NC0039586_2002 Environmental Monitoring Report_20031217

r ` ` Pro ress Ener
v� 9 9Y
C EC 1 8 2003
DEC 17 2003
Mr. Alan Klimek, Director
Division of Water Quality
N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
141(5c
SERIAL: HNP -03-146
Subject: Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
Dear Mr. Klimek:
Enclosed are three copies of the Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report.
The report summarizes the results of water quality monitoring conducted by Progress Energy
Carolinas, Inc.. at the Harris Reservoir during 2002.
During 2002, operational effects of the Harris Nuclear Plant on the water quality and aquatic life
continued to be minimal. Nutrient concentrations, including total phosphorus and total nitrogen
concentrations, remained stable for the reporting period. The concentrations of most chemical
constituents did not exhibit any consistent temporal trends.
Please contact Mr. R. T. Wilson at [phone] if you have any questions concerning this
report or if you have a need for additional information.
Sincerely,
B. C. Wa rep
Plant General Manager
Harris Nuclear Plant
MGW
Enclosure
c: /Mr. D. Goodrich — NCDWQ
Mr. F. A. Harris — NCWRC
Ms. C. Sullins - NCDWQ
Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Harris Nuclear Plant
P.O. Box 165
New Hill, NC 27562

y' rd
C

Norris Nuclear Fient
Y002 EnVirommental Monitoring Report
Environmental Services Section � Progress Energy

HARRIS NUCLEAR PLANT
2002 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT
November 2003
Environmental Services Section
PROGRESS ENERGY CAROLINAS
New Hill, North Carolina

Harris Nuclear Plant
Preface
2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
This copy of the report is not a controlled document as detailed in Environmental Services
Section Biology Program Procedures and Quality Assurance Manual. Any changes made to the
original of this report subsequent to the date of issuance can be obtained from:
Director
Environmental Services Section
Progress Energy Carolinas
3932 New Hill -Holleman Road
New Hill, North Carolina 27562-0327
Progress Energy Carolinas Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
Table of Contents
Page
Preface......................... ...................... ...................................................................................... i
Listof Tables....:....................................................................................................................
Listof Figures......................................................................:................................................. ill
Listof Appendices.............................................:.................................................................... iii
Metric-English Conversion and Units of Measure................................................................. iv
Water Chemistry Abbreviations ....... ....... ***. *.............. '**..........'..."**".:....***"'*"*'*......... iv
EXECUTIVESUMMARY.............:...................................................................................... v
HARRIS NUCLEAR PLANT 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT
Reservoir Description...................................................................................................... 1
Objectives........................................................................................................................ 1
Methods............................................................................................................................ 2
RESULTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AT HARRIS RESERVOIR
DURING,2002
Limnology.:......:...................................................................................................:........... 8
Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen........................................................................... 8
Water Clarity (Secchi Disk T1ansparency
Chloro h 11 , Total Dissolved Solids, and Turbidity)... 8
pY a............................................................................................................. 9
Nutrients and Total Organic Carbon.........:................................................................. 9
Specific Conductance, Ions and Hardness.................................................................. 9
pHand Total Alkalinity.........................:.........................................................I........... 9
Trace Metal - Copper............. .:...............:........................... :...................................... 9
Fisheries....::............................................................................................................ 10
Biofouling Monitoring Surveys....................:.................................................................. 12
AquaticVegetation......................................................................................................... 12
CONCLUSIONS......................................................:......:...................................................... 13
REFERENCES....................................................................................................................... 14
Progress Energy Carolinas
ii
Environmental Services Section

'Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring .Report
List of Tables
Table Page
1 Environmental monitoring program at Harris Reservoir for 2002 ...................... 4
2 Field sampling and laboratory methods followed in the 2002 environmental
monitoring program at Harris Reservoir............................................................... 5
3 Statistical analyses performed on data collected for the 2002 environmental
monitoring program at Harris Reservoir........................................................... 6
4 Common and scientific names of species in this report .................................... 7
List of Figures
Figure Page
1 Sampling areas and stations at Harris Reservoir during 2002 .............................. .3
List of Appendices
Appendix Page
1 . Water temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, pH, and Secchi disk
transparency data collected from Harris Reservoir during 2002 ......................... A-1
2 Means, ranges, and spatial trends of selected limnological variables
from the surface waters of Harris Reservoir during 2002 .................................... A-3
3 Mean number per hour for fish collected with electrofishing sampling
by transect from Harris Reservoir during 2002 ................................................... A-4
4 Mean weight per hour for fish collected with electrofishing sampling
by transect from Harris Reservoir during 2002 ................................................... A-5
5 Length -frequency distributions for bluegill, redear sunfish, and largemouth
bass collected with electrofishing sampling from Harris Reservoir
during2002.......................................................................................................... A-6
Progress Energy Carolinas iii Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant
2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
..:Metric -English
Conversion and Units of Measure
Length
Cl-
Weight
1 micron (,um) = 4.0 x 10-5 inch
Ammonia -nitrogen
1 microgram (,ug) = 10-3 mg or
u
1 millimeter (mm) =1000 ,m = 0.?4 inch
10-'g = 3.5 x 10-8 ounce
1 centimeter (cm) = 10 mm = 0.4 i ch
1 milligram (mg) = 3.5 x 10-5 ounce
1 meter (m) =100 cm = 3.28 feet
TP
1 gram (g) =1000 mg = 0.035 ounce
1 kilometer (km) =1000 m = 0.62
ile
1 kilogram (kg) =1000 g = 2.2 pounds
Total organic carbon
Na+
1 metric ton= 1000 kg = 1.1 tons
Area
Total copper
1 kg/hectare = 0.89 pound/acre
1 square meter (m) = 10.76 square
feet
Total dissolved solids
1 hectare (ha) = 10,000 m2 = 2.47 acres
Temperature .
