Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2006 - Environment (pdf) - Posiva

Working Report 2007-52Results of Monitoringat Olkiluoto in 2006EnvironmentEditor:Reija HaapanenJuly 2007POSIVA OYFI-27160 OLKILUOTO, FINLANDTel +358-2-8372 31Fax +358-2-8372 3709

Working Report 2007-52Results of Monitoringat Olkiluoto in 2006EnvironmentEditor:Reija HaapanenHaapanen Forest ConsultingJuly 2007Base maps: ©National Land Survey, permission 41/MYY/07Working Reports contain information on work in progressor pending completion.The conclusions and viewpoints presented in the reportare those of author(s) and do not necessarilycoincide with those of Posiva.

ABSTRACTThis Working Report presents the main results of Posiva Oy's environmentalmonitoring programme on Olkiluoto Island in 2006. This is the third annual report. Theenvironmental monitoring system supervised by Posiva Oy produces input forbiosphere modelling for long-term safety purposes as well as for monitoring the state ofthe environment during the construction (and later operation) of ONKALOunderground characterization facility.Although some of the nuclear power production related monitoring studies by TVO (thepower company) have been going on from the 1970s, the repository-relatedenvironmental monitoring of Olkiluoto Island has only recently been comprehensive.Consequently, the first Biosphere Description Report was written in 2006. This workfurther produced some analyses belonging to the environmental monitoring programme,namely the estimates of biomass in terrestrial vegetation (forests) and a preliminaryestimate of the biomass in terrestrial fauna (moose).In the monitoring data, the ongoing construction work (OL3, ONKALO and relatedinfrastructure) is seen for instance in raised noise levels and deposition of base cationsand iron. The land-use continues to change, but where there is natural environment, itresembles other coastal locations. The nearby marine environment is affected by thecooling water from the nuclear power plant.Keywords: environmental monitoring, ecosystem, baseline condition, change.

YMPÄRISTÖN MONITOROINTIOHJELMA OLKILUODOSSA VUONNA 2006TIIVISTELMÄTässä työraportissa esitetään päätulokset Posiva Oy:n toimintaan liittyvästä Olkiluodonsaaren ympäristön monitorointiohjelmasta vuodelta 2006. Raportti on järjestyksessäkolmas. Posivan ympäristön monitoroinnin ohjelma tuottaa tietoa pitkän ajanturvallisuusanalyysien vaatimaan mallinnukseen sekä ympäristön tilan seurantaanONKALOn rakennusaikana.Jotkin TVO:n ylläpitämät seurannat ovat olleet käynnissä 1970-luvulta saakka, muttakäytetyn ydinpolttoaineen loppusijoitukseen liittyvä ympäristön monitorointi on vastanyt tuottanut aineistoa kaikista suunnitelluista tutkimuksista. Näihin tutkimuksiinperustuen laadittiin ensimmäinen kuvaus Olkiluodon biosfääristä loppuvuonna 2006.Tämä työ tuotti aineistoa myös ympäristön monitorointiin: estimaatit saaren metsiensisältämästä biomassasta sekä eläinten, ensivaiheessa hirven, biomassasta.Monitoroinnin tuloksissa näkyy saarella käynnissä oleva rakennustyö (OL3, ONKALOja niihin liittyvät infrastruktuurit). Rakennustyö ja liikenne aiheuttavat melua janostavat esimerkiksi raudan määrää pölylaskeumassa. Saaren maankäyttö muuttuuedelleen, mutta suojaisemmissa paikoissa luonto muistuttaa muita rannikon seutuja.Voimalaitosten lauhdevedet vaikuttavat Olkiluodon lähivesien ominaisuuksiin.Avainsanat: ympäristön seuranta, ekosysteemi, perustilanne, muutos.

1TABLE OF CONTENTSABSTRACTTIIVISTELMÄ1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 32. MONITORING SYSTEM AND SCHEDULE............................................................ 53. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................... 73.1. Landscape Properties...................................................................................... 73.2. Input to Biosphere Modelling ........................................................................ 113.2.1. Radionuclides..................................................................................... 113.2.2. Terrestrial Systems ............................................................................ 123.2.3. Limnic Systems .................................................................................. 413.2.4. Marine/Brackish Systems................................................................... 423.2.5. Historical Properties ........................................................................... 523.3. Input to Environmental Impact Assessments................................................ 533.3.1. Air Quality and Noise ......................................................................... 533.3.2. Water Quality ..................................................................................... 543.3.3. Overburden ........................................................................................ 573.3.4. Flora and Fauna................................................................................. 573.3.5. Landscape, Land-Use and Traffic ...................................................... 583.4. Supplementary Environmental Information................................................... 584. SUMMARY................ ........................................................................................... 59REFERENCES.... ...................................................................................................... 61APPENDICES....................................................................................................... ..... 65A: LIST OF MONITORING LOCATIONS............................................................ 65B: FOREST AND MIRE MONITORING SYSTEM .............................................. 71C: RESULTS FROM RADIONUCLIDE MONITORING IN 2006 ......................... 81D: RESULTS FROM SOIL MICROBE STUDY IN 2006 ..................................... 89E: BULK PRECIPITATION AND STAND THROUGHFALL IN 2004-2006 ......... 91F: SOIL SOLUTION IN FIP PLOTS IN 2004-2006 ............................................. 95G: BIOMASS OF FIP SUB-PLOTS IN 2006 ..................................................... 101H: LITTERFALL PRODUCTION IN FIP PLOTS IN 2004-2005 ........................ 103I: GAME STATISTICS OF 2002-2006 .............................................................. 105J: RESULTS FROM MONITORING OF SEA ENVIRONMENT IN 2006 .......... 107K: WATER QUALITY IN 2006................ .......................................................... 111

31 INTRODUCTIONIn July 2004 Posiva began to construct an underground rock characterization facilitycalled ONKALO (Fig. 1), which is planned for use in the early 2010s. The constructionof ONKALO and subsequently the construction of the repository, will affect the surroundingrock mass and the groundwater flow system as well as the environment. InDecember 2003, a programme for monitoring at Olkiluoto during construction and operationof ONKALO was presented (Posiva 2003b). A summary of the observations andmeasurements is reported annually for each discipline: Rock Mechanics, Hydrogeology,Hydrogeochemistry, Environment and Foreign materials.The aim of this report is to give an overview of the progress of monitoring the environment.The environmental measurements and observations in 2006 are presentedhere. The report is divided into two parts: first, the data collected as input for biospheremodelling for long-term safety purposes are presented, followed by the data needed formonitoring the state of the environment during the construction work. Naturally, thesedata partly overlap. The earlier results and progress of the environmental monitoringwere presented by Haapanen (2005, 2006).Figure 1. Olkiluoto site.

52 MONITORING SYSTEM AND SCHEDULEThe environmental monitoring system is described in Posiva Report 2003-05 (Posiva2003b) and its supplement (Raitio et al. 2007). Refinements to the system have beendone based on experiences, which have been reported in the research-specific WorkingReports, as well as in previous summary reports on environmental monitoring (Haapanen2005, 2006). The current environmental monitoring schedule is presented in Table1.Part of the monitoring is performed by the company running the nuclear power plantson the island, Teollisuuden Voima Oy (TVO). TVO's radionuclide sampling system iscomprehensively described by Ikonen (2003) and Roivainen (2005) and TVO's marineenvironment monitoring system, for example, by Ikonen et al. (2003). Monitoring hasbeen carried out for varying periods of time depending on the sector: while some monitoringactivities (performed by TVO) originate from the 1970s, the repository-relatedenvironmental monitoring of the Olkiluoto Island has only recently been comprehensive.Major points of the monitoring design as well as maps of monitoring locations (whenapplicable) are presented at the beginning of each result sector. More specific details ofthe comprehensive forest and mire monitoring system are presented in Appendix B. Alist of monitoring locations is presented in Appendix A.The surface environment is in many ways affected by, e.g., the meteorological conditionsin the area. Specific reports have been compiled of the meteorological data (Ikonen2002, 2005, 2007). The overburden studies at Olkiluoto with an emphasis on geosphere-biosphereinterface (for modelling purposes) have been summarized by Lahdenperäet al. (2005).

6Table 1. Environmental monitoring schedule: X = single measurement or observation,O = measurement campaign, grey cells = continuous.2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Aerial imagery X X X X X X XSatellite imagery X XCharacteristics of observation plots X X XSoil X X XTrees X XVegetation inventory X X XNeedles and foliage X X X XBiomass (flora) X XSoil waterWet depositionAnimals and birds (field inventory) X XAnimals and birds (interview study) X X X X X X X X XBiomass (fauna) X XAnthropogenic influencesHydrochemical characterisation ofX X XseawaterSeawater quality O O O O O O O O OSea vegetationOPhytoplankton O O O O O O O O OSea bottom animals X X X X X X X X XTest fishingXFishing interviews X X X X XNoise X X X X X X X X XDrainage waters from rock heaps O O O O O O OWatertable of the private wells O O O O O O O O OWater quality of the private wells O O O O O O O O OVegetation of conservation area X X X XScenery O O O O O O O O O

73 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION3.1 Landscape PropertiesThe landscape of Olkiluoto Island has been under rapid changes during the time ofPosiva's environmental monitoring programme. Construction of the third nuclear powerplant on Olkiluoto (OL3) started in 2003. In recent great changes have occurred, part ofwhich are related to power production and part to nuclear waste disposal (Table 2).Table 2. Recently finished or ongoing construction activities on Olkiluoto Island.InfrastructureConstruction timeONKALO area 2003-2006-OL3 2003-Rock piling and crushing area (OL3+ONKALO) 2004-Main road 2004-2005Wind generator 2004Gas turbine reserve power plant 2006-2007Main power lines 2005-Roads, pipelines, parking areas etc. 2004-2006New gatehouse and extension to main office 2004-2005New visitor centre 2005-2006Accommodation village 2005-Concrete station extension, laboratory extensionOngoingTraining simulator, warehouse extension, new dumping place PlannedData of the changes are being collected, as well as, aerial photographs taken at regularintervals, most recently on June 27, 2006 (Table 3). They form the basis for mappingthe baseline situation and serve as a benchmark for the monitoring of changes. In addition,visible band aerial imagery has been obtained for planning the construction ofONKALO. Some low oblique aerial images have also been taken, most recently onJune 7, 2006 (Fig. 2). No satellite images have so far been acquired.Table 3. Aerial photograph types and acquisition dates.Data type Time label CoverageFalse-colour aerial images May 23, 2002 Olkiluoto IslandVisible band aerial images May 10, 2003 Olkiluoto IslandFalse-colour aerial images July 16, 2004 Olkiluoto IslandFalse-colour aerial images June 8, 2005 Olkiluoto IslandFalse-colour aerial images June 17, 2006 Olkiluoto IslandLow oblique aerial images (plane) July 16, 2004 Olkiluoto IslandLow oblique aerial images (helicopter) August 31, 2005 Olkiluoto IslandLow oblique aerial images (plane) June 7, 2006 Olkiluoto Island

8Figure 2. Olkiluoto from the air on June 7, 2006 (Lentokuva Vallas Oy/Hannu Vallas).The vegetation and forest inventories by homogeneous polygons (VCP) in 2002 and2003 describe the vegetated landscape at those time points. The monitoring of forestsand mires on the island is based on a systematic grid with a density of 1 plot/ha, calledFET (see Appendix B for details). The first rounds of measurements on FET grid in2004 and its subset FEH plots in 2005 provide a statistical basis for the monitoring offorested parts of the landscape.As a first approach for estimating the extent of all current land-use types, the FET networkwas extended to cover all land-use/land-cover classes and intermediate plots wereadded between the existing plots to create a 50 x 50 m grid. The land-use/land-cover ofeach plot was visually interpreted from the aerial photographs taken in 2005 (Haapanenet al. 2007). The classification system was fine-tuned in the spring of 2007. Theinterpretation was updated using the new classes, and the 2006 aerial photographs wereinterpreted as well (Table 4, Figs. 3-4). The interpretation of older photographs is underway. This work allows the land-use changes to be monitored on a statistical basis.

9Table 4. Distribution of Olkiluoto Island (main island and Ilavainen) into various landuse/land-coverclasses in 2005-2006. Data by Ari Ikonen.Share of Olkiluoto Island, %Class 2005 2006Forests and wetlands 58.6 55.9Agriculture 5.5 5.3Water areas 0.1 0.1Shore meadows 4.4 4.3Rock outcrops 5.4 5.4Traffic areas 4.4 4.3Power lines 5.5 7.0Industrial areas and infrastructure 13.1 12.8Industry-supporting services 1.1 2.8Investigation arrangements 0.8 0.8Services/Commerce 0.0 0.0Private lands 1.3 1.3Total area, km 2 10.4 10.4In 2006, two sets of generic cartographic data were also acquired: the CORINE landcoverraster data and National Forest Inventory GIS data (Table 5).Table 5. Generic GIS layers acquired in 2006.Data type Time label Coverage8th National Forest Inventory GIS layers 1994 OL Island + surroundings9th National Forest Inventory GIS layers 1999 OL Island + surroundings10th National Forest Inventory GIS layers 2006 OL Island + surroundingsCORINE Land cover raster 2000 Whole Finland

10Figure 3. Land-use distribution in 2005.Figure 4. Land-use distribution in 2006.

113.2 Input to Biosphere Modelling3.2.1 RadionuclidesRadioactivity in the environment is monitored by the nuclear power plant operated byTVO. Samples from air, terrestrial environment, terrestrial foodstuffs and marine environmentare relevant for Posiva as well. The results are collected in a database. TVO'ssampling activities have focused on the marine ecosystem. Before the operation of theencapsulation plant and the repository starts, the terrestrial baseline must also be morecomprehensively studied regarding radionuclides.The major anthropogenic sources of radionuclides in the area originate from the Chernobylfallout in April 1986 and from authorized effluents and air emissions from thenuclear power plant. The most common nuclides clearly originating from the powerplant include, for example, Mn-54, Co-60 and Ag-110m (not exclusively). Naturallyabundant nuclides, such as Be-7 and K-40 are found in every sample if determined.Their concentrations represent natural variations in the ecosystem and also reflect thequality of the measurement. In addition, the behaviour of these elements and nuclides isrelatively well known enabling, for example, model adjustments against the measurements.The results of radionuclide analyses in 2005 are shown in Appendix C. Some examplesof radionuclides in terrestrial environment are given in Fig. 5. Radionuclides in soil,mushrooms and berries are being measured at four-year intervals, the latest results beingfrom 2005 (reported in Haapanen 2006). National scale comparison values can beobtained from publications of the Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority(STUK).700600Cs-137500Bq/KgDW400300200100Be-7K-40Pine needlesLichen0200420052006200420052006200420052006Figure 5. Radionuclides in terrestrial environment in the vicinity of the weather mast in2004–2006, Bq/kgDW (Haapanen 2005, 2006). Pine needles in blue columns, lichen ingreen columns.

12Roivainen (2006) studied the distribution of some radionuclides (K-40, Cs-137, Cs-134and Be-7) and stable elements (K, P, Ca and Cu) in three shoreline alder forests ofOlkiluoto. Samples were collected from vegetation and small mammals. Be-7 wasfound in litter and understorey samples only. It was found that the behaviour of theelements did not differ from what is generally known from their behaviour in forests.Clear differences were found between the monitoring plots in the distribution of theelements on the basis of concentration ratios.3.2.2 Terrestrial SystemsSoil Inventory by FEH PlotsThe FEH plots (Fig. 6), which were inventoried for their vegetation types and coveragesin 2005 (Huhta & Korpela 2006), were also inventoried for their humus, mineralsoil (0–60 cm) and peat (0–30 cm) properties. Samples were taken for further analysesand the results reported by Tamminen et al. (2007). According to the survey, the mostcommon soil types at Olkiluoto are weakly developed (often podzolised) coarse to medium-coarseArenosols or fine-textured Regosols, shallow Leptosols and Gleysols characterisedby shallow groundwater. In general, the groundwater in FEH plots lay withinthe depth of 0 to 40 cm on 15 plots, and 24 sample pits out of the 85 mineral soil oneswere under 50 cm deep due to bedrock, big boulders or groundwater. Organic layer wasclassified in most cases as mor, peat or mull-like peat. The thickness of the organiclayer varied from 2.3 to 21.1 cm and in the peatland from 6 to 115 cm. The mediumparticle size class in mineral soils was very fine sand.Figure 6. Original FEH sample plots (Huhta & Korpela 2006) and land-use situationin summer 2006.

13The soils were acid. The organic layer pH ranged from 3.7 to 4.4 (from dry mineral soilsites to groves or herb-rich forests, respectively). The concentrations of calcium, magnesiumand sodium in the surface soil were higher at Olkiluoto than on nine controlplots inventoried in inland locations within the same campaign. These control plotswere not exactly similar in forest characteristics, but were measured to serve as benchmarkin monitoring of possible changes on Olkiluoto soils. Concentrations of basecations, especially calcium, correlated with the forest site type. In alder stands atOlkiluoto, the concentrations of base cations were even 30 to 40 times higher than ininland pine stands. These alder sites are the youngest, emerged some hundred years agofrom the sea and still containing sea salts rich in sodium and magnesium and maybestill getting sea salts as droplets or spray during storm events. The differences betweenOlkiluoto and the control plots decreased toward deeper soil layers.Both the Olkiluoto mineral soil FEH plots and the control plots had higher nitrogenconcentration and lower C/N ratio than Finnish forest soils on average, meaning highersoil fertility (Table 6; see average values for Finnish mineral soil sites in Tamminen2000). C/N ratio of the organic layer discriminated between mineral soil site types andalso between dominating tree species (Table 7). Soils in the alder stands contained morenitrogen compared with other stands, and had a very low C/N ratio in the organic layer,but also in the conifer stands nitrogen status was better than on average in Finnish forestsoils, where C/N ratio was in the organic layer 27 on the grove-like (OMT) sites and37 on the fresh (MT) sites (mineral soils; Tamminen 2000). According to Starr (1991),it takes a shorter time (200 to 300 years) for the N concentrations to reach equilibriumcompared with C concentrations (> 750 years) after the land has emerged from the sea.Table 6. Total concentrations (%) of carbon and nitrogen and C/N ratio by soil layer inthe 85 mineral soil FEH plots. Values of the control plots (n=9) are in italics (Tamminenet al. 2007).Organic0-10cm10-30cmn C N C/NMin 85 20.4 17.5 1.08 0.71 13.5 23.5Median 39.5 40.2 1.62 1.34 23.2 25.4Max 48.7 41.6 2.71 1.73 36.6 35.2Min 76 0.5 1.1 0.05 0.06 9.0 17.0Median 1.7 3.4 0.11 0.15 15.7 20.6Max 7.3 5.2 0.46 0.31 22.3 24.3Min 75 0.2 0.7 0.03 0.04 6.5 12.3Median 0.6 1.8 0.06 0.10 11.4 18.3Max 5.8 2.5 0.45 0.13 22.9 20.3

14Table 7. Total concentrations (%) of carbon and nitrogen and C/N ratio by soil layerand by dominant tree species in the 85 mineral soil FEH plots. Values of the controlplots (n=9) are in italics (Tamminen et al. 2007). Equal mean values are marked withthe same letter (Bonferroni test).Organic0-10cm10-30 cmn C N C/NPine 30 37.5 30.2 1.47 a 1.03 25.6 c 28.9Spruce 40 39.7 37.6 1.73 a 1.47 23.4 bc 25.8Birch 10 36.9 1.73 a 21.4 bAlder 5 36.0 2.32 b 15.5 aPine 22 2.0 1.8 0.12 0.09 16.8 19.5Spruce 39 2.2 3.6 0.14 0.18 16.2 20.6Birch 10 2.1 0.14 15.0Alder 5 2.0 0.15 13.2Pine 22 1.1 1.1 0.08 0.06 12.8 17.6Spruce 39 0.7 1.9 0.06 0.11 11.6 17.9Birch 9 0.8 0.06 11.8Alder 5 0.7 0.07 10.0Total elemental concentrations were determined only from the organic samples. Allelements, except for Mn, seemed to have higher concentrations at Olkiluoto than on thecontrol plots.Nine peat plots were studied within the survey. The pH in peat ranged from 3.4 to 4.5,depending from dominant tree species, peat layer and method. The nitrogen concentrationvaried between 1.36% and 2.92% (Table 8). Peat C/N ratios were mostly under 25-30, and indicated satisfactory nitrogen mineralisation conditions. In peatland pinestands, both low nitrogen concentration and high C/N ratio in the peat indicated poorernutritional status than in deciduous tree stands (Table 9). Soil carbon and nitrogenamounts increased from pine-growing peatland sites to alder forests. The total P, Caand Mn concentrations in peat were relatively similar to the values reported for correspondingdrained peatland types and peat layers in southern Finland (Kaunisto &Paavilainen 1988, Kaunisto & Moilanen 1998). In contrast, the K, Mg, Cu, Zn, B andFe concentrations in the peat at Olkiluoto were 2 to 40 times greater than the values forsouthern Finland.Carex peats with peat components of Cyperaceous, Sphagnum, Phragmites australis,lignum and Equisetum dominated in Olkiluodonjärvi. On two alder-dominated peatlandlocations, the dominating peat types were woody and Carex peats, i.e., Cyperaceouslignumor lignum-Cyperaceous peat. Other typical peat types were Sphagnum (pinedominatedLiiklansuo), and Sphagnum-lignum and lignum-Sphagnum.

