NC0038377_Environmental Monitoring Report_20031231

Progress Energy

MAYO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
2003 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT
April 2004
Environmental Services Section
Progress Energy
New Hill, North Carolina

This copy of the report is not a controlled document as detailed in the 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

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Table of Contents
Progress Energy Carolinas i Environmental Services Section
Page
Listof Tables.....................................................................................................................
ii
Listof Figures....................................................................................................................
ii
List of Appendices
Metric -English Conversion and Units of Measure............................................................
iv
Water Chemistry Abbreviations.........................................................................................
iv
ExecutiveSummary...........................................................................................................
v
Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report ................................
1
Introduction.......................................................................................................................
1
Objectivesand Methods.....................................................................................................
1
Key Indicators of Mayo Reservoir Environmental Quality During 2003 ..........................
7
Limnology......................................................................................................................
7
Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen.....................................................................
7
WaterClarity.........................................................................................................
7
Nutrients................................................................................................................
7
Specific Conductance, Ions, Hardness, and Alkalinity .........................................
8
Comparison of Limnological Variables along Transect B ....................................
8
TraceElements..............................................................................................................
8
Arsenic..................................................................................................................
8
Cadmium...............................................................................................................
9
Copper...................................................................................................................
9
Mercury.................................................................................................................
10
Selenium................................................................................................................
11
Phytoplankton................................................................................................................
11
Biofouling......................................................................................................................
12
Fisheries.......................................................................................................................
12
SpeciesComposition.............................................................................................
12
Relative Abundance and Distribution...................................................................
12
AquaticVegetation........................................................................................................
14
Conclusions.......................................................................................................................
15
References.......................................................................................................................
17
Progress Energy Carolinas i Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
List of Tables
Table Page
1 Mayo Reservoir environmental monitoring program for 2003 .................................. 4
2 Field sampling and laboratory methods followed in the 2003
Mayo Reservoir environmental monitoring program ................................................ 5
3 Statistical analyses performed on data collected in the 2003
Mayo Reservoir environmental monitoring program ................................................ 6
List of Figures
Figure Page
1 Mayo Reservoir sampling locations during 2003 .................................................... 3
List of Appendices
Appendix Page
1 Depth profiles of the temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and specific
conductance at Mayo Reservoir during 2003............................................................. A-1
2 Concentrations of limnological variables measured in the surface waters of
Mayo Reservoir during 2003.................................................................................... A-4
3 Spatial trends of means and ranges for selected limnological variables from
surface waters of Mayo Reservoir at Stations B2, E2, and G2 during 2003 .............. A-6
4 Spatial trends of means and ranges for selected limnological variables from
surface waters of Mayo Reservoir along Transect B during 2003 ............................ A-7
5 Mean ± standard error and range of trace element concentrations in the
sediments, zooplankton, and benthic invertebrates from Mayo Reservoir
during2003.............................................................................................................. A-8
6 Mean ± standard error of trace element concentrations in the liver
and left axial muscle tissues of fish from Mayo Reservoir during 2003 ................... A-9
7 Total number and weight of fish collected from Mayo Reservoir with
electrofishing sampling during 2003 ................................................... .
Progress Energy Carolinas ii Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
List of Appendices (continued)
Appendix Page
8 Mean number per hour for fish collected with electrofishing sampling by transect
from Mayo Reservoir during 2003............................................................................. A-11
9 Spatial trends of selected species collected with electrofishing sampling from
Mayo Reservoir during 2003..................................................................................... A-12
10 Length -frequency distributions of bluegill by transect collected with
electrofishing sampling from Mayo Reservoir during 2003 ...................................... A-13
11 Relative weight values of bluegill, largemouth bass, redear sunfish, and chain
pickerel collected with electrofishing sampling from Mayo Reservoir
during2003................................................................................................................ A-14
12 Length -frequency distributions of largemouth bass by transect collected
with electrofishing sampling from Mayo Reservoir during 2003 .............................. A-15
13 Length -frequency distributions and relative weight values of largemouth bass
caught by anglers during a fishing tournament held at Mayo Reservoir
during2003........................................................................................................... A-16
14 Length -frequency distributions of redear sunfish and chain pickerel
collected with electrofishing sampling from Mayo Reservoir during 2003 ...............A-17
Progress Energy Carolinas iii Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Metric -English Conversion and Units of Measure
Length
1 micron (um) = 4.0 x 10-5 inch
1 millimeter (mm) = 1000 gm = 0.04 inch
1 centimeter (cm) = 10 mm = 0.4 inch
1 meter (m) = 100 cm = 3.28 feet
1 kilometer (km) =1000 in = 0.62 mile
Area
1 square meter (m) = 10.76 square feet
1 hectare (ha) = 10,000 m2 = 2.47 acres
Volume
1 milliliter (ml) = 0.034 fluid ounce
1 liter = 1000 ml = 0.26 gallon
1 cubic meter = 35.3 cubic feet
Weight
1 microgram (ug) = 10-3 mg or
10-6 g = 3.5 x 10-8 ounce
1 milligram (mg) = 3.5 x 10-5 ounce
1 gram (g) =1000 mg = 0.035 ounce
1 kilogram (kg) =1000 g = 2.2 pounds
1 metric ton = 1000 kg = 1.1 tons
1 kg/hectare = 0.89 pound/acre
Temperature
Degrees Celsius (°C) = 5/9 (°F-32)
Specific conductance
MS/cm = Microsiemens/centimeter
Turbidity
NTU = Nephelometnc Turbidity Unit
Water Chemistry Abbreviations
Cl-
- Chloride
SO4
- Sulfate
Ca. 2+
- Total calcium
Mgt+
- Total magnesium
Na+
- Total sodium
NH3-N - Ammonia nitrogen
TP -
Total phosphorus
TOC -
Total organic carbon
TS -
Total solids
TDS -
Total dissolved solids
TN - Total nitrogen TSS - Total suspended solids
NO3- + NO2- - Nitrate + nitrite Al - Total aluminum
nitrogen
As -
Total arsenic
Cd -
Total cadmium
Cu -
Total copper
Hg - Total mercury
Se - Total selenium
Progress Energy Carolinas iv Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Executive Summary
Operational effects of the Mayo Steam Electric Plant on the reservoir waters, sediments,
and aquatic community continued to be minimal during 2003. Concentrations of many
limnological and trace element variables have been highest in the immediate vicinity of the ash
pond discharge and decreased rapidly with horizontal distance both across the lower reservoir
and upstream toward the headwaters F-rea indicating that effects of the ash pond discharge were
localized and not widespread throughout the reservoir.
During 2003, precipitation during the spring was about two times higher than the 30 -year
average and was likely a factor in greater than expected concentrations of many water chemistry
variables during the bimonthly sampling in April and June. Mean trace element concentrations in
reservoir waters at all sampling locations were below the North Carolina water quality standards
or action levels during 2003 except for arsenic at Station B I. High levels of arsenic measured in
April and June at this station were responsible for the higher than expected annual mean
(11 Mg/L). All measured selenium concentrations, including concentrations measured at the
station near the discharge, were less than the standard of 5 ,ug/L.
Most trace element concentrations in the sediments and tissues of plankton, benthic
invertebrates, and fish followed accumulation patterns observed in previous years. As expected,
arsenic and selenium concentrations in the sediments collected from the station nearest the ash
pond discharge were greater than concentrations across the reservoir and upstream of the
discharge point. Selenium concentrations in the tissues of benthic invertebrates also followed
this accumulation pattern. Selenium concentrations in fish tissues near the ash pond discharge
were generally higher than concentrations upstream. However, concentrations remained well
below thresholds considered detrimental.
No significant accumulation of arsenic in fish tissues was evident at Station B1, nearest the
ash pond discharge, despite elevated levels of arsenic in the water, sediments, and tissues of
plankton and benthic invertebrates at Elis location during 2003.
The fish community composition continued to be typical of a southeastern United States
reservoir during 2003. Species dominance and distribution patterns were similar to those in
previous years and were a result of the naturally occurring nutrient and habitat conditions present
in Mayo Reservoir. Bluegill remained the dominant species throughout the reservoir.
Successful reproduction of bluegill and largemouth bass was evident throughout the reservoir
and results indicated no missing year classes. During 2003, largemouth bass continued to exhibit
Progress Energy Carolinas v Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
healthy and relatively robust body condition. Redear sunfish and chain pickerel continued to
exhibit characteristics capable of supporting a recreational fishery. The relatively low abundance
of hybrid sunfishes and the lack of disease outbreaks, fish kills, and fish deformities during 2003
provided additional evidence of a healthy fish community.
Progress Energy Carolinas vi Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant DRAFT 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
MAYO STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
2003 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT
Introduction
Environmental monitoring of the water, sediments, and aquatic organisms in Mayo
Reservoir has been conducted since 1983 when the reservoir reached full -pool elevation and
Mayo Steam Electric Plant began commercial operation (CP&L 1984). This monitoring program
was conducted to meet requirements specified in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permit Number 0038377 issued by the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (NCDWQ) which regulates discharges from the power plant. The program was primarily
designed to address the NCDWQ's concerns about the potential for accumulation of certain trace
elements (primarily selenium) in water, sediment, and tissues of aquatic organisms of Mayo
Reservoir and the potential for any harmful effects on the aquatic organisms. Annual
environmental monitoring reports that characterize and describe the aquatic community of Mayo
Reservoir have been published since 1984 with the most recent results detailed in CP&L 1999,
2000, 2001, 2002, and PEC 2003. A largemouth bass selenium bioassay study aimed at
establishing tissue concentrations that are associated with reproductive impairment was
conducted during 1995 and 1996 (CP&L 1997). Night electrofishing sampling of the largemouth
bass population was conducted in 1997, 1998, 2000, and 2002 (CP&L 1998, 1999, 2001, PEC
2003).
