Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project ... · 2.1 SURFACE WATER QUALITY ISSUES...

Suite 201 – 1571 Bellevue Ave., West Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V7V 1A6 • Tel: 1.604.926.3261 • Fax: 1.604.926.5389 • www.hatfi eldgroup.com

Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project:Surface Water Quality Report

February 2008

Prepared for:

Coal Valley Resources Inc.Edson, Alberta

MERCOAL WEST AND YELLOWHEAD TOWER MINE EXTENSION PROJECT:

SURFACE WATER QUALITY REPORT

Prepared for:

COAL VALLEY RESOURCES INC. BAG 5000

EDSON, ALBERTA T7E 1W1

Prepared by:

HATFIELD CONSULTANTS SUITE 201 – 1571 BELLEVUE AVENUE

WEST VANCOUVER, BC V7V 1A6

FEBRUARY 2008

CVM1264.1

Suite 201 – 1571 Bellevue Ave., West Vancouver, BC, Canada V7V 1A6 • Tel: 1.604.926.3261 • Fax: 1.604.926.5389 • www.hatfieldgroup.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................... iii LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................... v

LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................ vi

1.0 INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.................. 1 1.1 OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 TERMS OF REFERENCE........................................................................................ 1 1.3 PROJECT LOCATION AND SCOPE....................................................................... 2 1.4 DATA SOURCES ..................................................................................................... 2 1.5 GOVERNMENT REGULATION AND POLICY ........................................................ 4 1.6 ORGANIZATION OF THIS REPORT....................................................................... 4

2.0 SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT................................. 5 2.1 SURFACE WATER QUALITY ISSUES CONSIDERED........................................... 5 2.2 CHARACTERIZATION OF SURFACE WATER QUALITY ...................................... 5 2.2.1 Variables Used to Characterize Surface Water Quality ...................................... 5 2.2.2 Surface Water Quality Measurement Endpoints................................................. 6 2.3 STUDY AREAS........................................................................................................ 6 2.3.1 Local Study Area................................................................................................. 6 2.4 ASSESSMENT CASES ......................................................................................... 10 2.4.1 Baseline Case .................................................................................................. 10 2.4.2 Application Case............................................................................................... 10 2.4.3 Cumulative Effects Assessment Case .............................................................. 10 2.4.4 Regional Study Area ......................................................................................... 10

3.0 SURFACE WATER QUALITY BASELINE CASE ............................. 11 3.1 HISTORICAL SURFACE WATER QUALITY INFORMATION ............................... 11 3.2 SURFACE WATER QUALITY FIELD PROGRAM................................................. 11 3.3 SURFACE WATER QUALITY BASELINE FOR LOCAL STUDY AREA............... 11 3.3.1 General............................................................................................................. 11 3.3.2 Lower Mercoal Creek: Mine-Affected Part of LSA............................................ 17 3.4 SURFACE WATER QUALITY BASELINE FOR REGIONAL STUDY AREA ........ 21 3.5 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WATER QUALITY AND TSS ................................... 30

4.0 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT FOR LOCAL STUDY AREA ................... 33 4.1 EFFECTS OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES..................................... 33 4.1.1 Assessment of Validity of Impact Pathways ..................................................... 33 4.1.2 Mitigation Measures to be Implemented........................................................... 34 4.1.3 Impact Analysis................................................................................................. 35 4.1.4 Residual Impact Classification.......................................................................... 35 4.1.5 Level of Confidence and Uncertainties ............................................................. 36 4.2 EFFECTS OF USING NITROGEN-BASED EXPLOSIVES ................................... 36 4.2.1 Assessment of Validity of Impact Pathways ..................................................... 36 4.2.2 Mitigation Measures to be Implemented........................................................... 36

Surface Water Quality Report i Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

4.2.3 Impact Analysis................................................................................................. 37 4.2.4 Residual Impact Classification.......................................................................... 37 4.2.5 Level of Confidence and Uncertainties ............................................................. 38 4.3 DISCHARGE FROM IMPOUNDMENTS TO NATURAL WATERCOURSES .......... 38 4.3.1 Assessment of Validity of Impact Pathways ..................................................... 38 4.3.2 Mitigation Measures to be Implemented........................................................... 39 4.3.3 Impact Analysis................................................................................................. 39 4.3.4 Residual Impact Classification.......................................................................... 49 4.3.5 Level of Confidence and Uncertainties ............................................................. 54 4.4 EFFECT OF END-PIT LAKE CHARACTERISTICS ON WATER QUALITY........... 55 4.4.1 Assessment of Validity of Impact Pathways ..................................................... 55 4.4.2 Impact Analysis................................................................................................. 55 4.4.3 Residual Impact Classification.......................................................................... 62 4.4.4 Level of Confidence and Uncertainties ............................................................. 62

5.0 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT FOR REGIONAL STUDY AREA ............ 63 5.1 REGIONAL EFFECTS OF USING NITROGEN-BASED EXPLOSIVES ............... 63 5.1.1 Impact Analysis................................................................................................. 63 5.1.2 Residual Impact Classification.......................................................................... 64 5.1.3 Level of Confidence and Uncertainties ............................................................. 64 5.2 DISCHARGE FROM IMPOUNDMENTS TO REGIONAL

WATERCOURSES – APPLICATION CASE .......................................................... 65 5.2.1 Impact Analysis................................................................................................. 65 5.2.2 Residual Impact Classification.......................................................................... 68 5.2.3 Level of Confidence and Uncertainties ............................................................. 68 5.3 DISCHARGE FROM IMPOUNDMENTS TO REGIONAL

WATERCOURSES – CEA CASE........................................................................... 68 5.3.1 Impact Analysis................................................................................................. 68 5.3.2 Residual Impact Classification.......................................................................... 69 5.3.3 Level of Confidence and Uncertainties ............................................................. 71

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING.................................................... 73

6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY ................................................... 73 6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING ........................................................................ 73

7.0 REFERENCES................................................................................... 75

Surface Water Quality Report ii Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Terms of Reference sections applicable to this assessment........................1

Table 2 Project surface water quality issues considered in this assessment...................................................................................................5

Table 3 Variables used for surface water quality environmental assessment...................................................................................................7

Table 4 Surface water quality guidelines used in this assessment............................8

Table 5 Dataset used to characterize surface water quality Baseline Case............12

Table 6 Surface water quality summary for the Local Study Area...........................14

Table 7 Frequencies of guideline exceedance in the Local Study Area. .................18

Table 8 Summary surface water quality Baseline Case conditions for lower Mercoal Creek. ...........................................................................................23

Table 9 Surface water quality summary for Regional Study Area. ..........................24

Table 10 Frequencies of guideline exceedance in the Regional Study Area. ...........27

Table 11 Project activities in the construction phase of the Project...........................33

Table 12 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Jackson Creek surface water quality: frequency of guideline exceedance. ........................44

Table 13 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Chance Creek surface water quality: frequency of guideline exceedance. ........................45

Table 14 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on McCardell Creek surface water quality: frequency of guideline exceedance. ........................46

Table 15 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Mercoal Creek surface water quality: frequency of guideline exceedance. ........................47

Table 16 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Jackson Creek surface water quality: increase in concentration.........................................50

Table 17 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Chance Creek surface water quality: increase in concentration.........................................51

Table 18 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on McCardell Creek surface water quality: increase in concentration.........................................52

Table 19 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Mercoal Creek surface water quality: increase in concentration.........................................53

Surface Water Quality Report iii Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

Table 20 Characteristics of end-pit lakes/ponds in the Project reclamation landscape. ..................................................................................................55

Table 21 Summary information on lakes sampled in end-pit lake study....................57

Table 22 Water quality of end-pit lakes and Fairfax Lake sampled in September 2006. ........................................................................................60

Table 23 Nitrate concentrations in the Embarras and Lovett Rivers, 2001 to 2005........................................................................................................64

Table 24 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge from Mercoal Creek Mine Extension on surface water quality in the McLeod River (site MCLD-3), Application Case. .......................................................................66

Table 25 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge from Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension on surface water quality in the Embarras River (site EM-4), Application Case............................................................67

Table 26 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on surface water quality in the Embarras River (site EM-4), Cumulative Effects Assessment Case.......................................................................................70

Table 27 Environmental assessment summary of the Project...................................74

Surface Water Quality Report iv Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Location of Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Project. .................................3

Figure 2 Local and Regional Study Areas for Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Project.......................................................................................9

Figure 3 Sampling locations used to develop surface water quality baseline for Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower project. .............................................13

Figure 4 Mean (±SE) ratio of concentration to guideline value of surface water quality variables in Local Study Area. ...............................................22

Figure 5 Mean (±SE) ratio of concentration to guideline value of surface water quality variables in Regional Study Area. .........................................31

Figure 6 Relationship between concentrations of selected water quality variables and TSS concentrations in Embarras River. ...............................32

Figure 7 Ionic characteristics of existing end-pit lakes, natural lakes, groundwater, and surface watercourses.....................................................58

Surface Water Quality Report v Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

Surface Water Quality Report vi Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A1 Description of Water Quality Field Program

Appendix A2 Compilation of Water Quality Data Used in Water Quality Baseline

Appendix A3 Surface Water Quality Model Description and Results

1.0 INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

1.1 OVERVIEW

This report presents an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project (Project) on surface water quality. This report was prepared by Hatfield Consultants Partnership (Hatfield) for Coal Valley Resources Inc. (CVRI) and was prepared as a component of an integrated formal application by CVRI for the Project.

1.2 TERMS OF REFERENCE

The format and contents of this Project report are guided by the Final Terms of Reference (ToR) for the Environmental Impact Assessment Report for the Project (AENV 2007). The final ToR was developed from the Project Public Disclosure Document released in May 2006 (CVRI 2006); the ToR outlines the format and contents for the entire regulatory application and EIA (i.e., all environmental disciplines). This report addresses specific components of the ToR that are relevant to surface water quality (Table 1).

This report is based on the Project design and activities described in CVRI (2008, Section C), including the construction, operation, reclamation, and closure of the Project and related facilities.

Table 1 Terms of Reference sections applicable to this assessment.

Section 5.14 of Final ToR for Project (from AENV 2007) Report Section

Describe baseline water quality conditions of surface waterbodies that will be influenced by the proposed Project or have the potential of being influenced by some or all aspects of the proposed Project. For these waterbodies, summarize baseline data for water and non-fish aquatic biota.

Section 3

a) Describe baseline water quality conditions in the Study Area with reference to the appropriate water quality parameters (temperature, pH, conductivity, cations and anions, metals, dissolved oxygen, suspended sediment, dissolved solids, and nutrients), their seasonality and relationship to flow and other controlling factors;

Section 3

b) Describe the Project activities for all stages, including construction, operation and reclamation that have the potential to affect surface water quality including constructed waterbodies such as end-pit lakes during and after the life of the Project;

Sections 4.1.1, 4.2.1, 4.3.1, 4.4.1

c) Assess the magnitude of the potential impacts of activities on surface water quality. Determine the local and regional extent of potential impacts as well as their frequency, duration, magnitude and seasonality. Assess the magnitude of each potential impact on water quality relative to existing water quality and accepted water quality guidelines;

Section 4, Section 5

d) Describe the proposed mitigation measures (water and waste water management treatment systems) in the context of best management practices and best available technologies to protect water quality during and after the Project;

Sections 4.1.2, 4.2.2, 4.3.2

e) Provide a monitoring program to assess water quality and the effectiveness of water quality management systems; and

Section 6.2

f) Assess the cumulative effects of the Project on surface water quality in the Regional Study Area(s).

Section 5

Surface Water Quality Report 1 Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

1.3 PROJECT LOCATION AND SCOPE

The Project is to be located along the eastern edge of the Rocky Mountain foothills to the southwest of Edson, Alberta (Figure 1) and is contained within the McLeod River basin. The project area lies within the Alberta Upland Ecoregion and within the Rocky Mountain Foothills Physiographic Region. The Project will consist of the development of:

The proposed Mercoal West mine located northwest of the previously mined and existing mine areas known as Mercoal Phase 2 and South Block, and northwest of the community of Mercoal (Figure 1). Coal reserves within the mine permit boundary are estimated at 3.0 million CMT. The project footprint for this mine is approximately 16 km in length, with a total area of approximately 522 ha. Mining will be by dragline and truck and shovel;

The proposed Yellowhead Tower mine located northwest of the previously mined and existing mine areas known as Coal Valley West Extension and Coal Valley Mine, and northwest of the community of Coalspur (Figure 1). Coal reserves within the mine lease boundary are estimated at 13.3 million CMT. The project footprint is approximately 8 km in length, with a total area of approximately 822 ha. Mining will be by dragline and truck and shovel; and

Development of access haul roads from existing mine operations across Highways 40 and 47 to both the Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower mines.

1.4 DATA SOURCES Data sources used in the preparation of this report include:

Specific field studies undertaken in support of this assessment;

Data and information gathered in support of previous applications for the Coal Valley Extension, South Block, and Mercoal Phase 2 mines;

Environmental monitoring data and information gathered from 2000 to 2006 as part of the approval requirements for the Coal Valley, Coal Valley Extension, South Block, and Mercoal Phase 2 mines;

Baseline groundwater conditions and impact assessments as described in the Hydrogeology Report of this Application (MEMS 2008);

Baseline surface water hydrology conditions and impact assessments as described in the Surface Water Hydrology Report of this Application (Matrix 2008);

Results of the public consultation program as described in CVRI (2008, Section G); and

Scientific literature related to water quality and coal mining, with priority given to research results from existing mines in the Coal Valley area.


!

!

ALBERTA

CALGARY

EDMONTON

HINTON

EDSON

Mercoal West Mine

Yellowhead Tower Mine

McLeo

d R.

McLeod R.

Emba

rras R

.

Erith R.

Pembina R.

16

16

40

47

40

South Block

Mercoal Phase 2

Coal Valley Extension

to JASPER(70 km)

to EDMONTON(180 km)

Jasper National

Park

ROBB

COALSPURMERCOALMcLeod R.

McL

eod

R.

Gregg R.Pembina R.

Athabasca R.

Coal Valley Mine

Rge 17/W5M

Twp 52

Rge 18Rge 19Rge 20Rge 21Rge 22Rge 23Rge 24Rge 25

Twp 51

Twp 50

Twp 49

Twp 48

Twp 47

Twp 46

475000

475000

500000

500000

525000

525000

5875

000

5875

000

5900

000

5900

000

5925

000

5925

000

K:\Data\Project\CVM1264\GIS\_MXD\CVM1264_A_Location_20080108.mxd

0 8 164km

Projection: UTM Zone 11 NAD83

1:525,000ScaleData Sources:a) Watercourses, Mine Permit Boundaries and Dragline Walkroad from Millennium EMS Solutions Ltd.b) Roads, railway, and lakes from1:250K National Topographic Data Base.c) Jasper National Park boundary from ESRI's Canada Map layer.

Figure 1 Location of Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Project.

t

LEGEND

Lakes

Rivers

Roads

Mercoal West Mine Permit Boundary

Yellowhead Tower MinePermit Boundary

Dragline Walkroad

Approved Mines

1.5 GOVERNMENT REGULATION AND POLICY This report has been prepared in consideration of the following key government laws, regulations, and standards:

Alberta Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act (AEPEA), with associated regulations and amendments in force;

Alberta Water Act (1999), with associated regulations and amendments in force; and

Various surface water quality guidelines: Surface Water Quality Guidelines for Use in Alberta (AENV 1999); the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) Canadian Water Quality Guidelines (CWQG) (CCME 2006); as well as various guidelines from the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and British Columbia.

1.6 ORGANIZATION OF THIS REPORT This report contains six sections:

Section 1: Introduction to Environmental Assessment;

Section 2: Scope of Surface Water Quality Environmental Assessment – defines the assessment cases, surface water quality issues considered, and the local and regional study areas used in this report;

Section 3: Surface Water Quality Baseline Case – a description of baseline water quality conditions in the study areas;

Section 4: Effects Assessment for Local Study Area – focused on the Local Study Area, this section includes a review of the activities of the Project that may influence surface water quality, an assessment of the validity of the linkages between the Project and potential effects on water quality, mitigation measures to be implemented as part of the Project, impact analysis, classification of residual impacts, and identification of key uncertainties associated with the impact assessment;

Section 5: Effects Assessment for Regional Study Area – similar in content to Section 4, this section focuses on the Regional Study Area; and

Section 6: Summary of Effects Assessment and Environmental Monitoring – provides a tabular summary of the effects assessment, and as well as a series of recommended environmental monitoring measures for the Project.

This report is supplemented by technical appendices that provide detailed descriptions of the environmental setting of the study area as well as the data analysis and modeling conducted in support of this assessment.



2.0 SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2.1 SURFACE WATER QUALITY ISSUES CONSIDERED

The following sources of information were used to develop the list of surface water quality issues considered in this environmental assessment:

Information obtained from the consultation program conducted by CVRI as part of its application, including Traditional Environmental Knowledge (TEK) and Traditional Land Use (TLU) as described in the TLU Report (Lifeways 2008);

The scope and findings of surface water quality impact assessments for previous Coal Valley area mine environmental assessments (Luscar 1999, MEMS 2005); and

Issues identified from a review of the Project Mine Plan (CVRI 2008, Section C).

The issues considered in this environmental assessment are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 Project surface water quality issues considered in this assessment.

Issue/Description of Impact Project Activities

Soil erosion, sediments entering streams via surface runoff, increased sedimentation of surface waters

Project construction activities including: logging and soil stripping, development of dewatering system, building of haul roads and stream crossings

Leaching of nitrates into surface waters Use of bulk explosives to break overburden rock

Discharges of water from impoundments to natural watercourses

Pit dewatering Surface runoff from mining areas, haul roads, overburden dumps, and other disturbed areas Use of flocculants in settling ponds

Effects on end-pit lakes on surface water quality

Design and creation of end-pit lakes as part of reclamation and closure activities

2.2 CHARACTERIZATION OF SURFACE WATER QUALITY

2.2.1 Variables Used to Characterize Surface Water Quality

Surface water quality is the Valued Environmental Component (VEC)1 considered in this assessment. The selection of surface water quality variables considered in this report was guided by a review of:

Water quality variables used in previous environmental assessments for the Coal Valley mine (Luscar 1999, MEMS 2005);

1 Defined in CEAA (1999) as “any part of the environment that is considered important by the proponent, public, scientists

and government involved in the assessment process. Importance may be determined on the basis of cultural values or scientific concern”.

Requirements of the ToR for this EIA;

Water quality variables that have regulatory concern in the form of guidelines;

Water quality concerns and issues raised during the public consultation conducted during the preparation of this EIA; and

Various water quality variables required for interpretation of effects on other aquatic components, particularly fish populations and human health.

The surface water quality variables used in this assessment are presented in Table 3.

2.2.2 Surface Water Quality Measurement Endpoints

The measurement endpoints used in this report are as follows:

Frequency of exceedance of surface water quality guideline values; and

Ratio of concentrations of water quality variables to water quality guideline values.

Guidelines for the protection of aquatic health are used in the assessment and the specific surface water quality guidelines are provided in Table 4.

2.3 STUDY AREAS

2.3.1 Local Study Area

The Local Study Area (LSA) for the Project is defined by the small drainages that begin within the mine permit boundaries of the proposed Mercoal West or Yellowhead Tower mines and discharge into the McLeod or Embarras River systems (Figure 2):

Mercoal Creek, Unnamed Mercoal Creek Tributary No. 1, Unnamed Mercoal Creek Tributary No. 2, Unnamed McLeod River Tributary, and McCardell Creek for the Mercoal West mine; and

Chance Creek, Jackson Creek, Fenton Creek, and White Creek for the Yellowhead Tower mine.

None of these watercourses are within or downstream of existing mines, with the exception of the lower portion of Mercoal Creek, which originates in the Mercoal East Phase 2 mining area (Figure 2) and is therefore influenced by the Mercoal East Phase 2 coal mine project.


Table 3 Variables used for surface water quality environmental assessment.

Group Water Quality Variables

Colour Total dissolved solids

Dissolved organic carbon Hardness

pH Total organic carbon

Conductivity Total suspended solids

Conventional variables

Total alkalinity Dissolved oxygen

Bicarbonate Potassium

Carbonate Sodium

Chloride Sulphate

Magnesium Sulphide

Major ions

Calcium

Nitrate Nitrite

Nitrate + nitrite Total phosphorus

Nutrients

Ammonia nitrogen Total Kjeldahl nitrogen

Naphthenic acids Total recoverable hydrocarbons Organics and Hydrocarbons

Total phenols

Aluminum Manganese

Antimony Mercury

Arsenic Molybdenum

Barium Nickel

Beryllium Selenium

Bismuth Silver

Boron Strontium

Cadmium Thallium

Chromium Thorium

Cobalt Tin

Copper Titanium

Iron Uranium

Lead Vanadium

Total Metals

Lithium Zinc

Note: All variables used to characterize existing surface water quality conditions in Baseline Case (Section 3); water quality variables in bold are used for impact assessment (Section 4 and Section 5).


Table 4 Surface water quality guidelines used in this assessment.

Water Quality Variable Units Guideline Value Source of Guideline Aluminum µg/L 100 at pH>=6.5; [Ca2+]>= 4 mg/L; DOC>=2 mg/L

(CCME 2006) Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37 at pH 8.0, 10oC (CCME 2006) Arsenic µg/L 5 CCME (2006) Boron µg/L 1200 BC ambient water quality guideline for boron

(BC 2003) Cadmium µg/L 10(0.86*LOG(Hardness)-3.2) (CCME 2006)

Chloride mg/L 230f USEPA continuous concentration guideline Chromium µg/L 1 Guideline for chromium III is 8.9 µg/L; guideline for

chromium VI is 1 µg/L (CCME 2006). More stringent guideline (1 µg/L) is used

Cobalt µg/L 0.9 BC working water quality guideline (BC 2006a) Copper µg/L Guideline is hardness-dependent: 2 µg/L at hardness =

0 to 120 mg/L; 3 µg /L at hardness = 120 to 180 mg/L; 4 µg /L at hardness > 180 mg /L (CCME 2006)

Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5 Alberta acute guideline for dissolved oxygen (AENV 1999); guideline is a minimum value

Iron µg/L 300 AENV (1999) Lead µg/L Guideline is hardness-dependent: 1 µg/L at hardness =

0 to 60 mg/L; 2 µg/L at hardness = 60 to 120 mg/L; 4 µg/L at hardness > 120 mg/L (CCME 2006)

Mercury µg/L 0.013 for acute concentrations (AENV 1999) Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13 for acute concentrations (AENV 1999) Molybdenum µg/L 73 CCME (2006) Nickel µg/L Guideline is hardness-dependent: 25 µg/L at hardness

= 0 to 60 mg/L; 65 µg/L at hardness = 60 to 120 mg/L; 110 µg/L at hardness = 120 to 180 mg/L; 150 µg/L at hardness > 180 mg/L (CCME 2006)

Nitrate mg/L 13 CCME (2006) Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L 0.06 CCME (2006) guideline for nitrate is 13 mg/L;

CCME (2006) guideline for nitrite is 0.060 mg/L; more conservative guideline is used as a surrogate

Nitrite mg/L 0.06 CCME (2006) pH pH units 6.5-9.0 CCME (2006). AENV (1999) guideline: "To be in the

range of 6.5 to 8.5 but not altered by more than 0.5 pH units from background values."

Phenols mg/L 0.004 CCME (2006) Selenium µg/L 1 CCME (2006) Silver µg/L 1 CCME (2006) Sulphate mg/L 100 BC approved water quality guideline (BC 2006b) Sulphide mg/L 0.002 USEPA continuous concentration guideline (as H2S) Thallium µg/L 0.8 CCME (2006) Titanium µg/L 100 BC working water quality guideline (BC 2006a) Total Kjedahl nitrogen mg/L 1.0 Water quality guideline for total nitrogen AENV (1999) Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05 Guideline is for chronic total (inorganic and organic)

phosphorus Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/L AENV (1999): "Not to be increased by more than

10 mg/L over background value." Zinc µg/L 30 CCME (2006)


White Creek

Embarras River

Felton Creek

Embarras River

McLeo

d Rive

r

Erith River

Erith R

.

McLeo

d Rive

r

McLeod River

McL

eod

Rive

r

McLeod River

McLeod River

Mercoal Creek

Mitche

ll Cree

k

Erith River

Rodney Creek

Lambert Creek

Bryan Creek

Prest Creek

McNeil CreekPrest Creek

Hay Creek

Dummy Creek

Lost Creek

Chance Cr. Jackson Cr.

Beaverdam C

r.

Eun i

ce C

r.

Deer

lick C

r.

Wampus Cr.

Gregg Cr.

Antler Cr.

Gregg Rive

r

Anderson Creek

Quigley Creek

McPherson Creek

Athabasca Rive

rW5MRge 18Rge 19Rge 20Rge 21Rge 22Rge 23

Twp 52

Twp 51

Twp 50

Twp 49

Twp 48

Twp 47

Twp 46

McCardell Creek

Emba

rras

R.

Rge 24

480000

480000

500000

500000

520000

520000

5880

000

5880

000

5900

000

5900

000

5920

000

5920

000

K:\Data\Project\CVM1264\GIS\_MXD\CVM1264_B_StudyArea_20080206.mxd

0 10 205km


Figure 2 Local and Regional Study Areas for Mercoal West - Yellowhead Tower Mine Project.

1:420,000Scale

LEGEND

Lakes / Ponds

Rivers / Creeks

Major Roads

Railway

Regional Study Area Watercourses

Local Study Area Watercourses


Yellowhead Tower Mine Permit Boundary

Dragline Walkroad

Approved Mines

Permit Boundary for Proposed Robb Trend Mine

Data Sources:a) Watercourses, Roads and Railway from 1:50,000 National Topographic Data Base.b) Hillshade from Geobase 1:50,000 DEM htttp://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/index.htmlc) Mine Permit Boundaries and Dragline Walkroad from Millennium EMS Solutions Ltd. t

2.4 ASSESSMENT CASES

2.4.1 Baseline Case

The Baseline Case consists of the existing and approved mines upstream of the Project: Mercoal East Phase 2; South Block, West Extension; Cheviot; Cardinal River (old mine is being reclaimed and plant is processing coal from Cheviot mine); Gregg River (final stages of reclamation), as well as a limestone quarry operated by Lehigh Inland Cement Ltd. immediately upstream of Cadomin. For the purposes of this environmental assessment, it is assumed that any effects of the existing projects that define the Baseline Case on surface water quality are already reflected in the data gathered to establish the baseline conditions and these existing projects will not cause any larger or different effects on surface water quality in the future.

2.4.2 Application Case

The Application Case is an assessment of the incremental environmental effects of the Project to existing conditions as represented by the Baseline Case. The Application Case is a cumulative effects assessment of adding the residual environmental impacts of the Project to existing environmental conditions in the study areas.

2.4.3 Cumulative Effects Assessment Case The Robb Trend coal mine, with reserves estimated at 42 million t, is being planned downstream of the Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower mines and the Cumulative Effects Assessment (CEA) Case is an assessment of the incremental environmental effects of the Project plus the planned Robb Trend coal mine.

2.4.4 Regional Study Area

The Regional Study Area (RSA) for the Project is defined by the LSA plus the following watercourses (Figure 2):

McLeod River from its confluence with Mercoal Creek to downstream of its confluence with the Embarras River; and

Embarras River from its confluence with Chance Creek downstream to its confluence with the McLeod River.

These watercourses are downstream of one or more of the Mercoal East Phase 2, South Block, and West Extension mining areas, as well as a number of mines upstream of the proposed Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower mines (Figure 2). This RSA also incorporates a portion of the McLeod River basin that is sufficiently large to assess the Planned Development Case including the planned Robb Trend coal mine.



3.0 SURFACE WATER QUALITY BASELINE CASE

3.1 HISTORICAL SURFACE WATER QUALITY INFORMATION

CVRI has measured surface water quality in numerous watercourses throughout the LSA and RSA under various surface water sampling field programs in the Coal Valley area. Some of these data were included in the surface water quality Baseline Case for the Project. In order to be included in the surface water quality Baseline Case, surface water quality data had to have been:

Obtained after 1997, i.e., within the past ten years, in order to be included in the Project surface water quality Baseline Case. This criterion was applied to ensure data that were used would include effects of existing projects and developments on surface water quality, and would therefore characterize existing development conditions in the study areas, including wherever possible the potential effects of the Coal Valley Mine Extension, Mercoal South Block, and the Mercoal East Phase 2 mines; and

Obtained from watercourses that would potentially be influenced by either the Mercoal West or Yellowhead Tower mines.

Table 5 contains a summary of the historical surface water quality data used for the LSA and RSA.

3.2 SURFACE WATER QUALITY FIELD PROGRAM

Table 5 and Figure 3 contain a summary of the surface water quality field sampling program conducted in support of this environmental assessment. Appendix A1 contains a description of methods used for the field sampling program, as well as a QA/QC analysis of surface water quality data obtained.

Appendix A2 contains a compilation of all surface water quality data used to define the Baseline Case for the Project.

3.3 SURFACE WATER QUALITY BASELINE FOR LOCAL STUDY AREA

3.3.1 General

Detailed surface water quality information is found in Appendix A2; Table 6 provides a summary of seasonal and annual median, minimum, and maximum concentrations for surface water quality variables measured in the LSA.

In the Baseline Case dataset, surface water quality in the LSA is characterized by high levels of dissolved oxygen, low levels of total suspended solids (TSS, ranging from 0.5 to 7 mg/L), and low levels of dissolved organic carbon (Table 6). Watercourses in the LSA are slightly alkaline and have TDS levels ranging from approximately 90 to 280 mg/L. The ionic characteristics of these surface waters are dominated by bicarbonate, calcium, and sodium. Water is moderately hard to hard, and summer trophic status of LSA watercourses is oligotrophic to mesotrophic (the trophic status category definitions of Dodds [2006] are used in the characterization of the surface water quality Baseline Case for the Project).

Table 5 Dataset used to characterize surface water quality Baseline Case.

Site Details Historical Data Record2 Additional Data

Collected 2006-2007

UTM1 No. Samples Site Code

Site Description

Influence of

Existing Mines

Easting Northing Start Year

End Year Sp Su Fa Wi

Sp Su Fa Wi

Local Study Area MEC-3 Lower-mid section of Mercoal Creek MP2 491815 5890525 2004 2005 1 1 1 1 - - - - MEC-4 Mercoal Creek before McLeod River MP2 488480 5891003 2004 2005 1 1 1 1 - - - - MCCARD-1 Lower McCardell Creek None 480098 5896891 2004 2005 1 1 1 1 - - - - MCCARD-2 Upper McCardell Creek None 478736 5897973 2004 2005 1 1 1 1 - - - - MERC-T1 Upper Mercoal Creek Tributary None 490918 5891478 2004 2005 1 1 1 1 - - - - MERC-T2 Lower Mercoal Creek Tributary None 488051 5891743 2004 2005 1 1 1 1 - - - - MCLDT-1 Upper Reach of Unnamed McLeod River Tributary None 484967 5893759 2004 2005 1 - - 1 - √ √ - MCLDT-2 Lower Reach of Unnamed McLeod River Tributary None 480758 5891681 2004 2005 1 1 1 1 - - - - CH Chance Creek None 498644 5892594 - - - - - - √ √ √ √ FC Felton Creek None 484639 5901453 - - - - - - √ √ √ √ WC White Creek None 487299 5912507 - - - - - - √ √ √ √ JC Jackson Creek None 494214 5893119 - - - - - - - √ - -

Regional Study Area MCLD-2 McLeod River below McCardell Creek MP2 481303 5901453 2004 2005 1 1 1 1 √ √ √ √ EM-2 Embarras River between Jackson and Bryan Creeks MSB, CVE 500334 5893512 1997 1998 2 2 1 - - - - √ EM-3 Embarras River above Prest Creek MSB 507158 5906033 1997 1998 2 2 1 - - - - √ EM-4 Embarras River above confluence with Erith River MSB 521678 5915808 1997 1998 2 2 1 - - - - - EM-WQ-1 Embarras River between Jackson and Bryan Creeks MSB 501170 5895200 2005 2005 1 1 1 1 - - - - EM-WQ-2 Embarras River below Bryan Creek MSB 502920 5899428 2005 2005 1 1 1 - - - - - EM-WQ-3 Embarras River above Prest Creek MSB 507240 5905735 2005 2005 1 1 1 - - - - - EM-WQ-4 Embarras River above confluence with Erith River MSB 521697 5914462 2005 2005 - - - 1 - - - - EM-RC Embarras River upstream of Rodney Creek MSB 522886 5918924 - - - - - - √ √ √ √ MCLD-3 McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River MP2 525117 5923679 - - - - - - √ √ √ √

MCLD-4 McLeod River below confluence with Embarras River MP2, MSB, CVE 525452 5923358 - - - - - - √ √ √ √

1 Zone 11, NAD83. Refer to Figure 3 for location of sampling sites. 2 1997 to 1998: data gathered in support of EIA for Coal Valley Mine Extension (Luscar 1999); 2004 and 2005 data gathered for Luscar Ltd. (Pisces 2006).

Sp – spring; Su – summer; Fa – fall; Wi – winter. MP2 – Mercoal Phase 2; MSB – Mercoal South Block; CVE – Coal Valley Extension


!!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

EM-4

EM-3

EM-2

EM-RC

MCLD-4

MCLD-3

MCLD-2

EM-WQ-4

EM-WQ-2

EM-WQ-1

MCLDT-2MCLDT-1

MCCARD-2MCCARD-1

MERC-T2

MERC-T1

MEC-4

MEC-3

CH

EM-WQ-3

White Creek

Embarras River

Felton Creek

Embarras River

McLeo

d Rive

r

Erith River

Erith R

.

McLeo

d Rive

r

McLeod River

McL

eod

Rive

r

McLeod River

McLeod River

Mercoal Creek

Mitche

ll Cree

k

Erith River

Rodney Creek

Lambert Creek

Bryan Creek

Prest Creek

McNeil CreekPrest Creek

Hay Creek

Dummy Creek

Lost Creek

Chance Cr. Jackson Cr.

Beaverdam C

r.

Eun i

ce C

r.

Deer

lick C

r.

Wampus Cr.

Gregg Cr.

Antler Cr.

Gregg Rive

r

Anderson Creek

Quigley Creek

McPherson Creek

Athabasca Rive

rW5MRge 18Rge 19Rge 20Rge 21Rge 22Rge 23

Twp 52

Twp 51

Twp 50

Twp 49

Twp 48

Twp 47

Twp 46

McCardell Creek

Emba

rras

R.

Rge 24

WC

JC

FC

480000

480000

500000

500000

520000

520000

5880

000

5880

000

5900

000

5900

000

5920

000

5920

000

K:\Data\Project\CVM1264\GIS\_MXD\CVM1264_C_WQ_20080206.mxd

0 10 205km


Figure 3 Sampling locations used to develop surface water quality baseline for Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower project.

1:420,000Scale

LEGEND

Lakes / Ponds

Rivers / Creeks

Major Roads

Railway

Regional Study Area Watercourses

Local Study Area Watercourses


Yellowhead Tower Mine Permit Boundary

Dragline Walkroad

Approved Mines

Permit Boundary for Proposed Robb Trend Mine

! Water Quality Sampling Locations

Data Sources:a) Watercourses, Roads and Railway from 1:50,000 National Topographic Data Base.b) Hillshade from Geobase 1:50,000 DEM htttp://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/index.htmlc) Mine Permit Boundaries and Dragline Walkroad from Millennium EMS Solutions Ltd. t

Table 6 Surface water quality summary for the Local Study Area.

