golden Redhorse
328, 302, 293
0.585
10.700
Golden Redhorse
309, 310, 310
0.261
5.270
Golden Redhorse
321, 332, 331
0.723
9.040
Mean 0.523
8.337
Snail Bullhead
196, 209, 211
0.190
5.440
Snail Bullhead
223, 233, 238
0.175
4.550
Snail Bullhead
137, 148, 151
0.227
6.870
Mean 0.197
5.620
Redbreast
165, 152, 142
0.531
6.170
Redbreast
136, 137, 136
0.744
7.510
Redbreast
133, 133, 130
0.796
7.650
Mean 0.690
7.110
The NAA value of duplicate samples was set equal to the average of the duplicates.
Measured concentrations reported as N.D. were set equal to the detection limit.
2-5

•
0
•
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
rn
0.8
m
N 0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Year
Figure 2-1. Mean selenium concentration (µg/g, wet weight) in suckers collected from three
locations in the Dan River.
1.6
1.4
1.2
a, 1.0
0.8
m
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 _
Year
Figure 2-2. Mean selenium concentration (µg/g, wet weight) in catfish collected from three
locations in the Dan River.
2-6

•
1.6
1.4
1.2'
1.0
0.8
m
y 0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Year
Figure 2-3. Mean selenium concentration (gg/g, wet weight) in sunfish collected from three
locations in the Dan River.
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
c
N 4.0
—� A
_ B
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Year
Figure 2-4. Mean zinc concentration (gg/g, wet weight) in suckers collected from three
locations in the Dan River.
2-7

•
12.0
10.0 + A
8.0
rn
6.0
C
N
4.0
2.0
0.0
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Year
Figure 2-5. Mean zinc concentration (gg/g, wet weight) in catfish collected from three
locations in the Dan River.
•
12.0
+A
10.0 �_ g
8.0 —k— E
6.0-
4.0-
2.0-
0.0
.04.02.00.0
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Year
Figure 2-6. Mean zinc concentration (gg/g, wet weight) in sunfish collected from three
locations in the Dan River.
0

u
CHAPTER 3
MACROINVERTEBRATES
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Macroinvertebrate sampling was conducted at Locations A and B in the Dan River, upstream
and downstream of the ash basin discharge, respectively, in September 2002 as part of the
continuing monitoring program (Figure 1-1). The bioassessment protocol devised by North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) was used to
compare macroinvertebrate communities at the two locations and assign bioclassifications.
These bioclassifications are based on scores assigned for the number of Ephemeroptera +
Plecoptera + Trichoptera (EPT) taxa, and the scores for the weighted mean biotic index for
all taxa (NCDENR 2001). The biotic index scores for individual taxa are assigned by
NCDENR, and are an indication of the sensitivity to pollution of that taxonomic group.
is
Samples were also collected for neutron activation analysis (NAA) to determine selenium,
zinc, arsenic, and copper concentrations in organisms. The North Carolina State University
Nuclear Services Laboratory performed the NAA on a wet sample weight basis. Similar taxa
were collected from Anderson Creek in Lincoln County, a reference location, in October
1999 and analyzed by NAA to provide some trace element comparisons. Statistical analyses
of these concentrations were completed on results of the late summer/early fall samples for
each year from 1984 through 2002. A two-way ANOVA was applied to analyze the data for
differences among locations and years for selenium and zinc. concentrations. Data were log -
transformed to better meet the assumptions of ANOVA.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Bioassessment
The summer of 2002 marked the fifth year of drought in NC and flows were considerably
below normal in the Dan River (Figures 1-2 and 1-3). Due to the extremely low flows
throughout the summer and two periods of elevated flow during the week prior to sampling,
both locations lacked both good bank samples and leaf pack samples (Table 3-1 and Figure 3-
1). Macroinvertebrate samples collected in 2002 yielded 42 and 30 total taxa, and 16 and 13
3-1

EPT taxa, respectively, at Locations A and B (Table 3-2). The number of total taxa, and EPT
taxa at Locations A and B was low relative to the number collected in previous years (Figure
3-2 and 3-3) which may be attributed to habitat alteration due to the drought and the two
periods of elevated flow prior to sampling. Comparable to the bioclassifications observed
since 1995, Dan River macroinvertebrate communities water quality bioclassifications were
in the "Good" to"Good-Fair" range upstream and downstream of the BCSS ash basin
discharge in 2002 (Figure 3-4).
Location A had a total of 7 species that have not been collected in the past three years while
Location B had one species. These species are highlighted in Appendix Table A-1 and A-2.
Several species that were collected in 1999-2001 were absent in 2002. These species include:
Helichus lithophilus, Ancyronyx variegates, Polypedilum illinoense, Orthocladius
obumbratus„ Cheumatopsyche spp, and Leptoxis spp. all marked with an asterisk in
Appendix Table A-1 and A-2.
Element Concentration in Organisms
and 51 copper values of the total 286 samples Because only 142 arsenic a pp les for each element p
were above the detection limit reported for these elements (Appendix Table B), these data
were not analyzed statistically (where appropriate, detection limits are identified in Appendix
Table B). Detection limits often varied from year to year, or among samples, and are
dependent on a number of factors. These factors include the presence of other elements that
may mask the presence of the element of concern, sediment on or in the specimen, or the
mass of the sample. If the mass of a sample is 'extremely small, as it was for the Diptera
samples in 2000 and 2002, the error related to other factors is magnified resulting in a very
high detection limit for the sample (Scott Lassell, Manager of Nuclear Services, North
Carolina State University, personal communication). Therefore, 2000 and 2002 Diptera
concentrations were not statistically analyzed or graphed due to the high detection limits.
Corbicula were included in the analysis even though they were not collected from upstream
Location A until 1988. (Also note that detection limit values were used for calculating mean
values depicted on graphs, and one value above the detection limit causes a mean to be above
that limit).
• Several factors may affect the concentration of various elements in aquatic
macroinvertebrates and can contribute to variability in the data. Some of these factors are:
3-2

r�
u
gut content (Lobel et al. 1991, Cain et al. 1995); size (Smock 1983a, Farag et 'al. 1998); food
habits (Dixit and Witcomb 1983, Smock 1983b, Munger and Hare 1997); temperature
(Bervoets et al. 1996a, Bervoets and Blust 1999); salinity (Bervoets et al. 1995, Bervoets et
al. 1996b, Bervoets and Blust 1999); pH (Gerhardt 1993, Bervoets and Blust 1999, Bervoets
and Blust 2000); as well as organic (Van Derveer and Canton 1997, Nelson et al. 2000),
mineral (Bendell-Young et al. 1994), and contaminant (Malloy, et al. 1999, Song and Breslin
1998, Filion and Morin 2000) content of the sediment; and the potential for synergism in the
uptake of various elements (Casini and Depledge 1997).
Selenium
The analysis of selenium bioconcentration data indicated significant location/year
interactions for all the taxa analyzed (Table 3-3) due to the different year-to-year trends at
both locations. Selenium concentrations in macroinvertebrates have continued to decline at
Location B since the high level reported in 1999. In 2002, concentrations of selenium in all
taxa collected at downstream Location B declined from 2001 levels while taxa at upstream
is
Location A experienced a minor increase in selenium concentrations (Figures 3-5 through 3-
8). The mean selenium concentration of all taxa collected in 1999 from the Anderson Creek
reference site samples (1.04 µg/g) was approximately equal to that observed in taxa collected
at downstream Location B, and slightly above that observed at upstream Location A (Table 3-
6; Figure 3-8).
is
Several authors have suggested that selenium concentrations as high as those found in Dan
River macroinvertebrates might be a cause for concern. Lemly (1993) stated that selenium
levels as low as 0.6 µg/g 1 in food organisms can be toxic to fish and birds that feed on them.
He also stated that food -chain organisms such as benthic invertebrates could accumulate up
to 6 µg/g (some taxa up to 74 µg/g) with no apparent effect on survival or reproduction.
Lemly (1995) suggested five categories of selenium hazard potential ranging from no
selenium in macroinvertebrates (< 0.4 µg/g) to high selenium (> 1 µg/g) with potential for
harm. Henderson et al. 1995 (cited in Engberg et al. 1998) reported that concentrations of
selenium that ranged from 0.6 to 1.4 µg/g in food chain organisms were "levels of concern,"
while at concentrations above 1.4 µg/g "toxicological and reproductive effects are a
certainty." The California Department of Fish and Game define concentrations greater than
1 All element concentrations are given as wet weight. Concentrations given in the literature as dry weight were
converted to wet weight by multiplying by 0.2 (Saiki and Lowe 1987).
3-3

0.8 µg/g in dietary items of fish and birds as "concentrations of concern" (Maier et al. 1998).
The selenium concentrations cited as a level of concern are within the historical range
observed at the Dan River and Anderson Creek reference sites during this study.
Zinc
Concentrations of zinc in macroinvertebrates in 2002 were less than those found in 2001
except for Ephemeroptera at Location A, where concentrations increased (Figures 3-9
through 3-13). The ANOVA performed on zinc data resulted in significant differences
among years for all Corbicula, Ephemeroptera, and Odonata taxa collected (Table 3-4).
Tukey's Studentized Range Test for 2002 zinc concentrations in Ephemeroptera indicated that
those upstream were significantly higher that those downstream. Tukey's results for all taxa
did not indicate any pattern among years that could be attributed to the ash basin discharge.
The 2002 values were high for Corbicula and in the middle range for Ephemeroptera and
Odonata in comparison to past years (Table 3-5). All mean values for each location/year are
below 55 µg/g. Saiki et al. (1995) reported zinc concentrations in Diptera and
Ephemeroptera that ranged from 80 to 104 µg/g and 260 to 340 µg/g, respectively, in samples
• from a California river polluted with acid -mine drainage. At the control site in that study,
zinc in Diptera ranged from 13.0 to 17.2 µg/g, and 80 to 104 µg/g in Ephemeroptera. Poulton
et al. (1995) randomly selected macroinvertebrates collected at increasing distances below a
source of metals pollution in a Montana stream. They reported a mean zinc concentration of
333 µg/g closest to the source and 71.8 µg/g 198 km downstream. Macroinvertebrates from a
control location contained 42.4 µg/g of zinc. Farag et al. (1998) reported zinc concentrations
in macroinvertebrates from Idaho stream reference sites that ranged from 51 to 78 µg/g. At
sites that were affected by past mining operations the concentrations ranged from 77 to
610 µg/g. The zinc concentrations reported in macroinvertebrates from the control locations
of these cited studies are generally similar to those in macroinvertebrates analyzed from the
Dan River locations. The zinc concentration in Anderson Creek organisms was higher that
that at either Dan River location (Table 3-6).
Arsenic
The mean arsenic concentrations in all taxa collected above and below the BCSS ash basin
• discharge in 2002 were 0.22 and 0.57µg/g, respectively. The average concentration of
arsenic in all organisms increased slightly at both locations when compared to data from
3-4

2001, but was within the historical range (Figure 3-14). Poulton et al. (1995) reported arsenic
concentrations that ranged from 6.8 µg/g nearest the source of pollution to 0.68 µg/g 198 km
downstream. The concentration at the control site was 0.54 gg/g. Farag et al. (1998) found
arsenic concentrations from 0.42 to 0.48 µg/g at reference sites and 0.44 to 19.40 at impacted
sites. Dan River locations in 2002 were considered to have lower concentrations than the
results reported by these sources. The Anderson Creek samples had a mean arsenic
concentration that was higher than Location A and slightly lower than Location B (Table 3-
6).
Copper
Only one of the eleven copper concentrations reported for the 2002 samples was above the
level that could be detected; the detection limit values were used for graphing (Figure 3-15),
and the trends apparent in the figure may not be realistic. Copper detection limits may vary
from sample to sample because different amounts of sodium, manganese, chlorine, and
aluminum affect the ability to detect copper (Dr. Jack Weaver, North Carolina State
University Nuclear Services Lab, personal communication). Taking these limitations into
40 account, no upstream or downstream differences in copper bioconcentrations are evident.
0
In the study of the Montana stream by Poulton et al. (1995), mean copper concentrations were
276.4 µg/g nearest the source, 9.6 µg/g far downstream, and 5.2 µg/g at the control. Farag et
al. (1998) reported copper levels of 4 to 4.6 µg/g at their reference sites and up to 40.2 µg/g at
sites affected by mine drainage. Saiki et al. (1995) in their study of a California river
reported that copper concentrations in Diptera ranged from 3.2 to 6.4 µg/g and in
Ephemeroptera ranged from 3.4 to 5.8 µg/g at the control site. At the site near acid -mine
drainage, the concentrations for Diptera ranged from 24 to 40 gg/g, and for Ephemeroptera
ranged from 9.4 to 15.8 µg/g. They referred to the maximum copper concentration of 40
µg/g in midges as "especially high." The mean copper concentration (which include the high
"less than" values) of all macroinvertebrate taxa analyzed from both Dan River locations in
2002 was well below this level (Figure 3-15). The copper concentration in Anderson Creek
organisms was higher than that at either Dan River location (Table 3-6).
3-5