Effects of the power plant discharges on the water and aquatic organisms in Mayo
Reservoir have been minimal and hav-_ been confined primarily to the area nearest the ash pond
discharge. The reservoir has continued to support a biological community typical of an
oligotrophic (nutrient -limited) southeastern reservoir. No significant negative impacts to the
aquatic community as a result of the ash pond discharge have been observed in Mayo Reservoir
over the last 20 years of monitoring. However, relatively more ash has been sluiced to the ash
pond since 1996 as a result of the installation of technology aimed at meeting air emission
standards. Thus, continued monitoring of the aquatic community is warranted.
Objectives and Methods
The primary objective of the 2003 Mayo Steam Electric Plant environmental monitoring
program was to provide an assessment of the effect of power plant operations on the water and
aquatic organisms in Mayo Reservoir. Secondary objectives of the program were to document
Progress Energy Carolinas 1 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
any other environmental factors impacting the aquatic community and the impact of
introductions of nonnative aquatic plant and animal species into the reservoir.
Key indicators of the environmental quality of Mayo Reservoir (i.e., water quality, water
chemistry, phytoplankton, fisheries, and trace elements) were assessed at designated locations in
the reservoir (Table 1 and Figure 1). These key indicators were used to describe and interpret the
environmental quality of the reservoir.
Sampling methods, data summaries, and statistical analyses for data collected during
2003 were similar to those used for data collected during 2002 (PEC 2003) (Tables 2 and 3).
Only results for sampling conducted during 2003 are presented in this report. All chemistry and
analytical testing of water samples collected in support of the Mayo environmental program were
performed by laboratories that were certified to conduct water and wastewater testing. Trace
element analyses of plankton, benthic invertebrates, and fish tissues were conducted by either
North Carolina State University's Nuclear Engineering Laboratory located in Raleigh, NC, or the
Progress Energy Carolinas (PEC) Chemistry Laboratory. The accuracy and precision of
laboratory analyses of water chemistry and trace element data were determined with analytical
standards, sample replicates, and reference materials. Quality assurance information including
the accuracy and percent recovery of water chemistry and trace element standards are available
upon request. For calculation of means in this report, concentrations of less than the laboratory
reporting limit were assumed to be at one-half the reporting limit.
Any references to Carolina Power & Light Company, CP&L, or CP&L-A Progress Energy
Company appearing in this report refer to Progress Energy Carolinas.
Progress Energy Carolinas 2 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Figure 1. Mayo Reservoir sampling locations during 2003.
Progress Energy Carolinas 3 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Table 1. Mayo Reservoir environmental monitoring program for 2003.
Program Frequency Location
Water quality
Water chemistry
Plankton+
Biofouling monitoring
Zebra mussel and
quagga mussel surveys
Fisheries
Electrofishing
Trace elements
Aquatic vegetation survey
February, April, June, August,
October, December
February, April, June, August,
October, December
February, April, June, August,
October, December
February, April, June, August,
October, December
Stations B 1, B2, B3, E2, and G2
(surface to bottom at 1-m intervals)
Stations B1, B2, B3, E2, and G2
Stations B2, E2, and G2
Intake structure or water quality station
April, May, October, November Stations B1, B3, E1, E3, G1, and G3
April, May, June Stations B1 and B3; Areas E and G
August Areas B, E, F, G, and H
+Plankton included sampling for phytoplankton (algae) and chlorophyll a. Since all chlorophyll a
concentrations were below 40 ,ug/L, phytoplankton samples collected and preserved
during the bimonthly sampling were not identified.
Progress Energy Carolinas 4 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Table 2. Field sampling and laboratory methods followed in the 2003 Mayo Reservoir
environmental monitoring program.
Program Method
Water quality Temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and specific conductance were measured with
calibrated YSI multiparameter instruments and YSe dissolved oxygen meters.
Measurements were taken from the surface to the bottom at 1-m intervals. Water
clarity was measured with a Secchi disk.
Water chemistry Surface samples were collected with a nonmetallic Van Dorn sampler, transferred to
appropriate containers, transported to the laboratory on ice, and analyzed according
to USEPA (1979) and APHA (1995).
Phytoplankton Equal amounts of water from the surface, the Secchi disk transparency depth, and
twice the Secchi disk transparency depth were obtained with a Van Dorn sampler
and mixed in a plastic container. A 250-m1 subsample was taken and preserved with
5 ml of "MY' fixative.
Chlorophyll a Equal amounts of water from the surface, Secchi disk transparency depth, and twice
Secchi disk transparency depth were collected with a Van Dorn sampler. The water
was mixed in a plastic container and a 1000 mL subsample taken. The samples were
placed in dark bottles, and transported to the laboratory on ice. In the laboratory,
250-m1 subsamples were analyzed following methods in Strickland and Parsons
(1972) and APHA (1995).
Mussel surveys An artificial PVC substrate sampler placed near the main water intake structure or a
water quality mom.onng station buoy was visually inspected for the presence of
zebra mussels and quagga mussels during routine water quality monitoring.
Electrofishing Fifteen -minute samples were collected at each station using a Smith -Root Type
7.5 gpp equipped, Wisconsin -design electrofishing boat with pulsed DC current.
Fish were identified, measured to nearest mm, weighed to nearest gram, examined
for presence of disease and deformities, and released.
Trace elements Water, sediments, and tissues of benthic invertebrates, zooplankton, and selected
fish were analyzed in the laboratory. All media, except water, were homogenized
and freeze-dried. Standard analytical techniques were employed for all sampled
media (CP&L 1980; NCSU 1985) with quality control achieved by analytical
standards, replicates, and certified reference materials. All tissue samples were
analyzed by neutron activation analysis at North Carolina State University. All
sediment samples were analyzed by x-ray spectrophotometry at the CP&L
Chemistry Laboratery.
Vegetation survey Portions of each area were surveyed for the presence of nuisance aquatic vegetation.
Qualitative observa7ions were recorded.
Progress Energy Carolinas 5 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Table 3. Statistical analyses performed on data collected in the 2003 Mayo Reservoir
environmental monitoring program.
Transfor- Statistical Main
Program Variable mation test/model+ effect(s)
Water quality Specific conductance and None One-way, block on month Station
Secclu disk transparency
Water chemistry Select monitoring variables None One-way, block on month
Trace elements Water
Sediment and tissues
Fisheries No fish per hour
None One-way, block on month
Station
Station
None One-way Transect, station
ln(x + 1) One-way Transect, month
Transect month
interaction
+Statistical testing was conducted using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). A
significance level of 5% (P < 0.05) was used to fudge the significance of all tests. For the
ANOVA models, Fisher's protected least significant difference (LSD) test was applied to
determine where differences in means occurred.
Progress Energy Carolinas 6 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Key Indicators of Mayo Reservoir Environmental Quality During 2003
Limnology
Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen
• Temperature and dissolved oxyg--n patterns in Mayo Reservoir during 2003 (Appendix 1)
were similar to patterns observed in previous years (CP&L 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002; PEC 2003)
and continued to be typical of other southeastern United States reservoirs. The reservoir was
stratified from June through October.
Water Clarity
• Mayo Reservoir continued to be v;xy clear for a piedmont reservoir during 2003, reflecting
its long retention time (averaging 36 months), low productivity, and small watershed with limited
development.
• Secchi disk transparency, turbidity, and total dissolved solids (all water clarity indicators)
varied with precipitation events, ash pond inputs, inflow to the reservoir, and season. In 2003,
Secchi disk transparency depth and turbidity values continued to reflect longitudinal trends in the
reservoir. The headwater region of the reservoir (Station G2) had the lowest water clarity while
water clarity was higher at mid reservoir (Station E2) and near the dam (Station B2)
(Appendices 2 and 3). Total dissolved solids data were similar among the main reservoir stations
during 2003.
Nutrients
• During 2003, nutrient concentrations in Mayo Reservoir continued to be low (Appendices 2
and 3) and within the range of concentrations observed for the past ten years (CP&L 2002;
PEC 2003). Nutrient concentrations were either similar among all reservoir stations or the
difference was not biologically important. As expected, total phosphorus concentrations in the
surface waters at the upstream station (Station G2) has consistently been greater than the
concentrations at the downstream sampling locations.
• The trend of decreasing phosphorus concentrations reservoir -wide over the past 5-10 years
ended with greater mean concentration at the main reservoir stations during 2003 (PEC 2003).
Progress Energy Carolinas 7 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Specific Conductance, Ions, Hardness, and Alkalinity
• During 2003 concentrations for specific conductance, calcium, sulfate, and hardness in the
surface waters near the dam (Station B2) were significantly greater than concentrations at the
upstream station (Station G2) (Appendix 3). None of these statistical differences were
considered to be biologically significant and continued the spatial trends observed during
previous years (CP&L 2002; PEC 2003). There were no spatial differences among the main
reservoir stations for the ions chloride, magnesium, or sodium or for total alkalinity during 2003.
• The mean sulfate concentration observed during 2003 was less than observed the previous
10 years. The mean sulfate concentration for 2002 was the highest reservoir mean concentration
observed since monitoring began in 1983 yet has always remained at levels acceptable to
organisms in the aquatic community (CP&L 2002; PEC 2003).
Comparison of Limnological Variables along Transect B (Stations B1, B2, and B3)
• The annual mean chloride concentration in the surface water at Station B1 was statistical
greater at Station B1 compared to the other stations along Transect B.