15Table 8. Total concentrations (%) of carbon and nitrogen and C/N ratio by peat layerin the nine FEH plots located on peatland (Tamminen et al. 2007).0-10cm10-20cm20-30cmn C N C/NMin 9 31.4 1.41 16.5Median 47.1 2.11 20.3Max 52.7 2.88 34.3Min 6 41.8 1.36 17.5Median 46.5 2.21 19.6Max 52.8 2.81 35.7Min 5 42.7 2.06 16.5Median 48.2 2.53 17.9Max 54.3 2.92 25.3Table 9. Total concentrations (%) of carbon and nitrogen and C/N ratio by peat layerand by dominant tree species in the nine FEH plots located on peatland (Tamminen etal. 2007). Equal mean values are marked with the same letter (Bonferroni test).n C N C/NPine 2 50.6 1.52 33.3 a0-10cmBirch 5 45.7 2.23 20.6 bAlder 2 39.8 2.39 16.6 bPine 2 50.5 1.50 a 33.8 a10-20cm20-30cmBirch 4 45.0 2.41 b 18.7 bAlder 0Pine 2 51.3 2.10 a 24.4Birch 3 45.4 2.66 b 17.1Alder 0Plant NutrientsNutrient analyses were carried out on the ground vegetation and tree foliage of the 94FEH plots to map the current nutrient status of forest vegetation on Olkiluoto Island.When possible, shoot samples of the most abundant or frequent evergreen and deciduousdwarf shrub, herb, grass, bryophyte and lichen species were collected from eachplot for chemical analysis (Huhta & Korpela 2006). Leaf samples of trees were collectedfor chemical analysis in August 2005, and needle samples in March 2006 (Tamminenet al. 2007). Samples were taken individually from the dominant tree species oneach plot. When possible, the remaining part of the samples were archived for futureuse.The carbon and nitrogen concentrations of the samples were analysed using a CHNanalyser. The element concentrations (P, K, S, Ca, Mg, B, Cu, Zn, Mn, Na, Fe, Al, Cd,Cr, Ni, Pb and Mo) were determined by wet digestion (HNO 3 /H 2 O 2 ) and analysed byICP-AES. The results were expressed as a concentration per weight of dry matter (dryingat +105°C). Concentrations of exchangeable cations, pH and exchangeable acidity

17bryophytes and Pb concentrations were higher than the detection level for analysis onlyin bryophytes and lichens.Foliage analyses indicated mainly good nutritional status of studied forests on theOlkiluoto Island (Fig. 8, Tamminen et al. 2007). However, calcium concentration inScots pine needles, sulphur and copper in Norway spruce needles and phosphorus, potassiumand copper concentrations in birch leaves were below optimal values. Averagecarbon content was 52.8% in current needles of pine and 51.4% in spruce. Birch andalder growing on peatland sites have slightly higher carbon content in their leaves(53.2% for birch and 51.9% for alder) than trees growing on mineral soils (52.5% and51.8%, respectively).Figure 8. Needle nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), sulphur (S), calcium(Ca) and magnesium (Mg) concentrations (+standard error) in current (C) and previous-year(C+1) needles of Scots pine and Norway spruce stands grouped by site fertilityand stand age (Tamminen et al. 2007). See Table 11 for a definition of forest sitetypes. Here MT includes also site types less fertile than MT, and OMT also site typesmore fertile than OMT.

18Soil MicrobesCarbon (C) and nitrogen (N) cycles in the ecosystem are strongly coupled. Biomass,structure and activity of the bacterial and fungal community are the key factors influencingC and N cycles. Changes in the function of soil microbial community can be asignal of plant responses to environmental changes. Potila et al. (2007) measured dissolvedN compounds, microbial biomass, microbial activity, fungal community structureand functional diversity of microbial communities in the organic layer of forestsoils on Olkiluoto in September 2006 to obtain information about soil microbial communitystructure and activity. The measurements were performed in the vicinity ofMRK plots 1, 4, 6, 8, and 10 (see location map in Fig. 15 and explanation in AppendixB). Two samples were collected from each plot. Some main results are presented below.See Appendix D for an example of a result table, and Potila et al. (2007) for detailedresults.The concentrations of extractable dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in the organic layerwere higher in FIP4 (a Scots pine plot) than in the other plots. On area basis, however,there was more DOC in the Norway spruce plots than in the Scots pine plots. The samewas true for DON: the concentration was higher under pine, but on an area basis therewas more DON in spruce forests. There was high variation in the net N mineralisationbetween the samples (Fig. 9). It was higher in spruce stands than in pine stands, andhigher in the younger spruce stands than in the old spruce stand (FIP10).Microbial biomass C (C mic ) varied from 7.2 to 13.2 mg/g OM in the organic layer, anddid not differ in pine and spruce stands in average (Fig. 10). The same was true for microbialbiomass N (N mic ), which varied from 0.5 to 1.0 mg/g OM (Fig. 11). Fungalbiomass measured as ergosterol concentration varied from 306 to 868 µg/g OM. Theconcentration was higher in pine stands than in spruce stands (Fig. 12).The number of studied DNA fragments (ITS), describing richness of taxa, varied between9 and 14. There were differences in the functional diversity between the plots, aswell. This is crucial for the long-term stability of an ecosystem.High within and between variation in the studied plots were detected. However, in thisstudy the values and their variation in the level of N mineralisation, dissolved N compounds,fungal biomass and microbial community structure in the studied plots werewithin a normal range in comparison with other published data of similar forest types inFinland.

194.543.53Norway spruceScots pinemg/kg OM/d2.521.510.50MRK8 MRK8 MRK6 MRK6 FIP10 FIP10 MRK1 MRK1 FIP4 FIP4Figure 9. Net mineralisation per day (mg/kg OM/d) in the organic layer of studiedMRK plots (data by Potila et al. 2007).1412Norway spruceScots pine10mg/g OM86420MRK8 MRK8 MRK6 MRK6 FIP10 FIP10 MRK1 MRK1 FIP4 FIP4Figure 10. Microbial biomass C (C mic ) in the organic layer of studied MRK plots, mg/gOM (data by Potila et al. 2007).

201.2Norway spruceScots pine10.8mg/g OM0.60.40.20MRK8 MRK8 MRK6 MRK6 FIP10 FIP10 MRK1 MRK1 FIP4 FIP4Figure 11. Microbial biomass N (N mic ) in the organic layer of studied MRK plots, mg/gOM (data by Potila et al. 2007).1000900800700Norway spruceScots pinemicro-g/g OM6005004003002001000MRK8 MRK8 MRK6 MRK6 FIP10 FIP10 MRK1 MRK1 FIP4 FIP4Figure 12. Ergosterol in the organic layer of studied MRK plots, µg/g OM (data byPotila et al. 2007).

21Biomass of FloraThe biomass of terrestrial vegetation was estimated for the Olkiluoto Biosphere DescriptionReport (Haapanen et al. 2007) by the Finnish Forest Research Institute. Twodifferent ways were used: Stand-based estimation, where the volumes for VCP units by Rautio et al.(2004) were converted to biomass using Biomass Expansion Factors (BEF) byLehtonen et al. (2004a) and understorey biomass models by Muukkonen andMäkipää (2006). Tree-based estimation, where the single tree data measured from the FET plots(Saramäki & Korhonen 2005) was converted to biomasses using models byMarklund (1988), except for fine roots, the biomass of which was calculated accordingto Helmisaari et al. (2007), and for leaves (models created in FFRI byJaakko Repola and Risto Ojansuu). Biomass of coarse roots and stumps of deciduoustrees were estimated using Marklund's (1988) models for pine. The understoreyvegetation coverages of the FEH plots were converted to biomassesusing models created at the Finnish Forest Research Institute (Maija Salemaa).The carbon content of vegetation was assumed to be 50% of dry mass. Net productionof the tree layer was calculated using measured growth estimates (data from Rautio etal. 2004) and BEFs by Lehtonen et al. (2004a). Net production of ground vegetationwas estimated with turnover rates (Muukkonen & Lehtonen 2004). Litter productionestimates are based on turnover rate coefficients of biomass compartments (Lehtonen etal. 2004b, Muukkonen & Lehtonen 2004, Starr et al. 2005, Liski et al. 2006,Muukkonen & Mäkipää 2006).According to the calculations by stands (VCP) the biomass of terrestrial vegetation inthe stands varied between 0.14 and 28.4 kg/m 2 , mean value being 7.3 kg/m 2 . Accordingly,carbon content varied between 0.07 and 14.2 kg/m 2 , and the highest values wereobserved in the Natura conservation area (Fig. 13). The mean carbon content in Scotspine, Norway spruce and deciduous stands was 0.8, 1.2 and 1.5 kg/m 2 , while the maximumcarbon content was 9.1, 9.9 and 11.7 kg/m 2 , respectively. The corresponding valuesfor understorey vegetation were mean 0.13 and maximum 0.32 kg C/m 2 . The totalcarbon content was 24,139 Mg in the terrestrial vegetation of the stands on the OlkiluotoIsland. Based on FET plot measurements, the highest mean carbon content 10.2kg/m 2 was found in 81–100-year-old spruce-dominated forests (Table 10). Mean carboncontent increased from young and infertile sites to more fertile and older ones (Table11). On average, the stem with bark accounted for 43, branches for 22, foliage for 15,stump for 5 and roots for 15% of the total tree biomass on FET plots. The amount ofcarbon bound in ground vegetation was clearly less than in trees (mean value 0.10kg/m 2 , Tables 12 and 13).The combined net production of the trees and understorey vegetation varied from 49 to763 being on average 302 g C/m 2 /a (Fig. 14). Estimates of annual fluxes of net production(growth) and litter production by dominant tree species are presented in Tables 14and 15.

22Figure 13. The biomass distribution of the terrestrial vegetation (kg C/m 2 ) by forestcompartments on Olkiluoto Island, based on Biomass Expansion Factors (Lehtonen etal. 2004a). (Haapanen et al. 2007).Figure 14. Net production of the tree layer and understorey vegetation on OlkiluotoIsland. (Haapanen et al. 2007).

23Table 10. Mean carbon content (kg/m 2 ) in tree stands (below-ground parts included) ofthe forest study area on Olkiluoto main island by dominant tree species and age class(based on calculated biomass distribution on FET plots and carbon coefficient estimate0.50). (Haapanen et al. 2007).Age class, yearsSpecies 1- 21- 41- 61- 81- 101- 121 Total20 40 60 80 100 120 -Pine 2.1 4.9 5.0 6.3 3.1 3.5 4.0 3.9Spruce 2.3 5.0 6.8 7.7 10.2 8.9 9.5 6.4Birch 2.0 3.2 6.1 7.5 9.2 3.3Otherbroadl.2.5 5.5 6.0 8.1 5.1Table 11. Mean carbon content (kg/m 2 ) in tree stands (below-ground parts included) ofthe forest study area on Olkiluoto main island by site types and age class (based oncalculated biomass distribution on FET plots and carbon coefficient estimate 0.50). Sitetypes: grove, grove-like, fresh, dryish, dry and extremely infertile mineral soil types, allwith corresponding mire and drained peatland types. Rocky soils also include finesandy soil and stony soil. Finnish site type abbreviations appear in parentheses. (Haapanenet al. 2007).Age class, yearsSite type 1- 21- 41- 61- 81- 101- 121 Total20 40 60 80 100 120 -Grove (Lh) 1.8 4.9 6.8 4.3 5.5Grove-like (OMT) 2.6 5.4 7.0 8.8 14.3 14.3 6.3Fresh (MT) 2.2 4.8 6.4 7.6 8.5 8.9 5.9 5.0Dryish (VT) 1.7 4.1 5.0 4.8 6.0 7.5 10.7 3.3Dry (CT) 2.2 1.9 1.8 4.5 2.9 5.0 2.7Infertile (ClT) 1.3 2.7 3.7 2.6Rocky soils 1.6 2.1 1.4 1.9 5.2 2.4Table 12. Mean carbon content (g/m 2 ) in ground vegetation (below-ground parts included)of the forest study area on Olkiluoto main island by dominant tree species andage class (based on calculated biomass distribution on FEH plots and carbon coefficientestimate 0.50). (Haapanen et al. 2007).Age class, yearsSpecies 1-20 21- 41- 61- 81- 101- 121- Total40 60 80 100 120Pine 117.6 127.3 140.2 205.4 118.2 159.2 119.0 130.9Spruce 89.9 92.0 93.6 99.0 65.8 69.5 88.4Birch 112.1 90.1 179.1 107.7Otherbroadl.67.2 101.8 39.1 61.0

24Table 13. Mean carbon content (g/m 2 ) in ground vegetation (below-ground parts included)of the forest study area on Olkiluoto main island by site types and age class(based on calculated biomass distribution on FEH plots and carbon coefficient estimate0.50). Site types: grove, grove-like, fresh, dryish, dry and extremely infertile mineralsoil types, all with corresponding mire and drained peatland types. Rocky soils alsoinclude fine sandy soil and stony soil. Finnish site type abbreviations are presented inparentheses. (Haapanen et al. 2007).Age class, yearsSite type 1-20 21- 41- 61- 81- 101- 121- Total40 60 80 100 120Grove (Lh) 102.2 102.2Grove-like (OMT) 108.7 84.5 73.5 58.6 62.9 69.5 82.1Fresh (MT) 86.8 132.8 103.5 144.5 69.6 110.7Dryish (VT) 196.1 196.1Dry (CT) 227.2 159.2 181.9Infertile (ClT) 163.2 163.2Rocky soils 128.1 118.2 74.7 114.3Table 14. Estimated net production of plants (below-ground parts included) of the foreststudy area on Olkiluoto main island by plant species/group. (Haapanen et al. 2007).Net production Mg C/ha/ypine spruce decid. g-veg. sumMineral soils 0.74 0.83 0.54 0.75 2.86Peatlands 0.22 0.63 0.54 1.04 2.42Table 15. Estimated litter production of plants (below-ground parts included) of theforest study area on Olkiluoto main island by plant species/group. Litter productionincludes also natural mortality. (Haapanen et al. 2007).Litter production Mg C/ha/ypine spruce decid. g-veg. sumMineral soils 0.75 0.62 0.50 0.75 2.61Peatlands 0.32 0.23 0.81 1.04 2.39Rough estimates of the prevailing natural carbon balance on Olkiluoto main island wereobtained by combining the results of net production and decomposition (Table 16).Table 16. Estimated carbon balances (below-ground parts included) of the forest studyarea on Olkiluoto main island by plant species/group. Fellings are ignored. A negativesign indicates carbon emission. (Haapanen et al. 2007).Carbon balance Mg C/ha/ypine spruce decid. g-veg. emission sumMineral soils 0.04 0.24 0.07 0.04 -0.18 0.20Peatlands -0.05 0.43 -0.19 0.05 -0.73 -0.50

25Bulk Deposition and Stand Throughfall: MRKAnnual precipitation, interception by the tree canopies, and the mean pH and amountsof a range of anions, cations and other elements in bulk deposition and in standthroughfall during the period Jan 1, 2004–Dec 31, 2006 have been presented by Antti-Jussi Lindroos and John Derome (Finnish Forest Research Institute) in a memo and aresummarized below. The result tables can be found in Appendix E. The plot network ispresented in Fig. 15.Figure 15. Location of MRK plots.The mean amount of precipitation during 2006 on the plots in open areas (bulk deposition;plots MRK2, MRK7 and MRK9) was slightly higher (535 mm) than in 2005 (491mm), but clearly lower than the situation in 2004 (632 mm) (Fig. 16, Table E-1). Therewas considerable variation between the annual amounts of precipitation measured onthe individual plots in 2006, as was the case in 2005. Plot MRK9 again had considerablylower precipitation than the other two plots. The difference between the amounts ofprecipitation was most probably related to topographic features.

26700600500400300200Open areaForested area2004200520061000MRK2MRK7MRK9MRK1MRK3MRK4MRK5MRK6MRK8MRK10Figure 16. Amounts of precipitation in open areas (blue columns) and forested areas(green columns) on MRK plots in 2004-2006.The mean amount of precipitation in stand throughfall in 2006 was clearly lower thanthat measured in bulk deposition in open areas (Fig. 16, Table E-1). The mean amountsof both variables were higher than that in 2005, but lower than in 2004. This clearlydemonstrates that the amount of precipitation falling on the forest floor within thestands is strongly dependent on the precipitation above the tree canopies. Although thecanopy layer and forest structure have a major effect on the amount of water in standthroughfall, the precipitation in the open area is the most important factor regulating theamount of water passing to the forest floor in Finnish conditions. However, a clear effectof the tree canopy layer can be seen in the mean interception values (precipitationin the open – that in the stand) (Fig. 17, Table E-2). The mean interceptions of precipitationby the tree crowns as percentage of the precipitation in the open were 37, 28 and29% in 2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively. The difference between 2004 and 2005-2006 suggests that a higher proportion of total precipitation occurred as snow during2005-2006. For comparison, the interception value was ca. 20% in the Scots pine plotslocated at Juupajoki and Tammela.The mean pH of bulk deposition at Olkiluoto during 2006 was 5.1 (Fig. 18, Table E-3),and there were no clear changes in pH during 2004-2006. The mean pH correspondsrather well to the mean values measured in Finland in recent years. Deposition atOlkiluoto contained an appreciable input of base cations (Ca, Mg, K, Na), and this willhave contributed to the maintenance of pH values at a level slightly above the nationallevel. In stand throughfall (Fig. 18, Table E-4), the pH continued to increase in 2006compared with the pH in 2004 and 2005. However, the changes were minimal.

27Interception of precipitation by tree crowns, %50.0045.0040.0035.0030.0025.0020.0015.0010.005.000.00MRK1 MRK3 MRK4 MRK5 MRK6 MRK8 MRK10200420052006Figure 17. Interception of precipitation by the tree crowns as percentage of precipitationin the open on MRK plots in 2004-2006.6Open areaForested area5pH20042005200643MRK2MRK7MRK9REFMRK1MRK3MRK4MRK5MRK6MRK8MRK10REFFigure 18. pH in bulk deposition (blue columns) and stand throughfall (green columns)on MRK plots in 2004-2006 and corresponding reference areas in 2004.The deposition of total nitrogen in bulk deposition decreased between 2004 and 2006(Fig. 19, Table E-3). NH 4 -N deposition in bulk deposition was also lower in 2006 thanin 2004 or 2005, but NO 3 -N deposition in bulk deposition remained relatively constantduring the 2004-2006 period. The deposition of nitrogen compounds in stand through-

28fall (Table E-4) was lower than that in bulk deposition in 2006, as was also the case in2004 and 2005. This is a well-documented phenomenon in coniferous stands in Finland,where the deposition of nitrogen compounds is relatively low.400Open areaForested areaTotal N, mg/m23002002004200520061000MRK2MRK7MRK9REFMRK1MRK3MRK4MRK5MRK6MRK8MRK10REFFigure 19. Total nitrogen in bulk deposition (blue columns) and stand throughfall(green columns) in 2004-2006 on MRK plots and reference areas.Sulphur (SO 4 -S) deposition in bulk deposition was at the same level in 2006 as in 2005,but clearly lower than in 2004. There was a decreasing trend in SO 4 -S deposition instand throughfall during 2004 to 2006. Sulphate deposition was clearly higher in standthroughfall than in bulk deposition due to the wash-off of dry deposition from the treecanopies. Sulphate deposition in stand throughfall is considered to rather well representthe total deposition of sulphate from the atmosphere to forest ecosystems.The deposition of base cations (Ca, Mg, K and Na) in both bulk deposition andthroughfall were high on all the plots (Tables E-3 and E-4) compared with the situationelsewhere in Finland. This is presumably due to the relatively dense network of forestroads and the commencement of construction work in the area; dust from unsurfacedroads and stone-crushing plants is a major source of base cation deposition. The depositionof base cations in 2006 in bulk deposition and stand throughfall did not differmarkedly from the situation in 2004 or 2005. The relatively high deposition of Cl (withassociated Na) at Olkiluoto is due to the proximity of the sea, and this is also seen in theresults for 2006. The higher values for base cations and chloride in stand throughfall aredue to the leaching and wash-off processes taking place in the tree canopies.The deposition of PO 4 -P, Al, Fe, Mn, Cu, Zn and Si in bulk deposition and standthroughfall showed some interesting trends in 2006, as was also the case in 2004 and2005 (Tables E-5 and E-6): in stand throughfall Al and Cu decreased and PO 4 -P, Fe,Mn, Zn and Si increased compared with the values in bulk deposition. The deposition

29of both PO 4 -P and Mn in stand throughfall is normally higher than that in bulk deposition.However, the other elements are not normally measured in bulk deposition in studieson ecosystem functioning, and therefore it is difficult to find comparable resultsfrom the literature. An increase in Fe, Mn and Si is understandable because these elementsare associated with mineral dust (e.g. from forest roads), but Al would also havebeen expected to increase correspondingly. The deposition of PO 4 -P, Al, Fe, Mn, Cu,Zn and Si in bulk deposition and stand throughfall was relatively similar in 2006 to thelevels in 2004 and 2005.Forest Intensive Monitoring Plot: FIPSoil SolutionThe results of the soil solution monitoring in 2004-2006 were originally reported byJohn Derome (Finnish Forest Research Institute) in a memo and are summarized below.The result tables can be found in Appendix F.The plate lysimeters at a depth of 5 cm functioned well on FIP4 during the monitoringperiod, the samples having been obtained on almost all sampling occasions (at ca. fourweek intervals). Despite the relatively dry summer in 2005, and especially in 2006, thesuction-cup lysimeters also provided samples on seven sampling occasions (ca. fourweek intervals) from 24.5.2005 to 7.11.2005 and on five occasions from 23.5. to2.11.2006. In July 2006, no samples were obtained because precipitation was only 1.6mm. The plate lysimeters installed at a depth of 5 cm on the spruce plot yielded samplesonly on two occasions in 2005 (5.8. and 6.9.), but on five occasions in 2006 (19.6.,14.8., 11.9., 10.10. and 2.11.).In FIP4 the amount of percolation water passing down to a depth of 5 cm during thesnow-free period (Fig. 20, Table F-1) was ca. 17% of the input to the forest floor (standthroughfall) in 2004, ca. 21% in 2005, and ca. 16% in 2006. There was considerablevariation between the sampling dates due primarily to the varying amounts of standthroughfall. The amounts were especially low after snowmelt in the latter half of Mayand the first half of June in 2004, and in July and August in 2006. Overall, the proportionof water passing down to a depth of 5 cm was relatively similar in all years, withslightly lower values in the dry parts of summer in 2004 and 2006.