0
LITERATURE CITED
Bendell-Young, L., J. Chouinard, and F.R. Pick. 1994. Metal concentrations in chironomids
in relation to peatland geochemistry. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 27: 186-194.
Bervoets, L., and R. Blust. 1999. Bioavailability of cadmium and zinc to midge larvae under
natural and experimental conditions: effects of some environmental factors. Belg. J.
Zool. 129: 269-284.
Bervoets, L., and R. Blust. 2000. Effects of pH on cadmium and zinc uptake by the midge
larvae Chironomus riparius. Aquat. Toxicol. 49: 145-157.
Bervoets, L., R. Blust, and R. Verheyen. 1995. The uptake of cadmium by the midge larvae
Chironomus riparius as a function of salinity. Aquat. Toxicol. 33: 227-243.
Bervoets, L., R. Blust, and R. Verheyen. 1996a. Effect of temperature on cadmium and zinc
uptake by the midge larvae Chironomus riparius. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol.
31: 502-511.
Bervoets, L., R. Blust, and R. Verheyen. 1996b. Uptake of zinc by the midge larvae
® Chironomus riparius at different salinities: role of speciation, acclimation, and
calcium. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 8: 1423-1428.
Cain, D.J., S.N. Luoma, and E.V. Axtmann. 1995. Influence of gut content in immature
aquatic insects on assessments of environmental metal contamination. Can. J. Fish.
Aquat. Sci. 52: 2736-2746.
Casini, S., and M.H. Depledge. 1997. Influence of copper, zinc, and iron on cadmium
accumulation in the talitrid amphipod Platorchestia platensis. Bull Environ. Contam.
Toxicol. 59: 500-506.
Dixit, S.S., and D. Witcomb. 1983. Heavy metal burden in water, substrate, and
macroinvertebrate body tissue of a polluted River Irwell (England). Environ. Pollut.
(Series B) 6: 161-172.
Engberg, R. A., D. W. Westcot, M. Delamore, and D. D. Holz. 1998. Chapter 1. Federal and
state perspectives on regulation and remediation of irrigation -induced selenium
problems in W. T Frankenberger. and R. A. Engberg (eds) Environmental Chemistry
of Selenium. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York. 713 pp.
Farag, A. M., D. F. Woodward, J. N. Goldstein, W. Brumbaugh, and J. S. Meyer. 1998.
Concentrations of metals associated with mining waste in sediments, biofilm, benthic
macroinvertebrates, and fish from the Coeur d'Alene River basin, Idaho. Arch.
Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 34: 119-127.
3-6

rFilion, A., and A. Morin. 2000. Effect of local sources on metal concentrations in littoral
sediments and aquatic macroinvertebrates of the St. Lawrence River, near Cornwall,
Ontario. Can J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 57 (Suppl. 1): 113-125.
Gerhardt, A. 1993. Review of impact of heavy metals on stream invertebrates with special
emphasis on acid conditions. Wat. Air Soil Pollut. 66: 289-314.
Henderson, J. D., T. C. Maurer, S. E. Schwarzbach. 1995. Assessing selenium
contamination in two San Joaquin Valley, CA, sloughs. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Region 1, Division of Environmental Contaminants, Sacramento, CA.
Lemly, A.D. 1993. Guidelines for evaluating selenium data from aquatic monitoring and
assessment studies. Environ. Monitor. Assess. 28: 83-100.
Lemly, A.D. 1995. A protocol for aquatic hazard assessment of selenium. Ecotoxicol.
Environ. Safety 32: 280-288.
Lobel, P.B., S.P. Belkhode, S.E. Jackson, and H.P. Longerich. 1991. Sediment in the
intestinal tract: a potentially serious source of error in aquatic biological monitoring
programs. Marine Environ. Res. 31: 163-174.
• Maier, K. J., C. R. Nelson, F. C. Bailey, S. J. Klaine, and A. W. Knight. 1998.
Accumulation of selenium by the aquatic biota of a watershed treated with
seleniferous fertilizer. Bull. Environ. Contain. Toxicol. 60: 409-416.
Malloy, J.C., M.L. Meade, and E.W. Olsen. 1999. Small-scale variation of selenium
concentrations in chironomid larvae. Bull. Environ. Contain. Toxicol. 62: 122-129.
Munger, C., and L. Hare. 1997. Relative importance of water and food as cadmium sources
to an aquatic insect (Chaoborus punctipennis): implications for predicting Cd
bioaccumulations in nature. Environ. Sci. Technol. 31: 891-895.
Nelson, S. M., R. A. Roline, J.S. Thullen, J. J. Sartoris, and J. E. Boutwell. 2000.
Invertebrate assemblages and trace element bioaccumulation associated with
constructed wetlands. Wetlands 20: 406-415.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). 2001.
Standard Operating Procedures Benthic Macroinvertebrates. NCDENR Division of
Water Quality, Water Quality Section. Raleigh, NC, June, 2001.
Poulton, B.C., D. P. Monda, D.F. Woodward, M.L. Wildhaber, and W.G. Brumbaugh. 1995.
Relations between benthic community structure and metals concentrations in aquatic
• macroinvertebrates: Clark Fork River, Montana. J. Freshwat. Ecol. 3: 277-293.
3-7

• Saiki, M.K.; and T.P. Lowe. 1987. Selenium in aquatic organisms from subsurface
agricultural drainage water, San Joaquin Valley, California. Arch. Environ. Contam.
Toxicol. 16: 657-670.
Saiki, M.K., D.T. Castleberry, T.W. May, B.A. Martin, and F.N. Bullard. 1995. Copper,
cadmium, and zinc concentrations in aquatic food chains from the Upper Sacramento
River (California) and selected tributaries. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 29: 484-
491.
Smock, L.A. 1983a. Relationships between metal concentrations and organism size in
aquatic insects. Freshwat. Biol. 13: 313-321.
Smock, L.A. 1983b. The influence of feeding habits on whole-body metal concentrations in
aquatic insects. Freshwat. Biol..13: 301-311.
Song, K., and V.T. Breslin. 1998. Accumulation of contaminant metals in the amphipod
Diporeia spp. in western Lake Erie. J. Great Lakes Res. 24: 949-961.
Van Derveer, W.D., and S.P. Canton. 1997. Selenium sediment toxicity thresholds and
derivations of water quality criteria for freshwater biota of western streams. Environ.
Toxicol. Chem. 6: 1260-1268.
r
•

r
•
Table 3-1. Descriptions of Dan River locations sampled on September 20, 2002.
Location A (above BCSS)
Location B (below BCSS)
Upstream of BCSS at Highway 311 bridge.
Downstream of BCSS at SR1138 bridge,
Riffle of gravel and some small cobble, bed
just downstream of low -head dam. Lack of
of river primarily sand. Lack of good bank
good bank samples and leaf pack due to
samples and leaf pack due to high water.
high water. Riffle of large cobble, bed of
Large cornfield adjacent to south bank,
river primarily sand. Pine Hall Brick
with a buffer of grass .and trees present.
Factory is just upstream on the north bank,
Sand -dredging operation on north bank and
and the south bank is parking area for
only a narrow buffer of grass and brush
fishermen. There is some buffered area on
present. (Actual dredging takes place
the south bank, and little on the north bank.
downstream of the sampling location).
3-9

•
•
•
Table 3-2. Macroinvertebrates collected from the Dan River above (A) and below (B)
the Belews Creek Steam Station ash basin discharge to the Dan River.
Samples were collected on September 20, 2002. A "R" =Rare (1 or 2
collected),"C"=Common (3-9), "A"=Abundant (10 or more), and a
"."_ (not collected).
TAXON Above Below
BCSS (A) BCSS (B)
Annelida
Oligochaeta
Lumbriculida
Lumbriculidae
. Lumbriculus spp.
Arthropoda
Crustacea
Decapoda
Cambaridae
Cambarus spp.
Insecta
Coleoptera
Elmidae
Ancyronyx variegatus
Macronychus glabratus
Gyrinidae
Dineutus spp.
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Palpomyia-Bezzia complex
Chironomidae-Chironominae
Chironomus spp.
Cladotanytarsus spp.
Cryptochironomus spp.
Cryptotendipes spp.
Dicrotendipes neomodestus
Polypedilum fallax
Polypedilum flavum
Rheotanytarsus spp.
Stictochironomus spp.
Tanytarsus spp.
Chironomidae-Orthocladiinae
Nanocladius spp.
Orthocladius carlatus
Chironomidae-Tanypodinae
Ablabesmyia spp.
Ablabesmyia mallochi
C
R
A
R
R
R
A
C
C
C
R
A
A
A
A
A
I
0
is
R
A
0
A
R
A
A
R
R
3-10

® Table 3-2. Continued.
3-11
TAXON
Above
Below
BCSS (A)
BCSS (B)
Nilotanypus spp.
R
C
Rheopelopia spp.
R
Simuliidae
Simulium spp.
C
R
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae
Acentrella spp.
R
Baetis intercalaris
C
R
Baetiscidae
Baetisca carolina
R
Caenidae
Caenis spp.
C
C
Ephemeridae
Hexagenia spp.
A
R
Heptageniidae
®
Heptagenia marginalis
Stenonema exiguum
R
R
Stenonema modestum
A
A
Oligoneuriidae
Isonychia spp.
A
A
Tricorythidae
Tricorythodes spp.
R
R
Hemiptera
Gerridae
Metrobates hesperius
A
Megaloptera
Corydalidae
Corydalus cornutus
C
A
Sialidae
Sialis spp.
R
Odonata-Anisoptera
Gomphidae
Ophiogomphus spp.
A
Odonata-Zygoptera
Coenagrionidae
Ischnura spp.
C
Plecoptera
®
Perlidae
Acroneuria abnormis
R
Agnetina capitata
C
Pteronarcyidae
3-11

•
Table 3-2. Continued. -
TAXON
Above
Below
BCSS (A)
BCSS (B)
Pteronarcys spp.
A
Trichoptera
Brachycentridae
Brachycentrus lateralis
C
Micrasema spp.
C
Hydropsychidae
Cheumatopsyche spp.
C
Hydropsyche incommoda
C
Hydropsyche venularis
A
A
Lepidostomatidae
Lepidostoma spp.
R
Leptoceridae
Nectopsyche exquisita
R
Triaenodes spp.
R
Mollusca
Gastropoda
• Mesogastropoda
Pleuroceridae
Leptoxis spp.
A
Pulmonata
Planorbidae
Helisoma spp.
C
Pelecypoda
Heterodontida
Corbiculidae
Corbicula fluminea
C
C
TOTAL TAXA
TOTAL EPT TAXA
BIOTIC INDEX VALUE
Pi
•
42 30
16 13
5.02 4.95
3-12

0
r
Table 3-3. P- values from ANOVA's performed on transformed selenium concentrations
in macroinvertebrate taxa collected from Dan River Locations A and B during
late summer/early fall of 1984 through 2002. An asterisk indicates
sivnificance at the 0.05 level.
Diptera collected in 2000 and 2002 were excluded from the analysis.
Table 3-4. P -values from ANOVA's performed on transformed zinc concentrations in
macroinvertebrate taxa collected from Dan River Locations A and B during
late summer/early fall of 1984 through 2002. An asterisk indicates
significance at the 0.05 level.
Location
Year
Location/Year
Corbicula
0.0318*
0.0609
0.0531*
Diptera
0.0002*
<0.0001*
<0.0001*
Ephemeroptera
0.0005*
<0.0001*
<0.0001*
Odonata F
<0.0001 *
0.0030*
0.0127*
Diptera collected in 2000 and 2002 were excluded from the analysis.
Table 3-4. P -values from ANOVA's performed on transformed zinc concentrations in
macroinvertebrate taxa collected from Dan River Locations A and B during
late summer/early fall of 1984 through 2002. An asterisk indicates
significance at the 0.05 level.
Diptera collected in 2000 and 2002 were excluded from the analysis.
Table 3-5. Results of Tukey's Studentized Range Test for variables for which P<0.05
and no significant interaction was indicated in the ANOVA of transformed
zinc concentrations. Variables joined by a line are not significantly different.
Years appear with lowest to highest concentrations arranged from left to right.
Corbicula
Location
Year
Location/Year
Corbicula
0.7512
0.0002*
0.1998
Diptera
0.4206.
0.0006*
0.1416
Ephemeroptera
0.0339*
0:0238*
0.6397
Odonata
0.1285
<0.0001*
0.0475
Diptera collected in 2000 and 2002 were excluded from the analysis.
Table 3-5. Results of Tukey's Studentized Range Test for variables for which P<0.05
and no significant interaction was indicated in the ANOVA of transformed
zinc concentrations. Variables joined by a line are not significantly different.
Years appear with lowest to highest concentrations arranged from left to right.
Corbicula
1999
1993
1995
1989
1992
1996
1998
1988
1997 2000
1994
1986
1987
1991
2002
1990
2001
Diptera
1989
1986
1991
1993
1994
1988
1985
1995
1992 1987
1998
1996
1997
1990
1999
1984
2001
Ephemeroptera
1986 1993 1988 2000 1989 1995 1999 1996 1987 1994 1998 2002 1997 1990 2001 1991 1992
Odonata 1988 1993 1995 1998 2000 2002 1997 1994 1999 1989 1991 1996 2001 1986 1992 1987 1990
3-13