• Although not statistically significant, the mean concentrations of most other variables
(especially ions and trace elements [discussed below]) from the surface water near the ash pond
discharge (Station B1) were greater than the corresponding concentrations at Stations B2 and B3
(middle and opposite side of the reservoir along Transect B, respectively) for 2003. Typically,
differences in concentrations along this transect reflect the localized influence of the nearby ash
pond discharge (Appendix 4).
Trace Elements
Arsenic
• All mean arsenic concentrations in the surface waters at all main reservoir stations
(Stations B2, E2, and G2) were well below the North Carolina water quality standard (10 /,cg/L)
for 2003 (Appendix 3). Mean arsenic concentrations in the surface waters in Mayo Reservoir
were similar among the main reservoir stations during 2003 with the concentrations at the mid
and upper reservoir remaining below 1 yg/L.
Progress Energy Carolinas 8 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
• The mean arsenic concentration in the surface waters at Station B1 was statistically similar to
the concentrations in the waters at the other stations along Transect B during 2003 (Appendices 2
and 4). Typically, arsenic concentrations in this area are usually greater than the concentrations
at the other sampling locations. The Pdgh variability of sample concentrations likely accounted
for the lack of indicated statistical difference.
• The mean concentration of arsenic at Station B 1 was 11 ,ug/L, 1 ,ug/L above the North
Carolina water quality standard. High levels measured during April and June were mainly
responsible for the elevated mean. During spring 2003 (March through June), precipitation was
about twice the 30 -year average for the Mayo Reservoir area; therefore, it is suspected that
greater than normal flushing of the ash pond occurred during this time period.
• Significant spatial differences in mean arsenic concentrations in sediment and in the tissues
of plankton during 2003 reflected localized deposition at Station B1 (Appendix 5). Annual mean
concentrations of arsenic in these matrices during 2003 were within the range of means observed
for the past ten years (CP&L 2002; PEC 2003).
• No significant differences in annual mean arsenic concentrations among stations were
detected in either fish tissue for the sampled fish species during 2003 and the overall arsenic
concentrations in fish tissues remained relatively low (Appendix 6).
Cadmium
• Except for the mean cadmium concentration in benthic invertebrates at Station B1, all
cadmium concentrations measured in sediments and in the tissues of plankton, benthic
invertebrates, and fish were less than laboratory reporting limits during 2003 (Appendices 5 and
6). The mean concentration for benthic invertebrates at Station BI was below the laboratory
reporting limits calculated for the other stations.
Copper
• All mean copper concentrations 2n the main reservoir surface waters (Stations B2, E2, and
G2) were well below the North Carolina action level (7.0 Mg/L) and were similar among all
stations during 2003 (Appendices 2 and 3). The greatest concentration of copper in the water
(5.6 yg/L) was measured at Station G2 indicating an upstream copper source.
Progress Energy Carolinas 9 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
• The mean copper concentration in the surface water at Station B1 was statistically similar to
the mean concentrations at the other two stations along Transect B during 2003 (Appendix 4).
Two bimonthly measurements taken at this station during 2003 (in April and June) were above
the North Carolina action level. Higher than normal precipitation may have contributed to greater
than expected levels during this time. The maximum copper concentrations measured at
Station B2, the next closest station to the ash pond discharge, was 2.8 and 2.6 Mg/L (also in April
and June, respectively) indicating that the copper input was highly localized.
• The mean copper concentration in sediments near the ash pond discharge (Station B1) was
greater than the concentrations measured at Station B3 and Transect E but less than the
concentrations at the upstream station (Transect G)—the sampling location which has routinely
had the greatest concentration of copper. The consistently greater concentrations in sediments at
Transect G indicate a watershed input of copper in this area.
• All measured copper concentrations in the tissues of plankton and benthic invertebrates
were less than the laboratory reporting limits in 2003, except for benthic invertebrates at
Station B1 (Appendix 5). However, the mean concentration for benthic invertebrates at this
station was relatively low.
• A significant difference in copper concentrations among stations for fish tissues was
detected only for brown bullhead liver tissues (Appendix 6). Tissue concentrations at Transect G
and Station B1 were significantly greater than the concentrations at Transect E and Station B3.
Mercury
• All measured mercury concentrations in sediments and in the tissues of plankton, benthic
invertebrates, and fish were below the laboratory reporting limits for 2003, except for the muscle
tissues of bluegill and largemouth bass at Transect E (Appendices 5 and 6). In both species, the
mercury concentration (0.3 and 0.9 gg/g, respectively) was low and either near or below the
lower reporting limits measured for these species at the other stations.
Progress Energy Carolinas 10 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Selenium
• All selenium concentrations measured in the main reservoir surface waters (Stations B2, E2,
and G2) were below the laboratory tower reporting limit (1.0 ,ug/L) during 2003 (Appendix 3).
The reservoir mean selenium concentration has been at or less than 1.0 pg/L each year since
monitoring began in 1983.
• All measured selenium concentrations nearest the ash pond discharge (Station B1) during
2003 were low (< 1 to 4.9 gg/L) and remained below the North Carolina water quality standard
(Appendix 4). Similar to most other water chemistry variables, the greatest concentrations were
measured during the April and June bimonthly sampling which followed increased precipitation
events during this time period. Mean selenium concentrations measured at the other two stations
along Transect B were < 1.0 Mg/L.
• Significantly greater selenium concentrations were detected in sediment and benthic
invertebrate tissues at Station B1 compared to mean concentrations at all other stations for 2003
(Appendix 5). However, mean selenium concentrations in the tissues of plankton were similar
among all sampling locations.
• The mean selenium concentrations in sediment and the tissues of plankton and benthic
invertebrates for 2003 were within the range of corresponding station concentrations over the
past ten years (CP&L 2002; PEC 2003).
• Consistent with previous years, spatial trends indicating that the greatest uptake of selenium
by fish was localized to the vicinity of the ash pond discharge and lower reservoir were observed
in selenium concentrations for all fish species and both tissues during 2003 (Appendix 6).
Generally, there was a consistent gradient of significantly greater selenium concentrations near
the discharge (Station B1) compared to the concentrations at the upstream sampling location
(Transect G). Mean selenium concentrations measured in the tissues of largemouth bass during
2003 were below the tissue concentra_ion (18 Mg/g muscle tissue) associated with reproductive
impairment (CP&L 1997).
Phytoplankton
• Chlorophyll a concentrations (an estimate of algal biomass) at all stations remained well
Progress Energy Carolinas 11 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
below 40 ,ug/L (North Carolina state water quality standard) during 2003 (Appendix 3). Mean
chlorophyll a concentrations (ranging from 3.5 to 7.6 ,ug/L) were statistically similar among
sampling stations.
Biofouling Monitoring
• No zebra mussels, Dreissena polymorpha, or quagga mussels, D. bugensis, were found in
Mayo Reservoir in 2003 These mussels are potentially serious biofouling organisms to power
plant operations. Neither species has been collected from Mayo Reservoir nor are they expected
to become a serious threat to the Mayo Plant because the reservoir environmental conditions are
not optimal to sustain a population of these mussels (Claudi and Mackie 1993; CP&L 1995).
Fisheries
Species Composition
• A total of 18 fish species were collected during 2003 (Appendix 7). Species richness was
similar to that collected during previous years with electrofishing sampling (CP&L 1999, 2000,
2001, 2002, PEC 2003) Similar to previous years, the Centrarchidae (sunfish) family had the
greatest number of species (7) collected No non-native species were collected during 2003.
• Twelve species were collected from Transect B with electrofishing sampling during 2003
(Appendix 8). Fourteen species were collected from Transect E and seventeen species were
collected from Transect G during 2003. The increase in number of species from the lower
reservoir to the upper reservoir was a function of the higher nutrient concentrations and greater
diversity of habitat found in the headwaters.
Relative Abundance and Distribution
• No major changes in fish species composition were detected during 2003 indicating a stable
fish community. Bluegill continued to be the dominant species in Mayo Reservoir exhibiting the
highest electrofishing catch rates of any species across all sampling stations during 2003
(Appendices 7 and 8). Bluegill, largemouth bass, alewife, gizzard shad, redear sunfish, and chain
pickerel comprised 89% of the total number collected with electrofishing sampling. Common
carp, largemouth bass, gizzard shad, chain pickerel, and redear sunfish comprised 90% of the
biomass collected. Another variable indicating a stable fish community during 2003 was the low
Progress Energy Carolinas 12 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
abundance of hybrid sunfish at all locations (Appendix 8).
• There was no significant spatial difference in the electrofishing catches of bluegill during
2003 indicating that bluegill were widely distributed throughout the reservoir (Appendix 9).
Length -frequency histograms indicated that reproduction was evident throughout the reservoir
during 2003 with no missing year classes (Appendix 10). A greater percentage of smaller
bluegill were collected in the middle and upper portions of the reservoir due to the relatively
greater amount of shallow -water, vegetated habitat found in those locations. The reservoir -wide
mean relative weight of bluegill was 78.5 (Appendix 11). The less than optimal value (a value
of 100 is optimum) and higher variability is consistent with high fish densities and relatively
nutrient -poor conditions existing in Mayo Reservoir and is similar to previous years (PEC 2003).
• Mean electrofishing catches of larg--mouth bass by location (transect) were not sigmficantly
different indicating similar abundances throughout the reservoir (Appendix 9). Similar length -
frequency distributions and the presence of young -of -year largemouth bass were evident at all
locations sampled in Mayo Reservoir during 2003 indicating no differences in the population that
could be attributed to the ash pond discharge (Appendix 12 ). The mean relative weight (Wr)
value for largemouth bass collected with electrofishing was 83.5 (Appendix 11).