Degrees Celsius (°C) = 5/9 (°F-32)
Volume
1 milliliter (ml) = 0.034 fluid ounce
Specific conductance
1 liter = 1000 ml = 0.26 gallon
MS/cm = Microsiemens/centimeter
1 cubic meter = 35.3 cubic feet
Turbidity
NTU = Nephelometric Turbidity Unit
Progress Energy Carolinas iv Environmental Services Section
Water
Chemistry Abbreviations
Cl-
Chloride
NH3-N
Ammonia -nitrogen
SO4
Sulfate
NO3- +NO2 - N
Nitrate + nitrite -nitrogen
Cat+
Total calcium
TP
Total phosphorus
Mgt+
Total magnesium
TOC
Total organic carbon
Na+
Total sodium
Cu
Total copper
TN
Total nitrogen
TDS
Total dissolved solids
Progress Energy Carolinas iv Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Harris Reservoir supplies makeup water .to the closed -cycle cooling system for the Harris
Nuclear Plant. The Harris Nuclear Plant discharges primarily cooling tower blowdown along
with low volume waste discharges into the reservoir near the main dam.
Harris Reservoir continued to show qualities of a typical, biologically productive, southeastern
reservoir in 2002. Nutrient concentrations, including total phosphorus and total nitrogen
concentrations, remained similar to recent years and were in an acceptable range for a productive
reservoir in this area.
Bluegill, redear sunfish, largemouth bass, and black crappie dominated the fish community in
Harris Reservoir during 2002. Annual catch rates for bluegill and largemouth bass were similar
to catch rates in previous years while the annual catch rates for black crappie and redear sunfish
were greater than in previous years. Bluegill and largemouth bass were represented by multiple
size groups and an abundance of small fish indicated good reproduction. Young redear sunfish
were less common in samples but the increasing abundance of this species in recent years
indicated sufficient reproduction. The largemouth bass population remained balanced with a
large percentage of larger fish present in the population.
Hydrilla stands reaching the surface of the water were observed in the intake canal in Harris
Reservoir during 2002. However, no fouling of the plant intake screens occurred. No stands of
hydrilla were observed in the littoral zone of the auxiliary reservoir during 2002. The attempt to
control hydrilla in the auxiliary reservoir by releasing grass carp appears to have been effective
in reducing the quantity and area covered by this vegetation.
Progress Energy Carolinas v Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant
2002 ENVIRO
Harris Reservoir, located in C
impounding Buckhorn Creek, a
Harris Reservoir has a surface
130 ha. The main reservoir has a
8.9 x 107 m3, a full -pool elevation
average residence time of 28 in
full -pool elevation was reached in F
the 183.9 -km2 drainage area is mo
agriculture. The conversion of
continues in many areas of the
2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
NUCLEAR PLANT
TAL MONITORING REPORT
Description
m and Wake Counties, North Carolina, was created by
ury of the Cape Fear River (Figure 1). The main body of
of 1680 ha; the auxiliary reservoir has a surface area of
ximum depth of 18 m, a mean depth of 5.3 in, a volume of
67.1 in National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD), and an
hs. The reservoir began filling in December 1980 and
bruary 1983. The 64.5 -km shoreline is mostly wooded and
y rolling hills with land used primarily for forestry and
from forestry or agricultural purposes to residential uses
Harris Reservoir was constructed t'o supply cooling tower makeup and auxiliary reservoir
makeup water to the 900 -MW Harris Nuclear Plant, which began commercial operation in May
1987. In 1986 the bottom waters ofj the reservoir near the main dam began receiving National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination
power plant cooling tower. Trib
Harris Energy and Environmental
Holly Springs. The reservoir is a s
Harris Nuclear Plant and the Harris
The primary objectives of the 20C
monitoring program were to: (1) ass
natural or power plant -induced effect
introduction and expansion of nonnal
demonstrate the existence of a reason
addressed in previous annual monitor
1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002.
Progress Energy Carolinas
(NPDES)-permitted wastewater discharges from the
ies also receive NPDES-permitted discharges from the
and from wastewater treatment plants at Apex and
of drinking water for Progress Energy employees at the
and Environmental Center.
Objectives
Harris Nuclear Plant non -radiological environmental
s the reservoir's overall water quality, (2) identify any
on the water quality in the reservoir, (3) document the
ve plant and animal populations in the reservoir, and (4)
recreational fishery. These objectives have also been
reports with the most recent detailed in CP&L 1998,
1 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
Methods
The Harris Nuclear Plant environmental program for 2002 included monitoring the reservoir's:
(1) limnological characteristics (water quality, water chemistry, and phytoplankton), (2) fisheries
community, (3) possible introductions of the zebra and quagga mussels, and (4) distribution of
aquatic vegetation. Sampling methods and statistical analyses for data collected during 2002
were similar to those used for data collected during 2001 (CP&L 2002) (Tables 2 and 3).
Supporting data summaries and appropriate statistical analyses were used to describe and
interpret the environmental quality of the reservoir (Table 3). A list of common and scientific
names of species in this report is provided (Table 4). Three stock assessment indices were used
as indicators of a balanced largemouth bass population (Gablehouse 1984). These indices
include: Proportional Stock Density (PSD), the percentage of fish z 300 mm; Relative Stock
Density for preferred length (RSDP), the percentage of fish z 380 mm; and Relative Stock
Density for memorable length (RSDM), the percentage of fish z 510 mm. Only fish greater than
the minimum stock length (>_ 200 mm) were included in these calculations.
All analytical testing completed in support of the Harris Reservoir environmental program was
performed by appropriate laboratories which were .qualified to perform water and wastewater
testing. The accuracy and precision of laboratory analyses of water chemistry data were
determined with analytical standards, spikes, and replicates. Quality assurance information
including the accuracy and percent recovery of water chemistry standards are available upon
request. In this report where concentrations were less than the laboratory -reporting limit, the
concentrations were assumed to be at one-half the reporting limit for the calculation of the mean.
Where statistically significant results were reported, a Type I error rate of 5% (« = 0.05) was
used and Fisher's protected least significant difference test was applied to determine where
significant differences in mean values occurred.