Table 3-6. Concentrations (µg/g wet weight) of arsenic, copper, selenium, and zinc in
organisms collected from Anderson Creek, Lincoln County, NC, in October
1999.
*Means include detection limit values.
Ell
3-14
Arsenic
Copper
Selenium
Zinc
Corbicula
0.44
<3.25
0.88
35.99
Corbicula
0.44
14.30
0.63
22.98
Diptera
0.14
<4.97
0.46
12.12
Diptera
0.44
76.05
2.72
78.32
E hemero tera
0.28
90.57
0.66
7.43
E hemero tera
<0.04
133.31
1.05
13.71
Odonata
<0.05
<24.29
0.36
39.08
Odonata
0.54
<17.32
1.55
27.67
Mean*
0.30
45.51
1.04
29.66
*Means include detection limit values.
Ell
3-14

�J
Figure 3-1. Flow in the Dan River in August and September 2002. Data are from the USGS gage at
Wentworth, NC.
to the Dan River in September or October of 1995 through 2002.
3-15
450
400
350
I
300
I
I
I
250
I
I
I
�
I
w
I
U
I
200
1
I
I
150
I
I
d
u I
d I
o I
UI
100
=
ai
E I
� I
50
I
I
I
0
roti roti
roti
roti
roti
roti
roti
roti
roti
roti
roti
roti
roti
roti
roti
roti
Figure 3-1. Flow in the Dan River in August and September 2002. Data are from the USGS gage at
Wentworth, NC.
to the Dan River in September or October of 1995 through 2002.
3-15

0
0
0
5
4.5
4
3.5
R 3
e
E 2.5
d
y
0 2
i�
1.5
1
0.5
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Figure 3-4. Water quality bioclassifications based on macroinvertebrate collections from the Dan River from
1995 through 2002.
3-16
discharge to the Dan River in September or October of 1995 through 2002.
■ Above BCSS (A) ® Below BCSS (B)
Excellent
Good
Good -Fair
Fair
Poor

0
0
Above BCSS (A) - - - - - • Below BCSS (B)
2.5
2
d 1.5
a
A
5
En
0.5
0
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2001
Figure 3-5. Mean concentration of selenium (µg/g wet weight) in Diptera collected annually from the Dan
River above (A) and below (B) the ash basin discharge to the river. Diptera collected in 2000 and
2002 were excluded (see text).
Above BCSS (A) - - - - - • Below BCSS (B)
4-
3.5
3
L
d
0 2.5
d
s
W
2-
1.5
1 -
0.5
------
0
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Figure 3-6. Mean concentration of selenium (µg/g wet weight) in all Ephemeroptera collected annually from
the Dan River above (A) and below (B) the ash basin discharge to the river.
3-17

0
40
is
AboveBCSS(A)------ Below BCSS(B)
2
1.8
1.6
1.4-
1.2-
0
.41.2O
° 1
0.8
rA
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Figure 3-7. Mean concentration of selenium (µg/g wet weight) in Odonata collected annually from the Dan
River above (A) and below (B) the ash basin discharge to the river.
-Above BCSS(A) -----•BelowBCSS.(B)
2.5
2
.y
Ci 1.5
ou
d
e _ ,
•[ 1 -
Cn
v7
0.5
0
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Figure 3-8. Mean concentration of selenium (µg/g wet weight) in all organisms collected annually
(except Diptera in 2000 and 2002) from the Dan River above (A) and below (B) the ash basin
discharge to the river.
3-18

0
Figure 3-9. Mean concentration of zinc (µg/g wet weight) in Corbicula collected annually from the Dan River
above (A) and below (B) the ash basin discharge to the river.
Above BCSS (A) - - - - - • Below BCSS (B)
80
70
60
50
L
d
d
O 40
c
iV
30
20
10
0
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2001
Figure 3-10. Mean concentration of zinc (µg/g wet weight) in Diptera collected annually from the Dan River
above (A) and below (B) the ash basin discharge to the river. Diptera collected in 2000 and 2002
were excluded (see text).
3-19

Ell
C
Above BCSS (A) - - - - - • Below BCSS (B)
50
45
40
35
L
0 30
d
s 25
W
9
20
N
15
10
5
0-
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
3-11. Mean concentration of zinc (µg g wet weight) in Ep emeroptera collected annually from the D;
River above A and below B the ash basin discharge to the river.
Above BCSS (A) ..... • Below BCSS (B)
40
35
30
25 -------
20 -20
e
V
C
N
15-
10
5
0
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
® Figure 3-12. Mean concentration of zinc (µg/g wet weight) in Odonata collected annually from the Dan
River above (A) and below (B) the ash basin discharge to the river.
3-20

0
1�
u
•
Diptera in 2000 and 2002) from the Dan River above (A) and below (B) the ash basin discharge to
Diptera in 2000 and 2002) from the Dan River above (A) and below (B) the ash basin discharge to
the river.
3-21

•
•
•
Figure 3-15. Mean concentration of copper (gg/g wet weight) in all organisms collected annually (except
Diptera in 2000 and 2002) from the Dan River above (A) and below (B) the ash basin discharge to
the river.
3-22

0 CHAPTER 4
WATER AND SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The Dan River was sampled in 2002 for water chemistry at one location upstream (A), and
three locations downstream (B, D and E) of the Belews Creek Steam Station (BCSS) ash
basin discharge (Figure 1-1). Water chemistry sampling was also conducted at a location (C)
on the Smith River, 1.2 km upstream of its confluence with the Dan River. Quarterly
samplings during 2002 occurred February 26, May 28, July 30 and November 12.
Water chemistry parameters were analyzed using standard analytical procedures (Table 4-1).
Continuing as in 2001, trace element concentrations of river water samples in 2002 were
analyzed as "total recoverable" elemental concentration, which incorporates a dilute acidic
digestion of the sample (USEPA 1994). This technique was distinct from the analytical
® method for trace elements employed during the period 1988 2000, when acid -preserved
samples were analyzed by atomic adsorption. spectroscopy direct injection, i.e., samples were
not acid -digested.
Sediment cores (2 replicates per location) were collected at the four Dan River locations (A,
B, D, and E) on May, 20, 2001. Fine surficial sediments were obtained from the sediment -
water interface of each core sample, sieved through a 63-µm plastic (Nitexo) screen, and
,deposited on a pre -weighed, 45 -gm Millipore° acetate membrane filter. Filters were dried at
room temperature and analyzed for dry weight -based selenium and arsenic concentration by
neutron activation, as previously described (Duke Power Company 1987).
Stream flow data were obtained from the US Geological Survey National Water Information
System (NWIS) web site. Data for October through December 2002 were classified as
provisional at the time of this report. Estimated selenium mass loading to the Dan River
from the BCS'S ash basin discharge was calculated from NPDES discharge monitoring report
weekly discharge flows and biweekly selenium analyses.
Statistical comparisons of aqueous chemical parameters were made among sample locations,
sample years, and low flow versus high flow conditions (i.e., flows exceeding the 75th
percentile for the entire Wentworth USGS gauge period of record) using an analysis of
4-1

•
0
variance (ANOVA) with Duncan's multiple range test (SAS Institute Inc. 1999). For all
statistical tests, significance was determined at an alpha of 0.05. Dan River sediment .arsenic
and selenium concentrations and arsenic, cadmium, lead, and selenium concentrations from
aqueous samples for 2002 were not .analyzed statistically due to the prevalence both in 2002
and historical data of analytical values below laboratory reporting limits. Graphical methods
were used to examine water quality and sediment elemental concentrations for temporal and
spatial trends.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Stream Flow Characterization
Comparison of 2002 water quality sampling events to Dan and Smith River hydrographs
(Figure 4-1) indicates that winter, spring and summer samples were collected during
historically referenced low flow conditions. Sampling results for those events are therefore
assumed to be indicative of base flow water. quality. Fall 2002 samples, however, were
collected at elevated flows associated with November storm events, and results were
expected to be heavily influenced by storm water runoff.
A summary of mean daily flows (with reference to selected USGS gauge stations) for both
the Dan River and the Smith River on water quality sampling dates is provided in Table 4-2.
These data provide a measure of the relative impact to be expected downstream of the rivers'
confluence from these two waterbodies' typically disparate water quality (Duke Power 1999;
2000; 2001; NCDENR 2000). As will be addressed in the following discussion, the varying
hydrologic conditions during water quality sampling appreciably impacted a number of water
quality parameters.
Surface Water Quality
Water chemistry data collected during 2002 are listed in Table 4-3; selected parameters of
interest are presented in Figures 4-2 through 4-10. Though the watershed continued to
experience an exceptional drought through early fall, upper Dan River water quality in 2002
remained comparable to that of other Piedmont streams in the Duke Power service area.
Water quality for 2002 was also similar to historical data. As might be anticipated, fall 2002
sampling during elevated flows of both the Dan and Smith Rivers produced notable
4-2

• differences in constituents directly related to suspended solids loading (i.e., total suspended
solids, turbidity, and particulate -bound minerals). Following the late 1985 redirection of the
BCSS ash basin discharge directly to the Dan River, most water chemistry indicators and
analyte concentrations have remained comparable to those measured during the baseline
period (January 1984 to October 1985). However, over the span of this monitoring program
(1984 through 2002), calcium and total alkalinity concentrations have shown a gradual
increasing trend over this reach of the Dan River.
During 2002, Dan River conductivity (Figure 4-2) and concentrations of most water quality
constituents increased significantly (a = 0.05) proceeding from upstream to downstream. An
exception to this spatial trend was noted for the storm runoff -impacted fall 2002 sampling,
where nearly four times the November historical median Dan River flow (632 cfs at
Wentworth, NC) was associated with the November 12 sampling (Table 4-2 and Figure 4-1).
Substantial temporal variability of parameters associated with suspended material (i.e.,
turbidity, iron, manganese, and total suspended solids) occurs primarily in response to river
discharge in the upper Dan River (NCDENR 2000). The degree of variability in these
• parameters from a temporal component is typically greater than any spatial variability
observed. During near base flow conditions (as for winter, spring and summer 2002
samplings), of the all measured parameters (Table 4-3), only turbidity, ammonia, iron,
manganese, total suspended solids, arsenic, cadmium, lead, and selenium did not exhibit a
significant upstream -to -downstream increase. However, for the high-flow fall sampling,
similar significant differences in water quality constituents among locations were
exceptionally rare (i.e., elevated alkalinity and magnesium contributions from the Smith
River). Contrary to the spatial trends normally observed during base flow, water quality
constituents frequently associated with storm runoff (primarily particulate -bound total
phosphorus, iron, manganese, zinc, and total suspended solids) were elevated in the
uppermost reach of the river (Locations A and B) during near -peak flow, relative to the Smith
River (Location C) or Dan River locations (D and C) below the Smith River confluence. The
inability to discern spatial differences among sample locations during 2002 for the trace
elements arsenic, cadmium, lead and selenium, as in previous years, can be attributed to the
predominance of concentrations that were below the laboratory reporting limit.
The Smith River continued to substantially impact water quality of the Dan River
downstream of the two rivers' confluence at Eden, NC. During samplings approximately
representative of base flow (winter through summer), Smith River conductivity, alkalinity,
chloride and sodium concentrations had a pronounced effect on downstream Dan River water
4-3

• quality, as observed previously (Duke Power 2000, 2001). Point source loading from the
Martinsville, VA wastewater treatment plant has been historically noted as a source of high
conductivity and total dissolved solids for the Smith River (NCDENR 2000, 2001).
As has been routinely observed (Duke Power 2001), relative to the upper Dan River, Smith
River water quality was highly variable, apparently depending on discharge. Increased
temporal variability of Dan River water chemistry below the Smith River confluence has
been partially attributed to highly variable flow and mixing of the two rivers, as influenced by
local meteorological patterns (Duke Power Company 1993) and upstream hydroelectric
operation on the Smith River.2 The long-term historical mean flow of the Smith River is
approximately 50 percent that of the Dan River where the two rivers converge at Eden, NC
(Slack et al. 1993). However, during the drought of 1998-2002, regular hydroelectric releases
from upstream on the Smith River have periodically provided a much greater proportion of
Smith River water at the confluence of the two rivers and below, as shown by the flow data
for the 2002 spring and summer samplings (Table 4-2).
During 2002, Dan River water quality was similar immediately upstream (Location A) and
• downstream (Location B) of the BCSS ash basin NPDES outfall. In 2002, analytes yielding
significantly (a = 0.05) higher average values downstream relative to upstream of the ash
pond outfall were conductivity, magnesium and sulfate.
Previously reported (Duke Power 2000, 2001) long-term trends include a small but relatively
uniform increase in alkalinity (Figure 4-3) and calcium (Figure 4-4) over the span of this
monitoring program. ` During 2002, Dan River total alkalinity and calcium concentrations
appeared to have remained relatively constant in relation to the prior two years, with the
notable exception of the spring 2001 sampling, which was heavily influenced by a storm
event leading to very high Smith River flows (Duke Power 2001).
Surface Water Trace Element Concentrations
Dan River (and lower Smith River) arsenic and selenium concentrations (Table 4-3)
remained below laboratory reporting limits (2.0 µg fl during 2002, except for a single
• 2 The flow of the Smith River is substantially regulated by controlled releases from Philpott Dam, 69 river
kilometers (43 river miles) upstream of Location C in Virginia. Subsequent river flow through the smaller
Martinsville Reservoir, situated 39.2 river kilometers (24.4 river miles) upstream of Location C, only partially
moderates these upstream peak and minimum flows.
4-4