• A largemouth bass fishing tournament was held on April 19, 2003, with 74 anglers
competing in the event. The duration of the tournament was 8 hours. One hundred and forty
seven fish were weighed in resulting in a tournament weigh-in catch rate of 0.25 fish per angler
hour. This catch rate is less than the 0.45 fish per hour reported for a tournament held on Mayo
Reservoir during 1994 but greater than the catch rate of 0.14 angler hour recorded for a
tournament held during June 2001 (CP&L 2002). The catch rate for 2003 was consistent with
the 0.11-0.20 fish per hour reported _or tournaments held on Harris Lake from 1987-1993
(CP&L 1994b and 1995). Seasonal differences may account for the differences in catch rates
observed for the two tournaments held at Mayo Reservoir. The 1994 tournament was held
during March when a greater number of fish would be in shallow water (prior to and during
spawning) making them more accessible to anglers. The length of largemouth bass caught by
anglers ranged from 356-562 mm with a mean of 437 mm (Appendix 13). The average weight
(not shown) was 1,146 g with a range of 502-2,250 g. The mean relative weight of tournament
Progress Energy Carolinas 13 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
caught fish was slightly greater than that for fish collected with electrofishing sampling
(Appendices 11 and 13).
• During 2003, no significant differences in the spatial distributions of any species were
detected except for gizzard shad (Appendix 9). More gizzard shad were collected at Transect G
compared to the numbers collected at Transects B and E.
• Significant seasonal differences in electrofishing catches were detected for several species
during 2003 (Appendix 9). More alewife, gizzard shad, and largemouth bass were collected
during the spring. There were a greater number of largemouth bass in shallow water prior to and
during spawning in April making them more vulnerable to the boat electrofishing gear. In
addition, higher turbidity values during April may have contributed to greater catches of all three
species. Significantly more chain pickerel were collected during the fall. This may have been
related to the extensive Hydrilla spp. and Egeria spp. beds (preferred habitat of chain pickerel)
present at that time of year.
• Two additional recreational species collected were chain pickerel and redear sunfish. Length -
frequency histograms indicated that both redear sunfish and chain pickerel support sigmficant
recreational fisheries in mayo reservoir (Appendix 14). Although less than optimal, the relative
weight values for redear sunfish and chain pickerel were similar to previous years and consistent
with the naturally occurring nutrient -poor conditions found in Mayo Reservoir (Appendix 11).
• No fish deformities, disease outbreaks or fish kills were observed or reported at Mayo
Reservoir during 2003.
Aquatic Vegetation
• A survey of the distribution and abundance of aquatic vegetation in Mayo Reservoir was
conducted during August 2003. Qualitative observations by CP&L biologists indicated no
substantial change in the species composition of submerged aquatic vegetation in Mayo
Reservoir during 2003 compared to observations from 1994 to 2002 (CP&L 1995, 1996, 1997,
1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, PEC 2003). A nonnative plant, Brazilian elodea (Egeria densa)
continued to be the dominant species throughout the littoral zone of the reservoir based on areal
coverage and overall distribution from the headwaters to the dam.
Progress Energy Carolinas 14 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
• Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata) another nonnative plant, continued to spread to shoreline
portions of the entire reservoir and was relatively more abundant in the cove containing the ash
pond discharge during 2003 compared to previous years.
• Additional genera noted include Brasenia spp., Myrophyllum spp., Najas spp., and
Potamogetan spp.
Conclusions
Operational effects of the Mayo Steam Electric Plant on reservoir waters, sediments, and
the aquatic community continued to be minimal during 2003. Concentrations of many
limnological variables were highest in the immediate vicinity of the ash pond discharge and
decreased with horizontal distance across the lower reservoir and longitudinal distance upstream
toward the headwaters. This spatial pattern has existed since early operation of the power plant
and the accumulation of these variables has not been considered biologically detrimental, even
near the discharge (Station B1). Flushing of the ash pond during a higher than normal
precipitation spring following at least a year of drought conditions may have contributed to the
greater than expected water chemistry concentrations in the vicinity of the outfall at Station B1 in
April and June.
All trace element mean concentrations in reservoir waters were below the North Carolina
water quality standards or action levels during 2003 except for arsenic concentrations at
Station B1. However, the concentration of arsenic at all other sampling stations remained
relatively low. Selenium concentrations in reservoir waters continued to be low during 2003.
Little difference was detected in trace element concentrations in sediments and tissues of
plankton, benthic invertebrates, and fish except for arsenic and selenium and to a lesser extend
copper. Arsenic concentrations in the sediments and tissues of plankton at Station B1, nearest the
ash pond discharge, were greater than concentrations across the reservoir and upstream of the
discharge point. This was also true for selenium concentrations in the sediments and tissues of
benthic invertebrates. The greatest copper concentrations in sediments were collected from
Transect G indicating a watershed source in that upstream area.
No significant accumulation of arsenic in fish tissues was evident at Station B1, nearest the
ash pond discharge, despite elevated levels of arsenic in the water, sediments, and tissues of
plankton at this location during 2003. This indicates that arsenic is not biomagnified up the food
chain in a fashion similar to selenium. Greater concentrations of selenium were detected in all
Progress Energy Carolinas 15 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
fish tissues collected from the vicinity of the ash pond discharge compared to the middle and
upper reservoir during 2003. However, concentrations continued to be below thresholds
considered detrimental.
Mayo Reservoir continued to support an aquatic community typical for a southeastern
United States oligotrophic impoundment. The relatively small watershed area, low-water inflow,
and limited shoreline development within the watershed have influenced the amount of nutrients
entering the reservoir and the subsequent biological productivity. Phytoplankton densities and
productivity, as measured by chlorophyll a, were extremely low and reflected the nutrient -limited
conditions present in the reservoir.
Species dominance and distributional patterns within the fish community during 2003 were
similar to results from previous years. The fish community in Mayo Reservoir continues to be a
sunfish -dominated community with bluegill remaining the dominant species. Successful
reproduction of bluegill and largemouth bass was evident throughout the reservoir and results
indicated no missing year classes. During 2003, largemouth bass continued to exhibit healthy
and relatively robust body condition consistent with nutrient loading to the reservoir. Fish
species distribution patterns within the reservoir were a result of naturally occurring differences
in nutrient and habitat conditions within the reservoir. The relatively low abundance of hybrids
and the lack of disease outbreaks, fish kills, or fish deformities during 2003 provided additional
evidence of a healthy fish community.
Progress Energy Carolinas 16 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
References
APHA. 1995. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 19th ed. American
Public Health Association, Washington, DC.
Claudi, R., and G. L. Mackie. 1993. Practical manual for zebra mussel monitoring and control.
Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.
CP&L. 1980. Trace element monitoring 1979. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
1984. Mayo Steam Electric Plant 1983 annual environmental monitoring report. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
1997. Largemouth bass selenium bioassay. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill,
NC.
1998. Mayo Steam Electric Plant 1997 annual environmental monitoring report. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New -Hill, NC.
1999. Mayo Steam Electric Plant 1998 annual environmental monitoring report. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
2000. Mayo Steam Electric Plant 1999 annual environmental monitoring report. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
2001. Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2000 annual environmental monitoring report. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
2002. Mayo Steam Electric Plar_t 2001 annual environmental monitoring report. CP&L—
A Progress Energy Corporation, New Hill, NC.
NCSU. 1985. Neutron activation analysis. Standard operating procedures. North Carolina State
University, Raleigh, NC.
PEC. 2003. Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2002 annual environmental monitoring report. Progress
Energy Carolinas, New Hill, NC.
Robins, R. C., R. M. Bailey, E. E. Bond, J. R. Brooker, E. A. Lachner, R. N. Lea, and W. B.
Scott. 1991. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada.
American Fisheries Society Publication No. 20, Bethesda, MD.
Strickland, J. D. H., and T. R. Parsons. 1972. A practical handbook of seawater analysis. J. Fish.
Res. Board Can., Ottawa, Canada.
USEPA. 1979. Methods for the chemical analysis of water and wastes. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA -60/4-79-020, Cincinnati, OH.
Progress Energy Carolinas 17 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 1. Depth profiles of the water temperature (°C), dissolved oxygen (mg/L), pH,
and specific conductance (,uS/cm) at Mayo Reservoir during 2003.
Depth
0.2
1.0
20
3.0
40
50
60
70
80
9.0
100
11.0
12.0
130
140
15.0
16.0
17.0
180
190
200
21.0
22.0
230
24.0
Depth
0.2
1.0
20
30
40
5.0
60
70
80
9.0
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
17.0
180
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
240
Temperature
B1 B2 B3 E2 G2
42
47
4.7
4.8
4.8
4.3
4.7
4.7
48
4.8
5.8
4.7
4.6
48
4.8
112
4.6
4.6
4.8
4.8
11010.8
4.6
4.6
4.8
4.8
11.2
4.6
112
48
4.7
11.0
4.6
.
4.7
4.7
11.2
4.6
112
4.7
4.7
4.6
.
4.7
47
112 .
4.6
112 .
4.7
4.7
4.6
4.7
46
4.6
4.7
46
47
46
47
46
47
46
47
46
.
66
.
46
.
.
46
.
46
.
.
46
.
.
46
.
.
4.6
.
.
4.6
.
.
4.6
.
.
Temperature
B1 B2 B3 E2 G2
184 16.4 18 0 17.0 18 0
16.7 15.9 17716.8 173
16.0 14.3 156 15.4 162
14 2 15 2 15.1 15 7
14.1 14.4 15.1 152
14.0 13.9 14.3
13.9 12.8 133
12.7 11.3 11.7
10.6 10410.8
10.2 10.1
9.5 98
94 9.3
9.1 8.6
88 8.5
8.7 84
85 8.3
8.3 8.2
8.0 . .
