NC0007064_2013-2015 Biological Monitroing Report_20170919

f DUKE
ENERGY.
SEP 1 9.2017
Serial: BSEP 17-0084
Ms. Cyndi Karoly,
Chief, Water Sciences Section
NC Division of Water Resources
NC Division of Environmental Quality
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Subject: Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2
2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Dear Ms. Karoly:
Brunswick Nuclear Plant
P O Box 10429
Southport, NC 28461
Enclosed are three copies of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant's Biological Monitoring
Report for the calendar years 2013 through 2015. The report summarizes the results of the
monitoring program required by National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit
(NPDES) No. NC0007064.
Biological monitoring during 2013 through 2015 continued to show a reduction in the
number of entrained and Impinged fish and shellfish as a result of the combination of
flow minimization, fine -mesh screens, and the fish diversion structure. The fish return
system continued to ensure that large numbers of the most valuable commercial
species were returned alive to the estuary.
Please contact Mr. Tom Thompson at [phone], or Mr. Marty McGowan at (910)
457-2538, if there are any questions concerning the data contained in this submittal.
Sincerely,
Karl M ser
Plant Manager
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant
Enclosure: Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
(three copies)
cc: Mr. Braxton Davis - NCDMF
Mr. Jim Gregson - NCDWR
Ms. Julie Grzyb - NCDWR
Dr. K. Rawls - NCDMF

Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant
2013-2015 Biological
Monitoring Report
Cape Fear River Estuary
Water Resources Unit

BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
2013-2015 BIOLOGICAL MONITORING REPORT
Prepared by:
Water Resources Unit
Duke Energy Progress, LLC
Raleigh, North Carolina
September 2017

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Preface
This copy of the report is not a controlled document as detailed in the Biology Program
Procedures Manual 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 Department
Water and Natural Resources Section
Duke Energy Progress, LLC
410 South Wilmington Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Duke Energy Progress, LLC i Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Table of Contents
Page
Preface................................................................................................................................. i
Tableof Contents....................................................................................
Listof Tables......................................................................................................................
Listof Figures..................................................................................................................... iv
Listof Appendices.............................................................................................................. vii
Metric -English Conversion and Units of Measure............................................................. vii
ExecutiveSummary............................................................................................................ viii
1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................... 1-1
2.0
MONITORING PROGRAM...............................................................................
2-1
2.1
Introduction..........................................................................................................
2-1
2.2
Methods................................................................................................................
2-1
2.2.1
Entrainment and Impingement Studies................................................................
2-1
2.2.2
Marsh Trawl Study..............................................................................................
2-3
2.3
Results and Discussion........................................................................................
2-4
2.3.1
Water Quality.......................................................................................................
2-4
2.3.2
Dominant Species................................................................................................
2-5
2.3.3
Seasonality and Abundance.................................................................................
2-7
2.3.4
Survival Estimates...............................................................................................
2-8
2.3.5
Annual Entrainment and Impingement Rate Comparisons .................................
2-8
2.3.6
Annual Trawl Catch Comparisons.......................................................................
2-9
2.3.7
Environmental and Station Operational Effects and the Distribution of Spot.....
2-11
2.4
Summary and Conclusions..................................................................................
2-12
3.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................... 3-1
4.0 APPENDICES..................................................................................................... A-1
Duke Energy Progress, LLC ii Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report \
List of Tables -
Table Page
2.1 Representative species and life stages entrained and impinged at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant showing spawning location and season ........... 2-15
2.2 Annual mean density and percent of total for the ten most abundant taxa/life
stages collected during entrainment sampling at the Brunswick Steam Electric
Plant, 2013-20152-16
.................................................................................................
2.3 Total number and percent of the ten most abundant taxa/life stages collected
during larval impingement sampling at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant,
2010-1012............................................................................................................ 2-17
2.4 Total number, total weight, and percent of total of the ten most
abundant juvenile and adult organisms collected in the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant impingement samples, 2010-2012 ................... 2-18
2.5 Total number and percent catch of the dominant organisms collected with
marsh trawl sampling in the Cape Fear Estuary, 2015 ........................................ 2-19
2.6 Mean densities of selected larval taxa entrained and impinged at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2015................................................................. 2-20
2.7 Density and modal length for representative important taxa collected
by month with juvenile and adult impingement sampling at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2015................................................................. 2-22
2.8 Mean percent survival+ and percent total number of larval organisms
collected during larval impingement sampling at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2013 -2015 ....................................................... 2-23
2.9 Mean percent survival+ and percent of total number of organisms collected
during impingement sampling at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant,
2013-2015 ............................................................................................................ 2-24
2.10 Mean annual percent reduction in the number of representative taxa
entrained and reductions in impingement mortality at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 1984 -2015 ....................................................... 2-25
2.11 Results of Spearman's Rank Correlation Procedure conducted for Spot based
on marsh trawl data collected from Alligator Creek, Mott's Bay, and
Walden Creek, 1981-1993 .................................................................................. 2-25
Duke Energy Progress, LLC iii Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
List of Figures
Figure page
1.1 Location of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant near Southport,
NorthCarolina..................................................................................................... 1-3
1.2
Location of the fish diversion structure, fish return flume, return basin, and
sampling locations at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant ..................................
1-4
2.1
Marsh trawl sampling locations in the Cape Fear Estuary, 2015 ........................
2-26
2.2
Mean daily freshwater flow to the Cape Fear Estuary, 2013-2015 .....................
2-27
2.3
Annual mean daily freshwater flow to the Cape Fear Estuary, 2000-2015 .........
2-27
2.4
Mean monthly intake canal salinity measured at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2010 -2012 .......................................................
2-28
2.5
Mean monthly salinity measured during trawl sampling in Alligator Creek,
Mott's Bay, and Walden Creek, 2015..................................................................
2-28
2.6
Mean monthly intake canal water temperature measured at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2013 -2015 .......................................................
2-29
2.7
Mean monthly water temperature measured during trawl sampling in
Alligator Creek, Mott's Bay, and Walden Creek during 2015 ............................
2-29
2.8
Number of taxa collected in entrainment and larval impingement
samples at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2013-2015 ................................
2-30
2.9
Annual number of total organisms entrained at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment estimates,
1979-2015............................................................................................................
2-31
2.10
Annual number of Spot entrained at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment estimates,
1979-2015............................................................................................................
2-31
2.11 Annual number of Atlantic Croaker entrained at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment estimates,
1979-20152-32
............................................................................................................
2.12 Annual number of flounder, Paralichthys spp., entrained at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline
entrainment estimates, 1979-2015....................................................................... 2-32
Duke Energy Progress, LLC iv Water Resources Unit

I
I
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
List of
figures (continued)
Figure
Palze
2.13
Annual number of Anchoa spp. (> 13 mm) entrained at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment estimates,
1979-2015 ........................... I................................................................................
2-33
2.14
I
Annual number of penaeid shrimp entrained at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment estimates,
1979-2015............................................................................................................
2-33
2.15
I
Annual number of portunid crab megalops entrained at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment estimates,
1979-2015.........................'...................................................................................
2-34
2.16
I
Annual number of Atlantic Menhaden impinged at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment estimates,
1977-2015
2.17
I
Annual number of Spot impinged at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percents reduction from baseline impingement estimates,
1977-2015
2.18
I
Annual number of Atlantic Croaker impinged at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline impingement estimates,
1977-2015
2.19
Annual number of mullet, Mugil spp., impinged at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline impingement estimates,
1977-2015 ..................... .......................................................................................
2-36
2.20
Annual number of shrimp impinged at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline impingement estimates,
1977-2015...................:........................................................................................
2-36
2.21
Mean annual CPUE of jSpot, Atlantic Croaker, and Pinfish collected
with trawl sampling in Alligator Creek, Mott's Bay, and Walden Creek,
1981-1993 and 2015..'.........................................................................................
2-37
2.22
Mean annual CPUE of Bay Anchovy, White Shrimp, and Brown Shrimp
collected with trawl sampling in Alligator Creek, Mott's Bay, and
Walden Creek, 1981-1993 and 2015...................................................................
2-39
2.23
I
Mean annual CPUE of Naked Goby, Darter Goby, and Freshwater Goby
collected with trawl sampling in Alligator Creek, Mott's Bay, and
Walden Creek, 1981-11993 and 2015...................................................................
2-39
Duke Energy Progress, LLC I v Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
List of figures (continued)
Figure
Page
2.24 The seasonal distribution of Spot collected with entrainment and trawl
sampling conducted during 2015......................................................................... 2-40
2.25 The mean annual CPUE of Spot collected with trawl sampling in
Alligator Creek and mean daily freshwater flow during peak recruitment
to the Cape Fear Estuary, 1981-1993, showing predicted and observed
valuesfor 2015..................................................................................................... 2-40
Duke Energy Progress, LLC vi Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
List of Appendices
Appendix Page
1 Summary of historical environmental studies conducted in association
with the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 1968-2015 .......................................... A-1
2 Total number of larval organisms collected during entrainment and larval
impingement sampling at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2013-2015........ A-3
3 Total number and biomass of juvenile and adult organisms collected during
impingement sampling at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2013-2015........ A-6
4 Total number of organisms collected with marsh trawl sampling, 2015 ............. A-9
Metric -English Conversion and Units of Measure
Area
1 square meter (m) = 10.76 square feet
1 hectare (ha) = 10,000 mZ = 2.47 acres
Temperature
Degrees Celsius (°C) = 5/9 (7-32)
Volume
1 milliliter (ml) = 0.034 fluid ounce
1 liter = 1000 ml = 0.26 gallon
1 cubic meter = 35.3 cubic feet
1 cubic foot per sec. = 448.8 gallons per min.
Weight
1 microgram (µg) = 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
Duke Energy Progress, LLC vii Water Resources Unit _
Length
1 micron (µm) = 4.0
x 10-5 inch
1 millimeter (mm)
= 0.001 in = 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 mZ = 2.47 acres
Temperature
Degrees Celsius (°C) = 5/9 (7-32)
Volume
1 milliliter (ml) = 0.034 fluid ounce
1 liter = 1000 ml = 0.26 gallon
1 cubic meter = 35.3 cubic feet
1 cubic foot per sec. = 448.8 gallons per min.
Weight
1 microgram (µg) = 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
Duke Energy Progress, LLC vii Water Resources Unit _

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Executive Summary
Biological monitoring of the Cape Fear River Estuary has been conducted since the early
1960's. Prior to the installation of fine -mesh screens and the fish return system in 1983, data
from intensive sampling from the 1970s through the 1990's indicated that operation of the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant had no measurable adverse effect on fish and shellfish
populations in the Cape Fear River Estuary. More recent fish and shellfish population studies
conducted during 2015 indicated no declines in abundance of any species or shifts in species
composition that were attributed to station operation.
Entrainment and impingement studies through 2015 indicated that the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant intake modifications and operational measures continued to be effective in
reducing the number of organisms affected by the withdrawal of cooling water from the Cape
Fear Estuary. Evidence supporting this conclusion includes species composition and abundance
of organisms entrained and impinged. The species composition and seasonality of organisms
collected in the entrainment, larval impingement, and Juvenile/Adult impingement studies
through 2015 were similar to previous years and corresponded to the natural seasonality of larval
organisms in the Cape Fear Estuary. Anchovies, gobies, Spot, Atlantic Croaker, Pinfish, penaeid
shrimp and crabs were the dominant larvae entrained and impinged. Use of fine -mesh screens
has decreased the risk of entrainment for all larval taxa. This is especially important for
organisms that spawn in the near -shore and offshore ocean such as Atlantic Menhaden, Spot,
Atlantic Croaker, mullet, flounder, shrimp and crabs. These organisms may potentially be at
more risk of being entrained since they are spawned offshore and pass by the plant intake to
reach the nursery areas in the Cape Fear Estuary. Conversely, anchovies and gobies are at less
risk since they are estuarine residents and spawning occurs throughout the entire estuary. Use of
fine -mesh screens and flow reduction during three decades, reduced the mean annual numbers of
all organisms entrained by 60-95%. Consistently greater annual reductions in entrainment were
evident for mullet, flounder, Gobiosoma spp., shrimp and swimming crab larvae. Except for
Gobiosoma spp., all are valuable commercial taxa. Larvae that would have been entrained were
returned alive by the fish return system to the Cape Fear Estuary in significant numbers. Based
on historic survival estimates data, substantial numbers of the larvae tested for survival were
returned alive to the estuary. The most valuable commercial taxa, flounder, shrimp and
swimming crab larvae, exhibited the greatest survival (> 87%).
Considered together, the fish diversion structure and fish return system have substantially
reduced the impingement mortality of larger organisms due to cooling water withdrawal. The
fish diversion structure excludes many of the larger fish and shellfish from the canal. Substantial
numbers of fish and shellfish that do get into the intake canal and subsequently become impinged
are returned alive to the estuary by the fish return system. Except for Bay Anchovy, reductions
in the mean annual impingement mortality of the representative taxa ranged from 92-99%.
Historic fish population monitoring indicated no declines in the abundance of bay anchovy as a
result of cooling water withdrawal. In addition to a reduction in numbers and mortality, a shift
to the impingement of smaller finfish has resulted as well. This shift to smaller individuals is
important because the larger individuals that are being excluded (saved) are the reproducing
members of the population. In addition, the natural mortality rates of smaller individuals is
relatively high compared to that of older, larger individuals so the loss of these earlier lifestages
results in a smaller loss to the spawning stock biomass. The species composition of organisms
Duke Energy Progress, LLC viii Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
collected with impingement sampling also shifted to a greater percentage of shrimp and blue
crabs rather than larger finfish as a result of the fish diversion structure. This shift in species
composition is significant since juvenile and adult shrimp and crabs exhibit excellent survival in
the fish return system (> 90%).
Marsh trawl sampling in 2015 indicated no impact as a result of station cooling water --
withdrawal to fish and shellfish populations using the estuary. Species composition of the trawl
samples was similar to the species composition of earlier studies conducted in the 1970's and the
long-term monitoring program conducted from 1981-1993. Except for Bay Anchovy and gobies,
the numerically dominant species collected with the trawl and with entrainment sampling are
species that spawn in the near -shore ocean or are spawned offshore such as Spot, Atlantic
Menhaden, penaeid shrimp, Pinfish, Atlantic Croaker, and Southern Flounder.
Results substantiate the absence of any consistent declining trends in relative abundance
associated with power station operations. During 2015, the relative abundance observed for
most species was within the range of values observed from 1981-1993. The relative abundance
of blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus and C. similis) decreased in 2015 compared to previous years.
However, data compiled by the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries indicated that the
indices of juvenile recruitment of Blue Crab and adult abundance for the past three years have
declined and were consistent with a declining stock in both the North Carolina southern region
and the entire North Carolina coast. Environmental conditions or fishing activities were most
likely the cause of declining stock rather than power station operation because larval, juvenile,
and adult blue crabs exhibit high survival and return efficiency in the fish return flume. The
relative abundance of Bay Anchovy and Pinfish collected during 2015 was the highest recorded
since the marsh trawl study was initiated in 1981. This is significant since Bay Anchovy is a
fragile, forage species demonstrating poor fine -mesh screen retention efficiency and survival in
the fish return flume.
Changes in relative abundance and spatial distribution were a result of changing freshwater Y
flow patterns to the estuary. Average annual daily freshwater flow during 2015 was the second
highest recorded since 2000. Relatively high freshwater flow during the winter recruitment
period limited the up -estuary dispersal of species such as Spot and Atlantic Croaker. The annual
relative abundance of Spot for the study period was significantly correlated to average daily
freshwater flow during peak recruitment to the estuary (February -April) and was not correlated
with average daily station cooling water flow.
Results indicate that operation of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant continues to have no
adverse effect on the populations of fish, shrimp, and crabs residing in the Cape Fear Estuary.
Station intake and operational modifications including fine -mesh traveling screens, fish return
system, and fish diversion structure continue to be effective in reducing entrainment and
impingement mortality after 32 years of operation. Ocean spawned organisms continue to
successfully migrate past the station intake canal to populate Walden Creek and the upriver
nursery areas. Organisms residing in the estuary are responding to environmental changes and
not operation of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC ix Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Duke Energy Progress, LLC (DEP), formerly Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. doing
business as Carolina Power & Light Company, was issued a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit in December 1974 for operation of the Brunswick Steam
1 Electric Plant (BSEP). The permit allowed for once -through cooling water, withdrawn from the
Cape Fear River Estuary (CFE), to be discharged into the Atlantic Ocean (Figure 1.1). A
stipulation of the NPDES permit required biological monitoring to provide sufficient information
for a continuing assessment of power plant impacts on the marine and estuarine fisheries of the
CFE. Data were reported annually and provide an assessment of the effectiveness of the fish
diversion structure, fine -mesh screens, and seasonally based flow minimization in reducing the
entramment and impingement of organisms. Organisms small enough to pass through 9.4 mm
mesh traveling screens may be entrained through the cooling water system. Larger organisms
retained on the traveling screens are impinged.