® sample (2.8 µg As/L) collected at Location B during the high-flow fall sampling. These
concentrations consistently remained below North Carolina water quality standards (arsenic:
50 µg/L; selenium: 5 µg/L; NCDENR 2002). Cadmium concentrations remained below the
laboratory reporting limit of 0.5 µg/L during 2002, except for a single sample (1.0 µg Cd/L)
collected at Location B in the summer. All cadmium concentrations were below the North
Carolina water quality standard (2 µg/L; NCDENR 2002).
Lead concentrations in 2002 (Table 4-3) never exceeded the water quality standard (25 µg/L;
NCDENR 2002). During base flow samplings (winter through summer), all lead
concentrations were below the laboratory reporting limit of 2.0 µg/L. Slightly elevated lead
concentrations were observed for all Dan River locations during the higher flow fall
sampling. Those lead concentrations appeared closely linked to concentrations of total
suspended solids.
Zinc concentrations never exceeded the NCDENR (2002) action level of 50 µg/L during
2002. As was true for lead, highest zinc concentrations were closely tied to elevated
suspended solids concentrations, due to increased storm water runoff during the fall
• sampling.
Copper concentrations ranged from < 2.0 to 9.2 µg/L, exceeding the NCDENR (2002) action
level (7.0 µg/L) in 25% of the 2002 Dan and Smith River samples (31% of Dan River
samples alone). Three samples collected from Locations B, D and E exceeded the action
level for copper during the higher flow, fall 2002 sampling. Greater concentrations of
suspended material appears to be the primary cause of the elevated copper concentrations at
that time, as mentioned previously for lead and zinc. Other samples exceeding the copper
action level were collected during the summer at the two furthest downstream locations (D
and E). Smith River inputs of copper averaged 4.6 µg/L throughout 2002, and were relatively
consistent from season to season.
Selenium Loading Rates
Increased selenium loading rates in 1999-2001, and particularly elevated loading rates during
the period June 2000 -June 2001 (Figure 4-11), had resulted in slightly elevated selenium
Stissue concentrations in Dan River biota, as reported previously (Duke Power 2001). The
transient elevated loading rates were attributable to several operational factors at BCSS
which had a net effect of periodically interrupting the dry ash handling system and increasing
4-5

® the quantity of flyash sluiced to the ash basin. These factors included an increased frequency
of generating unit start-ups and shut -downs, moist ash conditions, and occasional off -hour
lapses in dry ash transport by the ash handling vendor. In 2002, these problems had been
addressed operationally and selenium concentrations in the ash basin discharge had returned
to lower levels, averaging 9.7 µg/L. The 2002 effluent concentration mean was slightly
above the more typical 1985-1999 average of 7.3 µg/L. All 2002 effluent selenium
concentrations remained below the applicable NPDES permitted limit for selenium (23 µg/L
for January -May, and 26 µg/L for June -December, 2002).
Daily mean selenium loading to the Dan River from the BCSS ash basin via the NPDES
discharge was 214 g/day in 2002, representing a near -halving of the loading rate of the
previous two years. (Figure 4-12). The loading rate for 2002 was 85% of the long term
(November 1985-2001) average loading rate of 253 g/day. Except for 1985, BCSS ash basin
discharge flow has remained relatively constant from year to year. Annual differences in
selenium loading to the Dan River have therefore been primarily influenced by annual
differences in mean effluent selenium concentrations.
® Selenium loading from Belews Lake (via the Belews Lake spillway) to the Dan River has
been negligible over most of the past two decades due to the continued minimal
concentration of aqueous selenium in Belews Lake. Furthermore, throughout drought -
impacted 2002, Belews Lake surface elevations remained well below normal, precluding any
spillage from the lake to the Dan River. Therefore, selenium inputs to the Dan River during
2002 occurred entirely via the NPDES-permitted ash basin outfall.
Sediment Trace Element Concentrations
Spring 2002 selenium concentrations3 (Table 4-4; Figures 4-13 and 4-14) in Dan River
sediment surficial fines measured at four Dan River locations were representative of long
term historical data, and exhibited less sample -to -sample variability than has been typically
observed. Sediment selenium concentrations in samples collected from downstream
(Location B) of the BCSS ash basin outfall were not elevated relative to the upstream
location (A; Figure 4-15).
3 For 2002, as for 2001, quantification from all sediment sample selenium analyses was limited by the sample
matrix, and samples were reported as "less than" a sample -dependent detection limit. Therefore, only semi-
quantitative comparisons of data trends can be made, conservatively assuming that sample concentrations were
at the reported limit.
M,

Arsenic concentrations in sediment fines were also within the historical range for all Dan
River locations. In 2002, as has been true for the majority of years in this monitoring
program, a slightly higher average arsenic concentration (4.8 µg/g) was found in downstream
(Location B) samples relative to upstream (Location A) of the BCSS ash basin outfall (3.4
µg/g) (Table 4-4; Figures 4-13 through 4-15). However, given the wide variability in
concentrations from replicate samples over time, the significance of this finding is
questionable.
0
•
4-7

0 LITERATURE CITED
American Public Health Association (APHA); American Water Works Association; Water
Environment Federation. 1995. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater. 19th Edition. APHA, Washington, DC.
Duke Power Company. 1987. Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Dan River Phase Il
Report.
Duke Power Company. 1993. Dan River Steam Station Predictive 316(a) Demonstration.
Duke Power. 1998. Belews Creek Steam Station: 1997 Dan River Summary.
Duke Power. 1999. Belews Creek Steam Station: 1998 Dan River Summary.
Duke Power. 2000. Belews Creek Steam Station: 1999 Dan River Summary.
Duke Power. 2001. Belews Creek Steam Station: 2000 Dan River Summary.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). 2000.
Basinwide Assessment Report: Roanoke River Basin. May 2000. NCDENR,
® Division of Water Quality. Raleigh, NC.
NCDENR. 2001. Roanoke River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. July 2001. NCDENR,
Division of Water Quality. Raleigh, NC.
NCDENR. 2002. "Redbook" Surface Water and Wetlands Standards. NCDERN
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 0213.0100 &.0200. Amended Effective January 1,
2002. NCDENR, Division of Water Quality. Raleigh, NC.
SAS Institute Inc. 1999. SAS OnlineDocTm, Version 7-1. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.
Slack, J.R.; Lumb, A.M.; Landwehr, J.M. 1993. Hydro -Climatic Data Network (HCDN)
Streamflow Data Set, 1874 - 1988. USGS Water -Resources Investigations Report
934076. USGS. Denver, CO.
United States 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, OH.
USEPA. 1994. Methods for the Determination of Metals in Environmental Samples.
Supplement I. EPA/600/R-94/111. Office of Research and Development,
Washington, DC.
EW

R.
Table 4-1. Analytical methods for chemical and physical constituents measured in the Dan River in 2002.
Parameter
Method (EPA/APHA)4
Preservation
Reporting Limit
Alkalinity, Total
Electrometric titration to pH 4.5
4 °C
0.01 mg/L
EPA 310.1
Ammonia
EPA 350.1
4 °C
0.02 mg/L
Arsenic
ICP Mass Spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
2.0 pg/L
EPA 200.8
Cadmium
ICP Mass Spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
0.5 pg/L
EPA 200.8
Calcium
Atomic emission/ICP
0.5% HNO3
0.03 mg/L
EPA 200.7
Chloride
EPA 325.2
4 °C
1.0 mg/L
Conductivity
Temperature -compensated
in-situ
0.1 pmho/cm5
nickel electrode
Copper
ICP Mass Spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
2.0 pg/L
EPA 200.8
Iron
Atomic emission/ICP
0.5% HNO3
0.01 mg/L
EPA 200.7
Lead
ICP Mass Spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
2.0 pg/L
EPA 200.8
Magnesium
Atomic emission/ICP
0.5% HNO3
0.03 mg/L
EPA 200.7
Manganese
ICP Mass Spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
1.0 pg/L
EPA 200.8
4 References: 1. USEPA 1983 2. APHA et al. 1995
5 Instrument sensitivity furnished in lieu of laboratory reporting limit.

•
Table 4-1. (Continued).
is 0
Parameter
Method (EPA/ APHA)
Preservation
'Reporting Limit
Nitrite + Nitrate
EPA 353.2
4 °C
0.02 mg/L `
Orthophosphate
EPA 365.1
4 °C
0.005 mg/L
Oxygen, Dissolved
Temperature -compensated
in-situ
0.01 mg/L5
polarographic cell
pH
Temperature -compensated
in-situ
0.01 units
glass electrode
Potassium
Atomic emission/ICP
0.5% HNO3
0.25 mg/L
EPA 200.7
Selenium
ICP Mass Spectrometry
0.5% HNO3
2.0 pg/L
EPA 200.8
Silica
APHA 4500SW
4 °C
0.5 mg/L
Sodium
Atomic emission/ICP
0.5% HNO3
1.5 mg/L
EPA 200.7
Solids, Total
Gravimetric, dried at 103-105 °C
4 °C
4.0 mg/L
Suspended
EPA 160.2
Sulfate
Turbidimetric, using a
40C
1.0 mg/L
spectrophotometer
EPA 375.4
Temperature
NTC Thermistor
in-situ
0.01 °C5
Total Phosphorus
EPA 365.1
4°C
0.01 mg/L
o Turbidity Turbidimetric 4°C 0.05 NTU
EPA 180.1

Table 4-1. (Continued).
Parameter Method (EPA/APHA) Preservation Reporting Limit
Zinc6 Atomic emission/ICP 0.5% HNO3 0.005 mg/L
EPA 200.7
Zinc? ICP Mass Spectrometry 0.5% HNO3 1.0 pg/L
EPA 200.8
Sediment Arsenic & Neutron Activation Analysis, 4 °C 0.0002 pg/sample$
Sediment Selenium North Carolina State Univ. 4 °C 0.02 pg/sample6
6 February, May and July samples
7 November samples
8 Optimal conditions; no interfering elements in sample matrix.

• Table 4-2. Mean daily discharge flow for the Dan River at Wentworth, NC (USGS
Station 02071000) and the Smith River at Eden, NC (USGS Station
02074000) on 2002 water quality sampling dates.
•
•
Sampling Date
Dan River Flow cfs
Smith River Flow cfs
February 26
405
238
May 28
270
279
July 30
180
200
November 12
2,460
1,300
4-12

• Table 4-3. Water chemistry in the Dan and Smith Rivers in the vicinity of the Belews Creek
Steam Station during 2002.
Dan River at
Dan River at
Smith River at
Dan River at the
Dan River at
US -311
SR -1138
W. Kings Hwy.
DRSS CCW
NC -700
Analyte
Discharge
Date (Location A)
(Location B)
(Location C)
(Location D)
(Location E)
Temperature (°C)
-
2/26/02 5.9
6.7
7.8
11.6
10.5
5/28/02 20.1
23.2
21.8
22.8
23.1
7/30/02 27.8
29.0
28:9
33.3
31.6
11/12/02 14.1
14.4
13.8
14.2
14.2
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
2/26/02 12.8
11.8
12.2
10.4
11.2
5/28/02 8.2
8.0
7.7
-8.0
8.2
7/30/02 7.0
6.8
7.3
6.3
6.2
11/12/02 9.7
9.4
9.9
9.4
9.3
pH
2/26/02 6.8
6.6
7.7
7.2
7.4
5/28/02 7.1
7.1
7.5
7.5
7.5
7/30/02 6.3
6.5
6.8
6.8
6.7
11/12/02 7.1
7.1
7.3
6.9
7.1
Conductivity (µmho/cm)
2/26/02 50
67
258
240
186
5/28/02 54
•
68
167
214
. 189
7/30/02 46
60
149
209
185
11/12/02 47
62
114
158
91
Alkalinity (mg/L)
2/26/02 18.5
24.0
42.9
38.2
38.1
5/28/02 17.6
21.3
39.8
37.8
39.8
7/30/02 15.5
19.1
34.2
31.9
32.1
11/12/02 15.0
17.1
29.5
30.0
25.4
Total Suspended Solids (mg/L)
2/26/02 < 4
< 4
< 4
< 4
4
5/28/02 13
6
10
11
12
7/30/02 6
13
6
12
15
11/12/02 175
166
26
65
102
Turbidity (NTU)
2/26/02 3.4
6.3
4.2
8.8
10.1
5/28/02 .11.5
7.6
11.9
12.6
13.1
7/30/02 21.0
29.5
8.9
34.9
35.3
11/12/02 36.2
36.2
34.8
71.0
47.9
Sulfate (mg/L)
2/26/02 2.9
4.8
15.1
21.2
12.3
5/28/02 3.2
4.5
10.8
17.5
14.6
7/30/02 2.9
4.6
9.8
18.6
, , 15.8
11/12/02 4.2
5.8
7.0
8.8
6.9
1�
u
4-13