7.9 . .
77 . .
7.7 . .
7.6 .
76 . .
7.4 . .
73.
February 5, 2003
Dissolved oxygen
B1 B2 B3 E2 G2
112 11 8 11.5 11.6 11.2
11.2 11.7 114
11 6 10.9
114 11.4 11.4
113 10.9
113 114
112 10.9
113 114
11.2 10.8
11.3
11 1 10.8
113
11.1 10.8
11.2
11.0 10.8
112
11010.8
11.2
11010.8
112
11010.8
11.2
11.0
11.2
110
11.2
110
112
11.0
11.2
11.0
11.2
.
11.2 .
.
11.2
7.3
112
7.1
112
112
.
112
6.9
112 .
.
112 .
71
PH Specific conductance
B1 B2 B3 E2 G2 B1 B2 B3 E2 G2
77
7.4
7.2
71
7.1
7.5
7.4
7.2
7.1
7.0
7.3
74
7.2
71
70
9.7
74
7.2
7.1
7.0
88
7.3
7.2
7.1
70
9.7
7.3
9.6
7.1
7.0
79
7.3
.
7.1
69
9.9
7.3
9.8
7.1
6.9
7.3
.
71
6.9
90 .
7.3
71
69
7.3
7.1
6.9
7.3
7.1
7.3
71
7.3
7.1
7.2
7.1
7.2
7.1
7.2
66
72
.
.
7.2
.
72
.
.
72
.
.
72
.
.
72
.
.
72
.
.
72
.
.
April 24, 2003
Dissolved oxygen pH
B1 B2 B3 E2 G2 B1 B2 B3 E2 G2
9.9 106102 10.4106
10.2 10.4 10.2 10.4 10.8
10.3 10.6 10.6 10 6 10 8
10410610.3
98
10.4 10
3 10.2 9.4
10.4
9.2 8.0
10.3
91 7.1
10.2
88 6.6
99
8.9 66
9.7
89
97
89
9.6
88
9.8
88
9.8
88
9.7
8.8
9.6
87
9.8
79
9.8 .
.
9.8
6.9
9.9
7.1
9.8
7.1
96
96 .
.
9.4 .
.
90 .
.
7.2
7.5
73
73
7.2
7.4
7.3
73
7.3
7.3
73
7.3
7.4
7.3
7.3
72
7.3
7.2
7.2
7.1
7.2
71
7.1
71
71
6.9
7.1
71
6.9
7.1
7.1
6.9
71
69
6.7
70
68
6.9
68
6.8
6.7
6.8
6.7
68
67
6.8
67
6.8
67
6.8
66
67
.
.
67
.
67
.
.
67
.
.
67
.
.
6.7
6.7
.
.
6.7
.
.
87
84
187
76 75 64 47
76 75 64 47
76 75 64 47
76 75 64 47
76 75 64 47
76 64 47
76 64 47
76 64 47
76 64 47
76 64 47
76 64 47
76 64
76 64
76 64
76 64
76 64
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
Specific conductance
B1 B2 B3 E2 G2
183
99
124
70
70
70
69
69
69
69
69
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
66
71
71
67
67
67
65
65
63
63
63
60
58
58
58
58
58
58
63
63
65
65
69
59
59
57
57
57
53
48
45
45
Progress Energy A-1 Environmental Services Section

N
N N (O1 M I:t r- to �o r- \o
N
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 M O O It
v (�
` . . . . . . . . . . . . .
v U
r0oo\. . . . . . . . .
rr-rrrr`D)o,
p
p
N
tnW)W)NM[-. 00 N—OMO.'t't
(11
1 -It It It It 10%10 It It t It It d 00NCIA It�O
r- r- r- \�O \o r- \o r- r- - [- [- r- r- r- . . . . . .
v W
00 00 00 00 00 1 F- r- r- r- r- r- r- 6- r- co 00 00 00 . . . . . .
p
O
oo
M
C 0.M1
o
ooo000000000r. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
C 0.
a,C%COc-,C\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
V
V
Q N
It C14 N M 00 M tn r-cgen \O�o00tn I*\Okn\Ol-d'\O\O
Q N
�t'zt *'tNOO,\O-,a,G.\O\010*,0�,0*,0�CNCNC% \0N0N.--�
rH Pa
00 00 00 00 r` r- r r- r- r r r- r- r-- r r- r- r- r-- r- r r- r- r- r-
CG
O% Q1 01 01 O\ O) o0 0o r- r- r- r- r- r- r` r- r- r- r- r- r- r- r- O\
0.1
N 000 0a.
Pa
C., C) 01
N
M V)tn 00\Otn MM
N
V)Mr-V)It V)lry\O\Or- .
er M M 0\ 00 00 \o It M M N N N N N
M M r Ct M M M N N N N N V. �T It V) W)
r-� r \D \p \C \D \D \D \p \D \D \D \D \D
W
r`
Mt -td rte
���d N
W Cq
a
r` r` rr` r`
h+i
MMNO\ll-\ r- r- -r-r- -r-r- -t--r- -r-r- -r-r- -
N
\0\O\OtntnO\V)MMMMMMMMItItIt It V qtt It I. Vl
Oa
r` r` t` \,o %o �o �,6 \�o \�o \.o \,o �o �c \.o �o � �6 \�o \
q
r` r r r` r4 \o \o \D \o \c \o \o \D \D \D \o \D \D \D \D \D \D \D \D \o
.-
0.1
00 C\ 00
0.1
\o \D 0
r` r-: r. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C
r- oo . . . . . . .
O
N
N
rl-0\O\Mr-d.MMMNN
000000\6N666oo6 • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
N
\DOO -- Cli\OMMNNNN
r; r;r-- ItOOOOOOC
p
p
GAN
%n V)M(V V)\O"T\D 00 M in V)M MV N
V) V)MOO\D MMNN V)r-r-NMNMNN
W
00000000 NNNMMMMMMM'W
l�l�r�1��OOOOOOOOOOOOOO
O M
M N N N O%
C M
N N N N 00
d
00 00 00 00 4
J
N
--OoOI-O\OInN\OO\MOO\D\O\O\O[-ONON\ORtN\O
n V)M\DMO\I.-NOO�nl-r-r-Oo0O00o0.-.00O
000000 r- vi C; C'i m 44 V) V) V) V) V1 W) W) V)\O \D\O\O\D
V- t-4 r` r- N N M M (,i M M � M -,ztM Mit C6
H
.�
00 00
�
V) \D It
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
N
kn0\-Itd r - Or - r - r - MO
N
d• qt 00M(I-gtr-\OM -- \O
\p V) wi 4 -4 r%: d' N ' ' ' ' ' ' • ' ' ' ' '
\G \p 4 N 00 V) M N -- • ' ' ' ' ' ' • ' ' ' •
N N N N N .- — .-
N N N N .-- .-- .--i
N
W
N00r--v)v)—. -- mr-N O V)ItMN
N
W
r-kn 0"t\0000O. tO0\\O V)tn'td.
t, 4444 -4od V1M0000\C1C\C�
�^•'�
l�r�l�r-WnNONz4C-i 0001C1C�C1CNo1
M
NNNNNNNNNNN.
V)MNO
M
- .———
N Or`00
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
q,
N N N N N
q y
N N N N N
N
N—ONtn0000d.r-NNr-O\Dtncn—O0\0000\O V)tnMN
N
.-+.--X00\O\\DO\N\DO,oMO�\D�NocDcNmr-\O\O
6> CC
c,;rfi O O O\ O\ O\ 01 O\ W 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Pa
r`[�f`\D\O Mt--V)M•--��O O\ O\ 01 O\ 01 a\ a> 01 00 00 00 00 00
[�
N N N N N .--i .-i .--� --� --� •--� --�
E.y
N NNNN N .r .--� .--i .--i .-� .-�
o.,
r, rn \D
CO
N N N . . . . . . .
CQ
. . .