Environmental studies associated with the BSEP began in 1968 before the plant began
withdrawing cooling water from the estuary. Intensive physical, chemical, and biological studies
of the estuary and near -shore ocean were conducted in the mid and late 1970s. These original
studies were followed by a long-term monitoring program through the early 1990s aimed at
monitoring fish and shellfish populations within the estuary and documenting the effectiveness
of the intake modifications at reducing the entrainment and impingement of organisms. A more
detailed summary of historical environmental studies can be found in Appendix 1. Intensive
assessments throughout the 1970s, before the installation of fine -mesh screens and the fish return
system, indicated that cooling -water withdrawal had no measurable adverse effect on fish,
shrimp, and crab populations in the CFE (CP&L 1980). Annual entrainment and impingement
rates were insignificant compared to the natural mortality rates of the estuary. Annual population
levels in the CFE were determined by changing temperature, freshwater flow, and salinity
patterns in the estuary (CP&L 1980).
A stipulation of the renewed NPDES permit, issued in 1981, and subsequent permits was the
implementation of power station modifications to reduce entrainment and impingement of
estuarine organisms at the cooling water intake structure. A permanent fish diversion structure
was constructed across the mouth of the intake canal in November 1982 to reduce impingement
by preventing larger fish and shellfish from entering the intake canal (Figure 1.2). In addition,
the fish diversion structure significantly reduced the numbers of threatened and endangered sea
turtles entering the intake canal. To reduce the entrainment of larvae, 1 -mm fine -mesh screens
were installed on two of the four intake traveling -screen assemblies of each unit in July 1983 and
on a third assembly per unit in April 1987. At that time, the NPDES permit required that three of
the four intake traveling -screen assemblies on each unit be covered with fine -mesh screens. In
August 2003, the NPDES permit required two full fine -mesh screens along with two 50% fine -
mesh screens on the four intake traveling screens per unit. During January 2012, the NPDES
permit required that the existing total number of fine -mesh screens per unit be distributed equally
across all four intake traveling screen assemblies. This resulted in all identical traveling screens
each having 8 coarse -mesh and 42 fine -mesh screen panels. Intake cooling water traveling
screens are operated continuously. Organisms retained on either the fine mesh or coarse mesh
traveling screen panels are gently washed into a fiberglass fish return system and are
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 1-1 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
subsequently returned alive to the CFE (Figure 1.2). The fish return system was constructed and
became operational during June 1983 and has remained operational since that time.
Past data indicated that the impingement of large fish and shellfish of the CFE was reduced
as a result of the 9.4 -mm (3/8 -inch) mesh screening on the fish diversion structure (CP&L 1984,
1985a, 1985b). Organisms small enough to enter the intake canal through the fish diversion
structure may be impinged on the plant intake screens and returned to the CFE via a fish return
flume or they may be entrained through the plant. Similarly, previous studies have documented
a reduction in the entrainment of small organisms due to the installation of fine -mesh screens at
the intake structure. Larval and juvenile organisms are returned to the CFE via the fish return
flume (Hogarth and Nichols 1981; CP&L 1989; PEC 2008, 2009).
Under the current permit, a maximum intake flow of 26.1 cubic meters per second (cros)
per unit is allowed from December through March and 31.1 cros per unit is allowed from April
through November. The flow of one unit may be increased to 34.8 cros during July, August, and
September. Seasonal flow minimization during December through March is a measure, in
addition to fine -mesh screens, to reduce operational impacts on the large numbers of commercial
and recreational finfish larvae recruiting to the estuarine nursery areas during that time of year.
Beginning in 1994, DEP reduced the biological monitoring program with the concurrence
of the North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources. Based on almost two
decades of operation with no detectable adverse impact on fish and shellfish populations in the
CFE, the monitoring program was modified to concentrate on the impingement and entrainment
of organisms. Fish population special studies conducted in the estuarine nursery areas during
1999, 2001 and 2002 indicated no declines in abundance of any target species compared to long-
term data collected from the 1980s through 1993 even for Bay Anchovy, a species exhibiting
poor survival in the fish return system.
The USEPA published a revised rule to implement §316(b) of the Clean water Act in the
Federal register on August 15, 2014 (USEPA 2014). DEP is moving forward with compliance
activities required by the revised §316(b) rule. However, the purpose of this report is to provide
an update of monitoring activities required by the existing NPDES permit. This report presents
the 2013-2015 larval, juvenile, and adult fish and shellfish entrainment and impingement rates.
Longer term trends (1977-2015) for selected, representative species are included to evaluate the
effectiveness of the NPDES-required intake modifications designed to reduce the entrainment
and impingement of aquatic organisms. During 2015, a special study was initiated that repeated
the marsh trawl study conducted in representative nursery areas during the 1981-1993 long-term
monitoring program. Preliminary results of this special study are also included in this report.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 1-2 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
r
Brunswick Steam
��—Electric Plant
NORTH CAROLINA i
J
Elizabeth River
Ocean
Discharge
Area
Fish Return
s[ru
Plant Site Flume
Intake Canal
Discharge Weir
Ga�a�
rac9e
Southport
N
A
0 1 2 3 4 Miles
0 1.5 3 4.5 6 Kilometers
190
0
0
(7
ABantic
Ocean
Figure 1.1 Location of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant near Southport, North
Carolina.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC
1-3
Water Resources Unit
J

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
A
Entrainme.t Sanpling Larval Inpingerrmt Sanpling Inpingerimm SanpNng
Discharge Wer Fish Rettm Flume Fish Re[um Fbunle
s
Walden Creek
eK
v
��e
s
aa�G�i
Gum Log
Branch
Fish Return
Fish
.�
Basin
Diversion
Structure
\J�e
Intake Canal
Plant
Site
Discharge
Weir
mt
t�
0 1,250
2,500
5,000 Feet
�00
0 375
750
1,500 Meters
Figure 1.2 Location of fish diversion structure, fish return flume, return basin, and
sampling locations at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 1-4 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
2.0 MONITORING PROGRAM
2.1 Introduction
Entrainment sampling documented the species composition, seasonality, and abundances of
larval and postlarval organisms passing through the cooling system. The larval impingement
study evaluated the success of the fine -mesh screens in reducing entrainment of these organisms.
Organisms collected with larval impingement sampling were organisms that would have been
entrained without the use of fine -mesh screens. Juvenile and adult (J/A) impingement sampling
documented species composition, densities, weights, and lengths of juvenile and adult organisms
impinged and provided evidence of the continued effectiveness of the fish diversion structure.
Note that the J/A impingement study addressed the impingement of organisms that would
typically be impinged on conventional 9.4 -mm (3/8 -inch) mesh traveling screens. Survival study
results from previous years were presented to provide insight regarding the effectiveness of the
return system for returning impinged organisms alive to the CFE (CP&L 1987, 1988).
The objective of the marsh trawl study was to provide species composition, seasonality, and
abundance data comparable to data collected during the 1981-1993 long-term trawl monitoring
program. The marsh trawl study provides insight regarding potential entrainment impacts from
station operation to the populations of juvenile fish and shellfish recruiting to the Walden Creek
nursery area adjacent to the BSEP intake canal and locations upstream of the intake canal.
2.2 Methods
2.2.1 Entrainment and Impingement Studies
Intake canal water temperature and salinity measurements were collected from the fish return
flume during impingement sampling. Daily freshwater flow values presented in the report were
downloaded from the United States Geological Survey website. Total freshwater input to the
CFE was estimated using data from stream gaging stations in the Cape Fear, Northeast Cape
Fear, and Black Rivers according to the methods presented by Giese et al. (1979, 1985).
The collection gear used for entrainment and impingement sampling has remained
unchanged since 1984 (CP&L 1985a). Entrainment sampling was conducted in the discharge
weir (Figure 1.2). Larval impingement and J/A impingement sampling were conducted in the
fish return flume. The J/A impingement program included fish and shrimp > 41 mm, portunid
crabs > 25 mm, and eels and pipefish > 101 mm. Impinged organisms smaller than these size
limits would have been entrained without use of fine -mesh screens and were analyzed with the
larval impingement sampling program. These size class cut-off lengths were determined from
examination of historic entrainment and impingement length -frequency information.
Densities calculated for all larval organisms were averaged to obtain a mean number per
1,000 m3 of water entrained through the plant per sampling date. Densities for J/A organisms
impinged on each sampling date were calculated by dividing the total number of organisms
collected by the volume of water pumped through the plant. Densities were expressed as the
number per million cubic meters of water pumped through the plant during each 24-hour
sampling period.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-1 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Survival in the return system was determined for selected size classes of the dominant
organisms that have been impinged at the BSEP in past years (CP&L 1985a, 1986, 1987, 1988).
Studies conducted from 1984--987 were designed to assess survival of larger organisms
impinged on the traditional traveling screens and survival of the entrainable size classes of
organisms impinged on the 1 -mm fine mesh. Weekly survival studies were conducted initially.
The frequency of studies was reduced to the major periods of abundance for selected species and
size class during the latter two years of studies to target species and size classes where data was
lacking. Acute and latent 96 -hour survival was assessed. Results of the 4 -years of survival
studies were summarized in the 1987 Biological Monitoring Report (CP&L 1988) and
reproduced in section 2.3.4 of this report.
An overall assessment of reductions in entrainment due to fine -mesh screens, fish return
system, and reductions in plant cooling -water flow was conducted using historical entrainment -
data collected from 1979 through 2015. However, data collected in 1983 was excluded from the
analysis since fine -mesh screens and the fish return system were not fully operational for a
portion of that year. Both of these intake modifications were completed during June 1983. Data
prior to 1983 can be used to estimate annual numbers entrained during a period with no controls
in place (i.e., no continuously rotating fine -mesh screens or fish return system). Mean daily
entrainment densities were multiplied by design cooling water flow and summed to obtain an
annual estimate of total number entrained. The design flow of 84.15 cros is the rated flow of all
main cooling water pumps per unit. Linear interpolation was used to estimate entrainment rates
on non -sampling days. Annual numbers entrained after 1983 were calculated in a similar fashion
with the exception that NPDES p.rmitted cooling -water flow (i.e., reduced flow) was used. A
calculated annual baseline entrainment rate was obtained by averaging the annual number
entrained for the years 1979 through 1982. The estimated annual number entrained each year
after 1983 was subtracted from the annual baseline estimate to obtain a percentage reduction
from baseline due to the installation of fine -mesh screens, fish return system, and reduced
cooling -water flow.
A similar process allowed for the calculation of annual numbers impinged for comparison to
a calculated baseline annual impingement rate. Two additional years of data, 1977 and 1978,
were recovered from historical data sets for inclusion with the long-term comparisons. The
period 1977-1982 represents a period without impingement controls in place (i.e., no fish
diversion structure, fish return system, or flow reductions). The calculated baseline impingement
rates were obtained by averaging the annual number impinged from 1977-1982 with the
exception that data from 1980 and 1981 were not used in the baseline calculation since a
temporary fish diversion structure was in place during that time. The estimated annual number
impinged each year after 1983 was subtracted from the annual baseline estimate to obtain a
percentage reduction from baseline due to the installation of the fish diversion structure, fish
return system, and reduced cooling -water flow. Impingement sampling only occurred during the
last 6 months of 1983 because construction of the fish return system was in progress earlier that
year. Because of this, results of impingement sampling during 1983 are presented but not
included in the percentage reduction calculations. The inclusion of survival data allowed for an
assessment of reductions in impingement mortality due to the fish diversion structure and the
return system together for different species.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-2 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Ten taxonomic groups were selected for the detailed comparisons of annual numbers
entrained and impinged to a calculated baseline as described above (Table 2.1). These taxonomic
groups were selected as representative taxa (RT) and life stages based upon 4 main criteria.
First, they account for roughly 78% and 66%, respectively, of the larvae and nekton collected in
the CFE during the original Cape Fear Studies conducted prior to 1980 (CP&L 1980). In
addition, these organisms represent roughly 80% of the larvae and juvenile/adult organisms
collected with entrainment and impingement sampling (CP&L 1980, CP&L 1985b, CP&L 1994,
PEC 2009). Secondly, these taxonomic groups encompass the spectrum of life history strategies
evident within the CFE with respect to spawning location and season. Both estuarine dependent
and resident species are represented within these taxonomic groups. The third criterion for
consideration is that the majority of these taxonomic groups, except for anchovies and gobies,
are commercially and recreationally important species. Finally, there is precedent established for
the use of these taxonomic groups as RT. Except for the addition of gobies (Gobiosoma spp.),
blue crabs, and portunid crab megalops, these were the same taxonomic groups used by the
principal investigators during the original Cape Fear Studies during the 1970's (CP&L1980).
This is important in that use of these taxonomic groups provides a direct link back to the original
studies conducted prior to 1980. The additional two taxa (gobies and portunid crabs) were
included beginning in 1980 since relatively large numbers of these taxa may be entrained
seasonally. Common names are used throughout the body of the report. The associated scientific
names may be found in appendices 2-4.
2.2.2 Marsh Trawl Study
Sampling was conducted using the same trawl gear tow distance, and tow duration used
during the long-term marsh study, 1981-1993. The sampling procedure is identical to that used
by the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) for the Coastal Zone Management
Fisheries Program so data are directly. Bottom water temperature and salinity were measured
during sample collection.
The 3.2 in (10.5 ft.) two -seam otter trawl was constructed of 6.4 mm (0.25 in.) bar mesh in
the wings and body. The cod end was made of 3.2 mm (0.13 in) knitted mesh. The trawl was
towed during a mid to low outgoing tide over a distance of 68.5 in (225 ft.) with a tow duration
of 1 minute. A 4.3 in (14 ft.) double -wide aluminum boat equipped with a 20 BP outboard was
used to conduct trawling at all sites during all sampling events.
Three nursery areas were sampled monthly from January through December (Figure 2.1).
Walden Creek (WC) is a mesohaline (5-18 ppt) tidal creek located in the lower estuary
approximately 11.6 km (7.2 mi) from the mouth of the Cape Fear River (CFR). WC is located
adjacent to where the BSEP intake canal intersects Snow's Marsh. Four stations (21, 24, 27, 28)
were sampled from near the mouth up to the tidal creek headwaters. Mott's Bay (MB) is a salt
marsh tidal system adjacent to the mouth of Mott's Creek located approximately 30.5 km (18.9
mi.) from the mouth of the CFR. Salinity conditions in MB range from oligohaline (0.5-5ppt) to
mesohaline depending on season and freshwater input. Two stations were sampled (31, 32) at
MB. Station 32 was located along the east shore of the CFR near the mouth of Mott's Creek and
Station 31 was located along the marsh bordering the adjacent spoil island. Two stations (42, 43)
were sampled in Alligator Creek (AC) located approximately 42.3 km (26.3 mi) from the mouth
of the CFR. Freshwater to oligohaline salinity conditions exist in AC depending on season and
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-3 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
the magnitude of freshwater flow into the estuary. Complete descriptions of sampling stations
and methods can be found in CP&L 1982. All three areas sampled are designated primary
nursery habitat by the NCDMF.
Catch -per-unit effort (CPUE) provides a measure of the relative abundance of organisms
collected with the trawl gear and represents the mean number collected per trawl sample. The
data were subjected to a loge(nurnber+l) transformation to normalize the dataset. CPUE results
were compared spatially and temporally to provide insight regarding potential changes in the
relative abundance that may be due to power station cooling water withdrawal or natural
environmental changes. Long-term trends in relative abundance were exampled for selected
species that were numerically dominant in both trawl and entrainment samples. Spearman's
correlation procedure was conducted using data collected for Spot since relatively large numbers
of Spot were collected with the trawl gear and this species is one of the numerically dominant
species entrained by the station. Historical mean annual CPUE (1981-1993) for Spot collected
from each nursery area were correlated against selected variables measured during the main
recruitment period for Spot entering the CFE (February -April). These variables include water
temperature, salinity, NPDES permitted station cooling water flow (STA _FLO), and freshwater
flow (RIV FLOW) to the CFE. The values for water temperature and salinity represent a mean
of the values recorded during trawl sampling February -April each year. The values for
STA FLO and RIV FLOW represent mean daily flow (cros) from February -April each year.
2.3 Results and Discussion
2.3.1 Water Quality
•Freshwater flow to the estuary during 2013-2015 exhibited the typical seasonal patterns
of higher freshwater flow during the winter/spring and lower freshwater flow during
summer and fall with two exceptions (Figure 2.2). Relatively high freshwater flow was
observed during June and July 2013 and October through December 2015. Mean
annual daily freshwater flow observed during 2013 was similar to freshwater flow
recorded for most years since 2000 (Figure 2.3). Mean annual freshwater flow to the
CFE during 2014 and 2015 were the second and third highest on record since 2000.