Progress Energy Carolinas 2 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant
2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
N
1
l
`
Tom Jack
Thomas \
,
\ Little White
=t
Creek �
Creek 1 "
,
Oak Creek
White Oak
NC 42
\\
Boat Ramp
Creek
NC 42 ~^�
\
1
utfall #007 -
v N
e
Plant Sife /
Dike
Intake
1
Auxiliary"
Canal
1
Reservoir,
(MI)
1
Z
1
2
Dike
Boat
%Utfall V
i S
Ramp
006..
1v
Emergency;
v
'Service
,
Waterintakei
\
(AI)
J
P
Cary,
Branch
'Holleman's
Crossroads
Boat Rama n
t Cn
1 ,
1�
N
1
l
`
1
1
V
=t
NC 42
\\
Boat Ramp
NC 42 ~^�
\
1
1
e
NORTH CAROLINA
Figure 1. Sampling areas and static#ns at Harris Reservoir during 2002.
Progress Energy Carolinas I 3 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
Table 1. Environmental monitoring program at Harris Reservoir for 2002.
Program Frequency Location
Water quality
Water chemistry
Plankton+
Biofouling monitoring
Zebra mussel surveys
Fisheries
Electrofishing
Aquatic vegetation survey
January, May, July, November
January, May, July, November
January, May, July, November
January, May, July, November
February, May, August, November
November
Stations E2, H2, P2, and S2
(surface to bottom at
1-m intervals)
Stations E2, 112, P2, and S2
(surface samples at all stations)
Stations E2, H2, P2, and S2
Areas E, P or Q, and V
Stations E1, E3, H1, H3, P1, P3,
S1, S3, V1, and V3
Areas MI and Z
+Plankton included phytoplankton (algae) and chlorophyll a samples. Phytoplankton samples
were collected and preserved but were not identified because all sampled chlorophyll a
concentrations were < 40 ,ug/L.
Progress Energy Carolinas 4 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear
2002 Environmental
Table 2. Field' sampling and .laboratory methods followed in the 2002 environmental
monitoring program at Harris Reservoir.
Water quality
Temperature, diE
measured with c
oxygen meters. ]
Water clarity was
Water chemistry_ Surface water sai
laboratory on ice,
Phytoplankton Equal amounts of
twice the Secchi di
mixed in a plastic
5 ml of "MY fixati
Method
oxygen, pH, turbidity, and specific conductance were
I YSe multiparameter instruments and YSe dissolved
nents were taken from surface to bottom at 1-m intervals.
:d with a Secchi disk.
s were collected in appropriate containers, transported to the
analyzed according to accepted laboratory methods.
iter from the surface, the Secchi disk transparency depth, and
transparency depth were obtained with a Van Dorn sampler and
mtainer. A 250-m1 sub sample was taken and preserved with
Chlorophyl l_a Equal amounts ofater from the surface; the Secchi disk .transparency depth, and
twice the Secchi dis�C transparency depth were obtained with a Van Dorn sampler and
mixed in a plastic container. A 1000-m1 sub sample was collected in a dark bottle,
placed on ice, and returned turned to the laboratory. In the laboratory a 250-m1 sub sample
was. analyzed according to Strickland and Parsons (1972) and APHA (1995).
Electrofishing Fifteen -minute sam les were collected at each station using a Smith -Root Type
VI -A, 5.0 GPP, or7.5 GPP equipped, Wisconsin -design electrofishing boat with
pulsed DC current. Fish were identified to species, measured to the nearest mm,
weighed to the near st gram, examined for the presence of disease and deformities,
and released.
Zebra mussel The dock at the Holjleman's boat ramp or water quality station marker buoys were
visually inspected or the presence of mussels during routine water quality
monitoring.
Aquatic Portions of the shoretervoir
e and/or littoral zone of the Harris Plant main reservoir intake
vegetation canal and auxiliary rwere systematically surveyed by boat to document the
survey presence of aquatic vegetation, specifically hydrilla and water primrose.
Energy Carolinas 1 5 Environmental Services' Section

Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
Table 3. Statistical analyses performed on data collected for the 2002 environmental
monitoring program at Harris Reservoir.
Transfor- Statistical Main
Program Variable mation Test/model+ effect(s)
Water quality Specific conductance and None One-way, block on month Station
Secchi disk transparency
Water chemistry Select monitoring variables None One-way, block on month Station
Phytoplankton
Chlorophyll a
None
One-way, block on month Station
Fisheries
No. fish per hour by species
ln(x + 1)
One-way, block on month Transect
Weight per hour by species ln(x + 1) One-way, block on month Transect
Relative weight (Wr) ¶ None Wr = WOWS x 100 Selected species
+Statistical tests used were one-way and two-way analysis of variance models. A Type I error
rate of 5% (a = 0.05) was used to judge the significance of all tests. Fisher's protected
least significant difference (LSD) test was applied to determine where differences in
means occurred.
¶Relative weight (Wr) where Wo is the observed weight of each fish and Ws is the length -specific
standard weight predicted by a weight -length regression equation constructed to
represent the species as a whole (W,. = Wo / WS* 100). Relative weight (Anderson and
Neumann 1996) was calculated for bluegill (Hillman 1982), redear sunfish (Pope et al.
1995), and largemouth bass (Wege and Anderson 1978). Minimum total lengths for
inclusion in these calculations are 80 mm for bluegill and redear sunfish and 150 mm
for largemouth bass.
Progress Energy Carolinas 6 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant
2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
Table 4. Common and scientificl names of species in this report.
Common Name Scientific Name
Black crappie
Bluegill
Bluespotted sunfish
Bowfin
Brown bullhead
Chain pickerel
Channel catfish
Coastal shiner
Common carp
Flat bullhead
Gizzard shad
Golden shiner
Grass carp
Largemouth bass
Pumpkinseed
Redbreast sunfish
Redear sunfish
Threadfin shad
Warmouth
White catfish
White crappie
White perch
Quagga mussel
Zebra mussel
Water primrose
Hydrilla
Water hyacienth
Water lettuce
Progress Energy Carolinas
Fish
Mussels
Aquatic Vegetation
Pomoxis nigromaculatus
Lepomis macrochirus
Enneacanthus gloriosus
Amia calva
Ameiurus nebulosus
Esox niger ,
kt.alurus punctatus
Notropis petersoni
Cyprinus carpio
Ameiurus platycephalus
Dorosoma cepedianum
Notemigonus crysoleucas
Ctenopharyngodon idella
Micropterus salmoides
Lepomis gibbosus.