Is
4-14
Table 4-3. (Continued).
Dan River at
Dan River at
Smith River at
Dan River at the
Dan River at
US -311
SR -1138
W. Kings Hwy.
DRSS CCW
NC -700
Analyte
Discharge
Date (Location A)
(Location B)
(Location C)
(Location D)
(Location E)
Ammonia (mg-N/L)
2/26/02 < 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
0.02
< 0.02
5/28/02 < 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
7/30/02 0.04
0.07
0.03
0.08
0.10
11/12/02 < 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
< 0.02
Orthophosphate (mg-P/L)
2/26/02 < 0.005
< 0.005
0.053
0.102
0.046
5/28/02 0.013
0.014
0.025
0.115
0.101
7/30/02 0.020
0.018
0.056
0.122
0.105
11/12/02 0.026
0.033
0.029
0.068
0.032
Total Phosphorus (mg-P/L)
2/26/02 0.010
0.011
0.082
0.140
0.090
5/28/02 0.039
0.024
0.056
0.146
0.137
7/30/02 0.046
0.049
0.079
0.170
0.162
11/12/02 0.315
0.271
0.100
0.198
0.198
Silica (mg/L)
2/26/02 5.2
5.7
6.1
5.9
5.9
®
5/28/02 4.8
7/30/02 4.1
5.1
5.0
5.4
5.6
5.6
5.6
5.6
5.4
11/12/02 4.9
5.5
6.4
6.3
6.5
Chloride (mg/L)
2/26/02 3.5
4.1
38.6
35.7
27.2
5/28/02 3.5
3.8
19.9
28.8
24.4
7/30/02 3.9
3.8
15.5
25.1
21.4
11/12/02 4.2
4.9
11.4
23.4
11.5
Calcium (mg/L)
2/26/02 4.8
5.9
8.0
7.1
7.2
5/28/02 4.0
4.6
7.0
6.4
6.6
7/30/02 3.5
4.3
6.5
5.8
5.9
11/12/02 3.8
5.0
6.9
6.6
6.3
Iron (mg/L)
2/26/02 0.3
0.5
0.4
0.6
0.6
5/28/02 0.9
0.7
1.1
1.1
1.2
7/30/02 1.3
2.1
0.7
2.1
2.2
11/12/02 4.0
3.4
1.2
1.8
2.2
Magnesium (mg/L)
2/26/02 1.8
2.2
2.9
2.6
2.6
5/28/02 1.7
1.9
2.9
2.7
2.7
7/30/02 1.6
1.9
2.5
2.3
2.4
11/12/02 1.6
1.9
2.7
2.6
2.5
Is
4-14

0 • •
cn r 0 0 D Cl) o E > �
a-°a a a m
-4 Cn N C -4 M N v CJI N -4 CJI -! CJI N C) -• -1 M -1 CA Ns �I CJI N 7 0) CD
j CD
W N IV -• W N N -• W N N C W N N -• W N N j W N N W N N -� W N N y W
N O 00 O N O 00 O N O OD O Cp N O 00 O .-. N O co O C N O 00 m 3 N 0 00 m N O 00 O
O O O O O O O O O O O O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O'� 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Cn N N N N v N N N N v N N N N
fu
O
3 d
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
N N N N Un!Q N N O) N N N 0 0 O P W N C
CD 0 0 0 00 O0 C) W O -I O MM O 01 0 0 0 0 W N) w -i C l W -4 -4- — CA IV A Cl)
� v
0 C;
X
c <'
Z; (D
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A cNn 00 Cn W ~
N N N N Cn N N N P N N N O O O O N N N N W W A P. N N -1 71 O W CD p
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . P. . . . . . . . .
O O O O N O O O N — O O m Cn cn U7 00 O O O CO N O W co N O Ut N OD N O
CC Cl)
r
O
to X
3 =
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
___ C)
N N N N N N N N -? :A P, .P O O O O N N p N N O Cn O N N N W � N W O ,C
O O O O O O O O .? -I CO CJI Cn CJl Ll C i O O O O CA) CA -4 CA N CA CA -1 O
r v;v
0 N v 7
jw 0cnM
Oaacn<
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A -� N N W co CO O P = 0-1
N N N N N N N N -4 CO Cn -J 0 0 0 0 N N N N ,1 :I p W W W Cn Un p W C
A :IJ .Or
O CD O C) -1 O O O -4 N C) Cn Cn Cn to CO CD O C) CC). 00 00 ? CO m CA Cfl IV co c
� v
0 z�
O y <
CD fD
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A N N N N CO O W O
N N N N W N N N 0O 00 � O O O O N N N N CO — W CA N W W N CO O C.II U7 m
0 0 C) 0 W 0 C) 0 W N co A Cn Cn CJI Cn 0 0 CO O CO 4�-, Cid -1 co 0) G CC) 00 O W W

• Table 4-3. (Continued).
•
•
4-16
Dan River at US-
Dan River at
Smith River at
Dan River at
Dan River at
311
SR -1138
W. Kings Hwy.
the DRSS CCW
NC -700.
Analyte
Discharge
Date
(Location A)
(Location B)
(Location C)
(Location D)
(Location E)
Zinc (µg/L)
2/26/02
5.0
< 5.0
11.0
6.0
8.0
5/28/02
8.0
< 5.0
11.0
6.0
11.0
7/30/02
< 5.0
< 5.0
< 5.0
< 5.0
< 5.0
11/12/02
23.2
19.2
10.2
12.1
13.3
•
•
4-16

ti (q O"*: r M g N N Cq 00 r O 00 Lf) Lf) I� r N 7 Lf) Ln Cl? r N (f) d 7 00 I� O O O q Il M
O V) Lf) ('M r O r G d O tt O r M qT N 0 0 -T- N O N N O N t N r O N I- N (O O N M
v v v v v v v v v v v v v v
0
00 M Lf) O r Ce) d: N N M Lf) CO 00 � Lf) N M N O M N d, r 0 't r M N 00 � (C) C0 O O I-- N
M 'd M N r 0'i Or0' (M O> r d N r N O r M M 0000 0 0 0 0 O N S O � r O r
v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v
It I�t 'd' It
d' It d d
Lf) Ln Ln Ili
Lid Ln Lf) Ln
(O (O (O (f)
(0 (O (O (0
1- I- I- I,-
I- 1l- ti r`
00 00 00 00
co 00 00 00
00 00 00 00
00 � ao 0o
w o0 00 00
00 00 00 00
w 00 00 0o
ao 00 co 00
00 00 00 00
ao 00 00 00
O O O O
` ` ` `
O O O O
Ln L1') lf) Lfi
00 O O 00
Lf) In LC) Ln
Lo���
t` ti t` 00
M co M M
N N N N
N N N N
Lf) Ln Lf) lf)
r r r r
� � � �
r r r r
� � � �
r r r r
� � � �
In Lf) lf) Lf)
r r r r
� � � �
lf) Lf) Lf) Ln
L() Ln LO Lf)
fA O fA W
O fA W m
Lf) Lf) lf) L()
O O O O
fA W fA 0)
Q Q m m
Q Q m co
Q Q m m
Q Q m m
Q Q m m
Q Q m m
Q Q m m
Q Q m m
Q Q m m
0 0 0
'ct

�J
4-18
Table 4-4. (Continued).
Arsenic
Selenium
Location
Date
µg/g
µg/g
A
5/22/89
<
2.2
<
0.4
A
5/22/89
<
2.6
<
0.5
B
5/22/89
8.0
<
0.3
B
5/22/89
<
1.2
<
0.2
A
5/14/90
<
0.3
1.7
A
5/14/90
<
0.5
2.9
B
5/14/90
<
2.7
5.0
B
5/14/90
<
3.1
4.3
A
5/6/91
<
0.5
4.6
A
5/6/91
<
0.9
<
_ 1.7
B
5/6/91
16.3
<-
1.3
B
5/6/91
<
4.6
<
5.8
A
5/4/92
3.4
<
5.0
A
5/4/92
<
1.1
<
2.2
B
5/4/92
2.3
4.5
B
5/4/92
3.0
3.3
•
A
5/6/93
23.4
No data
A
5/6/93
24.5
8.0
B
5/6/93
357.4
85.2
B
5/6/93
23.4
23.1
A
4/26/94
0.9
7.2
A
4/26/94
1.7
6.2
B
4/26/94
2.1
4.2
B
4/26/94
4.7
8.8
E
4/26/94
<
0.8
3.7
E
4/26/94
5.3
5.9
A
5/3/95
1.0
3.8
A
5/3/95
1.3
2.5
B
5/3/95
2.1
2.2
B
5/3/95
1.9
2.8
E
5/3/95
1.9
2.1
E
5/3/95
2.0
1.8
�J
4-18

0
•
Table 4-4. (Continued).
4-19
Arsenic
Selenium
Location
Date
µg/g
gg/g
A
5/16/96
5.3
2.2
A
5/16/96
0.8
0.9
B
5/16/96
0.9
2.5
B
5/16/96
4.4
2.2
D
5/16/96
9.9
3.3
D
5/16/96
4.6
2.3
E
5/16/96
5.7
3.4
E
5/16/96
13.1
4.4
A
5/20/97
2.2
1.5
A
5/20/97
2.6
13.5
B
5/20/97
3.9
5.3
B
5/20/97
2.8
2.0
D
5/20/97
1.2
2.2
D
5/20/97
6.7
1.7
E
5/20/97
2.8
1.1
E
5/20/97
5.7
2.2
A
6/24/98
3.2
1.3
A
6/24/98
3.2
0.7
B
6/24/98
3.9
2.2
B
6/24/98
3.4
2.7
D
6/24/98
3.6
2.9
D
6/24/98
3.2
3.0
E
6/24/98
6.3
0.6
E
6/24/98
7.6
2.5
A
6/1/99
11.9
4.7
A
6/1/99
5.1
2.1
B
6/1/99
19.3
6.0
B
6/1/99
12.7
9:9
D
6/1/99
11.8
6.5
D
6/1/99
12.5
0.9
E
6/1/99
7.7
1.2
E
6/1/99
<
2.4
1.8
A
5/16/00
<
1.2
< 7.5
A
5/16/00
<
1.9
13.0
B
5/16/00
<
1.7
8.1
B
5/16/00
<
2.1
16.1
D
5/16/00
<
1.4
11.4
D
5/16/00
6.8
13.0
E
5/16/00
<
1.6
10.4
E
5/16/00
<
1.0
< 5.2
4-19

•
t,
N
O
•
cn cn cn cn u, 2 o o
N N N N N N N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N 0000000 NNNNNN
m m o m m m m m
� � �
N N N N N N N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
A A n
U1 U1 W A A U1 W W :P� --pl O N N-" W
O N IV W P W O A cn P W 0 .A. W
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
W W W N W? W Cn
--• N O O �--� O O N
O W W -- -4 O O
f-
0
d
0
v
1,
•
H
a-'
0
n
0
CD
a

0
10,000
1,000
100
10
— Dan R @ Wentworth, NC
i
— Smith R @ Eden, NC
I •
I
I
I
i
-
-
i
I - -
i
I
�i
Figure 4-1. Hydrograph of 2002 daily average flows for the Dan River near Wentworth,
NC (USGS Station 02071000) and the Smith River at Eden, NC (USGS
Station 02074000). Water quality and sediment sampling dates are depicted
by vertical lines.
800
—Loc. A; at US Hwy 311
—Loc. B; at SR 1138
700 —Loc. Q Smith River at Kings Hwy
— Loc. D; at DRSS
— Loc. E; at NCH 700
600 Initial BCSS Ash Basin
Discharge to Dan R.
500
400
2
ti
p 300
200
100
0
Figure 4-2. Comparison of specific conductance among Dan River water quality
monitoring locations from the baseline period (1984 -October 1985) through
2002.
4-21

•
CJ
•
60
50
_ 40
30
Y
a
20
10
0
f Loc. A; at US Hwy 311
�- Loc. B; at SR 1138
—*—Loc. C; Smith River at Kings Hwy
Initial BCSS Ash Basin —a Loc. D; at DRSS
Discharge to Dan R. Loc. E; at NC Hwy 700
Figure 4-3. Comparison of total alkalinity among Dan River water quality monitoring
locations from the baseline period (1984 -October 1985) through 2002.
g
8
7
s
E 5
4
3
2
1
0
Figure 4-4. Comparison of calcium among Dan River water quality monitoring locations
from the baseline period (1984 -October 1985) through 2002.
4-22