*Intake canal salinity was generally lowest during the winter months when freshwater
flow to the estuary was greatest (Figure 2.4). Salinity was higher during the summer
and fall months when freshwater flow was lowest. Exceptions include the relatively
high freshwater flow events observed during 2013 and 2015. Intake canal salinity
generally ranged between 10 and 30 ppt on a seasonal basis from 2013-2015 except for
July 2013 and October 2015 when high freshwater flows were observed. The lowest
salinity (< 5 ppt) was recorded during July 2013 when freshwater flow to the estuary
approached 1,400 cros.
• Similar to results observed in the intake canal, mean salinity measured while
conducting trawl samples was lower in the winter/spring months and higher during the
summer months (Figure 2.5) A salinity gradient was observed with higher salinity at
WC in the lower estuary and lower salinity at MB in the upper estuary. Salinity
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-4 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
measured at MB was generally less and freshwater conditions were observed for most
of the year at AC except for August.
• Generally, intake canal water temperature exhibited the expected seasonal pattern of
cooler temperature during January/February and higher temperature during July or
August (Figure 2.6). One exception was the warmer water temperature measured
during January/February 2013. The lowest water temperature (8.2°C) was recorded
during February 2014 and the highest water temperature (30.9°C) was recorded during
July 2015.
*Mean water temperature measured while trawl sampling remained near 10°C or less
from January through March except for the water temperature measured in WC
(14.8°C) during March (Figure 2.7). Summer water temperatures peaked at 29.0-
31.0°C during June to July.
2.3.2 Dominant Species
• Spot, gobies (Gobiosoma and Ctenogobius spp.), Atlantic Croaker, and anchovies
(Anchoa spp.) were the most abundant taxa consistently collected in entrainment
samples from 2013-2015 (Table 2.2). Shrimp postlarvae, silversides, Atlantic
Menhaden, and Pinfish were also among the ten most numerous taxa entrained in one
or more years from 2013-2015. These ten taxa accounted for about 95-96% of the 35+
taxa entrained over the 3 years. A complete species list showing total number collected
can be found in Appendix 2.
• Ten taxa (out of a total of 40-52 taxa per year) accounted for >_ 90% of the total larval
organisms collected in larval impingement samples from 2013-2015 (Table 2.3). The
most dominant larvae impinged on the fine -mesh screens and returned alive to the CFE
were shrimp postlarvae, Spot, Atlantic Croaker, Ctenogobius spp. and portunid crab
megalops. Atlantic Menhaden, Pinfish, Hardback Shrimp, and anchovies were also
among the top ten larval taxa impinged during 2013-2015. Although the relative
ranking has varied, the same ten most abundant taxa have generally dominated larval
impingement samples each year since 1984. A complete species list showing total
number collected can be found in Appendix 2.
• The overall number of taxa collected in larval impingement samples each month was
usually greater than the monthly number collected in entrainment samples during 2013-
2015 due to the use of fine -mesh screens (Figure 2.8). This result indicates that use of
fine -mesh screens reduces the risk of entrainment with station cooling water withdrawal
for the larvae and juvenile organisms found in the CFE.
• J/A impingement samples were numerically dominated by Bay Anchovy and penaeid
shrimp (Brown, Pink, and White) from 2013-2015 (Table 2.4). Additional taxa that
were among the top ten collected during these years include portunid crabs (Blue Crab,
and Lesser Blue Crab), Threadfin Shad, Blackcheek Tonguefish, Spot, and Atlantic
Menhaden. Considered together, Bay Anchovy, penaeid shrimp, and portunid crabs
were a significant percentage of the number and biomass impinged on the traveling
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-5 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
screens. Prior to installation of the fish diversion structure in 1982, Atlantic Menhaden
was consistently the top species collected in terms of number and biomass (CP&L
1980a, 1980b, 1982, 1983). Larger, Age 1+ finfish, such as Spot and Atlantic Croaker
also comprised a significant portion of the number and biomass collected with impinge-
ment sampling prior to 1983. This shift in species composition after 1983 was a result
of the exclusion of larger finfish by the fish diversion structure. This is significant
because penaeid shrimp and portunid crabs have become the more dominant taxa
impinged other than Bay Anchovy. Both shrimp and crabs exhibit relatively high
survival in the fish return system. A complete species list showing numbers and
weights collected for all species can be found in Appendix 3.
• Ten species accounted for 94.5 % of the total number of organisms (84 taxa) collected
with marsh trawl sampling during 2015 (Table 2.5). Bay Anchovy, Spot, Atlantic
Menhaden, grass shrimp, and White Shrimp were the numerically dominant organisms
collected (87%). Additional species among the top ten include Brown Shrimp, Pinfish,
Atlantic Croaker, Spotfin Mojarra, and Southern Flounder. Generally, the ten most
abundant species collected during 2015 dominated historical marsh trawl catches
throughout the 1980's and early 1990's (CP&L 1985b, 1993). Similar species
composition was observed for trawl catches from other historical studies conducted in
the CFE (Hodson 1979, Huish and Geaghan 1979, and Weinstein 1979). These results
are significant in that there is no indication of changes in species composition in the
CFE that could be attributed to station operation. A complete species list showing
numbers collected for all species can be found in Appendix 4.
• Blue Crab was the only species that was previously collected in relatively large
numbers and not among the dominant species collected with marsh trawl sampling
during 2015. A relatively low number of Blue Crab were collected from all locations
sampled (Appendix 4). Data compiled by the NCDMF indicate that juvenile
recruitment of Blue Crab and adult abundance have exhibited characteristics of a
declining stock for the past 3 years not only in the southern region but also the entire
North Carolina coast (NCDEQ 2016). Indications are that the decline in the marsh
trawl catch of Blue Crab is not due to cooling water withdrawal by the BSEP, but to
environmental effects or fishing activities. In addition, entrainment and impingement
mortality of portunid megalops and juvenile and adult blue crabs (Callinectes sapidus
and C similis) are reduced as a result of intake modifications to reduce entrainment and
impingement (DEP 2014). Atypically high freshwater flow during October and
November may have negatively influenced trawl catches of blue crab as well (Figure
2.2)
*No threatened or endangered species were collected with entrainment or impingement
sampling from 2013-2015 or with marsh trawl sampling during 2015 (Appendices 2-4).
No sea turtle takes occurred in the BSEP intake canal during 2015 (Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 2015 Sea Turtle Annual Report; January 25, 2016).
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-6 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
2.3.3 Seasonality and Abundance
• Seasonal variations for larvae entrained and impinged in 2015 represent the seasonal
patterns expected and observed for 2013 and 2014. Atlantic Menhaden, Spot, Atlantic
Croaker, Pinfish, flounder, and mullet, all ocean -spawned species, were most abundant
during winter and early spring (Table 2.6). Atlantic Croaker also exhibited a fall
recruitment period beginning in September. Penaeid shrimp larvae were present as
early as January but were most abundant during spring, late summer, and early fall.
Estuarine -spawned species (e.g., anchovies, Gobiosoma spp., and silversides) were
most abundant during the spring and summer. Seatrout were present during the spring
and summer. Some portunid crab megalops larvae were collected sporadically
throughout the year but peak abundance occurred during the fall and coincided with
Blue Crab spawning.
• Variation in the daily mean densities per month for larval organisms entrained and
impinged were similar to seasonal variations observed in previous years and
corresponded to the seasonality of larval fish in the CFE (Table 2.6; CP&L 1994). This
observation is important since it indicates that recruitment to and within the estuary is
functioning normally and has not been disrupted by cooling water withdrawal. Minor
changes in peaks of abundance in entrainment and impingement of organisms are
normal and can be influenced by environmental conditions such as changing freshwater
flow to the estuary (Blumberg et al. 2004; Copeland et al. 1979; Lawler et al. 1988;
Thompson 1989).
• The seasonality of larger individuals collected during J/A impingement sampling were
consistent with data collected from previous years and the natural seasonality reported
for these species in the lower CFE by Schwartz et al. (1979). Results indicate that
impinged finfish were mostly of young -of -year (YOY) or yearling individuals too small
to be excluded by the fish diversion structure. Impingement of significant numbers of
larger fish has been virtually eliminated by the installation of the fish diversion
structure. Atlantic Menhaden (modal length 110 mm) that were abundant during May
were yearling individuals (Table 2.7). Peak densities of Spot and Atlantic Croaker
collected during May through June were YOY individuals with modal lengths ranging
from 45-50 mm. Bay Anchovy, collected year round, was most abundant during the
fall and winter when past data indicated that most of the individuals in the population
had grown to a size large enough to be impinged on the coarse -mesh traveling screens.
Peak densities of white, brown, and pink shrimp occurred during the summer
recruitment period. Blue crabs (Callinectes spp.) were most abundant during summer
and fall.
• The seasonality for total number of all organisms impinged (January through April)
was driven by the large numbers of Bay Anchovy collected (Table 2.7). With Bay
Anchovy excluded, the greatest monthly impingement occurred during May -October
and December. Shrimp and blue crabs were the dominant organisms impinged during
May -October and December. Both taxa are characterized by high survival rates in the
fish return system (CP&L 1987, 1988).
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-7 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
2.3.4 Survival Estimates
• Seventeen of the impinged larval taxa were previously tested for survival from 1984-
1987 (CP&L 1988). Survival of Pinfish was estimated using data for Atlantic Croaker
as a surrogate since Atlantic Croaker and Pinfish both recruit to the estuary during the
winter months. These eighteen taxa accounted for approximately 91%, 81%, and 99%
of the total number collected with larval impingement sampling during 2013, 2014, and
2015, respectively (Table 2.8). Survival during fast -screen rotation ranged from
approximately 1% for anchovies (Anchoa spp. > 13 mm) to approximately 96% for
pink and white shrimp. Survival adjusted for controls was 100% for shrimp postlarvae,
portunid crab megalops, and blue crabs.
• Eleven taxa of the dominant J/A organisms impinged were previously tested for
survival during fast -screen rotation (Table 2.9; CP&L 1987, 1988). In addition,
survival of Star Drum and Silver Perch was estimated using data for two closely related
species (Atlantic Croaker and Spot) as surrogates. Data for Blue crabs was used as a
surrogate for Portunus spp. crabs. These fifteen taxa accounted for approximately 89%
of the total number collected per year from 2013-2015.
• Excluding Bay Anchovy, survival ranged from 16% for Atlantic menhaden to 96% for
blue crabs (Table 2.9). Survival adjusted for controls was 100% for penaeid shrimp
and blue crabs. The most valuable commercial species (shrimp and blue crabs)
exhibited the highest survival rates.
2.3.5 Annual Entrainment and Impingement Rate Comparisons
• The use of continuously rotating fine -mesh screens, fish return system, and reduced
cooling water flow successfully reduced the number of organisms entrained since 1983.
Reductions in the mean annual number of Representative taxa (RT) entrained compared
to a pre -1983 annual baseline entrainment ranged from 60% for spot to 95% for
portunid crab megalops (Table 2.10). RT exhibiting relatively high reductions (79-
95%) in the annual number entrained compared to a calculated baseline include
portunid crab megalops, flounder, mullet, shrimp, Gobiosoma spp., and anchovies.
Mean annual reductions in the number of total organisms entrained was relatively high.
Moderate reductions (60-68%) in the annual number entrained were exhibited by
Atlantic Croaker, Atlantic Menhaden, seatrout, and Spot.
• Variability in the annual number entrained was evident and consistent with the natural
variability of larvae within the estuary (Figures 2.9-2.15). Natural variability in
recruitment and natural mortality were determined to be significantly greater than
entrainment rates during the original Cape Fear Studies conducted during the 1970's
prior to intake and operational modifications to reduce entrainment (CP&L 1980).
Large-scale fluctuations in the number of larvae entering the estuary are natural and
expected due to spawning success, offshore transport mechanisms, and climate
conditions (Nelson et al. 1977, Norcross and Austin 1981, Norcross and Shaw 1984).
In addition, changing freshwater flow patterns and temperature during recruitment to
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-8 Water Resources Unit
f

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
the CFE has a strong effect on the distribution of larvae within the estuary (Copeland et
al. 1979, Lawler et al. 1988, Rogers et al. 1984, Thompson 1989, Weinstein 1979,
Weinstein et al. 1979, 1980). Higher freshwater flow during the recruitment season of
a particular species tends to limit dispersal of larvae to the upper estuary and increase
the number and availability of larvae potentially entrained with the cooling water
withdrawn from the lower estuary. The estimates of annual number entrained
compared to baseline estimates have not been normalized for changes in larval
recruitment, freshwater flow, or other environmental variables so variability is
expected. The mean annual percent reduction values presented in Table 2.10 minimize
the annual variability due to changing environmental conditions. Despite the annual
variability evident for some taxa, there has been an overall reduction in the annual
number of larvae entrained since 1983 for all RT.
• Installation of the fish diversion structure and fish return system has substantially
reduced impingement mortality by reducing the numbers of organisms impinged and
returning alive large numbers of those organisms that were impinged back to the CFE.
Mean annual reductions in impingement mortality of RT since 1984 ranged from 27%
for Bay Anchovy to > 98% for Atlantic Menhaden, mullet, and blue crabs (Table 2.10).
Mean annual reductions in impingement mortality for all other RT was greater than
92% over nearly 3 decades of monitoring.
• Consistently large reductions (99%) in the annual number impinged were evident for
Atlantic menhaden (Figure 2.16). A reduction in the annual number of Atlantic
Menhaden impinged during 1979, 1980, and 1981 occurred as a result of temporary fish
diversion structures installed for those years. A crude, prototype fish diversion
structure was installed and operational only during the period of abundance of Atlantic
Menhaden early in 1979. Severe failure of the screens after the first few months in
1979 limited its effectiveness for other species (CP&L 1981). A more substantial
prototype structure was in place during 1980 and 1981.
• Bay Anchovy has been the numerically dominant species collected with impingement
samples since 1984. Small to moderate reductions in the annual number of Bay
Anchovy impinged since 1984 were evident for some years and impingement rates
were highly variable (Table 2.10 and DEP 2014). This was not unexpected since most
individuals of this species are small enough to pass through the 9.4 -mm mesh screens
installed on the fish diversion structure. Bay anchovy is also characterized by poor
survival on the traveling screens so little reduction in impingement mortality was noted
for this species. While reductions in the mortality of Bay Anchovy was relatively poor,
abundance has not declined during three decades of population monitoring conducted in
the CFE. (CP&L 1980, 1994, 2002 )
• Spot, Atlantic Croaker, and mullet are taxa that provide examples of some variability in
the annual number impinged per year (Figures 2.17-2.19). When an estimate of
survival of the remaining impinged fish is factored in, overall reductions in
impingement mortality are greater than 80% per year for most years.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-9 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
• Shrimp and blue crabs exhibited high reductions (94-99%) in annual impingement
mortality (Table 2.10). Shrimp are examples of organisms that are not as effectively
excluded by the diversion structure (Figure 2.20). However, reduction in annual
impingement mortality per year was > 90% due to the high survival rates (90-94%) for
impinged shrimp.
2.3.6 Annual Trawl Catch Comparisons
• Figure 2.21 shows annual mean CPUE (relative abundance) by nursery area location for
Spot, Atlantic Croaker, and Pinfish. All 3 species are offshore, winter spawners that
migrate past the BSEP intake canal to the marsh nursery areas of the CFE. All are
among the numerically dominant species collected with the trawl gear and make up a
significant contribution to the number of larvae entrained and impinged on the fine -
mesh screens (Tables 2.2 and 2.3). Since 1981 Spot has been consistently more
abundant in the lower (WC) and middle estuary (MB). Exceptions were noted for Spot
collected at the head of the estuary (AC) during some years such as 1981, 1982, and
1986-1988. Past studies have demonstrated that the relative abundance of Spot in the
upper estuary may be similar to relative abundances in the lower and middle estuary
during years with relatively low freshwater input during recruitment (Weinstein et al.
1980, Rogers et al. 1984, and Thompson 1989). Changing freshwater flow patterns
have the effect of expanding and contracting habitat for estuarine dependent species
(Weinstein et al. 1980). Historically, Atlantic Croaker were more abundant in the
middle estuary (MB). The relative abundance declined at MB during 2015 due to high
freshwater flow during the winter recruitment period. The relative abundance of
Pinfish has consistently been greater at locations within the lower estuary (WC) (Figure
2.21).
• No consistent declines in the relative abundance of the 3 winter spawning finfish (Spot,
Atlantic Croaker, and Pinfish) were evident (Figure 2.21). While the relative
abundance of Atlantic croaker was down during 2015 due to high freshwater flow, the
relative abundance of Spot was within the annual variability of 1981-1993. The
relative abundance of Pinfish in WC was the highest recorded for the study period.
• The long-term relative abundance of 3 spring and summer spawning species are
presented in Figure 2.22. Consistent with previous years, Bay Anchovy was more
abundant in the middle estuarine locations (MB). Trawl stations in Mott's Bay were
located in open water at the mouth of Mott's Creek are also consistent with the pelagic -
habitat preference of Bay Anchovy. White Shrimp was abundant in both the lower
(WC) and upper (AC) nursery areas consistent with previous years. Brown Shrimp was
collected in greater number in the lower (WC) and middle estuary (MB), also consistent
with previous years.