Med Min Max Med Min MaxAluminum mg/L 100a 11 0.086 0.016 0.238 - 12 0.064 0.018 0.328 - Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 2 0.025 0.025 0.025 100 4 0.025 0.025 0.025 100Antimony mg/L - 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 89 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 82Arsenic mg/L 5c 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 8Barium mg/L - 10 0 0 0 - 11 0 0 0 - Beryllium mg/L - 10 0.00005 0.00 0.00005 90 11 0.00005 0.00 0.00005 82Bicarbonate mg/L - 11 157 102 229 - 12 175.5 142 250 - Bismuth mg/L - 9 0.00025 0.00 0.00025 89 11 0.00025 0.00 0.00025 82Boron mg/L 1200d 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 9 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 - Cadmium mg/L e 11 0.000 0.000005 0.000 82 12 0.000 0.000001 0.000 67Calcium mg/L - 11 31 20 41 - 12 36 27 40 - Carbonate mg/L - 11 3.0 2.5 3.0 100 12 3.0 2.5 3.0 100Chloride mg/L 230f 11 3.0 1.0 5.2 27 8 1.0 0.3 2 25Chromium mg/L 1g 11 0.000 0.000079 0.00 82 12 0.000 0.00002 0.18 75Cobalt mg/L 0.9h 11 0.00005 0.00 0.00 73 12 0.00005 0.00 0.00 33Conductivity µS/cm - 11 240 160 339 - 12 260.5 215 356 - Copper mg/L i 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 82 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 63Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 2 5.5 0.00005 12 - 5 5 4 12 20Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j - 9.0 9.0 9.0 1 10.1 9.5 10.6 - Hardness mg/L - 11 120 76 145 - 12 126.5 89 144 - Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - 1 2.5 2.5 2.5 100 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 100Iron mg/L 300 11 0.2 0.05 0.4 - 12 0.1 0.05 0.353 17Lead mg/L k 11 0.00005 0.00 0.0002 27 12 0.00 0.00 0.0002 42Lithium mg/L - 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 9Magnesium mg/L - 10 7.1 4.6 10.1 - 12 7.5 4.4 9.6 - Manganese mg/L - 10 0.0182 0.0 0.26 - 11 0.015 0.0 0.048 - Mercury mg/L 0.013l 10 0.000 0.000005 0.000 90 12 0.000 0.000005 0.177 92Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l - 0.30 0.30 0.30 - 1 0.30 0.30 0.30 100Molybdenum mg/L 73c 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 64 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 58Naphthenic Acids mg/L - - 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 100Nickel mg/L m 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 27 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 33Nitrate mg/L 13 9 0.025 0.005 0.090 56 9 0.050 0.005 1.300 11Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 11 0.050 0.010 0.090 73 11 0.100 0.050 0.600 45Nitrite mg/L 0.06 9 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 100 9 0.025 0.0025 1.3 89pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 11 8.2 8.1 8.31 - 12 8.2 7.9 8.41 - Phenols mg/L 0.004c - 1 0.004 0.004 0.004 - Potassium mg/L - 11 0.60 0.20 1.40 9 12 0.60 0.25 1.60 33Selenium mg/L 1c 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 80 12 0.00 0.00 0.00 42Silicon mg/L 8 4.79 4.28 5.17 - 8 4.19 0.00 5.12 - Silver mg/L 1c 11 0.000 0.000002 0.000 82 12 0.000 0.0000017 0.000 67Sodium mg/L - 11 9 0.2 40.7 - 12 10.6 0.243 45.5 - Strontium mg/L - 10 0 0 0.297 - 11 0 0 0.274 - Sulphur mg/L 9 1 1 1.7 - 11 1 0 1.98 9 Sulphate mg/L 100p 11 3.6 0.1 5.1 9 12 3.55 0.1 11.3 8Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 2 0.002 0.002 0.002 100 2 0.002 0.000 0.004 50Thallium mg/L 0.8c 11 0.000025 0.000 0.000025 82 12 0.000 0.000 0.000025 67Tin mg/L - 10 0.00 0.00003 0.00 60 11 0.00 0.000015 0.00 91Titanium mg/L 100r 11 0.00 0.00025 0.00 18 12 0.00 0.000015 0.01 42Total Alkalinity mg/L - 11 129 84 188 - 12 144 117 205 - Total dissolved solids mg/L - 11 151 98 195 - 12 149.5 120 216 - Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 11 0.10 0.07 0.40 27 12 0.42 0.1 0.50 33Total organic carbon mg/L - 2 7 0.3 12 - 4 5 0.203 12 - Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 11 0.050 0.004 0.100 45 12 0.025 0.0015 0.025 25Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 2 1.75 0.5 6.0 100 8 1.5 1.5 4.0 50True Color TCU - 2 25 18 50 - 4 15 8 35 - Turbidity NTU - 0Uranium mg/L - 9 0.00025 0.00 0.00025 89 11 0.00025 0.00 0.00025 73Vanadium mg/L - 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 9Zinc mg/L 30c 11 0.0 0.0005 0.0102 18 12 0.0 0.00005 0.004 50

503 36 566 33

Refer to Table 4 for sources of surface water quality guidelines.

Number of Cases and Percentage with Concentrations Below Detection Limit

Water Quality Variable Units Guideline Value n Non-D n Non-D

Concentration ConcentrationSummerSpring


Table 6 Cont’d.

Med Min Max Med Min MaxAluminum mg/L 100a 12 0.068 0.025 0.523 17 12 0.02285 0.01 0.112Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 4 0.025 0.025 0.025 100 6 0.025 0.025 0.025Antimony mg/L - 11 0.0001 0.0000376 0.001 82 11 0.0001 0.0000258 0.0001Arsenic mg/L 5c 12 0.000501 0.000243 0.001 17 12 0.0003 0.0001 0.0009Barium mg/L - 11 0.0581 0.0293 0.139 - 11 0.074 0.0416 0.224Beryllium mg/L - 11 0.00005 0.0000015 0.0005 82 11 0.00005 0.0000071 0.001Bicarbonate mg/L - 12 142 76 224 0 12 199 170 326Bismuth mg/L - 11 0.00025 0 0.0025 91 11 0.00025 0.000001 0.00025Boron mg/L 1200d 12 0.009325 0.00501 0.016 17 12 0.013 0.00809 0.025Cadmium mg/L e 12 0.000005 0.0000017 0.00005 67 12 0.000005 0.0000023 0.0005Calcium mg/L - 12 25.65 17.7 38.1 - 12 40 29.4 50.2Carbonate mg/L - 12 3 2.5 3 100 12 3 2.5 3Chloride mg/L 230f 6 1 0.25 2.8 - 7 0.5 0.2 2Chromium mg/L 1g 12 0.00025 0.000114 0.0025 67 12 0.00025 0.000061 0.0027Cobalt mg/L 0.9h 12 0.00006705 0.0000195 0.0005 33 12 0.0002 0.0000171 0.001Conductivity µS/cm - 12 214 126 331 - 12 308 257 475Copper mg/L i 6 0.0005 0.00025 0.00134 50 7 0.000438 0.000282 0.0005Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 4 11 10 14 - 6 4 3 7Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 1 10.785 10.67 10.9 - 4 6.34 0 12.68Hardness mg/L - 12 85.9 59 133 - 12 137.5 116 178Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - 3 0.25 0.25 0.25 100 3 0.25 0.25 0.25Iron mg/L 300 12 0.2 0.0522 0.558 17 12 0.1335 0.05 0.727Lead mg/L k 12 0.000154 0.0000005 0.0005 42 12 0.00005 0.0000187 0.01Lithium mg/L - 11 0.00308 0 0.009 9 11 0.004 0.003 0.012Magnesium mg/L - 12 5.2 3.7 9.2 - 12 8.15 6.9 12.8Manganese mg/L - 11 0.0235 0 0.043 - 11 0.02 0.007 0.082Mercury mg/L 0.013l 12 0.0001 0.000005 0.0001 83 12 0.0001 0.00001 0.0001Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l 1 1.55 0.6 2.5 100 4 0.3 0 0.6Molybdenum mg/L 73c 12 0.0005 0.000218 0.005 42 12 0.0006215 0.00034 0.0025Naphthenic Acids mg/L - 3 0.5 0.5 0.5 100 3 0.5 0.5 0.5Nickel mg/L m 12 0.00025 0.000005 0.0025 42 12 0.0024 0.000005 0.003Nitrate mg/L 13 8 0.01 0.0005 0.06 25 6 0.08 0.05 0.16Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 11 0.05 0.01 0.5 45 11 0.07 0.05 0.16Nitrite mg/L 0.06 9 0.0025 0.0025 0.05 100 7 0.0025 0.0025 0.05pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 12 8.1 7.97 8.26 - 12 8.085 7.59 8.24Phenols mg/L 0.004c 3 0.0005 0.0005 0.004 67 5 0.001 0.001 0.001Potassium mg/L - 12 0.45 0.2 1 17 12 0.65 0.2 2Selenium mg/L 1c 12 0.0001 0.00005 0.000155 58 12 0.0003 0.0001 0.0014Silicon mg/L 8 4.12 3.68 4.84 - 6 4.73 0 5.82Silver mg/L 1c 12 0.00005 0.0000017 0.00005 67 12 0.00005 0.0000005 0.0025Sodium mg/L - 12 8.8 0.115 37.4 - 12 14.35 0.25 68.1Strontium mg/L - 11 0.203 0.0861 0.303 - 11 0.268 0.173 0.407Sulphur mg/L 11 0.807 0.000473 1.3 9 11 1.2 0.8 1.7Sulphate mg/L 100p 12 2.5 0.2 6.1 - 12 3.7 1.4 5.4Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 3 0.0015 0.001 0.005 100 5 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015Thallium mg/L 0.8c 12 0.000025 0.0000016 0.000025 67 12 0.000025 0.0000003 0.025Tin mg/L - 11 0.0005 0.000171 0.047 73 11 0.0005 0.0005 0.025Titanium mg/L 100r 12 0.001755 0.00003 0.0135 17 12 0.0009 0.00003 0.00275Total Alkalinity mg/L - 12 116.5 63 184 - 12 177 139 1155Total dissolved solids mg/L - 12 134 89 191 - 12 180 146 280Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 12 0.3 0.025 1.01 17 12 0.1 0.025 0.3Total organic carbon mg/L - 4 10 0 14 - 6 0.3 0 7Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 12 0.025 0.005 0.18 58 12 0.08 0.003 0.12Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 10 3 1 6 40 11 1 1 7True Color TCU - 4 50 30 60 - 6 15 10 33Turbidity NTU 0 0Uranium mg/L - 11 0.00025 0.0000363 0.0025 73 11 0.00025 0.000158 0.0006Vanadium mg/L - 11 0.0005 0.0001 0.0014 18 11 0.0002 0.0001 0.0005

Zinc mg/L 30c 12 0.00172 0.0005 0.005 17 12 0.00189 0.0005 0.014

569 33 584



Water Quality Variable Units Guideline Value

Concentration Concentrationn Non-D n

WinterFall



Table 6 Cont’d.

ConcentrationMed

Aluminum mg/L 100a 47 0.062 4Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 16 0.025 100Antimony mg/L - 42 0.0001 81Arsenic mg/L 5c 46 0.0004 11Barium mg/L - 43 0.061 - Beryllium mg/L - 43 0.00005 84Bicarbonate mg/L - 47 176 - Bismuth mg/L - 42 0.00025 86Boron mg/L 1200d 47 0.01 9Cadmium mg/L e 47 0.000005 68Calcium mg/L - 47 35.2 - Carbonate mg/L - 47 3 100Chloride mg/L 230f 32 1 22Chromium mg/L 1g 47 0.00025 70Cobalt mg/L 0.9h 47 0.0000531 38Conductivity µS/cm - 47 260 - Copper mg/L i 32 0.0005 59Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 17 7 6Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 6 10.6 - Hardness mg/L - 47 120 - Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - 8 0.25 100Iron mg/L 300 47 0.177 9Lead mg/L k 47 0.0000545 36Lithium mg/L - 42 0.004 7Magnesium mg/L - 46 7.3 - Manganese mg/L - 43 0.0183 - Mercury mg/L 0.013l 46 0.0001 80Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l 6 0.3 50Molybdenum mg/L 73c 47 0.0005 49Naphthenic Acids mg/L - 7 0.5 100Nickel mg/L m 47 0.0006 30Nitrate mg/L 13 32 0.05 31Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 44 0.055 57Nitrite mg/L 0.06 34 0.0025 97pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 47 8.12 - Phenols mg/L 0.004c 9 0.001 78Potassium mg/L - 47 0.6 23Selenium mg/L 1c 46 0.0001 54Silicon mg/L 30 4.37 - Silver mg/L 1c 47 0.00005 64Sodium mg/L - 47 9.2 0Strontium mg/L - 43 0.232 0Sulphur mg/L 42 1.11 5Sulphate mg/L 100p 47 3.4 4Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 12 0.0015 83Thallium mg/L 0.8c 47 0.000025 70Tin mg/L - 43 0.0005 74Titanium mg/L 100r 47 0.0013 21Total Alkalinity mg/L - 47 144 0Total dissolved solids mg/L - 47 153 0Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 47 0.12 28Total organic carbon mg/L - 16 5 0Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 47 0.025 40Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 31 1.5 55True Color TCU - 16 29.5 0Turbidity NTU 0Uranium mg/L - 42 0.00025 76Vanadium mg/L - 43 0.0003 14Zinc mg/L 30c 47 0.00144 30

2,222 33



n NWater Quality Variable Units Guideline Value

Annual

on-D

Many surface water quality variables in the Baseline Case dataset are below detection limits in many parts of the LSA, with concentrations of 33% of all combinations of measured water quality variables, seasons, and sampling locations being below detection limits (Table 6). There is little seasonal variability to the frequency with which concentrations of water quality variables are below detection limits; the proportion of water quality variables in the LSA that are below detection limits was measured ranged from 30% in winter to 36% in the spring. Recoverable hydrocarbons and naphthenic acids are always below detection limits.

Concentrations of 4.5% of all combinations of measured water quality variables with guidelines, seasons, and sampling locations are above guideline values (Table 7). Ten of the 29 surface water quality variables with guidelines have guideline exceedances at least once in the Baseline Case dataset. The highest frequency of guideline exceedance occurs in the fall season (5.1%) and the lowest in the spring season (3.7%). The frequency with which surface water quality guidelines for total metals are exceeded is 3.2% of all cases. Nitrate plus nitrite, total aluminum, and total phosphorus concentrations account for approximately 73% of all guideline exceedances in the Baseline Case in the LSA, with lower frequencies of guideline exceedance for iron, chromium, sulphide, lead, mercury, nitrite, and selenium. Total phosphorus and sulphide account for most of the guideline exceedances for water quality variables that are not metals, with lower frequencies of guideline exceedance for chloride and nitrite (Table 7).

The ratio of the concentrations of surface water quality variables to their guideline value in the Baseline Case dataset is low for most water quality variables in the LSA (Figure 4). Only total chromium has an annual concentration greater than its guideline value and this is a result of concentrations very much above guideline in the summer season. Mean seasonal concentrations of nitrite (summer), total aluminum (fall), and total phosphorus (winter) exceed their guideline values as well.

3.3.2 Lower Mercoal Creek: Mine-Affected Part of LSA

Mercoal Creek originates in the Mercoal East Phase 2 Mine area (Figure 3) and is the only watercourse in the LSA that flows through an area that is being or has been mined. The lower Mercoal Creek Baseline Case is characterized by a total of eight seasons of water quality information at two sites (MEC-3 and MEC-4) located downstream of the Mercoal East Phase 2 Mine area and downstream of the mine permit boundary of the proposed Mercoal West mine (Figure 3).

Surface water quality in lower Mercoal Creek is similar to the LSA as a whole. Surface waters in lower Mercoal Creek are slightly alkaline, have levels of total suspended solids (TSS) that are consistent with the lowest values measured throughout the LSA (less than 3 mg/L), is moderately hard, and has high total alkalinity. The ionic characteristics of lower Mercoal Creek surface water are dominated by bicarbonate, calcium, and sodium. Lower Mercoal Creek has a trophic status ranging from oligotrophic to mesotrohpic in the summer.


Table 7 Frequencies of guideline exceedance in the Local Study Area.

n % n % n % n % n %Aluminum mg/L 0.1a 2 50 2 - 2 - 2 50 8 25Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 0 0 0 0 0Arsenic mg/L 0.005c 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Boron mg/L 1.2d 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Cadmium mg/L e 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Chloride mg/L 230f 2 - 1 - 1 - 0 4 - Chromium mg/L 0.001g 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Cobalt mg/L 0.0009h 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Copper mg/L i 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Iron mg/L 0.3 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Lead mg/L k 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Mercury mg/L 0.000013l 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l 0 0 0 0 0Molybdenum mg/L 0.073c 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Nickel mg/L m 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Nitrate mg/L 13 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 2 - 2 2 - 2 50 8 13Nitrite mg/L 0.06 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Phenols mg/L 0.004c 0 0 0 0 0Selenium mg/L 0.001c 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 50 8 13Silver mg/L 0.001c 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Sulphate mg/L 100p 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 0 0 0 0 0Thallium mg/L 0.0008c 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Titanium mg/L 0.1r 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L 1 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 2 50 2 50 2 - 2 50 8 38Zinc mg/L 0.03c 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 -

50 4 49 2 49 - 48 8 196 434 3 34 - 34 - 34 6 136 2


All MetalsAll Water Quality Variables

Water QualityVariable

Units Guideline Value

Portion of Local Study Area: Influenced by Existing MinesTotalSpring Summer Fall Winter


Table 7 Cont’d.

n % n % n % n % n %Aluminum mg/L 0.1a 9 22 10 20 10 60 10 30 39 33Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 2 - 4 - 4 - 6 - 16 - Arsenic mg/L 0.005c 8 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 38 - Boron mg/L 1.2d 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Cadmium mg/L e 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Chloride mg/L 230f 9 - 7 - 5 - 7 - 28 - Chromium mg/L 0.001g 9 - 10 10 10 10 10 - 39 5Cobalt mg/L 0.0009h 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Copper mg/L i 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Iron mg/L 0.3 9 11 10 10 10 20 10 20 39 15Lead mg/L k 9 11 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 3Mercury mg/L 0.000013l 8 - 10 10 10 - 10 - 38 3Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l 0 1 - 1 - 4 - 6 - Molybdenum mg/L 0.073c 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Nickel mg/L m 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Nitrate mg/L 13 7 - 7 - 6 - 4 - 24 - Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 9 11 9 22 9 44 9 33 36 28Nitrite mg/L 0.06 7 - 7 14 7 - 5 - 26 4pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Phenols mg/L 0.004c 0 1 - 3 - 5 - 9 - Selenium mg/L 0.001c 8 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 38 - Silver mg/L 0.001c 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Sulphate mg/L 100p 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 2 - 2 50 3 - 5 20 12 17Thallium mg/L 0.0008c 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Titanium mg/L 0.1r 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L 1 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 - Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 9 33 10 30 10 20 10 10 39 23Zinc mg/L 0.03c 9 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 39 -

222 4 248 5 248 6 255 4 973 5150 3 171 3 171 5 174 3 666 3





Portion of Local Study Area: Not Influenced by Existing MinesWinter TotalSpring Summer Fall


Table 7 Cont’d.

n % n % n % n % n %Aluminum mg/L 0.1a 11 27 12 17 12 50 12 33 47 32Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 2 - 4 - 4 - 6 - 16 - Arsenic mg/L 0.005c 10 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 46 - Boron mg/L 1.2d 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 - Cadmium mg/L e 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 - Chloride mg/L 230f 11 - 8 - 6 - 7 - 32 - Chromium mg/L 0.001g 11 - 12 8 12 8 12 - 47 4Cobalt mg/L 0.0009h 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 - Copper mg/L i 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 - Iron mg/L 0.3 11 9 12 8 12 17 12 17 47 13Lead mg/L k 11 9 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 2Mercury mg/L 0.000013l 10 - 12 8 12 - 12 - 46 2Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l 0 1 - 1 - 4 - 6 - Molybdenum mg/L 0.073c 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 - Nickel mg/L m 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 - Nitrate mg/L 13 9 - 9 - 8 - 6 - 32 - Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 11 9 11 18 11 36 11 36 44 25Nitrite mg/L 0.06 9 - 9 11 9 - 7 - 34 3pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 - Phenols mg/L 0.004c 0 1 - 3 - 5 - 9 - Selenium mg/L 0.001c 10 - 12 - 12 - 12 8 46 2Silver mg/L 0.001c 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 - Sulphate mg/L 100p 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 - Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 2 - 2 50 3 - 5 20 12 17Thallium mg/L 0.0008c 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 - Titanium mg/L 0.1r 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 - Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L 1 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 0 47 - Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 11 36 12 33 12 17 12 17 47 26Zinc mg/L 0.03c 11 - 12 - 12 - 12 - 47 -

272 4 297 4 297 5 303 5 1,169 4184 3 205 2 205 4 208 3 802 3





Local Study Area: OverallFall Winter TotalSpring Summer


The frequency with which surface water quality variables in the Baseline Case dataset are below detection limits in lower Mercoal Creek (40% on an annual basis, Table 8) is greater than in the LSA as a whole (33% on an annual basis, Table 7). A number of total metals and other surface water quality variables are below detection limits in all seasons in the Baseline Case dataset for lower Mercoal Creek.

The frequency of exceedance of guidelines for surface water quality in lower Mercoal Creek (3.7% on an annual basis, Table 8) is lower that for the entire LSA (4.5%, Table 7), and the frequency of guideline exceedance for total metals in lower Mercoal Creek (2.4% on an annual basis, Table 8) is approximately two-thirds that for the LSA exclusive of lower Mercoal Creek (3.2% on an annual basis, Table 7). Four of the 29 water quality variables with guidelines have guideline exceedances at least once in the Baseline Case dataset for lower Mercoal Creek: aluminum (four times); nitrate plus nitrite (twice), lead (once); selenium (once); and total phosphorus (three times).

3.4 SURFACE WATER QUALITY BASELINE FOR REGIONAL STUDY AREA

Detailed surface water quality information for the RSA is found in Appendix A2; Table 9 provides a summary of seasonal and annual median, minimum, and maximum concentrations for surface water quality variables that were measured.

Like the LSA, surface water quality in the RSA is also of generally good quality. Dissolved oxygen and dissolved organic carbon concentrations are high. TSS levels are usually below 10 mg/L, but increases to 50 mg/L to 80 mg/L in the downstream areas of the RSA occurred. Watercourses in the RSA are slightly alkaline and have generally low TDS levels with a range similar to that in the LSA (90 to 260 mg/L). Water in the RSA is moderately hard to very hard; 40% of all surface water quality samples used to characterize the Baseline Case for the RSA are classified as Hard, and approximately 10% are classified as Extremely Hard. Summer trophic status of RSA watercourses is classified as oligotrophic to mesotrophic (Dodds 2006).

In the RSA in the Baseline Case, as in the LSA, many water quality variables are below detection limits (Table 9) and the frequency with which surface water quality guidelines are exceeded is low (Table 10). With respect to detection limits, 29% of the 2,319 combinations of measured water quality variables, seasons, and sampling locations in the RSA are below detection limits (Table 9). There is some seasonal variability to the frequency with which concentrations of water quality variables are below detection limits; the proportion of water quality variables in the RSA that were measured to be below detection limits was ranged from 23% in winter to 33% in spring and summer.


Figure 4 Mean (±SE) ratio of concentration to guideline value of surface water quality variables in Local Study Area.

0.0

2.5

5.0

05

1015

0.0

2.5

5.0

Mea

sure

men

t:Gui

d elin

e

0.0

2.5

5.0

Aluminum

Ammonia-NArse

nicBoron

CadmiumChloride

ChromiumCobalt

CopperIro

nLead

Mercury

Molybdenum

NickelNitra

teNitrit

e

Phenols

Phosphorus

SeleniumSilve

r

Sulphate

Sulphide

Thallium

Titanium Zinc

0.0

2.5

5.0

Spring

Summer

Fall

Winter

Annual

*

*

*

*

*

*

Note: Dashed line in each pane is where the ratio of concentration to guideline value equals 1. Asterisks ( )

represent values which were measured at a detection limit that was above the guideline, therefore the calculated mean over-estimates the exceedance.


Table 8 Summary surface water quality Baseline Case conditions for lower Mercoal Creek.

Water Quality Variable n

% Below Detection

Limit % AboveGuideline

Water Quality Variable n

% Below Detection

Limit % AboveGuideline

Aluminum 8 13 25 Nickel 8 50 0 Ammonia-N - - - Nitrate 8 38 - Antimony 8 100 Nitrate+Nitrite 8 63 13 Arsenic 8 13 0 Nitrite 8 100 - Barium 8 - pH 8 - 0 Beryllium 8 100 Phenols - - - Bicarbonate 8 - Potassium 8 - Bismuth 8 100 Selenium 8 75 12.5 Boron 8 13 0 Silicon 8 - 0 Cadmium 8 100 0 Silver 8 100 Calcium 8 - Sodium 8 - Carbonate 8 100 Strontium 8 - 0 Chloride 4 - 0 Sulfur 8 - - Chromium 8 100 0 Sulphate 8 - 0 Cobalt 8 63 0 Sulphide - - - Conductivity 8 - Thallium 8 100 Copper 4 100 0 Thorium - - 0 Dissolved organic carbon

1 100 Tin 8 75

Dissolved oxygen - - - Titanium 8 13 Hardness 8 - Total Alkalinity 8 - Hydrocarbons, Recoverable

- - - Total dissolved solids

8 - -

Iron 8 13 0 Total Kjeldahl nitrogen

8 38 0

Lead 8 38 0 Total organic carbon - - Lithium 8 - 0 Total phosphorus 8 63 37.5 Magnesium 8 - Total Suspended

Solids 4 25 0

Manganese 8 - 0 True Color - - Mercury 8 100 0 Turbidity - - 0 Mercury, ultra-trace - - Uranium 8 100 Molybdenum 8 25 Vanadium 8 13 Naphthenic Acids - - Zinc 8 75

% Cases with Concentration below Detection Limit: 40 % Water Quality Variable Concentrations Above Guidelines: 3.7 % Total Metals Concentrations Above Guidelines: 2.4

Note: Information presented is annual summaries of Baseline Case surface water quality conditions in lower Mercoal Creek (sampling sites MEC-3 and MEC-4).


Table 9 Surface water quality summary for Regional Study Area.

Med Min Max Med Min MaxAluminum mg/L 100a 14 0.236 0.098 0.679 - 14 0.2495 0.0199 0.568 - Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 10 0.025 0.0025 0.065 90 10 0.025 0.025 0.06 90Antimony mg/L - 14 0.00046 0.000001 0.0025 79 14 0.000112 0.0000978 0.0025 79Arsenic mg/L 5c 14 0.0006125 0.00023 0.005 43 14 0.0006815 0.000213 0.005 43Barium mg/L - 14 0.06875 0.000082 0.103 - 14 0.07175 0.0586 0.0995 - Beryllium mg/L - 14 0.00005 0.0000005 0.00025 79 14 0.00005 0.0000015 0.00025 86Bicarbonate mg/L - 14 144.5 103 174 - 14 152 112 210 - Bismuth mg/L - 14 0.00025 0.000001 0.0035 71 14 0.00025 0.0000005 0.0035 79Boron mg/L 1200d 14 0.00998 0.001 0.014 90 11 0.01 0.001 0.014 9Cadmium mg/L e 14 0.000055 0.000005 0.00025 64 14 0.00001235 0.0000043 0.004 50Calcium mg/L - 14 31.2 20.6 42.1 - 14 33.7 25.2 52.8 - Carbonate mg/L - 8 2.5 2.5 3 100 8 3 2.5 6 63Chloride mg/L 230f 11 1.6 1 7 - 11 2 0.9 4.4 - Chromium mg/L 1g 14 0.0004 0.000172 0.0025 50 14 0.000325 0.00002 0.0016 43Cobalt mg/L 0.9h 14 0.0001 0.0000399 0.0009 36 14 0.0001 0.0000369 0.00035 50Conductivity µS/cm - 11 222 147 320 - 11 246 183 380 - Copper mg/L i 11 0.0005 0.0005 0.00157 55 11 0.0005 0.000177 0.002 45Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 4 5 4 8 - 4 4.5 3 6 - Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 10 10.1 6.32 13.6 - 10 8.9 8 10.2 - Hardness mg/L - 14 104.5 68 153 - 14 115 82 186 - Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - 0 0Iron mg/L 300 14 0.2525 0.0872 0.634 - 14 0.215 0.0178 0.6 - Lead mg/L k 14 0.0002 0.00005 0.003 36 14 0.00045 0.0000095 0.001 43Lithium mg/L - 14 0.00374 0.000006 0.00572 - 14 0.004 0.0023 0.0624 - Magnesium mg/L - 14 6.4 3.9 10.8 - 14 7.05 4.8 13.3 - Manganese mg/L - 14 0.01675 0.000006 0.0449 - 14 0.0245 0.00269 0.314 - Mercury mg/L 0.013l 14 0.00005 0.000005 0.00005 100 14 0.00005 0.000005 0.0001 100Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l 4 0.3 0.3 0.3 100 4 0.3 0.3 0.3 100Molybdenum mg/L 73c 14 0.0007435 0.0005 0.3 57 14 0.0005 0.0005 0.3 64Naphthenic Acids mg/L - 0 0Nickel mg/L m 14 0.000877 0.000216 0.002 21 14 0.0008035 0.00025 0.002 36Nitrate mg/L 13 3 0.005 0.005 0.005 100 2 0.0251 0.0002 0.05 50Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 14 0.055 0.000359 0.45 43 14 0.025 0.00131 0.2 79Nitrite mg/L 0.06 3 0.0025 0.0025 0.025 100 2 0.0125125 0.000025 0.025 100pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 11 8.23 8 8.5 - 11 8.3 8.2 8.5 - Phenols mg/L 0.004c 6 0.00125 0.0005 0.002 50 6 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 100Potassium mg/L - 11 0.6 0.25 0.7 27 14 0.5 0.3 1.1 43Selenium mg/L 1c 14 0.001022 0.0001 0.0015 64 14 0.001185 0.00005 0.006 50Silicon mg/L 3 4.98 4.47 5.73 - 4 5.075 3.81 5.28 - Silver mg/L 1c 14 0.00005 0.0000024 0.0005 71 14 0.00005 0.0000005 0.0005 71Sodium mg/L - 14 10.25 8.6 13 - 14 9.6 7 17 - Strontium mg/L - 14 0.1935 0.000305 0.401 - 14 0.241 0.165 1.42 - Sulphur mg/L 14 0.767 0.00224 1.8 - 14 1.25 0.00242 6.67 - Sulphate mg/L 100p 4 4.65 3.5 28.5 - 0 4.95 4 36.9Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 12 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 33 13 - Thallium mg/L 0.8c 14 0.000025 0.0000056 0.006 64 14 0.000025 0.00000155 0.006 57Tin mg/L - 14 0.0005 0.000005 0.003 79 14 0.0005 0.000015 0.0015 93Titanium mg/L 100r 14 0.00425 0.0003 0.016 7 14 0.00495 0.000139 0.0101 - Total Alkalinity mg/L - 14 118.5 84 146 - 14 124.5 92 181 - Total dissolved solids mg/L - 14 125 90 199 - 14 134 101 225 - Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 14 0.115 0.025 0.33 36 14 0.1 0.025 0.32 43Total organic carbon mg/L - 11 7.9 4 9 - 11 8.05 3 11.3 - Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 14 0.025 0.004 0.1 57 14 0.025 0.0015 0.06 86

Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 14 5 0.5 10 29 13 5 0.5 11 38True Color TCU - 10 20 15 50 - 10 36.5 5 55 -

Turbidity NTU 6 4.55 2.29 7.75 - 6 6.31 4.28 8 - Uranium mg/L - 8 0.0003175 0.0000025 0.000651 50 8 0.00025 0.000202 0.000545 50Vanadium mg/L - 14 0.0005 0.0000007 0.002 36 14 0.0005 0.000121 0.0016 43Zinc mg/L 30c 14 0.0017 0.00025 0.0126 43 14 0.00158 0.000241 0.0079 21

675 33 670 33



Non-D nWater Quality Variable Units Guideline Value

Concentration ConcentrationSpring Summer

n Non-D


Table 9 Cont’d.

Med Min Max Med Min MaxAluminum mg/L 100a 11 0.556 0.061 1.87 - 9 0.0318 0.011 0.23Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 7 0.025 0.025 0.025 100 6 0.025 0.025 0.025Antimony mg/L - 11 0.0001 0.000001 0.0025 73 7 0.0000875 0.000001 0.000104Arsenic mg/L 5c 11 0.000709 0.000487 0.005 36 7 0.000297 0.0001 0.000412Barium mg/L - 11 0.0811 0.000103 0.1 - 9 0.101 0.000109 0.121Beryllium mg/L - 11 0.0000692 0.0000015 0.0005 73 9 0.0000061 0.0000015 0.001Bicarbonate mg/L - 11 132 107 186 - 9 220 193 256Bismuth mg/L - 11 0.00025 0.000001 0.0035 64 7 0.000001 0.000001 0.0000025Boron mg/L 1200d 11 0.008 0.003 0.0119 9 9 0.0116 0.00824 0.025Cadmium mg/L e 11 0.0000326 0.000005 0.00025 55 9 0.0000096 0.000005 0.0005Calcium mg/L - 11 36.3 23.9 43.8 - 9 53.3 44 62.6Carbonate mg/L - 8 2.75 2.5 3 100 9 2.5 2.5 3Chloride mg/L 230f 7 2 1.5 2.4 - 7 2 1 4Chromium mg/L 1g 11 0.0008 0.0004 0.0026 27 9 0.000235 0.0000889 0.0025Cobalt mg/L 0.9h 11 0.00035 0.000132 0.0007 36 9 0.0000152 0.000001 0.001Conductivity µS/cm - 8 266.5 202 323 - 7 406 323 450Copper mg/L i 7 0.000988 0.0005 0.00227 43 7 0.000461 0.00042 0.000635Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 4 8.5 8 12 - 7 3 2 4Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 7 11.07 10.65 13.3 - 7 12.52 11.4 13.24Hardness mg/L - 11 120 77 148 - 9 188 141 218Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - 0 4 0.25 0.25 0.25Iron mg/L 300 11 0.7 0.05 1.6 9 9 0.104 0.008 0.246Lead mg/L k 11 0.0008 0.000191 0.001 36 9 0.0000385 0.0000107 0.0025Lithium mg/L - 11 0.00368 0.000005 0.00584 9 7 0.00397 0.000007 0.0067Magnesium mg/L - 11 8.1 4.3 11.4 - 9 11.9 8.1 14.8Manganese mg/L - 9 0.042 0.0097 0.068 - 9 0.013 0.0000025 0.039Mercury mg/L 0.013l 11 0.00005 0.00001 0.0001 64 7 0.00001 0.00001 0.0001Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l 4 3.25 1.7 3.9 - 6 0.65 0.6 1.2Molybdenum mg/L 73c 11 0.000858 0.0005 1.7 36 9 0.00154 0.000948 0.6Naphthenic Acids mg/L - 0 5 0.5 0.5 0.5Nickel mg/L m 11 0.0013 0.0005 0.0025 36 9 0.000005 0.000005 0.0016Nitrate mg/L 13 4 0.115 0.0001 0.18 - 2 0.7 0.4 1Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 11 0.18 0.00075 1 45 9 0.3 0.000005 1Nitrite mg/L 0.06 3 0.0025 0.0025 0.006 67 2 0.025 0.025 0.025pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8 8.215 8.1 8.8 - 7 8.1 7.9 8.2Phenols mg/L 0.004c 7 0.0005 0.0005 0.001 86 6 0.001 0.001 0.001Potassium mg/L - 11 0.7 0.5 2.59 - 9 1 0.5 1.3Selenium mg/L 1c 11 0.000782 0.0001 0.0015 55 7 0.0009 0.0001 0.00198Silicon mg/L 3 8.15 7 9.26 - 0Silver mg/L 1c 11 0.00005 0.00000068 0.0005 45 9 0.0000005 0.0000005 0.0025Sodium mg/L - 11 10 7.6 14.4 - 9 19 15 23Strontium mg/L - 11 0.224 0.000414 0.36 - 9 0.367 0.00044 0.438Sulphur mg/L 11 0.0108 0.00259 1.5 - 9 0.00784 0.0016 0.062Sulphate mg/L 100p 4 5.8 4 36.2 - 6 10.2 5.7 48.9Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 8 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 50 7 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015Thallium mg/L 0.8c 11 0.0000285 0.0000042 0.002 64 9 0.0000083 0.0000003 0.025Tin mg/L - 10 0.0005 0.0000337 0.006 30 9 0.00003 0.0000005 0.025Titanium mg/L 100r 11 0.0116 0.000282 0.0418 9 9 0.0031 0.00116 0.00959Total Alkalinity mg/L - 11 112 88 153 - 9 181 158 210Total dissolved solids mg/L - 11 157 95 200 - 9 224 186 262Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 11 0.27 0.025 0.5 18 9 0.1 0.025 0.1Total organic carbon mg/L - 8 8 4.2 12 - 8 3 1 5Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 11 0.028 0.01 0.1 36 9 0.004 0.0015 0.09Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 11 14 0.5 79 18 7 1.5 1 4True Color TCU - 7 30 15 50 - 6 8.5 4 10Turbidity NTU 3 1.09 1.08 1.72 - 0Uranium mg/L - 8 0.000329 0.00000025 0.000598 50 7 0.000394 0.0000007 0.000663Vanadium mg/L - 11 0.003 0.0000005 0.00477 36 9 0.0005 0.0000002 0.000661Zinc mg/L 30c 11 0.00486 0.00025 0.00933 27 9 0.00201 0.0005 0.007

530 26 444



Water Quality Variable Units Guideline Value Non-D

Concentration ConcentrationFall

n

Winter

n


Table 9 Cont’d.