N
N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.�
N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
v
O �NM4wn\Or-�o00\O—NM4v)\Or-o001O—NM-,t
y
0 NMd vi \6r�000\NM4tn\6r--o00\O—NM�t
N
Q

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 1 (continued)
Depth
02
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
9.0
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
Depth
0.2
10
20
30
4.0
50
60
70
80
90
100
11.0
120
13.0
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
21.0
220
230
240
October 28, 2003
Temperature Dissolved oxygen
B1 B2 B3 E2 G2 B1 B2 B3 E2 G2
164 168 167170167
16.4 16.8 16.7 17.0 16 8
15 8 16 8 16 8 17.016.8
16816817.0169
168 16717.0169
168
170169
168
169168
168
169 166
16.8
167160
168
16615.4
133
15 5 15.3
122
127
11 1
119
10.8
113
105
108
103
106
102
105
100
105
99
64
97
72
96
73
95
71
9.4
63
94
93
70
Temperature
BI B2 B3 E2 G2
11.0 114 114 115 10 8
10.9 11.5 114 115 109
104 115 114115 109
115114116108
115 108 116 108
115 116108
115 116 10.8
115 116108
115 115 106
115 115105
115 115105
11 5 11.5
11 5 114
115 11.3
115 11.3
115 113
115
115
11 1
107
102
101
99
99
98
8.8 83 8.3 70 7.8
8.4 82 8.1 70 7.3
8.3 82 81 70 72
82 80 70 71
81 80 7.0 71
8.1 70 7 1
81 68 70
81 68 66
8.1 53 56
8.1 47 52
1.9 09 49
11 02
10 02
0.3 02
02 03
02 03
02 05
0.2 05
02
02
02
02
02
0.2
02
PH
B1 B2 B3 E2 G2
73
73
74
71
76
73
73
7.4
71
76
72
73
74
7.1
75
69
73
73
71
7.3
64
73
73
71
7.3
72
73
69
71
73
73
64
71
72
70
73
72
71
72
63
73
70
70
77
73
74
69
69
6.7
68
68
82
67
77
6.8
81
66
68
75
6.6
86
69
75
66
69
107
65
70
65
70
65
7.0
65
65
65
65
65
65
66
December 3, 2003
Dissolved oxygen pH
B1 B2 B3 E2 G2 B1 B2 B3 E2 G2
87 90 8.7 83 8.6
84 82 86 80 85
97 81 85 79 85
81 84 78 85
80 85 7.8 8.5
80 78 8.5
80 78 8.5
80 78 85
79 77 84
78 77 84
79 77 83
79 77
78 77
78 77
78 77
77 72
7.7
77
55
20
10
05
03
02
02
73 73 71 72 72
73 73 7.1 71 72
71 71 71 71 72
72 71 7.1 7.1
72 7.1 7.1 7.1
7.2 7.1 7 1
7.2 7.1 7 1
72 7.1 7 1
72 71 71
71 71 71
71 71 71
71 71
71 71
71 70
71 70
71 70
71
71
69
68
68
67
66
66
66
Specific conductance
B1 B2
B3
E2
G2
71 71
70
69
64
73 72
70
69
64
163 72
70
69
64
72
70
69
64
72
70
69
64
72
69
64
72
70
64
72
70
64
72
70
63
72
70
61
77
74
61
77
86
77
82
77
81
75
81
75
86
75
97
75
107
75
75
75
75
75
75
80
Specific conductance
B1 B2 B3 E2 G2
73 68 67 64 57
93 68 67 64 57
176 68 67 64 57
68 67 64 58
68 67 64 58
68 64 58
68 64 58
68 64 58
68 64 58
68 64 58
68 64 58
68 64
68 64
68 64
68 64
68 64
68
68
74
74
74
74
78
78
78
Progress Energy A-3 Environmental Services Section

W ,--� N r+ uj 1" \3 J J - 00
+ \O oo 'E..wN
H
C
to J J a\ J to f7 N N N N w N Q
J "C W 00 N C\ —, 0% N O O w? q;
arA
— N N N N A
N 'O n
oo O N �] +
n
0
cm cm cm co) co) W) ,b
A
A nn z
N cQ 0 0 0 0 0 0 x
C,N'P000000 u
�1 -1 cn N N N N N Z
z
nnn
000000 +
"1 N
`Gz
x
N P N r N t 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 y
Oto N J tD p 000 "D A 000 p z
H
n 0 0 0 0 0 0
O W O P O\ J O O \C W O\
H
W N r-• n th N W W N tC z
0000t000NO H
It
n n n n n n t„ „„ ,, ,, w y
0
C'1
CD �,Oa' 4 dog
�A N \C 00 CA ",N o F C� u, O d
+ cn
H
C
C% D\ J J J O�, n N N W �--•
UJ N W O N N —, 00 ►-• N tC N 00 a;
n n n n n n„ .A .p• � W H
.- - - - -• •-• N rn w 00 ON C
CD�j 0 3 d o G �a '� 3
a' o '* oo
e� es•
lh lh UPI N N 00 C: � J 00 "DJ ON d
th N O ,-+ A9+ \o �O N \p tD tv
C
ON �1 O N N D\ Un N O N �-• a.
� �-. P � tD � A � rGl, •,
A
n
_ s
N w W O W rn W) c0) c0) c0) c0) co) ti
A
to
A
r'
�-` �-• N N N N
�
N N N N N -P
�
�*
t.N 00 O O O 00
=N
11 t, C� N O
m
OC3
+
000000
C'
n
N
s
N W W WA In
`S
nnn
0 0 0 0 0 0
A
00000 W r- O
0Fj 00000
0
`G
n n n n
z
0 0 0 0 0 O
x
O
C% O W? O'\ 'p,
0
0 0 0 0 0 0
O
-wi
�'NNNNw
z
N a�to�w
00
p, W W W N CA
Z
000NP�000
W N
a
0 0 0 0 0 0
�--N O J w
Y
nnn
H
JJLh W
0 0 0 0 0 0
+
J �U) LA .4.
_
a
000000
O
N N N N C� Z
H
�"f
`G
N
0o 00 N N
C
J 00 O J C',
z
x
n n n n
AD
000000
y
r+N JAN — W
.P O Vi O Cn O
p
N N W W W C�,
0
►-• tC
eo
H
C\ J W N
C:, 0 0 0 0 0
.-.-tj
y
000000
3
�• Q�
OC% W
to
0 0 r r-.
00000 NJ
H
N N N N
C1
01 W� w N 00
z
W O C\ 00 N
C
O N 0,
b
n n n n n n„ .A .p• � W H
.- - - - -• •-• N rn w 00 ON C
CD�j 0 3 d o G �a '� 3
a' o '* oo
e� es•
lh lh UPI N N 00 C: � J 00 "DJ ON d
th N O ,-+ A9+ \o �O N \p tD tv
C
ON �1 O N N D\ Un N O N �-• a.
� �-. P � tD � A � rGl, •,
A
n
_ s
N w W O W rn W) c0) c0) c0) c0) co) ti
A
to
r'
n n n n
z
�*
C, ----I N
��w� Otn
W
000000
x
OC3
O
000000
Z
N
z
nnn
0 0 0 0 0 0
'+
00000 W r- O
0Fj 00000
0
`G
z
x
-wi
000000
y
N a�to�w
00
p, W W W N CA
Z
000NP�000
W N
0 0 0 0 0 0
�--N O J w
Y
0 0 0 0 0 0
H
JJLh W
OOO-P p, CD
b
v00tC00w-t
H
0o 00 N N
C
J 00 O J C',
y
n n n n
y
.rte .rte a.�
rn
ww
0
►-• tC
ro
r-• th N i'� Lh
:;' w
cn
CD
fu
3
m
CD
0
0
G1
3

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 2 continued
Station E2
Month
TDS
Turbidity
Secchi
Chlorophyll a
NH3-N
NO3-+ NOZ -N
TN
TP
TN:TP
TOC
depth
Feb
74
25
32
1 8
003
010
060
0 008
75
40
Apr
69
44
24
45
<002
006
036
0013
28
44
Jun
69
32
18
63
<002
<002
028
0011
25
49
Aug
49
25
20
69
<002
<002
041
0011
37
44
Oct
78
22
24
3.6
<002
<002
025
0010
25
4.9
Dec
42
30
3 1
1 8
005
< 0 02
040
0 007
57
45
Month
Ca 2+
Cl
M9 2+
Na
SO2-
Alkalinity
Hardness
As
Cu
Se
Feb
60
49
24
48
19
16
25
<1
13
<1
Apr
26
68
20
40
14
14
15
<1
25
<1
Jun
47
52
19
29
95
15
20
<1
28
<1
Aug
14
66
19
34
76
14
42
13
14
<1
Oct
48
65
18
31
11
16
19
10
17
<1
Dec
37
62
12
20
13
15
14
<1
15
<1
Station G2
Month
TDS
Turbidity
Secchi
Chlorophyll a
NH3-N
NO3-+ NO2--N
TN
TP
TN:TP
TOC
depth
Feb
72
11
13
24
003
016
060
0 017
35
44
Apr
66
6 1
1 5
48
< 0 02
004
065
0 021
31
45
Jun
62
3 8
16
105
< 0 02
< 0 02
030
0 015
20
5 1
Aug
53
55
16
192
<002
<002
037
0018
20
46
Oct
65
44
20
45
<002
<002
042
0014
30
49
Dec
39
69
15
39
004
003
038
0012
32
44
Month
CaZ+
Cl
MgZ+
Na
SO4
Alkalinity
Hardness
As
Cu
Se
Feb
43
81
19
37
12
23
18
<1
33
<1
Apr
23
64
20
37
99
14
14
<1
56
<1
Jun
46
58
19
28
11
15
19
<1
32
<1
Aug
14
64
1.9
34
53
12
43
<1
1.7
<1
Oct
44
62
17
30
15
19
18
<1
21
<1
Dec
2.5
64
10
18
90
14
10
<1
18
<1
+Units are in mg/L except for trace metals and metalloids (/,tg/L), turbidity (NTU), total
alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3), hardness (calculated as mg equivalents CaCO3/L), and Secchi
disk depth (m). Less than values indicate the lower reporting limit for that parameter.
¶The Secchi disk hit the bottom of the lake before the transparency depth was reached.
§Chlorophyll a samples were collected only at Stations B2, E2, and G2.