• No consistent declines in the relative abundance of Bay Anchovy, White Shrimp, and
Brown Shrimp were evident (Figure 2.22). The relative abundance values for the
penaeid shrimp were within the range of variability of the long-term monitoring
program 23-35 years ago. The relative abundance in 2015 of Bay Anchovy, a non-
commercial forage species, was the highest recorded for the study period (1981-1993
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-10 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
and 2015). This is significant relative to power station operation since Bay Anchovy is
a fragile species exhibiting relatively poor fine -mesh screen efficiency and poor
survival rates.
• Figure 2.23 presents results for 3 estuarine resident species collected with trawl
sampling. The Naked Goby, Darter Goby, and Freshwater Goby are all among the top
species entrained as larvae and juveniles (Tables 2.2 and 2.3). The Naked Goby
spawns in spring and summer. The larvae and juveniles of the Darter and Freshwater
Gobies may be collected in entrainment and larval impingement samples sporadically
throughout the year but spring and fall peaks are evident (Table 2.6).
• All three species of goby exhibited distributional patterns within the estuary during
2015 that were consistent with previous years (Figure 2.23). The Naked Goby and
Darter Goby were more abundant in the higher salinity lower estuary (Figure 2.4). The
Freshwater Goby was more abundant in the upper estuary (AC) characterized by low
salinity to freshwater conditions.
• Consistent with the previous species' discussions no species of goby exhibited a
declining trend in relative abundance (Figure 2.23).
2.3.7 Environmental and Station Operational Effects and the Distribution of Spot
Laval and juvenile Spot is typically a numerically dominant species entrained and impinged
on the fine -mesh screens at the BSEP (Tables 2.2 and 2.3). Spot is also the second most abundant
species collected with trawl sampling in the primary nursery areas of the CFE (Table 2.5). Spot
spawn offshore and recruiting YOY must pass by the station intake canal to reach Walden Creek
and the upriver nursery areas. As such Spot are a good model species since, except for Bay
Anchovy and gobies, the top ten of the numerically dominant species and life stages entrained or
impinged are all spawned offshore or in the near -shore ocean.
• Spot recruit to the CFE during the winter with peak numbers entrained during
February -April in 2015 (Figure 2.24). The peak number of Spot collected with the
trawl gear coincided with peak recruitment and entrainment during March.
Recruitment declined after April.
• Except for salinity and WC, the relative abundance of Spot collected from the lower
' and middle estuary was not correlated to either mean water temperature, mean salinity,
mean daily station cooling water flow, or mean daily freshwater flow to the estuary
during recruitment of Spot from 1981-1993 (Table 2.11). A weak, negative correlation
for the relative abundance of Spot collected in WC and salinity was evident (- 0.56). A
stronger correlation (- 0.78) occurred for the relative abundance of Spot collected in the
upper estuary (AC) and mean daily freshwater flow during recruitment.
• A curvilinear regression equation was fitted to the data with freshwater flow as the
independent variable and CPUE (relative abundance index) as the dependent value.
The equation predicted the relative abundance of Spot collected in the upper estuary
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-11 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
during 2015 to within approximately one standard error of the observed value (Figure
2.25).
I '
• This correlation demonstrates the importance of an environmental factor, i.e. freshwater
flow, as primary determinant of recruitment to the upper estuary. Variation in station
cooling water flow during the recruitment of Spot did not impact dispersal to the _
nursery areas of the CFE including the upper estuary. Results indicate that Spot are
able to migrate past the BSEP intake canal and populate the nursery areas of the CFE.
More consistent abundance patterns over time were evident in the lower estuary due to
closer proximity to the inlet. The highly variable relative abundance patterns for Spot
over time were due to, fluctuating freshwater flow and lower salinity conditions
experienced in the upper I estuary.
I
I
2.4 Summary and Conclusions
I
Biological monitoring of the I CFE has been conducted since the early 1970's. Results of
intensive sampling throughout the 1970s and the early 1980's, prior to installation of intake
modifications to reduce entrainment and impingement, indicated that power station operations
had no measurable adverse effect on fish and shellfish populations in the CFE.
I ,
Entrainment and impingement studies through 2015 indicated that the BSEP intake
modifications and operational measures were effective in reducing the number of organisms '
affected by the withdrawal of cooling water from the CFE. Evidence supporting this conclusion
includes species composition and abundance of organisms entrained and impinged. The species
composition and seasonality of organisms collected in the entrainment, larval impingement, and
J/A impingement studies through 2015 were similar to previous years and corresponded to the
natural seasonality of larval organisms in the CFE. Anchovies, gobies, Spot, Atlantic Croaker,
Pinfish, penaeid shrimp and crabs were the dominant larvae entrained and impinged. Use of fine -
mesh screens has decreased the risk of entrainment for all larval taxa. This is especially
important for organisms that spawn in the near -shore and offshore ocean such as Atlantic
Menhaden, Spot, Atlantic Croaker; mullet, flounder, shrimp and crabs. These organisms may
potentially be at more risk of being entrained since they are spawned offshore and pass by the
plant intake in order to reach the nursery areas in the Cape Fear Estuary. Conversely, anchovies
and gobies are at less risk since they are estuarine residents and spawning occurs throughout the
entire estuary. Use of fine -mesh screens and flow reduction during 3 decades, reduced the mean ,
annual numbers of all organisms i entrained by 60-95%. Consistently greater reductions in
entrainment were evident for mullet, flounder, Gobiosoma spp., shrimp postlarvae and porlunid
crab megalops. Except for Gobiosoma spp., all are valuable commercial taxa. Larvae that
would have been entrained were re Iturned alive by the fish return system to the CFE in significant
numbers. Based on historic survival estimates data, substantial numbers of the larvae tested for
survival were returned alive to the estuary. The most valuable commercial taxa, flounder,
shrimp and swimming crab larvae, el hibited the greatest survival (> 87%).
i
Considered together, the fish diversion structure and fish return system have substantially
reduced the impingement mortalityl of larger organisms due to cooling water withdrawal. The . .
fish diversion structure excludes many of the larger fish and shellfish from the canal. Substantial
I
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-12 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
numbers of fish and shellfish that do get into the intake canal and subsequently become impinged
are returned alive to the estuary by the fish return system. Except for Bay Anchovy, reductions
in the mean annual impingement mortality of the representative taxa ranged from 91-99%.
Historic fish population monitoring indicated no declines in the abundance of bay anchovy as a
result of cooling water withdrawal. The relative abundance of Bay Anchovy was the highest on
record since the study was initiated in 1981. In addition to a reduction in numbers and mortality,
a shift to the impingement of smaller finfish has resulted as well. This shift to smaller
individuals is important because the larger individuals that are being excluded (saved) by the fish
diversion structure are the reproducing members of the population. In addition, the natural
mortality rates (predation, weather, tides, etc.) of smaller individuals is relatively high compared
to the natural mortality rates of older, larger individuals, so many of the smaller individuals
would not survive to maturity even in the absence of power station operation. The species
composition of organisms collected with impingement sampling also shifted to a greater
percentage of shrimp and blue crabs rather than larger finfish as a result of the fish diversion
structure. This shift in species composition is significant since juvenile and adult shrimp and
crabs exhibit excellent survival in the fish return system (> 90%).
Marsh trawl sampling conducted during 2015 indicated no impact to fish and shellfish
populations utilizing the estuary as a result of station cooling water withdrawal. Species
composition of the trawl samples was similar to the species composition of earlier studies
conducted in the 1970's and the long-term monitoring program conducted from 1981-1993.
Except for Bay Anchovy and gobies, the numerically dominant species collected with the trawl
and with entrainment sampling are species that spawn in the near -shore ocean or are spawned
offshore such as Spot, Atlantic Menhaden, penaeid shrimp, Pinfish, Atlantic Croaker, and
Southern Flounder.
Results indicated the absence of any consistent declining trends in relative abundance due to
power station operation. During 2015 the relative abundance observed for most species was
within the range of values observed from 1981-1993. The relative abundance of blue crabs
(Callznectes sapidus and C similis) was down in 2015 compared to previous years. However,
data compiled by the NCDMF indicate that juvenile recruitment of Blue Crab and adult
abundance have exhibited characteristics of a declining stock for the past three years not only in
the southern region but for the entire North Carolina coast as well indicating statewide declines
due to environmental conditions or fishing activities. In addition, larval, juvenile, and adult blue
crabs exhibit high survival and return efficiency in the fish return flume. The relative abundance
of Bay Anchovy and Pinfish collected during 2015 was the highest recorded since the marsh
trawl study was initiated in 1981. This is significant since Bay Anchovy is the most numerous
species entrained and impinged. Bay Anchovy, unlike blue crabs, is a fragile, forage species
demonstrating poor fine -mesh screen efficiency and poor survival in the fish return flume.
Because of this, one would expect that any adverse effect from station cooling water withdrawal
would manifest itself through a decline in the Bay Anchovy population. After over three decades
of monitoring there is no evidence of a decline in the Bay Anchovy population associated with
station operation.
Changes in relative abundance and spatial distribution were a result of changing freshwater
flow patterns to the estuary. Average annual daily freshwater flow during 2015 was the second
highest recorded since 2000. Relatively high freshwater flow during the winter recruitment
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-13 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Table 2.1 Representative species and life stages+ entrained and impinged at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant showing spawning location and season.
Spawning Spawning
Entrainment Impingement location season§
Anchovies (Anchoa spp.)
Atlantic Menhaden
Spot
Atlantic Croaker
Seatrout (Cynocion spp.)
Mullet (Mugil spp.)
Flounder (Parahchthys spp.)
Gobiosoma spp
Shrimp postlarvae
Portunid crab megalops
Bay Anchovy
E, NSO
SP, SU
Atlantic Menhaden
OSO
W
Spot
OSO
W
Atlantic Croaker
OSO
W
Seatrout
E, NSO
SP, SU, F
Mullet
OSO
W
Flounder
OSO
W
E
SP, SU
Shrimp (Litopenaeus spp,
Farfantepenaeus spp.)
OSO
SP, SU
Blue crabs (Callinectes spp)
NSO
F
+Larval and juvenile life stages are smaller size classes of organisms typically entrained with the
cooling water whereas sub adult and adult size classes of organisms are larger organisms
impinged on traditional 9.4 mm mesh traveling screens.
¶Spawning location designations are estuarine (E), near -shore ocean (NSO), and offshore ocean
(OSO).
§Spawning season designations are winter (W), spring (SP), summer (SU), and fall (F)
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-15 Water Resources Unit

I
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Table 2.2 Annual mean density (no./1000 m) and percent of total+
for the ten
most
abundant taxa/life
stages
collected
during entrainment
sampling at the
Brunswick SteamlElectric
Plant, 2013-2015
(ranking based on 2015 results).
2013
2014
2015
Mean
Mean
Mean
Taxon
density
Percent
density Percent
density Percent ;
i
Spot
16.9
14.8
43.3
41.3
49.8
35.2
Gobiosoma spp.
20.3
17.8
8.2
7.8
29.1
20.6
Atlantic Croaker
18.5
16.2
21.3
20.3
22.7
16.0 _
Ctenogobius spp.
2.9
2.5
2.5
2.4
11.3
8.0
Anchoa spp.(>13mm)
23.6
20.7
10.6
10.1
7.0
4.9
Shrimp postlarvae
6.2
5.4
2.4
2.3
5.7
4.0
Anchoa spp. (<13mm)
4.2
3.7
1.8
1.8
4.3
3.0
Silversides
4.4
3.9
3.4
3.2
3.7
2.6
Atlantic Menhaden
6.1
5.3
3.6
3.4
1.7
1.2
Pinfish
6.1
5.3
2.7
2.6
1.2
0.9
Other taxa
4.9
4.3
5.1
4.9
5.1
3.6
Number of other taxa/life stage
28
25
27
Total 114.1 100.0 105.0 100.0 141.6 100
i
+ Total may vary from summation due to rounding of individual taxon.
I
I
i
i
I
I -
I
I
I
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-16 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant
2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
- Table 2.3 Total number+ and percent of the ten most abundant taxa/life stages
collected during larval impingement sampling at the Brunswick Steam
Electric
Plant, 2013-2015 (based
on ranking for 2015).
2013
2014
2015
Total
Total
Total
Taxon
number Percent
number Percent
number
Percent
Shrimp (postlarvae)
2,307,168 54.5
1,627,056 20.8
3,515,760
47.2
Spot
194,832 4.6
1,477,152 18.9
1,369,728
18.4
Atlantic Croaker
360,432 8.5
1,977,984 25.3
1,360,080
18.3
Ctenogobius spp.
103,680 2.4
176,688 2.3
567,504
7.6
Swimming crab
megalops
247,392 5.8
429,840 5.5
208,368
2.8
Atlantic Menhaden
148,032 3.5
81,072 1.0
109,008
1.5
Hardback Shrimp
122,112 2.9
197,712 2.5
69,264
0.9
Pinfish
59,472 1.4
124,272 1.6
60,912
0.8
Anchoa spp. >13mm
267,552 6.3
854,352 10.9
59,472
0.8
_ Swimming crabs
24,624 0.6
92,304 1.2
25,488
0.3
Other taxa
399,024 9.4
786,240 10.0
102,384
1.4
Number of other
45
52
40
taxa/life stage
Total
4,234,320 100.0
7,824,672 100.0
7,447,968
100
+Total number is a sum
of the twelve sampling -day totals.
Total may vary from summation
due to rounding of individual taxon.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-17 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Table 2.4 Total number, total weight, and percent of total of the ten most abundant
juvenile and adult organisms collected in the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant
impingement samples, 2013-2015.
2013
Taxon
Number+
Percent&
Weight (kg)+
Percent&
Bay Anchovy
101,518
54.3
83.7
19.3
Brown Shrimp
30,920
16.5
130.9
30.2
White Shrimp
29,885
16.0
72.3
16.7
Lesser Blue Crab
3,846
2.1
5.9
1.4
Spot
3,192
1.7
14.0
3.2
Atlantic Croaker
2,356
1.3
11.5
2.7
Pinfish
2,323
1.2
5.4
1.3
Blue Crab
1,859
1.0
38.4
8.9
Blackcheek Tonguefish
1,794
1.0
8.5
2.0
Striped Anchovy
1,092
0.6
6.1
1.4
Other taxa (n = 69)
8,175
4.4
56.2
13.0
Total
186,960
100.0
433.1
100.0
2014
Taxon
Number+
Percent&
Weight (kg)+
Percent&
Star Drum
21,327
27.8
51.8
14.0
White Shrimp
15,444
20.1
67.2
18.1
Bay Anchovy
10,318
13.5
12.5
3.4
Brown Shrimp
10,318
13.4
79.7
21.5 y
Lesser Blue Crab
2,677
3.5
6.9
1.9
Atlantic Croaker
1,979
2.6
33.3
9.0
Pinfish
1,787
2.3
13.5
3.6
Pink Shrimp
1,341
1.8
2.5
0.7
Spot
1,105
1.4
20.2
5.4
Atlantic Silverside
1,077
1.4
3.3
0.9
Other taxa (n = 70)
9,369
12.2
80.3
21.7
Total 76,743 100.0 371.2 100.0
+Numbers and weights are sums of the twelve sampling day totals
'Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-18 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant
2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Table 2.4 (continued)
2015
' Taxon
Number+
Percent'
Weight (kg)+
Percent&
White Shrimp
32,327
29.2
157.1
32.1
Bay Anchovy
24,119
21.8
28.2
5.8
Brown Shrimp
23,588
21.3
105.0
21.4
Threadfin Shad
7,539
6.8
38.3
7.8
Lesser Blue Crab
3,958
3.6
12.1
2.5
Blue Crab
2,436
2.2
25.2
5.2
Blackcheek Tonguefish
2,248
2.0
8.6
1.8
Spot
2,202
2.0
13.5
2.8
Atlantic Menhaden
1,629
1.5
25.6
5.2
Pink Shrimp
1,447
1.3
2.9
0.6
Other taxa (n = 79)
9,251
8.4
73.1
14.9
Total
110,743
100.0
489.6
100.0
'Numbers and weights are sums of the twelve sampling day
totals.
&Percentages may not add up to 100 due to
rounding.
Table 2.5 Total number and percent catch of the
dominant organisms collected with
marsh trawl sampling in the Cape Fear Estuary,
2015.