Lepomis auritus
Lepomis microlophus
Dorosoma petenense
Lepomis gulosus
Ameiurus catus
Pomoxis annularis
Morone americana
Dreissena bugensis
Dreissena polymorpha
Ludwigia spp.
Hydrilla verticillata
Eichhornia crassipes
Pistia stratiotes
7 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant
2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
RESULTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AT
HARRIS RESERVOIR DURING 2002
Limnology
Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen
• Reservoir waters were slightly stratified in the Buckhorn Creek arm (Station H2) and in the
mid reservoir (Station P2) during May and July and were well mixed during January and
November 2002 (Appendix 1). Portions of the hypolimnion just above the reservoir bottom
were anoxic (i.e., conditions where dissolved oxygen concentrations are less than 1 mg/liter)
during May and July at the deeper stations (Stations E2, H2, and P2) (Appendix 1). During
July water at six meters and below was anoxic at these stations and water near the bottom at
Station S2 was also anoxic. A bottom -water oxygen decline is typical at the deeper stations
during the warm summer months in Harris Reservoir and in other productive southeastern
water bodies.
Water Clarity (Secchi Disk Transparency, Total Dissolved Solids, and Turbidity)
• Secchi disk transparency depths were similar among stations during January, May; and July
with depths ranging from 1.2 to 1.7 in (Appendix 1) and the maximum difference among
stations for any sampling date only 0.5 in. During November, the Secchi disk transparency
depth at S2 in the White Oak Creek arm was only 0.8 in. There were no significant
differences in the annual mean Secchi disk transparencies among stations during 2002
(Appendix 2).
• There were no significant spatial trends for total dissolved solids or turbidity during 2002
(Appendix 2). Based on consistently low concentrations of total solids and total suspended
solids in the historical database, sampling for these variables was discontinued in 2002.
Turbidity was generally low at all stations with values ranging from 1.3 to 7.2 NTU; the only
exception was the November sample at Station S2 where turbidity was 18 NTU.
Progress Energy Carolinas 8 Environmental Services Section

Harris NuclearPlant 1 2002 Environmental Monitoring Repor
Chlorophyll a
• During 2002, mean chlorophyl a concentrations (an indicator of algal biomass) .in Harris
Reservoir continued to be indi ative of moderate biological productivity. Chlorophyll a
concentrations were highest at all stations in the May samples and averaged 12 µg/liter
reservoir -wide for 2002 (Appe dix 2). The greatest recorded chlorophyll a concentration
was 25 µg/liter at Station H2 in May. Because chlorophyll a concentrations did not exceed
the North Carolina water quality standard of 40 µg/liter (NCDEM 1992), the collected
phytoplankton was not identi ied. Chlorophyll a concentrations at Station H2 were
significantly greater than the co centrations at Stations E2 and S2; concentrations at Station
P2 were intermediate between Stations H2 and E2.
Nutrients and Total Organic Carb
• There were no significant spati
phosphorus, ammonia -N, nitrate
concentrations in Harris Reservo
Specific Conductance, Ions, and F
• There were no significant spati
chloride, magnesium, sodium, ar
PH and Total Alkalinity
• The median pH in the surface w;
Surface pH values were highest
8.5.
• In 2002 total alkalinity cone
(Appendix 2).
Trace Metal - Copper
• Based on consistently low cor
historical database, sampling f
. differences among stations for mean nutrient (i.e., total
+ nitrite -N, and total nitrogen) and total organic carbon
during 2002 (Appendix 2).
differences in conductivity, ion concentration (calcium,
sulfate) or hardness during 2002 (Appendix 2).
s of Harris Reservoir was 7.4 during 2002 (Appendix 1).
all stations during July when values ranged from 8.1 to
were not statistically different among stations
nitrations of aluminum, cadmium, and -mercury in the
these trace elements was discontinued in 2002. All
measured ,concentrations of coppewere low (< 2.5 µg/liter) in 2002 with an annual reservoir
mean of 1.6 µg/liter (Appendix 2)1 No spatial trends were observed.
Progress Energy Carolinas 9 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
Fisheries
• Nineteen fish species were collected with quarterly electrofishing sampling during 2002
(Appendix 3). White perch, a species not collected in Harris Reservoir before 1999, was
collected at two transects in 2002. Four common carp, a species native to Asia, were
collected at Transect V during 2002. This introduced species was present in the Cape Fear
River before Harris Reservoir was created but had not been collected in the reservoir before
2000, when one common carp was collected at this same transect. White perch and common
carp will likely become more abundant and widespread in Harris Reservoir in the near future.
Redbreast sunfish and white crappie were not collected during 2002, but were collected in
2000 (CP&L 2001). These species have historically been uncommon in Harris Reservoir and
their absence in electrofishing samples was considered to be related to gear selectivity and/or
random spatial distribution.
• The reservoir -wide average of 322 total fish per hour during 2002 (Appendix 3) exceeded
reservoir means for quarterly electrofishing samples from 1988 to 2000 (CP&L 2001).
Reservoir -wide catch per hour values in 2002 for four common species (black crappie, redear
sunfish, threadfin shad, and golden shiner) exceeded the maximum catch rates with quarterly
electrofishing measured from 1988 to 2000 (CP&L 2001).
• Four sunfish species (bluegill, redear sunfish, largemouth bass, and black crappie) comprised
80% of the mean number per hour collected in Harris Reservoir during 2002 (Appendix 3).
By weight, largemouth bass, redear sunfish, bluegill, and gizzard shad were the dominate
taxa (Appendix 4).