Progress Energy A-5 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 3. Spatial trends of means and ranges for selected limnological variables from
surface waters of Mayo Reservoir at Stations B2, E2, and G2 during 2003.+
Variable
Station B2
Station E2
Station G2
Mean
Range
Mean
Range
Mean
Range
Total dissolved solids (mg/L)
6S
50-86
64
42-78
60
39-72
Turbidity (NTU)
2.2b
1.2-3.2
3.Ob
2.2-4.4
6.3a
3.8-11
Secclu disk transparency (m)
2.7a
2.2-4.0
2.5a
1.8-3.2
1.6b
1.3-2.0
Chlorophyll a (ug/L)
3.5
0.3-6.3
42
1.8-69
7.6
24-19.2
Nutrients (mg/L)
Ammonia -N
< 0. )2
< 0 02-0 03
0.02
< 0.02-0.05
< 0.02
< 0 02-0.04
Nitrate + Nitnte-N
0.03
< 0.02-0.09
0.03
< 0 02-0.10
0.04
< 0 02-0.16
Total nitrogen
0.38
026-0.62
0.38
0.25-0.60
0.45
030-0.65
Total phosphorus
0.009b
0.007-0.012
0.010b
0.007-0.013
0.016a
0.012-0.021
Total organic carbon (mg/L)
4.3
34-4.8
4.5
40-4.9
46
4.4-5.1
Ions (mg/L)
Calcium
6.5a
2.8-15
6.Oab
2.6-14
5.4b
2.3-14
Chloride
6 7
6 2-7 3
6.2
49-6.8
66
5.8-8.1
Magnesium
20
1 2-28
1.8
12-2.4
1 7
1 0-20
Sodium
3.7
2.1-59
3.4
2 0-4 8
3 1
1 8-3 7
Sulfate
163
10-24
12ab
7.6-19
1 O
5.3-15
Total alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3)
16
14-19
15
14-16
16
12-23
Hardness (mg equiv. CaCO3/L)
243
14-45
22ab
14-42
20b
10-43
Specific conductance (uS/cm)
773
68-94
70b
64-84
63c
47-78
Trace elements (ug/L)§
Arsenic [10]
1.,Z
1.1-20
< 1
< 1-1.3
< 1
IT
Copper [7]
2 1
1 2-2 8
1 9
1.3-28
2.9
1 7-56
Selenium [5]
< 1
IT
< 1
IT
< 1
IT
+Fisher's protected least significant difference test was applied only if the overall F test for the
treatment was significant Station means followed by different superscripts for a given
variable were significantly different (P < 0.05) Less than values indicate the lower reporting
limit for that parameter for that sampling year. Statistical analyses do not include values less
than the reporting limit. Sample size equaled 6 for all variables unless otherwise noted.
Rounding may obscure mean separations
North Carolina water quality standard or action level (for copper) in brackets for reference.
"All measured values were below the laboratory reporting limit.
Progress Energy A-6 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 4. Spatial trends of means and ranges for selected limnological variables from
surface waters of Mayo Reservoir along Transect B during 2003.+
Variable
Station B1
Station B2
Station B3
Mean
Range
Mean
Range
Mean
Range
Total dissolved solids (mg/L)
110
59-199
68
50-86
71
49-81
Turbidity (NTU)
5.6
1.4-12
22
12-3.2
2.4
2.0-3.3
Nutrients (mg/L)
Ammonia -N
< 0.02
< 0 02-0 03
< 0 02
< 0 02-0.03
002
< 0 02-0.05
Nitrate + Nitnte-N
003
< 0 02-0 10
0.03
< 0 02-0 09
003
< 0.02-0.09
Total nitrogen (TN)
0.36
028-0.50
038
0.26-0.62
037
0.28-0.54
Total phosphorus (TP)
0 020
0 007-0 048
0.009
0.007-0012
0 009
0.006-0.013
Total organic carbon (mg/L)
3.9b
3.4-4.5
4.3a
3.4-4.8
4.3a
3.5-4.7
Ions (mg/L)
Calcium
12
51-22
6.5
2.8-15
6.4
2.8-15
Chloride
9.0a
6.1-12
6.7'
6.2-7.3
6.8b
5.6-7.9
Magnesium
29
1 3-49
20
1.2-2.8
20
1.1-27
Sodium
64
24-13
3.7
2.1-59
37
1 9-5.6
Sulfate
34
99-70
16
10-24
15
9.7-25
Total alkalinity¶
22
10-33
16
14-19
15
14-19
Hardness¶
43
18-72
24
14-45
24
12-45
Trace elements (4g/L)§
Arsenic [ 10]
11
1.7-30
1.5
1 1-20
1.3
< 1-2 0
Copper [7]
36
1 2-7 9
2.1
1 2-2.8
1 8
1 1-32
Selenium [5]
1 8
< 1-4 9
< 1
£
< 1
£
+Fisher's protected least significant difference test was applied to the surface samples only if the
overall F test for the treatment was significant Station surface water means followed by
different superscripts for a given variable were significantly different (P < 0.05). Less than
values indicate the lower reporting limit for that parameter for that sampling year. Statistical
analyses do not include values less than the reporting limit Sample size equaled 6 for all
variables. Rounding may obscure mean separations.
¶Total alkalinity measured as mg/L as CaCO3, hardness calculated as mg equivalents CaCO3/L.
North Carolina water quality standard or action level (for copper) given in brackets for reference.
£All measured values were below the laboratory reporting limit
Progress Energy A-7 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 5. Mean ± standard error of trace element concentrations (,ug/g dry weight) in
the sediments, plankton, and benthic invertebrates from Mayo Reservoir
during 2003.
Transect/ Element'
Matrix Station Arsenic Cadmium Copper Mercury Selenium
Sediments BI 3 °`6�, ±z 1st ,y '� < 1.2' xX06+ "9 < 3.5
5:3 0.4°-
B3 .24
b ± 1 < 1.1 72� ,_� .2b
1 < 2.4 i,2c ± 0.2
E ID 1 <1 80'±4 <2.4 2'.6b±0.4
G 5.6b±0.2 <1 243a±3 <2.1 1.4c±0.4
s7 . , --, F
Plankton BI ! ° 8.4a ± 0.3 < 5.8 < 167 < 0.4 4.1 ± 1.4
B3 5.0±0.3 <4.8 <106 <0.3 4.2±0.3
E 2.1°±0.2 <5.3 <58 <0.4 3.2±0.1
G 1.9c ± 0.2 ! < 4.3 < 52 < 0.4 3.3 ± 0.4
Benthic invertebrates B1
10 ± 2
3.7 ± 1.5
64 ± 8
< 0.3
14a ±2
B3
4.8 ± 2.0
< 4.8
< 87
< 0.4
7.8b ± 0.7
E
2.4±0.9
<3.8
<156
<0.3
1 5.8b±0.5
G
7.8 ± 3.0
< 6.0
< 226
< 0.4
p8'.2b,± 1.6
+ Standard errors and statistical results are not shown when the mean was less than the reporting
limit. Fisher's protected least significant difference test was applied only if the overall F test
for the treatment was significant. Station means followed by different superscripts for a
given variable were significantly different (P < 0.05). Sample size equaled 3 for sediments
and zooplankton; sample size equaled 5 for benthic invertebrates. The mean dry- to wet -
weight ratios for conversion to "wet -weight" basis are 0.35 for sediment, 0.03 for plankton,
and 0.16 for benthic invertebrates.
Progress Energy A-8 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 6'. Mean ± standard error of trace element concentrations (ug/g dry weight) in
liver and axial muscle tissues of fish from Mayo Reservoir during 2003.
Transect/ Element+
Species¶ (length, mm) Station Arsenic Cadmium Copper Mercury Selenium
+Standard errors and statistical results are not shown when the mean was less than the reporting
limit. Fisher's protected least significant difference test was applied only if the overall F test
was significant. Means followed by different superscripts were significantly different
(P < 0.05). Rounding may obscure significant differences. Sample number equaled 6 for all
locations and species except at Station Bl for bluegill liver tissue which equaled 5 due to
laboratory processing error
"The mean dry- to wet -weight ratios for conversion to wet -weight basis were bluegill-0.19 for
muscle and 0.22 for liver, largemouth bass -for muscle 0 20 and 0 24 for liver, and catfish -
0.18 for muscle and 0.22 for liver
Progress Energy A-9 Environmental Services Section
Liver
Bluegill (101-200)
B1
2 8 ± 0 5
< 4.8
< 14
< 0 3
21' ± 2
B3
20±07
<4.6
<14
<03
12b±1
E
13±02
<5.8
<14
<05
15'±3
G
< 1
< 6.9
< 14
< 0.5
9.4b ± 0.6
Largemouth bass (270-398)
B1
< 0 9
< 5 4
18 ± 4
< 0.4
21ab ± 4
B3
<13
<82
17±4
<0.5
27a±2
E
<11
<50
28±8
<03
17bc±2
G
<0.7
<5.0
12±4
<03
12C±1
Brown bullhead (223-475)
B1
1.9 ± 0 5
< 5 5
128' ± 25
< 0.5
15a ±2
B3
<08
<78
40b±8
<0.6
16a±0.3
E
<06
<4.4
58b± 16
<04
13'+ 1
G
<06
<62
124'±32
<04
job± 1
+Standard errors and statistical results are not shown when the mean was less than the reporting
limit. Fisher's protected least significant difference test was applied only if the overall F test
was significant. Means followed by different superscripts were significantly different
(P < 0.05). Rounding may obscure significant differences. Sample number equaled 6 for all
locations and species except at Station Bl for bluegill liver tissue which equaled 5 due to
laboratory processing error
"The mean dry- to wet -weight ratios for conversion to wet -weight basis were bluegill-0.19 for
muscle and 0.22 for liver, largemouth bass -for muscle 0 20 and 0 24 for liver, and catfish -
0.18 for muscle and 0.22 for liver
Progress Energy A-9 Environmental Services Section
Muscle
Bluegill (101-200)
B1
0.5 ± 0 1
< 2 0
< 6.8
< 0 2
13a ± 1
B3
04±01
<20
<7.6
<02
9.2b±0.5
E
0.3 ± 0 1
< 1.7
< 7.6
0.3 ± 0.1
6.0° ± 0.7
G
< 0 3
< 2 6
< 7.7
< 0 3
4.8' ± 0.6
Largemouth bass (270-398)
BI
< 1
< 1
42+ 03
< 2
14' ± 0.5
B3
<1
<1
37±08
<2
14a±0.3
E
<1
<1
48±05
0.9±02
llb±0.5
G
<04
<1
43±07
<08
8.8C±0.6
Brown bullhead (223-475)
BI
1 6+ 06
< 1
5.1 ± 0.4
< 0.8
5.7 ab +2.0
B3
<04
<1
47±05
<08
7.2a±0.9
E
< 1
< 1
4.8 ± 05
< 2
3.4b° ± 0.9
G
< 1
< 1
4.0 ± 03
< 2
1.8° ± 0.1
+Standard errors and statistical results are not shown when the mean was less than the reporting
limit. Fisher's protected least significant difference test was applied only if the overall F test
was significant. Means followed by different superscripts were significantly different
(P < 0.05). Rounding may obscure significant differences. Sample number equaled 6 for all
locations and species except at Station Bl for bluegill liver tissue which equaled 5 due to
laboratory processing error
"The mean dry- to wet -weight ratios for conversion to wet -weight basis were bluegill-0.19 for
muscle and 0.22 for liver, largemouth bass -for muscle 0 20 and 0 24 for liver, and catfish -
0.18 for muscle and 0.22 for liver
Progress Energy A-9 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 7. Total number and weight (kg) of fish collected from Mayo Reservoir with
electrofishing sampling during 2003.