Walden
Mott's
Alligator
Creek
Bay
Creek Combined
Taxa Num Percent
Num Percent
Num
Percent Num
Percent
Bay Anchovy 1,299 7.9
8,680
81.9
1,258
32.5 11,237
36.5
Spot 6,947 42.5
1,303
12.3
459
11.9 8,709
28.3
Atlantic Menhaden 2,566 15.7
44
0.4
12
0.3 2,622
8.5
Grass shrimp 1,936 11.8
172
1.6
62
1.6 2,170
7.1
White Shrimp 714 4.4
41
0.4
1,300
33.6 2,055
6.7
Brown Shrimp 566 3.5
50
0.5
0
0.0 616
2.0
Pinfish 517 3.2
23
0.2
1
0.0 541
1.8
Atlantic Croaker 228 1.4
78
0.7
193
5.0 499
1.6
Spotfin Mojarra 252 1.5
30
0.3
61
1.6 343
1.1
Southern Flounder 109 0.7
4
0.0
219
5.7 332
1.1
Other organisms 1,208 7.4
170
1.6
302
7.8 1,682
5.5
Total organisms 16,342 100.0
10,595
100.0
3,867
100.0 30,805
100.0
Trawling effort 48
24
24
96
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-19 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Table 2.6 Mean densities (mean no./1000 m3 per sampling day) of selected larval taxa+
entrained and impinged (1 -mm fine mesh) at the Brunswick Steam Electric
Plant, 2015.
Month
Taxa Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Atlantic
Menhaden*
Larvae entrained
0
26
53
32
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.1
Larvae impinged
1.0
2.1
21
8.7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Snot*
Larvae entrained
54
314
2,975
242
3.1
1 0
0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
0
Larvae impinged
17
21
442
38
0.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Atlantic Croaker*
Larvae entrained
329
366
382
31
3.3
0
0
0
3.2
228
193
98
Larvae impinged
37
67
241
4.2 1
0.6
0.1
0
0
0
11
44
5.5
Pinfish
Larvae entrained
1 31
1 0
1 26
1 29 1
3
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Larvae impinged
16.2
1 1.2
1 2.7
1 3.7
1 0.1
0.1
0
1 0
0
0
0
1 0.2
Flounder*
Larvae entrained
3.4
3.2
0
0
0
1 0
0
1 0
0
1 0
0
0
Larvae impinged
1.5
0.2
0.8
0.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.03
Mullet*
Larvae entrained
0
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Larvae impinged
0.03
1.6
0.3
0.2
0.03
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Silversides
Larvae entrained
0
0
0
263
6.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Larvae impinged
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Anchoa snD. (> 13 mm)*
Larvae entrained
3.4
34
11 2.9
73
279
6.2
31
15
30
15
0
Larvae impinged
2.5
0.8
4.3 0.3
0.1
0.03
0.03
0
0
1.0
4.9
0.00
Anchoa sm). (< 13 mm)*
Larvae entrained
0
0
0
0
121
739.3
94
10
0
0
0
Larvae impinged
0
0
0
0
0
144
0
0
144
0
0
0
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-20 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Table 2.6 (continued)
Month
Taxa Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Seatrout*
Larvae entrained
0
0
0
0
34
0
3.1
6.3
0
0
0
0
Larvae impinged
0
0
0
0
0.03
0.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
Gobiosoma spp.*
Larvae entrained
0
0
0
1 0
464
11,2051
126
1 239
1 35
1 27
0
0
Larvae impinged
0
0
0
0
0
0.8
0.03
0.03
0.3
1.0
0.1
0
Ctenogobaus spp.
Larvae entrained
30
17
0
58
44
3.0
6.3
6.0
0
572
62
15
Larvae impinged
6.0
3.5
5.5
7.5
1 0.1
0
0
0
0
85
2.2
0.2
Shrimp postlarvae*
Larvae entrained
3.2
0
0
151
3.1
12
13
38
112
38
27
15
Larvae impinged
1.3
4.2
0
308
3.0
4.5
3.1
3.4
234
67
8.1
2.5
Hardback Shrimp
Larvae entrained
1 0
0
1 0
0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 19
1 45
1 0
1 0
1 0
Larvae impinged
10.03
0
1 0
0 1
0
1 0.4
1 1.9
1 2.6 1
7.4
1 0
1 0
1 0
Portunid crab megalops*
Larvae entrained
1 0
1 0
1 0
0 1
0
1 0
1 3.1
1 8.8
9.2
1 2.9
1 0
0
Larvae impinged
10.031
0
1 0
0.6 10.03
1 5.3
1 2.4
1 0.3
1 0.8 1
8.6
1 18
1 2.2
6.0
Total all organisms
Larvae entrained
467
799
3,455
832
806
1,599
176
466
242
913
306
135
Larvae impinged
74
102
719
1 374
1 5.3
9.9
5.5
6.8
250
189
62
15
+ Selected taxa comprised > 1% of the total number sampled in either entrainment or larval impingement sampling
and/or historically representative important taxa (RT) indicated by an asterisk.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-21 Water Resources Unit

it
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Table 2.7 Density (no./million m3) and modal length (mm) for representative important
taxa collected by month with juvenile and adult impingement sampling at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2015.
Month
Taxa Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
i
Atlantic Menhaden
densityl 58
1 37 1 78,
1 6.6
1 178
1 0 1 0 1 0
1 0
4.3
10
0
modal len 80
1 85 185-90180,1251
1 IN
110
1 1 1
1
75
1 50
1 IN
Snot
densityl
126
1 5.8 1 23,
1 0 1 165 1 58
1 97
1 46 1 <1 1 50 10
0
modallen
75
1 80 80-8'5
45 1 45
1 IN
IN I IN 1 115
1 125
Atlantic Croaker
densityl
25
1 4 9
1 3.7 { 1 51
1 7.0
1 134
1 1.2
1 4.6
1 2 7
1 28 1 < 1
I < 1
modal lengthl
115
1 125
1 IN40
1 45
1 50
1 IN
1 85
1 IN
1 90 1 IN
I IN
Flounder
densityl
0
1 0
1 0 1
1 0
1 16
1 0
1 0 1 0
1 0
1 <1 0
0
modal length
1 50
1 IN I
I IN 1 55 1 IN
60
40
1
1 1
1
1 IN
1 50
Seatrout
density
3.4
1 < 1 1 0 J
1 1 0
1 18
1 1.2 1 0
1 < 1 1 21 1 2
0
modal lengthl
IN
modal lengthl
IN 1
1 50
1 IN I
I IN 1 55 1 IN
60
White Shrimn
densityl
181
1 12
1 0
1 0 1 0 0
1 117
1 242
1 101
1 2,063
13,242 1 36
modal lengthl
70
1 65
! IN
1 50 1 80
60
1 70
195,1051
95
1 55 1 90
Brown Shmmn
densityl
2.0
1 0
1 0 11 1.0
1 389 13,3211
252
1 344
1 19 10
1 8.3
0
modal len h
IN
--densityl
modal lengthl
! IN
1 50 1 80
1 100
1 105
1 85 1
1 75
Pink Shmmm
Blue crabs" 32 1 21 3.4 1 0 69 1 323 1 41 1 184 1 19 1 114 1 365 58
Bay anchovy"
Total organisms
&Length -frequency analysis was not conducted on bay anchovy or blue crab data
i
§IN= insufficient size range collected for determination of modal length
i
i
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-22 Water Resources Unit
12
1 17
1 0 1 , 3 9
1 10
1 0
1 17
1 40
1 18
1 106
1 52
5.8
--densityl
modal lengthl
70
1 IN
, 55
1 110
1
160,70165
1 70
1 50
1 45
1 50
Blue crabs" 32 1 21 3.4 1 0 69 1 323 1 41 1 184 1 19 1 114 1 365 58
Bay anchovy"
Total organisms
&Length -frequency analysis was not conducted on bay anchovy or blue crab data
i
§IN= insufficient size range collected for determination of modal length
i
i
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-22 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Table 2.8 Mean percent survival+
and percent
of total number of larval organisms
collected
during larval
impingement
sampling
at the Brunswick
Steam
Electric Plant, 2013-2015.
Mean
percent survival
Percent total number
Adjusted
Intake
Intake
Taxa
Screens Controls
Screens¶
2013
2014
2015
Shrimp postlarvae
90
89
100
54.5
20.8
47.2
Spot
29
86
34
4.6
18.9
18.4
AtlanticCroaker
34
87
39
8.5
25.3
18.3
Ctenogobius spp.
15
NC
15
2.4
2.3
7.6
Portunid megalops
87
86
100
5.8
5.5
2.8
- Atlantic Menhaden
3.2
39
8.0
3.5
1.0
1.5
Hardback Shrimp
79
89
89
2.9
2.5
0.9
Pinfishg
34
87
39
1.4
1.6
0.8
- 4nchoa spp. > 13
0.7
NC
0.7
6.3
1.7
0.8
Blue crabs
92
92
100
0.8
1.3
0.3
Flounder spp.
93
97
96
0.1
0.1
0.2
Mullet
70
92
76
< 0.1
0.1
0.1
Pink and white shrimp
96
93
100
0.2
0.1
0.1
Prionotus spp.
90
97
93
0.2
0.1
< 0.1
Weakfish
13
54
24
0.1
0.1
< 0.1
Crevalle Jack
36
NC
36
0
< 0.1
< 0.1
Planehead Filefish
70
NC
70
0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
{ Percent total number collected
91
81
99
+Mean present survival values include data collected during 4 years of intake screen survival
studies conducted from 1984-1987. Results are presented in CP&L 1987 and 1988 (fast -screen
rotation).
¶Survival results were adjusted for control mortality when control results were available. An
entry of NC for control data indicates that no control data were collected. Adjusted intake screen
survival was estimated by dividing the treatment survival by the control survival to account for
competing sources of mortality. The adjusted intake screen survival was truncated to 100 in
cases where the calculated value exceeded 100.
§ The survival percentage for pinfish is an estimate based upon data for a similar species,
croaker.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-23 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Table 2.9 Mean percent survival+ and percent total number of organisms collected
during impingement sampling at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2013-
2015.
Mean percent survival Percent total number
Adjusted
Intake Intake
Taxa Screens Controls Screens¶ 2013 2014 2015
Shrimp (pink & white) 94
93 100
17 22 31
Bay Anchovy 4.9
73 6.7
54 13 22
Brown Shrimp 90
80 100
17 13 21
Blue crabs 96
92 100
3.1 4.3 5.8
Blackcheek
Tonguefish 83
98 85
1.0 1.0 2.0
Spot 60
98 61
1.7 1.4 2.0
Atlantic Menhaden 16
67 24
0.1 1.2 1.5
Atlantic Croaker 45
93 48
1.3 2.6 1.3
Silver Perch§ 60
98 61
0.1 0.7 1.3
Star Drum§ 45
93 48
< 0.1 28 0.6 ;
Mullet 92
92 100
0.1 0.7 0.3
Weakfish 35
54 65
0.5 0.1 0.2
Portunus spp.§ 96
92 100
0.1 0.3 0.1
Flounder 71
97 73
0.1 < 0.1 0.1
Percent total number collected
89 89 89
+ Mean present survival values include
data collected during 4 years of intake screen survival
studies conducted from 1984-1987.
Results are presented in CP&L 1987 and 1988 (fast -
screen rotation).
¶ Survival results were adjusted for control mortality. Adjusted
intake screen survival was
estimated by dividing the treatment survival by the control survival to account for competing
sources of mortality. The adjusted intake screen survival was truncated to 100 in cases where
the calculated value exceeded 100.
§ Survival percentages for Portunus spp.,
star drum, and silver perch are estimates based upon
data for similar species (blue crabs, croaker,
spot, respectively)
Water Resources Unit ,
Duke Energy Progress, LLC
2-24

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Table 2.10 Mean annual percent reduction in the number of representative taxa
entrained and reductions in impingement mortality at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant, 1984-2015+.
Entrainment J/A Impingement
Percent Percent
reduction reduction
Anchovies
79
Bay Anchovy
27
Atlantic Menhaden
62
Atlantic Menhaden
99
Spot
60
Spot
96
Atlantic Croaker
68
Atlantic Croaker
92
Seatrout
64
Seatrout
91
Mullet
90
Mullet
98
Flounder
91 Flounder 89
Gobiosoma spp
80
Shrimp postlarvae
84 Shrimp 94
Portunid crab megalops
95 Blue crabs 99
Total organisms
77
+ Baseline entrainment and impingement rates for years without reduction controls in place used
data from 1979-1982 for entrainment and 1977-1979, and 1982 for impingement. (Impingement
data from 1980 and 1981 was exclude from the baseline calculations since a temporary fish
diversion structure was in place those years.)
Table 2.11 Results of Spearman's Rank Correlation Procedure conducted for Spot
based on marsh trawl data collected from Alligator Creek (AC), Mott's Bay
(MB), and Walden Creek (WC), 1981-1993.
'CPUE-(Catch Per Unit Effort) -A [loge (number+l )] transformation was applied to the data at the sample level prior
to calculating a mean annual CPUE.
2Mean water temperature and salinity used for each location were based upon data collected during peak recruitment
of spot to the estuary( February -April). Values for station cooling water flow (STA_FLO) and freshwater flow
(RIV_FLOW) to the estuary were also based upon a mean daily flow rate during peak recruitment of spot.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-25 Water Resources Unit
AC TEMP'
AC SAL2
STA FL02
RIV FLOW'
AC CPUE' Coefficient
0.12541
0.24174
-0.09802
-0.78022
P > r
0.6692
0.4051
0.7389
0.001
MB TEMP
MB SAL
STA FLOW
RIV FLOW
MB CPUE Coefficient
-0.1956
0.42857
-0.01225
-0.15604
P > (r)
0.5028
0.1263
0.9668
0.5942
WC TEMP
WC SAL
STA FLOW
RIV FLOW
WC CPUE Coefficient
0.01982
-0.55666
-0.12389
0.48845
P > r
0.9464
0.0387
0.6731
0.0764
'CPUE-(Catch Per Unit Effort) -A [loge (number+l )] transformation was applied to the data at the sample level prior
to calculating a mean annual CPUE.
2Mean water temperature and salinity used for each location were based upon data collected during peak recruitment
of spot to the estuary( February -April). Values for station cooling water flow (STA_FLO) and freshwater flow
(RIV_FLOW) to the estuary were also based upon a mean daily flow rate during peak recruitment of spot.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-25 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant
NORTH CAROLINA i
eland ,Navassa
4 frR%1
�,�: Wilminytori
Oak I>land, Southport'
0 2.5 5 10 Miles
0 4 8 16 Kilometers
Imagery C 2017 National Geographic. ESRI
421
Kure Beach
Plant �0b
Site
�Q
V
OCICIP i
,Carolina Beach
Atlantic
Ocean
Figure 2.1 Marsh trawl sampling locations in the Cape Fear Estuary, 2015.
A
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-26 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
1,600
1,400
N
E 1,200
O 1,000
LL
800
3
r
u) 600
LL
400
200
0
- 2013 -2014 -2015
Figure 2.2 Mean daily freshwater (cros) flow to the Cape Fear Estuary, 2013-2015.
avu
450
E 400
350
0 300
w
250
w
3 200
150
L
u- 100
50
Q
ti°°°ti°°�ti°°$ti°°5ti°01 zPti°00 Z,ti°°%ti°°9ti°N°������ti°'Nati°N°
Figure 2.3 Annual mean daily freshwater flow (ems) to the Cape Fear Estuary, 2000-
2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-27 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
35
30 --
25 -- -----
CL
----a 20 - -
'E 15 - ----- -- - - -
N10 -------- -----— - -
5
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
-+-2013 [phone]
Figure 2.4 Mean monthly intake canal salinity (ppt) measured at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant, 2013-2015.
35
30
25---------------------------------
CL
------------------------------- a 20 - -- -
15 --------- ------------- -- -----
10
5 ------------ - --- - ----
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
-*-AC -*-MB -*--WC
Figure 2.5 Mean monthly salinity (ppt) measured during trawl sampling in Alligator
Creek (AC), Mott's Bay (MB), and Walden Creek (WC) during 2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-28 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
.S0
30
Uj 25
O
20
r
co
L
CL 15
E
H 10
5
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
+2013 +2014 --*-2015
Figure 2.6 Mean monthly intake canal water temperature (°C) measured at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2013-2015.
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
-*-AC -a--MB -SWC
Figure 2.7 Mean monthly water temperature (°C) measured during trawl sampling in
Alligator Creek (AC), Mott's Bay (MB), and Walden Creek (WC) during
2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-29 Water Resources Unit
35
30
25
�j
0
20
15
CL
E
H
10
5
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
-*-AC -a--MB -SWC
Figure 2.7 Mean monthly water temperature (°C) measured during trawl sampling in
Alligator Creek (AC), Mott's Bay (MB), and Walden Creek (WC) during
2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-29 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
iu
60
x 50
�a
4- 40
0
30
5 20
z
10
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
70
60
■ Entrainment 2014 62
x 50 OLarval impingement
M
w 40 35
0
30 29 25 23
22
�
20 16 15 18 16
z 9 12 12 10 10 13 11 9 9 14 12
10if] 7J-] 8 ].5n � s M I=Fl
0 jE-j A A
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
70
60 ■ Entrainment 2013 55
is 50 l7Larval impingement
x
w 40 8
3
0
30 27 24 25
2120
Z 20 13 10 12 10 15 11 14 14 j"l 11 1215 14
10 8 5 5 6
0 IN IN 1
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
Figure 2.8 Number of taxa collected in entrainment and larval impingement samples at
the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2013-2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-30 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
9000
c 8000
0
7000
6000
5000
4000
c
W 3000
L
2000
1000
z 0
V
��aiWNW WaW�wW�ww�ao,aaotio�iarnoWio�+i0000000000 �: ����
w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Number entrained - -Ar - Percent reduction
Baseline
100
80
0
60 v
m
40
r
c
d
20 L
d
CL
0
Figure 2.9 Annual number of total organisms entrained at the Brunswick Steam Electric
Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment estimates, 1979-2015.