ConcentrationMed

Aluminum mg/L 100a 48 0.2225 - Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 33 0.025 94Antimony mg/L - 46 0.0001 74Arsenic mg/L 5c 46 0.0006 37Barium mg/L - 48 0.07655 - Beryllium mg/L - 48 0.00005 76Bicarbonate mg/L - 48 153.5 - Bismuth mg/L - 46 0.00025 64Boron mg/L 1200d 45 0.01 16Cadmium mg/L e 48 0.0000275 53Calcium mg/L - 48 35.9 - Carbonate mg/L - 33 2.5 92Chloride mg/L 230f 36 2 - Chromium mg/L 1g 48 0.0004 40Cobalt mg/L 0.9h 48 0.0002 38Conductivity µS/cm - 37 275 - Copper mg/L i 36 0.0005 39Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 19 4 - Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 34 10.675 - Hardness mg/L - 48 122.5 - Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - 4 0.25 100Iron mg/L 300 48 0.2155 4Lead mg/L k 48 0.00035 38Lithium mg/L - 46 0.003965 2Magnesium mg/L - 48 8.15 - Manganese mg/L - 46 0.02205 2Mercury mg/L 0.013l 46 0.00005 79Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l 18 0.6 44Molybdenum mg/L 73c 48 0.0009935 51Naphthenic Acids mg/L - 5 0.5 100Nickel mg/L m 48 0.00087 32Nitrate mg/L 13 11 0.05 36Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 48 0.06 43Nitrite mg/L 0.06 10 0.00425 90pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 37 8.22 - Phenols mg/L 0.004c 25 0.0005 84Potassium mg/L - 45 0.69 21Selenium mg/L 1c 46 0.0009365 52Silicon mg/L 10 5.28 - Silver mg/L 1c 48 0.00005 60Sodium mg/L - 48 10.7 - Strontium mg/L - 48 0.236 - Sulphur mg/L 40 0.072 - Sulphate mg/L 100p 48 5.4 - Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 14 0.0015 100Thallium mg/L 0.8c 48 0.000025 58Tin mg/L - 47 0.0005 73Titanium mg/L 100r 48 0.00415 4Total Alkalinity mg/L - 48 126.5 - Total dissolved solids mg/L - 48 152.5 - Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 48 0.1 45Total organic carbon mg/L - 38 7.3 - Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 48 0.025 58

Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 45 4 35True Color TCU - 33 20 -

Turbidity NTU 15 5.5 - Uranium mg/L - 31 0.000349 40Vanadium mg/L - 48 0.0005 36Zinc mg/L 30c 48 0.002005 27

2,319 29



nWater Quality Variable Units Guideline Value

Annual

Non-D


Table 10 Frequencies of guideline exceedance in the Regional Study Area.

n % n % n % n % n %Aluminum mg/L 0.1a 3 100 3 33 3 67 3 - 12 50Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Arsenic mg/L 0.005c 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Boron mg/L 1.2d 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Cadmium mg/L e 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Chloride mg/L 230f 2 - 3 - 2 - 2 - 9 - Chromium mg/L 0.001g 3 - 3 - 3 67 3 - 12 17Cobalt mg/L 0.0009h 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Copper mg/L i 3 - 3 - 3 33 3 - 12 8Iron mg/L 0.3 3 - 3 - 3 67 3 - 12 17Lead mg/L k 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Mercury mg/L 0.000013l 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - 8 - Molybdenum mg/L 0.073c 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Nickel mg/L m 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Nitrate mg/L 13 - 2 - 1 - - 3 - Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 3 100 3 33 3 33 3 100 12 67Nitrite mg/L 0.06 - 2 - - - 2 - pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 3 812 3 812 3 812 3 812 12 - Phenols mg/L 0.004c - - 2 - 2 - 4 - Selenium mg/L 0.001c 3 33 3 100 3 - 3 67 12 50Silver mg/L 0.001c 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Sulphate mg/L 100p 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 2 - - 2 - 2 - 6 - Thallium mg/L 0.0008c 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Titanium mg/L 0.1r 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L 1 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 - Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 33 12 8Zinc mg/L 0.03c 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 12 -

74 42 77 38 77 42 76 40 304 953 8 53 8 53 13 53 4 212 8

Note: Overall Regional Study Area information includes results from MCLD-4, McLeod River below confluence with Embarras River.Refer to Table 4 for sources of surface water quality guidelines.

All Water Quality VariablesAll Metals


Guideline ValueUnits

McLeod Riverfrom Mercoal Creek Confluence to Embarras River Confluence

Spring Summer Fall Winter Total


Table 10 Cont’d.

n % n % n % n % n %Aluminum mg/L 0.1a 10 90 10 90 7 71 5 40 32 78Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 7 - 7 - 4 - 3 - 21 - Arsenic mg/L 0.005c 10 - 10 - 7 - 3 - 30 - Boron mg/L 1.2d 10 - 7 - 7 - 5 - 29 - Cadmium mg/L e 10 10 10 20 7 - 5 - 32 9Chloride mg/L 230f 8 - 7 - 4 - 4 - 23 - Chromium mg/L 0.001g 10 10 10 30 7 - 5 - 32 13Cobalt mg/L 0.0009h 10 - 10 - 7 - 5 - 32 - Copper mg/L i 10 - 10 - 7 - 5 - 32 - Iron mg/L 0.3 10 30 10 40 7 57 5 - 32 34Lead mg/L k 10 10 10 - 7 - 5 - 32 3Mercury mg/L 0.000013l 10 - 10 - 7 - 3 - 30 - Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l 1 - 1 - 1 - 3 - 6 - Molybdenum mg/L 0.073c 10 - 10 - 7 14 5 20 32 6Nickel mg/L m 10 - 10 - 7 - 5 - 32 - Nitrate mg/L 13 3 - - 3 - 2 - 8 - Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 10 20 10 7 43 5 80 32 31Nitrite mg/L 0.06 3 - - 3 - 2 - 8 - pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 10 812 10 7 812 5 812 32 - Phenols mg/L 0.004c 6 - 6 4 - 3 - 19 - Selenium mg/L 0.001c 10 - 10 7 - 3 - 30 10Silver mg/L 0.001c 10 - 10 7 - 5 - 32 - Sulphate mg/L 100p 10 - 10 7 - 5 - 32 - Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 1 - - 1 - 3 - 5 - Thallium mg/L 0.0008c 10 10 10 7 - 5 - 32 13Titanium mg/L 0.1r 10 - 10 7 - 5 - 32 - Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L 1 10 - 10 7 - 5 - 32 - Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 10 20 10 7 43 5 - 32 19Zinc mg/L 0.03c 10 - 10 7 - 5 - 32 -

249 41 238 8 174 42 124 38 785 9171 9 168 11 120 8 82 4 541 10





Total

Embarras River from Chance Creek Confluence to Confluence with McLeod River

Spring Summer Fall Winter


Table 10 Cont’d.

n % n % n % n % n %Aluminum mg/L 0.1a 14 93 14 71 11 73 9 22 48 69Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 10 - 10 - 7 - 6 - 33 - Arsenic mg/L 0.005c 14 - 14 - 11 - 7 - 46 - Boron mg/L 1.2d 14 - 11 - 11 - 9 - 45 - Cadmium mg/L e 14 7 14 14 11 - 9 - 48 6Chloride mg/L 230f 11 - 11 - 7 - 7 - 36 - Chromium mg/L 0.001g 14 7 14 21 11 27 9 - 48 15Cobalt mg/L 0.0009h 14 - 14 - 11 - 9 - 48 - Copper mg/L i 14 - 14 - 11 18 9 - 48 4Iron mg/L 0.3 14 21 14 29 11 64 9 - 48 29Lead mg/L k 14 7 14 - 11 - 9 - 48 2Mercury mg/L 0.000013l 14 - 14 - 11 - 7 - 46 - Mercury, ultra-trace ng/l 13l 4 - 4 - 4 - 6 - 18 - Molybdenum mg/L 0.073c 14 - 14 - 11 9 9 11 48 4Nickel mg/L m 14 - 14 - 11 - 9 - 48 - Nitrate mg/L 13 3 - 2 - 4 - 2 - 11 - Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 14 36 14 7 11 36 9 78 48 38Nitrite mg/L 0.06 3 - 2 - 3 - 2 - 10 - pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 14 754 14 174 11 738 9 722 48 - Phenols mg/L 0.004c 6 - 6 - 7 - 6 - 25 - Selenium mg/L 0.001c 14 7 14 21 11 - 7 29 46 20Silver mg/L 0.001c 14 - 14 - 11 - 9 - 48 - Sulphate mg/L 100p 14 - 14 - 11 - 9 - 48 - Sulphide mg/L 0.002q 4 - 0 4 - 6 - 14 - Thallium mg/L 0.0008c 14 7 14 - 11 - 9 - 48 8Titanium mg/L 0.1r 14 - 14 - 11 - 9 - 48 - Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L 1 14 - 14 - 11 - 9 - 48 - Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 14 14 14 - 11 27 9 11 48 15Zinc mg/L 0.03c 14 - 14 - 11 - 9 - 48 -

349 38 340 14 278 39 227 34 1,194 8242 9 239 9 191 11 153 3 825 9





Regional Study Area: Overall

Spring Summer Fall Winter Total


With respect to guideline exceedance, the frequency with which surface water quality guidelines are exceeded is low for the RSA in the Baseline Case, with concentrations in the RSA Baseline Case of 8% of all water quality variables for which there are surface water quality guidelines (i.e., all combinations of measured water quality variables with guidelines, seasons, and sampling locations) exceeded surface water quality guidelines (Table 10).

The frequency with which surface water quality guidelines are exceeded is seasonally-dependent, with the highest frequency of guideline exceedance occurring in the fall season (10% of cases) and the lowest frequency of guideline exceedance in the winter season (6% of cases). The frequency of guideline exceedance for total metals was 9% of all seasonal, total metal, and sampling location combinations in the Baseline Case, and ranged from 3% in the winter to 11% in the fall (Table 10).

Total aluminum (33%), nitrate plus nitrite (18%), and total iron (14%) and phosphorus concentrations account for 65% of all guideline exceedances in the Baseline Case in the RSA, with lower frequencies of guideline exceedance for selenium, total phosphorus, chromium, thallium, cadmium, copper, and molybdenum (Table 10).

The ratio of the concentrations of surface water quality variables to their guideline value in the Baseline Case dataset is low for most water quality variables in the LSA, with the exceptions of aluminum, cadmium, iron, and thallium (Figure 5). Mean seasonal concentrations of chromium (fall), and selenium (summer) exceed their guideline values as well.

3.5 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WATER QUALITY AND TSS

While there were insufficient water quality data in the small drainages in the LSA to conduct the analysis presented below, there is a correlation in larger streams between concentrations of some water quality variables and TSS levels (Figure 6) and it is likely that similar relationships exist for the LSA drainages. Strong correlations with TSS exist for some water quality variables and not for others (Figure 6).

Of particular interest are the relationships between total aluminum and total iron concentrations, their respective water quality guideline values, and TSS levels (Figure 6). For example, using the regression (p < .001) total aluminum concentrations are essentially above the aluminum guideline at TSS = 0 mg/L. Total iron concentrations are at guideline value at TSS level of approximately 8 mg/L. These relationships suggest that it may be difficult to manage concentrations of water quality variables such as total aluminum and total iron in impoundments through the management of TSS levels.


Figure 5 Mean (±SE) ratio of concentration to guideline value of surface water quality variables in Regional Study Area.

0

3

6

9

0

6

12

18

0

3

6

9

Mea

sure

men

t:Gui

deli n

e

0

3

6

9

Aluminum

Ammonia-NArse

nicBoron

CadmiumChloride

ChromiumCobalt

CopperIro

nLead

Mercury

Molybdenum

NickelNitra

teNitrit

e

Phenols

Phosphorus

SeleniumSilve

r

Sulphate

Thallium

Titanium Zinc

0

3

6

9

Spring

Summer

Fall

Winter

Annual

*

*

*

*

*

Note: Dashed line in each pane is where the ratio of concentration to guideline value equals 1. Asterisks ( ) represent values which were measured at a detection limit that was above the guideline, therefore the calculated mean over-estimates the exceedance.


Figure 6 Relationship between concentrations of selected water quality variables and TSS concentrations in Embarras River.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

Alu

min

um (m

g /L)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

Zinc

(mg /

L)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

Iron

( mg/

L)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.000

0.006

0.012

0.018

0.024

0.030

Thal

lium

(mg/

L)

Total Suspended Sediment (mg/L)

r = 0.82

r = 0.86

r = 0.072

r = 0.045

2

2

2

2

Dashed lines are surface water quality guideline.


4.0 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT FOR LOCAL STUDY AREA This section presents the effects assessment of the Project for surface water quality in the LSA. The assessment is organized as follows:

Assessment of the validity of the causal relationships linking Project activities to possible changes in surface water quality;

Specification of mitigation measures to be implemented to prevent or avoid potentially negative environmental consequences of Project activities; and

An analysis and classification of residual impacts after the application of mitigation measures.

Conservative assumptions are used throughout the impact assessment to ensure that residual impacts are not underestimated.

The effects assessment for the LSA will be the same for the Application Case and the CEA Case because the additional project defining the CEA Case (Robb Trend Mine) is downstream of the Project and will therefore have no influence on surface water quality conditions in the LSA. The analyses and conclusions presented in this section are therefore applicable to both the Application Case and the CEA Case.

4.1 EFFECTS OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES

4.1.1 Assessment of Validity of Impact Pathways

The construction phase of the Project will require the implementation of a number of activities in specific watersheds within the LSA (Table 11). The effects of all the construction activities listed in Table 11 are assessed as being valid through the impact pathway of increased sediment loading to surface waters and associated changes in surface water quality.

Table 11 Project activities in the construction phase of the Project.

Project Component Local Watersheds Affected Construction Activities

Mercoal West Mine Mercoal Creek, Unnamed tributaries to Mercoal Creek, Unnamed tributaries to McLeod River, McCardell Creek

Tree clearing, constructing access roads, diversions, and settling ponds, Area disturbances for borrow pits and waste and soil piles

New Yellowhead/Mercoal Haul Roads

Mercoal Creek, Chance Creek, Jackson Creek

Clearing and site disturbance, constructing drainage controls, cleanouts/retention areas and borrow pits

Yellowhead Tower Mine Chance Creek, Jackson Creek Tree clearing, constructing access roads, staged diversions, settling ponds, area disturbances for borrow pits and waste rock

From Surface Water Hydrology Report (Matrix 2008).


4.1.2 Mitigation Measures to be Implemented

The Project will implement a number of well-established mitigation measures which will effectively prevent or reduce to acceptable levels the effects on surface water quality from Project activities in the construction phase. These are presented in detail in CVRI (2008, Section C) and include:

Minimization of the time interval between clearing/grubbing and subsequent earthworks, particularly at or in the vicinity of watercourses or in areas susceptible to erosion;

Installation of surface runoff collection and treatment systems to control groundwater seepage from road cuts and surface runoff from disturbed areas. Surface runoff will be directed to settling impoundments for removal of settleable solids;

Slope grading and stabilization techniques will be adopted. Slopes will be contoured to produce moderate slope angles to reduce erosion risk. Other stabilization techniques used to control erosion include: ditching above the cutslope to channel surface runoff away from the cutslope, leaving buffer (vegetation) strips between the construction site and a watercourse, placing large rock rip rap to stabilize slopes;

Temporary measures to control erosion before a vegetation cover is re-established, including: diversion ditches, drainage control, check dams, sediment ponds, sumps and mulches;

Progressive mining and reclamation to reduce the amount of disturbed area at any given time. During reclamation, permanent plant cover and revegetation will be established. Soil erosion will be reduced by minimizing the time that reclaimed surfaces are left bare;

Whenever possible, construction activities in close proximity to watercourses will be carried out during periods of relatively low surface runoff in late fall, winter and early spring (from October to April). A 30 m buffer (vegetation) strip will be left between construction sites and watercourses except at stream crossings and diversions;

The design and construction of all stream crossings will be done in compliance with the Alberta Code of Practice for Watercourse Crossings and associated guidelines. This means that all stream crossings constructed by the Project will meet regulatory requirements for protection of fish resources and aquatic habitat; this will also effectively mitigate against effects on surface water quality; and

Where necessary, interim erosion/sediment control measures will be utilized until long-term protection can be effectively implemented.


4.1.3 Impact Analysis

It is expected that construction activities of the Project will have minor effects on surface water quality conditions in the LSA. A review of existing information regarding effects of construction activities on surface water quality is provided in MEMS (2005, Section 3.1.1). The main conclusions of this review were that sedimentation increases at affected sites but rapidly returns to levels similar to reference sites following cessation of construction activities. The rate of return depends upon the hydrologic regime of the watercourse (gradient and flow), and that surface water quality effects can be mitigated with strict application of operating conditions.

With strict implementation of the mitigation measures summarized above and described in detail in the CVRI 2008, Section F, Reclamation Plan, potential impacts of the construction phases are predicted to be insignificant for the following reasons:

Impacts from construction activities which have been identified as potentially adverse are mitigable using standard engineering and environmental design applications;

Short-term impacts on surface water quality during culvert crossing installation are inevitable. Those impacts are, however, temporary and localized;

Potential adverse effects associate with sedimentation will be localized, that is, will be confined to the immediate and downstream areas of the construction activities;

Potential effects on water quality associated with sediment input will be temporary, that is, they will occur mainly during the period of construction and until bank slopes are stabilized; and

Construction of haul roads, mine dewatering systems and overburden dumps will follow mining plans and schedules. These activities will be carried out sequentially, at intervals, before the development of new areas.

4.1.4 Residual Impact Classification

The residual (after mitigation) effects of the Project on surface water quality from construction activities of the Project are assessed as Insignificant in the LSA:

Project Contribution – Negative, there will be some effect of Project construction activities on surface water quality;

Direction – the residual change in the surface water quality will be Negative;

Geographic Extent – Local, within the LSA;


Duration – Short, and confined to the Construction Phase of the Project;

Frequency – the effect will be Isolated and confined to the Construction Phase of the Project;

Reversibility – the effect is assessed as Reversible, short-term because effects will diminish quickly once construction activities are complete;

Magnitude – Low, there will be changes in surface water quality as a result of construction activities. However, with the effective application of well-accepted and regulated mitigation measures, these changes are expected to be within established protective standards and to cause no detectable change in surface water quality beyond short-term, local effects; and

Probability of Occurrence – High.

4.1.5 Level of Confidence and Uncertainties

The level of confidence in this assessment is High. The mitigation measures to be applied are well-accepted and there is good evidence from previous studies that the effective application of these mitigation measures in accordance with operating procedures will ensure any effects of construction activities on surface water quality will be localized and short-term.

4.2 EFFECTS OF USING NITROGEN-BASED EXPLOSIVES


Explosives containing ammonium nitrate (used as an oxidizer) will be used during the mine operations. The use of explosives is restricted to breakup of the overburden material to be removed by the dragline. Broken rock and unconsolidated material will be deposited in piles, or be used to backfill previously mined areas. These rock piles and backfilled areas are potential sources of leaching of nitrates into surface waters. The leaching and runoff of residual nitrates from the rockpiles, via the impoundments, into receiving waters. This impact pathway is assessed as valid.


Nitrogen release to the aquatic environment will be minimized through a number of mitigation measures already in use at existing coal mines in the area:

The use of explosives with less slurry to reduce the amount of nitrogen compounds released;

Increase of blasting efficiency, including decreased amplitude and increased frequency of blasts to decrease the amount of nitrogen which can escape to the environment; and


Minimization of water contact with explosives. Nitrogen compounds found in explosives are water soluble and water control activities (dewatering of pit areas, use of diversion ditches and interceptor ditches) will ensure the driest conditions possible for mining and blasting operations.


Several studies addressing elevated nitrogen levels in surface waters from mining activities were summarized in Hackbarth (1999) and MEMS (2005); the main findings reported in these documents are as follows:

While increased levels of nitrogen (nitrate) were noted in streams receiving discharges from settling ponds, these increases were inconsistent with data from the Erith, Pembina and Embarras Rivers downstream of the mines which indicated concentrations often at or below detection limits;

Studies conducted in the Lovett River by Alberta Environment found significantly higher concentrations of nitrogen in areas downstream of mining, although the elevated concentrations were less than surface water quality guidelines;

Release of nitrogen from explosives does not necessarily occur in the same year as the explosives were used but depends on factors such as hydrological cycle, form and intensity of precipitation, drainage exposure, aspect of waste dump, quantity of water and watershed characteristics; and

While nitrogen release increases rapidly with mining, the total quantity of nitrogen drops relatively quickly following the first freshet after blasting is completed and then continues to release over a period of five to ten years.


The residual (after mitigation) effects of the Project on surface water quality via increases in nitrogen caused by the use of explosives containing ammonium nitrate are assessed as Insignificant in the LSA:

Project Contribution – Negative, there will be some effect of use of nitrogen-based explosives on surface water quality;

Direction – the residual change in the surface water quality in the receiving watercourses will be Negative;


Duration – Long, as release of nitrogen compounds from mine waste dumps have been documented to occur from five to ten years after the use of explosives;


Frequency – Periodic, as explosives will be used intermittently but repeatedly during the life of the Project;

Reversibility – the effect is assessed as Reversible, Long-term because effects have been documented as diminishing with time;

Magnitude – Low, as while increases in concentration of nitrogen compounds downstream of active mines has been documented in a number of cases, elevated concentrations have more often than not been below surface water quality guidelines; and



The level of confidence in the assessments concerning the leaching of nitrates from mined areas is Moderate to High because the magnitude as well as spatial and temporal patterns of elevated nitrogen as a result of mining and use of nitrogen-based explosives are well-documented (Hackbarth (1999).

4.3 DISCHARGE FROM IMPOUNDMENTS TO NATURAL WATERCOURSES


The Project areas will potentially impact surface water quality. Specific activities which can potentially influence the surface water quality include construction (i.e., soil stripping and logging, development of a dewatering system, and building haul roads and stream crossings), normal mine operations (i.e., pit dewatering and surface runoff), and reclamation (i.e., abandonment of open pit workings, surface and rock disposal area recontouring, and abandonment of roads and water management systems). Each of these activities will potentially influence the natural drainage, infiltration, runoff, and soil erosion of the existing area which can influence surface water quality. Because of the potential influence of the mining activities on the surface water quality, water collection and impoundment structures will be used to attenuate the impacts of the mining activities on the local water courses, including increased sediment loads and deposition of those sediments. The water from these impoundments will be released into local streams which will eventually merge with the larger systems; the regional study area concerns the McLeod and Embarras Rivers.

The Project will have impoundments designed for storage and treatment of incidental water collecting in sumps, drained from mine pits, runoff from roads, and runoff from exposed, unvegetated areas. The water will be draining into the Embarras and McLeod Rivers following collection in the impoundments and discharge into smaller tributaries. This impact pathway is assessed to be valid.



Mine Operations Water from pit dewatering operations will be directed to settling impoundments for treatment prior to discharge of surface waters. In impoundments, pit water will mix with surface runoff. If necessary, flocculants will be used to enhance the rate of settlement of suspended solids. Impoundment discharges will be subject to conditions in the EPEA approval.

Impoundment Water All mine water will be treated prior to its release in to the receiving waters to reduce sediment and chemical loading impacts. The mine wastewater treatment program similar to the one currently in use at existing mines will be established to minimize downstream siltation and minimize downstream effects on surface water quality.

Water Management System An adaptive management approach to water treatment has been used in existing mines and will be used for this Project as well. The water management system design and maintenance have been consistently improved using best available technology which has resulted in significant increases in waste water treatment efficiency.

Release of water pollutants from the site such as oil and grease is controlled. With the installation of oil booms on the impoundments and immediate containment of oil in the event of a spill, there is little danger of these materials contaminating surface waters. Components of the water handling system will be designed according to the governmental specification and the systems will be operated in accordance with regulatory approval requirements.


The impact analysis uses an environmental effects monitoring framework to evaluate effects of potential point sources of pollution. Surface water quality upstream of impoundments is represented by the Baseline Case surface water quality conditions, impoundment discharges represent potential point sources of pollution, and surface water quality downstream of impoundments is determined by the use of a simple surface water quality model.

A water quality model was developed and applied to simulate the effects of impoundment discharges into receiving waters for four creeks in the LSA: Jackson Creek and Chance Creek for the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension; and McCardell Creek and Mercoal Creek for the Mercoal West Mine Extension. The model was developed solely from empirical data gathered as part of baseline conditions (Section 3 of this report and Surface Water Hydrology Report (Matrix 2008)), as well as from data reported by Coal Valley in its annual approvals reports that summarize monitoring conducted on existing mines from 2001 to 2005. Appendix A3 contains a detailed description of the water quality model; a summary of the model is provided below:

Only surface water quality variables with water quality guidelines are simulated (Table 3, Table 4);


Surface water quality conditions are predicted for Jackson Creek and Chance Creek immediately upstream of their confluences with the Embarras River (at sampling sites JC and CH, respectively as indicated on Figure 3, and for McCardell Creek and Mercoal Creek immediately upstream of their confluences with the McLeod River (at sampling sites MCCARD-1 and MEC-4, respectively as indicated on Figure 3);

Surface water quality of natural watercourses is derived from Baseline Case conditions as described in Section 3 and Appendix A2 of this report;

Impoundment discharges to natural watercourses are derived from historical discharges measured in impoundments from the Coal Valley Mine from 2001 to 2005 as reported in annual approvals monitoring reports; and

Impoundment water quality is derived from water quality measurements taken in the period 2001 to 2005 as reported in annual approvals monitoring reports as well as results of sampling five existing impoundments in September 2006.

4.3.3.1 Conservative Assumptions used in Impact Analysis

The model scenarios used as basis of the impact analysis contain a number of conservative assumptions about the number of impoundments operating at any given time, water quality of impoundment discharges, streamflows in the receiving watercourses, and statistical power available for assessing impoundment effects.

First, the number of impoundments discharging to each of the four natural watercourses considered in the model was set to the total number of impoundments scheduled to be operating in the drainage of each of the watercourses as described in the Surface Water Hydrology Report (Matrix 2008). It is likely that fewer impoundments will be operating during certain stages of the Project, particularly in the startup, when not all impoundments will have been constructed, and final reclamation phases, when the oldest impoundments will have already been decommissioned. Because the total impoundment discharge is a function of the number of impoundments operating in a drainage (Appendix A3), this assumption creates a level of impoundment discharge in the model that is likely greater than the discharge that would actually occur.

Second, a conservative watercourse streamflow was used. For the spring, summer, and fall seasons, the watercourse streamflow was set to the flow of the 7Q10 low flow event for that watercourse for the May to October period, provided in the Surface Water Hydrology Report (Matrix 2008). Winter season flow was set to 50% of the mean winter flow which in turn is estimated in the Matrix 2008 at 50% of the size of the May to October 7Q10 event. That is, rather than assuming a once in ten year occurrence, this low flow event is assumed to be a constant hydrologic feature of the receiving watercourse. In reality, the particular


precipitation and overall hydrologic conditions that would give rise to a 7Q10 event would also mean very little, if any, impoundment discharge. Therefore, this assumption a greater contribution to final watercourse flow attributable to impoundments, as well as greater influence of the water quality of impoundment discharges.

Third, many of the impact analysis results presented below are based on the generation of 100 different conditions from the model, i.e, 100 different impoundment flows, impoundment water quality, and streamflow water quality. The use of 100 simulations of the water quality model for every combination of assessment case and natural watercourse provides great statistical power to the testing for effects, as this is analogous to having 100 replicates of water quality samples upstream and downstream of impoundments. However, an actual effects monitoring program will not have this level of statistical power because the Baseline Case datasets for these four watercourses contain far fewer than 100 measurements and each of the two mine extensions will be in operation for far less than 100 years. Other analyses presented below are based on more realistic statistical power that will be available, with 12 years of water quality sampling on Jackson Creek (the time period from pre-development to final reclamation) and Chance Creek for the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension, and 7 years of water quality sampling on McCardell Creek and Mercoal Creek for the Mercoal West Mine Extension.

Finally, impoundment water quality datasets, detection limits for a number of water quality variables were above surface water quality guidelines in the 1999 (cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, and thallium) and 2003 (cadmium and cobalt), often substantially so (Appendix A3). For purposes of analysis, the concentration of a water quality variable that was below its detection limit was set to half of its detection limit. This means that, for the water quality variables listed above, their concentrations in impoundment discharge were often above guideline values simply because their actual concentrations were not detectable. This elevates the concentrations of these water quality variables in impoundments relative to natural watercourses. This is also the case for some of the water quality variables in the baseline datasets for the natural watercourses, particularly with water quality data gathered in 2004 and 2005 (cadmium, cobalt, mercury, nitrate plus nitrite).

4.3.3.2 Key Questions for Impact Analysis

The impact analysis was targeted at examining two sets of questions related to potential effects of impoundments on surface water quality:

Question 1: Will Concentrations of Surface Water Quality Variables Exceed Surface Water Quality Guidelines More Often as a Result of Project Impoundments and will these be Detectable With Effects Monitoring Programs?


Question 2: Will Mean Concentrations of Surface Water Quality Variables Increase as a Result of Project Impoundments and Will the Predicted Increases in Mean Concentration Be Detectable With Effects Monitoring Programs?

Appendix A3 contains a detailed description of the model and simulation procedures used.

4.3.3.3 Results

For the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension, two impoundments will be constructed and operated in the Jackson Creek drainage and six impoundments will be constructed and operated in the Chance Creek drainage while, for the Mercoal West Mine Extension, three impoundments will be constructed and operated in each of the McCardell Creek and Mercoal Creek drainages (Surface Water Hydrology Report Matrix 2008). The results of the impact analysis for the LSA, using the set of conservative assumptions described above in Section 4.3.3.1 are as follows.

Question 1: Will Concentrations of Surface Water Quality Variables in the LSA Season Exceed Surface Water Quality Guidelines More Often as a Result of Project Impoundments and will these be Detectable With Effects Monitoring Programs? Using the set of conservative assumptions described above in Section 4.3.3.1, a total of 355 (i.e., 85%) out of 416 cases (i.e., combinations of water quality variable (26), season (4), and LSA drainage (4) are predicted to have no difference in the proportion of their measured concentrations that are greater than water quality guidelines downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments (Table 12 to Table 15, Appendix A3 contains the detailed simulation results). The remaining 61 cases are comprised of: aluminum; cadmium; cobalt; lead; mercury; selenium, silver; thallium; zinc, as well as phosphorus and TSS on occasion, in various seasons and drainages.

27 of these 61 cases are predicted to be undetectable with an effects monitoring program (12 years for Yellowhead Tower and 7 years for Mercoal West, i.e, “Prob.” values in Table 12 to Table 15 are less than 0.5) and are therefore assessed as insignificant.

Predicted mean concentrations downstream of impoundments in 15 of these 61 cases are below water quality guideline values (i.e, RB values in Table 12 to Table 15 are less than 1.0) and are therefore assessed as insignificant.

For example, even though the frequency of guideline exceedance of selenium is predicted to increase in Jackson Creek in the Application Case in spring and summer as compared to the Baseline Case, mean selenium concentrations in the Application Case are predicted to be 56% and 16.5% of the surface water quality guideline for selenium in the spring and summer season, respectively. The detailed results presented in Appendix A3 indicate selenium concentrations are predicted to exceed the selenium guideline value in 14% and 5% of the water



quality samples collected downstream of impoundments (Application Case) in spring and summer, respectively; this compares to 0% upstream of impoundments in both spring and summer upstream of impoundments (Baseline Case). In a 12-year monitoring program for the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension, this equates to measuring selenium above guideline values twice in the spring season and perhaps once in the summer season over the 12-year duration of an effects monitoring program. The increase predicted for the summer season in Jackson Creek is therefore predicted to be undetectable with a 12-year monitoring program for the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension (Table 12).

This means that 19 of the 416 cases (less than 5%) of water quality variable are predicted to have (i) a higher proportion of their measured concentrations above water quality guidelines downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments; (ii) a better than 50:50 chance of this effect being detected with an effects monitoring program; and (iii) a mean concentration downstream of impoundments being above water quality guideline values. These 19 of 416 cases are assessed as insignificant because:

The results are in part due to the high impoundment concentrations in relation to guideline values for 1999 and 2003 impoundment water quality data that were set because of the high detection limits for these water quality variables in those years (Section 4.3.3.1 and Appendix A3). This is particularly the case for cadmium, cobalt, lead, and thallium (Table 12 to Table 15). These results are also due in part to similar conditions for baseline mercury concentrations (Section 4.3.3.1) and both these factors elevate the predicted concentrations of these water quality variables above what they would likely be; and

Concentrations of some water quality variables with predicted increased guideline exceedances are correlated with TSS levels (Section 3.5). This is particularly the case with aluminum (Figure 6) and is a factor with predicted increases in the frequency with which aluminum concentrations will exceed its water quality guideline. CVRI will manage the impoundments within required TSS guidelines.

The number of the 61 cases occurring seasonally is predicted to decrease consistently from the spring through to the winter season throughout the LSA (Table 12 to Table 15). Most of the cases in the spring season are also predicted to have a better than 50:50 chance of being detected with effects monitoring programs. In contrast, almost none are predicted to have a better than 50:50 chance of being detected in the summer, fall, and winter seasons. This means that, for most of the year and for most water quality variables, it is predicted that it would be impossible to detect a greater proportion of water quality samples with concentrations exceeding guideline values downstream of impoundments as compared to upstream of impoundments, even under the conservative assumptions described in Section 4.3.3.1.

Table 12 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Jackson Creek surface water quality: frequency of guideline exceedance.

Spring Summer Fall Winter Water Quality Variable

Guidel. (mg/L) RB RA Freq Prob RB RA Freq Prob RB RA Freq Prob RB RA Freq Prob

Aluminum 0.1 0.94 2.36 0.55 0.840 1.370 0.02 Ammonia 1.37 Arsenic 0.005 Boron 1.2 Cadmium 3.09E-05 0.38 1.66 0.63 0.141 0.506 0.10 0.334 0.608 0.00 Chloride 230 Chromium 0.001 Cobalt 0.0009 0.073 0.34 0.87 0.073 0.116 0.57 Copper 0.002 Iron 0.3 Lead 0.002 0.038 5.2 0.84 Mercury 1.3E-5 Molybdenum 0.073 Nickel 0.065 Nitrate 13 Nitrate+Nitrite 0.06 Nitrite 0.06 Selenium 0.001 0.144 0.56 0.97 0.104 0.165 0.08 Silver 0.001 0.038 0.257 0 .96 Sulphate 100 Sulphide 0.002 insufficient data for analysis Thallium 0.0008 0.025 2.5 0.73 0.023 1.357 1.00 Titanium 0.1 Phosphorus 0.05 1.302 1.508 0.41 TSS 1 Zinc 0.03 0.13 14 0.86 0.034 6.82 0.30 0.109 0.672 1.00 0.079 0.082 0.06

RB ratio of mean concentration of water quality variable in Baseline Case to surface water quality guideline. RB = 1 is a mean concentration equal to guideline value. RA ratio of mean concentration of water quality variable in Application Case to surface water quality guideline. RA = 1 is a mean concentration equal to guideline value.

Water quality variables with increase in frequency of guideline exceedance predicted for downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments. Predictions made with the assumption that 100 replicates of water quality conditions upstream and downstream of impoundments in Jackson Creek during each period of the year are available for analysis. “Prob.” is likelihood of detecting the increase with an assumed 12-year effects monitoring program for Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension; for example, a value of 0.5 denotes a 50:50 chance of detecting the effect with a 12-year monitoring program.