0
D
4U
35
30
J 25
y 20
15
10
5
0
Figure 4-5. Comparison of sulfate among Dan River water quality monitoring locations
from the baseline period (1984 -October 1985) through 2002.
50
40
J 30
0
20
10
I (Loc A; 7/19/84 - 123 and 75 µg/L)
(Loc B; 7/19/84 - 49 and 84 µg/L)
Initial BCSS Ash Basin
Discharge to Dan R.
f Loc. A; at US Hwy 311
—Loc. B; at SR 1138
–i– Loc. C; Smith River at Kings Hwy
—Loc. D; at DRSS
--$-- Loc. E; at NC Hwy 700
0 '
Figure 4-6. Comparison of arsenic among Dan River water quality monitoring locations
from the baseline period (1984 -October 1985) through 2002.
4-23

0
•
•
20
15
E 10
I
5
0
Figure 4-7. Comparison of cadmium among Dan River water quality monitoring locations
from the baseline period (1984 -October 1985) through 2002.
50
45
40
35
J 30
25
20
15
10
5
0
— Loc. A; at US Hwy 311
— Loc. B; at SR 1138
-t -Loc. Q Smith River at Kings Hwy
�- Loc. D; at DRSS
$-Loc. E; at NC Hwy 700
N
Figure 4-8. Comparison of copper among Dan River water quality monitoring locations
from the baseline period (1984 -October 1985) through 2002.
4-24

r�
0
0
10
9
8
7
J
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
— Loc. A; at US Hwy 311
—Loc. B; at SR 1138
–f– Loc. C; Smith River at Kings Hwy
Loc. D; at DRSS
–0– Loc. E; at NC Hwy 700
Figure 4-9. Comparison of selenium among Dan River water quality monitoring locations
from the baseline period (1984 -October 1985) through 2002.
150 I
I
125
Initial E
Discha
100 11
0
(Loc A: 1/19/84 - 240 µg/L)
–.– Loc. A; at US Hwy 311
(Loc B: 3/22/84 - 260 µg/L
75
} Loc. C; Smith River at Kings Hwy
7/7/87 - 158.8 µg/L)
Loc. D; at DRSS
–e– Loc. E; at NC Hwy 700
;S Ash Basin
50
25
0
(Loc A: 1/19/84 - 240 µg/L)
–.– Loc. A; at US Hwy 311
(Loc B: 3/22/84 - 260 µg/L
�- Loc. B; at SR 1138
} Loc. C; Smith River at Kings Hwy
7/7/87 - 158.8 µg/L)
Loc. D; at DRSS
–e– Loc. E; at NC Hwy 700
;S Ash Basin
to Dan R.
Figure 4-10. Comparison of zinc among Dan River water quality monitoring locations from
the baseline period (1984 -October 1985) through 2002.
MAI

® 45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Ash Basin Outfall Se
233 g/d from 1986-1999
❑ Mean Daily Discharge
Loading Averages:
401 g/d from 2000-2001
313
— — — — — — —
—2-14-g/d-in-2002 — — –R — —
— — — ■ Mean Daily Se Loading
258 260
n
229 229 236
--------
— — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
191
v
176
153
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Rbc AN
Figure 4-11. Monthly mean daily ash basin discharge and selenium loading to the Dan
River for 1999-2002.
0 60,000
50,000
�E 40,000
30,000
O
>,
20,000
10,000
0
408
❑ Mean Daily Discharge, m3 399 402
■Se Loading g/d
313
298 288
258 260
229 229 236
214
191
176
153
118 11
450
400
350
300
250
t].
200
150
100
50
0
Figure 4-12. Annual mean daily ash basin discharge and selenium loading to the Dan River
for 1985-2002. Selenium loading for 1985 is based on November and
December data only.
4-26

0
0
5/24/il4 As: 44.9 µg/g • • Arsenic
■ Selenium
20
15 Initial BCSS Ash Basin
Discharge to Dan R. ■
o� ■
10 ■
5-1
• . ■
■ • ■ • s 2 • • _ • ■ •
0 ■
15 11 15 11
Figure 4-13. Arsenic and selenium concentrations (dry weight) in Dan River fine surficial
sediments collected upstream (Location A) of the BCSS ash basin discharge.
25
t5/6/93 As: 38.5 µg/g; .Arsenic
5/24/84 As: 38.5 µg/g i I Se: 85.2 µg/g
■ Selenium
20
•
15 • Initial BCSS Ash Basin ■
rn Discharge to Dan R.
•
10
03
• ■
■
■
0
4-27
Figure 4-14.
Arsenic and selenium concentrations (dry weight)
in Dan River fine surficial
sediments collected
downstream
(Location
B)
of
the
BCSS ash
basin
discharge.
4-27

CJ
0
0
20
15
10
5
In
0
-5
L- 0 ---------
1 5/6/1993
As: 166.4
Se: 42.2
-------------------------
♦ Arsenic
■ Selenium
----------------------------------------
Figure
----------------------------------
-----------
■
■
-----
------------------
----------------
Figure 4-15. Average difference in Dan River fine surficial sediment elemental
concentrations between the upstream and the uppermost downstream site (i.e.,
Location B minus Location A difference).
ON

0
APPENDIX A
(Taxonomic composition of Dan River macroinvertebrates)
•
A-1

®
Appendix Table A-1. Macroinvertebrate taxa collected from Location A above the
Belews Creek ash basin discharge to the Dan River from 1994
through 2002. An "R"=Rare (1 or 2 collected), "C"=Common
(3-9), and "A"=Abundant (10 or more). Highlighted taxa are
taxa that have not been found in three or more years. Taxa
with an asterick are taxa that were present in 1999-2001, but
were absent in 2002. "."=not collected.
TAXON 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
2002
Annelida
Hirudinea
Rhynchobdellida
Glossiphoniidae
Helobdella spp. R
Oligochaeta
Branchiobdellida
Branchiobdellidae R
Haplotaxida
Naididae
Bratislavia unidentata R
Dero spp. R
Homochaeta naidina R
Nais spp. R
Nais communis R
Nais variabilis R
lima R
®Pristina
Pristinella osborni C R
Tubificidae R C R C C
Aulodrilus limnobius R
Limnodrilus spp. C
Limnodrilus hoffineisterei R R C R R
Limnodrilus udekemianus R
Spirosperma spp R
Tasserkidrilus harmani R
Lumbriculida
Lumbriculidae C R R C C R
Kincaidiana freidrius R
Lumbriculus R
C
Arthropoda
Acari R R R
Crustacea
=
Decapoda
Cambaridae R R R R R R R
Cambarus spp.
R
Insecta
Coleoptera
Dryopidae
Helichus lithophilus C R R R C R R
Dytiscidae
Bidessus spp. R
Hydroporus spp. C
Elmidae
Ancyronyx variegatus R R A R A R R
Dubiraphia spp. R
Dubiraphia bivittata R
Macronychus glabratus C A C A A A R A
A
®
Optioservus spp. C
Promoresia elegans R A
Stenelmis spp. R
Gyrinidae
Dineutus spp. C A A R
R
A-2

®
Appendix Table A-1. Continued.
TAXON
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Diptera
Athericidae
Atherix lantha
C
R
C
Ceratopogonidae
Palpomyia-Bezzia complex
R
C
R
C
R
Chironomidae-Chironominae
Chironomus spp.
R
C
C
R
Cladotanytarsus spp.
C
A
R
R
C
A
Cryptochironmus spp.
R
R
R
R
C
C
C
Cryptotendipes spp.
R
C
Dicrotendipes neomodestus
C
C
Harnischia curtilamellata
R
Microtendipes spp.
R
Paralauterborniella nigrohalteral
R
Phaenopsectra spp.
C
R
R
R
R
Polypedilum spp.
R
Polypedilum convictum
R
C
C
C
R
R
Polypedilum fallax
R
R
R
C
R
R
Polypedilum flavum
C
A
A
Polypedilum illinoense
C
A
R
R
R
R
R
A
Polypedilum scalaenum
C
R
R
R
Polypedilum simulans/digitifer
C
A
C
C
Rheotanytarsus spp.
C
A
C
A
A
Robackia demeijerei
C
R
Stenochironomus spp.
R
R
R
C
R
Stictochironomus spp.
R
A
A
spp.
R
C
R
A
®Tasus
Tribeloibelos spp.
R
C
A
Chironomidae-Orthocladiinae
Corynoneura spp.
R
R
R
Cricotopus spp.
C
Cricotopus bicinctus
A
C
Cricotopus vierriensis
C
Eukiefferiella spp.
C
C
C
C
Nanocladius spp.
R
A
C
R
Nanocladius downesi
C
C
R
Orthocladius spp.
R
Orthocladius carlatus
C
A
Rheocricotopus spp.
A
C
Rheocricotopus tuberculatus
C
Thienemanniella spp.
R
R
R
C
Tvetenia bavarica
R
Tvetenia discoloripes
R
C
A
Chironomidae-Tanypodinae
Ablabesmyia spp.
R
R
Ablabesmyia annulata
R
Ablabesmyia mallochi
C
C
C
C
Clinotanypus pinguis
R
Nilotanypus spp.
R
Rheopelopia spp.
R
Thienemannimyia gp.
R
R
Zavrelimyia spp.
R
Simuliidae
Simulium spp.
R
A
C
C
A
R
C
A
C
Tanyderidae
R
Tipulidae
Antocha spp.
R
R
R
A
Hexatoma spp.
R
R
Tipula spp.
C
R
R
A
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae
A-3

A-4
Appendix Table A-1. Continued.
TAXON
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Acentrella spp.
C
R
Baetis anoka
R
Baetis ephippiatus
C
Baetis intercalaris
C
A
C
C
C
R
C
C
Baetis pluto
C
Baetis propinquus
R
R
R
R
C
Centroptilum spp.
R
Heterocloeon curiosum
C
C
R
R
C
Pseudocloeon spp.
R
R
R
Caenidae
Caenis spp.
C
R
R
R
R
C
Ephemerellidae
Eurylophella spp.
R
Serratella deficiens
R
R
Serratella serratoides
R
C
Ephemeridae
Hexagenia spp.
C
R
A
A
C
A
A
Heptageniidae
Heptagenia marginalis
R
R
Leucrocuta spp.
R
Rhithrogena uhari
R
R
Stenonema exiguum
R
R
C
Stenonema meririvulanum
R
R
Stenonema modestum
A
A
A
A
A
C
C
A
A
Stenonema terminatum
C
Oligoneuriidae
Isonychia spp.
A
A
R
A
A
C
R
A
A
®
Polymitarcyidae
Ephoron leukon
R
Tricorythidae
C
Leptohyphes robacki
R
R
Tricorythodes spp.
c
c
A
c
c
R
Hemiptera
Gerridae
Metrobates hesperius
R
Nepidae
Ranatra nigra
R
R
Heteroptera
Corixidae
A
Megaloptera
Corydalidae
Corydalus cornutus
C
C
C
A
A
A
C
A
C
Nigronia serricornis
R
R
Sialidae
sialis spp.
R
R
Odonata-Anisoptera
Aeshnidae
Boyeria grafiana
C
R
Boyeria vinosa
C
C
C
R
Corduliidae
Neurocordulia spp.
R
Gomphidae
C
R
Dromogomphus spp.
R
Gomphurus spp.
C
Gomphus spp.
R
R
R
Hagenius brevistylus
R
C
Hylogomphus spp.
Ophiogomphus spp.
R
C
C
A
®
Progomphus obscurus
_
R
Stylogomphus albistylus
_
_
R
Stylurus spiniceps
R
C
R
R
Macromiidae
A-4

Appendix Table A-1. Continued.
TAXON
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001 2002
Macromia spp.
C
R
Macromia georgina
C
A
A
R
A
R
R
Odonata-Zygoptera
Calopterygidae
Calopteryx spp.
C
R
Calopteryx dimidiata
R
Calopteryx maculata
A
C
A
Coenagrionidae
Argia spp.
C
C
R
R
Ischnura spp.
C
Plecoptera
Peltoperlidae
Tallaperla spp.
R
Perlidae
Acroneuria abnormis
A
A
C
A
C
R
R
R
Agnetina annulipes
R
C
Agnetina flavescens
C
Eccoptura xanthenes
R
Paragnetina fumosa
C
R
R
Paragnetina ichusa
C
C
R
Paragnetina immarginata
R
Perlodidae
Isoperla spp.
R
Pteronarcyidae
Pteronarcys spp.
R
C
R
R
C
A
Pteronarcys dorsata
C
A
Trichoptera
Brachycentridae
®
Brachycentrus lateralis
C
A
C
Micrasema spp.
C
Micrasema bennetti
R
Micrasema sprulesi
R
Hydropsychidae
Cheumatopsyche spp.
C
C
C
C
A
C
A
A
C
Hydropsyche incommoda
R
Hydropsyche morosa
R
C
Hydropsyche phalerata
R
R
R
Hydropsyche simulans/rossi
R
R
C
C
A
A
Hydropsyche sparna
R
A
A
Hydropsyche venularis
C
R
A
A
A
Lepidostomatidae
Lepidostoma spp.
R
C
R
Leptoceridae
Ceraclea cancellata
R
Nectopsyche spp.
c
C
Nectopsyche exquisita
A
R
c
A
R
R
Oecetis spp.
R
R
R
R
Setodes incerta
R
Triaenodes spp.
R
R
Triaenodes ignitus
R
C
C
R
Triaenodes tardus
R
R
Odontoceridae
Psilotreta spp.
C
Philopotamidae
Chimarra spp.
R
R
R
R
Polycentropodidae
Polycentropus spp.
R
R
Mollusca
®
Gastropoda
Basommatophora
Physidae
Physella spp.
R
A-5