900
0 800
C
700
E 600
y 500
c
400
L
w+
W 300
d 200
E 100
M
Z 0
1 I N,
IV
11 1 I 1 1 11 �
11 � f 11 d
'O0 W WN N�� WyW W WOW 001 O)ONf OWj Or
O)0, O)O40 (0 NOj 010000000000 �w���w
01 OJ O) 01 O) 0100) 0CIO 010) 0101 O) 010100) O) 01010000000000000000
w w w w w w w w w ------------
Number
wwwwwwwwwww
Number entrained - Percent reduction
Baseline
100
80
60
m
40 c
20 a
0
Figure 2.10 Annual number of Spot entrained at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant and
percent reduction from baseline entrainment estimates, 1979-2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-31 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
900
c800
700
600
= 500
400
c
u1 300
L
200
= 100
Z
0
^waiw`rw"'w�w�ro`Dew`bw�ooioioNo�yiopio�io�Oio^iogioioo00000000 0 w0) v 4
-^o----^af-ww--w----w--NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Number entrained — —Ar — Percent reduction
Baseline
100
80 r-
0
60
d
o`
40
d
v
L
20 a
0
Figure 2.11 Annual number of Atlantic Croaker entrained at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment estimates,
1979-2015
y 40
O 35
' 30
-a 25
.R
20
15
W 10
L
5
E
3 0
Z
d
NN�N�N�N�NyNW�WOOjO>ONO�j�aOioOjo^i00i00f0000000000O-NMVh
O O OOO O OO O O O O O O O O O O O OON N N N NNNNNN NNNNNN
—�— Number entrained - -Ar - Percent reduction
Baseline
100
80 C
v
60
40
U
20 a
0
Figure 2.12 Annual number of flounder, Paralichthys spp., entrained at the Brunswick
Steam Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment
estimates, 1979-2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-32 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
y 2500
0
= 2000
1500
_
1000
W
L
500
E
0
Z 0
I �
�wwai�w`�'waww����owio..io`io�ioaivyia�Oio^iao°fi0000000000 ������
�— Number entrained - Percent reduction
Baseline
100
_
8o .2
60
40
v
L
d)
20 a
0
Figure 2.13 Annual number of Anchoa spp. (> 13mm) entrained at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment estimates,
1979-2015.
to 600
_
0
500
.E
400
d
-� 300
4-0
tL 200
L
M 100
E
0
Z 0
VA %t4.'At
��°'ww`"w�'waw"'ww�www°frnarnrnrnao`Oiama0000000000 ������
����������������o�o�ofofo�NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
-�— Number entrained - -Ar - Percent reduction
Baseline
100
_
80 0
v
60
40
L
d
20 a
0
Figure 2.14 Annual number of penaeid shrimp (postlarvae) entrained at the Brunswick
Steam Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment
estimates, 1979-2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-33 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
�— 1200
C
1000
.E
800
m
= 600
L
LI 400
L
200
E
Z 0
�� •�Ir� Y��� A
^WWN 0 NSW 1-1 W4��W00f 01 Ory��0yf�O��OOOOOOOOOO ^^�V-�
0)0)0)0)0)0) 0f 0f 0>O OfOOf Of Of 0f 0f 0f 0f00fOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
— A Number entrained – Percent reduction
Baseline
100
80 O
v
60
40 y
v
L
20 0-
0 0
Figure 2.15 Annual number of portunid crab megalops entrained at the Brunswick
Steam Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline entrainment
estimates, 1979-2015.
—12.0
c
010.0
E 8.0
a
m
IM 6.0
Q
E 4.0
L
E 2.0
M
z 0.0
I^ICOZ9NC0NN�NpNOW4NO NO00f 0f ONE 0�f 0pf 0lfjf 0Ol 0Nf 0Of 0010000000000
00000000000000000000000NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
--�— Number impinged – -A– – , Percent reduction fish diversion structure
Baseline -->A Percent reduction fish diversion structure
and return system
100
80 0
v
60
m
40 c
m
v
L
20 a
0
Figure 2.16 Annual number of Atlantic Menhaden impinged at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline impingement estimates,
1977-2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-34 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
1.6
0 1.4
= 1.2
E
1.0
v� 0.8
S
C 0.6
L 0.4
m
0.2
Z 0.0
OOOOf0010100)O�OOfA010)00�0)O O>W Of Of0000000000000000
�NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
�— Number impinged – -fir – Percent reduction fish diversion structure
Baseline Percent reduction fish diversion structure
and return system
11111,1, 11 111111
�A
100
80
C
0
60
m
40 W
r
C
d
20
a
0
Figure 2.17 Annual number of Spot impinged at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant and
percent reduction from baseline impingement estimates, 1977-2015.
1.4
rn
c
0 1.2
E 1.0
0 0.8
as
0.6
L 0.4
m
E 0.2
0
z 00
100
80
c
0
60
m
40
c
m
v
20
a
0
I�cO oIO�N�`l eth<p^ Wa>O •NM�th toA WOfO�N�h �}If)to^4�0>O^N�h Vh
/�hhq�q�cpW WOW4�4�W of os O�O>O)OOf Of os O)0000000000������
OOOf 0)0000000) 0f 010000) Of 0900)0)010000000000000000
A Number impinged – -d– – Percent reduction fish diversion structure
Baseline —A Percent reduction fish diversion structure
and return system
Figure 2.18 Annual number of Atlantic Croaker impinged at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline impingement estimates,
1977-2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-35 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
0.050
C 0.045
0
0.040
E 0.035
0.030
0.025
E 0.020
0.015
0.010
= 0.005
Z 0.000
A
A4 it A.
1 % 1
1 1 }
1 1 1 1 4 1
AA
�
1 1 1 1 1
� 1_ 1 / 1
S A 1 I
1
100
CORNOWNN�N�NyNOWNONO�OfO�OMi�001�01�Opf0000000000^w�w�
Os O O) Os O> vi O) O� O Of O Of O> Of 01 O 01 O 01 O 01 Os 01 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
—�- Number impinged - -&- - Percent reduction fish diversion structure
Baseline —A Percent reduction fish diversion structure
and return system
0
Figure 2.19 Annual number of mullet, Mugil spp., impinged at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline impingement estimates,
1977-2015.
4.0
c 3.5
0
= 3.0
2.5
2.0
C
'a 1.5
1.0
d
0.5
Z 0.0
d1j
1
80
0
1
v
60
d
� 1
♦ 11
40
a�0i
I
v
1 A
1
�
i 1
20
CL
11
11
11
11
CORNOWNN�N�NyNOWNONO�OfO�OMi�001�01�Opf0000000000^w�w�
Os O O) Os O> vi O) O� O Of O Of O> Of 01 O 01 O 01 O 01 Os 01 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
—�- Number impinged - -&- - Percent reduction fish diversion structure
Baseline —A Percent reduction fish diversion structure
and return system
0
Figure 2.19 Annual number of mullet, Mugil spp., impinged at the Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant and percent reduction from baseline impingement estimates,
1977-2015.
4.0
c 3.5
0
= 3.0
2.5
2.0
C
'a 1.5
1.0
d
0.5
Z 0.0
d1j
1
1
� 1
♦ 11
1
11 1
1
�
11
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
11
11 11 1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
11
1 y 1
1
1�
11 1
1
1/
1 1 1
N►COImNOwNN 3Z80(0N^NONOooiOiO�OCV)
V440(0^io0io0i000000000g�?' '2! M V go
o�ao�a�o�ao�o�o�o�o�o�o�aa,a�oio>o�o�o�o�o�0000000000000000
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
�— Number impinged - -A- - - Percent reduction fish diversion structure
Baseline i Percent reduction fish diversion structure
and return system
100
80
C
0
60 0
m
40
C
m
20 L
d
a
0
Figure 2.20 Annual number of shrimp impinged at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant
and percent reduction from baseline impingement estimates, 1977-2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-36 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
5
+ Spot
E 4
c
w 1
D
IL
U 0
%At
--*--WC --E -MB --A- AC
5
+ Atlantic Croaker
E 4
3
4.
c
0 3
d 2 4-
W —_ - —
w.
V 0 ---r - 7-
•-• 2
E
c
1b 0ti b� �� �h 06 0� �� �°� 00 0b q 0j Rh
N0 K0 KO' N°' N0 N0 N°' NO' ^q N0 N0 N0 NO' 10
--*--WC --a -MB -.A- AC
Pinfish
0^0� 0� 0�` 00 Oro 0bA 00 0°� 00 0� 0ti 0b
N.
—SWC --E -MB --A- AC
ry0
C]
■
Figure 2.21 Mean annual CPUE of Spot, Atlantic Croaker, and Pinfish collected with
trawl sampling in Alligator Creek (AC), Mott's Bay (MB), and Walden
Creek (WC), 1981-1993 and 2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-37 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
�. 5
+ Bay Anchovy
E 4 ■
c 3
k --1C
Lu
a 0
v N ti 0 b h ro A 0 o O N �, ^� h
0O oO oO oO oO oO oO oO oO o°I O°' O°' O°' O�
N K N K N K N K N K K K N ti
-SWC --■ -MB -.A- AC
2
+ White Shrimp
E
c
m
m
1 IA_,
~,%
•
d i � '■
,or?■`•� ■
W r �� ;
a 0 0' N -i
v ►� tih ro 1 0 0 0 ►� h
0O oO oO ,q 0O %q "Cb
oO oO 00 ,(b "q (b (b O°� If,
--O--WC --M -MB -*- AC
2
Brown Shrimp
E
_
c
m
m
-- 1,
Lu A. i ,A. i
a .ate J.� IL" .
L) 0 sic' "A ' �►'
0N000 0000"''0011, oh %r 010000 0°' Oo O►• Oti 00
--*--WC -a -MB --A- AC
rLO
•
■
Figure 2.22 Mean annual CPUE of Bay Anchovy, White Shrimp, and Brown Shrimp
collected with trawl sampling in Alligator Creek (AC), Mott's Bay (MB), and
Walden Creek (WC), 1981-1993 and 2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-38 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
A
E
c
m
a�
0
r -
co
d
LU
a
A
1
0.5
Naked Goby
•
0 A, -
�N �`l, �fb ON gbh fro �A �F 00'ICbqz PN Iry X21 �h
SWC --0 -MB --A- AC
2
Darter Goby
1
•
0 '�---t-�i'-y� i
SWC -E -MB --A- AC
2
+ Freshwater Goby
E
0
C I%
o i
-�
LU
CL
o _ •
.43
--*—WC --s -MB AC
Figure 2.23 Mean annual CPUE of Naked Goby, Darter Goby, and Freshwater Goby
collected with trawl sampling in Alligator Creek (AC), Mott's Bay (MB, and
Walden Creek (WC), 1981-1993 and 2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-39 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
4,000
E
0o 3,500
0 3,000
L
c. 2,500
Z 2,000
1,500
1,000
y 500
c
0
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
--o—Entrainment -a- Marsh Trawl
450
400 3
0
350 ',-
(D m
300 Q-
250 5
200 c
150 2
100 w
0
50 v
0
Figure 2.24 The seasonal distribution of Spot collected with entrainment (Density) and
trawl sampling (CPUE) conducted during 2015.
4.0
+ 3.5
3.0 A
3
2.5
C 2.0
M 1.5
E
LU 1.0 _
D 0.5
U
0.0
0 100 200
AC CPUE 1981-1993
Y = 6E -06x' - 0.0087x + 4.4408
R = 0.73
A
A
a
,i►
•
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Freshwater inflow (cros)
♦ AC CPUE Poly. (AC CPUE)
I
2015 Freshwater flow = 390.33 cros AC CPUE Predicted = 1.96
AC CPUE Observed = 1.60 t 0.33
Figure 2.25 The mean annual CPUE of Spot collected with trawl sampling as a function
of mean freshwater flow during peak recruitment to the Cape Fear Estuary,
1981-1993, showing predicted and observed values for 2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 2-40 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
3.0 REFERENCES
Blumberg, A. F., D. J. Dunning, H. Li, D. Heimbugh, and W. R. Geyer. 2004. Use of a particle
tracking model for predicting entrainment at power plants on the Hudson River. Estuaries. 27
(3): 515 - 526.
CP&L. 1980. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Cape Fear Studies Interpretive Report. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
_.1982. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant annual biological monitoring report, 1981. Vol 1.
Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
_.1984. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant annual biological monitoring report, 1983. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
1985a. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant annual biological monitoring report, 1984. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
_. 1985b. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Cape Fear Studies, Interpretive Report. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
_. 1986. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant annual biological monitoring report, 1985. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
_. 1987. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant annual biological monitoring report, 1986. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
1988. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant annual biological monitoring report, 1987. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
_. 1989. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant annual biological monitoring report, 1988. Carolina
Power & Light Company, Southport, NC.
2002. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant annual biological monitoring report, 2001. Carolina
Power & Light Company, New Hill, NC.
Copeland, B. J., R. G. Hodson, and R. J. Monroe. 1979. Larvae and postlarvae in the Cape Fear
Estuary, North Carolina, during operation of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 1974-1978.
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
DEP. 2014. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant annual biological monitoring report, 2010-2012.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Raleigh, NC.
Giese, G. L., H. B. Wilder, and G. G. Parker, Jr. 1979. Hydrology of major estuaries and sounds
of North Carolina. United States Geological Survey. Water resources investigations 7946.
Raleigh, NC.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 3-1 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
1985. Hydrology of major estuaries and sounds of North Carolina. United States
Geological Survey. Water -supply paper 2221. Alexandria, Va.
Hodson, R. G., 1979. Utilization of marsh habitats as primary nursery areas by young fish and
shrimp, cape fear Estuary, North Carolina. BSEP Cape Fear Studies, Volume VIII. North
Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
Hogarth, W. T. and K. L. Nichols. 1981. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant intake modifications to
reduce entrainment and impingement losses. Carolina Power & Light Company, New Hill,
NC.
Huish, M. T., and J. P. Geaghan. 1979. A study of adult and juvenile fishes of the lower Cape
Fear River near the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 1975-1976. BSEP Cape Fear Studies,
Volume XIII. Report 79-4 to Carolina Power and Light Co., North Carolina State University,
Raleigh, NC.
Lawler, J. P., M. P. Weinstein, H. Y. Chen and T. L. Englert. 1988. Modeling the physical and
behavioral mechanisms influencing the recruitment of spot and Atlantic croaker to the Cape
Fear Estuary. Am. Fish. Soc. Sym. 3: 115-131.
NCDEQ. 2016. May 2016 revision to amendment 2 to the North Carolina blue crab fishery
management plan. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. Division of Marine
Fisheries. Morehead City, NC.
Nelson, W. R., M. C. Ingham, and W. E. Shaaf, 1977. Larval transport and year class strength of
Atlantic menhaden, Brevoortia tyrannus. Fish. Bull. U. S. 75: 23-42.
Norcross B. L., and H. M. Austin. 1981. Climate scale environmental factors affecting year -class
fluctuations of Chesapeake Bay croaker, Micropogonias undulatus. Va. Inst. Mar. Sci. Spec.
Sci. Rep. 110: 87 pp.
Norcross B. L., and R. F. Shaw. 1984. Oceanic and estuarine transport of fish eggs and larvae: a
review. Tran. Am. Fish. Soc. 113: 153-165.
PEC. 2005. Progress Energy Brunswick Steam Electric Plant proposal for information
collection. NPDES Permit No. NC0007064. Progress Energy Carolinas Inc., Raleigh, NC.
_. 2008. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2007 biological monitoring report. Progress Energy
Carolinas Inc., Raleigh, NC.
_. 2009. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2008 biological monitoring report. Progress Energy
Carolinas Inc., Raleigh, NC.
Rogers S. E., T. E. Targett, and S. B. Van Sant. 1984. Fish nursery use in Georgia salt -marsh
estuaries: The influence of springtime freshwater conditions. Tran. Am. Fish. Soc. 113: 595-
606.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 3-2 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Schwartz, F. J., P. Perschbacher, L. Davidson, C. Simpson, D. Mason, M. McAdams, K. Sandoy
and J. Duncan. 1979. An ecological study of fishes and invertebrate macrofauna utilizing the
Cape Fear River Estuary, Carolina Beach Inlet, and adjacent Atlantic Ocean, 1973-1977.
BSEP Cape Fear Studies, Volume XIV. Report to Carolina Power & Light Co., Institute of
Marine Sciences, University of North Carolina, Morehead City, NC.
Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation. 1984. Advanced intake technology study. Research
project 2214-2. Prepared for the Electric Power Research Institute. Prepared by Stone &
Webster Engineering Corporation. Boston, MA.