Empty cells: variables in Application Case with no predicted increase in frequency of guideline exceedance for given season. 1 Guidelines for TSS range from 11.94 mg/L (summer) to 12.86 mg/L (fall).

See Section 4.3.3.1 for a list of conservative assumptions; Appendix A3 for a detailed description of analytical procedures used; and Table 4 for source of water quality guidelines. Shaded rows are water quality variables for which a number of concentrations in impoundment discharges (1999 and 2003) or natural watercourses (2004 and 2005) were set to greater than guideline value because detection limit for those years was greater than 50% of guideline value (Section 4.3.3.1).


Table 13 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Chance Creek surface water quality: frequency of guideline exceedance.



Aluminum 0.1 0.823 2.204 0.99 0.815 1.570 0.24 Ammonia 1.37 Arsenic 0.005 Boron 1.2 Cadmium 3.09E-05 0.518 1.621 0.75 0.144 1.26 0.83 Chloride 230 Chromium 0.001 Cobalt 0.0009 0.064 0.207 0.00 0.078 0.165 0.11 Copper 0.002 Iron 0.3 0.477 0.738 0.34 Lead 0.002 0.037 26.012 0.65 0.04 18.07 0.42 Mercury 1.3E-5 5.9 8.9 0.00 Molybdenum 0.073 Nickel 0.065 Nitrate 13 Nitrate+Nitrite 0.06 Nitrite 0 .06 Selenium 0.001 0.135 0.667 0.98 0.097 0.709 0.00 0.102 0.316 0.14 Silver 0.001 0.039 0.25 0.93 0.029 0.298 0.03 0.033 0.099 1.00 Sulphate 100 Sulphide 0.002 Thallium 0.0008 0.021 3.57 0.86 0.015 1.354 0.01 Titanium 0.1 Phosphorus 0.05 0.250 0.293 0.22 TSS 1 Zinc 0.03 0.1 8.5 0.91 0.04 4.33 0.57 0.08 0.45 0.42 0.09 0.77 0.85


Water quality variables with increase in frequency of guideline exceedance predicted for downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments. Predictions made with the assumption that 100 replicates of water quality conditions upstream and downstream of impoundments in Chance Creek during each period of the year are available for analysis. “Prob.” is likelihood of detecting the increase with an assumed 12-year effects monitoring program for Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension; for example, a value of 0.5 denotes a 50:50 chance of detecting the effect with a 12-year monitoring program.

Empty cells: variables in Application Case with no predicted increase in frequency of guideline exceedance for given season. 1 Guidelines for TSS range from 11.82 mg/L (summer) to 12.83 mg/L (spring).



Table 14 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on McCardell Creek surface water quality: frequency of guideline exceedance.



Aluminum 0.1 0.861 2.812 0.47 Ammonia 1.37 Arsenic 0.005 Boron 1.2 Cadmium 3.09E-05 0.407 1.997 0.26 0.143 0.42 0.05 Chloride 230 Chromium 0.001 Cobalt 0.0009 0.075 0.720 0.63 Copper 0.002 Iron 0.3 Lead 0.002 0.041 16.07 0.71 Mercury 1.3E-5 5.7 8.6 0.39 Molybdenum 0.073 Nickel 0.065 Nitrate 13 Nitrate+Nitrite 0.06 Nitrite 0.06 Selenium 0.001 0.132 0.594 0.73 0.112 0.29 0.00 Silver 0.001 0.037 0.719 0.72 Sulphate 100 Sulphide 0.002 insufficient data for analysis Thallium 0.0008 0.022 1.390 0.00 Titanium 0.1 Phosphorus 0.05 TSS 1 0.196 1.110 0.69 Zinc 0.03 0.109 6.540 0.68 0.045 1.258 0.49 0.095 0.095 0.09


Water quality variables with increase in frequency of guideline exceedance predicted for downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments. Predictions made with the assumption that 100 replicates of water quality conditions upstream and downstream of impoundments in McCardell Creek during each period of the year are available for analysis. “Prob.” is likelihood of detecting the increase with an assumed 12-year effects monitoring program for Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension; for example, a value of 0.5 denotes a 50:50 chance of detecting the effect with a 12-year monitoring program.

Empty cells: variables in Application Case with no predicted increase in frequency of guideline exceedance for given season. 1 Guidelines for TSS range from 11.86 mg/L (summer) to 12.96 mg/L (spring).




Table 15 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Mercoal Creek surface water quality: frequency of guideline exceedance.



Aluminum 0.1 0.988 1.807 1.00 Ammonia 1.37 Insufficient data for analysis Arsenic 0.005 Boron 1.2 Cadmium 3.09E-05 Chloride 230 Chromium 0.001 1.25 1.43 0.0 Cobalt 0.0009 Copper 0.002 Iron 0.3 Lead 0.002 0.025 8.59 0.99 Mercury 1.3E-5 0.76 3.6 0.66 Molybdenum 0.073 Nickel 0.065 Nitrate 13 Nitrate+Nitrite 0.06 0.001 0.003 0.19 Nitrite 0 .06 Selenium 0.001 Silver 0.001 Sulphate 100 Sulphide 0.002 Insufficient data for analysis Thallium 0.0008 Titanium 0.1 Phosphorus 0 .05 TSS 1 Insufficient data for analysis Zinc 0.03 0.017 6.52 0 .99


Water quality variables with increase in frequency of guideline exceedance predicted for downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments. Predictions made with the assumption that 100 replicates of water quality conditions upstream and downstream of impoundments in Mercoal Creek during each period of the year are available for analysis. “Prob.” is likelihood of detecting the increase with an assumed 12-year effects monitoring program for Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension; for example, a value of 0.5 denotes a 50:50 chance of detecting the effect with a 12-year monitoring program.

Empty cells: variables in Application Case with no predicted increase in frequency of guideline exceedance for given season. 1 Guideline for TSS is 12 mg/L (spring, fall, winter).


Question 2: Will Mean Concentrations of Surface Water Quality Variables in the LSA Increase in Relation to Surface Water Quality Guidelines as a Result of Project Impoundments and will the Predicted Increases in Mean Concentration Be Detectable With Effects Monitoring Programs? Using the set of conservative assumptions described above in Section 4.3.3.1, a total of 397 (i.e., more than 95%) of the 416 cases of LSA drainage, season and water quality variables examined in this impact analysis, are predicted to have mean concentrations of water quality variables that are not greater downstream of impoundments (Application Case) as compared to upstream of impoundments (Baseline Case, Table 16 to Table 19).

14 of the remaining 19 cases are predicted to have a less than 50:50 chance of being detected with an effects monitoring program (i.e, “Prob.” values in Table 16 to Table 19 are less than 0.5) and are therefore assessed as insignificant.

The remaining five cases (i.e., slightly more than 1% of all 416 possible combinations of water quality variable, LSA drainage, and season) are predicted to: (i) have an increase in mean concentration downstream as compared to upstream of impoundments; (ii) have mean concentrations downstream of impoundments exceeding surface water quality guidelines; and (iii) have a greater than 50:50 chance of being detected in a 12-year effects monitoring program for the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension or a 7-year effects monitoring program for the Mercoal West Mine Extension:

Aluminum in the spring season in each of the four drainages comprising the LSA (Jackson Creek, Chance Creek, McCardell Creek, and Mercoal Creek); and

Cadmium in the spring season in Chance Creek.

The result for cadmium is likely in part due to the predicted high impoundment concentrations that were derived from the 1999 and 2003 impoundment water quality data. The detection limits for cadmium samples were substantially higher than the guidelines and conservatively the estimated values were set at half the detection limits for these years (Section 4.3.3.1 and Appendix A3). This may have elevated the predicted cadmium concentrations of these water quality variables above what the concentrations would likely be.

The predicted mean concentrations of aluminum downstream of impoundments in the spring season range from 0.1807 mg/L (Mercoal Creek, Table 19) to 0.2812 mg/L (McCardell Creek, Table 18). While there were insufficient water quality data in the small drainages in the LSA to permit an analysis of the relationship between concentration of total aluminum and TSS levels, a good relationship was found between TSS and total aluminum in the Embarras River (Figure 6).

Figure 6 indicates a particular sensitivity between total aluminum concentrations, TSS levels, and the aluminum guideline of 0.1 mg/L. Assuming the same relationship between total aluminum and TSS exists in Jackson Creek as in the



Embarras River (Figure 6) implies that a TSS level of 1.9 mg/L would be sufficient to generate a total aluminum concentration of 1.807 mg/L in Mercoal Creek in the spring season, while a TSS level of 5.8 mg/L would be sufficient to generate a total aluminum concentration of .2812 mg/L in McCardell Creek in the spring season. Approximately 90% of impoundment water quality samples have historically had TSS levels above 1.9 mg/L, while approximately 65% of impoundment water quality samples have historically had TSS levels below 5.8 mg/L (Appendix A3). Also, those that exceed 5.8 mg/L would not have occurred at the 7Q10 flow levels being simulated in this impact analysis. Therefore, the magnitude of the predicted change in mean concentration of aluminum upstream of impoundments as compared to downstream of impoundments is assessed as insignificant.

4.3.3.4 Summary of Impact Analysis

The following conclusions can be made regarding the results of the impact analysis of impoundment discharges:

The results of the impact analysis for the LSA indicate that there will be some effects of the impoundments proposed for the LSA drainages but that these effects will be seasonal and difficult to detect in an effects monitoring program of expected duration of effects monitoring programs. In addition, these effects will terminate immediately once the impoundments are decommissioned;

Residual (after mitigation) impact predictions were made under a conservative assumption of impoundment discharges always being made during a 7Q10 low flow event in the receiving watercourse. In actual fact, this will happen only rarely and flows in receiving watercourses will generally be greater than what has been assumed in this impact analysis. Greater flows will reduce the likelihood of increases in surface water quality concentrations downstream of impoundments as compared to upstream of impoundments;

Increases in the frequency of guideline exceedance downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments are predicted to be more common than increases in concentration; and

Increases in both the frequency of guideline exceedance and in mean concentration are predicted to be more common in the spring and summer seasons rather than the fall and winter seasons.


The residual (after mitigation) effects of the Project on surface water quality via the operation of impoundments are assessed as Insignificant in the LSA:

Project Contribution – Negative, there will be some effect of the operation of Project impoundments on surface water quality;

Table 16 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Jackson Creek surface water quality: increase in concentration.


Guidel. (mg/L) RB RA Conc Prob RB RA Conc Prob RB RA Conc Prob RB RA Conc Prob

Aluminum 0.1 0.94 2.36 0.87 0.840 1.370 0.05 Ammonia 1.37 Arsenic 0.005 Boron 1.2 Cadmium 3.09E-05 Chloride 230 Chromium 0.001 Cobalt 0.0009 Copper 0.002 Iron 0.3 Lead 0.002 Mercury 1.3E-5 3 39 0.41 6.30 8.70 0.01 Molybdenum 0.073 Nickel 0.065 Nitrate 13 Nitrate+Nitrite 0.06 Nitrite 0.06 Selenium 0.001 Silver 0.001 Sulphate 100 Sulphide 0.002 insufficient data for analysis Thallium 0.0008 Titanium 0.1 Phosphorus 0 .05 TSS +10 Zinc 0 .03

RB ratio of mean concentration of water quality variable in Baseline Case to surface water quality guideline. RB = 1 is a mean concentration equal to guideline value. RA ratio of mean concentration of water quality variable in Application Case to surface water quality guideline. RA = 1 is a mean concentration equal to guideline value. Increase in mean concentration predicted for downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments, and mean downstream concentration exceeds guidelines. Predictions made with the assumption that 100 replicates of water quality conditions upstream and downstream of impoundments in Jackson Creek during each period of the year are available for analysis. “Prob.” is likelihood of detecting the increase with an assumed 12-year effects monitoring program for Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension; for example, a value of 0.5 denotes a 50:50 chance of detecting the increase with a 12-year effects monitoring program.

Empty cells: water quality variables in Application Case with either no increase in mean concentration or mean concentration less than guideline value for given season. 1 Guidelines for TSS range from 11.94 mg/L (summer) to 12.86 mg/L (fall).

See Section 4.3.3.1 for a list of conservative assumptions, Appendix A3 for a detailed description of analytical procedures used, and See Table 4 for source of water quality guidelines. Shaded rows are water quality variables for which a number of concentrations in impoundment discharges (1999 and 2003) or natural watercourses (2004 and 2005) were set to greater than guideline value because detection limit for those years was greater than 50% of guideline value (Section 4.3.3.1).


Table 17 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Chance Creek surface water quality: increase in concentration.



Aluminum 0.1 0.823 2.204 1.00 0.815 1.570 0.21 Ammonia 1.37 Arsenic 0.005 Boron 1.2 Cadmium 3.09E-05 0.518 1.621 0.71 0.144 1.26 0.26

Chloride 230 Chromium 0.001 Cobalt 0.0009 Copper 0.002 Iron 0.3 Lead 0.002 0.037 26.012 0.00 Mercury 1.3E-5 Molybdenum 0.073 Nickel 0.065 Nitrate 13 Nitrate+Nitrite 0.06 Nitrite 0.06 Selenium 0.001 Silver 0.001 Sulphate 100 Sulphide 0.002 Thallium 0.0008 Titanium 0.1 Phosphorus 0 .05 TSS +10 Zinc 0.03 0.1 8.5 0 .35

RB ratio of mean concentration of water quality variable in Baseline Case to surface water quality guideline. RB = 1 is a mean concentration equal to guideline value. RA ratio of mean concentration of water quality variable in Application Case to surface water quality guideline. RA = 1 is a mean concentration equal to guideline value. Increase in mean concentration predicted for downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments, and mean downstream concentration exceeds guidelines. Predictions made with the assumption that 100 replicates of water quality conditions upstream and downstream of impoundments in Chance Creek during each period of the year are available for analysis. “Prob.” is likelihood of detecting the increase with an assumed 12-year effects monitoring program for Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension; for example, a value of 0.5 denotes a 50:50 chance of detecting the increase with a 12-year effects monitoring program.

Empty cells: water quality variables in Application Case with either no increase in mean concentration or mean concentration less than guideline value for given season. 1 Guidelines for TSS range from 11.82 mg/L (summer) to 12.83 mg/L (spring).



Table 18 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on McCardell Creek surface water quality: increase in concentration.



Aluminum 0.1 0.861 2.812 0.70 Ammonia 1.37 Arsenic 0.005 Boron 1.2 Cadmium 3.09E-05 0.407 1.997 0.42 Chloride 230 Chromium 0.001 Cobalt 0.0009 Copper 0.002 Iron 0.3 Lead 0.002 0.041 16.07 0.05 Mercury 1.3E-5 Molybdenum 0.073 Nickel 0.065 Nitrate 13 Nitrate+Nitrite 0.06 Nitrite 0.06 Selenium 0.001 Silver 0.001 Sulphate 100 Sulphide 0.002 insufficient data for analysis Thallium 0.0008 Titanium 0.1 Phosphorus 0 .05 TSS +10 0.196 1.110 0 .47 Zinc 0 .03

RB ratio of mean concentration of water quality variable in Baseline Case to surface water quality guideline. RB = 1 is a mean concentration equal to guideline value. RA ratio of mean concentration of water quality variable in Application Case to surface water quality guideline. RA = 1 is a mean concentration equal to guideline value. Increase in mean concentration predicted for downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments, and mean downstream concentration exceeds guidelines. Predictions made with the assumption that 100 replicates of water quality conditions upstream and downstream of impoundments in McCardell Creek during each period of the year are available for analysis. “Prob.” is likelihood of detecting the increase with an assumed 7-year effects monitoring program for Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension; for example, a value of 0.5 denotes a 50:50 chance of detecting the increase with a 7-year effects monitoring program.

Empty cells: water quality variables in Application Case with either no increase in mean concentration or mean concentration less than guideline value for given season. 1 Guidelines for TSS range from 11.86 mg/L (summer) to 12.96 mg/L (spring).




Table 19 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on Mercoal Creek surface water quality: increase in concentration.



Aluminum 0.1 0.988 1.807 0.96 Ammonia 1.37 Insufficient data for analysis Arsenic 0.005 Boron 1.2 Cadmium 3.09E-05 Chloride 230 Chromium 0.001 Cobalt 0.0009 Copper 0.002 Iron 0.3 Lead 0.002 0.025 8.59 0.21 Mercury 1.3E-5 3.8 12.7 0.30 0.76 3.6 0.07 Molybdenum 0.073 Nickel 0.065 Nitrate 13 Nitrate+Nitrite 0.06 Nitrite 0.06 Selenium 0.001 Silver 0.001 Sulphate 100 Sulphide 0.002 Insufficient data for analysis Thallium 0.0008 Titanium 0.1 Phosphorus 0 .05 TSS +10 Insufficient data for analysis Zinc 0.03 0.017 6.52 0 .13

RB ratio of mean concentration of water quality variable in Baseline Case to surface water quality guideline. RB = 1 is a mean concentration equal to guideline value. RA ratio of mean concentration of water quality variable in Application Case to surface water quality guideline. RA = 1 is a mean concentration equal to guideline value. Increase in mean concentration predicted for downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments, and mean downstream concentration exceeds guidelines. Predictions made with the assumption that 100 replicates of water quality conditions upstream and downstream of impoundments in Mercoal Creek during each period of the year are available for analysis. “Prob.” is likelihood of detecting the increase with an assumed 7-year effects monitoring program for Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension; for example, a value of 0.5 denotes a 50:50 chance of detecting the increase with a 7-year effects monitoring program.

Empty cells: water quality variables in Application Case with either no increase in mean concentration or mean concentration less than guideline value for given season. 1 Guideline for TSS is 12 mg/L (spring, fall, winter).




Duration – Short, as the effects will occur in particularly seasons over the life of the Project, until the impoundments cease to operate;

Frequency – the effect will be Occasional throughout the life of the Project, as the impoundments will discharge at irregular intervals during the life of the Project;

Reversibility – the effect is assessed as Reversible, short-term because effects will cease once the impoundments cease to operate;

Magnitude – Low, there will be changes in surface water quality with the Project. However, there are expected to be relatively few instances of detectable increases in the concentration of water quality variables as a result of impoundment discharges and even fewer instances detectable increases in concentration coupled with concentrations being above surface water quality guidelines; and


4.3.5 Level of Confidence and Uncertainties The level of confidence in this assessment of residual effects is High. First, there is a good historical data record of impoundment operation and data from existing mines; this means the impoundment flows and water quality of those flows are well-understood. Second, the assessment was conducted using very conservative estimates of flows in receiving watercourses.

Key uncertainties in the assessment are as follows:

Differences may exist in geological and soil conditions between Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower as compared to Coal Valley, Coal Valley Extension, South Block, and Mercoal East Phase 2. These differences may influence surface water quality. However, any differences would need to be substantial to considerably influence the impact analysis results in Table 12 to Table 19;

The frequency and volumes of Project impoundment discharge may be different than in impoundments from existing mines. The impact analysis results from Chance Creek which is expected to have the highest total impoundment flows due to having the largest number of impoundments of any drainage in the LSA suggest that impoundment flow is a more important determinant of water quality in the receiving watercourse than impoundment water quality; and

While the dataset characterizing Baseline Case conditions (Section 3, Appendix A2) is generally a good characterization of existing surface water quality conditions and its seasonal variability, the spatial coverage


of the dataset with respect to the drainages in the LSA is uneven. Some sites have one sample in a single season, while others have samples for multiple seasons. This causes particular sites (e.g., Jackson Creek) to be under-represented in the Baseline Case dataset and in the analysis.

4.4 EFFECT OF END-PIT LAKE CHARACTERISTICS ON WATER QUALITY


Analyses presented in End-Pit Lake Working Group (2004) suggest that the design, construction, and management of end-pit lakes influence their viability. Nine end-pit lakes/ponds will be constructed as part of the reclamation landscape for the Mercoal West Mine Extension, while five end-pit lakes will be constructed as part of the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension (Table 20). The influences of the characteristics of these end-pit lakes on the surface water quality of those lakes are therefore assessed as valid impact pathways.

Table 20 Characteristics of end-pit lakes/ponds in the Project reclamation landscape.

End-Pit Lake

Surface Area (ha)

Maximum Depth (m)1

Volume (dam3)

Littoral Zone (%)

Drainage Area (ha)

Residence Time (years)

Mercoal West M-A 6.78 10 339 33 154 0.85 M-B 0.94 3 14.2 100 647 0.01 M-C 1.48 3 22.3 100 59 0.15 M-D 1.80 10 90.2 33 44 0.79 M-E 1.67 10 83.7 33 427 0.25 M-F 2.82 3 42.3 100 265 0.06 M-G 1.30 10 65.0 33 426 0.06 M-H 0.41 3 6.2 100 212 0.01 M-I 0.22 3 3.3 100 6 0.14 Yellowhead Tower Y-A 1.83 10 91.3 25.1 9.3 4.9 Y-B 6.06 10 303 8.8 32.4 4.6 Y-C 14.54 50 3,636 3.4 181 8.9 Y-D2 9.14 0 0 n/a 530-610 n/a Y-E 2.12 20 212 21.7 364 0.2 Y-F 12.79 50 3,197 11.3 264 5.2

From Surface Water Hydrology Report (Matrix 2008). 1 Water depths of 3 m or less indicate waterbody would be classed as a pond rather than a lake. 2 Area will be backfilled and is anticipated to be a wetland rather than a lake.


The information used in this impact analysis is derived from a detailed study of existing Coal Valley end-pit lakes prepared by Hatfield (2008), in which detailed limnological sampling was conducted on five existing end-pit lakes and one



natural lake in September 2006. Information collected was intended in part to update studies conducted on end-pit lakes by Agbeti (1999); summary information on the sampled lakes is provided in Table 21. All the end-pit lakes surveyed in September 2006 were found to contain a diversity of phytoplankton, zooplankton, and benthic invertebrate communities (Hatfield 2008).

4.4.2.1 Source of Water for End-Pit Lakes

Ionic characteristics of different types of water in the study area are as follows (Figure 7):

Groundwater in the study area is strongly bicarbonate or bicarbonate-sulphate, and sodium-calcium; and

Surface waters of the LSA are strongly bicarbonate and primarily calcium with equal amounts of sodium and magnesium.

Ionic characteristics of Fairfax Lake are very similar to the ionic characteristics of surface waters of the LSA, while ionic characteristics of all end-pit lakes with the exception of Pit 35 Lake in 2006 are similar to the ionic characteristics of groundwater (Figure 7). In particular, despite Silkstone Lake and Pit 45 Lake having natural inflows (Table 21), ionic characteristics of their waters more closely resemble groundwater rather than surface waters. Also, the ionic characteristics of end-pit lakes have remained largely consistent over time (15 years in the case of Lovett Lake and 8 years in the case of Pit 24 Lake).

These results suggest that groundwater is the main source of water for end-pit lakes, and that the fundamental ionic characteristics of end-pit lakes change very little from the time of formation due to the ongoing influence of groundwater as the main source of water for these lakes.

4.4.2.2 Mixing and Turnover of End-Pit Lakes

While Agbeti (1999) argued that young end-pit lakes experienced turnover, results presented in Hatfield (2008) are less conclusive. A number of the end-pit lakes that were sampled in September 2006 exhibited strong chemoclines, with sharp increases in conductivity and TDS at about 6 m depth, suggesting that either turnover had not yet occurred or would not be possible to occur.

The ration of surface area to depth and the fetch (i.e., distance traveled by waves without obstruction) are two end-pit lake characteristics that significantly influence the likelihood of mixing (End-Pit Lake Working Group 2004), with a large surface area relative to the depth and a long fetch being better for turnover. These characteristics are difficult to control when developing an end-pit lake as the location, orientation, size, and depth of end-pit lakes are largely a function of the location, shape, and depth of the coal resource that was mined.

Table 21 Summary information on lakes sampled in end-pit lake study.

Lake Year Created Type Location

Approximate Surface Area

(ha)

MaximumDepth

(m)

MeanDepth

(m) Inflow Outflow Recent Fish Stocking

Programs1 Monitoring

History

Lovett Lake2 1985 Dragline 10-47-19-

W5M 6.0 18 5.5 1,000 RNBR per year since 2004, average length: 18 to 21 cm

1987, 1989, 1991, 1993,

1998

Silkstone Lake 1986 Dragline 9-47-19-

W5M 6.4 14.8 4.7 √ √ 1,300 RNBR per year since 2004, average length: 18 to 21 cm

1987, 1989, 1991, 1993,

1998

Pit 24 1993 Truck and shovel

4-47-19-W5M 4.9 23.5 8.1

First stocked in 2006 with 750 RNBR, average

length: 12 cm 1998

Pit 35 1999 Dragline 26-46-19-W5M 4.5 20 8 √

First stocked in 2006 with 390 RNBR, average

length: 12 cm

Not monitored prior to 2006

Pit 45 1999 Dragline 26-46-19-W5M 12.5 15 7 √ √

First stocked in 2006 with 1,100 RNBR, average

length: 12 cm

Not monitored prior to 2006

Fairfax Lake Natural 17-46-18-

W5M 28.4 7.6 3.2 √ 10,000 RNBR per year since 2004, average length: 18 to 21 cm

1998

from Hatfield (2008). RNBR – rainbow trout 1 Recent fish stocking information found at http://www.srd.gov.ab.ca/fw/fishing/FishStocking.html#Reports. Information only published from 2004 onward. 2 Both Lovett Lake and Silkstone Lake were stocked with rainbow trout experimentally in 1991 and, based on information contained in Mackay (1999) and at

http://www.srd.gov.ab.ca/fishwildlife/fishingalberta/fishstocking.aspx, appear to have been stocked annually since 1995 at the levels described in this table.


http://www.srd.gov.ab.ca/fw/fishing/FishStocking.html#Reports

http://www.srd.gov.ab.ca/fishwildlife/fishingalberta/fishstocking.aspx


Figure 7 Ionic characteristics of existing end-pit lakes, natural lakes, groundwater, and surface watercourses.

The end-pit lake guidelines contained in Golder (2006) were applied to the physical characteristics of the proposed end-pit lakes for the Project (Table 20). The ratio of surface area to depth is sufficiently small for all proposed end-pit lakes that all are likely to be meromictic (i.e., none are likely to mix). The possible exceptions may be those lakes which may be sufficiently shallow (i.e., 3 m) that thermoclines or chemoclines may not develop. The guidelines contained in Golder (2006) also suggest that the five end-pit lakes sampled in September 2006 (Table 21) are likely exhibiting partial mixing at best.


4.4.2.3 Water Quality of Existing End-Pit Lakes

Water quality was similar in all end-pit lakes in 2006, with higher levels of alkalinity, bicarbonate, calcium, conductivity, TDS, hardness, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and sulphate than in Fairfax Lake in 2006 (Table 22). All end-pit lakes had lower levels of dissolved organic carbon than Fairfax Lake and all lakes, Fairfax Lake included, were slightly alkaline in 2006 and had low TSS. Sulphide concentrations were much higher in the hypolimnion relative to the epilimnion of all end-pit lakes with the exception of Silkstone Lake and the higher of the two measured sulphide concentrations in most of the lakes was above water quality guideline for sulphide, with the exception of Pit 35 Lake.

Turbidity was low in all lakes, which meant that there were little suspended materials such as mud, silt or algae in the water column. For most of the other water quality variables, concentrations in the end-pit lakes were near or below the detection limits and were consistent with concentrations in Fairfax Lake.

There was a number of water quality guideline exceedances for the protection of aquatic life in the epilimnion and hypolimnion measured in September 2006 (Table 22):

In the epilimnion, sulphate in Pit 24 and Silkstone Lake, sulphide in Silkstone Lake, total phosphorus in Pit 35 Lake, total aluminum and total cadmium in Pit 45 Lake, and total selenium in Silkstone Lake; and

In the hypolimnion, sulphate in Silkstone Lake, sulphide and total phosphorus in Pit 35, Lovett, and Pit 24 Lakes, total Kjeldahl nitrogen in Lovett and Pit 24 Lakes, aluminum in Pit 45 Lake, mercury in Pit 24 Lake, and selenium in Silkstone Lake.

4.4.2.4 Impact Analysis Summary

The following conclusions may be made regarding the results of the impact analysis of water quality in end-pit lakes:

All of the end-pit lakes proposed for the Project will likely have groundwater as their major source of water;

With the possible exception of the very shallow end-pit lakes, almost all of the most of the end-pit lakes proposed for the Project will likely be meromictic; and

Water quality of the end-pit lakes proposed for the Project will likely be suitable for aquatic life.

In this regard, the water quality of the end-pit lakes proposed for the Project will likely be similar to existing end-pit lakes (Hatfield 2008).

Table 22 Water quality of end-pit lakes and Fairfax Lake sampled in September 2006.

Sample Depth (m) m 1 5 1 8.7 1 9 1 13 1 13.8 1 11.3

Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) mg/L 5 69 69 131 131 182 182 387 636 183 313 547 464Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37a 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 1.28 <0.05 0.64 <0.05 0.09Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L 5 84 84 160 160 220 220 463 776 211 382 653 527Calcium (Ca) mg/L 0.5 19.4 19.5 29.3 29.6 27.1 27.2 30.3 72.6 18.7 37.9 59.1 24Carbonate (CO3) mg/L 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 6 <5 7 19Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230b 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 <1 1 3 3Conductivity (EC) µS/cm 0.2 130 130 259 257 400 402 762 1140 454 698 1290 1180Dissolved Organic Carbon mg/L 1 7 7 3 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 3Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L 64 64 124 126 99 100 130 243 83 148 232 123Magnesium (Mg) mg/L 0.1 3.7 3.7 12.4 12.6 7.7 7.7 13.3 15.1 8.7 13 20.4 15.2Nitrate+Nitrite-N mg/L 13c 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.3 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.4 <0.1pH pH 6.5-9.0d 7.8 7.7 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.3 8.3 7.8 8.6 8.3 8.3 8.6Phosphorus, Total mg/L 0.05e 0.02 <0.02 <0.02 3.57 0.34 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.31 <0.02 0.24 <0.02 <0.02Potassium (K) mg/L 0.5 1 1 1.4 1.7 3.7 3.8 3.7 4.1 2.7 3.3 11.8 4.6Sodium (Na) mg/L 1 8 8 19 19 58 59 146 209 71 110 250 231Sulfate (SO4) mg/L 100f 0.5 2 1.8 23.8 24.3 32.4 32.4 43.7 34.9 54.2 67.5 181 170Sulphide mg/L 0.002g 0.003 0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.005 <0.003 5.25 <0.003 1.46 0.003 <0.003Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 10 77 77 166 168 240 241 471 718 265 421 856 727Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L 1h 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 <0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 1.6 0.2 1.4 0.2 0.3Total Suspended Solids mg/L i 3 3 4 <3 <3 4 4 <3 <3 <3 5 <3 <3Turbidity NTU 0.1 1.1 1.2 0.95 1.6 2.8 4.7 1 32 0.4 40 1.3 1.2Bold Below detection limit.

Guideline exceedance.

1 Guidelines are Alberta Environment Guidelines for the Protection l BC ambient water quality guideline for boron (BC 2003)of Freshwater Aquatic Life (1999) unless otherwise specified. m Is equal to 10(0.86*LOG(Hardness)-3.2) (CCME 2006)

a at pH 8.0, 10oC (CCME 2006) n Guideline for chromium III is 0.0089 mg/L; guideline forb Set to USEPA continuous concentration guideline chromium VI is 0.0010 mg/L (CCME 2006). Most stringent guideline (0.0010 mg/L) is c CCME guideline for nitrate is 13 mg/L; CCME guideline for nitrite is 0.060 mg/L. o BC working water quality guideline (BC 2006a)d CCME (2006). AENV (1999) guideline: "To be in the range of 6.5 to 8.5 but p Guideline is hardness-dependent: 0.002 mg/L at hardness = 0 to 120 mg/L;

not altered by more than 0.003 mg/L at hardness = 120 to 180 mg/L; 0.004 mg/L at hardness > 180 mg/L (CCMe Guideline is for chronic total (inorganic and organic) phosphorus. q Guideline is hardness-dependent: 0.001 mg/L at hardness = 0 to 60 mg/L;f BC approved water quality guideline (BC 2006b) 0.002 mg/L at hardness = 60 to 120 mg/L; 0.004 mg/L at hardness > 120 mg/L (CCMEg USEPA continuous concentration guideline (as H2S) r chronic guideline (AENV 1999)h set to total nitrogen guideline (AENV 1999) s Guideline is hardness-dependent: 0.025 mg/L at hardness =0 to 60 mg/L;i AENV (1999) acute and chronic guideline for suspended solids states: 0.065 mg/L at hardness = 60 to 120 mg/L; 0.11 mg/L at hardness = 120 to 180 mg/L;

"Not to be increased by more than 10 mg/L over background value." 0.15 mg/L at hardness > 180 mg/L (CCME 2006).j at pH>=6.5; [Ca2+]>= 4 mg/L; DOC>=2 mg/L (CCME 2006). t BC working water quality guideline (BC 2006a)k CCME (2006)

DetectionLimit

Stirling Lake (Pit 24 Lk) Silkstone Lake

21-Sep-06

Pit 45 Lake Lovett Lake

21-Sep-06

Fairfax Lake Pit 35 Lake

19-Sep-0619-Sep-06

Physical Variables, Nutrients, Ions, and Organics/Hydrocarbons

UnitsRegulatoryGuideline1

20-Sep-0620-Sep-06Water Quality Variable


Surface Water Quality Report 61 Hatfield

Aluminum µg/L 100j 0.5 52.5 97.9 10.5 6.03 213 273 25.6 21.1 36.1 12.2 73.1 85.4Arsenic µg/L 5k 0.002 0.981 0.929 0.435 0.414 1.11 1.11 1.2 1.49 0.868 1.96 1.39 1.61Boron µg/L 1200l 0.05 17.3 14.3 6.77 6.29 36.7 34.6 73.6 93.7 22.8 32.7 60.7 61.9Cadmium µg/L m 0.002 0.0238 0.0136 0.0022 <0.002 0.0299 0.028 0.0038 0.002 0.0075 0.0102 0.0217 0.0267Chromium µg/L 1n 0.04 0.197 0.204 0.033 0.053 0.323 0.41 0.163 0.122 0.301 0.162 0.278 0.254Cobalt µg/L 0.9o 0.001 0.0637 0.0797 0.0139 0.02 0.0968 0.121 0.0514 0.403 0.0336 0.339 0.0505 0.251Copper µg/L p 0.05 0.949 1.02 0.483 0.15 0.85 0.946 0.561 0.314 0.931 0.73 0.926 1.1Iron µg/L 300 2 37.6 69 123 130 138 192 20 150 15.5 82.9 43.8 37Lead µg/L q 0.001 0.783 0.344 0.148 0.128 0.234 0.724 0.742 0.45 0.447 0.31 0.214 0.174Mercury µg/L 0.005r 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.0362 0.0188 <0.01 <0.01Molybdenum µg/L 73k 0.001 5.26 5.15 0.409 0.4 13.6 13.6 0.978 0.375 3.74 1.01 12.3 13.3Nickel µg/L s 0.005 0.281 0.369 0.005 0.005 0.822 0.907 0.566 0.178 0.49 0.485 1.07 1.97Selenium µg/L 1k 0.1 0.881 0.899 0.114 0.103 0.448 0.486 0.198 0.16 0.552 0.497 2.14 1.78Silver µg/L 0.1k 0.0005 0.0027 0.0021 0.0015 0.001 0.0024 0.003 0.0012 0.001 0.0014 0.0019 0.0012 0.0018Thallium µg/L 0.8k 0.0003 0.0098 0.009 0.0017 0.0016 0.01 0.011 0.0039 0.0023 0.0298 0.041 0.0435 0.0421Titanium µg/L 100t 0.04 0.79 1.68 0.441 0.401 4.33 5.82 0.715 3.07 1.85 2.89 4.27 3.6Zinc µg/L 30k 0.1 3.2 4.17 1.25 1.06 2.2 4.74 0.771 2.11 5.7 3.87 1.62 2.04

Hydrocarbons, Recoverable (I.R.) mg/L 1 <1 1 <1 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Naphthenic Acids mg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Phenols (4AAP) mg/L 0.005k <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Total Organic Carbon mg/L 1 7 7 3 3 4 4 4 3 5 5 4 3Bold Below detection limit.