30160140120Percolation waterStand throughfall100mm80604020200420052006018.5-31.531.5-14.614.6-5.75.7-12.712.7-26.726.7-10.810.8-8.98.9-4.104.10-5.116.6-21.621.6-19.719.7-4.84.8-6.96.9-12.1012.10-7.1123.5-19.619.6-17.717.7-14.814.8-11.911.9-10.1010.10-2.11Figure 20. The amount of percolation water passing down to a depth of 5 cm duringthe snow-free period in 2004-2006 in FIP4. The amount of stand throughfall is alsoshown.Percolation water collection started on plot FIP10 during July 2005, and the results forthis plot are only indicative. However, it is clear that only very small amounts of standthroughfall passed down to a depth of 5 cm in the soil in 2005 (Fig. 21, Table F-2). In2006, when sampling covered the whole snow-free period, the proportion of percolationwater passing down to a depth of 5 cm was ca. 7% of the input to the forest floor. However,the actual amount was most probably much higher, because samples could not beobtained in June and early July owing to the fact that the groundwater table/sea levelwas above the ground surface on part of the plot.

31706050Percolation waterStand throughfallmm4030201020052006019.7-5.85.8-22.822.8-6.96.9-13.923.5-19.619.6-17.717.7-14.814.8-11.911.9-10.1010.10-7.11Figure 21. The amount of percolation water passing down to a depth of 5 cm duringthe snow-free period in 2005-2006 in FIP10. The amount of stand throughfall is alsoshown.The chemical composition of the soil solution during the snow-free period in both plotswas compared with corresponding values in a Scots pine (FIP4) or Norway spruce(FIP10) stand growing on a site of similar fertility (Tammela, period 1998-2000, depthsof 5, 20 and 40 cm). Since the monitoring in FIP4 began earlier, the values could alsobe compared with those from 2004.In FIP4, the acidity of the soil solution was relatively similar at all depths in all threeyears, apart from a sharp drop at 10 cm in 2006 (Fig. 22, Table F-3). However, this wasdue to relatively low values (average 4.0) on the three sampling occasions in autumn.Otherwise the pH values at all depths were fully comparable to a site of similar fertilityat Tammela. In FIP10 the pH of the soil solution at all depths in both years was considerablyhigher than that in the reference spruce stand at Tammela, growing on similarsite type (Fig. 23, Table F-4). The main reason for this is that the soil at Olkiluoto isconsiderably younger than that at Tammela, and therefore contains much higher concentrationsof base cations (Ca, Mg, K) (see Tables F-11 to F-14). Soil solution pH andbase cation concentrations are strongly negatively correlated in forest soils.

3265pH432200420052006Ref. 1998-2000105 10 20 30 40Depth, cmFigure 22. pH of soil solution on FIP4 in 2004-2006 and on the reference site in Tammelain 1998-2000. Note that the reference data has been collected from depths 5, 20and 40 cm, while FIP4 data is from depths 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm.65pH43220052006Ref. 1998-2000105 10 20 30 40Depth, cmFigure 23. pH of soil solution on FIP10 in 2005-2006 and on the reference site inTammela in 1998-2000. Note that the reference data has been collected from depths 5,20 and 40 cm, while FIP10 data is from depths 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm.In FIP4, the DOC concentrations in 2004 and 2005 were considerably higher at a depthof 5 cm than at the reference site (Fig. 24), but not excessively high for organic matterrichforest soils under a coniferous tree stand. The same was true for FIP10 in 2005-2006 (Fig. 25). Installation of the suction-cup lysimeters undoubtedly caused short-termflushes of DOC at the beginning of monitoring periods, but DOC is also strongly af-

33fected by precipitation and soil temperature. The increase at depths of 10, 20 and 30 cmin 2006 on FIP4 may be related to the relatively dry, hot summer.160140120DOC, mg/l1008060200420052006Ref. 1998-2000402005 10 20 30 40Depth, cmFigure 24. DOC in soil solution on FIP4 in 2004-2006 and on the reference site inTammela in 1998-2000. Note that the reference data has been collected from depths 5,20 and 40 cm, while FIP4 data is from depths 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm.140120100DOC, mg/l806020052006Ref. 1998-2000402005 20 30 40De pth, cmFigure 25. DOC in soil solution on FIP10 in 2005-2006 and on the reference site inTammela in 1998-2000. Note that the reference data has been collected from depths 5,20 and 40 cm, while FIP10 data is from depths 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm.

34Total nitrogen (Tables F-5 and F-6), which, in addition to ammonium and nitrate, alsoincludes organic dissolved nitrogen, obviously closely followed the pattern for the DOCconcentrations on both plots. In FIP4, the NH 4 -N, and especially the NO 3 -N concentrations,were extremely low at all depths in the mineral soil throughout the three yearperiod (Tables F-5 and F-7). The low concentrations are primarily due to the fact thatnitrogen is the main factor limiting tree growth in coniferous stands in Finland; theavailable nitrogen (NH 4 and NO 3 ) mineralized from the organic layer is rapidly takenup by the roots of the trees and ground vegetation. In FIP10 the NH 4 -N and NO 3 -Nconcentrations were somewhat elevated at a depth of 5 cm compared to the referencesite (Tables F-6 and F-8).In FIP4, sulphate concentrations at a depth of 5 cm (Table F-7) were considerablylower in all three years than those at the reference site but, but at other depths wererelatively similar. There was a clear overall increase in sulphate concentrations withincreasing depth, apart from at 20 and 30 cm in 2006. Similar trends in the sulphateconcentration have been reported at all the ICP Forests Level II plots in Finland(Derome et al. 2007). In FIP10, sulphate concentrations were approximately the sameas the reference site at a depth of 5 cm (Table F-8), but strongly elevated at 20 and 30cm. Chloride concentrations were extremely high at all depths throughout the monitoringperiod in both plots (Tables F-9 and F-10); it is clear that there is a considerableinput of NaCl in deposition derived from the sea. In FIP4, chloride concentrations at adepth of 5 cm showed a considerably increase over the three-year period. Phosphateconcentrations were at approximately normal levels on both plots (Tables F-9 and F-10). Phosphate concentrations are very low in soil solution at most forested sites inFinland (Derome et al. 2007).In FIP4, the concentrations of the three important plant nutrients (Ca, Mg, K) were relativelyelevated, especially in the mineral soil (10, 20 and 30 cm) at the start of themonitoring period in 2004 (Tables F-11 to F-14). Since then the concentrations in themineral soil have fallen and are now approaching the levels for the reference site. Thissuggests that there has been a short-term flush of these nutrients following installationof the lysimeters (as for DOC). The K concentration below the organic layer in 2006increased considerably. In FIP10 the concentrations of all three nutrients were stronglyelevated at all depths in the soil (Tables F-12 and F-14). The soil at the spruce plot atOlkiluoto is very young, and weathering processes in the mineral soil will be relativelystrong and release abundant amounts of these three nutrients.The concentrations of Na at all depths continued to be elevated on both plots, due to theproximity of the sea, weathering of minerals (FIP10) and there was a relatively strongincrease (as for K) below the organic layer in FIP4 in 2006.In FIP4 the concentrations of total Al at all depths were similar in all three years (TableF-15), and higher than the values for the reference site at deeper (10 – 30 cm) depths.The concentration of Al 3+ , which is a form of Al that is toxic to plant roots and mycorrhizas,was still extremely low at a depth of 5 cm, but considerably higher at theother depths compared with the reference site. However, they are still much lower thanthe widely accepted toxicity level of 2 mg/l. In FIP10 the total Al concentrations werelower at a depth of 5 cm, but the Al 3+ (Table F-16) and Mn concentrations (Table F-18)were relatively similar to the reference values at all depths. The Mn concentrations of

35FIP4 at all depths were very similar in all three years (Table F-17), and also similar tothe concentrations at the reference site.The Fe concentrations were higher at deeper depths than at the reference site, and FIP4.showed considerable year-to-year variation (Table F-17). The Si concentrations atdepths of 5 and 10 cm in 2005 and 2006 were considerably higher than the correspondingvalues in 2004 (Table F-19), and higher than the corresponding concentrations atthe reference site. The values in FIP10 at depths of 20 and 30 cm were also stronglyelevated (Table F-20). The high silicon values are undoubtedly due to the young age ofthe soil: silicon plays an important role in soil-forming processes (podzolisation) underconiferous tree species.The Cu concentrations at all depths of FIP10 and at the reference site, were below thelimit of quantification of the analytical instrument (Table F-22). The same was true forFIP4 and the reference site, except the depth of 10 cm in 2005 in Olkiluoto (Table F-21). In FIP4 the Zn concentrations were relatively constant, and higher than the referencevalues throughout the monitoring period. In FIP10, the Zn concentrations werealso slightly higher than the reference (Table F-22).The concentrations of heavy metals at all depths in FIP4 continued to be below the limitof quantification. In FIP10 the nickel concentrations at 20 and 30 cm were slightly elevatedin 2005 (Table F-22), which is a relatively common finding in soils that have developedfrom marine sediments. The Ni is derived from the bedrock in the region andnot a sign of pollution from industrial sources.Biomass and Carbon DistributionBiomass of different tree compartments on FIP plots was derived using tree-basedmodels, as presented above in the case of whole island. The results have been reportedin a memo by Lasse Aro and Timo Kareinen (Finnish Forest Research Institute). Meancarbon content in Scots pine stands of the FIP4 plot was 7.978 kg C m -2 (Table G-1).Mean carbon content in tree stands of the FIP10 plot was 16.946 kg C m -2 (from whichspruce counted 13.540 and birch 3.406 kg C m -2 , Table G-2).LitterfallLitterfall collection was started on the plot FIP4 in summer 2004 and on the plot FIP10in spring 2005, thus the results for litterfall production are incomplete for 2004 on FIP4and for 2005 on FIP10. The results have been reported in a memo by Lasse Aro andTimo Kareinen (Finnish Forest Research Institute). Annual total litterfall productionwas 293 g m -2 in the Scots pine stand FIP4 in 2005. This corresponded well with theresults from ICP Level II plot in Tammela (average 329 g m -2 during 1996-2003; Ukonmaanaho2007). Detailed results are presented in Appendix H. The nutrient contentof litter has also been analysed, but the reporting was underway.

36DefoliationThe degree of defoliation of Scots pine and Norway spruce was determined on FIPplots in August 2006, and reported in a memo by Lasse Aro and Timo Kareinen(Finnish Forest Research Institute). The average defoliation level of pines was 3.7%(±0.7) and of spruces 17.8% (±2.7) indicating good crown condition: pines wereclassified as not defoliated and spruces as slightly defoliated. See Table 17 for results.Defoliation levels were also in agreement with the results from ICP Level II plots inTammela (Lindgren et al. 2007).Table 17. Number of assessed trees (No) and defoliation degree (DEF, %) on the FIPplots.Plot Sub-plot Species No DEFFIP4 1 Scots pine 20 3.22 Scots pine 20 3.23 Scots pine 20 4.24 Scots pine 20 4.5Mean 3.7Tree GrowthFIP10 1 Norway spruce 20 15.82 Norway spruce 20 18.83 Norway spruce 20 15.54 Norway spruce 20 21.3Mean 17.8Tree characteristics are measured every fifth year. In addition, the diameter growth oftwo trees of both FIP plots is being measured continuously with girth bands, andrecorded once an hour (Figs. 26-27).Figure 26. A girth band measuring diameter growth continuously in FIP4. Photo byReija Haapanen (May 2007).

375045403530mm252015105001/08/200409/11/200417/02/200528/05/200505/09/200514/12/200524/03/200602/07/200610/10/200618/01/2007Figure 27. Data from girth band of tree 395 in FIP4. Daily averages betweenSeptember 1, 2004 and December 12, 2006.Stand MicrometeorologyStand meteorological measurements are recorded once an hour. The parameters are airtemperature, minimum and maximum temperature inside the crown layer and above thecanopy, relative humidity, precipitation (1 m above ground level), soil moisturecontent, and soil temperature. Depth of ground frost and the thickness of the snowcover are measured manually on FIP4. Photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), solarradiation, air pressure, wind speed and its direction are measured only on FIP4. See Fig.28 for an example of recorded data.

38302520Temperature at 9 mPAR at 24 m600500Temperature, ºC151050-5-10400300200-15-20-2501/09/200417/10/200402/12/200417/01/200504/03/200519/04/200504/06/200520/07/200504/09/2005PAR, micromol/s/m220/10/200505/12/200520/01/200607/03/200622/04/200607/06/200623/07/200607/09/200623/10/200608/12/20061000Figure 28. Examples of data from meteorological measurements on FIP4: temperatureat 9 m and PAR at 24 m. Daily averages between September 1, 2004 and December 12,2006.Terrestrial AnimalsAnimal life on Olkiluoto Island is inventoried in the field (track counts, line transects,traps for small animals) at intervals of ca. 10 years. Local hunters are interviewedannually. Inventory results are reported in Posiva Working Reports and interviews inmemos or Working Reports. According to the plan, the game statistics were updated byinterviewing local hunters and the local hunting group (Olkiluodon metsästysseura) inMarch 2007 by Suomen Luontotieto Oy and have been reported by Satu Oja and JyrkiOja in a memo. The game catches in 2002-2006 are presented in Appendix I where apopulation estimate in 2006 is also given. The variation of catches of mammals aregiven in Fig. 29.

392018Catch, individuals1614121086MooseWhite-tailed deerRoe deerAmerican minkRaccoon dogRed foxBadgerBrown hare & Mountain hare4202002 2003 2004 2005 2006Figure 29. Catches of mammals on Olkiluoto Island.The hunting season varies with respect to the game animals and the data are presentedaccording to these hunting seasons, and not calendar years. The main points to be notedconcerning the catches and populations of game are as follows:CervidsOn Olkiluoto, the home ranges of moose are smaller than on the mainland, where theytypically are 5-10 km 2 . On Olkiluoto, the home ranges overlap with other individuals'home ranges. There is also migration from the coastal area to wintering areas on themainland. On Olkiluoto, most of the forests are ideal habitats for white-tailed deer andthe population density is much higher than average in southern Finland; in fact, it isincreasing. Only one roe deer was brought down in 2006, while, in 2005, the number ofcatches was five to ten. The hunting of roe deer has not been regulated since 2005,which creates uncertainty in the figures. The population on Olkiluoto (and generally inFinland) has grown in recent years. In the winter of 2005-2006, the population size wasabout 15-20 individuals, and there has been at least four road killings within a singleyear.Predators of Small MammalsThe populations of small mammal predators (American mink, raccoon dog, red fox)were smaller than last year. In Olkiluoto, the home ranges of red foxes probably overlapwidely, and foxes move freely to and from the mainland. The red fox population mayhave grown on Olkiluoto. In 2002, two red fox dens were reported, but there have beenno reported observations later.

40Exceptionally, only two raccoon dogs were killed on Olkiluoto in 2006, because of lowhunting pressure caused by mild weather. The number of catches does not necessaryindicate the population size. In the autumn raccoon dogs move around a lot (especiallyyoung individuals) and hunting pressure also varies depending on weather, snow, etc.It is probable that the number of raccoon dogs on Olkiluoto has been increasing, or atleast has not been decreasing.There were no sightings of pine martens at Olkiluoto between 2003-2006. However, itcan be assumed that a pair or a solitary pine marten live on the island.Small and Medium-Sized MammalsThere were no catches of brown hare or mountain hare in Olkiluoto area in 2006. Theirpopulations have probably been stable on Olkiluoto. Nationally their catches have decreased,most probably because the low level of vole populations (which has continuedfor a long time) forces carnivores, such as red foxes, to find other food sources.There is no detailed information of the red squirrel population on Olkiluoto. Redsquirrel populations typically experience great variations, following the production ofspruce cones. In the long run, the red squirrel population is believed to have remainedstable. Hunting the red squirrel for fur has practically ceased, although hunting thisanimal is permitted during the hunting season.There are no large badger setts in the Olkiluoto area, probably because the soil is notideal for digging. The last badger kill was reported in 2003. There were still no reportedobservations of muskrat. It is possible that the population continued to decline due tothe increase of American mink or some virus infection.BirdsWaterfowls were hunted moderately and the catch is small.Biomass of FaunaA first approach to estimating the biomass and carbon content of the fauna in Olkiluotowas done for the Olkiluoto Biosphere Description Report (Haapanen et al. 2007). Thedata were, however, partly lacking: the distribution of fauna on the island was notknown, some animal groups had not been inventoried, there were no parameters concerninganimal weights, element concentrations, consumption habits and amounts, orproduction. Thus it was decided to present a model of moose, which is the largestmammal on the island. The carbon budget was calculated for 2002 and is presented inFig. 30. For parameters and details, see Haapanen et al. 2007.

41Figure 30. Preliminary estimates of the carbon cycling in the moose population inOlkiluoto (Haapanen et al. 2007).Anthropogenic and Social EffectsChanges in land ownership, settlement and land-use are recorded annually. Historicaldata are also of importance. Water supply information is monitored when checking thewater quality of private wells. Much of this information is available from national institutesand authorities, which also have information about potential food resources.The land register map has been added to Posiva's GIS database and a review of otheravailable registers and statistics of use has been started. The changes in land-use due tothe new nuclear power plant (OL3) and its infrastructure are also continuously monitored.3.2.3 Limnic SystemsThere are few limnic systems in Olkiluoto at the moment. The Korvensuo fresh-waterreservoir is the most important, but it is artificial and heavily controlled. Its hydrogeochemistryis monitored weekly by TVO, and the results of the analyses are submitted tothe water works. No further summary of the findings is compiled. The Eurajoki River ismonitored by industrial companies operating on its upper course.

42The discharge and the nutrients of the Eurajoki River are presented by Turkki (2007).The average discharge in 2006 was at the same level as in 2005, both being slightlyhigher than the average for 1990-2002 (Table 18). The discharge was at its highest inNovember-December. The discharge in December was greatest since the 1980s. Thedischarges were lowest in July-September, being also lower than usual. The amounts ofphosphorus, nitrogen and substance matter carried by the river to the sea were similarto 2005, but considerably higher than in 2004. Most of the nutrients (65% of N, 50% ofP) and substance matter (57%) were carried in October-December by the exceptionallyhigh discharges. Compared with the average values for 1990-2002, the amount of phosphoruswas lower but that of nitrogen higher.Table 18. Amounts of nutrients and substance matter carried by the Eurajoki River tothe sea and the average, min and max discharges in 2004-2006. * = Mode of months.Data by Turkki (2007) and Haapanen (2006).P, kg N, kg Substance Discharge, m 3 /smatter, tonnes Average Min(month)Max(month)2004 7 320 563 680 3 341 5.8 1.4 (8) 16.4 (12)2005 20 630 848 080 8 802 9.3 1.5 (7) 26.3 (1)2006 21 500 781 000 8 440 9.2 0.3 (8) 29.4 (12)1990-2002 23 900 640 000 8.8 1.9 (8*) 20.8 (4*)3.2.4 Marine/Brackish SystemsIn Posiva's own monitoring programme seawater samples from four selected sites areanalysed for hydrochemical modelling purposes once every three years. Water qualitysamples will be collected three times a year from three or four sites, either as part of themonitoring programme of the nuclear power plant or by Posiva. In this connection, thetemperature of the seawater and its thermal stratification will also be recorded. The intensityof marine system data acquisition required for monitoring the repository is lowerthan that required by the nuclear power production regulations.The marine ecosystem has been monitored by TVO since the 1970s. The study areamostly extends to a distance of 5-6 km from the nuclear power plant cooling water dischargesite. Ten monitoring plots have been established in the study area to be used fora varying number of analyses. Detailed methods and annual results are published in theresearch report series of Lounais-Suomen vesi- ja ympäristötutkimus Oy. Results fromthe 2006 studies are presented by Turkki (2007). The main findings are summarizedhere, and the study locations are shown in Fig. 31. Result Tables are in Appendix J.The state of the nearby waters is partly connected with the nuclear power productionactivity. The capacity factor of OL1 in 2006 was 93.8% and that of OL2 96.9%. Coolingwater consumption was 1.81 billion m 3 , and 98.8 PJ/a of heat was conducted to thesea.