• Redear sunfish catch rates in electrofishing samples differed significantly among transects
(Appendix 3). Significantly more redear sunfish were collected at Transect H than at all
other transects. The catch rates of other recreationally important species were not
significantly different among transects. Comparisons of redear sunfish weight per hour
revealed a similar pattern among transects (Appendix 4). With the exception of golden
shiner, there were no significant differences in weights among transects for any of the other
species assessed.
Progress Energy Carolinas 10 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
• The length -frequency distribution for bluegill indicated strong recruitment during 2002
(Appendix 5). Additionally, th re were adequate numbers of older, larger fish to support a
recreational fishery. The me relative weight of bluegill (n = 1,023, fish z 80 min TL)
collected during 2002 was 82. This was less than optimal (100 = optimum), but was
consistent with the range that mi t be expected under relatively high population densities.
• The annual mean electrofishing c atch rate for redear sunfish of 92 fish per hour (Appendix 3)
was the highest ever for quarterly sampling (CP&L 200 1) and continued -an increasing trend
in redear sunfish catch rates. Similar to previous years, the length -frequency distribution for
redear sunfish indicated low reploductive success during. 2002 (Appendix 5). However, the
relatively high mean electrofishing catch rate, increasing population size in recent years, .and
the presence of older, larger fisII in the population indicated that, a viable redear sunfish
fisheryexists in Harris Reservoi . Similar to bluegill, the less than optimal mean relative
� g p
weight (77) for redear sunfish (n — 916, fish z 80 mm TL) was in the range consistent with a
relatively large population density.
• The annual mean electrofishing c tch rate for largemouth bass of 29 fish per hour was within
the range reported for quarterly ata from 1988 through 2000 (CP&L 2001). Proportional
Stock Density (PSD) and Rel ti Stock Density preferred length (RSDP) values of 78 and
50 respectively,were consistn�ith objectives for a largemouth bass management strategy
targeting larger fish (Gablehouse 1984; Willis et al. 1993). The management _objective for
Harris Reservoir to contain a larg number of big bass equates to a PSD ranging from 50 to
80 and an RSDP in the range of 30 to 60. Also, the Relative Stock Density memorable length
index (RSDM) was 5 during 200 , which was in the range (0-10) of values indicating a
balanced largemouth bass populat on. The mean relative weight of largemouth bass collected
during 2002 (n = 126, fish z1.50 mm TL) was 96, indicating a healthy, robust body
condition.
• Largemouth bass length-frequenc analysis revealed a large number of bass < 100 mm TL
(Appendix 5). Length -frequency alysis for the four sampling _periods revealed that the
majority of the bass < 100 mm T were from the 2002 year class. Young -of -Year (YOY)
Were well distributed among the fi e transects with each transect contributing at least 10% of
the total YOY and Transect P co tributing 41% of the YOY. Largemouth bass weight per
Progress'Energy Carolinas 1 11 Environmental, Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
hour ranged from 3.8 kg/hour at Transect E to 25.0 kg/hour at Transect V, which is a
restricted area that prohibits angling access. However, these differences among transects
were not significant (Appendix 4).
• No fish kills or disease outbreaks were noted in Harris Reservoir during 2002.
• Seven bundles of Christmas trees were added to the reservoir to improve fish habitat near the
fishing pier at Harris Lake County Park.
Biofouling Monitoring Surveys
• No zebra mussels or quagga mussels, potentially serious biofouling organisms to power plant
operations, were found in Harris Reservoir or the auxiliary reservoir during 2002. Zebra and
quagga mussels are not expected to thrive in Harris Reservoir because alkalinity, calcium,
total hardness, and pH levels are sub -optimal for mussel growth and reproduction (Claudi
and Mackie 1993).
Aquatic Vegetation
• During November 2002 water hyacinth and water lettuce, two species of invasive aquatic
plants new to Harris Reservoir, were found across the reservoir from the Holleman's
Crossroads boat ramp at Transect P. Both are free floating vascular plants native to South
America that are widely imported for the ornamental pond trade. All observed plants were
removed from this location. A follow-up visual survey later in November failed to locate any
additional water hyacinth or water lettuce.
• A visual survey for troublesome aquatic vegetation was conducted in the Harris Auxiliary
Reservoir, Harris Reservoir main intake canal, and in the Thomas Creek arm during
November 2002. No hydrilla was observed in the auxiliary reservoir. These observations
indicated that grass carp stocked in 1994, 1996, and 1997 had effectively controlled the
abundance of hydrilla in the auxiliary reservoir. The dominant species growing in the main
intake canal were hydrilla and water primrose. Both shorelines of the main intake canal were
covered with dense stands of water primrose and appeared to be similar in density and
coverage area to previous years. Hydrilla in the intake canal and in the Thomas Creek area
Progress Energy Carolinas 12 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant
2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
just outside the intake canal was; relatively less abundant in 2002 than in 2001, possibly due
to drought conditions throughout most of 2002. Similar levels of hydrilla growth in the past
have had no effect on Harris Nuclear Plant operations.
• No impacts to Harris Nuclear Plant operations from aquatic vegetation occurred during 2002.
CONCLUSIONS
During 2002, Harris Reservoir continued to typify a biologically productive southeastern
reservoir with seasonally occurring oxygen -deficient subsurface waters, elevated nutrient
I
concentrations, abundant rooted, shallow -water aquatic plants, and a sunfish dominated fishery.
The environmental monitoring program conducted during 2002 continued to provide an
assessment of the effects of the HariTis Nuclear Plant's operation on the various components of
the aquatic environment. Most key indicators of the environmental quality in Harris Reservoir
were unchanged from previous year . Nutrient concentrations have been a concern in Harris
Reservoir since phosphorous and nitrogen concentrations increased rapidly in the late 1980s and
early 1990s. Water quality assessme' is determined that nutrient concentrations have remained
stable in recent years and at le els acceptable for productive, southeastern reservoirs.