Guideline exceedance.

1 Guidelines are Alberta Environment Guidelines for the Protection l BC ambient water quality guideline for boron (BC 2003)of Freshwater Aquatic Life (1999) unless otherwise specified. m Is equal to 10(0.86*LOG(Hardness)-3.2) (CCME 2006)

a at pH 8.0, 10oC (CCME 2006) n Guideline for chromium III is 0.0089 mg/L; guideline forb Set to USEPA continuous concentration guideline chromium VI is 0.0010 mg/L (CCME 2006). Most stringent guideline (0.0010 mg/L) is usedc CCME guideline for nitrate is 13 mg/L; CCME guideline for nitrite is 0.060 mg/L. o BC working water quality guideline (BC 2006a)d CCME (2006). AENV (1999) guideline: "To be in the range of 6.5 to 8.5 but p Guideline is hardness-dependent: 0.002 mg/L at hardness = 0 to 120 mg/L;

not altered by more than 0.003 mg/L at hardness = 120 to 180 mg/L; 0.004 mg/L at hardness > 180 mg/L (CCME 20e Guideline is for chronic total (inorganic and organic) phosphorus. q Guideline is hardness-dependent: 0.001 mg/L at hardness = 0 to 60 mg/L;f BC approved water quality guideline (BC 2006b) 0.002 mg/L at hardness = 60 to 120 mg/L; 0.004 mg/L at hardness > 120 mg/L (CCME 200g USEPA continuous concentration guideline (as H2S) r chronic guideline (AENV 1999)h set to total nitrogen guideline (AENV 1999) s Guideline is hardness-dependent: 0.025 mg/L at hardness =0 to 60 mg/L;i AENV (1999) acute and chronic guideline for suspended solids states: 0.065 mg/L at hardness = 60 to 120 mg/L; 0.11 mg/L at hardness = 120 to 180 mg/L;

"Not to be increased by more than 10 mg/L over background value." 0.15 mg/L at hardness > 180 mg/L (CCME 2006).j at pH>=6.5; [Ca2+]>= 4 mg/L; DOC>=2 mg/L (CCME 2006). t BC working water quality guideline (BC 2006a)k CCME (2006)

RegulatoryGuideline1

DetectionLimit

Stirling Lake (Pit 24 Lk) Silkstone Lake

19-Sep-06 19-Sep-06 20-Sep-06 20-Sep-06 21-Sep-06 21-Sep-06Water Quality Variable Units

Pit 45 Lake Lovett LakeFairfax Lake Pit 35 Lake

Organics and Hydrocarbons

Total Metals

Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

Table 22 Cont’d.


The residual (after mitigation) effects of the Project on surface water quality in the end-pit lakes as a result of their design, construction, and management are assessed as Insignificant:

Project Contribution – Neutral, water quality of the end-pit lakes and any receiving watercourses downstream of the end-pit lakes will provide no direct benefit of loss to surface water quality resources in the LSA;

Direction – Negative, as water quality of the end-pit lakes will have the characteristics of groundwater rather than surface waters;


Duration – Residual, as water quality of the end-pit lakes and any receiving watercourses downstream of the end-pit lakes will likely exhibit little change over time;

Frequency – the effect will be Continuous, as water quality of the end-pit lakes and any receiving watercourses downstream of the end-pit lakes will likely exhibit little change over time;

Reversibility – the effect is assessed as Irreversible, as the end-pit lakes will be permanent features of the reclamation landscape;

Magnitude – Low, while all of the end-pit lakes proposed for the Project will likely have groundwater as their major source of water and almost all of the most of the end-pit lakes proposed for the Project will likely be meromictic, water quality of the end-pit lakes proposed for the Project will likely be suitable for aquatic life; and



The level of confidence in this assessment of residual effects is High. This assessment is based on a good understanding of the characteristics of existing end-pit lakes in the Coal Valley area. One uncertainty is the applicability of the Golder (2006) study, conducted for much larger and deeper end-pit lakes in a more northern part of Alberta, to the situation in the Coal Valley area. The conclusion that the proposed end-pit lakes will likely be meromictic imposes a conservative element to water quality conditions of the proposed end-pit lakes; water quality of hypolimnia in meromictic lakes may, in some cases, be unsuitable for some aquatic life. However, existing end-pit lakes are likely meromictic and have groundwater as their major source of water, and yet their water quality conditions are suitable for supporting aquatic life.


5.0 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT FOR REGIONAL STUDY AREA

This section provides an assessment of Project effects on surface water quality in the RSA and consists of:

An assessment of the effects of discharges from impoundments on surface water quality in the McLeod and Embarras Rivers in the Application Case; and

An assessment of the effects of discharges from impoundments on surface water quality in the Embarras River in the CEA Case.

5.1 REGIONAL EFFECTS OF USING NITROGEN-BASED EXPLOSIVES


The residual (after mitigation) effects of the Project on surface water quality via increases in nitrogen caused by the use of explosives containing ammonium nitrate are assessed as Insignificant in the LSA because, while increases in concentration of nitrogen compounds downstream of active mines has been documented in a number of cases, elevated concentrations have more often than not been below surface water quality guidelines (Section 4.2).

The impact analysis of this issue for the RSA uses the results of monthly monitoring of the watercourses receiving impoundment water from 2001 to 2005 in the Embarras and Lovett Rivers; this monitoring was conducted as part of the monitoring requirements for approval of existing mines and is documented in annual compliance monitoring reports (Luscar 2001 to 2006). The sampling locations used in the analysis were upstream (reference) and downstream (exposed) sites in the Embarras (site codes: EMBUS – upstream and EMBDS –downstream) and Lovett (site codes: LUS – upstream and LDS – downstream) Rivers. The reference and exposed sites were compared using a t-test using a significance value of 0.05.

Nitrate concentrations in the Lovett River were greater in the exposed (downstream) site as compared to the reference (upstream) site, and this difference is statistically significant (p < 0.001, Table 23). Nitrate concentrations in the Embarras River were also greater in the exposed (downstream) site as compared to the reference (upstream) site, but this difference is not statistically significant (p = 0.143, Table 23). There was not a single case in which the nitrate values exceeded its surface water quality guideline (13 mg/L), in either the reference or exposed sites. These results indicate that, while nitrate concentrations do increase at a regional scale as a result of mine activities, the likelihood of these elevated nitrate concentrations exceeding water quality guidelines is low in regional watercourses.


Table 23 Nitrate concentrations in the Embarras and Lovett Rivers, 2001 to 2005.

River Site Nitrate Concentration

(mg/L) Mean ± SD (n)

p

EMBUS – Reference 0.0093 ± 0.0073 (7) Embarras

EMBDS – Exposed 2.98 ± 5.05 (11) 0.143

LUS – Reference 0.068 ± 0.12 (43) Lovett

LDS – Exposed 0.426 ± 0.394 (60) <0.001


The residual (after mitigation) effects of the Project on surface water quality via increases in nitrogen caused by the use of explosives containing ammonium nitrate are assessed as Insignificant in the RSA:

Project Contribution – Negative, there will be some effect of use of nitrogen-based explosives on surface water quality;


Geographic Extent – Regional, within the RSA;

Duration – Long, as release of nitrogen compounds from mine waste dumps have been documented to occur from five to ten years after the use of explosives;

Frequency – Periodic, as explosives will be used intermittently but repeatedly during the life of the Project;

Reversibility – the effect is assessed as Reversible, Long-term because effects have been documented as diminishing with time;

Magnitude – Low, as while increases in concentration of nitrogen compounds downstream of active mines has been documented in a number of cases, historical data indicates these elevated concentrations have not exceeded surface water quality guidelines; and



The level of confidence in the assessments concerning the leaching of nitrates from mined areas is High, given the results provided in Table 23.


5.2 DISCHARGE FROM IMPOUNDMENTS TO REGIONAL WATERCOURSES – APPLICATION CASE


The water quality model used in the assessment of discharges from impoundments in the LSA (Section 4.3) is used to assess the residual (after mitigation) effects of discharges from impoundments in the Application Case on the McLeod and Embarras Rivers, the two watercourses defining the RSA (Figure 2). The set of conservative assumptions described above in Section 4.3.3.1 for the LSA apply to this analysis of impoundment effects at the RSA level as well.

5.2.1.1 McLeod River

Using the set of conservative assumptions described above in Section 4.3.3.1, only thallium in the summer season is predicted to have a higher proportion of its measured concentrations exceeding its water quality guideline in the Application Case (site MCLD-3) than in the Baseline Case (upstream of Mercoal and McCardell Creeks, Table 24). There is a 54% chance of detecting this effect in a 7-year effects monitoring program for the Mercoal West Mine Extension. However, the mean concentration of thallium in the Application Case is predicted to be approximately 18% of its guideline value (Appendix A3) and so the predicted effect on thallium is assessed as insignificant.

In addition, using the set of conservative assumptions described above in Section 4.3.3.1, the mean concentration of cadmium in the Application Case (site MCLD-3) is predicted to be greater than in the Baseline Case (upstream of Mercoal and McCardell Creeks, Table 25). However, there is less than 50:50 chance of detecting this effect in a 7-year effects monitoring program for the Mercoal West Mine Extension and so this effect is predicted to be insignificant.

5.2.1.2 Embarras River

Using the set of conservative assumptions described above in Section 4.3.3.1, TSS in the fall and selenium, thallium, and total phosphorus in the winter are predicted to have a higher proportion of their measured concentrations exceeding their water quality guidelines in the Application Case (site EM-4) than in the Baseline Case (upstream of Jackson and Chance Creeks, Table 25). However, there is predicted to be a less than 50:50 chance of detecting the TSS effect in a 12-year effects monitoring program for the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension, as well as a less than 50:50 chance of detecting these effects for selenium, thallium, and total phosphorus with a 7-year effects monitoring program for the Mercoal West Mine Extension. Therefore, all four of these effects are predicted to be undetectable in a regular effects monitoring program and therefore insignificant.


Table 24 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge from Mercoal Creek Mine Extension on surface water quality in the McLeod River (site MCLD-3), Application Case.


Conc. Freq. Conc. Freq. Conc. Freq. Conc. Freq.

Aluminum

Ammonia

Arsenic

Boron

Cadmium

Chloride

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead

Mercury

Molybdenum

Nickel

Nitrate

Nitrate plus Nitrite

Nitrite

Selenium

Silver

Sulphate

Sulphide

Thallium

Titanium

Total phosphorus

TSS

Zinc

Conc. – results of test for increase in concentration of water quality variable; Freq. – results of test for increase in frequency of guideline exceedance. Increase in mean concentration predicted for downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of impoundments, and mean downstream concentration exceeds guidelines. Predictions made with the assumption that 100 replicates of water quality conditions upstream and downstream of impoundments during each period of the year are available for analysis. Increase in frequency of guideline exceedance downstream of impoundments compared to upstream of

impoundments. Empty cells: water quality variables with either no increase in mean concentration or mean concentration less than guideline value for given season.


Table 25 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge from Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension on surface water quality in the Embarras River (site EM-4), Application Case.


Conc. Freq. Conc. Freq. Conc. Freq. Conc. Freq.

Aluminum

Ammonia

Arsenic

Boron

Cadmium

Chloride

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead

Mercury

Molybdenum

Nickel

Nitrate


Nitrite

Selenium

Silver

Sulphate

Sulphide

Thallium

Titanium

Total phosphorus

TSS

Zinc


impoundments. Empty cells: water quality variables with either no increase in mean concentration or mean concentration less than guideline value for given season. Insufficient data for nitrate, nitrite, and sulphide in summer for data analysis.



The residual (after mitigation) effects of the Project on surface water quality in the RSA via the operation of impoundments are assessed as Insignificant for the Application Case:




Duration – Short, as the effects will be seasonal and will occur seasonally over the life of the Project, until the impoundments cease to operate;



Magnitude – Low, there will be changes in surface water quality with the Project. However, there are predicted to be relatively few instances of detectable increases in the concentration of water quality variables as a result of impoundment discharges and even fewer instances detectable increases in concentration coupled with concentrations being above surface water quality guidelines; and



The level of confidence in this assessment of residual effects is High. The assessment was conducted using very conservative estimates of flows in the McLeod and Embarras Rivers. Actual flows in these rivers will be greater most of the time, thereby reducing the residual effects of impoundment discharges from the Project impoundments.

5.3 DISCHARGE FROM IMPOUNDMENTS TO REGIONAL WATERCOURSES – CEA CASE


The CEA case is defined by including the effects of the Robb Trend mine in addition to the effects of the Project. The effect of the Robb Trend mine was simulated by assuming it would have nine impoundments discharging water into the Embarras River (as currently configured, the Robb Trend mine will not


enter the McLeod River basin, Figure 2). Therefore, in the CEA Case, a total of eighteen impoundments were assumed to be operational (nine for the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension and nine for the Robb Trend mine), and all impoundment discharges were assumed to directly enter the Embarras River at site EM-4.

Using the set of conservative assumptions described above in Section 4.3.3.1, only iron in the spring season is predicted to have a higher proportion of its measured concentrations exceeding its water quality guideline in the CEA Case (site EM-4) than in the Baseline Case (upstream of Jackson and Chance Creeks, Table 26). The detailed results in Appendix A3 indicate that 36% of iron samples that would be taken at site EM-4 in an effects monitoring program in the spring season in the CEA Case would exceed the surface water quality guideline, as compared to 26% in the Baseline Case and so the predicted effect on iron is assessed as insignificant.


The residual (after mitigation) effects on surface water quality in the RSA via the operation of impoundments are assessed as Insignificant for the CEA Case:




Duration – Short, as the effects will be seasonal and will occur seasonally over the life of the Project, until the impoundments cease to operate;



Magnitude – Low, there will be changes in surface water quality with the Project and added impoundment discharges from the Robb Trend mine. However, as with the assessment of the Application Case for the RSA (Section 5.2), there are expected to be no instances of increases in the mean concentration of surface water quality variables as a result of impoundment discharges; and



Table 26 Predicted effect of impoundment discharge on surface water quality in the Embarras River (site EM-4), Cumulative Effects Assessment Case.

Spring Summer Fall Winter Annual Water Quality Variable Conc. Freq. Conc. Freq. Conc. Freq. Conc. Freq. Conc. Freq.

Aluminum

Ammonia

Arsenic

Boron

Cadmium

Chloride

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead

Mercury

Molybdenum

Nickel

Nitrate


Nitrite

Selenium

Silver

Sulphate

Sulphide

Thallium

Titanium

Total phosphorus

TSS

Zinc


impoundments. Empty cells: water quality variables with either no increase in mean concentration or mean concentration less than guideline value for given season. Insufficient data for nitrate, nitrite, and sulphide in summer for data analysis.



The level of confidence in this assessment of residual effects is High. The assessment was conducted using very conservative estimates of flows in the Embarras River. Actual flows in these rivers will be greater most of the time, thereby reducing the residual effects of impoundment discharges from the Project impoundments. While the exact number of impoundments discharging to the Embarras River is unknown, it is expected that the results of the impact analysis above are relatively insensitive to changes in numbers of impoundments, given the very large flows in the Embarras River relative to impoundment discharges.




6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

A summary assessment of the residual effects of the Project on surface water quality is provided in Table 27.

6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

As for past mines in the Coal Valley area, CVRI intends to conduct environmental monitoring as required in all Project approvals. This will include monitoring of Project impoundments as well as monitoring for surface water quality in natural watercourses, both upstream and downstream of Project activities. The sampling network used in the development of the Baseline Case for this assessment (Section 3) will be used as the basis for the effects monitoring sampling design.

Table 27 Environmental assessment summary of the Project.

Issue Case Geographic Extent1 Duration2 Frequency3

Ability for Recovery

from Effect4 Magnitude of Effect5

Project Contribution

and Direction6 Confidence

Rating7 Probability of

Impact or Effect Occurrence8

Significance9

Local Short Isolated Reversible, Short-term Low Negative High High Insignificant

Application Regional Short Isolated Reversible,

Short-term Low Negative High High Insignificant

Local Same as Application Case because additional project defining CEA Case (Robb Trend Mine) is downstream of Project

Changes in Surface Water Quality from Construction Activities

CEA Regional Same as Application Case because additional project defining CEA Case (Robb Trend Mine) is downstream of Project

Local Long Periodic Reversible, Long-term Low Negative High High Insignificant

Application Regional Long Periodic Reversible,

Long-term Low Negative High High Insignificant


Changes in Surface Water Quality from use of Nitrogen-Based Explosives

CEA Regional Long Periodic Reversible,

Long-term Low Negative High High Insignificant

Local Extended Occasional Reversible, Short-term Low Negative High High Insignificant

Application Regional Extended Occasional Reversible,



Changes in Surface Water Quality from Operation of Project Impoundments

CEA Regional Extended Occasional Reversible,


Water Quality of End-Pit Lakes Application Local Residual Continuous Irreversible Low Neutral High High Insignificant

1. Local, Regional, Provincial, National, Global 2. Short, Long, Extended, Residual 3. Continuous, Isolated, Periodic, Occasional, Accidental, Seasonal 4. Reversible in short term, Reversible in long term, Irreversible – rare 5. Nil, Low, Moderate, High 6. Neutral, Positive, Negative 7. Low, Moderate, High 8. Low, Medium, High 9. Insignificant, Significant


7.0 REFERENCES

Alberta Environment. 1999. Surface Water Quality Guidelines for Use in Alberta. Environmental Assurance Division, Science and Standards Branch. 25 pp.

AENV. 2007. Final Terms of Reference Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report for the Proposed Coal Valley Mining Expansion Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Mine Project. 16 pp.

Agbeti, M.D. 1999. Water quality of two end-pit lakes in relation to fishery sustainability. Prepared for: Luscar Ltd. Prepared by: Bio-Limno Research & Consulting. 80 pp.

CCME. 2006. Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Winnipeg. Manitoba.

Cumulative Effects Assessment Working Group. 1999. Cumulative Effects Assessment Practitioners Guide. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.

CVRI. 2006. Coal Valley Mining Expansion: Public Disclosure Document. 11 pp.

CVRI. 2008. Application for Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Expansion Project.

Dodds, W.K. (2006) Eutrophication and trophic state in rivers and streams. Limnological Oceanography 61 (1, part 2) 671-680.

End-Pit Lake Working Group 2004. Guidelines for Lake Development at Coal Mine Operations in Mountain Foothills of the Northern East Slopes, Report # ESD/LM/00-1, Alberta Environment, Environmental Service.

Environment Canada. 2002. Metal mining guidance document for aquatic environmental effects monitoring. June 2002.

Environment Canada. 2005. Revised pulp and paper EEM guidance document. Environment Canada. July 2005.

Golder. 2006. Pit Lake Modelling Phase II: Task A validation and refinement of existing RMA10 and Dyresm pit lake hydrodynamic results. Submitted to: Cumulative Environmental Management Association. Submitted by: Golder Associates Ltd. 127 pp.

Government of British Columbia. 2003. Part E: Ambient freshwater and effluent sampling. In: British Colubmia Field Sampling Manual. BC Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Government of British Columbia, Victoria, British Columbia.



Hackbarth, D. 1999. Nitrate in Surface Runoff from Coal Mines in the Coal Branch: A Review of Existing Information.

Lifeways. 2008. Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Expansion Project: Traditional Land Uuse Report.

Luscar 1999. Surface Water Quality Impact Assessment: Coal Valley Extension. Prepared by Luscar Ltd., March 1999.

Luscar Ltd. 1999. Surface water quality impact assessment: Coal Valley Mine extension. 68 pp.

Luscar Ltd. 2002. Coal Valley Mine: Annual wastewater, groundwater, domestic wastewater, and waterworks, combined report for 2001.





Mackay, W.C. 1999. Coal Valley Mine Extension: Cumulative effects of reclaimed end-pit lakes on water quality and fisheries resources. Prepared for: Luscar Ltd. Prepared by: W.C. Mackay & Associates. 39 pp.

Matrix. 2008. Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Expansion Project: Surface Water Hydrology Report.

Millennium EMS Solutions Ltd. 2005. Luscar Ltd., Coal Valley Mine Mercoal East Phase 2 water quality impact statement. Prepared for Luscar Ltd.

Millennium EMS Solutions Ltd. 2008. Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Expansion Project: Groundwater Report.

MOE (Ministry of Environment) 1997. Ambient water quality criteria for dissolved oxygen. Environmental Protection Division Water, Air and Climate Change Branch. Overview Report.

RAMP. 2005. RAMP Technical design and rationale document. Prepared for the RAMP Steering Committee by Hatfield Consultants Ltd., Stantec Consulting Ltd., Mack, Slack, and Associates Inc., and Western Resource Solutions. November 2005.

APPENDICES

Appendix A1

Description of Water Quality Field Program

Surface Water Quality Report A1-i Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A1.0 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY FIELD PROGRAM........... A1-1 A1.1 WATER QUALITY FIELDWORK ACTIVITIES................................................... A1-1 A1.2 SAMPLE SHIPMENT AND ANALYSIS............................................................ A1-12 A1.3 QA/QC ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... A1-12

LIST OF TABLES

Table A1.1 Water quality QA/QC results: field and trip blanks................................ A1-14

Table A1.2 Water quality QA/QC results: sample splits.......................................... A1-16

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure A1.1 Surface water quality sampling site MCLDT-1, Upper Reach of Unnamed McLeod River tributary. .......................................................... A1-2

Figure A1.2 Surface water quality sampling site CH, Chance Creek. ........................ A1-3

Figure A1.3 Surface water quality sampling site FC, Felton Creek above confluence with McLeod River................................................................ A1-4

Figure A1.4 Surface water quality sampling site WC, White Creek above confluence with McLeod River................................................................ A1-5

Figure A1.5 Surface water quality sampling site JC, Jackson Creek above confluence with Embarras River. ............................................................ A1-6

Figure A1.6 Surface water quality sampling site MCLD-2, McLeod River below McCardell Creek. .................................................................................... A1-7

Figure A1.7 Surface water quality sampling site EM-2, Embarras River between Jackson and Bryan Creeks. ..................................................... A1-8

Figure A1.8 Surface water quality sampling site Site EM-3, Embarras River above Prest Creek. ................................................................................. A1-8

Figure A1.9 Surface water quality sampling site EM-RC, Embarras River upstream of Rodney Creek..................................................................... A1-9

Figure A1.10 Surface water quality sampling site MCLD-3, McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River. .......................................................... A1-10

Figure A1.11 Surface water quality sampling site MCLD-4, McLeod River below confluence with Embarras River. .......................................................... A1-11

Surface Water Quality Report A1-ii Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

A1.0 DESCRIPTION OF WATER QUALITY FIELD PROGRAM

A1.1 WATER QUALITY FIELDWORK ACTIVITIES

Water quality baseline surveys were conducted in June (spring), July (summer), September (fall), December (winter) 2006, as well as August (summer), and October (fall) 2007. Sampling locations were identified using UTM coordinates, and locations were accessed by ATV-quad, truck, and foot. Field data were recorded on separate datasheets and digital photographs of each site were taken and catalogued. Details of each location sampled are provided in Figure A1.1 to Figure A1.11.

Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) developed using sampling guidance described by Environment Canada (2002, 2005), the Government of British Columbia (2003) and the Athabasca Oil Sands Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program (RAMP 2005) were used for all field sampling. Water sampling involved collecting single grab samples by submerging sample bottles to a depth of approximately 30 cm (where possible), uncapping and filling the bottle, and recapping at depth using Latex powder-free gloves. Each bottle was triple-rinsed using this procedure prior to the final sample collection. Grab samples were collected upstream of the person collecting the sample to avoid disturbing the substrate. Samples taken at mouths of tributaries of the McLeod and Embarras Rivers were collected not less than 50 m upstream of tributary confluences to avoid influences of mainstem water on sampled water quality at each location.

At all water quality sampling locations, in situ measurements of pH, dissolved oxygen, water temperature and conductivity were collected using an YSI Model 650 multi-probe water meter, or a LaMotte Tracer Pocketester. Dissolved oxygen titrations were performed in the field using a LaMotte Winkler titration kit (code 5860).

A field blank, trip blank, and field split were also collected for QA/QC purposes. Potential contamination of samples during collection, handling, and transport was assessed using a field blank and a trip blank. The field blank was used to assess potential contamination from sample handling, and was prepared in the field by filling sample bottles with de-ionized water provided by the lab. The trip blank, prepared in the analytical laboratory prior to sampling and kept sealed for the duration of the sampling trip, was used to evaluate potential contamination from the sample container and the efficacy of sample preservation and storage conditions. The sample split was collected at one station in each season to assess analytical precision in the lab. All blanks and splits were labeled with dummy codes to ensure “blind” laboratory analysis.

Surface Water Quality Report A1-1 Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

Figure A1.1 Surface water quality sampling site MCLDT-1, Upper Reach of Unnamed McLeod River tributary.

19 July 2006

Weather Conditions: Water Temperature:

Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Sunny, clear, warm

8.5oC

282 μS/cm

8.3

10.6 mg/L

Reach is largely depositional with dominant substrate being silt/sand with some cobble

26 September 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Partly cloudy, cool

6.4oC

119 μS/cm

7.6

10.7 mg/L

Small meandering stream through grasses, shrubs; estimated wetted width: 0.5 m; estimated average water depth: 1.0 m


Figure A1.2 Surface water quality sampling site CH, Chance Creek.

27 June 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Mainly cloudy, calm

12.5oC

218 μS/cm

8.3

9.0 mg/L

Substrate consists of fractured boulders and cobble

19 July 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Partly overcast, warm

13.8oC

267 μS/cm

8.5

9.5 mg/L

Estimated wetted width: 2.5 m; estimated average water depth: 0.1 m

26 September 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Overcast

6.2oC

157 μS/cm

7.8

10.9 mg/L

Estimated wetted width: 4 m, estimated average water depth: 0.2 m

No image available

19 December 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Windy, 0oC

0.1oC

292 μS/cm

8.1

12.7 mg/L

Ice cover was 10 cm over top 15 cm water



Figure A1.3 Surface water quality sampling site FC, Felton Creek above confluence with McLeod River.

27 June 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Clear; light wind

12.20°C

147 μS/cm

7.97

7.95 mg/L

Run; cobble and gravel; average width 5 m; average depth 20 cm

19 July 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Clear

11.67 °C

271 μS/cm

8.2

9.32

Riffle; run; cobbles; boulders; width 5 m; depth 40-50 cm

26 September 2006


Conductivity: pH:

Dissolved oxygen: Notes:

Overcast

5.64 °C

147 μS/cm

-

10.94 mg/L

Riffle; run; cobble gravel; 6 m wide; 30 cm deep

21 December 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

-

0.05 °C

285 μS/cm

7.84

13.3 mg/L

Riffle; water 25 cm deep; ice 10 cm thick

Figure A1.4 Surface water quality sampling site WC, White Creek above confluence with McLeod River.

27 June 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Clear

14.76°C

145 μS/cm

7.59

7.56 mg/L

Run; cobble; 9 m wide; 20 cm deep

19 July 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Clear, warm

12.84 °C

209 μS/cm

8.23

8.67 mg/L

Riffle; pool; cobble; boulder; 10 m wide; 30 cm deep

26 September 2006


Conductivity: pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Overcast, light showers

7.65 °C

140 μS/cm

7.66

10.37 mg/L

Cobble; average width 7-8 m

21 December 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

-

0.09°C

256 μS/cm

8.04

13.14 mg/L

Riffle; water 25 cm deep; ice 10 cm


Figure A1.5 Surface water quality sampling site JC, Jackson Creek above confluence with Embarras River.

2 August 2007


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Cloudy, heavy rain

10.69°C

246 μS/cm

8.50

9.18 mg/L

Cobble; silt; Average width 1 m; average depth 10 cm

2 October 2007

Weather Conditions:

Water Temperature:

Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Cloudy

5.3°C

229 μS/cm

6.98

132 mg/L

Riffle; cobble; silt; average width 80 cm; average depth 10-20 cm

To be provided later


Figure A1.6 Surface water quality sampling site MCLD-2, McLeod River below McCardell Creek.

27 June 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Clear with some clouds

15.2oC

259 μS/cm

8.4

8.2 mg/L

Estimated wetted width: 25 m; estimated average water depth: 0.3 m

19 July 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Sunny, warm

13.7oC

342 μS/cm

8.5

9.4 mg/L

Erosional site, with substrate consisting largely of cobble; estimated wetted width: 30 m; estimated average water depth: 0.5 m

26 September 2006


Conductivity: pH:


Overcast, dark clouds

7.6oC

239 μS/cm

8.0

10.7 mg/L

Estimated wetted width: 25; estimated average water depth: 0.5 m; water visibly turbid

21 December 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Clear

0.1oC

430 μS/cm

8.0

13.4 mg/L



Figure A1.7 Surface water quality sampling site EM-2, Embarras River between Jackson and Bryan Creeks.

19 December 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Clear, Windy

<0.1oC

314 μS/cm

8.0

12.9 mg/L


Figure A1.8 Surface water quality sampling site EM-3, Embarras River above Prest Creek.

20 December 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Partly cloudy

<0.1oC

346 μS/cm

7.8

12.9 mg/L

n/a


Figure A1.9 Surface water quality sampling site EM-RC, Embarras River upstream of Rodney Creek.

28 June 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Clear, calm

22.3oC

147 μS/cm

8.4

6.3 mg/L


20 July 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Sunny, warm

18.9oC

340 μS/cm

8.5

9.3 mg/L

Erosional site, with substrate consisting largely of cobble, some boulder, sand; estimated wetted width: 50 m; estimated average water depth: 0.3 m

27 September 2006


Conductivity: pH:


Sunny

8.8oC

202 μS/cm

8.0

11.1 mg/L

Estimated wetted width: 40 m; estimated average water depth: 1.0 m; water brown-hued (some turbidity)

20 December 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Cloudy

<0.1oC

380 μS/cm

7.9

12.9 mg/L



Figure A1.10 Surface water quality sampling site MCLD-3, McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River.

28 June 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Clear, light breeze

20.9oC

1298 μS/cm

8.4

6.3 mg/L

Erosional site, cobbled and boulder substrate, estimated wetted width: 100 m; estimated average water depth: 1 m

20 July 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Sunny, warm

20.5oC

377 μS/cm

8.5

9.1 mg/L


27 September 2006


Conductivity: pH:


Sunny

8.3oC

277 μS/cm

8.1

10.8 mg/L

Water is brown-hued

20 December 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Cloudy

<0.1oC

446 μS/cm

7.9

12.4 mg/L



Figure A1.11 Surface water quality sampling site MCLD-4, McLeod River below confluence with Embarras River.

28 June 2006

Weather Conditions:

Water Temperature:

Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Clear, moderate breeze

22.3oC

284 μS/cm

8.5

7.0 mg/L

Estimated wetted width: 90 m

20 July 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Sunny, warm

18.9oC

361 μS/cm

8.5

8.2 mg/L

Erosional site, with substrate consisting largely of cobble; estimated wetted width: 40 m; estimated average water depth: 0.9 m

27 September 2006


Conductivity: pH:


Sunny

9.1oC

258 μS/cm

8.1

10.7 mg/L

Estimated wetted width: 100 m; water brown-hued and turbid

20 December 2006


Conductivity:

pH:

Dissolved oxygen:

Notes:

Cloudy

<0.1oC

415 μS/cm

7.9

12.5 mg/L



A1.2 SAMPLE SHIPMENT AND ANALYSIS

Samples were collected, preserved and shipped according to protocols specified by consulting laboratories. Standard water quality variables and organics/hydrocarbons were analyzed by ALS Laboratory Group (ALS) in Edmonton, Alberta, with metals (including ultra-trace total mercury) analyzed by the Alberta Research Council (ARC) in Vegreville, Alberta.

A1.3 QA/QC ANALYSIS

Field and trip blank analytical results were compared to analytical detection limits. Water quality variable concentrations in the blank samples greater than five times the detection limit were assumed to demonstrate potential contamination of samples during sample collection or analysis or analytical error. Blanks with water quality variable concentrations below or near detection limits represent samples that were collected, handled, and analyzed without contamination or potential errors.

Analytical results for the split samples were compared, and relative percent difference (difference between data values/average of data values, multiplied by 100%) was calculated for each water quality variable. Relative percent differences of greater than 20% were noted as potentially unacceptable levels of precision. However, because precision decreases as the water quality variable concentration approaches the detection limit, relative percent differences greater than 20% were considered to be of significance only if water quality variable concentrations in both samples were greater than five times the detection limit.

Concentrations of water quality variables in field and trip blanks for all seasons are shown in Table A1.1.

The QA/QC results are similar for all seasons for field and trip blanks. With the exception of nitrate and nitrate plus nitrite in the summer field blank, concentrations of all physical variables, nutrients, ions, and organics/hydrocarbons were less than five times the detection limits in both the field and trip blanks in all sampling seasons.

In all seasons, several total metal concentrations in both the field and trip blanks were greater than five times the detection limit. For field blanks, this ranged from 22% to 37% of total metals in the spring and winter seasons, respectively. For trip blanks, this ranged from 7% to 44% of total metals in the winter and spring seasons, respectively. In addition, for both trip and field blanks, a number of elevated concentrations occurred for the same total metals in different seasons. This suggests that the source of these exceedances was related to consistent characteristics of laboratory water, sample bottle handling or storage, analytical procedures, or some other factor that is consistent across seasons rather than accidental contamination in the field; accurate laboratory analysis of low concentrations of certain water quality variables may be problematic.



Concentrations of water quality variables in the sample split are shown in Table A1.2. Of all cases of physical variables, nutrients, and ions (concentrations of organics/hydrocarbons were all below detection limits and so are not reported in Table A1.2), only sulphate concentrations in the winter sample split exceeded 20% relative difference to the sample concentration and was greater than five times the detection limit. The relative percent difference in concentrations of two total metals was greater than 20% (with concentrations greater than five times the detection limit) in the summer 2006 sample split; this represents 7% of all total metals analyzed. Results are similar for the fall and winter 2006 sample splits.

Table A1.1 Water quality QA/QC results: field and trip blanks.

Conventional VariablesTotal Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5True Color T.C.U. 2.5 2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 2 <2Total Suspended Solids mg/L 3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3Total organic carbon mg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 1 <1 <1 <1Total dissolved solids mg/L 5 8 8 <5 <5 <5 <5 5 <5Biochemical Oxygen Demand mg/L 2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2NutrientsAmmonia-N mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.9 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1Nitrate-N mg/L 0.1 0.9 <0.1Nitrite-N mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05Dissolved organic carbon mg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Hydroxide (OH) mg/L 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <0.5 <0.5 <5 <5Total phosphorus mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001Total dissolved phosphorus mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2IonsMagnesium (Mg) mg/L 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1Potassium (K) mg/L 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5Sodium (Na) mg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 0.5 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003Calcium (Ca) mg/L 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5Chloride (Cl) mg/L 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5Carbonate (CO3) mg/L 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5Total MetalsAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.0002 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Antimony (Sb) mg/L 0.0000005 0.0000013 <0.0000005 <0.0000005 0.0000022 0.0000011 0.000026 0.0000025 0.0000035Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.000002 0.0000047 <0.000002 0.000007 <0.000002 0.0000098 0.0000149 <0.000002 <0.000002Barium Ba) mg/L 0.000004 0.0000689 0.000103 0.0000163 <0.000004 0.000014 0.000015 0.000036 0.0000209Beryllium (Be) mg/L 0.000003 <0.000003 <0.000003 <0.000003 <0.000003 <0.000003 <0.000003 <0.000003 <0.000003Value is at Detection Limit

Unit DetectionLimit

Fall2006

Field BlankWater Quality Variable

Fall2006

Trip Blank

Winter2006

Field Blank

Winter2006

Trip Blank

Spring2006

Field Blank

Spring2006

Trip Blank

Summer2006

Field Blank

Summer2006

Trip Blank

Value Exceeds 5 times Detection Limit


Table A1.1 (Cont’d.)