43Figure 31. Locations of established seawater sampling sites.Physical and Chemical PropertiesWater samples from seven observation plots were taken at four instances in February-November as vertical series with 5 m distances. The samples were analysed by Lounais-Suomenvesi- ja ympäristötutkimus Oy for oxygen, pH, alkalinity, eletrical conductivityand salinity, colour, cloudiness, ammonium N (NH 4 ), total N, total P and substancematter. The temperature was recorded at all physical-chemical and biologicalsampling instances.In the monitoring performed in late February, the nearby waters were mostly free of icecover, but some locations could not be reached due to pack ice. In the surface water theincrease in the temperatures due to the cooling waters of the power plant (SEA08 vs.SEA03/06) was 5-7ºC and close to the bottom 1-5ºC. The difference between SEA05and SEA03/06 was 0.1- 1.6ºC. A slight temperature rise due to the cooling water dischargecould be seen within a distance of 2-3 km, both in winter and open water season.The temperatures at the observation plots during the open water season are presented inAppendix Table J-1.The oxygen saturation of sea water at the observation plots is presented in AppendixTable J-2. There was oversaturation in late winter (February), but the results were inline with the reference values (close to Rauma and Pyhäranta). The production maximumof plankton caused oversaturation of oxygen in the surface water in May, as inprevious years. In August the oxygen situation was good, and in November excellent.

44In general, the open water season values of the nearby waters of Olkiluoto conformedto the reference values.The opacity of water (visible depth) varied from 2.4 m in SEA08 to 3.7 m in SEA10.The within-plot variation during the open water season was small (standard deviation0.5-0.7 m). The opacity is nowadays clearly better than at the end of the 1990s, butworse than at the beginning of the 1990s (Fig. 32).65Visible depth, m432SEA05SEA06SEA03SEA08SEA07SEA08SEA10Reference site101990-941995-992000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006Figure 32. Opacity of water during the open water season in 1990-2006. The referencesite is in Pyhäranta. ( Turkki 2007).Wintertime N concentrations were relatively similar at the monitoring locations (280-360 µg/l; Table J-3), and lower than usual. The average background concentration incoastal waters of the Bothnian Sea was 350 µg/l in 1997-1999. The concentrations oftotal N in the study locations were between 240-390 µg/l during the open water season.The concentrations were similar or slightly higher compared with the average of 1996-2005, except at SEA03 and SEA09, where the concentrations were clearly higher thantypical. The background concentration in coastal waters of the Bothnian Sea (data fromPyhäranta reference site) was 280 µg/l in 2000-2006. The ammonium N concentrationvaried between 2-15 µg/l during the open water season. In May and August the amountswere generally under the detectable amount.In the production layer, the total N concentrations varied between 220-730 µg/l duringthe growing season, and were approx. 10% higher than the average for 1996-2005. Thetotal N concentration was highest at SEA09, and due to nutrients carried by River Eurajoki.

45In winter (February) the averages P concentrations of water columns were between 23-25 µg/l (Table J-4). The concentrations were slightly higher than the average for 1996-2005 and higher than the background concentration in coastal waters of the BothnianSea measured at Pyhäranta (19 µg/l in 2004-2006). The wintertime P concentrationshave increased significantly between 1979 and 2002. In 2003-2004 the P concentrationswere lower, but grew again in 2005-2006. The average P concentrations of the nearbywaters during the open water season (13-26 µg/l) were higher than in 2005, and theaverage for SEA09 was exceptionally high (Fig. 33). This was caused by the nutrientscarried by River Eurajoki in October.4035Total P, mg/m33025201510SEA05SEA06SEA03SEA09SEA10SEA08SEA07Reference site501979-841985-891990-941995-992000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006Figure 33. The concentrations of total P (µg/l) during open water seasons 1979-2006.Water columns 0-10 m in locations SEA03, 06 and 10, and 0-6, 7.5, 8.5, and 8 m for therest, respectively. The reference site is in Pyhäranta. (Turkki 2007).The wintertime concentrations of substance matter were clearly lower than the averagefor 2001-2005 (Table J-5). Also during the open water season the values of substancematter was low (Fig. 34). The cloudiness values of water were unusually low in thewinter (February, 0.7-1.7 FNU). In May the values were 0.7-2.3 FNU, in August 0.7-2.8 FNU and in November 2.3-4.5 FNU. The average open water season values weresmall, 26-51% lower than in 1996-2005 on average.

4665Substance matter, mg/l432SEA03SEA05SEA06SEA07SEA08SEA09SEA10102004 2005 2006Figure 34. The concentrations of substance matter (mg/l) at the sampling locationsduring the open water season. Water columns 0-10 m in locations SEA03, 06 and 10,and 0-5.5, 7, 9, and 8 m for the rest, respectively (Turkki 2007).VegetationA number of survey sites have been established as part of the nuclear power plant'smonitoring programme for the monitoring of marine vegetation. Phytoplankton is sampledannually on the water quality monitoring sites. Macrophytes growing at sea bottomare observed by divers using line transects. Also point survey methods will be used tomonitor any changes in the annual cycle of the vegetation. The survey interval forPosiva's needs is 5-10 years, and is defined by Posiva's activities and TVO's ongoingmonitoring programme.The primary production of phytoplankton was measured eight times by radiocarbonmethod (C-14) in April-September in the production layers of SEA06 and SEA08. Thewater column samples were analysed for total P, phosphate P, N compounds, chlorophyll-a,amount and composition of phytoplankton and the production capacity ofplankton. In order to establish the annual variation in phytoplankton, the samples takenat various sampling instances at SEA08 were microscopied separately. On other samplingsites, the summer season phytoplankton samples were combined.At the beginning of May it was sunny and warm, and the conditions for primary productionof phytoplankton were good. The P concentrations were on average level. Theseasonal variation of phytoplankton biomasses by species on SEA08 is presented inTable J-6 and Fig. 35.

47908070605040302010010/04/200724/04/200708/05/200722/05/200705/06/200719/06/200703/07/200717/07/200731/07/200714/08/200728/08/2007% of biomass11/09/200725/09/2007CyanophyceaeCryptoph.Chrysoph.Prymnesioph.Bacillarioph.Prasinoph.MonadsDinoph.Figure 35. Variation of dominating phytoplankton species by sampling date at SEA08in 2006. Species with minor shares have been removed for clarity. Figure after Turkki(2007).Due to the fact that the cooling water discharge area with its surroundings stays openalso during the winter, considerable amounts of cool season planktons (Bacillariophyceaeand Dinophyceae) grow in the waters even in mid-winter. The abundant springtimeproduction of Bacillariophyceae therefore usually starts at least a month earlierthan in other coastal water areas and the growing season is longer. The springtimesampling caught the maximum springtime bloom in 2006, and the total biomass inApril-May was considerably greater than in previous years. The average biomass onSEA08 during the whole growing season (1787 mg/m 3 ) was over 2 times that of 2005(Fig. 36), and also larger than the 5-year averages from 1985 to 2004. Annual differenceshave been great since 1985 (370-1830 mg/m 3 ). The increase of growing seasonbiomasses have mostly been due to mild winters (extending the growing season) andgeneral eutrophication of the Baltic Sea.

48Biomass, mg/m320001800160014001200100080060040020001985-89 1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2005 2006Figure 36. The average phytoplankton biomass on SEA08 during the whole growingseason in 1985-2006 (Turkki 2007).Total summertime phytoplankton biomasses (190-506 mg/m 3 ) were in general similarto previous years, except in SEA05, where the biomass was greater (Fig. 37). TheCryptophyceae, Cyanophyceae, and Chrysophyceae dominated the summertime biomasses(Table J-7).600mg/m3500400300200SEA08SEA05SEA06SEA07SEA031001985-891990-941995-9920002001200220032004200520060Figure 37. Summertime phytoplankton biomass in 1985-2006 (Turkki 2007).Chlorophyll-a concentrations showed only small spatial or temporal variation (1.6-2.9µg/l, local standard deviations 0.3-1.1), being at the same levels with the backgroundvalues in the coastal waters of the Bothnian Sea, except at SEA05 and 09 (Table J-8).The average primary production capacity was 150-230 mg C/m 3. d during the growing

49season, the smallest values being at the outermost plot SEA10. The primary productioncapacity was highest at the end of April (260-450 mg C/m 3. d). The summertime capacity,100-175 mg C/m 3. d was typical of slightly eutrophic coastal waters. In 2003-2005the primary production capacity of the nearby waters of Olkiluoto was at the same levelas the measurements from the mid-1980s, but has again increased to the levels of mid-1990s. The recent drop may have been due to dry summers and consequent small runoffs.The average primary production of phytoplankton in shown in Appendix Table J-9. Thecumulated productions of the growing season (1 April - 30 September) were 56 and 69g C/m 2 for plots SEA06 and 08, respectively. The primary production in the nearbywaters of Olkiluoto was similar to the average production in 1990-1999 (61 g/m 2. a),while in 2003-2005 the values were 13-34% lower. Over the long term, primary productiongrew until the year 2002, with some annual variation.FaunaBottom fauna samples are taken in TVO's monitoring programme once a year on theseawater quality monitoring sites. The species are identified and their proportions(measured in abundance), total number (individuals/m 2 ) and biomass are calculated. Inaddition, the size distribution of Baltic clam (Macoma balthica) is measured. Balticclams and blue mussels are sampled on one seawater quality site for radionuclideanalyses, as well. TVO monitors fish stocks by test fishing every five years for determiningthe age and growth of trout, whitefish and perch. In addition, pike, perch, roachand Baltic herring are caught twice a year for radionuclide analysis.Bottom fauna were inventoried on November 15-16, 2006 on six of the water qualitysample plots. On four sites the bottom sediments were clay sludge (SEA09, SEA05,SEA06, SEA08), and on two sites gravel and sand (SEA03, SEA07). On average therewere 11 species in sludge bottoms and the average number of individuals per m 2 was3730 ± 2055. The biomass in sludge bottoms was 143 ± 63 g/m 2 , which was ca. 70%higher than in 2005 (52 g/m 2 ). Baltic clam (Macoma balthica) accounted for most ofthe biomass (97%) and individuals (47%). The numbers of species, individuals andbiomass in 2006 by bottom type are presented in Appendix Table J-10. The averagenumber of species, density (Fig. 38) and biomass (Fig. 39) on sludge/clay bottoms weregreater in 2006 than in the 2000s in average. Especially the biomass has increased dueto larger Baltic clams. The smallest sludge bottom biomasses were found in SEA05 (94g/m 2 ) and the largest in SEA08 (234 g/m 2 ).

50450040003500Individuals/m23000250020001500100050001982-841985-891990-941995-992000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006Figure 38. The density (number of individuals per m 2 ) of bottom fauna on sludge bottomsin 1982-2006 (Turkki 2007).250200Biomass, g/m21501005001982-841985-891990-941995-992000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006Figure 39. The biomass of bottom fauna on sludge bottoms in 1982-2006 (Turkki2007).An amphipod species typical to undisturbed bottoms, Monoporeia affinis, has not beenfound in samples in 2003-2006. It has, however, also disappeared from large areas inthe Northern Baltic Sea. In the beginning of the 1990s the North-American polychaete(Marenzelleria viridis) spread fast into the coastal waters of Southwestern Finland. In2006, it was the third most common species on sludge/clay bottoms in Olkiluoto, measuredby the number of individuals, following the Jenkin's spire snail (Potamopyrgusjenkinsi). Tubifex costatus, typical of dirty bottoms was not found. Another indicatorspecies for dirty bottoms, larvae of the buzzer midge (Chironomus plumosus) wasfound in small amounts in SEA08.

51The standard deviation of the measured fauna values in sludge bottoms has grown sincethe mid-1990s. This indicates more unstable sea bottom communities and an increasedrisk of significant changes. Within several years large amounts of dead algae materialwas found carpeting the bottom. The decaying remains consumed much oxygen causingat least occasional lacks of oxygen in the near-bottom waters. In some years clam populationshave probably been destroyed by the lack of oxygen. In 2006 sampling, no largeamounts of algae or other plant debris were found.The hard bottoms with gravel-sand-clay mixture showed an average biomass of 208g/m 2 , with 3797 individuals/m 2 . Species composition was versatile. Some sludgeworms were found on SEA03. The samples from hard bottoms are not fully reliable andcomparable, and part of the annual variation may be caused by measurement errors. Alarge amount of dead algae has also accumulated in recent years on the bottom of plotSEA07, causing lack of oxygen and changes in the species composition.Test fishing was not performed in 2006, in concordance with the programme.Anthropogenic and Social EffectsAs part of the nuclear power plant's monitoring programme, fishing activities are followedup by interviewing fishermen every other year. In addition, three fishermen carryout continuous account fishing. For Posiva's biosphere modelling needs, interviewsshould include questions on the consumption of crustaceans, crayfish and molluscs.Professional fishermen were interviewed in 2006, concerning the catches in 2005. Sincethe report was not available while completing the previous environmental monitoringreport, these results are summarized here. The interview study was performed by OtsoLintinen from Ramboll Finland Oy. The results have been presented in an internal reportfor TVO. The main findings are summarized in the following:In 2005, five people were involved in professional fishing in the offshore area close toOlkiluoto. Of these two were full-time professional fishermen and the rest were fishingas a secondary occupation. In addition, some household fishermen had minor sales incomefrom fish. Some fishermen were fishing also in other areas. The presented figuresconcern those five professional fishermen.Professional fishing is performed year round in the offshore area close to Olkiluoto.However, fishing in some areas may be prevented by ice conditions. Largest amount ofprofessional fishermen are engaged in fishing in June-October. In 2003, the fishing ofsalmon using nets had totally ceased, but using seal-safe salmon fyke nets brought thefigures up in 2005. According to this study, the total fish catch of the professional fishermenwas ca. 13 000 kg in 2005 (Fig. 40), of which 47% was perch. The total catchwas under half of the catch in 2003. The catch per fisherman in 2005 was 2590 kg,while in 2003 it was 3215 kg, and in 2001 2872 kg (figures concern the group of thefive remaining fishermen). The catch per fisherman has thus also slightly decreased.

5212000kg100008000600040002000Baltic herringWhitefishSalmon, troutPikeBreamIdeRoachBurbotPike-perchPerchFlatfishRainbow troutOther02001 2003 2005Figure 40. Catches of fish ( professional fishermen) in 2001, 2003 and 2005.3.2.5 Historical PropertiesKnowledge of historical properties is gained either through separate research efforts oras a bi-product of continuous monitoring. The Baseline Condition Report (Posiva2003a) summarizes the results of studies carried out mainly during the environmentalimpact assessment process toward the end of the 1990s.GIS tools and databases have been established to allow comparisons and other analysesof current and older data. The terrain development study by Mäkiaho (2005), the studiesof sea bottom sediments (Rantataro 2001), soils (Rautio et al. 2004, Lahdenperä etal. 2005, Tamminen et al. 2007), and vegetation (Miettinen & Haapanen 2002, Rautioet al. 2004, Saramäki & Korhonen 2005, Huhta & Korpela 2006, Tamminen et al. 2007)allow simulations of the past and future. In 2005 a study was performed, where the futurevegetation types were estimated based on some of these data (Rautio et al. 2005).The development of a GIS toolbox called UNTAMO is underway (Ikonen 2006).

533.3 Input to Environmental Impact Assessments3.3.1 Air Quality and NoiseSurface excavation, rock crushing and traffic generate dust and noise. The effects ofdust are studied with deposition collectors and needle sampling at MRK plots. The resultsof the effects of the construction of ONKALO on the element concentrations ofneedles were reported in 2005 in a memo by the Finnish Forest Research Institute(summarized by Haapanen 2006).Noise has been monitored once a year during winter by TVO using direct measurements.In 2005, a more comprehensive survey was performed by InsinööritoimistoPaavo Ristola Oy (three occasions, 45 locations). TVO staff recorded noise in early2007. Some new locations were added in this occasion, as well: Olkiluodonvesi icebuoy, OL3 harbour, OL3 parking area, OL3 truck gate, west end of the main gate, harbourroad facing Onkalo, and the visitor centre.The 2007 measurements by TVO staff were planned to take place in December 2006,but had to be cancelled due to excess wind. Noise was thus measured on January 11,2007, at 1-4 pm. The temperature was -0.9ºC and wind was blowing from north (to184º) 3-4 m/s. The nearby sea was free of ice, and there was no snow on the ground.The device was a CESVA model SC-160 type 2 recording digital device. L AT (continuousmean noise level) and L Cpeak (maximum pressure level of the noise) were recorded.Recording time at one spot was ten minutes, at one second intervals. Earlier measurementsby TVO have been performed with less sensitive analogue device, meaning thatthe results cannot be directly compared. The results are presented in Fig. 41.The noise models developed by Insinööritoimisto Paavo Ristola Oy in 2005 were partlyupdated in 2006, with more detailed data concerning the properties of OL3 unit.

54Figure 41. Noise levels (L AT , dB) on January 11, 2007, at 1-4 pm.At locations NMP01-NMP02, the L AT values were 5-6 dB higher compared with thoseof Insinööritoimisto Paavo Ristola Oy in 2005. At locations NMP48 and NMP51, theL AT values were similar to the 2005 values. In location MNP46, L AT values had increasedfrom the previous occasion (from 35 dB to 54.9 dB), mostly because of trafficon Olkiluodontie, wind and ongoing tree logging between the road and measuringpoint. At location NMP51, there was constant traffic, which raised the noise values by20 dB compared with the previous, which was recorded in the evening (less traffic). Atthe new location NMP52 L AT ja L Cpeak , values were risen especially due to traffic at theharbour road and ONKALO construction area.3.3.2 Water QualityAs stated above, TVO monitors seawater quality, nutrient and chemical loading and theEurajoki River is monitored by companies operating on its upper course. Results for thequality, nutrient load and chemical loading of seawater are presented in Section 3.2.4and the results for the Eurajoki River in Section 3.2.3. Sampling of sump water foranalysis of possible residues from blasted rock is performed in connection with the hydrogeochemicalmonitoring of ONKALO, and reported in another sector report, withother hydrogeochemical results. Drainage water from rock heaps is sampled in observationwells or ditches.A sample was taken from the drainage water originating from rock heaps on May 4,2006, and analysed at TVO's laboratory for substance matter, the content of which was16 mg/l, compared with 12.2 mg/l in November 2005. In reference samples taken byTVO in 2004 from the ditch running to Flutanperä bay, the values were 23 mg/l (May)

55and 13 mg/l (Sep). Due to changes in the rock piling area, two new locations were establishedin late 2006, and the first samples were taken on November 9, 2006. Theanalyses were also considerably extended. See Appendix Table K-1 for detailed resultsof the samples.Seven of a total of 11 private drilled wells could theoretically be influenced by the constructionof ONKALO, although this is unlikely, and four of these are used as a primarywater source. These four have been chosen for monitoring the water table, chemicalcomposition and radon content. Wells DWH1 and DWH2 are used all year round, whileDWH3 and DWH4 are mainly used during the summer. The sampling frequency ishigher for the wells in full-time use.In 2006, the private well water tables were measured as planned, and the results arepresented in Fig. 42. Reference data from three shallow wells in bedrock (PP) not affectedby ONKALO are given as well. PP values show water level above the sea level,whereas the DWH measurements give difference to the top of the well. The fluctuationof private wells generally follows that of reference data and no unexplained changes oreffects from ONKALO were observed. The low level in well DWH1 is due to heavyconsumption just before the measurement.12.0010.008.006.00Reference data: above sea levelWater level (m)4.002.000.00-2.00DWH data: measured from the top of the wellDWH1DWH2DWH3DWH4PP9PP1PP10-4.00-6.00-8.00-10.0001/01/2003 01/01/2004 01/01/2005 01/01/2006 02/01/2007Figure 42. The water tables in wells DWH1-DWH4 in 2003 - 2007.The chemical contents were analysed in 2006 by the Environmental Laboratory ofRauma. As in 2005, none of the analysed bacteria was found (Escherichia coli +44ºC,Coliform bact. +37ºC, Heat resistant Coliform bact. +44ºC). The chloride, iron, manganeseand pH results from 2003-2006 are presented in Figures 43-46. Other results arepresented in Appendix Table K-2. The chloride, humus, iron and manganese contentsof DWH1 and DWH4 exceeded the limits set by the Ministry of Social Affairs andHealth. In DWH1, there was a hydrogen sulphide odour in the water, which is a normal

56phenomenon, especially in dry summers. The chloride, iron and manganese limits wereexceeded in DWH2, where there was also a hydrogen sulphide odour.160014001200Chloride, mg/l10008006004002002003200520060DWH1 DWH2 DWH3 DWH4Figure 43. Chloride contents of the water in monitored private wells in 2003-2006.Iron, mg/l54.543.532.521.510.50DWH1 DWH2 DWH3 DWH4200320052006Figure 44. Iron contents of the water in monitored private wells in 2003-2006.

570.60.5Manganese, mg/l0.40.30.22003200520060.10DWH1 DWH2 DWH3 DWH4Figure 45. Manganese contents of the water in monitored private wells in 2003-2006.987pH65432003200520062101 2 3 4Figure 46. pH of the water in monitored private wells in 2003-2006.3.3.3 OverburdenThe current monitoring data for nutrients, radionuclides and other substances in soilhave been presented in the modelling input (Subsections 3.2.1 and 3.2.2).3.3.4 Flora and FaunaA nature survey that covers the island is considered adequate for the environmentalimpact evaluations with respect to flora and fauna. However, the FET and especiallythe FEH plots will provide much more detailed vegetation information.