Assessments of other water quality, plarameters, including total dissolved solids, turbidity, total
organic carbon, ions, total alkalinity, Ihardness, and copper, indicated no consistent, statistically
significant spatial trends. None o these variables were at concentrations that would be
detrimental to the aquatic community.
Bluegill, redear sunfish, and largemou
during 2002. Bluegill of various size
sunfish were increasingly abundant ix
and near the dam. Results indicated
exhibiting strong reproduction and the
forage species have resulted in a very
perch and common carp were collecte
will likely become more abundant and
Progress Energy Carolinas
bass continued to dominate the Harris Reservoir fishery
classes were abundant throughout the reservoir. Redear
Harris Reservoir, especially at the Buckhorn Creek arm
the presence of a balanced largemouth bass population
presence of a large percentage of larger fish. Abundant
ealthy, robust body condition for largemouth bass. White
for the first time in Harris Reservoir in recent years but
in the near future.
13 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
No nuisance algal blooms, as indicated by chlorophyll a concentrations or exotic mussels were
detected in the main reservoir during 2002. Water hyacinth and water lettuce plants were
discovered in the main reservoir and all known individuals were removed during November
2002. Hydrilla was relatively less abundant in the intake canal during 2002 compared to 2001.
Grass carp continued to control the amount and areal coverage of hydrilla in the auxiliary
reservoir during 2002. No operational impacts have occurred at the Harris Nuclear Plant because
of aquatic vegetation biofouling.
REFERENCES
Anderson, R. O., and R. M. Neumann. 1996. Length, weight, and associated structural indices.
Pages 447-482 in B. R. Murphy and D. W. Willis (eds.). Fisheries Techniques. Second
edition. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD.
APHA. 1995. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 19th ed.
American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.
CP&L. 1998. Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant 1997 annual environmental monitoring
report. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
CP&L. 1999. Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant 1998 annual environmental monitoring
report. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
CP&L. 2000. Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant 1999 annual environmental monitoring
report. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
CP&L. 2001. Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant 2000 annual environmental monitoring
report. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
CP&L. 2002. Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant 2001 annual environmental monitoring
report. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
Claudi, R., and G. L. Mackie. 1993. Practical manual for zebra mussel monitoring and control.
Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.
Gablehouse, D. W., Jr. 1984. A length -categorization system to assess fish stocks. N. A. J. Fish.
Mange. 4:273-285.
Hillman, W. P. 1982. Structure and dynamics of unique bluegill populations. Master's thesis.
University of Missouri, Columbia, MO.
NCDEM. 1992. North Carolina lake assessment report. Report No. 92-02. Water Quality
Section, Division of Environmental Management, North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.
Progress Energy Carolinas 14 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant
2002 Environmental Monitor!
Pope, K. L, M. L. Brown, and D. W. Willis. 1995. Proposed revision of the standard weight
(Ws) equation for redear sunfish. J. Freshwater Ecology. 10: 129-134.
Strickland, J. D. H., and T. R. Parsons. 1972. A practical handbook of seawater analysis.
Bulletin No. 167 (2nd ed.). Fisheries Research Board of Canada.
Wege, G. J., and R. O. Anderson. 11978. Relative weight (Wr): a new index of condition for
largemouth bass. Pages 79-91 in G. D. Novinger and J. D. Dillard, editors. New
approaches to management of small impoundments. American Fisheries Society, North
Central Division. Special Pub�,lication 5, Bethesda Maryland.
Willis, D. W., B. R. Murphy, and C. S. Guy. 1993. Stock density indices: development, use, and
limitations. Reviews in Fisheries Science 1: 203-222
Progress Energy Carolinas
15 Environmental Services Section

rn
C
0
Ta
C
d
E
C
0
C
W
N
O
O
N
y
PC
b
a
v,
b
0
L4Ad
,-.a
d
E�
=
x
�
d
ci
W
rii
co
CO
N
h h hr�[l� l-: r-:[-: l�o
N
'cf 'cf MMMNN�n�M
I�hl�hhhhhhl.
x
N
It ct It V V V 7't7
N
�Thkn V ah �o N.-.
Q
N
n V 7 V'+ n V' V????? V' d' ? d; ? "'
N
o O h h D V 7 N N N N N N N N M
C
W
[�[�h�C`C`h h[�hhhl�hhhC`
W
b�o �c �o %0 %0 �a �c �o �c %D%
W
N
�N
ttet V V' V' V v77�
s r.N
0000000000
N
Q N
^� N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
r
M M M N N N N N N
o
0 0
�x
p eq
0 0 0 O'0'oioicwlwlW)W)W)ein000
...
p
W
<nCD0M<DC.C,0<= DC)0 h
o--OOO---0-000
U W
v,���v,v,�nv,viv,inin�o
M
U
-•-•- ---••••- ••--
N
rnrna,aao,
N
aao 0
�
y
N
NNNNNN--�00�0�
N
l�h�D v�v'��-.M hO�
�C^7 �y
�
�.N. � N_ N_ N_. N. N_.�.
00 00 00 00 00 w oo M. -•O
"O
.-.