Total Metals Cont'd.Bismuth (Bi) mg/L 0.000001 <0.000001 <0.000001 0.0000027 0.0000015 0.0000015 0.0000022 <0.000001 <0.000001Boron (B) mg/L 0.00003 0.000109 0.00234 0.000384 0.000897 0.000217 0.000333 0.00047 0.000144Cadmium (Cd) mg/L 0.000002 0.0000038 0.0000137 0.0000111 0.0000073 <0.000002 <0.000002 <0.000002 <0.000002Calcium (Ca) mg/L 0.004 <0.004 0.0347 0.0043 <0.004 0.0046 0.0042 0.0308 <0.004Chlorine (Cl) mg/L 0.1 0.719 0.507 0.278 <0.1 0.378 0.49 <0.1 0.146Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.00004 0.000048 <0.00004 0.00006 <0.00003 0.000042 0.0000701 0.000083 0.0000817Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.000001 <0.000001 0.0000074 <0.000001 <0.000001 <0.000001 <0.000001 <0.000001 <0.000001Copper (Cu) mg/L 0.00005 0.0000909 0.0000557 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 0.000179 0.000142 0.0000982Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002Lead (Pb) mg/L 0.000001 0.0000286 0.0000293 0.0000085 <0.000001 0.0000069 0.0000061 0.00001 0.0000046Lithium (Li) mg/L 0.00002 <0.00002 0.0000269 <0.00002 <0.00002 0.000536 0.000391 0.000125 0.00013Manganese (Mn) mg/L 0.000003 0.0000342 0.000031 0.0000438 <0.000003 0.0000137 0.0000195 0.0000139 0.0000123Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.00001 0.0000254 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001Mercury (Hg), ultra<trace ng/l 0.6 0.8 <0.6 2.3 1.2 <0.6 0.7 <0.6 <0.6Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.000001 0.0000048 0.000122 0.0000047 <0.000001 0.0000022 0.0000025 0.0000087 0.0000033Nickel (Ni) mg/L 0.000005 0.0000111 0.0000456 0.000006 <0.000005 <0.000005 <0.000005 0.0000158 <0.000005Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.0000005 <0.0000005 <0.0000005 0.0000012 0.0000009 <0.0000005 <0.0000005 <0.0000005 <0.0000005Strontium (Sr) mg/L 0.000004 0.0000324 0.000358 0.0000265 <0.000004 0.0000184 0.0000158 0.0000435 0.0000573Sulpher (S) mg/L 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.291 0.282 <0.2 0.51Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0000003 0.000001 0.0000005 0.0000043 0.0000006 0.000002 0.0000037 0.0000018 <0.0000003Thorium (Th) mg/L 0.0000003 <0.0000003 0.0000027 <0.0000003 <0.0000003 0.0000041 0.0000072 0.0000018 0.0000006Tin (Sn) mg/L 0.00003 <0.00003 <0.00003 <0.00003 <0.00003 <0.00003 0.0000519 <0.00003 <0.00003Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.00004 <0.00004 0.000055 0.000108 0.000066 0.000111 0.000107 0.000239 0.000096Uranium (U) mg/L 0.0000001 0.0000001 0.0000002 0.0000001 <0.0000001 0.0000004 0.0000002 0.0000002 0.0000003Vanadium (V) mg/L 0.000005 0.0000105 0.0000113 0.000018 <0.000005 0.0000532 0.0000718 0.0000117 0.0000188Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.00005 0.00036 0.00034 0.00031 0.000292 0.000461 0.000421 0.00038 0.00025General OrganicsNaphthenic Acids mg/L 1 <1 <1Hydrocarbons, Recoverable (I.R.) mg/L 0.5 <0.5 <0.5Phenols (4AAP) mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.002 <0.002Value is at Detection Limit

Winter2006

Trip Blank

Spring2006

Trip Blank

Summer2006

Field Blank

Summer2006

Trip Blank

Fall2006

Field Blank

Value Exceeds 5 times Detection Limit

Fall2006

Trip Blank

Winter2006

Field BlankUnit Detection

Limit

Spring2006

Field BlankWater Quality Variable


Table A1.2 Water quality QA/QC results: sample splits.

Conventional VariableTotal Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L 5 181 181 0.0 115 115 0.0 175 174 0.6True Color T.C.U. 2.5 15 15 0.0 30 25 18.2 9 10 10.5Conductivity (EC) µS/cm 0.2 328 328 0.0 289 289 0.0 358 355 0.8Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 164 165 0.6 139 139 0.0 145 160 9.8pH pH units 0.1 8.5 8.5 0.0 8.4 8.4 0.0 8.1 8.2 1.2Total suspended solids mg/L 3 <3 <3 79 83 4.9 <3 4Dissolved organic carbon mg/L 1 6 6 0.0 8 7 13.3 2 3 40.0Total organic carbon mg/L 1 7 7 0.0 8 7 13.3 2 3 40.0Total dissolved solids mg/L 5 192 189 1.6 171 167 2.4 193 188 2.6NutrientsAmmonia<N mg/L 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L 0.1 0.6 0.1 142.9 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0Total phosphorus mg/L 0.001 0.005 0.005 0.0 0.048 0.046 4.3 0.004 0.004 0.0Total dissolved phosphorus mg/L 0.001 0.002 0.003 40.0 <0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.0Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L 0.2 <0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.0 <0.2 <0.2IonsMagnesium (Mg) mg/L 0.1 10.5 10.6 0.9 10.5 10.6 0.9 8.4 9.1 8.0Potassium (K) mg/L 0.5 0.8 0.6 28.6 0.6 0.7 15.4 0.9 1.3 36.4Sodium (Na) mg/L 1 12 12 0.0 11 11 0.0 18 21 15.4Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 0.5 5.2 5.1 1.9 30.1 30.2 0.3 8.2 10.2 21.7Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003Calcium (Ca) mg/L 0.5 48.3 48.7 0.8 38.2 38.3 0.3 44.3 49.1 10.3Chloride (Cl) mg/L 1 2 2 0.0 2 2 0.0 4 4 0.0Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L 5 210 210 0.0 137 137 0.0 213 213 0.0Carbonate (CO3) mg/L 5 6 5 18.2 <5 <5 <5 <5Total MetalsAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.0002 0.0373 0.0413 10.2 1.87 2.24 18.0 26 26.8 3.0Antimony (Sb) mg/L 0.0000005 0.0000769 0.0000761 1.0 0.000112 0.000122 8.5 0.0846 0.084 0.7Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.000002 0.000663 0.000664 0.2 0.000709 0.000746 5.1 0.382 0.412 7.6Barium Ba) mg/L 0.000004 0.0882 0.088 0.2 0.0975 0.103 5.5 106 105 0.9Beryllium (Be) mg/L 0.000003 0.0000043 0.0000088 68.7 0.0000692 0.0000722 4.2 0.0037 <0.003Bismuth (Bi) mg/L 0.000001 0.0000026 0.0000015 53.7 0.0000115 0.0000109 5.4 0.001 0.001 0.0Boron (B) mg/L 0.00003 0.00969 0.0097 0.1 0.0119 0.0114 4.3 10.6 11.6 9.0Variables differ by > 20% but one or both concentrations are < 5 times the detection limit.

Relative Percent

DifferenceEM-3 EM-3

2006 Winter2006 FallRelative Percent

DifferenceMCLD-3 MCLD-3

Split

2006 SummerRelative Percent

DifferenceEM-RC EM-RC

SplitWater Quality Variable Detection LimitUnit

Variables differ by > 20% and concentrations are > 5 times the detection limit.


Total Metals, cont'd.Cadmium (Cd) mg/L 0.000002 0.0000083 0.0000052 45.9 0.0000326 0.0000326 0.0 0.0095 0.0117 20.8Calcium (Ca) mg/L 0.004 42.3 42.6 0.7 37.9 39 2.9 46.5 48.1 3.4Chlorine (Cl) mg/L 0.1 1.12 1.17 4.4 0.668 0.758 12.6 3.54 3.71 4.7Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.00004 0.000076 0.000117 42.5 0.00255 0.00268 5.0 0.162 0.173 6.6Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.000001 0.0000499 0.0000507 1.6 0.000609 0.000622 2.1 0.0343 0.033 3.9Copper (Cu) mg/L 0.00005 0.000332 0.000447 29.5 0.00212 0.00216 1.9 0.479 0.461 3.8Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.002 0.0618 0.0662 6.9 1.54 1.6 3.8 137 154 11.7Lead (Pb) mg/L 0.000001 0.0000354 0.0000417 16.3 0.000862 0.000906 5.0 0.0336 0.0306 9.3Lithium (Li) mg/L 0.00002 0.00451 0.00465 3.1 0.00584 0.00537 8.4 3.79 3.97 4.6Manganese (Mn) mg/L 0.000003 0.0109 0.0114 4.5 0.0488 0.051 4.4 28.9 31.1 7.3Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 0.00001 <0.00001 <0.01 0.0105Mercury (Hg), ultra<trace mg/L 0.6 <0.6 <0.6 3.4 3.4 0.0 <0.6 1.2Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.000001 0.000907 0.000909 0.2 0.000858 0.000769 10.9 1.49 1.52 2.0Nickel (Ni) mg/L 0.000005 0.00131 0.00141 7.4 0.00179 0.00209 15.5 0.005 0.005 0.0Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.000959 0.000972 1.3 0.189 0.205 8.1Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.0000005 0.0000016 0.0000017 6.1 0.0000143 0.0000132 8.0 0.0008 0.00056 35.3Strontium (Sr) mg/L 0.000004 0.299 0.3 0.3 0.224 0.263 16.0 357 367 2.8Sulpher (S) mg/L 0.2 2.24 2.22 0.9 10.5 10.7 1.9 2.59 2.99 14.3Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0000003 0.0000094 0.000009 4.3 0.0000354 0.0000302 15.9 0.0073 0.0083 12.8Thorium (Th) mg/L 0.0000003 0.0000085 0.0000017 133.3 0.000223 0.000162 31.7 0.0036 0.0067 60.2Tin (Sn) mg/L 0.00003 <0.00003 <0.00003 0.0000422 0.000042 0.5 0.03 <0.03Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.00004 0.00139 0.00125 10.6 0.0319 0.0457 35.6 3.31 3.56 7.3Uranium (U) mg/L 0.0000001 0.000501 0.000497 0.8 0.000459 0.00047 2.4 0.609 0.624 2.4Vanadium (V) mg/L 0.000005 0.000426 0.000435 2.1 0.00476 0.0052 8.8 0.222 0.219 1.4Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.00005 0.00434 0.00496 13.3 0.00933 0.00647 36.2 2.51 2.01 22.1

Variables differ by > 20% but one or both concentrations are < 5 times the detection limit.

Relative Percent

DifferenceEM-3 EM-3

Unit Detection Limit

2006 Summer

Water Quality Variable

Variables differ by > 20% and concentrations are > 5 times the detection limit.

Relative Percent

Difference

2006 Fall 2006 Winter

EM-RC EM-RC Split

Relative Percent

DifferenceMCLD-3 MCLD-3

Split


Table A1.2 (Cont’d.)

Appendix A2

Compilation of Water Quality Data Used in Water Quality Baseline

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A2.0 COMPILATION OF WATER QUALITY DATA USED IN WATER QUALITY BASELINE .................................................................... A2-1

LIST OF TABLES

Table A2.1 Sources of specific water quality guidelines used in this report.............. A2-1

Table A2.2 Water quality data for site MEC-3: Lower-mid section of Mercoal Creek. ..................................................................................................... A2-2

Table A2.3 Water quality data for site MEC-4: Mercoal Creek before McLeod River. ...................................................................................................... A2-3

Table A2.4 Water quality data for site MCCARD-1: Lower McCardell Creek. .......... A2-4

Table A2.5 Water quality data for site MCCARD-2: Upper McCardell Creek. .......... A2-5

Table A2.6 Water quality data for site MERC-T1: Upper Mercoal Creek Tributary.................................................................................................. A2-6

Table A2.7 Water quality data for site MERC-T2: Lower Mercoal Creek Tributary.................................................................................................. A2-7

Table A2.8 Water quality data for site MCLDT-1: Upper Reach of Unnamed McLeod River Tributary. ......................................................................... A2-8

Table A2.9 Water quality data for site MCLDT-2: Lower Reach of Unnamed McLeod River Tributary. ......................................................................... A2-9

Table A2.10 Water quality data for site CH: Chance Creek...................................... A2-10

Table A2.11 Water quality data for site FC: Felton Creek......................................... A2-11

Table A2.12 Water quality data for site WC: White Creek. ....................................... A2-12

Table A2.13 Water quality data for site JC: Jackson Creek...................................... A2-13

Table A2.14 Water quality data for site MCLD-2: McLeod River below McCardell Creek. .................................................................................. A2-14

Table A2.15 Water quality data for site EM-2: Embarras River between Jackson Creek and Bryan Creek. ......................................................... A2-16

Table A2.16 Water quality data for site EM-3: Embarras River above Prest Creek. ................................................................................................... A2-17



Table A2.17 Water quality data for site EM-4: Embarras River above confluence with Erith River. .................................................................. A2-18

Table A2.18 Water quality data for site EM-WQ-1: Embarras River between Jackson Creek and Bryan Creek. ......................................................... A2-19

Table A2.19 Water quality data for site EM-WQ-2: Embarras River below Bryan Creek. ................................................................................................... A2-20

Table A2.20 Water quality data for site EM-WQ-3: Embarras River above Prest Creek. ................................................................................................... A2-21

Table A2.21 Water quality data for site EM-WQ-4: Embarras River above confluence with Erith River. .................................................................. A2-22

Table A2.22 Water quality data for site EM-RC: Embarras River upstream of Rodney Creek....................................................................................... A2-23

Table A2.23 Water quality data for site MCLD-3: McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River. .......................................................... A2-24

Table A2.24 Water quality data for site MCLD-4: McLeod River below confluence with Embarras River. .......................................................... A2-25

A2.0 COMPILATION OF WATER QUALITY DATA USED IN WATER QUALITY BASELINE

Locations of water quality sampling sites are found in Figure 3 of the main report.

Water quality data for the water quality baseline from all years and seasons are presented in the following tables.

Table A2.1 Sources of specific water quality guidelines used in this report.

Notation in Water Quality

Tables Description/Explanation

1 Guidelines are Alberta Environment Guidelines for the Protection of Freshwater Aquatic Life (1999) unless otherwise specified.

a at pH>=6.5; [Ca2+]>= 4 mg/L; DOC>=2 mg/L (CCME 2006).

b at pH 8.0, 10oC (CCME 2006).

c CCME (2006).

d BC ambient water quality guideline for boron (BC 2003).

e Is equal to 10(0.86*LOG(Hardness)-3.2) (CCME 2006).

f Set to USEPA continuous concentration guideline.

g Guideline for chromium III is 0.0089 mg/L; guideline for chromium VI is 0.0010 mg/L (CCME 2006). Most stringent guideline (0.0010 mg/L) is used.

h BC working water quality guideline (BC 2006a).

i Guideline is hardness-dependent: 0.002 mg/L at hardness = 0 to 120 mg/L; 0.003 mg/L at hardness = 120 to 180 mg/L; 0.004 mg/L at hardness > 180 mg/L (CCME 2006).

j Alberta acute guideline for dissolved oxygen (AENV 1999); guideline is a minimum value.

k Guideline is hardness-dependent: 0.001 mg/L at hardness = 0 to 60 mg/L; 0.002 mg/L at hardness = 60 to 120 mg/L; 0.004 mg/L at hardness > 120 mg/L (CCME 2006).

l for acute concentrations (AENV 1999).

m Guideline is hardness-dependent: 0.025 mg/L at hardness =0 to 60 mg/L; 0.065 mg/L at hardness = 60 to 120 mg/L; 0.11 mg/L at hardness = 120 to 180 mg/L; 0.15 mg/L at hardness > 180 mg/L (CCME 2006).

n CCME guideline for nitrate is 13 mg/L; CCME guideline for nitrite is 0.060 mg/L.

o CCME (2006). AENV (1999) guideline: "To be in the range of 6.5 to 8.5 but not altered by more than 0.5 pH units from background values."

p BC approved water quality guideline (BC 2006b).

q USEPA continuous concentration guideline (as H2S).

r BC working water quality guideline (BC 2006a).

s Guideline is for chronic total (inorganic and organic) phosphorus.

t AENV (1999) acute and chronic guideline for suspended solids states: "Not to be increased by more than 10 mg/L over background value."



MEC-3 MEC-3 MEC-3 MEC-32004 2004 2005 2005

Summer Fall Winter SpringAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.103 0.063 0.01 0.069Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b

Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0008 0.0008 0.0006 0.0007Barium mg/L - 0.144 0.139 0.224 0.153Beryllium mg/L - <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 250 224 326 229Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.022 0.016 0.023 0.017Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 33.9 30.4 37 27.4Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6 <6 <6 <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1.3 2.8 4.9Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0001 <0.0001Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 356 331 475 339Copper (Cu) mg/L i <0.001 <0.001 <.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - <0.0001Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 113 101 124 92Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0001 0.0002 0.0001 <0.0001Lithium mg/L - 0.014 0.009 0.012 0.009Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 7 6.1 7.7 5.7Manganese mg/L - 0.026 0.026 0.021 0.26Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c 0.003 0.002 <0.003 0.002Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.0006 0.0007 0.002 <0.0005Nitrate mg/L 13 <0.01 <0.01 0.06 0.02Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.2 <0.02 0.06 0.02Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.05 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.29 8.26 8.21 8.12Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 1.4 1 2 1.4Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0002 <0.0002 0.0003 <0.0002Silicon mg/L - 5.12 4.84 5.82 4.54Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 45.5 37.4 68.1 40.7Strontium mg/L - 0.246 0.203 0.268 0.198Sulfur mg/L - 1.25 1.14 0.9 1.1Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 3.9 3.4 3 3Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005Tin mg/L - 0.003 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0021 0.0019 0.0007 0.0013Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 205 184 267 188Total dissolved solids mg/L - 216 191 280 195Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.42 <0.05 <0.05 0.07Total organic carbon mg/L -Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.05 0.06 0.07 <0.1Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 1True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Vanadium mg/L - 0.0004 0.0003 0.0002 0.0003Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.002 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit

Regulatory Guideline1Units

Table A2.2 Water quality data for site MEC-3: Lower-mid section of Mercoal Creek.


MEC-4 MEC-4 MEC-4 MEC-42004 2004 2005 2005

Summer Fall Winter SpringAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.07 <0.05 0.022 0.128Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b

Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0005 <0.002 0.0009 0.0006Barium mg/L - 0.177 0.139 0.224 0.153Beryllium mg/L - <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 198 159 253 188Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.005 <0.0005 <0.0005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.014 <0.02 0.022 0.012Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 33.8 24.8 37.8 30.8Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6 <6 <6 <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 0.8Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.0005 <0.005 <0.0005 <0.005Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.0001 <0.001 0.0001 0.0001Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 279 237 362 278Copper (Cu) mg/L i <0.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 115 83.2 129 100Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 <0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0002 <0.001 0.0001 <0.0001Lithium mg/L - 0.014 0.009 0.012 0.009Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 7.3 5.2 8.4 6.7Manganese mg/L - 0.014 0.019 0.082 0.019Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c 0.002 <0.01 0.002 0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m <0.0005 <0.0005 0.003 <0.0005Nitrate mg/L 13 <0.1 0.01 0.07 0.01Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.2 <0.02 0.07 <0.02Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.05 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.41 8.2 8.24 8.31Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 1 0.7 1.2 0.8Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0002 <0.0002 0.0014 <0.0002Silicon mg/L - 4.33 4.1 5.18 5.03Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 22.9 18 38 25.8Strontium mg/L - 0.236 0.207 0.282 0.206Sulfur mg/L - 1.28 0.86 0.9 1.3Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 3.7 2.7 3 3.1Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005Tin mg/L - <0.001 0.047 <0.001 <0.001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0011 <0.005 0.0011 0.0019Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 162 130 207 154Total dissolved solids mg/L - 167 153 213 164Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.42 <0.05 0.12 0.08Total organic carbon mg/L -Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.05 <0.05 0.1 <0.1Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 2 <2 2True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.005 <0.0005 <0.0005Vanadium mg/L - 0.0003 <0.001 0.0003 0.0004Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.002 <0.01 <0.001 <0.001Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.3 Water quality data for site MEC-4: Mercoal Creek before McLeod River.


MCCARD-1 MCCARD-1 MCCARD-1 MCCARD-12004 2004 2005 2005


Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0003 0.0005 0.0002 0.0004Barium mg/L - 0.057 0.061 0.0736 0.059Beryllium mg/L - <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 166 179 228 180Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.012 0.011 0.013 0.01Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 37 36.9 48.1 38.7Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6 <6 <6 <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 0.8 <0.5 <0.4 5Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0002 <0.0001Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 255 260 329 259Copper (Cu) mg/L i <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 128 128 170 140Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0001 0.0002 <0.0001 <0.0001Lithium mg/L - 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.003Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 8.7 12.3 9.5Manganese mg/L - 0.01 0.022 0.017 0.009Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.0006 <0.0005 0.0028 0.001Nitrate mg/L 13 <0.1 0.01 0.05 0.03Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.2 <0.02 0.05 0.03Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.05 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.18 8.18 7.9 8.22Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.5Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0002 <0.0002 0.0003 <0.0002Silicon mg/L - 3.73 3.68 4.36 4.31Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 7.6 8.8 13.5 8.6Strontium mg/L - 0.274 0.291 0.405 0.297Sulfur mg/L - 1.24 1.09 1.7 1.6Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 3.5 3.8 5 4.5Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005Tin mg/L - <0.001 0.003 <0.001 <0.001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0009 <0.0005 0.0007 0.0008Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 136 147 187 147Total dissolved solids mg/L - 140 147 192 155Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.42 1.01 0.05 0.08Total organic carbon mg/L -Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.05 0.18 0.08 <0.1Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt

True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Vanadium mg/L - 0.0002 0.0005 0.0002 0.0002Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.001Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.4 Water quality data for site MCCARD-1: Lower McCardell Creek.


MCCARD-2 MCCARD-2 MCCARD-2 MCCARD-22004 2004 2005 2005


Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0003 0.0004 0.0004 0.0005Barium mg/L - 0.059 0.058 0.077 0.058Beryllium mg/L - <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 172 189 241 178Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.012 0.011 0.013 0.012Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.00001 <0.00001 0.00002 <0.00001Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 35.9 38.1 50.2 39.7Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6 <6 <6 <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 0.7 <0.5 5.2Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0003 <0.0001Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 254 273 346 266Copper (Cu) mg/L i <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 125 133 178 140Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 <0.1Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0001 <0.0001 0.0001 <0.0001Lithium mg/L - 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.003Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 8.6 9.2 12.8 9.9Manganese mg/L - 0.028 0.014 0.013 0.008Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.0006 <0.0005 0.0028 0.0028Nitrate mg/L 13 <0.01 <0.001 0.06 0.01Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.2 <0.02 0.06 <0.02Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.05 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.2 8.23 7.99 8.21Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.6 0.4 <0.4 0.5Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0002 <0.0002 0.001 0.0003Silicon mg/L - 3.8 3.86 4.47 4.28Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 7.7 8.9 13.7 9Strontium mg/L - 0.26 0.303 0.407 0.289Sulfur mg/L - 1.12 1.15 1.6 1.6Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 3.6 3.8 5.4 3.6Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005Tin mg/L - <0.001 0.003 <0.001 <0.001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0016 <0.0005 0.0007 <0.0005Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 141 155 198 146Total dissolved solids mg/L - 142 154 202 155Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.42 0.35 <0.05 0.09Total organic carbon mg/L -Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.05 0.07 0.08 0.1Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt <2True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 0.0006 <0.0005Vanadium mg/L - 0.0004 0.0003 0.0003 0.0002Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.002 <0.001 0.002 <0.001Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.5 Water quality data for site MCCARD-2: Upper McCardell Creek.


MERC-T1 MERC-T1 MERC-T1 MERC-T12004 2004 2005 2005


Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0004 0.0004 <0.0002 0.0004Barium mg/L - 0.077 0.054 0.072 0.071Beryllium mg/L - <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 177 121 186 157Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.008 0.006 0.009 0.005Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.0001Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 40 26.5 42.2 36.1Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6 <6 <6 <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f <0.5 <0.5Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.005Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0002 0.0001Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 248 179 275 226Copper (Cu) mg/L i <0.001 <0.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 136 88.6 142 120Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.2Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0002Lithium mg/L - 0.004 0.003 0.004 0.002Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 8.8 5.4 9 8.2Manganese mg/L - 0.016 0.043 0.01 0.043Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m <0.0005 <0.0005 0.0024 <0.0005Nitrate mg/L 13 <0.1 0.02 0.1 0.08Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.2 0.02 0.1 0.08Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 7.92 7.97 7.59 8.05Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.5 <0.4 <0.4 0.5Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0002 <0.0002 0.0003 <0.0002Silicon mg/L - 4.37 4.23 5.62 4.98Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 5.6 4.4 8.4 5Strontium mg/L - 0.228 0.147 0.252 0.26Sulfur mg/L - 0.74 0.46 0.8 1.2Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 2 1.3 2.8 2Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005Tin mg/L - <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r <0.0005 0.0008 <0.0005 0.0016Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 145 99 152 129Total dissolved solids mg/L - 144 97 155 130Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.44 0.12 0.1 0.19Total organic carbon mg/L -Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.05 0.05 0.08 <0.1Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt <2 3True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Vanadium mg/L - <0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.001 <0.001 0.014 <0.001Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.6 Water quality data for site MERC-T1: Upper Mercoal Creek Tributary.


MERC-T2 MERC-T2 MERC-T2 MERC-T22004 2004 2005 2005

Summer Fall Winter SpringAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.104 <0.05 0.112 0.156Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b

Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0003 <0.002 0.0003 0.0004Barium mg/L - 0.052 0.058 0.061 0.056Beryllium mg/L - <0.0001 <0.001 <0.0001 <0.0001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 142 134 171 147Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.005 <0.0005 <0.0005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.01 <0.02 0.017 0.01Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.00001 <0.0001 0.00003 <0.0001Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 29.6 24.7 35.2 30.3Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6 <6 <6 <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 0.9Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.0005 <0.005 0.0027 <0.005Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.0001 <0.001 0.0002 0.0001Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 215 199 257 211Copper (Cu) mg/L i <0.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 98.5 81.4 117 100Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0002 <0.001 0.0002 0.0002Lithium mg/L - 0.005 <0.001 0.005 0.004Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 6 4.8 7.2 6.5Manganese mg/L - 0.015 0.025 0.027 0.029Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.001 <0.01 0.002 <0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m <0.0005 <0.005 0.0029 <0.0005Nitrate mg/L 13 <0.1 0.06 0.09 0.05Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.2 0.06 0.09 0.05Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.06 8.07 7.92 8.12Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.7Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0002 <0.0002 0.0009 0.0003Silicon mg/L - 4.05 4.12 4.76 4.84Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 10.1 8.9 15.3 10.7Strontium mg/L - 0.186 0.192 0.248 0.209Sulfur mg/L - 1.04 0.73 1.3 1.3Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 2.9 2.3 2.9 3.9Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005Tin mg/L - <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0016 <0.005 0.0024 0.0026Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 117 110 140 121Total dissolved solids mg/L - 120 120 146 129Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.42 0.11 0.12 0.09Total organic carbon mg/L -Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.05 <0.05 0.12 <0.1Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt <2 7 6True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.005 <0.0005 <0.0005Vanadium mg/L - 0.0003 <0.001 0.0004 0.0005Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.002 <0.01 0.005 0.002Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.7 Water quality data for site MERC-T2: Lower Mercoal Creek Tributary.


MCLDT-1 MCLDT-1 MCLDT-1 MCLDT-12005 2005 2006 2006

Winter Spring Summer FallAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.049 0.238 0.0265 0.0861Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 0.0000294 0.0000572Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0002 0.0005 0.000298 0.000243Barium mg/L - 0.074 0.073 0.0248 0.0625Beryllium mg/L - <0.0001 <0.0001 0.000003 <0.000003Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 223 190 196 76Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 0.0000035 <0.000001Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.013 0.011 0.00814 0.00501Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.000002 <0.0000034Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 44.9 41.2 39 17.7Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6 <6 <5 <5Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1 1Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.00004 0.000143Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.0002 0.0001 0.0000389 0.0000195Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 320 270 294 126Copper (Cu) mg/L i <0.00005 0.00025Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 5 10Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 10.6 10.67Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 158 145 134 59Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.101 0.0672Lead (Pb) mg/L k <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0000067 0.0000356Lithium mg/L - 0.005 0.004 0.00127 0.00316Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 11 10.1 9 3.7Manganese mg/L - 0.02 0.026 0.00451 0.0138Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.00001 0.00001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l <0.6 0.6Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c 0.001 <0.001 0.000999 0.000257Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.0024 0.0006 0.000875 0.000005Nitrate mg/L 13 0.16 0.09Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 0.16 0.09 0.6 <1Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.005 <0.005pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.07 8.15 8.2 8Phenols mg/L 0.004c <0.001Potassium (K) mg/L - <0.4 0.6 <0.5 <0.5Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c 0.0005 <0.0002 0.000183 0.0001Silicon mg/L - 4.84 5.17Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 <0.0001 0.000002 0.0000018Sodium (Na) mg/L - 15.4 9.2 14 6Strontium mg/L - 0.304 0.254 0.101 0.253Sulfur mg/L - 1.7 1.4 0.0002 0.000473Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 4.4 3.6 3.7 0.8Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q <0.003Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.0000003 <0.0000034Tin mg/L - <0.001 <0.001 0.00003 0.000473Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.001 0.0041 0.00111 0.00161Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 183 156 160 63Total dissolved solids mg/L - 186 162 175 89Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - <0.05 0.19 <0.2 0.3Total organic carbon mg/L - 5 10Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 0.08 <0.1 0.002 0.005Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt <2 6 <3 <3True Color T.C.U. - 7.5 30Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - 0.0006 <0.0005 0.0000379 0.000493Vanadium mg/L - 0.0003 0.0007 0.00021 0.000113Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.001 0.002 0.000306 0.00144Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.8 Water quality data for site MCLDT-1: Upper Reach of Unnamed McLeod River Tributary.


MCLDT-2 MCLDT-2 MCLDT-2 MCLDT-22004 2004 2005 2005


Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0004 <0.002 <0.0002 0.0005Barium mg/L - 0.06 0.065 0.042 0.032Beryllium mg/L - <0.0001 <0.001 <0.0001 <0.0001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 174 168 176 112Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.005 <0.0005 <0.0005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.011 <0.02 0.01 0.008Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e 0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 37.4 34.1 34.8 22.8Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6 <6 <6 <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1.2Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.0001 <0.001 0.0002 <0.0001Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 266 250 268 166Copper (Cu) mg/L i <0.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 129 117 117 76Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0001 <0.001 <0.0001 <0.0001Lithium mg/L - 0.005 <0.01 0.004 0.003Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 8.7 7.9 7.3 4.7Manganese mg/L - 0.048 0.026 0.007 0.006Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.001 <0.01 <0.001 <0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.0005 <0.0005 0.0028 0.001Nitrate mg/L 13 <0.1 0.06 0.08 <0.01Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.2 0.1 0.08 <0.02Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.05 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.03 8.09 7.95 8.17Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.6 0.5 <0.4 <0.4Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Silicon mg/L - 4.56 4.15 4.7 4.73Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c 0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 10.2 8.8 15.2 8.3Strontium mg/L - 0.232 0.211 0.208 0.129Sulfur mg/L - 1.98 0.76 1.1 0.8Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 3 2.5 3.4 2Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005Tin mg/L - <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0053 <0.005 0.0008 0.0028Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 143 138 144 92Total dissolved solids mg/L - 147 160 147 98Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.41 0.14 <0.05 0.12Total organic carbon mg/L -Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.05 <0.05 0.08 <0.1Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 4 <2 <1True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.005 <0.0005 <0.0005Vanadium mg/L - <0.0007 <0.001 0.0002 0.0004Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.004 <0.01 0.002 <0.001Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.9 Water quality data for site MCLDT-2: Lower Reach of Unnamed McLeod River Tributary.


CH CH CH CH CH2005 2006 2006 2006 2006

Winter Spring Summer Fall WinterAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.1 0.132 0.0388 0.523 0.036Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.000342 0.000368 0.000502 0.000313Barium mg/L - 0.095 0.0743 0.0837 0.0581 0.0786Beryllium mg/L - <0.002 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 209 156 178 98 189Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d <0.05 0.00941 0.00907 0.00739 0.00868Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.001 0.0000076 <0.000002 0.0000109 0.0000073Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 45.3 40.5 40.2 22.4 42.3Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <5 <5 <5 <5 <5Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 2 1 2 2 1Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.005 0.000219 <0.00004 0.000756 0.000211Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.002 0.0000462 0.0000654 0.000165 0.0000171Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 328 218 267 157 292Copper (Cu) mg/L i <0.001 0.000552 <0.00005 0.0011 0.000438Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 5 4 10 3Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 9.03 9.51 10.9 12.68Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 147 130 131 74 137Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - <0.5Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.167 0.138 0.09 0.558 0.0937Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.01 0.0000545 0.0000156 0.000223 0.000019Lithium mg/L - <0.01 0.002 0.001 0.003Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 8.2 7.1 7.5 4.4 7.5Manganese mg/L - 0.02 0.013 0.015 0.0338 0.0208Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.00001 <0.00001 0.00001 0.00001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l <0.6 <0.6 2.5 0.6Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.005 0.0006 0.000731 0.000334 0.000638Naphthenic Acids mg/L - <1Nickel (Ni) mg/L m <0.002 0.000126 0.00111 0.000965 0.000005Nitrate mg/L 13 0.1Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.05pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.1 8.3 8.4 8.1 8.2Phenols mg/L 0.004c <0.001 <0.002Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.7Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c 0.000137 <0.0001 0.000155 0.000179Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.005 0.0000029 0.0000018 0.0000075 0.0000005Sodium (Na) mg/L - 0.288 0.2 0.243 0.115 0.25Strontium mg/L - 0.288 0.2 0.243 0.115 0.25Sulfur mg/L - 1.01 0.949 0.807 1.5Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 5.4 5.1 5.3 6.1 5.2Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q <0.003 0.005 <0.003Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.05 0.0000076 0.0000012 0.0000097 0.0000071Tin mg/L - <0.05 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.002 0.00242 0.00122 0.0135 0.00275Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 171 128 150 80 1155Total dissolved solids mg/L - 181 146 160 121 174Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - <0.2 <0.2 0.5 0.3 <0.2Total organic carbon mg/L - 0.3 0.203 1.3 0.3Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.02 0.005 <0.003 0.017 0.004Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt <3 <3 6 3True Color T.C.U. - 17.5 12.5 50 10Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Vanadium mg/L - <0.001 0.0005 0.0002 0.0014 0.0002Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.002 0.00399 0.000634 0.00264 0.0014Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.10 Water quality data for site CH: Chance Creek.


FC FC FC FC2006 2006 2006 2006

Spring Summer Fall WinterAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.0378 0.0576 0.202 0.0176Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L -Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.000337 0.000385 0.000332 0.000258Barium mg/L -Beryllium mg/L -Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 154 190 93 184Bismuth mg/L -Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.00855 0.00759 0.0058 0.00997Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e 0.0000066 0.0000047 0.0000108 0.0000024Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 31.2 36.4 24.6 35.3Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <5 <5 <5 <5Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1 1 2 <1Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g 0.000188 0.177 0.00032 0.000061Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.0000401 0.0000656 0.0000841 0.0000223Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 240 279 156 296Copper (Cu) mg/L i 0.000455 <0.00005 0.000677 0.000326Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 6 5 14 4Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 120 144 79 138Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - <0.5 <0.5Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.117 0.177 0.235 0.169Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0000333 0.0000343 0.000108 0.0000187Lithium mg/L -Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 7.2 9.6 4.9 8.1Manganese mg/L -Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.00001 0.177 0.00001 0.00001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c 0.000572 0.000709 0.000294 0.000605Naphthenic Acids mg/L - <1 <1Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.000106 0.0011 0.000201 0.000005Nitrate mg/L 13Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1Nitrite mg/L 0.06pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.3 8.2 8.1 8.1Phenols mg/L 0.004c <0.001 <0.002Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.7 0.6 <0.5 0.7Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 0.000111 0.0001 0.0001Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c 0.000002 0.000002 0.0000024 0.0000005Sodium (Na) mg/L - 9 12 5 12Strontium mg/L -Sulfur mg/L -Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 5.1 11.3 2.5 4Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q <0.003 <0.003 <0.003Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c 0.0000037 0.0000007 0.0000087 0.0000003Tin mg/L -Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.00103 <0.00003 0.00003 0.00199Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 126 156 76 151Total dissolved solids mg/L - 151 172 116 179Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - <0.2 <0.2 0.4 <0.2Total organic carbon mg/L - 7 5 14 4Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 0.004 0.004 0.009 0.003Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt <3 3 6 <3True Color T.C.U. - 25 15 60 15Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L -Vanadium mg/L -Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.0102 0.000865 0.00308 0.00178Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.11 Water quality data for site FC: Felton Creek.