58On the southern part of the island, there is a conservation area of old forest, which haslater been included in the Natura 2000 programme. The construction of ONKALOcould affect vegetation within this area through a change in groundwater level. Thevegetation sub-plots of the FIP system are also used to monitor these potential effects.The flora and fauna results obtained so far have been presented in Subsection 3.2.2.3.3.5 Landscape, Land-Use and TrafficA log of observations on landscape and land-use is to be maintained. For this frequentlytaken aerial images are of great value, as well as digital photos taken on the ground.The acquisition of aerial imagery has been presented in Section 3.1. Ground-based digitalphotographs were taken, e.g., from the construction sites.Baseline landscape and land-use of the vegetated areas have been documented in thevegetation inventory (Miettinen & Haapanen 2002) and in the forest inventory by compartments(Rautio et al. 2004). A statistical description of the forest and mire regions isavailable in the FET inventory results (Saramäki & Korhonen 2005). The new 50 x 50m photo interpretation grid presented in section 3.1 is employed in land-use changedetection.The potential of picking berries can be assessed on the basis of FEH inventories, nationaldatabases and knowledge of forest habitats.Traffic conditions and changes in traffic levels are studied by means of single surveysas needed during the construction of ONKALO. The ongoing construction of the OL3nuclear power plant, however, has a much greater effect on traffic.3.4 Supplementary Environmental InformationSupplementary environmental information outside Posiva's current scope, reportedwithin other site characterization disciplines or acquired by specific campaigns beyondthe actual monitoring programme, is taken into consideration as needed. Sources of thisinformation include TVO's monitoring programme (parts not considered here), the futuremonitoring programme of the power plant for safeguard purposes, as well as environmentalstudies carried out at the regional, national or international level by authorities,research institutes, etc., and topical surveys for biosphere modelling, for example.Two-year-old sea trout has been marked and planted in 1999, 2001 and 2002, and theirgeographic distribution in the catch has been followed by Riista- ja kalatalouden tutkimuslaitossince 1999. The results were also added to the fishing interview report. Thesea trout in the Bothnian Sea tend to travel northward.

594 SUMMARYThis report presents the annual environmental monitoring results for the year 2006. Themonitoring system is described in the Posiva Report 2003-05 and more detailed methodologycan be found in Raitio et al. (2007). The construction of ONKALO undergroundrock characterization facility was started in July 2004 by Posiva. Part of themeasurements are targeted for monitoring the effects of this construction work. Most,however, are meant for producing input for biosphere modelling for long-term safetypurposes. Many of the studies have been running since the 1970s within TVO's monitoringprogramme. Some of the monitoring is continuous, some is performed annuallyand some is carried out in campaigns at intervals of 1-10 years.The monitoring was accomplished as planned in 2006. Activities completed for the firsttime were the analyses of FEH soil, peat, plant and foliage samples and the investigationsof soil microbes. The biomasses were estimated for the whole forest study areaand separately for plots FIP4 and FIP10. The third intensive monitoring plot (FIP11)was established, but was not yet in use.The FEH soil analyses confirmed the results of earlier inventories and produced detailedinformation of the soil profiles and chemical properties. The soils are young andon average acid. Mineral soil sites have higher nitrogen concentration and lower C/Nratio than average Finnish forest soils, meaning higher soil fertility. The mires are shallow.The macronutrient concentrations in vascular species were relatively similar to the concentrationsmeasured in southern Finland. The Fe concentrations of bryophytes andlichens were high. The particulate and dust accumulation on vegetation, especially onforest floor bryophytes, has been increased due to emissions caused by soil constructionand industrial activities on Olkiluoto Island. The foliage analyses indicated mainlygood nutritional status of studied forests on the Olkiluoto Island. In the crown conditionstudy pines were classified as not defoliated and spruces as slightly defoliated. Accordingto the biomass calculations, there was on average 7.3 kg/m 2 of terrestrial vegetationbiomass in forests. The first soil microbe study showed that the characteristics associatedwith the structure and functioning of microbial communities were within a normalrange in comparison with other published data of similar forest types in Finland.In the studies that have already produced repetitive data, no drastic changes were observedin 2006, as were also the cases in 2004 and 2005. The proximity of the sea anddust from construction activities is seen in the soil solution and deposition results. Theanimal and bird life on the island remains rich and typical of a coastal region. The gamecatches vary according to hunting pressure and natural variation in populations.Phytoplankton biomasses and primary production were higher than in 2005. Marinebottom fauna has suffered on the observation sites closest to the cooling water dischargesite, but in 2004-2006 the situation has been slightly better due to improvedoxygen conditions.

60The water quality of the monitored private drilled wells was poor, as in previous years.The water level fluctuation follows that of reference sites, shallow wells in bedrock notaffected by ONKALO. Noise readings in 2006 (early 2007) varied between 40.7 and62.4 dB, being in many locations higher than in 2005. This was mostly due to heaviertraffic and wind.

61REFERENCESDerome, J. Lindroos, A-J. & Derome, K. 2007. Soil percolation water quality during2001-2004 on 11 Level II plos. In: Merilä, P., Kilponen, T. & Derome, J. (eds.). ForestCondition Monitoring in Finland – National report 2002-2005. Working Papers of theFinnish Forest Research Institute 45. pp. 93-98.Haapanen, R. 2005. Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2004. Environment. PosivaWorking Report 2005-31. 127 p. http://www.posiva.fi/Haapanen, R. 2006. Results of Monitoring at Olkiluoto in 2004. Environment. PosivaWorking Report 2006-68. 99 p. http://www.posiva.fi/Haapanen, R., Aro, L., Ilvesniemi, H., Kareinen, T., Kirkkala, T., Lahdenperä A-M.,Mykrä, S., Turkki, H. & Ikonen, A., 2006. Olkiluoto Biosphere description. Posiva Oy,Report 2007-02. 181 p. http://www.posiva.fi/Helmisaari, H-S., Derome, J., Nöjd, P. and Kukkola, M. 2007. Fine root biomass inrelation to site and stand characteristics in Norway spruce and Scots pine stands. Acceptedfor publication in Tree Physiology.Huhta, A-P. & Korpela, L. 2006. Permanent Vegetation Quadrats on Olkiluoto Island.Establishment and Results from the First Inventory. Posiva Working Report 2006-33.76 p. http://www.posiva.fi/Ikonen, A.T.K. 2002. Meteorological data of Olkiluoto in period of 1992-2001. PosivaWorking Report 2002-44. 26 p.Ikonen, A.T.K. 2003. Environmental Radioactivity Data of Olkiluoto in 1984-2001.Posiva Working Report 2003-14.Ikonen, A.T.K. 2005. Meteorological data of Olkiluoto in period of 2002-2004. PosivaWorking Report 2005-35. 53 p.Ikonen, A.T.K. 2006. Posiva Biosphere Assessment: Revised structure and status 2006.Posiva Oy, POSIVA 2006-07. http://www.posiva.fi/Ikonen, A.T.K. 2007. Meteorological data and update of climate statistics of Olkiluoto,2005. Posiva Working report (in preparation).Ikonen, A.T.K., Kaapu, J., Lehtonen, K., Mattila, J., Räisänen, R., Sauvonsaari, J. &Turkki, H. 2003. Environment Studies in the Olkiluoto area. Posiva Working Report2003-15. 114 p. http://www.posiva.fi/Kaunisto, S. & Paavilainen, E. 1988. Nutrient stores in old drainage areas and growthof stands. Communicationes Instituti Forestalis Fenniae. Vol. 145, 39 p.

62Kaunisto, S. & Moilanen, M. 1998. Kasvualustan, puuston ja harvennuspoistumansisältämät ravinnemäärät neljällä vanhalla ojitusalueella. Folia Forestalia. Vol. 1998,no. 3, p. 393-410.Lahdenperä, A-M., Palmén, J. & Hellä, P. 2005. Summary of Overburden Studies atOlkiluoto with an Emphasis on Geosphere-Biosphere Interface. Posiva Oy, WorkingReport 2005-11. 85 p.Lehtonen, A., Mäkipää, R., Heikkinen, J., Sievänen, R. & Liski, J. 2004a. Biomass expansionfactors (BEFs) for Scots pine, Norway spruce and birch according to stand agefor boreal forests. Forest Ecology and Management. Vol. 188, p. 211-224. ISSN 0378-1127.Lehtonen, A., Sievänen, R., Mäkelä, A., Mäkipää, R., Korhonen, K. T., & Hokkanen, T.2004b. Potential litterfall of Scots pine branches in southern Finland. EcologicalModelling. Vol. 180, p. 305–315. ISSN 0304-3800.Lindgren, M., Nevalainen, S. & Pouttu, A. 2007. Crown condition on the Level II network2001-2004. In: Merilä, P., Kilponen, T. & Derome, J. (eds.). Forest ConditionMonitoring in Finland. National report 2002-2005. Working Papers of the Finnish ForestResearch Institute 45: 41-45.Lintinen, O. 2006. Olkiluodon edustan merialueen kalataloudellinen tarkkailu vuonna2005. Ammattikalastuskysely, meritaimenen merkintätutkimus. (In Finnish: Monitoringof the fishing in the sea areas near Olkiluoto. Questionnaire of professional fishing,marking study of Salmo trutta trutta). Ramboll Finland Oy.Liski, J. 1997. Carbon storage of forest soils in Finland. University of Helsinki Departmentof Forest Ecology Publications 16. Academic dissertation.Mäkiaho, J-P. 2005. Development of Shoreline and Topography in the Olkiluoto Area,Western Finland, 2000 BP - 8000 AP. Posiva Working Report 2005-70. 47 p.http://www.posiva.fi/Mäkipää, R. 1994. Effects of nitrogen fertilization on the humus layer and ground vegetationunder closed canopy in boreal coniferous stands. Silva Fennica. Vol. 28, no. 2, p.81–94. ISSN 0037-5330.Marklund, L.G. 1988. Biomassafunktioner för tall, gran och björk i Sverige. Summary:Biomass functions for pine, spruce and birch in Sweden. Swedish University of AgriculturalSciences, Department of Forest Survey, Report 45. 71 p.Miettinen, T. & Haapanen, R. 2002. Vegetation Types on Olkiluoto Island. PosivaWorking Report 2002-54. 54 p.Muukkonen, P. & Lehtonen, A. 2004. Needle and branch biomass turnover rates ofNorway spruce (Picea abies). Canadian Journal of Forest Research. Vol. 34, no. 12, p.2517–2527. ISSN 0045-5067.

63Muukkonen, P. & Mäkipää, R. 2006. Empirical biomass models of understorey vegetationin boreal forests according to stand and site attributes. Boreal Environmental Research.Vol. 11, no. 5, p. 355-369. ISSN 1239-6095.Poikolainen, J., Lippo, H., Hongisto, M., Kubin, E., Mikkola, K. & Lindgren, M. 1998.On the abundance of epiphytic green algae in relation to the nitrogen concentrations ofbiomonitors and nitrogen deposition in Finland. Environmental Pollution 102: 85-92.Posiva 2003a. Baseline Conditions at Olkiluoto. Posiva Oy. Posiva Report POSIVA2003-02. 127 p. http://www.posiva.fi/Posiva 2003b. Programme of Monitoring at Olkiluoto During Construction and Operationof the Onkalo. Posiva Oy. Posiva Report POSIVA 2003-05. http://www.posiva.fi/Potila, H., Sarjala, T., & Aro, L. 2007. Dissolved nitrogen transformations and microbialcommunity structure in the organic layer of forest soils in Olkiluoto in 2006.Posiva Working Report 2007-08. http://www.posiva.fi/Raitio, H., Saramäki, J., Aro, L. Ranta, P., Siitonen, M., & Oja, J. 2007. Methods forenvironmental monitoring and studies at Olkiluoto site. Supplement to the environmentalmonitoring programme. Posiva Oy, Working Report (in preparation).Rantataro, J. 2001. Acoustic-Seismic Research in the Sea Area near Olkiluoto in theYear 2000 (in Finnish with English abstract). Posiva Working Report 2002-19.Rautio, P., Latvajärvi, H., Jokela, A. & Kangas-Korhonen, P. 2004. Forest Resourceson Olkiluoto Island. Posiva Working Report 2004-35. 109 p.Rautio, P., Aro, L. & Ikonen, A. 2005. Terrain development at Olkiluoto site and implicationsto biosphere assessment. In: Strand, P., Børretzen, P. & Jølle, T. (eds.). The 2ndInternational Conference on Radioactivity in the Environment, 2-6 October 2005, Nice,France. Proceedings. Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority, pp. 372-375.Roivainen, P. 2006. Stable Elements and Radionuclides in Shoreline Alder Stands atOlkiluoto in 2005. Posiva Oy, Working Report 2006-70. 103 p.Roivainen, P. 2005. Environmental Radioactivity Data of Olkiluoto in 1977-1983 and2002-2003. Posiva Working Report 2005-26. 121 p. http://www.posiva.fi/Salemaa, M., Derome. J. Helmisaari, H.-S., Nieminen, T. & Vanha-Majamaa, I. 2004.Element accumulation in boreal bryophytes, lichens and vascular plants exposed toheavy metal and sulfur deposition in Finland. The Science of the Total Environment.Vol. 324, p. 141-160. ISSN 0048-9697.Saramäki, J. & Korhonen, K. 2005. State of the Forests on Olkiluoto in 2004. Comparisonsbetween Olkiluoto and the rest of Southwest Finland. Posiva Working Report2005-39. 79 p. http://www.posiva.fi/

64Starr, M. 1991. Soil formation and fertility along a 5000 year chronosequence. In:Pulkkinen, E. (ed.). Environmental geochemistry in northern Europe. Geological Surveyof Finland, Special Paper 9, p. 99-104.Starr, M., Saarsalmi, A., Hokkanen, T., Merilä, P. & Helmisaari, H-S. 2005. Models oflitterfall production for Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) in Finland using stand, site andclimate factors. Forest Ecology and Management. Vol. 205, p. 215–225. ISSN 0378-1127.Tamminen, P. 2000. Soil factors. In: Mälkönen, E. (ed.). Forest condition in a changingenvironment - The Finnish case. Forestry Sciences. Kluwer Academic Publishers,Dordrecht, p. 72-86.Tamminen, P., Aro, L. & Salemaa, M. 2007. Forest soil survey and mapping of vegetationnutrition on Olkiluoto Island. Results from the first inventory on FEH plots. PosivaWorking Report (in preparation).Turkki, H. 2007. Olkiluodon lähivesien fysikaalis-kemiallinen ja biologinen tarkkailututkimusvuonna 2006. Vuosiyhteenveto. (In Finnish: The physiochemical and biologicalmonitoring of nearby waters of Olkiluoto in 2006. Annual report.) Lounais-Suomenvesi- ja ympäristötutkimus Oy. Tutkimusseloste 270. 42 p. + appendixes.Ukonmaanaho, L. 2007. Litterfall production on 14 Level II plots during 1996-2003. In:Merilä, P., Kilponen, T. & Derome, J. (eds.). Forest Condition Monitoring in Finland.National report 2002-2005. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 45:63-68.

65APPENDIX A: LIST OF MONITORING LOCATIONSTable A-1. Monitoring sites, their codes and descriptions.Sampling site type(s) Code Former code NameDrilled well DWH1 W1 TyrnirantaDWH2 W2 MajahaminaDWH3 W3 HirvikallioDWH4 W4 HilakariWaterfowl counting point of1997 FAL01-FAL12Carabid beetles inventory FAL13 Nature conservation area2004 FAL14 Commercial conifer forestFAL15Cutting area with birches standingFAL16Black alder forest at RumminperäSmall animal quatrat 2004 FAL17 Old spruce forest 1FAL18 Old spruce forest 2FAL19Coniferous forest near the old forestFAL20Cutting areaFAL21 Commercial forest 1FAL22 Commercial forest 2FAL23Black alder forest at RumminperäFAL24Seashore meadowFAL25Abandoned fieldFAL26HayfieldFAL27Commercial forest near shoreBird inventory transect of FAT01 Ulkopää1997 FAT02 Flutanperä-SelkänummenharjuFAT03SelkänummenharjuFAT04OlkiluotoFAT05LiiklankallioFAT06KorpiBat inventory transect of FAT07 Ulkopää2004 FAT08 outlet channelFAT09SelkänummenharjuFAT10MunakariFAT11FlutanperäFAT12LiiklankallioFAT13Itäranta (road to Kornamaa)FAT14SatamatieFAT15Karhunkarinrauma reedbedsForest inventory, sampling, FEH931256Black alder plot at the switchyardradioactivityRadioactivity (forests) FEH931256-FT1 ...small animal quatratFEH931256-FT2FEH931256-FT3FEH931256-FT4

66Table A-1 cont'd. Monitoring sites, their codes and descriptions.Sampling site type(s) Code Former code NameRadioactivity (forests) FEH931256-GL1 ...litter samplingFEH931256-GL2FEH931256-GL3FEH931256-WA1...earthworm samplingRadioactivity (fish) FIA01-FIA04 F1, F2 Old fishing areasFIA05Lippo fishing areaFIA06Susikari southern shoreFIA07-FIA8 F1, F2 Old fishing areasFIA09 F1r reserve fishing area 1FIA10 F2r reserve fishing area 2FIA11 FI fishing area FIFIA12 FII fishing area FIIFishery survey FIA13 Account fishing sub-area AFIA14Account fishing sub-area BFIA15Account fishing sub-area C- FIA16FIA17FIA18Test fishing FIA19 Test fishing area 1 (1997, 2006, 2010)FIA20 Test fishing area 2 (1997, 2006, 2010)FIA21 Test fishing area 3 (1997, 2006, 2010)Forest intensive FIP04 IP4 Liiklanperä pine standmonitoring FIP10 IP10 Liiklanperä spruce standForest deposition MRK01-MRK10MRK93-MRK96 MRK3-MRK6Environmental noise, NMP01 Nousiainen, northern shorecurrent numbering as in NMP02 Kuusisenmaa, eastern endTVO survey 2005 NMP03 LeppäkartaNMP04OL3 support area inside power plant areaNMP05OL3 support area inside power plant areaNMP06OL3 constr. site/gate to guest saunaNMP07...08OL3 support area inside power plant areaNMP09...15OL3 construction siteNMP16...18Power plant areaNMP19 NMP01 Inlet channel of OL1, trash rackNMP20...23Power plant areaNMP24 NMP02 Middle of training centre and swicthyardNMP25...30Power plant areaNMP31 NMP04 Between OL1/OL2, waterworks levelNMP32...35Power plant areaNMP36...41Rock piling and crushing areaNMP42...45ONKALO excavation siteNMP46 NMP03 Raunela/Luoto crossroadsNMP47Ice buoy

67Table A-1 cont'd. Monitoring sites, their codes and descriptions.Sampling site type(s) Code Former code NameEnvironmental noise NMP48 OL3 harbourNMP49OL3 parking areaNMP50OL3 truck gateNMP51West end of the main gateNMP52Harbour road facing OnkaloNMP53Visitor CentreNature survey 1997 NSS01…49 survey square 01…49Precip. chemistry (1990s) PCC01Snow chemistry (1990s) PCC02Precipitation chemistry PCC03 precipitation sampler for isotope studiesRadioactivity: Soil gamma RNM01 AH Ahtola Aerosol RNM02-AS1 KU (KUa) Kuivalahti aerosol sampler Deposition RNM02-DC1 KU (KUa) Kuivalahti Aerosol RNM03-AS1 HA Hankkila aerosol sampler Deposition RNM03-DC1 HA Hankkila deposition collector 1 Deposition RNM03-DC2 HA Hankkila deposition collector 2 Aerosol RNM04-AS1 HS Haapasaari aerosol collector Deposition RNM04-DC1 HS Haapasaari deposition collector Drinking water RNM05-DW1 RA Rauma waterworks Deposition RNM06-DC1 WM weather mast collector 1 Deposition RNM06-DC2 WM weather mast collector 2 Aerosol RNM07-AS1 KO Korvensuo aerosol sampler Drinking water RNM07-DW1 KO Korvensuo drinking waterEurajoki River monitoring RWS01 PappilankoskiLapinjoki River monitoring RWS02 YlinenkoskiRadioactivity (sea biota) SBP01 KPb KalliopölläSBP02 KA Kaalonpuhti shoalRadioactivity SBP03 IP Iso-Pietari(bladderwrack) SBP04 VE VähäkrunnitTest fishing SBP05 Fyke net, Iso-SiiliöSBP06Fyke net, Susikari NSBP07Fyke net, Susikari SESBP08Fyke net, PyrekariSBP09Fyke net, UskalinmaaSBP10Fyke net, PujonsärkkäSBP11Fyke net, MarskinkaritSeabottom vegetation SBT01 A Piertransect SBT02 B OtpääSBT03 C shoalSBT04 D KuusinenSBT05 E SusikariSBT06 F ReimargrundSBT07 G Pihlavakari