^a
"�%
bA N�y
v� v v v m o t� t� �
ueq
O, o, (71 h 10 " N N C�
O
O v
y N
X0000000 h IO v 11)11) OM
y N
000N mM o�hN 1l:M C1 h IIo V'
AW
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W
1 o t n U i 7 M N N N O C O O
R
Q
N
het '7 'AMMN
MMfnN
rA
aa��
o
N N N N
L
Q
L (V
't V 't V M N N N N
,L. N
00 00 00 h h h W1 0o
V
MMmmCD h
y V
y
N
V N
OR 0o r� n n W?Oct-
d
a V'N of 0000
i
N N N N N N—
E.�y
M M M M M M M M W
FW
N
rnrnv,o,nMrnm000Mrnr
y
W
ht�r;ht�t�rrt�rrrt�r;r;rr;
W
000i�o;0000c���ovi�
N
L
O W N M V N 'G h o (7, C:) V1 G
O N M �1 Vi %D h 00 0% 0 N M
L
r
Fq
a

Harris Nuclear Plant
Appendix 1 (continued)
2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
July 2, 2002
Depth Temperature Dissolved oxygen Conductivity pH Secchi disk depth
(m) (OC) - (mg/L) (µS/cm) (m)
E2 H2 P2 S2 E2 H2 2 S2 E2 112 P2 S2 E2 112 P2 S2 E2 H2 P2 S2
0.2
28.5
29.5
29.0 29.1
8.9
8.7.2
I
1.0
2.0
27.9
27.7
29.5
28.8
29.0 29.2
28.6 29.2
8.9
8.2
8.8
9.0
.2
0.8
124
126
127
127
8.3
8.2
8.8
3.0
26.8
27.4
28.0 27.1
7.1
8.4
.2
4.0
'26.2
26.1
27.4 26.3
5.0
2.2
q.6
5.0
25.1
24.2
25.1
1.1
0.5
1A
6.0
23.8
22.8
23.5
0.4
0.3
. q.4
7.0
22.7
21.4
22.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
un
11 n
Wno
I1 n
n1
n1
n'1
8.1
125
126
127
127
8.2
8.1
8.5
8.2
1.5
-1.6
1.7
1.7
8.1
124
126
127
127
8.3
8.2
8.8
8.1
123
7.5
123
123
125
128
8.2
8.4
8.6
7.9
0.3
1.4
122
122
122
183
7.9
8.3
8.2
6.8
0.3
0.4
121
116
122
202
7.6
7.2
7.7
6.7
16.2
0.3
121
125
124
152
7.3
7.0
7.5
136
133
131
6.9
6.9
7.1
Depth
Temperature
Dissolved ox ,gen
138
136
130
pH
6.8
6.8
6.9
(°C)
(mg/L)
111
111;
117
4 Q
42
r 4
E2
H2
P2
S2
9.0
20.1
20.4
0.3
0.3
126
137
6.7
6.6
10.0
19.4
.0.3
123
6.6
11.0
18.8
0.3
124
6.6
12.0
17.1
0.3
141
6.7
13.0
16.2
0.3
152
6.7
November 19, 2002
Depth
Temperature
Dissolved ox ,gen
Conductivity
pH
Secchi disk depth
(m)
(°C)
(mg/L)
(JIS/cm)
(m)
E2
H2
P2
S2
E2
112
P
S2
E2
H2 P2 S2
E2
H2
P2
S2 E2 H2 P2 S2
0.2
14.9
14.3
14.7
13.3
8.8
8.4
9.
7.5
75
68 70 50
7.2
7.2
7.0
6.8 2.0 1.5 1.9 0.8
1.0
14.7
14.4
14.7
13.3
8.2
8.0
8.
7.0
75
68 70 50
7.2
7.2
7.1
6.7
2.0
14.6
14.1 '
14.7
12.5
8.2
7.9
8.
5.6
74
68 70 45
7.2
7.1
7.1
6.6
3.0
14.6
14.0
14.5
12.4
8.2
7.7
8.
5.4
74
67 70 44
7.2
7.1
7.1
6.5 -
4.0
14.5
14.0
14.4
12.1
8.0
7.7
8.7
5.3
74
67 70 44
7.1
7.1
7.1
6.4
5.0
14.5
14.0
14.4
12.0
8.0
7.7
8I
5.1
74
67 70 44
7.1
7.0
7.1
6.3
6.0
14.5
14.0
14.3
8.0
7.7
8.8
74
67 69
7.1
7.0
7.1
7.0
14.5
14.0
14.3
7.9
7.7
8.d
74
67 69
7.1
7.0
7.1
8.0
14.5
14.0
14.2
7.9
7.7
8.
74
67 69
7.1
7.0
7.1
9.0
14.5
13.9
14.2
7.9
7.6
7.6�
74
67 69
7.0
6.9
7.0
10.0
14.5
7.8
74
7.0
11.0
14.5
7.8
74
7.0
12.0
14.4
7.8
74
7.0
13.0
14.4
7.8
74
7.0
14.0
14.4
7.8
74
7.0
15.0
14.4
7.8
74
7.0
16.0
14.4
7.8
74
7.0
17.0
14.6
0.6
92
7.0
Progress Energy Carolinas
A-2
Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant
2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 2. Means, ranges, and spatial trends of selected limnological variables from the
surface waters of Harris Reservoir during 2002.+
'Fisher's protected least significant difference test was applied only if the overall F test for the
treatment was significant. Means followed by the same superscript were not significantly
different (P > 0.05) -see shaded row. Sample size equaled 4 for all stations and equaled
16 for reservoir mean.
¶Total alkalinity units are in mg/L as CaCO3 and hardness is calculated as mg equivalents
CaCO3/L.
Progress Energy Carolinas A-3 Environmental Services Section
Station
Reservoir
Variable
E2
H2
P2
S2
Mean
Total dissolved solids (mg/liter)
58
57
69
72
64
39-67
50-65
58-77
57-82
Turbidity (NTU)
2.8
4.3
3.8
8.6
4.9
1.3-4.3)
2.5-5.2
2.3-5.5
2.8-18
Secchi disk transparency (m)
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.3
1.5
1.3-2.0)
1.2-1.7
1.3-1.9
0.8-1.7
Chlorophyll a (µg/liter)
11 c �r
ab
;12_'`
b 8�'' .w °
12
..