WC WC WC WC2006 2006 2006 2006

Spring Summer Fall WinterAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.0646 0.0312 0.194 0.0237Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L - 0.0000409 0.0000432 0.0000376 0.0000258Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.000589 0.000693 0.000504 0.000594Barium mg/L - 0.0296 0.039 0.0293 0.0416Beryllium mg/L - 0.0000114 0.0000071 0.000008 0.0000071Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 102 143 89 170Bismuth mg/L - 0.0000024 0.0000016 0.0000158 0.000001Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.00608 0.00707 0.0054 0.00809Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e 0.0000066 0.0000052 0.0000076 0.0000023Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 20.3 27.3 21.8 29.4Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <5 <5 <5 <5Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1 2 1 <1Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g 0.000079 <0.00004 0.000364 0.000103Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.0000531 0.0000622 0.0000946 0.0000347Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 160 216 147 266Copper (Cu) mg/L i 0.000544 0.000093 0.000597 0.000282Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 12 12 14 7Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 76 101 72 116Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - <5 <0.5 <0.5Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.316 0.353 0.326 0.727Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0000597 0.0000408 0.0000978 0.0000311Lithium mg/L - 0.00215 0.0022 0.000993 0.00331Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 4.6 6.2 4.8 6.9Manganese mg/L - 0.0174 0.0176 0.034 0.0162Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l 0.00001 <0.00001 0.00001 0.00001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c 0.000337 0.000527 0.000218 0.00034Naphthenic Acids mg/L - <1 <1Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.000604 0.00126 0.000232 0.000099Nitrate mg/L 13 1.3Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.1Nitrite mg/L 0.06 1.3 <0.1 <0.1pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.1 8.3 8.1 8.1Phenols mg/L 0.004c <0.001 <0.002Potassium (K) mg/L - <0.5 <0.5 0.6 0.8Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c 0.00012 0.0001 0.000107 0.0001Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c 0.0000027 0.0000017 0.0000026 0.0000005Sodium (Na) mg/L - 8 11 6 15Strontium mg/L - 0.0969 0.143 0.0861 0.173Sulfur mg/L - 1.7 1.2 1.3 1Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p <0.20 <0.2 0.2 1.4Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q <0.003 <0.003 <0.003Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c 0.0000036 0.0000011 0.0000096 0.0000003Tin mg/L - 0.00003 0.0012 0.00556 0.00188Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.00156 <0.00003 0.00003 0.00003Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 84 118 73 139Total dissolved solids mg/L - 114 147 105 173Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3Total organic carbon mg/L - 12 12 14 7Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 0.009 0.008 0.01 0.008Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt <3 <3 6 <3True Color T.C.U. - 50 35 50 33Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - 0.0000735 0.00017 0.0000363 0.000158Vanadium mg/L - 0.00029 0.000199 0.000553 0.00015Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.00927 0.000119 0.00138 0.00123Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.12 Water quality data for site WC: White Creek.


JC JC2007 2007

Summer FallAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.111 0.062Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L - 0.0000732 0.0000727Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.000467 0.000425Barium mg/L - 0.0549 0.0457Beryllium mg/L - 0.0000087 0.00001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 161 150Bismuth mg/L - 0.0000051 <0.000001Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.0101 0.00865Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.000002 0.0000045Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 28.3 26.9Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <5 <5Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1 1Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g 0.000177 0.000114Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.00004 0.0000297Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 254 229Copper (Cu) mg/L i 0.000172 0.00134Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 9 11Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 89 89Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - <1 <0.5Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.0707 0.0522Lead (Pb) mg/L k <0.000001 <0.000001Lithium mg/L - 0.00314 0.00228Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 4.4 5.2Manganese mg/L - 0.0044 0.00247Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.00001 <0.00001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c 0.000753 0.000542Naphthenic Acids mg/L - <1 <1Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.00025 0.000501Nitrate mg/L 13Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.1 <0.1Nitrite mg/L 0.06pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.3 8Phenols mg/L 0.004c 0.004 0.004Potassium (K) mg/L - 1.6 0.7Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 <0.0001Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c 0.0000017 0.0000017Sodium (Na) mg/L - 20 19Strontium mg/L - 0.187 0.155Sulfur mg/L - <0.2 <0.2Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 3.5 1.8Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q 0.004 <0.002Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c 0.0000041 0.0000016Tin mg/L - <0.00003 0.000171Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.00372 0.00194Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 133 123Total dissolved solids mg/L - 152 152Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.2 0.4Total organic carbon mg/L - 9 10Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 0.009 0.006Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 4 <3True Color T.C.U. - 29 30Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - 0.000152 0.000131Vanadium mg/L - 0.000393 0.000235Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c <0.0001 0.0014Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.13 Water quality data for site JC: Jackson Creek.


MCLD-2 MCLD-2 MCLD- 2 MCLD-22004 2004 2005 2005


Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.000002 <0.000002 <0.000002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0003 <0.002 <0.0002 0.0003Barium mg/L - 0.071 0.000103 0.000109 0.000082Beryllium mg/L - <0.0001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.000001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 133 173 220 158Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.000005 <0.000005 <0.000005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.014 <0.02 0.016 0.011Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.00001 <0.0001 <0.00001 <0.0001Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 30.2 37.8 51.7 36.7Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6 <6 <6 <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 0.9Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g 0.0005 <0.005 <0.0005 <0.005Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.0001 <0.001 0.0002 0.0001Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 246 323 406 280Copper (Cu) mg/L i 0.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 112 141 187 135Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 0.2Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0003 <0.001 <0.0001 <0.0001Lithium mg/L - 0.007 <0.00001 0.000007 0.000006Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 8.8 11.4 14.1 10.6Manganese mg/L - 0.007 <0.000005 0.000006Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c 0.001 <0.01 0.002 0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.0011 <0.005 <0.0032 <0.0005Nitrate mg/L 13 <0.1Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.2 0.17 0.34 0.08Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.05pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.27 8.23 8 8.2Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.6Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c 0.0012 <0.0002 <0.0032 0.0007Silicon mg/L - 3.81Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 9.2 12.1 21.9 10Strontium mg/L - 0.263 0.000414 0.00044 0.000305Sulfur mg/L - 6.67 0.0111 0.062 0.082Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 20.7 36.2 48.4 25Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005Tin mg/L - <0.001 <0.000001 <0.00001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0066 <0.005 0.0021 <0.0039Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 109 142 181 129Total dissolved solids mg/L - 136 200 246 160Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.21 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Total organic carbon mg/L -Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.05 <0.05 0.09 <0.1Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 3 <2 4True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0000005 0.0000007 <0.000005Vanadium mg/L - 0.0008 <0.000001 0.0000002 0.0000007Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.003 <0.01 <0.001 <0.001Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.14 Water quality data for site MCLD-2: McLeod River below McCardell Creek.


MCLD-2 MCLD-2 MCLD-2 MCLD-22006 2006 2006 2006

Spring Summer Fall WinterAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.117 0.0199 1.15 0.0188Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L - 0.0000928 0.0000978 0.00000872 0.0000759Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.00023 0.000213 0.000487 0.000146Barium mg/L - 0.0761 0.0972 0.0838 0.101Beryllium mg/L - <0.000003 <0.000003 0.000043 0.0000061Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 150 188 117 214Bismuth mg/L - 0.000001 <0.000001 0.0000095 0.000001Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.0115 0.012 0.0112 0.0104Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e 0.0000124 0.0000043 0.000025 0.0000065Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 34.6 43.8 32.7 53.3Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <5 <5 <5 <5Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1 2 2 1Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g 0.000172 <0.00004 0.00189 0.0000889Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.0000399 0.0000369 0.000364 0.000001Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 286 352 253 437Copper (Cu) mg/L i 0.000731 0.000177 0.0017 0.00052Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 4 3 8 2Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 8.23 9.39 10.7 13.24Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 127 161 120 190Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - <0.5Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.0872 0.0178 0.936 0.008Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0000504 0.0000095 0.000509 0.0000107Lithium mg/L - 0.00572 0.0624 0.00368 0.0067Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 9.9 12.6 9.4 13.8Manganese mg/L - 0.00318 0.00269 0.0249 0.00321Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.00001 <0.00001 0.00001 0.00001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l <0.6 <0.6 3.9 0.7Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c 0.00112 0.00143 0.000792 0.00122Naphthenic Acids mg/L - <1Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.000234 0.00121 0.00118 0.000005Nitrate mg/L 13 0.0002 0.0001Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 0.1 0.2 <1 0.3Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.00005pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.3 8.3 8.2 8.1Phenols mg/L 0.004c <0.001 <0.002Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.9Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c 0.00113 0.00117 0.000823 0.00198Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c 0.0000024 0.0000022 0.0000147 0.0000005Sodium (Na) mg/L - 11 17 9 23Strontium mg/L - 0.295 0.388 0.235 0.438Sulfur mg/L - 0.00963 0.0144 0.00954 0.0237Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 28.5 36.9 31 48.9Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q <0.003 <0.003 <0.003Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c 0.0000056 <0.0000031 0.0000285 0.0000003Tin mg/L - 0.0000514 <0.00003 0.0000369 0.00003Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.00191 0.000936 0.000282 0.00116Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 125 156 96 175Total dissolved solids mg/L - 175 208 157 260Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - <0.2 <0.2 0.3 <0.2Total organic carbon mg/L - 4 3 8 2Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 0.004 <0.003 0.028 0.002Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt <3 <3 21 <3True Color T.C.U. - 15 5 35 4Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - 0.000385 0.000536 0.000408 0.000622Vanadium mg/L - 0.000378 0.000121 0.00381 0.000109Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.00821 0.000849 0.00486 0.00183Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.14 Cont’d.


EM-2 EM-2 EM-2 EM-21997 1997 1997 1998

Spring Summer Fall SpringAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.522 0.225 0.104 0.679Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b <0.005 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01Barium mg/L - 0.0578 0.0646 0.0811 0.063Beryllium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 103 123 164 106Bismuth mg/L - <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.01 0.004 0.007 <0.002Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 20.6 26.6 36.6 22.5Carbonate (CO3) mg/L -Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1.6 1.1 2 1.3Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g 0.0009 <0.0008 0.0009 <0.0008Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.0007 <0.0007 <0.0007 0.0009Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 167 191 252 174Copper (Cu) mg/L i 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5

EM-2 EM-21998 2006

Summer Winter0.533 0.0723<0.05 <0.05

<0.005 0.0000978<0.01 0.000370.0654 0.102

<0.0005 <0.000003112 193

<0.007 0.0000010.0123

0.004 0.000009625.2 44

<53.5 2

0.0014 0.00037<0.0007 0.0000152

183 323<0.001 0.00042

3j 11.5 8.9 12.8 9.8

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 68 87 120 73Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.33 0.293 0.139 0.634Lead (Pb) mg/L k <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002Lithium mg/L - 0.00249 0.0031 0.00344 0.00348Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 3.9 4.9 6.8 4.1Manganese mg/L - 0.0205 0.0234 0.0273 0.0449Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.002 <0.001 <0.001 0.002Nitrate mg/L 13Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 0.08 <0.05 <0.05 0.45Nitrite mg/L 0.06pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.07 8.22 8.16 8Phenols mg/L 0.004c 0.002 <0.001 0.001 <0.001Potassium (K) mg/L - <0.60 <0.60 2.11Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 9.2 9 14.2 9.5Strontium mg/L - 0.156 0.195 0.241 0.149Sulfur mg/L - 1.35 1.25

8 11.482 141

<0.50.19 0.131

<0.002 0.00003810.004 0.003594.8 8.2

0.0256 0.0257<0.0001 0.00001

0.6<0.001 0.00154

<1<0.001 0.000005

<0.05 0.4

8.22 8.2<0.001 <0.002<1.00 0.70.005 0.000326

<0.001 0.00000057.1 17

0.177 0.3381.35 0.00324

Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 4 4.2 5.8 3.5 4.4 8.4Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q <0.003Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.004 <0.004 <0.004 <0.004 0.004 0.0000085Tin mg/L - <0.003 <0.003 0.004 <0.003 <0.003 <0.00003Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0086 0.0061 0.0022 0.016 0.0087 0.00274Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 84 101 135 87 92 158Total dissolved solids mg/L - 90 107 148 94 101 186Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.2 0.16 <0.05 0.33 0.14 <0.2Total organic carbon mg/L - 8 8 4.2 9 8.1 3Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.004Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 7 7 <1 10 11 3True Color T.C.U. - 49 37 15 20 44 8Turbidity N.T.U - 5.8 6.62 1.09 7.75 7Uranium mg/L - 0.000663Vanadium mg/L - <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002 <0.001 0.000364Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.0014 0.0054 0.0051 <0.0005 0.0012 0.00166Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.15 Water quality data for site EM-2: Embarras River between Jackson Creek and Bryan Creek.


EM-3 EM-3 EM-3 EM-31997 1997 1997 1998

Spring Summer Fall SpringAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.379 0.217 0.081 0.226Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b 0.065 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01Barium mg/L - 0.0604 0.0725 0.0791 0.0635Beryllium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 120 147 184 130Bismuth mg/L - <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.006 0.004 0.003 <0.002Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 24.9 32.6 42.4 29Carbonate (CO3) mg/L -Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.6Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.0008 0.0009 <0.0008 <0.0008Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.0007 <0.0007 <0.0007 <0.0007Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 196 226 278 218Copper (Cu) mg/L i <0.001 0.002 <0.001 <0.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5

EM-3 EM-31998 2006

Summer Winter0.274 0.02680.06 <0.05

<0.005 0.000084<0.01 0.0004120.0651 0.105

<0.0005 <0.000003126 213

<0.007 0.0000010.0116

<0.002 0.000011729.7 48.1

<54.4 4

0.0013 0.000173<0.0007 0.0000182

208 355<0.001 0.000461

3j 13.1 9.6 13.3 11

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 81 107 139 94Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.28 0.35 0.204 0.272Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.003Lithium mg/L - 0.00291 0.00346 0.00379 0.004Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 4.7 6.3 8.1 5.2Manganese mg/L - 0.019 0.314 0.034 0.0211Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.002 0.002 <0.001 <0.001Nitrate mg/L 13Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 0.06 <0.05 <0.05 0.06Nitrite mg/L 0.06pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.13 8.2 8.2 8.15Phenols mg/L 0.004c 0.002 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.69 <1.00 2.59Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 10.2 10 14.4 12.2Strontium mg/L - 0.184 0.233 0.262 0.184Sulfur mg/L - 1.47 1.28 0.184Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 4.2 5.5 6.2 4.2

q

8.7 11.497 160

0.23 0.154<0.002 0.00003060.003 0.003975.4 9.1

0.0331 0.0311<0.0001 0.0000105

1.2<0.001 0.00152

<1<0.001 0.000005

0.11 0.3

8.24 8.2<0.001 <0.002<1.00 1.30.005 0.000205

<0.001 0.000000568.1 21

1.42 0.3670.00299

4.7 10.2Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002 <0.003Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.004 0.006 <0.004 0.006 <0.004 0.0000083Tin mg/L - <0.003 <0.003 0.006 <0.003 <0.003 <0.00003Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0086 0.0057 0.0021 0.0062 0.0042 0.00286Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 99 121 151 107 103 174Total dissolved solids mg/L - 106 130 167 118 115 188Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.15 <0.05 0.12 0.19 0.18 <0.2Total organic carbon mg/L - 8.4 8.2 5 7.3 9 3Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.004Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 7 5 2 1 6 4True Color T.C.U. - 50 36 15 20 55 10Turbidity N.T.U - 5.5 5.65 1.72 3.15 8Uranium mg/L - 0.000624Vanadium mg/L - <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.000219Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c <0.0005 0.0046 <0.0005 <0.0005 0.0008 0.00201Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.16 Water quality data for site EM-3: Embarras River above Prest Creek.


EM-4 EM-4 EM-4 EM-4 EM-41997 1997 1997 1998 1998

Spring Summer Fall Spring SummerAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.195 0.147 0.094 0.098 0.29Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b <0.005 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01Barium mg/L - 0.0552 0.0611 0.0593 0.0542 0.0586Beryllium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 139 165 186 143 144Bismuth mg/L - <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.005 <0.002 0.003 <0.002Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 0.002Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 30.7 37.3 43.8 31.7 35.5Carbonate (CO3) mg/L -Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 3.8Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.0008 <0.0008 <0.0008 <0.0008 0.0016Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.0007 <0.0007 <0.0007 <0.0007 <0.0007Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 222 246 275 230 234Copper (Cu) mg/L i <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 13.6 10.2 12.5 10.4 8.9Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 103 125 148 106 118Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.19 0.247 0.203 0.167 0.18Lead (Pb) mg/L k <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002Lithium mg/L - 0.00334 0.00396 0.00388 0.00452 0.005Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 6.4 7.8 9.3 6.4 7Manganese mg/L - 0.0113 0.0144 0.0097 0.0063 0.0324Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.002Nitrate mg/L 13Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Nitrite mg/L 0.06pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.23 8.32 8.25 8.36 8.31Phenols mg/L 0.004c 0.002 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Potassium (K) mg/L - <0.60 <1.00 2.59 <1.00Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.006Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 8.6 8.2 11.3 10.3 7Strontium mg/L - 0.194 0.245 0.247 0.193 0.214Sulfur mg/L - 1.52 1.2 1.34Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 4.6 5.3 5 3.8 4.6Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.004 0.005 <0.004 <0.004 <0.004Tin mg/L - 0.003 <0.003 0.003 <0.003 <0.003Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0046 0.0041 0.0016 0.0027 0.0036Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 114 135 153 117 118Total dissolved solids mg/L - 121 142 165 125 130Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.18 <0.05 0.11 0.19 0.32Total organic carbon mg/L - 8.9 10.8 7.4 7.8 11.3Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.06Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 6 3 <1 <1 <1True Color T.C.U. - 48 40 21 20 55Turbidity N.T.U - 3.6 4.28 1.08 2.29 6Uranium mg/L -Vanadium mg/L - <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c <0.0005 0.0079 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0006Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.17 Water quality data for site EM-4: Embarras River above confluence with Erith River.


EM-WQ-1 EM-WQ-1 EM-WQ-1 EM-WQ-12005 2005 2005 2005

Winter Spring Summer FallAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.23 0.324 0.568 0.731Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b

Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0006 0.0005 0.0006Barium mg/L - 0.121 0.078 0.08 0.077Beryllium mg/L - <0.002 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 207 127 144 107Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d <0.05 0.014 0.01 0.008Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.001 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 44.5 35.3 28.4 23.9Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <5 <5 <6 <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1 7Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.005 <0.005 <0.0005 0.0008Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0003Conductivity (EC) µS/cm -Copper (Cu) mg/L i 0.000438 <0.001Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 3Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 12.68Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 144 87 94 77Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.227 0.3 0.6 0.8Lead (Pb) mg/L k <0.005 0.0002 0.0002 0.0004Lithium mg/L - 0.003 0.004 0.003Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 8.1 8.6 5.7 4.3Manganese mg/L - 0.039 0.023 0.031 0.046Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m <0.002 0.001 0.0006 0.0015Nitrate mg/L 13 1 <0.01 0.07Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 1 <0.02 <0.02 0.49Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.05 <0.05 <0.005pH pH units 6.5-9.0o

Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 1 0.6 0.5 0.7Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0002 <0.0002 0.0003Silicon mg/L - 5.73 5.28 8.15Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.005 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 23 9.3 9.1 8.5Strontium mg/L - 0.376 0.174 0.228 0.134Sulfur mg/L - 1.6 1.2 1.5Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 6.4 4.2 4 4Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.05 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005Tin mg/L - <0.05 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.004 0.0053 0.0101 0.0166Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 170 104 118 88Total dissolved solids mg/L - 196 110 122 95Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - <0.2 0.05 0.06 0.27Total organic carbon mg/L - 1 0 0 0Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.02 <0.1 <0.1 0.1Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 7 7 21True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Vanadium mg/L - <0.001 0.0016 0.0016 0.0039Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.002 0.002 <0.003 0.004Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.18 Water quality data for site EM-WQ-1: Embarras River between Jackson Creek and Bryan Creek.


EM-WQ-2 EM-WQ-2 EM-WQ-22005 2005 2005

Spring Summer FallAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.296 0.476 0.556Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b

Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0006 0.0007 0.0006Barium mg/L - 0.074 0.08 0.076Beryllium mg/L - <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 146 157 119Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.014 0.01 0.008Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e 0.00006 <0.00001 <0.00001Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 26.2 30 26.2Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6 <6 <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f

Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g 0.0011 <0.0005 0.0007Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002Conductivity (EC) µS/cm -Copper (Cu) mg/L i

Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j

Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 94 99 85Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.7Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0002 0.0006 0.0003Lithium mg/L - 0.003 0.004 0.003Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 5.3 6 4.7Manganese mg/L - 0.026 0.03 0.042Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.001 <0.001 0.002Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.001 0.0007 0.0013Nitrate mg/L 13 <0.01 0.16Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.02 <0.02 0.61Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.005 <0.005pH pH units 6.5-9.0o

Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.6 0.6 0.7Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Silicon mg/L - 4.98 5.28 9.26Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 10.8 10.6 9.8Strontium mg/L - 0.225 0.237 0.161Sulfur mg/L - 1.4 1.4 1.2Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 4.7 4.3 4.4Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005Tin mg/L - <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0044 0.007 0.0128Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 120 128 98Total dissolved solids mg/L - 125 132 106Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.13 0.06 0.32Total organic carbon mg/L -Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 0.1 <0.1 0.1Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 6 6 14True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Vanadium mg/L - 0.0009 0.0014 0.003Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.002 0.004 0.004Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.19 Water quality data for site EM-WQ-2: Embarras River below Bryan Creek.


EM-WQ-3 EM-WQ-3 EM-WQ-32005 2005 2005

Spring Summer FallAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.246 0.37 1.17Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b

Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.0006 0.0006 0.0007Barium mg/L - 0.074 0.081 0.086Beryllium mg/L - <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 150 176 116Bismuth mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.013 0.009 0.008Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.00001 0.00001 0.00003Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 28.5 34.8 27.1Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6 <6 <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f

Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g 0.0008 <0.0005 0.0006Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.0001 <0.0001 0.0007Conductivity (EC) µS/cm -Copper (Cu) mg/L i


Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 110 120 90Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.3 0.4 1.3Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0002 0.0001 0.0008Lithium mg/L - 0.004 0.004 0.003Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 5.6 7.1 5.4Manganese mg/L - 0.027 0.032 0.068Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.001 <0.0005 0.0017Nitrate mg/L 13 <0.01 0.18Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.02 <0.02 0.18Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.005 0.006pH pH units 6.5-9.0o

Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.7 0.5 0.5Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Silicon mg/L - 4.47 4.87 7Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Sodium (Na) mg/L - 11 10.5 7.6Strontium mg/L - 0.251 0.268 0.193Sulfur mg/L - 1.8 1.7 1.3Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 5.1 4.4 4Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005Tin mg/L - <0.001 <0.001 <0.001Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0041 0.0071 0.0199Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 124 145 95Total dissolved solids mg/L - 133 148 120Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - 0.1 0.09 0.24Total organic carbon mg/L -Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 0.1 <0.1 0.1Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 6 8 58True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005Vanadium mg/L - 0.0008 0.0011 0.0033Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.002 <0.001 0.006Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.20 Water quality data for site EM-WQ-3: Embarras River above Prest Creek.


EM-WQ-42005

WinterAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.17Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b

Antimony mg/L -Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c

Barium mg/L - 0.101Beryllium mg/L - <0.002Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 256Bismuth mg/L -Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d <0.05Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e <0.001Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 56.2Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <6Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f

Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g <0.005Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h <0.002Conductivity (EC) µS/cm -Copper (Cu) mg/L i


Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 189Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.246Lead (Pb) mg/L k <0.005Lithium mg/L -Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 11.9Manganese mg/L - 0.013Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l

Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l

Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c <0.005Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m <0.002Nitrate mg/L 13 0.4Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 0.4Nitrite mg/L 0.06 <0.05pH pH units 6.5-9.0o

Phenols mg/L 0.004c

Potassium (K) mg/L - 1Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c

Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c <0.005Sodium (Na) mg/L - 17Strontium mg/L - 0.409Sulfur mg/L -Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 6.9Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q

Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c <0.05Tin mg/L - <0.05Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.005Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 210Total dissolved solids mg/L - 224Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - <0.2Total organic carbon mg/L - 1Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.02Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt

True Color T.C.U. -Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L -Vanadium mg/L - <0.001Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.007Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.21 Water quality data for site EM-WQ-4: Embarras River above confluence with Erith River.


EM-RC EM-RC EM-RC EM-RC2006 2006 2006 2006

Winter Spring Summer FallAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.0349 0.135 0.0373 0.459Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L - <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.000369 0.000625 0.000663 0.000566Barium mg/L - 0.0702 0.09 0.06 0.1Beryllium mg/L - 0.0000134 0.0000043 0.00000178 <0.000003Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 244 167 210 126Bismuth mg/L - 0.0000019 0.0000026 0.0000052 0.000001Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.00828 0.00807 0.00969 0.00644Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e 0.0000067 0.0000374 0.0000083 0.0000081Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 55.8 39.7 48.3 31.4Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <5 <5 6 <5Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 2 2 2 2Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g 0.000235 0.000246 0.000076 0.00067Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.0000067 0.0000551 0.0000499 0.000132Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 380 147 320 202Copper (Cu) mg/L i 0.000459 0.00157 0.000332 0.000988Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 4 8 6 12Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 12.89 6.32 9.33 11.07Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 188 133 164 106Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L -Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.0992 0.126 0.0618 0.392Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0000377 0.0000939 0.0000354 0.000191Lithium mg/L - 0.00325 0.00451 0.0023 0.00409Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 11.8 8.2 10.5 6.7Manganese mg/L - 0.012 0.0109 0.0184Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l 0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 0.00001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l 0.6 <.6 <.6 1.7Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c 0.6 <0.6 <0.6 1.7Naphthenic Acids mg/L -Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.000833 0.000754 0.000907 0.000577Nitrate mg/L 13Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 0.000005 0.000359 0.00131 0.00075Nitrite mg/L 0.06pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 7.9 8.4 8.5 8.8Phenols mg/L 0.004c <0.002 <0.001Potassium (K) mg/L - 1.1 <0.5 0.8 0.8Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c 0.0001 0.000176 <0.0001 0.000106Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c 0.0000005 0.0000029 0.0000016 0.00000068Sodium (Na) mg/L - 15 10 12 8Strontium mg/L - 0.225 0.299 0.165 0.36Sulfur mg/L - 0.0016 0.00224 0.00242 0.00259Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 5.7 5.2 5.2 4.3Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q <0.003 <0.003 <0.003Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c 0.0000042 0.0000084 0.0000094 0.0000042Tin mg/L - <0.001 <0.001 0.00003 0.0000421Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0031 0.0003 0.000139 0.0116Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 200 140 181 106Total dissolved solids mg/L - 189 172 192 129Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.4Total organic carbon mg/L - 5 8 7 12Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s <0.003 0.007 0.005 0.01Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt <3 <3 <3 7True Color T.C.U. - 9 25 15 50Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - 0.000349 0.000501 0.000202 0.000598Vanadium mg/L - 0.000661 0.000426 0.00118 0.000237Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.0037 0.0126 0.00434 0.00271Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.22 Water quality data for site EM-RC: Embarras River upstream of Rodney Creek.



Spring Summer Fall WinterAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.263 0.0322 1.87 0.0318Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L - 0.000118 0.000117 0.000112 0.0000875Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.00039 0.000382 0.000709 0.000254Barium mg/L - 0.0801 0.0995 0.0975 0.0997Beryllium mg/L - 0.0000058 0.0000037 0.0000692 0.0000061Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 174 206 137 241Bismuth mg/L - 0.0000016 0.0000084 0.0000115 0.000001Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.0103 0.0123 0.0119 0.00824Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e 0.0000163 0.0000147 0.0000326 0.0000119Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 38.2 45 37.9 54.6Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <5 5 <5 <5Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1 1 2 2Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g 0.000365 0.0000975 0.00255 0.000129Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.0000991 0.0000486 0.000609 0.0000123Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 320 380 289 450Copper (Cu) mg/L i 0.000853 0.000306 0.00212 0.000635Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 5 4 8 2Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 6.32 8.56 10.83 12.35Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 153 183 139 218Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - <0.5Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.233 0.0826 1.54 0.104Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.000126 0.0000372 0.000862 0.0000408Lithium mg/L - 0.00537 0.00663 0.00584 0.00575Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 10.8 13.3 10.5 14.8Manganese mg/L - 0.0145 0.00962 0.0488 0.0155Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <.00001 <.00001 0.00001 0.00001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l <.6 <.6 3.4 0.6Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c 0.00109 0.00132 0.000858 0.000948Naphthenic Acids mg/L - <1Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.000349 0.0013 0.00179 0.000005Nitrate mg/L 13Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n 0.1 <0.1 <1 0.3Nitrite mg/L 0.06pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.2Phenols mg/L 0.004c <0.001 <0.002Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.6 1.1 0.6 1.1Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c 0.000914 0.00102 0.000959 0.00134Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c 0.0000038 0.0000005 0.0000143 0.0000005Sodium (Na) mg/L - 13 17 11 19Strontium mg/L - 0.285 0.34 0.224 0.378Sulfur mg/L - 0.0105 0.0127 0.0105 0.0183Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 28.2 33 30.1 41.7Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q <0.003 <0.003 <0.003Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c 0.0000102 0.0000134 0.0000354 0.000005Tin mg/L - <0.00003 <0.00003 0.0000422 0.00018Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.00401 0.00115 0.0319 0.00959Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 146 178 115 198Total dissolved solids mg/L - 199 225 171 262Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - <0.2 <0.2 0.4 <0.2Total organic carbon mg/L - 5 4 8 3Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 0.007 <0.003 0.048 0.002Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt 4 <3 79 <3True Color T.C.U. - 15 5 30 7Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - 0.000416 0.000545 0.000459 0.00003Vanadium mg/L - 0.000766 0.000288 0.00476 0.000649Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.00864 0.00166 0.00933 0.00393Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Table A2.23 Water quality data for site MCLD-3: McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River.

Table A2.24 Water quality data for site MCLD-4: McLeod River below confluence with Embarras River.



Spring Summer Fall WinterAluminum (Al) mg/L 0.1a 0.169 0.0211 1.87 0.0216Ammonia-N mg/L 1.37b <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05Antimony mg/L - 0.000802 0.000107 0.000106 0.000104Arsenic (As) mg/L 0.005c 0.00044 0.00047 0.000818 0.000297Barium mg/L - 0.103 0.0952 0.0984 0.0755Beryllium mg/L - 0.00003 <0.000003 0.0000758 0.0000056Bicarbonate (HCO3) mg/L - 169 206 132 250Bismuth mg/L - 0.000001 0.0000013 0.0000141 0.0000015Boron (B) mg/L 1.2d 0.00996 0.0115 0.0104 0.00931Cadmium (Cd) mg/L e 0.0000121 0.0000092 0.0000374 0.0000079Calcium (Ca) mg/L - 42.1 52.8 36.3 62.6Carbonate (CO3) mg/L - <5 6 <5 <5Chloride (Cl) mg/L 230f 1 2 2 3Chromium (Cr) mg/L 0.001g 0.000236 0.000064 0.0026 0.000106Cobalt (Co) mg/L 0.0009h 0.000069 0.000043 0.00065 0.0000017Conductivity (EC) µS/cm - 284 361 258 415Copper (Cu) mg/L i 0.000862 0.000289 0.00227 0.000602Dissolved organic carbon mg/L - 5 5 9 2Dissolved oxygen mg/L 5j 6.99 8.2 10.65 12.52Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L - 147 186 130 215Hydrocarbons, Recoverable mg/L - <0.5Iron (Fe) mg/L 0.3 0.146 0.0523 1.6 0.0947Lead (Pb) mg/L k 0.0000856 0.0000244 0.000931 0.0000385Lithium mg/L - 0.00571 0.00601 0.0053 0.00495Magnesium (Mg) mg/L - 10.1 13.1 9.6 14.3Manganese mg/L - 0.00683 0.00773 0.0593 0.0115Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.000013l <0.00001 <0.00001 0.00001 0.00001Mercury (Hg), ultra-trace ng/l 13l <0.6 <0.6 3.1 1.1Molybdenum (Mo) mg/L 0.073c 0.000987 0.00117 0.000702 0.000985Naphthenic Acids mg/L - <1Nickel (Ni) mg/L m 0.000216 0.00134 0.00194 0.000005Nitrate mg/L 13Nitrate+Nitrite mg/L n <0.1 <0.1 1 0.2Nitrite mg/L 0.06pH pH units 6.5-9.0o 8.5 8.5 8.1 7.9Phenols mg/L 0.004c <0.001 <0.002Potassium (K) mg/L - 0.5 0.8 0.8 1.2Selenium (Se) mg/L 0.001c 0.000804 0.000669 0.000782 0.0009Silicon mg/L -Silver (Ag) mg/L 0.001c 0.0000025 0.0000009 0.0000161 0.0000005Sodium (Na) mg/L - 13 15 10 19Strontium mg/L - 0.401 0.32 0.202 0.263Sulfur mg/L - 0.015 0.00938 0.00815 0.00784Sulphate (SO4) mg/L 100p 22.4 27.5 24.1 30.8Sulphide (S) mg/L 0.002q <0.003 <0.003 <0.003Thallium (Tl) mg/L 0.0008c 0.0000081 0.0000082 0.0000362 0.000002Tin mg/L - 0.00003 <0.00003 0.0000337 <0.00003Titanium (Ti) mg/L 0.1r 0.0033 0.000938 0.0418 0.00775Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3) mg/L - 142 180 112 205Total dissolved solids mg/L - 190 217 166 257Total Kjeldahl nitrogen mg/L - <0.2 <0.2 0.5 <0.2Total organic carbon mg/L - 6 5 9 3Total phosphorus mg/L 0.05s 0.006 <0.003 0.046 <0.003Total Suspended Solids mg/L +10 mg/Lt <3 <3 55 <3True Color T.C.U. - 17.5 5 30 9Turbidity N.T.U -Uranium mg/L - 0.000651 0.000515 0.000415 0.000394Vanadium mg/L - 0.000165 0.000291 0.00477 0.000605Zinc (Zn) mg/L 0.03c 0.00923 0.000241 0.00727 0.0023Guideline ExceedanceBelow Detection Limit


Appendix A3

Surface Water Quality Model Description and Results


TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................... A3-i LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................. A3-iv

A3.0 SURFACE WATER QUALITY MODEL.......................................... A3-1 A3.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................ A3-1 A3.2 MODEL STRUCTURE ....................................................................................... A3-1 A3.3 SURFACE WATER QUALITY VARIABLES CONSIDERED ............................. A3-2 A3.4 SOURCES OF IMPOUNDMENT DATA ............................................................. A3-2 A3.5 DERIVATION OF MODEL TERMS .................................................................... A3-2 A3.5.1 Baseline Case Concentrations of Surface Water Quality Variables in

Natural Watercourses ................................................................................... A3-2 A3.5.2 Baseline Case Watercourse Flows............................................................... A3-4 A3.5.3 Number of Impoundments ............................................................................ A3-4 A3.5.4 Impoundment Discharge Flows .................................................................... A3-5 A3.5.5 Impoundment Water Quality ......................................................................... A3-6 A3.6 ANALYSIS........................................................................................................ A3-10 A3.6.1 Simulation Procedure ................................................................................. A3-10 A3.6.2 Comparing Concentrations of Water Quality Variables to Guidelines......... A3-12 A3.7 ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................... A3-13 A3.8 RESULTS ......................................................................................................... A3-13

LIST OF TABLES

Table A3.1 Baseline Case watercourse flows........................................................... A3-4

Table A3.2 Number of impoundments within drainages of natural watercourses. ......................................................................................... A3-4

Table A3.4 Probability of an impoundment discharging water. ................................. A3-6

Table A3.5 Water quality of impoundment discharge. .............................................. A3-7

Table A3.6 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Jackson Creek, Application Case, spring season. ......................................................... A3-14

Table A3.7 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Jackson Creek, Application Case, summer season. ...................................................... A3-15

Table A3.8 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Jackson Creek, Application Case, fall season................................................................ A3-16

Table A3.9 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Jackson Creek, Application Case, winter season........................................................... A3-17

Table A3.10 Predicted changes in surface water quality, McCardell Creek, Application Case, spring season. ......................................................... A3-18


Table A3.11 Predicted changes in surface water quality in McCardell Creek, Application Case, summer season. ...................................................... A3-19

Table A3.12 Predicted changes in surface water quality in McCardell Creek, Application Case, fall season................................................................ A3-20

Table A3.13 Predicted changes in surface water quality in McCardell Creek, Application Case, winter season........................................................... A3-21

Table A3.14 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Chance Creek, Application Case, spring season. ......................................................... A3-22

Table A3.15 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Chance Creek, Application Case, summer season. ...................................................... A3-23

Table A3.16 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Chance Creek, Application Case, fall season................................................................ A3-24

Table A3.17 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Chance Creek, Application Case, winter season........................................................... A3-25

Table A3.18 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Mercoal Creek, Application Case, spring season. ......................................................... A3-26

Table A3.19 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Mercoal Creek, Application Case, summer season. ...................................................... A3-27

Table A3.20 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Mercoal Creek, Application Case, fall season................................................................ A3-28

Table A3.21 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Mercoal Creek, Application Case, winter season........................................................... A3-29

Table A3.22 Predicted changes in surface water quality, McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River, Application Case, spring season...... A3-30

Table A3.23 Predicted changes in surface water quality, McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River, Application Case, summer season. ................................................................................................. A3-31

Table A3.24 Predicted changes in surface water quality, McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River, Application Case, fall season........... A3-32

Table A3.25 Predicted changes in surface water quality, McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River, Application Case, winter season...... A3-33

Table A3.26 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, Application Case, spring season. ....... A3-34

Table A3.27 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, Application Case, summer season. .... A3-35

Surface Water Quality Report A3-iii Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

Table A3.28 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, Application Case, fall season.............. A3-36

Table A3.29 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, Application Case, winter season......... A3-37

Table A3.30 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, CEA Case, spring season................... A3-38

Table A3.31 Magnitude of predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, CEA Case, summer season. ................................................................................... A3-39

Table A3.32 Magnitude of predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, CEA Case, fall season............................................................................................. A3-40

Table A3.33 Magnitude of predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, CEA Case, winter season........................................................................................ A3-41

Surface Water Quality Report A3-iv Hatfield Mercoal West-Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure A3.1 Summary of historical impoundment discharges from existing mines. ..................................................................................................... A3-5

Figure A3.2 Frequency of total suspended sediment data from all impoundments separated by season...................................................... A3-8

Figure A3.3 Frequency of nitrate data collected in all impoundments separated by season. .............................................................................................. A3-9


A3.0 SURFACE WATER QUALITY MODEL

A3.1 OVERVIEW

This surface water quality model predicts the effects of mine impoundment discharges on natural watercourses. The model is applied to impoundments planned for the Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project in the Application Case, as well as for an assumed number of impoundments for the planned Robb Trend Mine in the Cumulative Effects Assessment (CEA) Case. The model uses empirical distributions of impoundment discharges, impoundment water quality and surface water quality of natural watercourses against low flow events in natural watercourses to predict changes in surface water quality in receiving environments in the Local Study Area (LSA) and Regional Study Area (RSA).