68Table A-1 cont'd. Monitoring sites, their codes and descriptions.Sampling site type(s) Code Former code NameWater chemistry SEA01 ER EteläriuttaSEA02 PK PuskakariSEA03 RK, SU, 525 Susikari (Rääpinkivet)SEA04 ES, 490 Pitkäkarinkulma (Marskinkari N)Water quality SEA05 500 LiiklankariSEA06 505 KuusinenWater quality SEA07 515 PuskkariSEA08 510 UlkopääSEA09 480 EurajoensalmensuuSEA10 530 PyrekariRadioactivity: Seawater SEA11 IKa Iso Kaalonperä A Seawater, sediment, suspended,sea biota SEA12 LL Lippo (Liponluoto) Seawater SEA13 KPa Kalliopöllä (Pussikari) Sediment SEA14 OV Olkiluodonvesi Sediment SEA15 TA Tankarit Seawater, sea biota SEA16 IS Iso-Siiliö Sediment, sea biota SEA17 IKb Iso Kaalonperä B Sediment, suspended SEA18 VK Vähä Kivikkokari Sediment SEA19 PF Piskerfäärti Seawater, suspended SEA20 SA Santakari Sediment SEA21 KK Kaksoiskivet Sediment SEA22 HV Haapasaarenvesi Sediment SEA23 KJ KuuskajaskariSpring TMA01 PistolaTMA02KaukenpieliWell TMA03 VarvinnokkaTMA04HelmirantaBat inventory area of 2004 +others TMA05 Nature conservation areaWater sampling / reservoir TMA06 Korvensuo reservoirFor later needsTMA07-TMA10Waterfowl counting sector 1997 TMA11-TMA22Associated to FAL01-FAL12Radioactivity: Milk TMA23 Zone I (0-5 km from NPP) Milk TMA24 Zone II (5-10 km from NPP) Milk TMA25 Zone III (10-20 km from NPP) Grazing grass, milk TMA26 0-10 km from NPP Grazing grass, cereals TMA27 0-20 km from NPP Milk, beef TMA28 0-40 km from NPP Hair moss TMA29 HA Hankkila forest Soil TMA30 Hankkila, soil sampling site Blackcurrant, lettuce TMA31 HA Hankkila, Laaksonen farm

69Table A-1 cont'd. Monitoring sites, their codes and descriptions.Sampling site type(s) Code Former code NameRadioactivity: Garden products TMA32 HA Hankkila, farm at Olkiluodontie crossing Garden products TMA33 LM Linnamaa farm Cereals TMA34 Vuojoki farm Birch leaves/C-14 TMA35 LJ Lapijoki Wild berries TMA36 KS Kaalonpuhti N shore Needles, wild berries, mushroomsTMA37 WM Weather mast area Lichen, wild berries, mushr. TMA38 WN Weather mast N area Soil, wild berries TMA39 MU Munakari Soil, wild berries TMA40 MU Munakari Mushrooms TMA41 MR Munakari road junction Soil TMA42 FL Flutanperä Wild berries, mushrooms TMA43 SR Santalahti road side Soil TMA44 LU Luonto farm Soil TMA45 IR ItärantaRadioactivity TMA46 OA Otpää areaRadioactivity (hair moss) TMA47 LK Liiklankari areaTMA48 SL Santalahti areaRadioactivity (soil gamma, suppl.aerosol) TMA49 IL Ilavainen areaRadioactivity TMA50 OL OlkiluotoRadioactivity (soil) TMA51 MaaselkäTMA52Flutanperä NRadioactivity (shore TMA53 Kaalonpuhti N shore, line 1transects 2005) TMA54 Kaalonpuhti N shore, line 3TMA55 Kuusisenmaa, line 2Radioactivity TVO01 PI Pier(exposure rate) TVO02 WM Weather mast dosemeterTVO03 KO Korvensuo dosemeterTVO04 PN Pujonnokka (pujo)TVO05 KUb Kuivalahti dosemeter (Ellilä)TVO06 LM LinnamaaTVO07 HA Hankkila dosemeterTVO08 TM Taipalmaa (Hummatus)TVO09 RE ReksaariTVO09old AI AikkoTVO10 RA RaumaTVO11 OP OtpääVegetation survey 2002 VCP02-001…435 Vegetation compartment polygon 1…435Nature survey TVO 5/05 VCP05-501…513 Nat. survey compartment polygon 1…13Nature survey TVO 6/05 VCP05-601…611 Nat. survey compartment polygon 1…11Weather WOM1 Weather mast, TVOWOM2Weather mast, forest

71APPENDIX B: FOREST AND MIRE MONITORING SYSTEMForest monitoring was started in 2002 according to a plan compiled in late 2001. Theplan has later been fine-tuned (Raitio et al. 2007). The forest monitoring system consistsof several levels (Fig. B-1) and it allows continuous follow-up of the vegetation,soil, and processes affecting them, as well as comparisons with areas further awayfrom the island. The first steps aimed at describing present situation, but with repeatedmeasurements changes can be detected, and processes modelled.Figure B-1. Forest monitoring levels. The outermost land-use grid consists of plots at50 m intervals. These have been visually interpreted for land-use. VCP contains thevegetation polygons, from which also the forest resources have been inventoried. Thenumbers of monitoring plots are 560 (FET), 94 (FEH), 11 (MRK), and 3 (FIP). TheFEH plots are a sub-sample of the FET plots and the FIP plots are a sub-sample of theMRK plots. The number of FET and FEH plots has been reduced due to expanding infrastructure.Vegetation Classification and Mapping: VCPThe purpose of vegetation-type mapping was to classify the vegetation and its distributionfor use as a basis in the monitoring of primary plant succession caused by land upliftat the plant community level and the possible anthropogenic environmental impact.Mapping also provides additional information for long-term safety monitoring and isuseful for validating the results of separate succession studies. The task was performedin 2002 by the Finnish Forest Research Institute (FFRI), covering the main island ofOlkiluoto, and reported by Miettinen & Haapanen (2002).

72Forest Inventory by VCP UnitsThe forest inventory by vegetation polygons, together with vegetation mapping, providesa basis for the division of the area into homogeneous parts and facilitates optimaltargeting of intensive monitoring measurements. At the same time, it also serves forestryin the Olkiluoto area by providing up-to-date information for the planning of silviculturaltreatment. The vegetation/tree map allows monitoring of changes in the vegetatedlandscape. The inventory by forest compartments was performed in 2003 by theFFRI, and the results have been reported by Rautio et al. (2004).Figure B-2. Forest monitoring plots in 2006.Forest Extensive Monitoring Plots: FETFET grid (Fig. B-2) was established in autumn 2003 by locating 560 plots with the helpof GPS and marking them out with a pole at the centre. The main purpose of this grid isto describe the biomass, to monitor the changes in it and the damage manifesting itselfin tree stands. Furthermore, the FET grid provides a flexible intercoordinated frameworkfor other studies.Field measurement of tree stand variables along FET plots is based on the use of threeconcentric circular sample plots of a fixed radius: the inclusion area varies according tothe breast height diameter of the trees. The guidelines for inventorying the forests andmires are in accordance with the National Forest Inventory of Finland, with the exceptionof the actual layout of the plot, modified to better fit the purposes of Posiva. A

73comprehensive measurement of forest parameters is to be carried out at intervals ofabout 10 years (started in 2004; Saramäki & Korhonen 2005), but a lighter inventorywill be performed more often.Forest Extensive High-Level Monitoring Plots: FEHPart of the FET plots have been further selected as Forest Extensive High-level monitoringplots (FEH, Fig. B-2). Originally, 94 FEH plots were established, but later somehave been lost due to the ongoing construction. In these plots the vegetation is inventoriedand the soil, needles and vegetation are sampled at intervals of 5-10 years. Thesevariables describe soil properties and nutrient balances. The vegetation inventory andsampling was performed for the first time in 2005 by the FFRI (Huhta & Korpela2006). The mineral soil, peat and needle samples were also collected in 2005 by theFFRI.Bulk Deposition and Stand Throughfall: MRKIntensive monitoring of bulk deposition and stand throughfall was started in Olkiluotoin June 2003 within a plot network called MRK (Fig. B-2). The sampling is concentratedin 11 plots (Table B-1) located at varying distances from the dust-producing activities:excavation of ONKALO and rock piling and crushing.Table B-1. Stand types and operating times of MRK plots. FIP = Forest Intensive monitoringPlot (explained in next paragraph).Plot Started Stand typeMRK1MRK2MRK3MRK4 = FIP4MRK5MRK6MRK7MRK8MRK9MRK10 = FIP10MRK11 = FIP112.6.20032.6.20032.6.20032.6.200326.8.200326.8.20032.6.20032.6.200320.4.200423.5.2005not yetScots pineOpenScots pineScots pineNorway spruceNorway spruceOpenNorway spruceOpenNorway spruceYoung Norwayspruce/birchA total of 10 rainfall collectors were located systematically on the plots established in2003. This was later changed to 20 collectors in the forested plots. During winter, depositionis monitored with five systematically located snow collectors (2 in open areas;Fig. B-3). Two of the original plots had to be moved because of felling activities on theplots and new plots (MRK5 and MRK6) were established on August 25, 2003. Rainwatersamples are collected by Posiva every two and snow samples every four weeks.Needles are sampled at regular intervals from forested locations by the Finnish ForestResearch Institute, and all samples are analysed in the laboratory of the FFRI's Ro-

74vaniemi Research Station. Results of the first needle analyses of the MRK plots werereported in 2005 in a memo by Finnish Forest Research Institute, and the next memo isdue in late 2007.Figure B-3. Layout of an open area MRK plot. Photo by Jere Lahdenperä (October2005).Forest Intensive Monitoring Plots: FIPThe functioning of forest ecosystems on the island is studied in Forest Intensive monitoringPlots (FIP). Three plots have now been established (Fig. B-4) in the Liiklansuocatchment area: FIP4 (Scots pine forest), FIP10 (Norway spruce forest) and FIP11(young Norway spruce/birch forest). FIP4 and FIP10 represent Oxalis-Myrtillus/grovelikemineral soil forest site types growing on fine-textured till. The third intensivemonitoring plot (FIP11) was established in a young Norway spruce and birch standnearby in late 2006, and the installation of equipment was finished during 2007. Thebasic stand characteristics of FIP11 will be inventoried in summer 2007.

75Figure B-4. Top: FIP10, middle: FIP4, bottom: FIP11. Photos by Reija Haapanen(May 2007).

76The establishment and basic characteristics of the current plots have been reported in amemo by Finnish Forest Research Institute, and summarized by Haapanen (2006). EachFIP plot consists of three 30 x 30 m sub-plots (OA). A 5-10 m wide zone between andaround the sub-plots constitutes OA4. The monitored variables are presented in TableB-2.Table B-2. Activities performed at FIP plots. = continuous.FIP4 FIP10 FIP11Establishment 2003 2003 2006Vegetation inventory (OA3) 2003, 2004, 2005 2003, 2004, 2005Location and measurement of trees 2004 2005Stand throughfall and precipitation 2003 2005 2007measurements (MRK, OA2)Soil water sampling (OA2) 2003 2005 2007Litterfall sampling (OA2) 2004 2005 2007Needle sampling (OA2) 2003, 04, 05, 06 2004, 05, 06Micrometeorology (OA2) 2004 2005 2007Diameter growth measurements 2004 2005 (OA2)Sap flow measurements 2007 2007 Tree growth measurements (OA1) 2009 2010Crown condition survey 2006 2006VegetationSub-plot OA3 in each FIP is reserved for analyses of understorey vegetation, whichplays a very important role in the annual biomass production, nutrient and water cycling,and biodiversity of boreal forests. Long-term study of the understorey vegetationprovides information on changes in other forest ecosystem variables (soil, microclimateetc.). Responses to anthropogenic impacts may be detectable sooner in the understoreythan in trees. Vegetation has been studied annually by botanists of the Finnish ForestResearch Institute and reported in a yearly memo. Due to initial experiences the intervalwas changed to 3 years in 2005.The sub-plot (30 x 30 m) is divided into 16 smaller sampling units (1.41 x 1.41 m = 2m 2 ). Visual coverage of the plant species is assessed using the following scale: 0.01,0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1, 2, ...99, 100%. The analysis is performed by layers (bottom layer, fieldlayer, shrub layer and trees). Species occurring within the sub-plot, but not within thesample units, are also recorded. The botanists carrying out the work cross-check theirassessment levels in order to keep them uniform. Samples of unknown species are lateridentified by specialists. The starting situation in 2003 is presented in Table B-3.

77Table B-3. Coverage (%) and number of species in 2003 (first inventory).FIP4FIP10Cover % Nbr of species Cover % Nbr of speciesShrub layer 5.23 3 8.81 2Field layer 73.75 31 43.4 25Bottom layer 32.24 27 48.97 35Soil SolutionChanges in the chemical composition of rainfall are being followed as the water firstpasses down through the tree canopy, and then down the soil profile in the form of soilsolution. Soil solution gives information of soil formation processes, the effects of airpollution and other stress factors on soil properties. The concentrations of individualions and the amount of water passing down through the soil are being monitored continuouslyduring the snow-free period in sub-plot OA2 of each FIP. Two sampling techniquesare being used (Table B-4): plate lysimeters (installed immediately below theorganic layer) and suction-cup lysimeters (installed at different depths, primarily in themineral soil). The soil in FIP4 is extremely stony, and the tension lysimeters weretherefore installed at depths of 10, 20 and 30 cm, instead of 20 and 40 cm as originallyplanned.In addition to the chemical composition, also the amount of percolation water is beingmonitored using the plate lysimeters located at a depth of 5 cm. The collection periodfor the first time that percolation water is collected following snowmelt starts in thespring when the ground is no longer frozen. The amount of water percolating down todifferent depths in the soil is determined by a number of factors:1) The amount of water falling on the forest floor as rain or snow. In a treestand, this is the amount of stand throughfall.2) Some of the water in stand throughfall is lost from the snow cover duringthe winter through evaporation directly from the snow surface. This can beespecially high during spring when, even though the air temperature is belowfreezing point, solar radiation causes the sublimation of ice directly intowater vapour that is released into the atmosphere.3) Some of the water (as snow) falling on the forest floor is lost during snowmeltin the form of horizontal runoff out of the stand. This can be considerableif the ground immediately below the melting snow cover is still frozen,thus preventing the water from passing down into the soil.4) During the period extending from spring to autumn, a variable proportion ofthe water falling onto the forest floor is recyled back into the atmospherethough the uptake of water by the tree stand and ground vegetation (asevapo-transpiration). The plate lysimeters are located below the organiclayer, which is the layer in the soil that contains the highest proportion ofplant roots.5) Some of the water (as rain) that collects on the surface of the ground vegetationduring the snowfree period may evaporate directly into the atmosphere,especially during warm periods.

786) During the summer especially, the intensity (amount) of stand throughfallstrongly affects the amount of percolation water: high precipitation eventsresult in more percolation water owing to the proportionally smaller amountof water lost through evapo-transpiration.In addition to the abovementioned natural factors, there are also technical problemsduring the snowmelt period: the capacity (volume) of the bottles used to collect the watersamples may not always be sufficient to hold all the water running out of the platelysimeters. Under such conditions, the amount of percolation water will be underestimated.On plot FIP10 there are also problems in the spring with an excessively highwater table and inundation by sea water; the plot is located only a few meters above sealevel.Posiva's field personnel collects the samples and the chemical analyses are carried outin the laboratory of the Finnish Forest Research Institute, Rovaniemi Research Station.Monitoring of soil solution started in FIP4 on October 20, 2003, and in FIP10 on May24, 2005. The results are reported annually in a memo.Table B-4. Soil solution sampling design. FIP11 has been established, but it was notyet in use in 2006.FIP4 FIP10 FIP11Lysimeter layout 4 clusters Systematic layout Systematic layoutDepth Plate lysimeters Suction-cuplysimetersNumber Plate lysimeters Suction-cuplysimetersLitterfall Sampling5 cm10, 20 and 30 cm2 replications/cluster = 81/cluster at each depth= 125 cm20 and 30 cm1212 at each depth = 245 cm10, 20 and 30 cm812 at each depth= 36The amount and chemical composition of litterfall in the stands is monitored using 12litterfall collectors located on sub-plot OA2 (Fig B-5).

79Figure B-5. Litterfall samplers (green) and a deposition collector used in snowfreeperiod (orange). Photo by Reija Haapanen (May 2007).Nutrient Status of the TreesTen pines on FIP4 and ten spruces on FIP10 have been selected around sub-plot OA2for monitoring the nutrient status of the trees. Because a new electric power line wasconstructed through plot FIP4, seven pines were changed in 2004. Four spruces werechanged due to their unsuitable location in 2005. Needle samples have now been collectedfour times from FIP4, and three times from FIP10. Needle sampling is repeatedannually in winter, until the major construction works on the island have been finished.Tree GrowthTree characteristics will be measured every fifth year. In addition, the diameter growthof two trees on sub-plot OA2 of both FIP plots is being measured continuously withgirth bands (Fig. 26).Stand MicrometeorologyStand meteorological measurements are recorded once an hour in OA2. The parametersare air temperature, minimum and maximum temperature inside the crown layer andabove the canopy, relative humidity, precipitation (1 m above ground level), soil moisturecontent, and soil temperature. Depth of ground frost and the thickness of the snowcover are measured manually on FIP4. Photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), solarradiation, air pressure, wind speed and its direction are measured only on FIP4.

81APPENDIX C: RESULTS FROM RADIONUCLIDE MONITORING IN 2006Results from the radionuclide monitoring from the year 2006 are presented in this Appendix.In the data tables the uncertainty of the measurement is shown in the column onthe right-hand side of the activity concentration as a percentage of the concentration.The uncertainties reported do not include the uncertainty arising out of the samplingmethod and practice. For sampling periods longer than one day, the starting and endingdates are reported. Activity concentrations are decay-corrected to correspond with themiddle of the sampling period. The dates have been printed as day.month notations, e.g.1.3 is March 1. For sampling periods started in 2005 or ended in 2007 the year is alsogiven: 1.3.05. Measurement results below the minimum detectable activity (MDA) aremarked with the symbol < in the tables. Lost and contaminated samples are indicated. Ifno mark has been presented in the data table cell, gammanuclides have not been detectedin significant amounts in the sample.Table C-1. Radionuclides in deposition in 2006, Bq/m 2 . Tritium (H-3) deposition inrainwater in RNM03-DC2 and RNM06-DC2 was below detectable limits in all samples.Location Start date End date Be-7 ±% Cs-137 ±% Sr-90 ±%RNM02-DC1 29.12.05 29.3. 62 10 0.31 44 -30.3. 28.6. 24.7 10 0.087 20 -28.6. 27.9. 219 6 0.75 18 -2.10. 27.12. 273 10 0.36 60 -RNM03-DC1 29.12.05 29.3. 56 8 0.26 38 -30.3. 28.6. 28.2 12 0.099 24 -28.6. 27.9. 201 10 0.65 34 -2.10. 27.12. 410 14 0.41 28 -RNM04-DC1 29.12.05 29.3. 63 10 0.22 40 -30.3. 28.6. 29.0 20 0.11 20 -28.6. 27.9. 160 6 0.38 20 -2.10. 27.12. 380 14 0.53 24 -RNM06-DC1 29.12.05 1.2. 35 6 0.086 12 0.080 1 401.2. 1.3. 14 10 0.054 221.3. 29.3. 17 6 0.055 1830.3. 26.4. 78 6 0.088 14 0.03 2 161.5. 1.6. 102 6 0.51 61.6. 28.6. 59 6 0.56 628.6. 2.8. 38 6 0.34 6 < 32.8. 30.8. 69 12 0.24 1430.8. 27.9. 47 12 0.12 162.10. 1.11. 136 6 0.26 6

Table C-2. Radionuclides in air in 2006, Bq/m 3 .Location Start date End d. Be-7 ±% Cs-137 ±% Mn-54 ±% Co-60 ±%RNM04 4.1. 18.1. 1800 8 1.5 34 - --AS1 18.1. 1.2. 2500 11 1.3 52 - -1.2. 15.2. 2300 9 2.9 22 - -15.2. 1.3. 1700 7 3.5 12 - -1.3. 15.3. 1900 6 4.3 14 - -15.3. 29.3. 1800 20 2.5 24 - -29.3. 12.4. 1200 9 1.4 38 <

Table C-2 cont'd. Radionuclides in air in 2006, Bq/m 3 .Location Start date End d. Be-7 ±% Cs-137 ±% Mn-60 ±% Co-60 ±%RNM07 4.1. 18.1. 2000 11 1.7 36 - --AS1 18.1. 1.2. 2700 9 1.2 28 - -1.2. 15.2. 2400 8 2.5 16 - -16.5. 1.3. 1600 11 1.5 44 - -1.3. 15.3. 2100 20 4.1 22 - -15.3. 29.3. 1700 7 1.6 24 - -29.3. 12.4. 1200 8 0.9 44 <

84Table C-3. Radionuclides in milk in 2006, Bq/dm 3 .Location Start date End date Sr-90 ±% I-131 ±% K-40 ±% Cs-137 ±%TMA26 1.1. 29.1. - < a 49 6 0.28 125.2. 26.2. - < b 48 12 0.32 205.3. 26.3. - < c 48 6 0.54 82.4. 30.4. - < d 53 8 0.49 67.5. 28.5. - < e 51 6 0.33 104.6. 25.6. - < f 50 8 0.34 122.7. 30.7. - < g 53 14 0.44 166.8. 27.8. - < h 49 8 0.44 83.9. 24.9. - < i 51 8 0.67 81.10. 29.10. -

85Table C-4. Radionuclides in food in 2006, Bq/kgDW.Type LocationSamplingdate Sr-90 ±% Be-7 ±% K-40 ±% Cs-134 ±% Cs-137 ±%Beef TMA28 21.4. - - 84 5 - 0.86 524.10. - - 285 4 - 1.74 7Blackcurrant TMA31 10.8. - 3.6 34 530 14 < 1.22 20Lettuce TMA49 10.8. - 200 10 1980 8 < 2.4 287.9. - 101 10 1790 8 < 14.3 10Table C-5. Radionuclides in drinking water in 2006, Bq/m 3 .Location Sampl. date H-3 ±% Sr-90 ±% K-40 ±% Cs-137 ±%RNM05-DW1 9.1.