Thompson, T. E. 1989. Factors limiting the movement of spot, Leiostomus xanthurus, into a
freshwater-oligohaline tidal marsh. Master's thesis. Department of Biological Sciences,
University of North Carolina at Wilmington, Wilmington, N.C.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2014. National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System -Final regulations to establish requirements for cooling water intake
structures at existing facilities and amend requirements at phase I facilities; Final rule, 79
Federal Register, pp 48,300 - 48,439.
Tomljanovich, D. A., J. H. Heuer, and C. W. Voigtlander. 1978. A concept for protecting fish
larvae at water intakes. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 30:105 - 106.
Weinstein, M. P. 1979. Shallow marsh habitats as primary nurseries for fishes and shellfishes,
Cape fear River, North Carolina. Fish. Bull. 77:339-357.
Weinstein, M. P. 1979. Larval retention study, Cape Fear River, 1978. BSEP Cape Fear
studies, Volume X. Report to Carolina Power & Light Company. Lawler, Matusky & Skelly
Engineers, Pearl River, NY.
Weinstein, M. P., S. L. Weiss, R. G. Hodson, and L. R. Gerry. 1979. Retention of three taxa of
postlarval fishes in an intensively flushed tidal estuary, Cape Fear River, North Carolina.
Fish. Bull. 78(2):419-436.
Weinstein, M. P., S. L. Weiss, and M. E. Walters. 1980. Multiple determinants of community
structure in shallow marsh habitats, Cape Fear River estuary, North Carolina. Mar. Biol.
58:226-243.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC 3-3 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
APPENDICES
Appendix 1. Summary of historical environmental studies conducted in association with
the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 1968-2015.
As part of the initial nuclear licensing efforts Carolina Power & Light Company (CP&L,
predecessor to Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc and subsequently Duke Energy Progress, LLC)
commenced environmental impact studies in 1968. Physical/chemical studies included dye and
flow studies, water chemistry, and thermal studies. Biological studies included phytoplankton,
zooplankton, benthos and larval fish and shellfish diversity, distribution and abundance studies in
the main stem of the estuary. Juvenile and adult fish and shellfish population studies were also
conducted in the estuary. Special emphasis was placed on Walden Creek and Snow's Marsh
adjacent to the plant's intake canal. Entrainment and impingement studies were also conducted
after Unit 2 came online in 1974. In addition, thermal tolerance, swimming performance studies
and marsh productivity studies were conducted.
Studies were expanded and intensified in 1976 to address the potential adverse impact on
the entire estuary by the intake under full 2 -unit operation. These comprehensive studies were
developed through an interagency review group assembled at CP&L's initiative and included
representatives of the EPA, NRC, National Marine Fisheries Service, United States Fish and
Wildlife Service, North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management (predecessor to NC DENR), and CP&L. Exhaustive dye tracer,
hydrographic, tidal, temperature, and salinity studies were conducted to model estuarine flow
dynamics relative to plant intake flows. Various gear efficiency and sampling methodology
studies were conducted to ensure that statistically valid data were collected. The biological
studies were modified to provide adequate data concerning the larval, juvenile, and adult fish and
shellfish populations having the greatest potential to be adversely affected by plant operation. In
addition to weekly entrainment and impingement studies, population studies were conducted in
the near -shore ocean, main stem estuary, estuarine shallows, and tidal creek nursery areas from
below Southport, NC upstream to the vicinity of Wilmington, NC. Specific criteria studied
included species composition plus spatial, seasonal, and inter -annual abundance as well as age,
growth, dietary, and tagging studies. The principal investigators from CP&L, NCSU, Institute of
Marine Science and Lawler, Matusky and Skelly consultants used results of these studies to
determine the mechanisms by which larvae enter and are retained in this intensively flushed
estuary and to provide insight regarding the lack of any detectable adverse environmental impact
on fish and shellfish populations due to cooling water withdrawal. Results of these studies were
compiled in the 20 volume Cape Fear Studies.
Beginning in 1980 and continuing through 1993, CP&L conducted a long-term
Biological Monitoring Program that would provide for the continued assessment of the impact
that the cooling water withdrawal might have on the Cape Fear River Estuary. Using historic
biological study results as a guide, particular emphasis was placed on marine fisheries. With
some modification, these Biological Monitoring Studies were a continuation of the studies
conducted since 1976, thus, allowing for long-term trending of results. Certain studies were also
expanded or added to address the effectiveness of the circa 1983 intake modifications in reducing
the number of organisms entrained and impinged. Beginning in 1984, a larval impingement
study was conducted in addition to the standard entrainment and impingement studies as
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-1 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Appendix 1. continued
another means to assess the success of fine -mesh screens in reducing entrainment of larvae.
Larval fish sampling was conducted in the ship channel and the mouths of two major tidal creek
nursery areas. A larval fish discrete depth sampling study was conducted to better understand the
distribution of larvae during recruitment to the estuary and to validate the standard larval fish
study. A marsh nursery study using trawl, seine, and rotenone sampling was conducted to assess
recruitment to and use of the tidal creek nursery areas with special interest placed on Walden
Creek adjacent to the Plant's intake canal and several nursery areas upstream of the intake canal.
Sampling stations also included a location in the fish return basin. This station along with a
special tagging study demonstrated that juvenile fish and shellfish used the return basin as a
shallow water nursery area in a fashion similar to the headwaters of a natural tidal creek. A
nekton study using trawl and gill net sampling was conducted to assess the populations of
juvenile and adult fish and shellfish that could potentially be subject to impingement at the plant
intake structure. Sampling stations in the CFE ranged from below Southport, NC to the vicinity
of Wilmington, NC. Several sampling stations in the intake canal were used as an additional
means of assessing the success of the fish diversion structure in reducing impingement. Survival
studies were conducted in the fish return system to assess the success of the return system in
returning larval, juvenile, and adult organisms alive to the estuary. A weekly temperature and
salinity study was conducted along the main stem of the estuary because historic results indicated
that freshwater flow, salinity, and temperature were the main determinants of fish and shellfish
distribution and abundance in the estuary.
Beginning in 1994 and continuing through the current permit cycle, the biological
monitoring program was significantly reduced with the concurrence of State regulatory and
resource agencies. Because of almost two decades of data demonstrating that the cooling water
withdrawal has no adverse impact to the fish and shellfish populations in the estuary, the
monitoring program was reduced to concentrate on entrainment and impingement only. This
allowance was based on the fact that if the impingement mortality and entrainment performance
remains relatively consistent then the environment remains protected. Sampling frequency was
reduced to monthly sampling and results demonstrated the continuing effectiveness of the intake
modifications in reducing entrainment and impingement of fish and shellfish. Periodic special
study trawl surveys conducted in the marsh/tidal creek nursery areas continued to show no
adverse impact on the recruitment to and use of these nursery areas by juvenile fish and shellfish.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC believes over three decades of biological and environmental
monitoring has resulted in one of the most extensive and informative data bases concerning our
nation's estuaries. These data can provide valuable insight regarding the ecology of our nation's
estuaries and facilitate compliance with the 2014 existing facility 316(b) regulation.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-2 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Appendix 2. Total number+ of larval organisms collected during entrainment (BE) and
larval impingement (LI) sampling at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant,
2013-2015.
Scientific name Common name BE 2013 LI I 2014 I 2015` BE LI BE 1-1
Anguillidae
Anguilla rostrata
Elopidae
Elops saurus
Megalops atlantica
Elopidae
Ophichthidne
Myrophis punctatus
Ophichthus gomesii
Myrophis punctatus
Ophichthidae
Clupeidae
A. sapidissima
Brevoortia tyrannus
Alosa mediocris
Engraulidae
Anchoa < 13mm
Anchoa> 13mm
Synodontidae
Synodus foetens
Gadidae
Urophycis spp
Ophidiidae
Ophidion welshi
Batrachoididae
Opsanus tau
Gobiesocidae
Gobiesox strumosus
Exocoetidae
Hyporhamphus
unifasciatus
Belonidae
Strongylura marina
Cyprinodontidae
Fundulus heteroclitus
Poeciliidae
Gambusia holbrooki
Atherinidae
Menidia menidia
Menidia beryllina
Atherinidae
Syngnathidae
Syngnathus spp.
Syngnathusfuscus
Syngnathus louisianae
Triglidae
Prionotus spp.
Prionotus scitulus
Prionotus tribulus
Prionotus carolinus
Serranidae
Centropristis striata
Percichthyidae
Moron spp.
Carangidae
Caranx hippos
Chloroscombrus chrysurus
Carangidae
Lutjanidae
Lu#anus griseus
Freshwater eels
American Eel
Tarpons
Ladyfish
(leptocephalus stage.)
Tarpon
(leptocephalus stage.)
Unidentified Tarpon
Snake eels
Speckled Worm Eel
Shrimp Eel
Speckled Worm Eel
(leptocephalus)
Herrings
American Shad
Atlantic Menhaden
Hickory Shad
Anchovies
Anchoa < 13mm
Anchoa> 13mm
Lizsrdfishes
Inshore Lizardfishes
Codfishes
Cusk-eels
Crested Cusk-eel
Toadfishes
Oyster Toadfish
Clingfishes
Skilletfish
Flying fishes
Silverstripe Halfbeak
Needlefishes
Atlantic Needlefish
Killifishes
Mummichog
Livebearers
Eastern Mosquitofish
Silversides
Atlantic Silverside
Inland Silverside
Silversides
Pipefishes
Unidentified pipefish
Northern Pipefish
Chain Pipefish
Searobins
Searobin
Leopard Searobin
Bighead Searobin
Northern Searobin
Sea basses
Black Seabass
Temperate basses
Jacks
Crevalle Jack
Atlantic Bumper
Snappers
Gray Snapper
1
6
0
0
0
(1
0
147
0
64
632
0
0
i
U
0
0
100
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
14
0
288
15,408
5040
0
1,584
1,008
3,744
0
0
148,032
0
44,784
267,552
2,016
0
0
576
720
0
0
432
576
0
576
0
0
0
3,600
7,488
576
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,152
4
I
0
I
I
I)
0
84
6
43
270
1
1
0
0
0
U
1
0
0
0
80
0
U
U
0
(1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
720
3,600
3,312
0
432
0
4,896
0
1,296
81,072
0
133,488
854,352
0
0
144
0
720
2,880
576
576
0
0
1,152
3,744
576
1,584
13,536
7.632
0
1,008
0
576
0
576
576
1,152
1,152
3
I
0
0
4
0
0
0
35
0
101
190
0
0
0
2
1
U
91
0
0
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,584
4,032
720
0
9,504
432
1,008
1,440
0
109,008
0
288
59,472
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
288
0
0
0
0
2,592
3,744
2,880
0
1,152
144
0
0
144
0
0
144
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-3 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Appendix 2. continued
2013
Scientific name Common name BE Ll
Centrachidac
Sunfishes
Lepomis macrochirus
Bluegill
Gerridae
Mojarras
Gerridae
59,472
Haemulidae
Grunts
Orthopristis chrysoptera
Pigfish
Sparidae
Porgies
Lagodon rhomboides
Pinfish
Sciaenidae
Drums
Bairdiella chrysoura
Silver Perch
Cynoscion nebulosus
Spotted Seatrout
C. regalis
Weakfish
Larimus fasciatus
Banded Drum
Leiostomus xanthurus
Spot
Menticirrhus spp
Kingfish spp.
Pogonias cromis
Black Drum
Micropogonias undulatus
Atlantic Croaker
Sciaenops ocellatus
Red Drum
Stellifer laneeolatus
Star Drum
Ephippidae
Spadefishes
Chaetodipterus faber
Atlantic Spadefish
Mugilidae
Mullets
Mugil cephalus
Striped Mullet
M. curema
White Mullet
Blennifdae
Combtooth blennies
Hypsoblennius hentz
Feather Blenny
H.ionthas
Freckled Blenny
Blennidae
3,312
Eleotridae
Sleepers
Eleotris pisonis
Spinycheek Sleeper
Dormitator maculates
Fat Sleeper
Gobiidae
Gobies
Gobiosoma spp.
10,512
Microgobius spp.
0
Ctenogobius spp.
4,032
Stromateidae
Butterfishes
Peprilus alepidotus
Harvestfish
P. triacanthus
Butterfish
Bothidae
Lefteye flounders
Citharichthys spilopterus
Bay Whiff
Etropus crossotus
Fringed Flounder
Scophthalmus aquosus
Windowpane
Paralichthys spp
Citharichthys spp
Soleidae
Soles
Trinectes maculatus
Hogchoker
Cynoglossidne
Tonguefishes
Blackcheek
Symphurus plagiusa
Tonguefish
Symphures spp
Balistidae
Triggerfishest f-defishes
Monacanthus hispidus
Planehead Filefish
Aluterus schoepfi
Orange Filefish
Tetraodontidae
Puffers
Chilomycterus schoepfi
Striped Bun�fish
Unidentified fishl
Unidentified fish
Invertebrates
Penseidae
Prawns
Penaeidae (postlarvae)
Shrimp larvae
Penaeid shrimp (unidentified) damaged
F. duorarum
Pink Shrimp
Litopenaeus setiferus
White Shrimp
Trachypenaeus constrictus
Hardback Shrimp
0
0
2,736
3
4,176
137
59,472
16
26,496
2
2,880
9
2,736
0
0
371
194,832
1
4,176
1
144
426
360,432
2
5,616
2
720
0
0
0
864
1
720
0
0
0
0
7
3,024
0
0
0
576
380
194,976
4
9,360
67
103,680
0
576
0
144
0
3,312
0
0
0
0
5
5,472
4
6,192
4
10,512
0
0
1
4,032
0
2,304
U
2,304
0
0
0
0
148 2,307,168
0 576
0 576
0 6,912
6 122,112
2014
BE LI
0 0
0 11,520
16 50,976
60 124,272
6 29,808
6 22,608
4 8,208
0 0
969 1,477,152
0 3,456
17 576
458 1,977,984
1 1,728
0 22,320
0 576
4 6,192
0 0
0 576
0 576
6 3,024
0 576
0 0
189 346,320
4 7,632
56 176,688
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
U 0
8 8.064
1 2,304
42,768
0 2,592
10,512
0 576
0 576
0
0
55 1,627,056
0 576
0 1,728
0 7,632
6 197,712
201
BE Ll
0 864
6 1,584
9 1,152
27 60,912
9 576
4 144
10 576
0 0
1017 1,369,728
1 0
0 0
502 1,360,080
1 4,752
1 576
0 0
8 8,928
0 144
0 0
0 0
e 144
I 144
I 144
700 12,096
0 0
262 567,504
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 144
0 0
2 12,528
3 14,832
2 576
0 0
6 4,608
0 144
0 0
0 576
0
135 3,515,760
0 0
0 576
0 3,744
22 69,264
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-4 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
I I I
Appendix 2. continued
2013 2014 2015
Srientifir name Cnmmnn name RF 1.1 RF LI RF LI
Portunidae Swimming crabs
Swimming crab
14 247,392
14 429,840
8 208,368
Portunid crab megalops megalops stage
Portunid crab:5 10 mm Swimming crab
2 24,624
0 92,304
1 25,488
Blue Crab
Callinectes spp. (> I Omm, <_ 20 mm)
0 7,344
0 6,336
0 2,736
+Numbers represent total number collected per 5 -minute sample summed over all samples.
Fish were unidentifiable due to damage.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-5 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Appendix 3. Total number+ and biomass (g) of juvenile and adult organisms collected
during impingement sampling at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 2013-
2015.
2013 1 2014 1 2015
Total Total Total Total Total Total
Scientific name Common name number weight (g) number wei ht number weight
Carcharhinidae
Rhizoprionodon
terraenovae
Carcharhinus obscures
Rajidae
Raja eglanteria
Dasyatidae
Dasyans americana
D. sabina
Gymnura micrura
Dasyatis say
Dasyatis centroura
Myliobatidae
Rhinoptera bonasus
Anguillidne
Anguilla rostrata
Elopidae
Elops saurus
Ophichthidae
Myrophis punctatus
Ophichthus gomesii
Clupeidae
Alosa aestivalis
A.pseudoharengus
A. sapidissima
Brevoortia tyrannus
Dorosoma cepedianum
D. peternense
Opisthonema oglinum
Engraulidae
Anchoa hepsetus
Anchoa mitchilli
Synodontidae
Synodus foetens
Gadidae
Urophycis florfdana
U. regia
Ophidiidae
Ophidion welshi
Batrachoididae
Opsanustau
Gobiesocidae
Gobiesox strumosus
Exocoetidae
Henuramphus spp.