®
Appendix Table A-1. Continued.
TAXON
Mesogastropoda
Hydrobiidae
Pleuroceridae
Leptoxis spp.
Pulmonata
Planorbidae
Helisoma spp.
Pelecypoda
Heterodontida
Corbiculidae
Corbicula fluminea
Veneroida
Sphaeriidae
Pisidium spp.
Nemertea
Enopla
Hoplonemertea
Tetrastemmatidae
Prostoma graecens
Platyhelminthes
Turbellaria
Tricladida
Planariidae
Dugesia spp.
0
0
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
R R C R
A A A A A
A C
C A C A A A C A C
R
R R R
A-6

®
Appendix Table A-2. Macroinvertebrate taxa collected from Location B below the Belews
Creek ash basin discharge to the Dan River from 1994 through 2002.
An "R"=Rare (1 or 2 collected), "C"=Common (3-9), and
"A"=Abundant (10 or more). Highlighted taxa are taxa that have not
been found in three or more years. Taxa with an asterick are taxa that
were present in 1999-2001, but were absent in 2002. "."=not collected.
TAXON 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annelida
Hirudinea
Rhynchobdellida
Glossiphoniidae
Helobdella spp. R
Oligochaeta
Haplotaxida
Naididae
Nais behningi R
Nais communis R R
Nais variabilis R
Tubificidae C R R
Limnodrilus spp. R
Limnodrilus hoffineisterei R R
Lumbriculida
Lumbriculidae A C C C C R C
Lumbriculus spp. R R
Arthropoda
Acari R A
®
Crustacea
Decapoda
Cambaridae R C C R
Cambarus spp. C R
Insecta
Coleoptera
Dryopidae
Helichus lithophilus C R R C C
Dytiscidae
Bidessus spp. R
Elmidae
Ancyronyx variegatus R R R R R
Dubiraphia spp.
Macronychus glabratus C C C C C C A
Promoresia elegans R A C C R C A
Stenelmis spp. R C
Gyrinidae
Dineutus spp. R R A A R
Dineutus discolor R
Dineutus nigrior R
Psephenidae
Psephenus herricki R
Diptera
Athericidae
Atherix lantha C R
Ceratopogonidae
Palpomyia-Bezzia complex
Chironomidae-Chironominae
Chironomus spp. A C R
Cladotanytarsus spp. R A A
Cryptochironmus spp. CR C
Crytotenipes spp. R
Cryptotendipes emorsus A
A-7

Appendix Table A-2. Continued.
TAXON
Demicryptochironomus cuneatus
Dicrotendipes neomodestus
Paracladopelma spp.
Phaenopsectra spp.
Polypedilum spp.
Polypedilum convictum
Polypedilum fallax
Polypedilum flavum
Polypedilum illinoense
Polypedilum scalaenum
Polypedilum simulans/digitifer
Pseudochironomus spp.
Rheotanytarsus spp.
Robackia spp.
Robackia claviger
Robackia demeijerei
Stenochironomus spp.
Stictochironomus spp.
Tanytarsus spp.
Tribelos spp.
Chironomidae-Orthocladiinae
Brillia spp.
Corynoneura spp.
Cricotopus spp.
Cricotopus annulator
Cricotopus bicinctus
® Cricotopus cylindraceus
Bukiefferiella spp.
Nanocladius spp.
Nanocladius downesi
Orthocladius carlatus
Orthocladius obumbratus
Parakiefferiella spp.
Psectrocladius spp.
Rheocricotopus spp.
Rheocricotopus tuberculatus
Rheosmittia spp.
Thienemanniella spp.
Tvetenia spp.
Tvetenia discoloripes
Tvetenia vitracies
Chironomidae-Tanypodinae
Ablabesmyia spp.
Ablabesmyia mallochi
Conchapelopia gp.
Labrundinia spp.
Nilotanypus spp.
Rheopelopia spp.
Thienemannimyia gp.
Empididae
Hemerodromia spp.
Simuliidae
Simulium spp.
Tabanidae
Tanyderidae
Tipulidae
® Antocha spp.
Limonia spp.
Tipula spp.
Ephemeroptera
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
R
C
R
R
R
A
R
C
C
C
C
R
C
R
R
R
R
C
A
R
R
R
R
C
C
C
C
R
R
R
C
R
R
C
R
C
A
R
R
C
C
R
R.
R
C
C
R
R
R
R
C
A
R
R
C
R
R
R
R
R
R
A
C
R
R
C
C
R
R
R
R
R
C
R
C
A
C
R
C
R
C
R
R
C
C
R
R
R
R
C
R
C
R
R
R
R
C
R
R
R
C
R
R
C
R
R
R
R
C
R
R
R
C
R
R
R
R
A
A
A
R
C
A
A
R
R
R
R
C
R
R
R
C
C
R

A-9
Appendix Table A-2. Continued.
TAXON
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Baetidae
Acentrella spp.
C
R
R
Acentrella amplus
R
R
Baetis spp.
R
Baetis anoka
R
Baetis ephippiatus
C
R
R
Baetis intercalaris
A
R
C
R
A
R
R
Baetis pluto
A
R
Baetis propi.nquus
R
R
R
R
R
Heterocloeon curiosum
R
C
C
C
R
R
C
Pseudocloeon spp.
A
R
R
Baetiscidae
Baetisca carolina
-
R
Caenidae
Caenis spp.
R
R
R
C
Ephemerellidae
Serratella serratoides
Timpanoga simplex
R
Ephemeridae
Hexagenia spp.
R
R
R
Heptageniidae
Heptagenia marginalis
R
R
R
R
Leucrocuta spp.
R
Stenacron interpunctatum
R
Stenonema exiguum
C
R
R
R
C
R
R
R
Stenonema lenati
R
Stenonema mexicanum
R
A
®
Stenonema modestum
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
Stenonema terminatum
R
C
A
Oligoneuriidae
Xsonychia spp.
A
A
C
A
A
R
C
A
A
Siphlonuridae
Siphlonurus spp.
C
Tricorythidae
Leptohyphes robacki
R
R
Tricorythodes spp.
A
R
C
C
C
R
C
R
Hemiptera
Gerridae
Metrobates hesperius
R
c
A
Nepidae
Ranatra spp.
R
Heteroptera
Veliidae
R
Rhagovelia obesa
R
Megaloptera
Corydalidae
Corydalus cornutus
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
Nigronia serricornis
R
Odonata-Anisoptera
Aeshnidae
Boyeria vinosa
R
Corduliidae
Gomphidae
Dromogomphus armatus
R
R
Gomphidae
R
R
R
R
Gomphus spp.
R
R
Lanthus vernalis
R
Ophiogomphus spp.
C
Progomphus obscurus
R
R
R
Macromiidae
Macromia spp.
C
R
R
R
A-9

Appendix Table A-2. Continued.
TAXON
Macromia georgina
Odonata-Zygoptera
Calopterygidae
Hetaerina spp.
Coenagrionidae
Argia spp.
Ischnura spp.
Plecoptera
Perlidae
Acroneuria abnormis
Agnetina annulipes
Agnetina capitata
Agnetina flavescens
Paragnetina fumosa
Paragnetina ichusa
Paragnetina immarginata
Paragnetina kansensis
Pteronarcyidae
Pteronarcys spp.
Pteronarcys dorsata
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Cheumatopsyche spp.
Hydropsyche betteni
Hydropsyche incommoda
Hydropsyche morosa
Hydropsyche phalerata
® Hydropsyche simulans/rossi
Hydropsyche sparna
Hydropsyche venularis
Leptoceridae
Nectopsyche exquisita
Oecetis spp.
Triaenodes spp.
Philopotamidae
Chimarra spp.
Polycentropodidae
Mollusca
Gastropoda
Limnophila
Ancylidae
Ferrissia spp.
Mesogastropoda
Hydrobiidae
Pleuroceridae
Leptoxis spp.
Pelecypoda
Heterodontida
Corbiculidae
Corbicula fluminea
Nemertea
Enopla
Hoplonemertea
Tetrastemmatidae
Prostoma graecens
11
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
R
A-10
R
C
R
R
R
C
R
R
A
A
A
A C
R
C R
C
C
C
R
R
C
A
C
C
C
C
R R
C
A
A
R
C
C
A
C
R
R
C
C
A
C
R
A A
C
A
A
C
A
A
R
R R
C
R
C
C
R
R
C
R
R
R
R
A A
C
A
A
A
R
C
R
R
R A
A
C
R
C
A
A
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
A-10
R
R
R
R
C
A A
C
A
A
A
A C
R
A-10

0
APPENDIX B
(Table listing the concentration of elements in Macroinvertebrates)
�11
0

® Appendix Table B. Concentrations of elements (µg/g wet weight)in organisms
collected from Dan River Locations A and B, above and
below Belews Creek Steam Station, respectively.
IM
---------------------------------
YEAR=1984 ----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
Cu
ZN
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.10
0.05*
2.00*
54.83
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.10
0.05*
2.00*
69.77
720.0
DIPTERA
1
0.95
0.36
8.72
28.94
720.0
DIPTERA
2
1.10
0.05*
9.89
31.62
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.32
0.05*
2.00*
32.17
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.58
0.05*
2.00*
15.22
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.97
0.05*
2.00*
42.70
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
1.27
0.05*
16.51
36.74
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.79
0.05*
2.00*
35.73
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.92
0.05*
2.00*
20.71
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.93
0.05*
11.74
26.89
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.79
0.05*
2.00*
24.20
---------------------------------
YEAR=1985 ----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
Cu
ZN
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.79
0.97
1.60*
22.00
720.0
CORBICULA
2
1.37
0.90
1.80*
36.00
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.41
0.05*
2.00*
21.00
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.78
0.05*
2.00*
20.00
720.0
DIPTERA
1
1.99
0.05*
2.00*
2.00*
720.0
DIPTERA
2
1.82
0.05*
2.00*
16.00
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.69
0.05*
2.00*
37.00
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.47
0.05*
2.00*
2.00*
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.72
0.05*
16.80
28.00
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
1.12
0.05*
17.10
2.00*
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.47
0.05*
2.00*
27.00
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.40
0.05*
2.00*
26.00
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.81
0.05*
2.00*
36.00
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.28
0.05*
2.00*
14.00
------------------------=--------
YEAR=1986 ----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
Cu
ZN
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.64
0.32
0.75*
27.20
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.73
0.64
0.75*
32.30
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.05*
0.05*
0.75*
5.00*
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.05*
0.05*
0.75*
5.00*
720.0
DIPTERA
1
0.05*
0.05*
0.75*
5.00*
720.0
DIPTERA
2
0.05*
0.05*
0.75*
5.00*
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.05*
0.05*
0.75*
5.00*
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.05*
0.05*
0.75*
5.00*
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.05*
0.05*
0.75*
5.00*
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.25
0.05*
0.75*
29.40
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.20
0.05*
0.75*
16.70
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.66
0.05*
0.75*
38.50
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.80
0.05*
5.84
21.30
---------------------------------
YEAR=1987 ----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
Cu
ZN
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.91
0.85
7.80
27.08
720.0
CORBICULA
2
1.05
0.86
7.58
33.18
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.10*
0.05*
5.00*
65.89
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.10*
0.05*
5.00*
30.75
*Detection
Limit
IM