+Taxonomic nomenclature follows Robins et al (1991).
Progress Energy A-10 Environmental Services Section
Total
Total
Scientific name+
Common name
number
weight (kg)
Clupeidae
herrings
Alosa pseudoharengus
alewife
160
1.2
Dorosoma cepedianum
gizzard shad
121
29.3
Esocidae
pikes
Esox niger
chain pickerel
61
13.5
Cyprinidae
minnows
Cyprinella analostana
satinfin shiner
19
< 0.1
Cyprinus carpio
common carp
32
119.4
Notemigonus crysoleucas
golden shiner
5
0.3
Catostomidae
suckers
Moxostoma anisurum
silver redhorse
3
3.2
M. erythrurum
golden redhorse
1
1.1
Catastomus commersoni
white sucker
1
0.8
Ictaluridae
bullhead catfishes
A catus
white catfish
2
1.2
A nebulosus
brown bullhead
6
1.8
Centrarchidae
sunfishes
Lepomis auritus
redbreast sunfish
31
0.5
L cyanellus
green sunfish
3
< 0.1
L gulosus
warmouth
37
1.1
L. macrochirus
bluegill
675
9.7
L microlophus
redear sunfish
117
12.5
Lepomis hybrid
hybrid sunfish
3
< 0.1
Micropterus salmoides
largemouth bass
179
64.5
Pomoxis nigromaculatus
black crappie
16
2.7
Total species
18
262.7
+Taxonomic nomenclature follows Robins et al (1991).
Progress Energy A-10 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 8. Mean number per hour for fish collected with electrofishing sampling by
transect from Mayo Reservoir during 2003.
Taxon Transect B Transect E Transect G Reservoir mean
Alewife
0
33
47
27
Gizzard shad
6
14
41
20
Chain pickerel
11
9
11
10
Satinfin shiner
2
5
3
3
Common carp
5
6
6
5
Golden shiner
0
2
1
1
Silver redhorse
0
1
1
1
Golden redhorse
0
0
1
< 1
White sucker
0
0
1
< 1
White catfish
0
1
1
< 1
Brown bullhead
1
0
3
1
Hybrid sunfish
1
0
1
1
Redbreast sunfish
15
1
0
5
Green sunfish
1
0
1
1
Warmouth
6
5
8
6
Bluegill
109
112
117
114
Redear sunfish
19
23
17
20
Largemouth bass
25
38
28
30
Black crappie
1
2
6
3
Total+ 200 248 289 245
+Totals may vary from column sums due to rounding.
Progress Energy A-11 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Appendix 9. Spatial trends (mean number per hour) of selected species collected with
electrofishing sampling from Mayo Reservoir during 2003.
+One-way ANOVA was applied to analyze the 2002 database. Values with different superscript
letters were significantly different. P values: * = 0.01 < P < 0.05, ** = 0.001 < P <
0.01, *** = P < 0.001, and NS = nonsignificant. Fisher's least significant difference
test ranking of transects waE used to separate means. Analyses were performed on loge -
transformed (catch -per -unit -effort + 1) data. Means are only presented for significant
ANOVA results. Species tested include bluegill, chain pickerel, gizzard shad,
largemouth bass, redbreast sunfish, redear sunfish, and warmouth. For night
electrofishing, only data for largemouth bass was analyzed.
Progress Energy A-12 Environmental Services Section
ANOVA+
Classification
Species
Transect
Alewife
NS
B
E
G
Gizzard shad
**
1.1b
1.7b
3.2a
Chain pickerel
NS
Bluegill
NS
Largemouth bass
NS
Redbreast sunfish
NS
Redear sunfish
NS
Warmouth
NS
Species
Month
April
May October
November
Alewife
*
2.6a
0b 03 b
0b
Gizzard shad
**
3.3a
2.3b 1.9b
0.7°
Chain pickerel
**
0.6b
1.3b 2.8 a
2 8a
Bluegill
NS
Largemouth bass
**
3.8a
3.8a 2.6b
2.4b
Redbreast sunfish
NS
Redear sunfish
NS
Warmouth
NS
+One-way ANOVA was applied to analyze the 2002 database. Values with different superscript
letters were significantly different. P values: * = 0.01 < P < 0.05, ** = 0.001 < P <
0.01, *** = P < 0.001, and NS = nonsignificant. Fisher's least significant difference
test ranking of transects waE used to separate means. Analyses were performed on loge -
transformed (catch -per -unit -effort + 1) data. Means are only presented for significant
ANOVA results. Species tested include bluegill, chain pickerel, gizzard shad,
largemouth bass, redbreast sunfish, redear sunfish, and warmouth. For night
electrofishing, only data for largemouth bass was analyzed.
Progress Energy A-12 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
15
15
10
V
L
Q1
9L
5
I
15
L_�
Transect B
n=162
25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250
Length (mm)
Transect E
n = 206
25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250
Length (mm)
Transect G
n=189
25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250
Length (mm)
Appendix 10. Length -frequency distributions of bluegill by transect collected with
electrofishing sampling from Mayo Reservoir during 2003.
Progress Energy A-13 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
150
130 Mean value = 78 5 + 11.0 (SD), n = 366
a� 110 _ • _
'0%0
> 70
I. •
50 •'. • `
Bluegill
� 30
75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 210 225
Length (mm)
140
Mean value = 83 5 + 9.4 (SD), n = 122
120
100 silo
.•: r '• yM ... + �•
•� -to
.s• • •.
60 Largemouth bass
a�
40
145 180 215 250 285 320 355 390 425 460 495 530 565 600
Length (mm)
L 120
- 100
80
d
60
a�
Mean value = 75.9 +7.6 (SD), n = 116
' • • • •• •' • • • � ; • • •• • �••� + to L
• • • • • • -OF • • • • 4F• ••�•—•j I ••• •
Redear Sunfish
W 40 4-
90
120
100
80
60
d
40
105 120 135 150 165 180 195 210 225 240
Length (mm)
Mean value = 86.8 + 9.2 (SD), n = 58
go
Chain Pickerel
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
Length (mm)
Appendix 11. Relative weight values of bluegill, largemouth bass, redear sunfish, and
chain pickerel collected with electrofishing sampling from Mayo Reservoir
during 2003.
Progress Energy A-14 Environmental Services Section

Uo133ag sa31n-1ag 1e3UGWUo-1inU3 5VV
A6-1aU3 ssa-16o-1d
'£OOZ 2upnp lion lasag of.eyV tuo.i3 &iidmus 2uigsiio ijaaia g3im
p01391103 133sue cl Sq sseq qjnouia2.zel 3o suoijngpjsip f,auanba.ij-gj2uaZ •ZT xipuaddV
(LULU) y}Bua7
009 Ogg 009 o9v oov O9E oos osz ooz os 1. o01. 09 0
E5 = U
!9 33asue-11
z
cD
In
9 n
tD
0
8
01.
(LULU) yIBua-1
009 OSS 009 Osv oov Os£ 00E osz OOz 091- 001. O9 O
O
Z
C7
9 CD
tiL = U �.
3 330sue-11 9
n
(LULU) ypBue-1
009 OSS 009 09V 0Ov OSE 00£ o9z OOZ 091. 001• 09 O
O
Z
CD
9 SD
6b = U
8 33asue-11
8
n i_
podab 6U1-1o31UOW 1e3Uawu0-11nU3 EOOZ 3Ue1d 31-133013 wea3S oAeW

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
10
8
d
6
V
i
4
OL
K
n=98
o T ----------T-- — —
300 330 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 570 600
Length (mm)
140
120
. 100
80
60
Mean value = 86.8 + 9.4 (SD), n = 147
•
• • •
•• • • • •
• • of
r • •r �••� •
•
• • N • •• • • • • +• •
40 '
300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 570 600
Length (mm)
Appendix 13. Length -frequency distribution and relative weight values of largemouth
bass caught by anglers during a fishing tournament held at Mayo
Reservoir during April 2003.
Progress Energy A-16 Environmental Services Section

Mayo Steam Electric Plant 2003 Environmental Monitoring Report
Redear Sunfish
0
30 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250
Length (mm)
s
L
CL
4
W,
0
40 90 140 190 240 290 340 390 440 490 540 590
Length (mm)
Chain Pickerel
Appendix 14. Length -frequency distributions of redear sunfish and chain pickerel
collected with electrofishing sampling from Mayo Reservoir during 2003.
Progress Energy A-17 Environmental Services Section