86Table C-7. Radionuclides in fish in 2006, Bq/kgFW.Species Location Start date End date K-40 ±% Sr-90 ±% Cs-134 ±% Cs-137 ±%Perch FIA11 9.5. 25.5. 113 14 - - 22.8 12FIA11 17.8. 8.9 125 14 0.36 14 - 17.9 12FIA12 12.5. 28.5. 99 8 - - 29.5 8FIA12 27.8. 23.10. 125 14 - - 22.3 12Pike FIA11 9.5. 25.5. 118 8 - - 18.7 8FIA11 15.9. 15.10. 116 6 - - 18.5 8FIA12 12.5. 28.5. 128 20 - - 18.0 20FIA12 17.8. 23.10. 126 14 - - 17.1 12Baltic FIA12 12.5. 28.5. 117 8 - - 6.6 6herring FIA11 17.8. 8.9. 129 6 0.022 18 - 6.9 8FIA12 8.11. 9.11. 140 8 - - 9.7 6Roach FIA11 9.5. 25.5. 110 8 - - 4.7 8FIA12 12.5. 28.5. 102 6 - - 6.9 8FIA11 17.8. 8.9. 105 8 - - 10.4 8FIA12 17.8. 8.9. 119 14 - - 6.7 12Table C-8. Radionuclides in seawater in 2006, Bq/m 3 , except for H-3, Bq/l.Sampl. date H-3 ±% Sr-90 ±% K-40 ±% Cs-137 ±%SEA11 16.3. 58 12 11.2 14 2050 10 46 10SEA11 11.5. 12.5 13 10.5 16 2010 10 51 10SEA11 19.7.

Table C-9. Radionuclides in sea indicators and suspended matter in 2006, Bq/kgDW.Type Loc. Sampling date Be-7 ±% K-40 ±% Mn-54 ±% Co-58 ±% Co-60 ±% Sr-90 ± % Sr-89 ±% Cs-137 ±% Pu-238 ±%Pu-239,240 ±%Bladder- SBP02 11.5. 31 10 730 10 < 0 - 1.13 12 - - 39 10 - -wrack SBP02 10.8. 18.5 10 680 10 .25 54 0.11 56 1.57 10 6.9 12 - 31 10 < 0.037 36SBP01 11.5. 29.2 10 660 10 < - 0.43 16 - - 37 8 - -SBP01 10.8. 16.8 12 630 10 < < 0.55 18 - - 23.8 8 - -SBP03 10.5. 14.2 12 740 10 < - < - - 28.4 10 - -SBP03 9.8. 15.1 14 760 8 < < < 5.4 12 - 26.2 8 < 0.034 36SEA16 10.5. 10.1 12 620 10 < - < - - 27.2 10 - -SEA16 9.8. 16.5 14 720 10 < < < - - 24.9 10 - -SBP04 11.5. 21.6 10 740 8 < - < - - 31 8 - -SBP04 9.8. 14.2 14 730 10 < < < - - 27.1 10 - -Green alga SBP02 10.8. 75 12 1240 10 < < < - - 31 10 - -Baltic clam SEA17 18.7. - 84 14 - - - 10.1 12 3.4 24 8.7 10 - -Blue mussel SBP02 19.7. - 74 26 - - - - - 2.16 30 - -Suspended SEA03 9.11.05-10.5. 229 14 760 8 - - 2.61 22 - - 360 8 - -matter SEA03 10.5.-27.6 330 20 550 20 - - < - - 213 20 - -SEA03 27.6-7.9. 340 10 680 10 - - 2.21 30 - - 295 6 - -SEA03 7.9.-24.10. 400 6 710 8 - - 1.95 18 - - 298 6 - -SEA20 11.11.05-9.5. 241 20 800 20 - - 0.85 36 - - 380 20 0.032* 56 1.18* 14SEA20 9.5.-27.6. 295 20 620 20 - - < - - 237 20 - -SEA20 27.6.-6.9. 210 14 820 14 - - < - - 370 12 - -SEA20 6.9.-26.10. 380 14 800 14 - - 0.78 46 - - 360 12 - -SEA15 9.11.05-9.5. 173 14 690 8 - - 1.86 24 - . 340 6 - -SEA15 9.5.-27.6. 235 16 520 12 - - < - < 237 10 - -SEA15 27.6.-6.9. 300 14 720 14 - - 1.95 32 - - 360 14 - -SEA15 6.9.25.10. 360 14 740 14 - - 2.72 28 - - 370 14SEA18 10.11.05-10.5. 271 10 740 8 - - 3.5 12 - - 400 6 0.084* 36 1.12* 14SEA18 10.5.-27.6. 281 16 560 12 - - < - - 232 10 - -SEA18 27.6.-6.9. 300 14 690 14 - - 1.59 40 - - 320 12 - -SEA18 6.9.-24.10. 360 6 600 8 - - 5.6 12 - - 340 6 - -*Results for 10.11.05-24.10.0687

APPENDIX D. RESULTS FROM SOIL MICROBE STUDY IN 2006Table D-1. Thickness of the organic layer, pH, organic matter content (OM), C/N ratio, concentrations and amounts of ammonium andtotal N and dissolved N and C compounds (DON, DOC), microbial biomass C and N (Cmic , Nmic ), ergosterol and net N mineralisation inthe organic layer of each sampling point (Potila et al. 2007).Sample1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10PlotMRK8 MRK8 MRK6 MRK6 MRK1 MRK1 FIP4 FIP4 FIP10 FIP10Thickness, cm 39.6 42.2 41.5 57.8 97.5 81.8 31.2 27.8 107 69.4pH, H 2 O 4.20 4.20 3.84 4.17 4.27 3.88 3.99 4.08 3.93 3.95pH, CaCl 3.71 3.66 3.37 3.74 3.77 3.31 3.40 3.58 3.45 3.48OM, % 86.5 76.6 82.2 81.0 71.4 70.3 83.4 72.6 90.4 80.6C to N ratio 28.9 28.8 23.8 20.7 25.6 27.4 33.4 27.6 24.9 22.8NH 4 -N, mg g -1 OM 0.062 0.010 0.025 0.017 0.008 0.009 0.017 0.028 0.005 0.006g m -2 0.289 0.051 0.143 0.178 0.091 0.080 0.058 0.086 0.073 0.063TOT-N, mg g -1 OM 0.197 0.132 0.145 0.093 0.068 0.092 0.138 0.240 0.065 0.106g m -2 0.916 0.648 0.839 0.947 0.814 0.848 0.463 0.737 0.964 1.041DON, mg g -1 OM 0.135 0.122 0.120 0.075 0.060 0.083 0.121 0.212 0.060 0.010g m -2 0.627 0.598 0.696 0.769 0.723 0.767 0.405 0.651 0.891 0.978DOC, mg g -1 OM 1.59 1.39 1.20 1.06 0.832 0.960 1.35 3.32 0.873 1.39g m -2 7.41 6.81 6.97 10.83 10.04 8.86 4.54 10.22 13.01 13.65C mic, mg g -1 OM 12.59 13.18 12.01 8.89 11.93 9.25 10.03 11.75 9.75 7.24g m -2 58.7 64.8 69.7 90.7 143.8 85.3 33.7 36.1 145.3 70.9N mic, mg g -1 OM 1.013 0.938 1.016 0.711 0.695 0.786 0.793 0.990 0.536 0.580g m -2 4.72 4.61 5.89 7.25 8.38 7.25 2.66 3.04 7.98 5.68ergosterol, µg g -1 OM 421 422 509 369 463 369 868 696 306 405g m -2 1.96 2.08 2.95 3.76 5.58 3.40 2.91 2.14 4.56 3.97Net N min., mg kg -1 OM d -1 3.11 1.39 3.99 3.39 0.28 0.60 0.42 1.26 0.58 0.76mg m -2 d -1 14.5 6.84 23.1 34.5 3.43 5.54 1.40 3.88 8.60 7.4689

91APPENDIX E. BULK PRECIPITATION AND STAND THROUGHFALL IN2004-2006In this Appendix the annual bulk precipitation and stand throughfall results for theMRK plots are given for the years 2004 - 2006. Original data has been presented in amemo by Antti-Jussi Lindroos and John Derome (Finnish Forest Research Institute).Precipitation collection on MRK9 was started on 20.4.2004, and on MRK10 on23.5.2005. Reference values for Forest Focus/ICP Forests plots at Juupajoki andTammela are given for comparison when possible.Table E-1. Annual precipitation in the open (MRK2, MRK7 and MRK9) and annualstand throughfall (MRK1, MRK3, MRK4, MRK5, MRK6, MRK8 and MRK10) in 2004-2006. NM = no measurements covering the whole year.Annual precipitation(mm)Plot 2004 2005 2006MRK2 659 517 586MRK7 604 464 535MRK9 NM 385 484632 491* 535MeanMRK1 460 393 394MRK3 397 324 347MRK4 (FIP4) 381 303 364MRK5 381 374 396MRK6 409 365 380MRK8 362 320 373MRK10 (FIP10) NM NM 404Mean 398 347 380*excluding plot MRK9Open areaStand throughfallTable E-2. Interception of precipitation by the tree canopies during 2004-2006.Interception was calculated as: (annual precipitation in the open) – (stand throughfall)/ (annual precipitation in the open) x 100, and expressed as %. NM = no measurementscovering the whole year.PlotYear MRK1 MRK3 MRK4 MRK5 MRK6 MRK8 MRK10 Mean2004 27% 37% 40% 40% 35% 43% NM 37%2005 20% 34% 38% 24% 26% 29% NM 28%2006 26% 35% 32% 26% 29% 30% 24% 29%

Table E-3. Annual amount of precipitation, pH and annual bulk deposition of DOC (dissolved organic carbon), Na, NH 4 -N, K, Mg, Ca, Cl, NO 3 -N, SO 4 -S and Ntot (total nitrogen) measured in open areas (MRK2, MRK7 and MRK9) on Olkiluoto in 2004-2006. NM = no measurements coveringthe whole year.YearPlot Precip. pH DOC Na NH 4 -N K Mg Ca Cl NO 3 -N SO 4 -S Ntotmm 25º C mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 22004 MRK2 659 5.1 1481 363 119 195 73 189 530 175 222 3772005 MRK2 517 5.4 1030 212 175 104 47 195 325 170 188 4392006 MRK2 586 5.1 944 188 114 87 62 145 278 163 162 3282004 MRK7 604 5.0 894 269 127 160 78 183 390 167 202 3442005 MRK7 464 5.3 745 183 118 75 46 148 284 146 153 2932006 MRK7 535 5.1 921 179 94 120 73 165 256 159 158 2982004 MRK9 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM2005 MRK9 385 5.1 695 150 112 84 38 134 245 128 134 2902006 MRK9 484 5.1 697 187 85 67 63 158 274 147 142 2632004 Mean 632 5.1 1188 316 123 178 75 186 460 171 212 3612005 Mean 491 5.3 823 182 135 88 44 159 285 148 158 3412006 Mean 535 5.1 854 185 98 91 66 156 269 156 154 296Juupajoki 1998- Mean 673 4.9 1501 99 157 44 15 68 104 182 241 372Tammela 2000 Mean 669 4.9 1533 173 169 40 24 74 213 209 253 417Juupajoki 2004 640 4.8 895 96 100 43 28 92 120 131 168 278Tammela 2004 758 4.8 998 175 139 49 41 131 216 197 212 359Olkiluoto92

Table E-4. Annual amount of precipitation, pH and annual deposition of DOC (dissolved organic carbon), Na, NH 4 -N, K, Mg, Ca, Cl, NO 3 -N,SO 4 -S and Ntot (total nitrogen) inside the stand (stand throughfall) on MRK1, MRK3, MRK4, MRK5, MRK6, MRK8 and MRK10 on Olkiluoto in2004-2006. NM = no measurements covering the whole year.Year Plot Precip. pH DOC Na NH 4 -N K Mg Ca Cl NO 3 -N SO 4 -S Ntotmm 25º C mg/m2 mg/m2 mg/m2 mg/m2 mg/m2 mg/m2 mg/m2 mg/m2 mg/m2 mg/m22004 MRK1 460 4.9 4425 315 48 398 82 195 466 114 202 2252005 MRK1 393 4.9 3276 255 99 355 69 262 400 134 195 2652006 MRK1 394 4.9 4210 251 62 518 88 190 399 102 154 2142004 MRK3 397 4.9 4074 348 45 472 97 220 546 110 202 2182005 MRK3 324 5.2 3238 293 45 416 80 252 492 136 185 2552006 MRK3 347 5.1 3917 336 28 666 107 203 601 129 183 2252004 MRK4 381 4.6 5736 503 35 609 111 244 827 108 246 2522005 MRK4 303 4.9 4047 385 43 482 87 231 661 159 220 2942006 MRK4 364 4.8 5041 444 17 672 111 205 764 123 225 2362004 MRK5 381 5.1 5300 424 70 848 96 212 704 84 272 2912005 MRK5 374 5.2 3916 380 40 638 94 258 643 126 247 2672006 MRK5 396 5.3 5307 417 55 1086 125 255 730 106 272 2662004 MRK6 409 5.4 3839 466 80 1121 86 195 883 120 289 3032005 MRK6 365 5.4 3144 413 32 829 87 215 801 149 245 2712006 MRK6 380 5.5 4278 416 24 1165 99 193 770 115 242 2742004 MRK8 362 5.0 6776 703 29 1244 126 305 1295 95 406 2862005 MRK8 320 5.0 4572 593 51 850 113 295 1131 179 365 3802006 MRK8 373 5.3 5764 437 39 1272 112 256 900 133 315 3432004 MRK10 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM2005 MRK10 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM NM2006 MRK10 404 5.2 5957 402 55 1089 107 236 728 142 244 3762004 Mean 398 5.0 5025 460 51 782 99 229 787 105 269 2622005 Mean 347 5.1 3699 386 52 595 88 252 688 147 243 2892006 Mean 380 5.2 4925 386 40 924 107 220 699 121 234 276Juupajoki 1998- Mean 545 4.8 5321 173 84 316 44 140 205 136 255 297Tammela 2000 Mean 519 4.8 5813 263 68 507 78 239 397 171 319 346Juupajoki 2004 515 4.6 4693 160 59 326 49 148 225 94 181 239Tammela 2004 541 4.6 5725 214 79 460 53 166 315 113 216 264Olkiluoto93

94Table E-5. Annual bulk deposition of PO 4 -P, Al, Fe, Mn, Cu, Zn and Si in open areas(MRK2, MRK7 and MRK9) and inside the stand (stand throughfall; MRK1, MRK3,MRK4, MRK5, MRK6, MRK8 and MRK10) on Olkiluoto in 2004-2006. NM = no measurementscovering the whole year.YearPlot PO 4 -P Al Fe Mn Cu Zn Simg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m2 mg/m 2 mg/m 22004 MRK2 18 32 10 6 11 9 162005 MRK2 18 25 10 4 8 5 142006 MRK2 8 30 7 2 9 6 142004 MRK7 11 30 6 3 10 6 142005 MRK7 7 23 6 3 7 5 142006 MRK7 7 27 6 3 9 7 132004 MRK9 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM2005 MRK9 9 20 7 3 6 5 102006 MRK9 7 25 5 2 8 5 112004 Mean 15 31 8 4 10 8 152005 Mean 12 23 8 3 7 5 132006 Mean 7 27 6 2 9 6 13Year Plot PO 4 -P Al Fe Mn Cu Zn Simg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m 2 mg/m2 mg/m 2 mg/m 22004 MRK1 26 23 11 30 7 8 232005 MRK1 8 19 11 24 6 6 232006 MRK1 18 21 9 30 6 7 182004 MRK3 35 20 15 18 6 9 332005 MRK3 14 19 14 14 5 7 322006 MRK3 23 20 14 18 6 8 362004 MRK4 7 19 9 29 6 9 262005 MRK4 6 19 11 20 5 6 292006 MRK4 5 21 9 23 6 8 272004 MRK5 54 19 14 39 6 10 382005 MRK5 31 19 18 33 6 7 492006 MRK5 68 21 20 38 6 11 532004 MRK6 16 20 5 31 7 10 252005 MRK6 7 19 9 31 6 6 312006 MRK6 8 19 8 24 6 8 352004 MRK8 30 18 15 46 6 14 552005 MRK8 21 16 14 42 5 8 422006 MRK8 55 19 13 41 6 10 372004 MRK10 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM2005 MRK10 NM NM NM NM NM NM NM2006 MRK10 17 20 10 20 6 10 272004 Mean 28 20 12 32 6 10 332005 Mean 15 19 13 27 6 6 342006 Mean 28 20 12 28 6 9 33

95APPENDIX F. SOIL SOLUTION RESULTS IN FIP PLOTS IN 2004-2006In this appendix the results of soil solution monitoring from years 2004, 2005 and 2006are presented. Original data was reported in a memo by John Derome, of the FinnishForest Research Institute. The collection period for the first time that percolation wateris collected following snowmelt starts in the spring following snowmelt when theground is no longer frozen. In the tables subscript denotes the standard error of themean. Values marked with a “

96Table F-3. Mean pH and dissolved organic carbon (DOC, mg/l) concentrations in soilsolution collected at depths of 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm in the Scots pine stand at Olkiluotoduring the snowfree period in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Reference values are from a Scotspine stand in Tammela.FIP4 Ref. FIP4 Ref.Depth 2004 2005 2006 1998-20002005 2005 2006 1998-2000cm pH pH pH pH DOC DOC DOC DOC5 4.23 0.07 4.12 0.04 4.32 0.11 4.31 0.03 119.4 10.2 114.7 8.1 99.9 8.4 60.5 4.510 4.93 0.07 5.01 0.05 4.67 0.30 136.0 39.1 60.7 12.4 78.3 20.520 5.19 0.04 5.18 0.05 5.22 0.06 4.90 0.08 40.5 9.4 28.1 2.5 38.3 9.4 29.0 4.230 5.51 0.06 5.24 0.11 5.38 0.08 33.4 9.7 19.9 1.9 34.5 10.340 5.15 0.11 24.4 3.6Table F-4. Mean pH and dissolved organic carbon (DOC, mg/l) concentrations in soilsolution collected at depths of 5, 20 and 30 cm in the Norway spruce stand at Olkiluotoduring the snowfree period in 2005 and 2006. Reference values are from a Norwayspruce stand in Tammela.FIP10 Reference FIP10 ReferenceDepth 2005 2006 1998-2000 2005 2006 1998-2000cm pH pH pH DOC DOC DOC5 4.81 0.35 4.69 0.19 4.16 0.02 129.7 36.7 125.4 14.4 33.0 1.81020 5.41 0.12 5.19 0.21 4.51 0.03 77.0 6.9 60.6 2.9 24.1 4.630 5.60 0.19 5.36 0.25 59.8 14.9 50.9 5.940 4.69 0.03 4.5 0.2Table F-5. Mean total nitrogen (Ntot, mg/l) and ammonium (NH 4 -N, mg/l)concentrations in soil solution collected at depths of 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm in the Scotspine stand at Olkiluoto during the snowfree period in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Referencevalues are from a Scots pine stand in Tammela.FIP4 Ref. FIP4 Ref.Depth 2004 2005 2006 1998-20002004 2005 2006 1998-2000cm Ntot Ntot Ntot Ntot NH 4 -N NH 4 -N NH 4 -N NH 4 -N5 3.51 0..34 2.76 0.20 2.52 0.20 1.85 0.14 0.37 0.09 0.21 0.04 0.48 0.19 0.26 0.0510 2.21 0.19 1.58 0.42 1.77 0.60 0.08 0.06 0.12 0.07 0.06 0.0220 1.03 0.25 0.61 0.05 1.61 0.99 1.62 0.28 0.11 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.59 0.1630 0.64 0.06 0.41 0.09 0.62 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.0040 1.12 0.30 0.43 0.18Table F-6. Mean total nitrogen (Ntot, mg/l) and ammonium (NH 4 -N, mg/l)concentrations in soil solution collected at depths of 5, 20 and 30 cm in the Norwayspruce stand at Olkiluoto during the snowfree period in 2005 and 2006. Referencevalues are from a Norway spruce stand in Tammela.FIP10 Reference FIP10 ReferenceDepth 2005 2006 1998-2000 2005 2006 1998-2000cm Ntot Ntot Ntot NH 4 -N NH 4 -N NH 4 -N5 6.40 1.64 4.86 0.60 1.08 0.08 1.68 0.39 0.36 0.12 0.30 0.061020 2.52 0.51 1.48 0.03 0.97 0.30 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.19 0.0530 1.78 0.75 1.37 0.17 0.10 0.22 0.04 0.0140 0.30 0.02 0.10 0.01