®
Appendix Table B. Continued.
--------------
--------------
-----
YEAR=1987 ----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
CU
ZN
720.0
DIPTERA
1
0.10*
0.05*
5.00*
10.00*
720.0
DIPTERA
2
0.10*
0.05*
5.00*
10.00*
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.71
0.05*
5.00*
24.75
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.10*
0.05*
20.56
10.00*
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.10*
0.05*
5.00*
38.30
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.10*
0.05*
5.00*
28.81
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.42
0.05*
5.00*
29.23
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.43
0.05*
5.00*
29.08
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.63
0.05*
5.00*
18.53
720.0
ODONATA
2
1.20
0.05*
5.00*
40.65
---------------------------------
YEAR=1988 ----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
CU
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
0.48
0.02*
0.50*
10.00*
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.05*
0.02*
0.50*
30.76
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.91
1.23
13.19
28.88
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.79
0.83
0.50*
28.46
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.05*
0.02*
0.40*
10.00*
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.05*
0.02*
0.40*
10.00*
720.0
DIPTERA
1
0.05*
0.02*
0.50*
40.42
720.0
DIPTERA
2
0.05*
0.02*
0.40*
10.00*
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.43
0.02*
0.40*
10.00*
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.34
0.02*
0.40*
10.00*
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.05*
0.02*
0.50*
10.00*
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.05*
0.02*
0.50*
63.09
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.24
0.02*
0.50*
10.00*
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.28
0.02*
0.40*
10.00*
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.43
0.02*
0.50*
15.20
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.45
0.02*
0.50*
14.52
---------------------------------
YEAR=1989 ----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
CU
ZN
710.0
®
CORBICULA
1
0.27
0.05*
5.00*
12.60
710.0
CORBICULA
2
3.00
0.05*
5.00*
11.30
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.63
0.48
5.00*
23.61
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.47
0.34
5.00*
16.14
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.08*
0.05*
5.00*
1.00*
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.08*
0.05*
5.00*
1.00*
720.0
DIPTERA
1
0.08*
0.05*
5.00*
1.0*
720.0
DIPTERA
2
0.08*
0.05*
5.00*
112.12
'710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.08*
0.05*
5.00*
31.38
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.08*
0.05*
5.00*
1.00*
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
1.15
0.05*
5.00*
42.83
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.80
0.05*
5.00*
32.50
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.26
0.05*
5.00*
14.04
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.08*
0.05*
5.00*
26.14
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.71
0.05*
5.00*
29.45
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.41
0.05*
5.00*
32.44
---------------------------------
YEAR=1990 ----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
CU
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
1.53
0.05*
10.00*
37.60
710.0
CORBICULA
2
1.62
0.05*
121.00
78.10
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.51
0.45
10.00*
21.20
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.69
0.05*
19.60
31.80
710.0
DIPTERA
1
1.31
0.05*
10.00*
20.10
*Detection
Limit

Appendix
Table B. Continued.
---------------------------------
YEAR=1990 ----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
Cu
ZN
710.0
DIPTERA
2
1.26
0.05*
10.00*
25.70
720.0
DIPTERA
1
6.51
0.05*
10.00*
76.50
720.0
DIPTERA
2
3.14
0.05*
10.00*
46.20
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
2.12
0.05*
10.00*
54.50
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.76
0.05*
10.00*
22.00
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.90
0.05*
10.00*
23.40
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
1.05
0.89
32.40
31.40
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.44
0.05*
10.00*
34.50
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.41
0.05*
10.00*
31.10
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.60
0.14
10.00*
26.60
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.67
0.84
10.00*
33.80
---------------------------------
YEAR=1991 ----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
Cu
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
0.51
0.40
12.00*
35.70
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.81
0.34
12.00*
32.25
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.61
0.08*
12.00*
33.55
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.61
0.52
10.00*
27.69
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.63
10.72
10.00*
40.51
710.0
DIPTERA
2
1.14
0.08*
10.00*
5.00*
720.0
DIPTERA
1
0.10
0.08**
10.00*
5.00*
720.0
DIPTERA
2
0.10
0.08*
12.00*
5.00*
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.53
0.08*
12.00*
38.90
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.28
0.08*
12.00*
28.16
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.60
0.08*
10.00*
33.41
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.67
0.08*
10.00*
36.10
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.41
0.08*
10.00*
19.00
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.53
0.08*
10.00*
31.55
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.99
0.08*
10.00*
27.34
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.88
0.34
12.00*
23.13
--------------------------------
YEAR=1992 ----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
Cu
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
2.85
2.11
5.00*
32.70
710.0
CORBICULA
2
1.59
0.10
5.00*
5.00*
720.0
CORBICULA
1
2.00
0.48
5.00*
28.55
720.0
CORBICULA
2
1.79
0.56
5.00*
26.57
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.25*
0.03*
5.00*
25.10
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.25*
0.03*
5.00*
36.24
720.0
DIPTERA
1
3.65
0.03*
5.00*
19.79
720.0
DIPTERA
2
2.34
0.03*
5.00*
5.00*
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
1.69
0.03*
5.00*
33.07
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
2.12
0.03*
14.51
44.57
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
2.62
0.56
15.73
32.62
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
3.88
0.53
5.00*
33.38
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.96
0.03*
5.00*
23.28
710.0
ODONATA
2
1.93
0.24
24.25
35.68
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.88
0.03*
5.00*
26.07
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.54
0.03*
5.00*
21.62
*Detection Limit

I1
Appendix Table B. Continued.
--------------------------------
YEAR=1993 -----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
CU
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
0.58
0.49
10.00*
9.91
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.73
0.23
10.00*
13.08
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.59
0.56
10.00*
7.88
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.43
0.70
10.00*
10.36
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.21
0.02*
10.00*
2.45
710.0
DIPTERA
2
1.20
0.43
10.00*
3.06
720.0
DIPTERA
1
3.30
0.97
10.00*
9.92
720.0
DIPTERA
2
4.30
0.02*
10.00*
12.70
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.72
0.34
10.00*
8.39
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
1.18
0.52
10.00*
0.50*
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
1.06
0.48
10.00*
15.65
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.95
0.55
10.00*
14.77
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.51
0.02*
10.00*
12.94
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.50
0.09
10.00*
9.74
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.12
0.52
10.00*
16.21
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.50
0.02*
10.00*
10.74
--------------------------------
YEAR=1994 -----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
CU
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
0.82
0.45
6.76
25.34
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.82
0.24
30.39
20.51
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.84
0.52
5.37
22.30
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.92
0.74
17.12
15.80
710.0
DIPTERA
1
1.42
0.90
65.50
18.63
710.0
DIPTERA
2
5.68
0.82
114.30
5.52
720.0
DIPTERA
1
0.44
0.63
8.96
8.30
720.0
DIPTERA
2
0.99
0.73
27.02
4.75
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
2.51
0.62
53.43
22.79
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.96
1.01
28.84
22.11
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
1.39
0.25
1.91
21.70
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
2.43
0.42
20.16
15.34
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.50
0.20
13.88
21.55
710.0
ODONATA
2
1.34
0.55
8.28
25.42
--------------------------------
YEAR=1995 -----------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
CU
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
0.63
0.26
5.35*
15.30
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.39
0.14
20.24
11.45
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.79
0.50
19.34
17.23
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.74
0.40
5.00*
13.61
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.30
0.52
53.90
10.81
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.32
0.21
5.41*
11.61
720.0
DIPTERA
1
0.41
0.50
18.87
11.48
720.0
DIPTERA
2
0.32
0.14
37.46
9.84
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.48
0.10
14.85
14.43
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.49
0.07
23.66
12.71
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.98
0.26
27.93
20.17
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.52
0.23
73.20
16.31
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.39
0.09
11.00
13.50
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.39
0.12
41.43
17.47
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.48
0.14
30.38
12.18
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.51
0.17
15.88
10.82
*Detection
Limit
I1

M. e
Appendix
Table B. Continued.
----------------------------
YEAR=1996---------------
------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
CU
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
0.52
0.29
18.00*
12.10
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.91
0.47
20.50
26.30
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.61
1.86
5.65*
18.44
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.77
0.52
11.07*
19.66
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.48
0.04*
152.10
23.70
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.33
1.49
390.10
12.19
720.0
DIPTERA
1
0.45
0.94
112.50
22.87
720.0
DIPTERA
2
1.11
0.22
164.20
46.21
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.82
0.06*
43.10
14.10
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.74
0.08*
24.70
10.30
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.87
0.34
43.80
18.76
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
1.18
0.14
4.13*
28.91
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.49
0.10
35.30
18.10
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.81
0.18
17.50*
20.70
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.76
0.07
8.04*
20.53
720.0
ODONATA
2
1.03
1.35
83.06
49.32
--------------------------------
YEAR=1997 --------------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
CU
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
1.47
0.70
33.33
39.31
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.52
0.15
72.10
26.61
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.88
0.65
26.74
16.39
720.0
CORBICULA
2
1.08
0.78
27.15
7.43
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.92
0.48
5.50*
22.32
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.64
0.24
62.40
49.54
720.0
DIPTERA
1
0.55
0.17
15.38*
21.21
720.0
DIPTERA
2
0.72
0.58
10.20*
14.31
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
2.41
0.53
13.00*
25.19
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
1.13
0.28
15.43*
36.19
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
1.81
0.36
7.44*
37.60
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.63
0.92
88.85
20.98
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.63
0.01*
57.35
22.58
710.0
ODONATA
2
1.94
0.78
93.18
29.46
720.0
ODONATA
1
1.03
0.24
28.83
15.65
720.0
ODONATA
2
1.53
0.22
38.40
22.56
------------------------------
YEAR=1998 --------------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
CU
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
0.78
0.37
5.56*
22.69
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.64
0.34
8.49*
20.90
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.80
0.54
3.99
12.89
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.85
0.60
4.59*
20.00
710.0
DIPTERA
1
0.38
0.45
4.72*
19.61
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.40
0.30
72.27
21.79
720.0
DIPTERA
1
0.54
1.17
5.55*
18.04
720.0
DIPTERA
2
0.37
1.39
8.70*
20.04
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.39
0.24
26.32
23.11
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.56
0.33
4.60*
23.51
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
1.30
0.51
12.17*
26.08
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.43
0.56
14.11
15.27
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.52
0.18
1.85*
22.05
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.58
0.24
37.14
25.18
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.42
0.12
3.44*
12.46
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.50
0.46
4.08*
14.48
*Detection Limit
Appendix
Table B. Continued.
M. e

WN
--------------------------------
YEAR=1999 --------------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
Cu
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
0.30
0.34
14.70*
8.66
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.47
0.43
22.08*
5.64
720.0
CORBICULA
1
1.04
0.68
13.82*
9.06
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.92
0.26
18.57*
3.44
710.0
DIPTERA
1
2.64
0.68
15.00*
93.64
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.93
0.21
37.48
46.80
720.0
DIPTERA
1
2.44
0.62
58.84
4.42
720.0
DIPTERA
2
2.30
1.69
29.02*
138.63
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.65
0.18
33.12*
10.10
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.50
0.05*
5.46*
6.02
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
2.04
3.31
48.91
22.24
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
5.28
3.26
26.38*
44.87
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.32
0.08
24.42*
32.54
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.41
0.09
17.76*
19.50
720.0
ODONATA
1
1.84
1.01
27.08*
24.20
720.0
ODONATA
2
1.61
0.35
22.43*
21.78
---------------------------------
YEAR=2000 --------------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
Cu
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
0.63
0.33
8.90*
14.80
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.40
0.20*
39.96
17.76
720.0
CORBICULA
1
1.30
0.98
31.13
27.41
720.0
CORBICULA
2
1.20
0.69
12.42*
20.69
710.0
DIPTERA
1
1.90*
2.62*
36.00*
133.30*
710.0
DIPTERA
2
11.10*
14.93*
146.10*
73.64*
720.0
DIPTERA
1
6.90*
1.20*
174.00*
48.83*
720.0
DIPTERA
2
26.70*
4.20*
314.00*
608.40*
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.15
0.20*
16.70*
10.56
-
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.70
0.22*
29.30*
11.87
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
2.24
0.75*
8.30*
7.07*
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
2.94
0.52*
15.80*
23.00
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.66*
1.76*
8.80*
17.43
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.29
0.01*
12.00*
17.60
720.0
ODONATA
1
0.84
0.17*
36.90*
16.77
720.0
ODONATA
2
1.26
0.55
8.00*
22.22
--------------------------------
YEAR=2001 --------------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
Cu
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
0.47
0.26
8.00*
41.15
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.62
0.33
17.00*
48.38
720.0
CORBICULA
1
1.47
0.75
14.50*-
59.02
720.0
CORBICULA
2
1.17
1.04
25.50*
44.46
710.0
DIPTERA
1
1.80
0.18*
10.00*
63.83
710.0
DIPTERA
2
0.41*
0.17*
15.00*
70.34
720.0
DIPTERA
1
1.28
0.62
21.00*
37.72
720.0
DIPTERA
2
1.05
0.12*
64.09
22.87
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.13*
0.15
14.50*
21.87
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
0.31
0.18
17.50*
27.09
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
1.47
0.39
10.50*
43.64
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
1.45
0.18*
14.00*
48.44
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.52
0.14
7.50*
17.68
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.15*
0.05*
13.50*
20.74
720.0
ODONATA
1
2.70
0.47
12.00*
48.94
720.0
ODONATA
2
0.64
0.33
8.00*
21.73
*Detection
Limit
WN

0
Appendix Table B. Continued.
------------------------------
YEAR=2002 --------------------------------
LOCATION
TAXON
REP
SE
AS
CU
ZN
710.0
CORBICULA
1
0.46
0.38
10.00*
31.39
710.0
CORBICULA
2
0.35
0.28
6.44
25.97
720.0
CORBICULA
1
0.99
0.53
5.50*
38.84
720.0
CORBICULA
2
0.96
0.63
8.50*
36.52
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.75
0.23
21.00*
33.02
710.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
1.03
0.24
16.00*
27.52
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
1
0.90*
0.78
25.00*
18.50*
720.0
EPHEMEROPTERA
2
1.15*
0.68
28.50*
22.00*
710.0
ODONATA
1
0.75*
0.15*
14.00*
14.00*
710.0
ODONATA
2
0.19*
0.06*
5.50*
19.04
720.0
ODONATA
1
1.55*
0.23*
8.50*
30.50*
*Detection Limit
LI,
Cr
RE