6.6-19
4.8-25
(5.7-22)
(1.2-13
Nutrients (mg/liter)
Ammonia -N
0.05
0.03
< 0.02
0.02
0.03
(< 0.02-0.12)
(< 0.02-0.09)
(< 0.02-0.04
< 0.02-0.03
Nitrate + Nitrite -N
0.07
0.04
0.05
0.03
0.05
< 0.02-0.20
< 0.02-0.14
< 0.02-0.15
< 0.02-0.09
Total nitrogen
0.70
0.58
0.62
0.56
0.62
0.63-0.77
(0.40-0.67)
(0.46-0.69
0.46-0.65
Total phosphorus
0.035
0.030
0.027
0.030
0.030
0.028-0.046
0.021-0.042
0.022-0.031
(0.022-0.035
Total organic carbon
7.6
7.5
7.5
8.5
7.8
7.1-8.3
6.9-8.4
7.0-8.2
7.2-11
Hardnessil18
18
17
18
18
14-22
14-21
13-20
15-21
Conductivity (MS/cm)
90
89
90
88
89
(56-125)
(53-126
54-127
50-127
Ions (mg/liter)
Calcium
3.8
4.1
3.6
4.0
3.9
3.0-5.6
3.0-5.1
2.8-5.3
3.4-5.5
Chloride
12
11
11
11
11
11-14
9.8-13
9.9-14
9.4-14
Magnesium
2.1
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.5-3.0
1.5-3.1
1.5-2.9
1.5-3.1
Sodium
12
11
12
10
11
11-13
10-13
11-12
6.4-13
Sulfate
17
17
18
17
17
17-18
16-18
16-18
(16-18
Total alkalinity
13
13
13
14
13
10-16
10-16
10-16
11-19
Copper (ug/liter)
1.8
1.3
1.8
1.5
1.6
(1.3-2.4)
1.4-2.2
1.2-1.9
'Fisher's protected least significant difference test was applied only if the overall F test for the
treatment was significant. Means followed by the same superscript were not significantly
different (P > 0.05) -see shaded row. Sample size equaled 4 for all stations and equaled
16 for reservoir mean.
¶Total alkalinity units are in mg/L as CaCO3 and hardness is calculated as mg equivalents
CaCO3/L.
Progress Energy Carolinas A-3 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant
2002 Environmental
Appendix 3. Mean number per Hour for fish collected with electrofishing sampling by
transect from Harris Reservoir during 2002.
+For selected species, a one-wayAN VA was used to determine significant differences among
transects. Fisher's protected east Significant Difference (LSD) test was applied only if
the overall F test for the eatment was significant. Means followed by different
superscripts were significantly different (P 5 0.05)—see shaded row.
"Summations may vary from column
due to rounding.
Progress Energy Carolinas I A-4 Environmental Services Section
Transect
Reservoir
E H
P
S
V
Species
mean
Bowfin
1
< 1
< 1
2
< 1
1
Gizzard shad+
12
6
12
12
17
12
Threadfin shad+
10
2
9
1
60
16
Chain pickerel
3
< 1
3
6
3
3
Coastal shiner
22
11
19
< 1
< 1'
11
Common carp
0
0
0
0
2
< 1
Golden shiner+
6
8
24
20
4
13
Brown bullhead
0
0
2
2
< 1
1
Channel catfish
1
2
< 1
0
< 1
1
Flat bullhead
0
0
< 1
0
2
< 1
White catfish
0
< 1
4'
0
< 1
1
Bluespotted sunfish
1
0
< 1
1
< 1
1
Bluegill+
91
153
160
116
66
117
Pumpkinseed
0
< 1
0
0
0
< 1
Redear sunfish+I14b
92
'...'"-,'T`
194
�.. "--.
�53b��="5`8
^^�'
0 6
, A.>42�
Warmouth
< 1
2
1
5
6
3
Largemouth bass+
17
30
42
27
28
29
Black crappie+
48
5
40
4
6
21
White perch
< 1
1
0
0
0
< 1
Total"
328
416
372
256
240
322
+For selected species, a one-wayAN VA was used to determine significant differences among
transects. Fisher's protected east Significant Difference (LSD) test was applied only if
the overall F test for the eatment was significant. Means followed by different
superscripts were significantly different (P 5 0.05)—see shaded row.
"Summations may vary from column
due to rounding.
Progress Energy Carolinas I A-4 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant 2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 4. Mean weight (measured in kilograms) per hour for fish collected with
electrofishing sampling by transect from Harris Reservoir during 2002+.
Species
Transect
Reservoir
Mean
E
H
P
S
V
Largemouth bass
3.8
12.4
10.3
4.7
25.0
11.3
Redear sunfish
g lab
ro,
11 6a >
4 15w
-� 2.,6
3.2G `
6.0
Bluegill
3.7
3.4
5.7
3.4
2.7
3.8
Gizzard shad
3.3
2.0
3.0
3.4
5.0
3.3
Black crappie
2.7
0.3
2.1
0.7
0.3
1.2
Golden shiner
0 tab `
0 lb
;` 0 6a
0 3a`;
< 0:1b re,
0.2
Threadfin shad
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
0.1
< 0.1
+A one-way ANOVA was used to determine significant differences among transects. Fisher's
protected Least Significant Difference (LSD) test was applied only if the overall F test for
the treatment was significant. Means followed by different superscripts were significantly
different (P <_ 0.05) -see shaded rows.
Progress Energy Carolinas A-5 Environmental Services Section

Harris Nuclear Plant
8
7
6
�• 5
c
L 4
d
a 3
2
1 d x _
0 aN
O r M LO O
'tt Cti O 0)
Bluegill
2002 Environmental Monitoring Report
n = 1,174
O Ln O LL) O M O Ln O Ln O MOM
N M M Cfl W M N "t 0 r` M O .-
r r- N N N N N N M M
Total Length (mm)
,Redear Sunfish
8
7
6
n = 923
5
4
ate. 3
2-w7
7
r,
k
MV
0P'OPm
O
LO O Ln O LO O
Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln
O Ln O LO O Ln
M It 0 rl- rn
O N M Ln (0 00 0) V- N
t M � 00 O
� � r- r- N N
N N N N M M
Total Length (mm)
20
18
16
14
12
10
L
m 8
a
6
FA
11,
r T T
Appendix 5. Length -frequency
bass collected with
2002.
Largemouth bass
d0' 00 O C0 (00
N N M M M
Total Length (mm)
n = 289
M It Nt It In LLQ Ln 0
s for bluegill, redear sunfish, and largemouth
ng sampling from Harris Reservoir during
Progress Energy Carolinas I A-6 Environmental Services Section