97Table F-7. Mean nitrate (NO 3 -N, mg/l) and sulphate (SO 4 -S, mg/l) concentrations insoil solution collected at depths of 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm in the Scots pine stand at Olkiluotoduring the snowfree period in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Reference values are from aScots pine stand in Tammela.FIP4 Ref. FIP4 Ref.Depth 2004 2005 2006 1998-20002004 2005 2006 1998-2000cm NO 3 -N NO 3 -N NO 3 -N NO 3 -N SO 4 -S SO 4 -S SO 4 -S SO 4 -S5 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.01

98Table F-11. Mean calcium (Ca, mg/l) and magnesium (Mg, mg/l) concentrations in soilsolution collected at depths of 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm in the Scots pine stand at Olkiluotoduring the snowfree period in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Reference values are from a Scotspine stand in Tammela.FIP4 Ref. FIP4 Ref.Depth 2004 2005 2006 1998-20002004 2005 2006 1998-2000cm Ca Ca Ca Ca Mg Mg Mg Mg5 4.84 0.65 5.74 0.67 4.33 0.52 3.40 0.19 0.58 0.06 0.74 0.10 0.73 0.09 0.40 0.0210 6.99 2.91 3.92 1.39 3.06 0.41 2.36 1.23 1.07 0.27 0.95 0.1420 3.74 0.73 2.25 0.10 2.41 0.11 2.15 0.18 1.35 0.18 0.79 0.04 0.96 0.05 0.39 0.0330 3.42 0.96 1.97 0.11 2.56 0.21 1.15 0.25 0.79 0.04 0.95 0.0140 2.16 0.15 0.34 0.02Table F-12. Mean calcium (Ca, mg/l) and magnesium (Mg, mg/l) concentrations in soilsolution collected at depths of 5, 20 and 30 cm in the Norway spruce stand at Olkiluotoduring the snowfree period in 2005 and 2006. Reference values are from a Norwayspruce stand in Tammela.FIP10 Ref. FIP10 Ref.Depth 2005 2006 1998-2000 2005 2006 1998-2000cm Ca Ca Ca Mg Mg Mg5 6.9 1.7 8.6 1.0 0.8 0.1 1.73 0.29 2.33 0.36 0.42 0.041020 13.1 0.5 11.8 0.9 1.2 0.1 4.91 0.52 4.54 0.71 0.54 0.0330 14.0 1.2 11.9 0.3 5.04 0.44 4.46 0.3440 1.1 0.0 0.45 0.02Table F-13. Mean potassium (K, mg/l) and sodium (Na, mg/l) concentrations in soilsolution collected at depths of 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm in the Scots pine stand at Olkiluotoduring the snowfree period in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Reference values are from a Scotspine stand in Tammela.FIP4 Ref. FIP4 Ref.Depth 2004 2005 2006 1998-20002004 2005 2006 1998-2000cm K K K K Na Na Na Na5 3.95 0.44 2.28 0.52 6.98 1.21 1.44 0.27 1.17 0.11 1.39 0.14 1.71 0.13 0.70 0.0410 4.78 0.86 2.73 1.17 2.15 0.84 3.63 1.01 3.93 0.96 3.38 0.4820 2.10 0.42 0.94 0.07 0.98 0.11 1.65 0.25 3.73 0.26 4.05 0.29 3.36 0.39 1.06 0.0830 1.79 0.63 0.70 0.06 1.50 0.84 5.41 0.84 4.15 0.24 3.42 0.2040 0.99 0.18 1.07 0.07Table F-14. Mean potassium (K, mg/l) and sodium (Na, mg/l) concentrations in soilsolution collected at depths of 5, 20 and 30 cm in the Norway spruce stand at Olkiluotoduring the snowfree period in 2005 and 2006. Reference values are from a Norwayspruce stand in Tammela.FIP10 Ref. FIP10 Ref.Depth 2005 2006 1998-2000 2005 2006 1998-2000cm K K K Na Na Na5 7.07 0.71 8.52 1.84 0.42 0.07 3.3 0.8 4.9 0.9 1.33 0.101020 1.63 0.05 1.67 0.12 1.54 0.57 17.8 1.1 15.2 1.5 2.89 0.5530 1.94 0.58 1.51 0.07 17.5 1.6 15.1 0.940 0.23 0.03 2.51 0.12

99Table F-15. Mean total aluminium (Altot, mg/l) and monomeric aluminium (Al 3+ , mg/l)concentrations in soil solution collected at depths of 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm in the Scotspine stand at Olkiluoto during the snowfree period in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Referencevalues are from a Scots pine stand in Tammela.FIP4 Ref. FIP4 Ref.Depth 2004 2005 2006 1998-20002004 2005 2006 1998-2000cm Altot Altot Altot Altot Al 3+ Al 3+ Al 3+ Al 3+5 0.85 0.10 0.77 0.07 0.63 0.06 0.75 0.05

100Table F-19. Mean silicon (Si, mg/l) concentrations in soil solution collected at depthsof 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm in the Scots pine stand at Olkiluoto during the snowfree period in2004, 2005 and 2006. Reference values are from a Scots pine stand in Tammela.FIP4Ref.Depth 2004 2005 2006 1998-2000cm Si Si Si Si5 0.85 0.11 1.63 0.17 1.74 0.23 0.80 0.0410 2.65 0.56 6.14 1.07 6.94 1.1720 8.76 0.41 8.02 0.56 6.35 0.78 2.92 0.2430 7.84 0.60 7.64 0.41 5.21 0.9940 2.92 0.26Table F-20. Mean silicon (Si, mg/l) concentrations in soil solution collected at depthsof 5, 20 and 30 cm in the Norway spruce stand at Olkiluoto during the snowfree periodin 2005 and 2006. Reference values are from a Norway spruce stand in Tammela.FIP10Ref.Depth 2005 2006 1998-2000cm Si Si Si5 4.6 0.6 5.3 0.7 2.97 0.141020 10.8 0.6 10.5 1.0 3.67 0.2430 10.6 0.7 10.8 1.040 3.92 0.08Table F-21. Mean copper (Cu, mg/l) and zinc (Zn, mg/l) concentrations in soil solutioncollected at depths of 5, 10, 20 and 30 cm in the Scots pine stand at Olkiluoto during thesnowfree period in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Reference values are from a Scots pine standin Tammela.FIP4 Ref. FIP4 Ref.Depth 2004 2005 2006 1998-20002004 2005 2006 1998-2000cm Cu Cu Cu Cu Zn Zn Zn Zn5

APPENDIX G. BIOMASS OF FIP SUB-PLOTS IN 2006In this appendix the biomass estimates of FIP plots are presented (original data by Lasse Aro and Timo Kareinen (FFRI).Table G-1. Biomass distribution (kg/m 2 ) in Scots pine stands by sub-plot on FIP4. Coarse roots > 2mm, fine roots < 2mm.CompartmentBranches RootsSubplotNeedles Living Dead Stem Bark Stump Coarse Fine Total1 0.57 2.08 0.30 8.68 0.67 1.02 1.65 0.13 15.102 0.57 2.00 0.32 9.89 0.75 1.07 1.72 0.19 16.503 0.60 2.10 0.34 10.13 0.78 1.09 1.76 0.11 16.904 0.54 1.91 0.31 9.13 0.70 0.10 1.60 0.13 15.32Mean 0.57 2.02 0.32 9.46 0.73 1.04 1.68 0.14 15.96Table G-2. Biomass distribution (kg/m 2 ) by sub-plot and by tree species on FIP10. Coarse roots > 2mm, fine roots < 2mm.101CompartmentBranches RootsSub-plot(species)Needles Living Dead Stem Bark Stump Coarse Fine Leaves Total1 (Norway spruce) 1.58 4.17 0.38 13.83 1.11 1.34 2.68 0.40 25.481 (Birch) 0.97 0.02 4.05 0.65 0.34 0.54 0.07 0.13 6.772 (Norway spruce) 1.78 4.74 0.43 15.86 1.26 1.56 3.08 0.46 29.162 (Birch) 1.13 0.02 4.65 0.74 0.39 0.62 0.08 0.15 7.783 (Norway spruce) 2.07 5.50 0.54 19.46 1.52 1.82 3.66 0.53 35.133 (Birch) 0.76 0.02 3.18 0.51 0.26 0.41 0.05 0.11 5.304 (Norway spruce) 1.25 3.37 0.27 9.61 0.80 0.98 1.96 0.32 18.554 (Birch) 1.12 0.03 4.34 0.70 0.38 0.60 0.08 0.16 7.41Mean (Norway spruce) 1.67 4.45 0.40 14.69 1.17 1.43 2.84 0.43 27.08Mean (Birch) 0.10 0.02 4.05 0.65 0.34 0.54 0.07 0.14 6.81

102

103APPENDIX H. LITTERFALL PRODUCTION ON FIP PLOTS IN 2004-2005In this appendix the litterfall production estimates of FIP plots are presented (originaldata by Lasse Aro and Timo Kareinen (FFRI).Table H-1. Litterfall production (g/m 2 ) on the FIP plots by sampling occasions (date) in2004 and 2005.Litter fraction 1)Plot Year Date 1 2 3 4 5 TotalFIP4 2004 29 June 1.186 0.143 0.000 0.000 4.188 5.51720 July 3.561 0.536 0.000 0.000 10.975 15.07310 Aug 4.564 0.677 0.005 0.000 16.907 22.15326 Aug 6.753 0.680 0.000 0.000 4.885 12.3198 Sep 20.485 0.516 0.000 0.000 7.410 28.41120 Sep 37.481 0.546 0.000 0.000 7.005 45.0334 Oct 11.317 0.091 0.000 0.000 0.915 12.32220 Oct 24.304 0.281 0.008 0.009 1.512 26.1145 Nov 10.200 0.088 0.003 0.000 1.145 11.436Total 119.851 3.559 0.017 0.009 54.942 178.378FIP4 2005 13 Apr 4.768 2.362 0.000 0.000 17.311 24.4419 May 0.463 0.331 0.023 0.000 4.346 5.16323 May 1.348 0.333 0.009 0.000 2.766 4.4567 June 2.731 0.749 0.020 0.000 2.302 5.8014 July 7.822 0.253 0.031 0.000 28.875 36.9814 Aug 9.160 0.487 0.001 0.000 33.032 42.68130 Aug 15.127 1.927 0.060 0.000 25.790 42.90413 Sep 20.956 3.610 0.000 0.016 15.458 40.04012 Oct 6.342 0.319 0.000 0.014 2.832 9.5079 Nov 63.468 0.966 0.057 0.043 16.974 81.507Total 132.185 11.337 0.200 0.073 149.687 293.482FIP10 2005 7 June 0.000 0.000 13.141 0.085 4.925 18.1514 July 0.000 0.000 9.690 0.321 6.870 16.8815 Aug 0.000 0.000 6.453 0.753 4.285 11.49130 Aug 0.000 0.000 6.403 1.766 11.576 19.74513 Sep 0.000 0.005 2.735 2.026 6.085 10.85012 Oct 0.007 0.000 6.651 23.843 12.431 42.9329 Nov 0.001 0.000 18.880 20.513 11.411 50.804Total 0.007 0.005 63.952 49.307 57.584 170.8541) Litter fractions: 1= pine brown needles, 2= pine green needles, 3= spruce needles, 4= leaves, 5= remaininglitter

104

105APPENDIX I. GAME STATISTICS OF 2002-2006Table I-1. Game catches (number of individuals) and population estimates at Olkiluoto.Hooded Crow is not a game bird, but is hunted for game protection reasons (it destroysnests of other birds). Table according to interview study by Satu Oja and Jyrki Oja,populations partly based on earlier estimates, summarized in Haapanen (2005). " - "=missing, "* " = before hunting season.Species 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 PopulationAmerican mink (Mustela vison) 2 8 - 9 3 >15Badger (Meles meles) 0 1 0 0 0 one pair?Brown hare (Lepus europaeus) - 1 0 2 0 10-15Moose (Alces alces) 10 - 5 7 6 16*Mountain hare (Lepus timidus) 3 2 0 2 0 20-25Muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) 0 0 0 0 0 0Pine marten (Martes martes) 0 0 0 0 0 one pair?Raccoon dog (Nyctereutes procyonoides)12 19 10 9 2 >20Red fox (Vulpes vulpes) 1 7 - 1 3 >20Red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris) 0 0 0 0 0 60-100Roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) 0 1 0 5-10 1 15-20White-tailed deer (Odocoileus - - 5 10 14 20-25*virginianus)Black grouse (Tetrao tetrix) - - 1 0 1Hazel grouse (Bonasa bonasia) - - 5 0 0Hooded crow (Corvus corone) - - 2 2 0Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) - - 18 5 10Teal (Anas crecca) - - 4 0 0Woodcock (Scolopax rusticola) - - 2 0 0

106

107APPENDIX J: RESULTS FROM MONITORING OF SEA ENVIRONMENT IN 2006Detailed result tables from monitoring of sea environment are presented in this Appendix.Table J-1. Temperatures (ºC) on water quality observation plots in 2006 in the openwater season sampling (physical-chemical; Turkki 2007). " - " = no samples.Location Depth, m 8-9 May 7-8 August 15 NovemberSEA03 0-257-10SEA05 0-25-5.5SEA06 0-257-13.5SEA07 0-257SEA08 0-258.5-9SEA09 0-257.5-8SEA10 0-257-1310.47.05.512.68.712.87.04.811.05.85.312.36.55.8---7.55.43.620.914.810.520.613.420.314.79.521.015.110.120.917.49.620.219.112.518.918.410.35.04.94.93.23.23.03.03.13.83.73.79.05.23.53.94.34.6---Table J-2. Oxygen saturation (%) of water in winter and open water season 2006(Turkki 2007). Subscript = standard deviation, " - " = no samples. Pran and Raum arereference locations in Pyhäranta and Rauma.Location Depth, m Winter Open water seasonSEA03 0-10 - 105 13SEA05 0-5.5 94 1 105 11SEA06 0-1012.5-13.595 191104 1093 15SEA07 0-7 99 1 107 10SEA08 0-9 107 6 106 11SEA09 0-8 91 4 96 10SEA10 0-1013--109 994 12Raum 435 0-1015-16--100 793 9Pran 319 15-16 97 84

108Table J-3. The concentrations of total N and NH 4 -N (µg/l) during winter and open waterseason 2006 (Turkki 2007). Subscript = standard deviation, " - " = no samples.WinterOpen water seasonLocation Depth, m Total N NH 4 -N Total N NH 4 -NSEA03 0-10 - - 360 110 8 10SEA05 0-5.5 290 7 3 2 300 40 12 2SEA06 0-1012-13.5280 63002 09290 50330 1107 88 12SEA07 0-7 290 17 3 2 310 50 14 9SEA08 0-9 290 10 4 2 320 40 8 10SEA09 0-8 360 60 29 34 390 90 15 14SEA10 0-1013----260 30240 142 02 0Table J-4. The concentrations of total P (µg/l) during winter and open water season2006 (Turkki 2007). Subscript = standard deviation, " - " = no samples.Location Depth, m Winter Open water seasonSEA03 0-10 - 17 3SEA05 0-5.5 24 1 18 5SEA06 0-1012.5-13.523 02718 420 3SEA07 0-7 24 2 18 4SEA08 0-9 23 1 20 4SEA09 0-8 25 1 38 50SEA10 0-1013--Table J-5. The concentrations of substance matter (mg/l) during winter and open waterseason 2006 (Turkki 2007). Subscript = standard deviation, " - " = no samples.15 215 1Location Depth, m Winter Open water seasonSEA03 0-10 - 3.2 2.3SEA05 0-5.5 0.5 0 2.7 1SEA06 0-1012.5-13.50.7 0.41.02.4 0.72.1 1.4SEA07 0-7 0.8 0.5 4.0 3.5SEA08 0-9 0.7 0.5 3.0 0.7SEA09 0-8 1.2 1.2 3.7 0.9SEA10 0-1013--1.8 1.01.1 0.8

109Table J-6. Species composition (% of total biomass) and total phytoplankton biomassesin location SEA08 in year 2006 ( Turkki 2007).%Species 10-Apr 24-Apr 8-May 22-May 12-Jun 10-Jul 07-Aug 25-SepCyanophyceae 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.1 38.9 20.1 0.7Cryptoph. 0.9 1.2 1.1 0.6 28.5 11.4 14.3 35.8Dinoph. 9.9 23.0 7.8 3.2 10.7 7.9 4.8 4.8Chrysoph. 0.5 0.3 0.5 3.3 19.3 4.5 4.4 0.8Prymnesioph. 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.1 0.5 3.8 15.1 1.4Bacillarioph. 81.8 63.5 81.6 77.5 10.9 4.7 6.7 18.3Euglenoph. 1.9 0.9 0.2 0.6 0.7 2.3 0.0 0.0Prasinoph. 0.5 1.6 0.8 0.1 9.0 9.9 13.8 0.7Chloroph. 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.8 4.6 5.8 3.6Monads 2.3 3.3 2.3 9.1 13.1 11.7 14.2 29.3Mesodinium 2.1 6.2 5.6 3.7 5.6 0.4 1.0 4.7Total, mg/m 3 2931.4 4728.7 4807.9 790.0 452.6 263.2 199.3 120.3Table J-7. Phytoplankton biomass and its composition in the combined samples ofsummer 2006 (12 June – 25 September; Turkki 2007). Water column 0-6 m, exceptSEA03 0-8m.SEA08mg/m 3 %SEA05mg/m 3 %SEA06mg/m 3 %SEA07mg/m 3 %SEA03mg/m 3 %Cyanophyceae 37.0 14 168.3 33 37.4 14 14.2 8 12.4 6Cryptophyceae 57.6 22 52.3 10 29.5 11 41.1 22 32.4 17Dinophyceae 21.2 8 24.2 5 15.5 6 17.6 9 15.8 8Chrysophyceae 27.2 11 43.1 9 20.0 7 14.2 8 35.4 18Bacillariophyceae 24.2 9 26.5 5 39.3 14 19.3 10 16.7 9Chlorophyceae 8.0 3 15.4 3 7.2 3 7.9 4 5.8 3Other 83.7 32 176.3 35 125.3 46 75.4 40 77.2 39Total 258.9 100 506.3 100 274.1 100 189.6 100 195.8 100Table J-8. Chlorophyll-a and primary production capacity in June-September 2006(Turkki 2007). Water column samples 0-4, 0-6, 0-8 and 0-10 m; n=4 except SEA09 andSEA10 n=3. Subscript = standard deviation. Pran and Raum are reference locations inPyhäranta and Rauma.Location Chlorophyll a, µg/l Primary production capacity, mg C/m 3. dSEA03 2.0 0.3 130 24SEA05 2.8 1.1 175 65SEA06 1.9 0.6 120 30SEA07 1.6 0.3 130 54SEA08 2.0 0.7 130 10SEA09 2.9 0.6 160 47SEA10 1.6 0.4 100 20Pran 310 2.2 120Raum 435 1.6 100

110Table J-9. Primary production (mg C/m 2. d) of phytoplankton in 2006 (Turkki 2007).Date SEA06 SEA08April 10 378 441April 24 308 527May 8 328 488May 22 225 251June 12 300 357July 10 363 375August 7 366 425September 25 214 210Mean for growing season 2006 310 384Mean for growing season 2005 238 292Mean for growing season 2004 225 275Table J-10. The numbers of species, individuals and biomass of bottom fauna in 2006by sea bottom type (Turkki 2007). Subscript = standard deviation.Sludge bottom(SEA05, 06, 08, 09)Hard bottom(SEA03, 07)Number of species 11 5 14 3Density, individuals/m 2 3730 2055 3797 528Biomass g/m 2 143.0 63 208.5 54Main species, % of individual numbers:Baltic clam (Macoma balthica) 47 51Spionid polychaetes of sp. Marenzelleria viridis 6 20Sludge worms (Tubificidae) 2 0Nemertine worm (Prostoma obscurum) 1

111APPENDIX K. WATER QUALITY IN 2006Table K-1. Chemical analyses of the samples from rock piling areas (new samplinglocations) on November 9, 2006. Original results by TVO's laboratory.Ditch water from landfill siteEP5Analysis Unit Result RSD% Result RSD%Ion balance +5.24 -12.64TDS mg/l 290 920Water type Ca-Na-Mg-So 4 -No 3 Na-Ca-HCO 3Aluminium Al mg/l 1.25 0.79

112Table K-2. Chemical analyses of samples from private wells in 2006. The wells weresampled on July 24. Original results by the Environmental Laboratory of Rauma.Analysis DWH1 DWH2 DWH3 DWH4pH 6.9±0.3 7.9±0.3 8.1±0.3 7.9±0.3Electrical conductivity +25ºC, 1400±200 5000±400 740±60 5000±400µS/cmTemp. for EC measurement, ºC 19 17.9 18 18.2Colour index, mg/l Pt 80±30 40±10 25±10 60±20Cloudiness, NTU 3.1±0.9 2.4±0.8 1.6±0.5 6.9±2.1Chloride, mg/l 360±40 1400±200 44±4 240±30Ammonia, mg/l 0.11±0.02 0.31±0.04 0.024±0.004 0.20±0.03Nitrite, mg/l 0.013±0.001