Hemiramphus
brasiliensis
Hyporhamphus
unifasciatus
Belonidae
Strong lura marina
Cyprinodontidae
Fundulus heteroclitus
Fundulus majalis
Atherinidae
Membras martinica
Menidia menidia
Menidia beryllina
Syngnathidae
Syngnathusfuscus
Sharks
Atlantic Sharpnose
Shark
Dusky Shark
Skates
Clearnose Skate
Rays
Southern Stingray
Atlantic Stingray
Smooth Butterfly Ray
Bluntnose Stingray
Roughtail Stingray
Eagle rays
Cownose Ray
Freshwater eels
American Eel
Tarpons
Ladyfish
Snake eels
Speckled Worm Eel
Shrimp Eel
Herrings
Blueback Herring
Alewife
American Shad
Atlantic Menhaden
Gizzard Shad
Threadfin Shad
Atlantic Thread
Herring
Anchovies
Striped Anchovy
Bay Anchovy
Lizardfishes
Inshore Lizardfishes
Codfishes
Southern Hake
Spotted Hake
Cusk-eels
Crested Cusk-Eel
Toadfishes
Oyster Toadfish
Clingfishes
Skilletfish
Flying fishes
Halfbeaks
Ballyhoo
Silverstripe Halfbeak
Needlefishes
Atlantic Needlefish
Killifishes
Mummichog
Striped Killifish
Silversides
Rough Silverside
Atlantic Silverside
Inland Silverside
Pipefishes
Northern Pipefish
3
1
1
5
16
23
0
0
0
1
0
17
7
6
0
12
148
248
509
0
1,092
101,518
36
31
71
35
124
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
745
9
0
255
386
0
500
1,203
3,005
3,344
0
0
0
50
0
387
887
11
0
100
1,898
880
4,344
0
6,135
83,696
83
193
389
891
2,133
u
1 I
U
0
1 I
41
0
932
34
0
0
0
3
7
16
1
1
0
0
4
13
15
74
66
0
31
888
119
594
18
453
10,318
71
87
1,075
54
35
13
0
38
0
117
1,077
0
101
0
0
700
700
4,690
100
189
0
0
471
2,056
369
2,746
233
0
87
9,555
937
2,041
18
2,142
12,516
945
223
4,885
1,032
1,821
0
0
0
12
0
102
0
340
3,284
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
0
16
22
11
0
138
1,629
1
7,539
0
599
24,119
38
33
87
26
37
0
0
0
0
8
5
0
209
170
45
160
0
0
0
0
2,589
326
0
950
0
0
7
345
1,105
231
0
570
25,571
35
38,328
0
4,233
28,213
296
122
463
166
2,330
0
0
0
0
273
15
0
662
453
145
240
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-6 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Aooendix 3. continued
Scientific name
Common name
Total
number
2013
Iotal
"eight
Total
number
2014
Total
weight
Total
number
2015
Total
weight
Syngnathus louisianae
Chain Pipefish
166
489
142
489
145
438
Triglidae
Searobins
Prionotus evolans
Striped Searobin
0
0
3
10
0
0
Prionotus scitulus
Leopard Searobin
207
317
71
188
20
46
Prionotus tribulus
Bighead Searobin
164
543
107
528
137
1,050
Percichthyidae
Temperate basses
Morone saxatilis'
Striped Bass
0
0
0
1
623
Serranidae
Sea basses
Mycteroperca microlepis
Gag
24
137
U
0
1
88
Centropristis
philadelphica
Rock Seabass
0
0
0
u
240
Centropristis striata
Black Seabass
0
0
_
,4
0
0
Pomatomidae
Bluefishes
Pomatomussaltatrix
Bluefish
207
545
6
87
92
193
Rachycentridae
Cobia
Rachycentron canadum
Cobia
10
16
6
6
5
5
Echeneidae
Remoras
Remora remora
Remora
0
0
U
0
16
264
Carangidae
Jacks
Caranx hippos
Crevalle Jack
26
66
17
42
13
229
Chloroscombrus
11
11
0
0
chrysurus
Atlantic Bumper
13
13
Oligoplites saurus
LeatherJack
0
0
0
0
0
0
Selene vomer
Lookdown
24
218
33
141
4
11
Trachinotus falcatus
Permit
0
0
0
0
0
0
Lutjanidae
Snappers
Lug'anus analis
Mutton Snapper
0
0
0
0
0
0
Lu#anus griseus
Gray Snapper
5
5
1
5
9
85
Centrachidae
Sunfishes
Lepomis macrochirus
Bluegill
0
0
0
0
20
53
Lepomis microlophus
Redear Sunfish
0
0
0
0
20
53
Gerridae
Mojarras
Diapterus auratus
Kish Pompano
2
9
8
54
1
24
Eucinostomus argenteus
Spotfin Mojarra
17
40
0
0
176
1,338
E. gula
Silver Jenny
6
43
17
119
0
0
Haemulidae
Grunts
Orthopristis chrysoptera
Pigfish
46
189
173
4,346
7
33
Sparidne
Porgies
Archosargus
0
0
1
4
probatocephalus
Sheepshead
5
28
Lagodon rhomboides
Pinfish
2,323
5,421
1,787
13,472
575
6,211
Sciaenidae
Drums
Bairdiella chrysoura
Silver Perch
246
940
507
2,162
1,391
10,042
Cynoscion nebulosus
Spotted Seatrout
29
210
9
159
3
113
C. nothus
Silver Seatrout
0
0
0
0
0
0
C. regalis
Weakfish
1,003
2,247
91
286
249
1,453
Larimus fasciatus
Banded Drum
0
0
0
0
0
0
Leiostomus xanthurus
Spot
3,192
14,049
1,105
20,172
2,202
13,473
Menticirrhus americanus
Southern Kingfish
5
64
11
74
7
13
M. saxatilis
Northern Kingfish
0
0
0
0
0
0
M. littoralis
Gulf Kingfish
0
0
8
74
0
0
Menticirrhus spp.
Kingfish spp.
11
11
0
0
0
0
Micropogonias
undulatus
Atlantic Croaker
2,356
11,544
1,979
33,251
1,388
12,750
Pogonias cromis
Black Drum
0
0
0
0
1
107
Sciaenops ocellatus
Red Drum
0
0
1
109
0
0
Stellifer lanceolatus
Star Drum
28
118
21,327
51,771
704
1,699
Ephippidae
Spadefishes
Chaetodipterus faber
Atlantic Spadefish
91
2
22
11
150
Mugilidae
Mullets
Mugil cephalus
Striped Mullet
a
255
248
2,638
233
1,546
M. curema
White Mullet
I _
876
254
2,848
117
1,178
Sphyraenidae
Barracudas
S. borealis
Northern Sennet
0
U
0
0
33
327
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-7 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
ADnendix 3. continued
Scientific name
Common name
Total
number
2013
Total
weight
Total
number
2014
Total
weight
Total
number
2015
Total
weight
Blenniidae
Combtooth blennies
Hypsoblennius hentz
Feather Blenny
42
205
139
667
16
115
H.ionthas
Freckled Blenny
7
38
21
94
4
32
Eleotridae
Sleepers
Eleotris pisonis
Spinycheek Sleeper
0
0
0
0
0
0
Gobiidse
Gobies
Ctenogobius oceanicus
Highfin Goby
1
10
0
0
18
40
Gobiosoma bosc
Naked Goby
0
0
0
0
0
0
Trichiuridae
Snake mackerels
Trichiurus lepturus
Atlantic Cutlassfish
182
2,889
50
358
59
4,707
Scombridae
Mackerels
Scomberomorus
maculatus
Spanish Mackerel
6
12
0
0
2
275
Scomberomorus spp.
Unidentified mackerel
344
765
27
27
0
0
Stromateidae
Butterfishes
Peprilus alepidotus
Harvestfish
16
381
9
172
8
154
P. triacanthus
Butterfish
20
46
0
0
0
0
Bothidne
Lefteye flounders
Ancylopsetta
quadrocellata
CGcellated Flounder
33
141
77
306
22
127
Citharichthysspilopterus
Bay Whiff
775
1,705
65
653
243
1,150
Etropus crossotus
Fringed Flounder
43
346
349
1,237
1,155
3,270
Paralichthys dentatus
Summer Flounder
50
1,047
12
144
74
185
P. lethostigma
Southern Flounder
63
10,026
16
861
16
1,962
Scophthalmus aquosus
Windowpane
11
33
4
35
17
81
Soleidae
Soles
Trinectes maculatus
Hogchoker
83
447
136
528
49
345
Cynoglossidae
Tonguefishes
Blackcheek
1,794
8,518
766
3,828
Symphurus plagiusa
Tonguefish
2,248
8,628
Balistidae
Triggerfishes/ fdefishes
Monacanthus hispidus
Planehead Filefish
0
0
0
0
3
84
Tetraodontidae
Puffers
Chilomycterus schoepfi
Striped Burrfish
162
439
2
78
Sphoeroides maculates
Northern Puffer
1
242
0
10
380
Sphoeroides spengleri
Bandtail Puffer
0
_
26
0
0
Lagocephalus laevigatus
Smooth Puffer
0
0
3
1
28
Amphibians
Sirenidae
Siren lacertian
Greater Siren
0
0
0
0
1
488
Invertebrates
Loliginidae
Lolliguncula brevis
Atlantic Brief Squid
280
1,586
483
1,716
135
1,594
Limulidae
Horseshoe crabs
Atlantic Horseshoe
1
1,500
0
0
0
0
Limulus polyphemus
Crab
Squillidae
Mantis shrimps
Squilla empusa
Mantis Shrimp
222
3,394
42
298
75
742
Alpheidae
Snapping shrimps
Alpheus sp.
Snapping shrimp
0
0
0
0
12
12
Thalassinidea
Mud shrimps
Upogebia sp.
Mud shrimp
0
0
0
0
12
12
/Callianassa sp.
Penaeidae
Prawns
Farfantepenaeus aztecus
Brown Shrimp
30,920
130,901
10,318
79,706
23,588
104,995
F. duorarum
Pink Shrimp
1,004
1,538
1,341
2,520
1,447
2,876
Litopenaeus setiferus
White Shrimp
29,885
72,333
15,444
67,233
32,327
157,146
Xiphopeneus sp.
0
0
0
0
5
17
Trachypeneus constrictus
Hardback Shrimp
73
105
608
488
86
101
Portunidae
Swimming crabs
Ovalipes sp.
Lady Crab
0
0
0
0
0
0
Portunus sp.
Swimming crabs
229
223
250
280
80
116
Callinectes ornatus
Shelligs Crab
0
0
83
537
127
1,033
C. sapidus
Blue Crab
1,859
38,391
552
16,812
2,436
25,246
C. similis
Lesser Blue Crab
1 3,846
5,855
2,677
6,905
3,958
12,065
'Numbers and biomass represent total number and weight
collected per 24-hour sample summed
over all sample dates.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-8 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Appendix 4. Total number of organisms collected with marsh trawl sampling during
2015.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-9 Water Resources Unit
Walden
Mott's
Alligator
Scientific name
Common name
Creek
Bay
Creek
Anguillidae
Freshwater eels
Anguilla rostrata
American eel
0
0
1
Elopidae
Tarpons
Elops saurus (leptocephalus)
Ladyfish
1
0
0
Ophichthidae
Snake eels
Myrophis punctatus
Speckled Worm Eel
1
1
0
Ophichthus gomesi
Shrimp Eel
Clupeidae
Herrings
Alosa aestivalis
Blueback Herring
4
0
0
A. sapidissima
American Shad
4
3
4
Brevoortia tyrannus
Atlantic Menhaden
2,566
44
12
D. petenense
Threadfin Shad
1
0
1
Engraulidae
Anchovies
Anchoa sp. (< 13mm)
Anchovy postlarvae
0
0
1
Anchoa hepsetus
Striped Anchovy
1
37
0
Anchoa mitchilli
Bay Anchovy
1,299
8,680
1,258
Ictaluridae
Catfishes
ktalurus punctatus
Channel Catfish
0
0
5
Synodontidae
Lizardfishes
Synodus foetens
Inshore Lizardfishes
4
2
0
Gadidae
Codfishes
Urophycis regia
Spotted Hake
1
0
0
Batrachoididae
Toadfishes
Opsanus tau
Oyster Toadfish
2
0
0
Cyprinodontidae
Killifishes
Fundulus heteroclitus
Mummichog
27
0
4
Poeciliidae
Livebearers
Gambusia holbrooki
Eastern Mosquitofish
5
0
0
Atherinidae
Silversides
1
0
0
Membras martinica
Rough Silverside
1
0
0
Menidia menidia
Atlantic Silverside
92
0
1
M. beryllina
Inland Silverside
0
8
Syngnathidae
Pipefishes
Syngnathus louisianae
Chain Pipefish
0
0
Triglidae
Searobins
0
2
0
Prionotus tribulus
Bighead Searobin
1
3
0
Moronidae
Temperate basses
Morone americana
White Perch
0
0
1
M. chrysops
White Bass
0
0
2
M. saxatilis
Striped Bass
0
0
2
Pomatomidae
Bluefishes
Pomatomus saltatrix
Bluefish
0
1
0
Carangidae
Jacks
Caranx hippos
Crevalle Jack
3
1
0
Chloroscombrus chrysurus
Atlantic Bumper
0
3 7
0
Selene vomer
Lookdown
0
1
0
Lutjanidae
Snappers
Lu Janus griseus
Gray Snapper
1
7
U
Centrachidae
Sunfishes
Lepomis spp
Unidentified sunfish
0
IJ
2
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-9 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
ADDendix 4. continued
Invertebrates
Loliginidae
Brief squids
Walden
Mott's
Alligator
Scientific name
Common name
Creek
Bay
Creek
Gerridae
Mojarras
2
3
0
Diapterus auratus
Irish Pompano
11
1
1
Eueinostomus argenteus
Spotfin Mojarra
252
30
61
Haemulidae
Grunts
1
0
0
Orthopristis chrysoptera
Pigfish
1
0
0
Sparidae
Porgies
1,936
172
62
Archosargus probatocephalus
Sheepshead
4
0
0
Lagodon rhomboides
Pinfish
517
23
1
Sciaenidae
Drums
566
50
0
Bairdiella chrysoura
Silver Perch
74
21
3
Cynoscion nebulosus
Spotted Seatrout
4
0
1
C. regalis
Weakfish
0
0
4
Leiostomus xanthurus
Spot
6,947
1,303
459
Pogonias cromis
Black Drum
3
0
0
Sciaenops ocellatus
Red Drum
2
0
0
Micropogonias undulatus
Atlantic Croaker
228
78
193
Sciaenops ocellatus
Red Drum
0
0
2
Mugilidae
Mullets
Mugil cephalus
Striped Mullet
186
0
1
M. curema
White Mullet
67
0
0
Sphyraenidae
Barracudas
Sphyraena barracuda
Great Barracuda
1
0
0
Gobiidae
Gobies
Ctenogobius oceanicus
Highfin Goby
1
0
11
C. boleosoma
Darter Goby
178
0
11
C. shulfeldti
Freshwater Goby
6
0
91
Gobiosoma bosc
Naked Goby
55
0
1
Bothidne
Lefteye flounders
Citharichthys spilopterus
Bay Whiff
5
1
13
Etropus crossotus
Fringed Flounder
2
1
6
Paralichthys dentatus
Summer Flounder
1
0
1
P. lethostigma
Southern Flounder
109
4
219
Soleidae
Soles
Trinectes maculatus
Hogchoker
2
0
53
Cynoglossidae
Tonguefishes
Symphurus plagiusa
Blackcheek Tonguefish
20
0
1
Invertebrates
Loliginidae
Brief squids
Lolliguncula brevis
Atlantic Brief Squid
2
0
0
Alpheidae
Snapping shrimps
Alpheus sp.
Snapping Shrimp
4
1
0
Sicyoniidae
Rock shrimps
Sicyonia sp.
Rock shrimp
1
0
0
Palaemonidae
Grass shrimps
Palaemonetes sp.
Grass shrimp
1,936
172
62
Penaeidae
Prawns
Penaeidae postlarvae
Shrimp larvae
9
10
6
Farfantepenaeus azteeus
Brown Shrimp
566
50
0
F. duorarum
Pink Shrimp
66
0
0
Litopenaeus setiferus
White Shrimp
714
41
1,300
Trachypenaeus constrictus
Hardback Shrimp
3
7
0
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-10 Water Resources Unit

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant 2013-2015 Biological Monitoring Report
Avnendix 4. continued
Reptiles
Emydidae Emydiaeid turtles
Malaclemys terrapin Diamondback Terrapin 0 2 0
(released alive)
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-11 Water Resources Unit
Walden
Mott's
Alligator
Scientific name
Common name
Creek
Bay
Creek
Portunidae
Swimming crabs
Portunidae <_ 10 mm
Swimming crabs
157
14
30
Portunus sp.
(> l Omm, < 20 mm)
Swimming crabs
2
0
0
Callinectes spp.
(> l Omm, < 20 mm)
Blue crab unidentified
142
13
21
C. sapidus
Blue Crab
36
2
20
C. similis
Lesser Blue crab
1
0
0
Reptiles
Emydidae Emydiaeid turtles
Malaclemys terrapin Diamondback Terrapin 0 2 0
(released alive)
Duke Energy Progress, LLC A-11 Water Resources Unit