A3.2 MODEL STRUCTURE

The surface water quality model as applied to the LSA has the following form:

∑

∑

=

+

=

+= n

jsjs

N

jsjsssi

si

QIQB

QIWQIQBWQBWQP

1,

1,,

, , where

WQPi,s predicted concentration of water quality variable i in watercourse k in season s;

WQBi,s Baseline Case concentration of water quality variable i in watercourse k in season s;

QBs Baseline Case flow of watercourse k in season s;

WQIs concentration of water quality variable i in impoundments in season s;

N Number of impoundments within drainage of watercourse k; and

QIj,s discharge flow from impoundment j in season s.

The surface water quality model as applied to the RSA has the following modified form:

sj

sj

QINQBQINWQIQBWQBWQP

s

sssisi

,

, )(,,

+

+=


A3.3 SURFACE WATER QUALITY VARIABLES CONSIDERED

Only those surface water quality variables with surface water quality guidelines (Table 4, Section 2 of main report) were simulated: aluminum; ammonia; arsenic; boron; cadmium; chloride; chromium; cobalt; copper; iron; lead; mercury; molybdenum; nickel; nitrate; nitrate plus nitrite; nitrite; selenium; silver; sulphate; sulphide; thallium; titanium; total phosphorus; total suspended solids; and zinc.

A3.4 SOURCES OF IMPOUNDMENT DATA

Data gathered from the following impoundments were used to estimate impoundment water quality and impoundment discharge flows: Val D'Or East; Centre Creek Impoundment; Pit 15; Halpenny East; Halpenny West; Pit 25 East; Pit 27 West; Pit 33; Pit 120 East; Pit 141; Pit 142; Pit 123; Pit 122; Erith Pond; and Mercoal Pond. These ponds represent a cross section of types of impoundments that could be created in the Project in the Application Case as well as in the planned Robb Trend mine for the CEA Case. These impoundments receive a mixture of pit water, surface runoff, runoff from waste rock piles, water from sumps, and groundwater.

Impoundment water quality data were obtained from these annual reports as well as from results of sampling five existing impoundments (Erith, Halpenny East, Pit 15, Pit 122, and Mercoal Ponds) in September 2006.

A3.5 DERIVATION OF MODEL TERMS

A3.5.1 Baseline Case Concentrations of Surface Water Quality Variables in Natural Watercourses

Baseline Case concentrations of surface water quality variables in natural watercourses were compiled from the data summarized in Section 3 and presented in detail in Appendix A2 for three sets of watersheds:

the LSA excluding Mercoal Creek;

Mercoal Creek; and

the RSA.

Mercoal Creek was simulated separately from the rest of the LSA because its surface water quality has already been influenced by the Mercoal Phase 2 mine; data from the following sampling locations (Section 3, Appendix A2) were aggregated to represent Baseline Case surface water quality conditions in Mercoal Creek: MEC-1; MEC-2; MEC-3; and MEC-4.

Data from the following sampling locations (Section 3, Appendix A2) were aggregated to represent Baseline Case surface water quality conditions in the LSA excluding Mercoal Creek:

MCCARD-1: Upper McCardell Creek;


MCCARD-2: Lower McCardell Creek, near McLeod River;

MCLDT-1: upper site on unnamed tributary to McLeod River;

MCLDT-2: lower site on unnamed tributary to McLeod River, near McLeod River;

MERC-T1: upper site on unnamed tributary to Mercoal Creek;

MERC-T2: lower site on unnamed tributary to Mercoal Creek;

CH: Chance Creek;

WC: White Creek;

FC: Fenton Creek; and

JC: Jackson Creek.

Data from the following sampling locations (Section 3, Appendix A2) were aggregated to represent Baseline Case surface water quality conditions in the RSA:

MCLD-1: McLeod River upstream of McCardell Creek confluence;

MCLD-2: McLeod River downstream of McCardell Creek confluence;

MCLD-3: McLeod River;

MCLD-4: McLeod River upstream of confluence with the Embarras River;

EM-2: Embarras River immediately downstream of the Yellowhead Tower site;

EM-3: Lower Embarras River; Near the town of Embarras;

EM-4: Embarras River upstream of confluence with the Erith River;

EM-WQ-1: Embarras River between Chance and Hay Creeks;

EM-WQ-2: Embarras River between Chance and Erith confluence;

EM-WQ-3: Embarras River upstream of Prest Creek;

EM-WQ-4: Embarras River upstream of Erith River confluence; and

EM-RC: Embarras River at confluence with Rodney Creek.


A3.5.2 Baseline Case Watercourse Flows

The 7Q10 data (lowest flow in 7 consecutive days in a 10 year period) was used as the baseline case watercourse flow in the model as a conservative flow estimate for simulating Project effects. 7Q10 flow rates were derived using data and regression models provided Consultant Report No. 6 of the Application which relate the flow of a 7Q10 event in the May to October period to drainage area. Winter flow is set to 50% of the mean winter flow which in turn is estimated in Consultant Report No. 6 of the Application at 50% of the size of the 7Q10 event in the May to October period (Table A3.1).

Table A3.1 Baseline Case watercourse flows.

Watercourse Drainage Area (km2)

Location at which Drainage Area is Calculated

7Q10 Flow (L/s)

Winter Flow(m3/s)

McCardell Creek1 11.3 Immediately above confluence with

McLeod River 11.03 2.76

Mercoal Creek 45.5 Immediately above confluence with McLeod River 53.73 13.43

McLeod River 2,560 Immediately above confluence with Embarras River 5251 1312

Chance Creek 23.6 Immediately above confluence with Embarras River 25.47 6.37

Jackson Creek 2.24 Immediately above confluence with Embarras River 1.75 0.44

Embarras River 1,800 Immediately above confluence with McLeod River 3518 880

Source of information is Consultant Report No. 6 of the Application.

A3.5.3 Number of Impoundments

The number of impoundments within drainages of natural watercourses is taken from information provided in Consultant Report No. 6 of this Application (Table A3.2).

Table A3.2 Number of impoundments within drainages of natural watercourses.

Study Area Case Mine Extension Watercourse Total Number of Impoundments

McCardell Creek 3

Mercoal West

Mercoal Creek 3

Jackson Creek 2

Yellowhead Tower

Chance Creek 6

RSA CEA Robb Trend Embarras River 9

Number of impoundments for Yellowhead Tower and Mercoal West Mine Extensions from Consultant Report No. 6 of this Application. Number of impoundments for planned Robb Trend mine is assumed for the purposes of simulating the CEA Case.


A3.5.4 Impoundment Discharge Flows

Impoundment discharge data were obtained from the 2001 to 2005 annual compliance reports prepared by Coal Valley Mine (Luscar 2002 to Luscar 2006) and are summarized in Figure A3.1. Data from May and June were compiled to represent spring, July and August for summer, September and October for fall, and December and January for winter. Generally, impoundments have historical flowed about 20% of the time (across all seasons), with flows during discharges up to 170 L/s. These empirical distributions are used to simulated impoundment discharges.

Figure A3.1 Summary of historical impoundment discharges from existing mines.

60

80

100

0 50 100 150 200Impoundment Discharge (L/s)

Cum

ulat

ive

% O

bser

vatio

ns

Spring Summer Fall Winter May-October

Data obtained from 2001 to 2005 annual compliance reports prepared by Coal Valley Mine (Luscar 2002 to Luscar 2006).

A3.5.4.1 Local Study Area

Discharge from each impoundment within the Jackson, Chance, McCardell, and Mercoal Creek drainages is simulated independently; the discharge from each impoundment is calculated using the following procedure:

First, the probability that the impoundment is discharging is determined using the historical discharge frequency distribution specific to the season being simulated (Figure A3.1) is used to compute the probability of an impoundment discharging water (Table A3.3); and


Second, if the impoundment is determined to be discharging water, the actual discharge is calculated, again using the historical discharge frequency distribution specific to the season being simulated (Figure A3.1).

This simulation is carried out for each impoundment in the drainage being considered (Table A3.2) and the discharges are then summed across all impoundments (Section A3.2).

Table A3.3 Probability of an impoundment discharging water.

Season Probability of Any Discharge froman impoundment1

Spring 0.314

Summer 0.269

Fall 0.190

Winter 0.110

Annual 0.221 1 Determined from Figure A3.1.

A3.5.4.2 Regional Study Area

In calculating impoundment discharges in the RSA, the discharge from each impoundment within the drainages is assumed to be identical. The discharge of a single impoundment is calculated using the historical discharge frequency distribution specific to the season being simulated (Figure A3.1) and this discharge is then multiplied by the total number of impoundments in the RSA (Table A3.2).

A3.5.5 Impoundment Water Quality

As indicated above, impoundment water quality data were obtained from annual monitoring reports as well as from results of sampling five existing impoundments (Erith, Halpenny East, Pit 15, Pit 122, and Mercoal Ponds) in September 2006 (Table A3.4). Impoundment water quality data were available only for May 1999, June 2003 and September 2006 and so data were aggregated across seasons and impoundments and applied to all seasons. Data for nitrate and TSS were available on a monthly basis were therefore aggregated by season (Figure A3.2 and Figure A3.3).


Table A3.4 Water quality of impoundment discharge.

Centre Creek

Impoundment Val D'or

East Halpenny

East Halpenny

West Pit 25East Pit 33 Pit 15 Halpenny

East Halpenny

West Erith Pond

HalpennyEast

Mercoal Pond Pit 122 Pit 15 Water

Quality Variable May

1999 May 1999

May 1999

May 1999

May 1999

June2003

June2003

June 2003

June 2003

September2006

September 2006

September 2006

September 2006

September 2006

Aluminum 0.44 0.38 1.71 0.49 1.78 0.05 0.03 0.07 0.08 0.464 0.564 0.134 0.494 0.823

Ammonia <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.08 0.025 0.025 0.4 0.025

Arsenic 0.0052 <0.0004 <0.0004 <0.0004 0.0030 0.0012 0.0013 0.0005 0.0008 0.000786 0.000804 0.000551 0.00181 0.000903

Boron 0.045 0.033 0.033 0.063 0.00837 0.047 0.00475 0.0379 0.0706

Cadmium <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0000174 0.0000122 0.0000101 0.00014 0.0000392

Chloride <1 <1 <1 <1 2 1 2 0.5 3

Chromium <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.0004 <0.0004 <0.0004 <0.0004 0.000798 0.000602 0.000209 0.000631 0.00112

Cobalt <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.0001 <0.0001 0.0002 0.0001 0.000426 0.000123 0.000211 0.00119 0.000192

Copper <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 0.0011 0.0012 0.0012 0.002 0.0014 0.00145 0.000325 0.00134 0.00134

Iron 0.183 0.298 1.12 0.319 0.673 0.071 0.051 1.118 0.094 0.423 0.406 0.358 0.245 0.484

Lead <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.000248 0.00028 0.000044 0.000271 0.00036

Mercury 0.000005 0.000005 0.000005 0.000005 0.000005

Molybdenum 0.079 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.064 0.0335 0.0017 0.0016 0.0045 0.00206 0.00164 0.000836 0.0525 0.0126

Nickel 0.004 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.002 0.0009 0.0005 0.0006 0.0009 0.00173 0.000494 0.000288 0.00797 0.000943

Nitrate * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Nitrate plus Nitrite 0.9 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.8 0.05 1.4 3 0.05

Nitrite <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05

Selenium 0.0059 <0.0004 <0.0004 <0.0004 0.0047 0.0069 0.0012 0.0014 0.0014 0.00194 0.000203 0.000934 0.00367 0.00144

Silver <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 0.000003 0.0000046 0.00000025 0.0000052 0.0000067

Sulphate 43.9 7.0 19.5 33.0 17.4 40.8 7.7 86.6 52.7

Sulphide 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015

Thallium <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 <0.00005 0.0000043 0.000011 0.00000015 0.0000204 0.0000167

Titanium 0.0017 0.0015 0.0021 0.0020 0.0202 0.0103 0.00309 0.0132 0.0177 Total Phosphorus 0.28 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.025 0.019 0.018 0.013 0.016

Total Suspended Sediment

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Zinc 0.007 0.019 0.007 <0.001 0.005 0.005 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.0651 0.00198 0.0152 0.00269 0.00666

All values are expressed in mg/L. See Figure A3.2 for TSS and Figure A3.3 for Nitrate data.


Figure A3.2 Frequency of total suspended sediment data from all impoundments separated by season.

0 50 100 150 2000

10

20

30

0 50 100 150 2000

10

20

30

0 100 200 300 4000

10

20

30

0 5 10 15 200

10

20

30

Freq

uen c

y

Total Suspended Sediments (mg/L)

Spring Summer

Fall Winter


Figure A3.3 Frequency of nitrate data collected in all impoundments separated by season.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 80

10

20

30

40

50

0 1 2 3 40

10

20

30

40

50

0 5 10 15 200

10

20

30

40

50

0 5 10 15 20 250

10

20

30

40

50

Freq

uen c

y

Nitrate (mg/L)

Spring Summer

Fall Winter


A3.6 ANALYSIS

A3.6.1 Simulation Procedure

For the impact analysis, the surface water quality model was simulated as follows for each of the four watercourses in the Application Case, for each of the two seasons (i.e., May to October and winter):

Step 1: a very conservative watercourse streamflow was used. For the May to October period, the watercourse streamflow was set to the flow of the 7Q10 low flow event for that watercourse for the May to October period, provided in the Surface Water Hydrology Report of this Application. Winter flow was set to 50% of the mean winter flow which in turn is estimated in the Surface Water Hydrology Report at 50% of the size of the May to October 7Q10 event;

Step 2: the model was used to generate 100 different concentrations of each water quality variable for the Baseline Case. These represent 100 different simulated water quality samples characterizing surface water quality upstream of the impoundments;

Step 3: the model was used to generate 100 different impoundment flows;

Step 4: the model was used to generate 100 different concentrations of each water quality variable. These concentrations, together with the impoundment flows, represent the potential point source of pollution to the watercourse;

Step 5: the model combined each of the 100 different combinations of the two flows (watercourse flow and impoundment flow), and flow-weighted average concentrations of each surface water quality variable were calculated. These concentrations represent 100 different simulated surface water quality samples characterizing surface water quality downstream of the impoundments, i.e., the Application Case.

It is important to recognize that the simulated flow regime (streamflow and impoundment conditions) are conservative; the model simulated 100 Application Case water quality conditions from the mixing of: (i) impoundment flows generated from empirical distributions of discharge that represent the range of hydrologic conditions in 2001 to 2005 with (ii) for the May to October period, the lowest streamflow for seven consecutive days that would be expected to occur once in ten years. That is, rather than assuming a once in ten year occurrence, this low flow event is assumed to be a constant feature of the receiving watercourse. In reality, there would almost certainly be no impoundment discharges during a 7Q10 event.

Once the simulations were completed, a set of statistical tests were conducted to determine if there was any difference between surface water quality conditions predicted for downstream of the impoundments (Application Case) as compared to the surface water quality conditions upstream of the impoundments (Baseline Case). The statistical tests were targeted at examining two questions.


A3.6.1.1 Question 1: Will Concentrations of Surface Water Quality Variables Exceed Surface Water Quality Guidelines More Often as a Result of Project Impoundments and will these be Detectable With an Effects Monitoring Program?

The first part of Question 1 was examined by conducting a binomial test to determine if there was a statistically significant increase in the proportion of the 100 simulation results with concentrations above surface water quality guidelines downstream of impoundments (Application Case) as compared to upstream of impoundments (Baseline Case). This was akin to having 100 replicates of water quality upstream of impoundments (Baseline Case) and 100 replicates downstream of impoundments (Application Case), and then testing if surface water quality guidelines were exceeded more often downstream of impoundments as compared to upstream of impoundments.

The use of 100 simulations of the water quality model for every combination of assessment case and natural watercourse provides great statistical power to the testing for significant effects, as this is analogous to having 100 replicates of water quality samples upstream and downstream of impoundments. However, an actual effects monitoring program will not have this level of statistical power because the Baseline Case datasets for these four watercourses contain far fewer than 100 measurements and each of the two mine extensions will be in operation for far less than 100 years. It is reasonable to assume that there will be approximately 12 years of water quality sampling on Jackson Creek and Chance Creek for the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension, while there will be approximately 7 years of water quality sampling on McCardell Creek and Mercoal Creek for the Mercoal West Mine Extension, both far less than the 100 replicates assumed for Question 1.

The second part of Question 1 was examined by using the surface water quality model to simulate effects monitoring programs of more realistic duration. A water quality effects monitoring program was simulated as follows:

For Jackson Creek and Chance Creek, the simulation procedure described above in Section A3.6.1 was conducted 12 times, representing the assumed length of the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension monitoring program. The model was simulated three times each year in the May to October season (spring, summer, and fall) and once in the winter season; and

For McCardell Creek and Mercoal Creek, the simulation procedure described above in Section A3.6.1 was conducted 7 times, representing the assumed length of the Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension monitoring program. Again, the model was simulated three times each year in the May to October season (spring, summer, and fall) and once in the winter season.

The binomial described above applied to the first part of Question 1 was conducted on the simulation model results:

The Baseline Case (upstream of impoundments) consisted of the 12 or 7 simulations of the model generated from Step 2 of the Simulation


Procedure (Section A3.6.1) plus the empirical surface water quality dataset described in Section 3 and Appendix A2; and

The Application Case (downstream of impoundments) consisted of the 12 or 7 simulations of the model generated from Step 5 of the Simulation Procedure (Section A3.6.1).

This entire simulation of the effects monitoring program described above was then replicated 100 times. The proportion of these 100 replications in which a statistically significant increase in mean concentration was generated was taken to be the likelihood that the effects identified in the first part of Question 1 would actually be detected in effects monitoring programs to be conducted for these mine extensions. Statistically significant effects identified in the first part of Question 1 were assumed to be detectable if 50 or more of the 100 simulated effects monitoring programs generated statistically significant increases in mean concentration.

A3.6.1.2 Question 2: Will Mean Concentrations of Surface Water Quality Variables Increase as a Result of Project Impoundments and Will the Predicted Increases in Mean Concentration Be Detectable With An Effects Monitoring Program?

The first part of Question 2 was examined by conducting a t-test of the 100 simulations to determine if there was a statistically significant increase in mean concentration of surface water quality variables downstream of impoundments as compared to upstream of impoundments. This was akin to having 100 replicates of water quality upstream of impoundments (Baseline Case) and 100 replicates downstream of impoundments (Application Case), and then testing if mean concentrations of surface water quality variables were greater downstream of impoundments as compared to upstream of impoundments.

A screening was conducted on the results and those surface water quality variables for which there was a statistically significant increase in mean concentration and with a mean concentration downstream of the impoundment (i.e., in the Application Case) greater than the surface water quality guideline were noted. In these instances there was predicted to be a statistically significant effect of the Project and surface water quality guidelines were predicted to be exceeded.

The second part of Question 2 was examined in the same way as the second part of Question 1, except that the t-test described above was used.

A3.6.2 Comparing Concentrations of Water Quality Variables to Guidelines

Data were compared against the surface water quality guidelines contained in Table 4, Section 2 of the main report.

TSS guidelines were generated using the Baseline Case concentrations within each season plus 10 mg/L. The average of the seasonal TSS measurements was used for the annual comparisons.


For those guidelines which are hardness dependant, the mean hardness for the receiving water for a given season was used. Receiving water hardness varied from 59 to 178 mg/L. For guideline calculation, a hardness range of 60 to 120 mg/L was assumed, which results in more strict hardness derived guidelines. The cadmium criteria was directly calculated from hardness. For this calculation, the lower 20th percentile of hardness was used (89 mg/l).

A3.7 ASSUMPTIONS

A number of assumptions were made in the model to accommodate the dataset and the available observations:

In many cases, the measured concentration of a water quality variable was below the detection limit. In these cases, a concentration equaling 50% of the detection limit was used. In some instances (i.e., chloride and sulphide), 100% of the concentrations were below the detection limit. In addition, for mercury, data collected prior to 2005 was measured at a detection limit that exceeds the current surface water quality guideline; the procedure to modify the dataset to accommodate concentrations below the detection limit upwardly skewed mercury concentrations in many instances;

Regional baseline datasets are created and used to characterize the Baseline Case conditions of individual watercourses because there are insufficient data to characterize baseline surface water quality conditions of the individual watercourses;

Insufficient impoundment water quality data were available for creating characterizing seasonal pond water quality (with the exception of nitrate and TSS). Annual average concentrations were therefore used (again, with the exception of nitrate and TSS;

Concentration of any given water quality variable is assumed to be independent of flow or of concentrations of other surface water quality variables;

Complete mixing of impoundment discharge and flows in natural watercourses is assumed; and

One model simulation is assumed to represent a single field season’s sample.

A3.8 RESULTS

Model results are presented below as follows: LSA – Application Case (Table A3.5 to Table A3.20); RSA – Application Case (Table A3.21 to Table A3.28): and RSA – CEA Case (Table A3.29 to Table A3.32).


Table A3.5 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Jackson Creek, Application Case, spring season.

Water Quality Measurement Endpoints

Change in Frequency of Guideline Exceedance

Change in Magnitude of Guideline Exceedance

Baseline Case Application Case Baseline Case Application Case Water Quality Variable %Baseline

Dataset Concentrations

Exceeding Guidelines

%Predicted Concentrations


p

Mean Ratio of Concentrations

in Baseline Dataset to Guideline

Value

Mean Ratio of Predicted

Concentrations to Guideline

Value

p

Aluminum 38 67 <0.01 0.94 2.36 0.02

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.018 0.026 0.07

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.085 0.18 0.67

Boron 0 0 - 0.007 0.011 0.77

Cadmium 14 33 <0.01 0.38 1.66 0.08

Chloride 0 0 - 0.013 0.01 0.51

Chromium 24 19 0.23 0.72 0.63 0.74

Cobalt 0 14 <0.01 0.073 0.34 0.03

Copper 0 0 - 0.26 0.33 0.44

Iron 38 38 1.00 0.74 0.72 0.64

Lead 0 10 <0.01 0.038 5.2 0.06

Mercury 72 59 <0.01 3 39 <0.01

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.007 0.115 <0.01

Nickel 0 0 - 0.011 0.05 0.09

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.003 0.009 0.27

Nitrate plus Nitrite 0 0 - 0.004 0.025 0.45

Nitrite 0 0 - 0.042 0.14 0.03

Selenium 0 14 <0.01 0.144 0.56 0.04

Silver 0 5 0.03 0.038 0.257 0.57

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.029 0.093 0.04

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.00

Thallium 0 10 <0.01 0.025 2.5 0.60

Titanium 0 0 - 0.019 0.061 0.06

Total phosphorus 10 5 0.03 0.78 0.66 0.33

TSS 0 1 0.28 0.22 0.39 0.99

Zinc 0 29 <0.01 0.13 14 0.17

Note: Total suspended sediments guideline is 13.09 mg/L.


Table A3.6 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Jackson Creek, Application Case, summer season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 41 68 <0.01 0.840 1.370 0.03

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.020 0.028 0.38

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.077 0.076 0.59

Boron 0 0 - 0.008 0.012 0.25

Cadmium 0 9 <0.01 0.141 0.506 0.39

Chloride 0 0 - 0.005 0.005 0.67

Chromium 18 18 1.00 20.60 20.95 0.72

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.064 0.078 0.39

Copper 0 0 - 0.163 0.210 0.64

Iron 9 14 0.19 0.465 0.430 0.60

Lead 0 0 - 0.036 0.042 0.55

Mercury 79 76 0.06 10.0 13.50 0.12

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.008 0.077 0.23

Nickel 0 0 - 0.011 0.015 0.59

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.020 0.019 0.76


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.250 0.310 0.17

Selenium 0 5 0.03 0.104 0.165 0.17

Silver 0 0 - 0.036 0.033 0.96

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.034 0.050 0.37

Sulphide Insufficient data for analysis

Thallium 0 0 - 0.018 0.017 0.77

Titanium 0 0 - 0.011 0.033 0.25

Total phosphorus 0 0 - 0.349 0.41 0.38

TSS 0 1 0.28 0.215 0.39 0.77

Zinc 0 9 <0.01 0.034 6.82 0.27



Table A3.7 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Jackson Creek, Application Case, fall season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 50 50 1.00 1.426 1.651 0.57

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.018 0.029 0.21

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.112 0.110 0.77

Boron 0 0 - 0.007 0.007 0.85

Cadmium 9 18 0.02 0.334 0.608 0.31

Chloride 0 0 - 0.012 0.013 0.91

Chromium 14 14 0.85 0.546 0.552 0.87

Cobalt 0 5 0.03 0.073 0.116 0.80

Copper 0 0 - 0.260 0.272 0.78

Iron 29 27 0.77 0.718 0.688 0.88

Lead 0 0 - 0.041 0.049 0.49

Mercury 83 84 0.10 6.30 8.70 0.03

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.007 0.009 0.98

Nickel 0 0 - 0.019 0.008 0.65

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.004 0.009 0.70


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.042 0.042 1.00

Selenium 0 0 - 0.102 0.112 0.08

Silver 0 0 - 0.034 0.040 0.67

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.036 0.036 0.90

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.750 0.750 1.00

Thallium 0 5 0.03 0.023 1.357 1.00

Titanium 0 0 - 0.020 0.030 0.64


TSS 0 0 - 0.153 0.130 0.89

Zinc 0 9 <0.01 0.109 0.672 0.93



Table A3.8 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Jackson Creek, Application Case, winter season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 18 18 1.00 0.458 0.451 0.93

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.018 0.018 1.00

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.052 0.046 0.53

Boron 0 0 - 0.010 0.011 0.41

Cadmium 14 14 1.00 2.17 2.05 0.87

Chloride 0 0 - 0.003 0.003 0.32

Chromium 23 18 0.24 0.753 0.659 0.71

Cobalt 9 5 0.03 0.285 0.242 0.67

Copper 0 0 - 0.22 0.23 0.99

Iron 5 0 - 0.485 0.384 0.74

Lead 9 9 1.00 0.402 0.247 0.56

Mercury 82 81 0.10 5.8 5.7 0.36

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.015 0.016 0.55

Nickel 0 0 - 0.024 0.028 0.46

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.007 0.007 0.62


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.069 0.076 0.41

Selenium 0 0 - 0.538 0.530 0.86

Silver 9 5 0.03 0.240 0.157 0.85

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.040 0.040 0.89

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.00

Thallium 18 18 1.00 3.92 3.17 0.65

Titanium 0 0 - 0.014 0.014 0.89

Total phosphorus 73 86 <0.01 1.302 1.508 0.41

TSS 0 0 - 0.153 0.130 0.80

Zinc 0 0 - 0.079 0.082 0.41



Table A3.9 Predicted changes in surface water quality, McCardell Creek, Application Case, spring season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 31 94 <0.01 0.861 2.812 <0.01

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.018 0.025 0.09

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.092 0.174 <0.01

Boron 0 0 - 0.007 0.016 0.46

Cadmium 13 50 <0.01 0.407 1.997 <0.01

Chloride 0 0 - 0.014 0.009 0.13

Chromium 25 25 1.00 0.70 0.628 0.29

Cobalt 0 31 <0.01 0.075 0.720 <0.01

Copper 0 0 - 0.249 0.360 0.04

Iron 19 6 <0.01 0.605 0.784 0.27

Lead 0 13 <0.01 0.041 16.07 <0.01

Mercury 76 76 0.09 2.6 23.6 0.18

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.007 0.083 <0.01

Nickel 0 0 - 0.011 0.026 0.08

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.004 0.018 0.36


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.004 0.058 0.15

Selenium 0 14 <0.01 0.132 0.594 <0.01

Silver 0 38 <0.01 0.037 0.719 0.02

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.063 0.093 0.26

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.00

Thallium 0 6 0.01 0.022 1.390 0.97

Titanium 0 0 - 0.019 0.074 <0.01


TSS 0 5 0.022 0.196 1.110 <0.01

Zinc 0 13 <0.01 0.109 6.540 0.52



Table A3.10 Predicted changes in surface water quality in McCardell Creek, Application Case, summer season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 24 24 1.00 0.724 0.729 0.49

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.018 0.021 0.23

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.082 0.083 0.65

Boron 0 0 - 0.008 0.009 0.78

Cadmium 0 12 <0.01 0.143 0.42 0.23

Chloride 0 0 - 0.005 0.004 0.63

Chromium 6 12 0.07 10.56 13.41 0.44

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.065 0.083 0.55

Copper 0 0 - 0.149 0.183 0.49

Iron 18 18 1.00 0.506 0.512 0.73

Lead 0 0 - 0.043 0.042 0.58

Mercury 65 65 1.00 10.6 14.7 0.09

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.008 0.009 0.54

Nickel 0 0 - 0.010 0.021 0.11

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.010 0.015 0.36


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.24 0.27 0.17

Selenium 0 12 <0.01 0.112 0.29 0.85

Silver 0 0 - 0.032 0.035 0.57

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.036 0.037 0.47


Thallium 0 0 - 0.015 0.021 0.20

Titanium 0 0 - 0.012 0.015 0.84


TSS 0 0 - 0.092 0.166 0.84

Zinc 0 6 0.012 0.045 1.258 0.49



Table A3.11 Predicted changes in surface water quality in McCardell Creek, Application Case, fall season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 35 40 0.34 1.227 1.35 0.59

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.018 0.022 0.39

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.105 0.109 0.80

Boron 0 0 - 0.007 0.007 0.44

Cadmium 6 0 - 0.287 0.21 0.91

Chloride 0 0 - 0.01 0.009 0.93

Chromium 25 20 0.211 0.747 0.52 0.67

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.073 0.010 0.14

Copper 0 0 - 0.254 0.263 0.23

Iron 31 33 0.66 0.72 0.747 0.90

Lead 0 0 - 0.04 0.031 0.81

Mercury 81 91 <0.01 5.7 8.6 0.22

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.007 0.007 0.76

Nickel 0 0 - 0.008 0.008 0.57

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.003 0.004 0.83


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.042 0.727 0.37

Selenium 0 0 - 0.104 0.118 0.96

Silver 0 0 - 0.032 0.037 0.607

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.032 0.034 0.63

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.00

Thallium 0 0 - 0.026 0.028 0.82

Titanium 0 0 - 0.018 0.0238 0.56


TSS 0 0 - 0.200 0.271 0.30

Zinc 0 0 - 0.083 0.051 0.98



Table A3.12 Predicted changes in surface water quality in McCardell Creek, Application Case, winter season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 12 18 0.12 0.404 0.422 0.70

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.018 0.018 1.00

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.054 0.052 0.89

Boron 0 0 - 0.010 0.011 0.63

Cadmium 6 6 1.00 1.207 0.446 0.77

Chloride 0 0 - 0.004 0.004 0.84

Chromium 35 35 1.00 1.057 1.057 0.83

Cobalt 6 0 - 0.257 0.217 0.97

Copper 0 0 - 0.219 0.232 0.70

Iron 6 0 - 0.542 0.465 0.69

Lead 6 0 - 0.325 0.032 0.88

Mercury 87 88 0.12 6.3 7.1 0.17

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.012 0.011 0.93

Nickel 0 0 - 0.029 0.029 0.80

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.007 0.007 0.63


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.067 0.070 0.39

Selenium 0 0 - 0.387 0.387 0.91

Silver 12 12 1.00 0.286 0.237 0.89

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.041 0.045 0.38

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.00

Thallium 6 0 - 1.86 0.025 0.61

Titanium 0 0 - 0.014 0.014 0.86


TSS 0 0 - 0.173 0.135 0.21

Zinc 0 6 0.01 0.095 0.095 0.92



Table A3.13 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Chance Creek, Application Case, spring season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 33 86 <0.01 0.823 2.204 0.0001

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.018 0.021 0.132

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.089 0.117 0.075

Boron 0 0 - 0.007 0.014 0.028

Cadmium 24 57 <0.01 0.518 1.621 0.0015

Chloride 0 0 - 0.013 0.009 0.057

Chromium 24 29 0.29 0.730 0.732 0.47

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.079 0.263 0.001

Copper 0 0 - 0.259 0.350 0.01

Iron 33 19 <0.01 0.71 0.840 0.554

Lead 0 0 0.025 0.032 17.7 0.11

Mercury 80 80 0.09 3.3 28.6 0.06

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.007 0.102 0.0001

Nickel 0 0 - 0.011 0.062 0.215

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.003 0.007 0.195


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.042 0.21 0.014

Selenium 0 10 <0.01 0.135 0.667 0.0001

Silver 0 10 <0.01 0.039 0.25 0.031

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.033 0.099 0.11

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.00

Thallium 0 29 <0.01 0.021 3.57 0.074

Titanium 0 0 - 0.021 0.051 0.045


TSS 0 2 0.139 0.2 0.449 0.027

Zinc 0 3 <0.01 0.1 8.5 <0.01



Table A3.14 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Chance Creek, Application Case, summer season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 36 68 <0.01 0.815 1.570 0.04

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.018 0.023 0.118

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.074 0.099 0.464

Boron 0 0 - 0.008 0.010 0.879

Cadmium 14 27 <0.01 0.144 1.26 <0.01

Chloride 0 0 - 0.005 0.004 0.445

Chromium 0 18 0.24 20.75 11.14 0.557

Cobalt 0 5 0.029 0.064 0.207 0.006

Copper 0 0 - 0.144 0.225 0.08

Iron 9.1 27 <0.01 0.477 0.738 0.09

Lead 0 27 <0.01 0.037 26.012 0.003

Mercury 82 87 0.05 11.3 19.8 0.02

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.008 0.059 <0.01

Nickel 0 0 - 0.01 0.04 0.311

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.011 0.016 0.238


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.014 0.014 0.27

Selenium 0 18 <0.01 0.097 0.709 <0.01

Silver 0 14 <0.01 0.029 0.298 0.08

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.042 0.083 0.573


Thallium 0 14 <0.01 0.015 1.354 0.18

Titanium 0 0 - 0.014 0.035 0.013


TSS 0 1 0.072 0.099 0.293 0.071

Zinc 0 14 <0.01 0.04 4.33 0.03



Table A3.15 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Chance Creek, Application Case, fall season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 46 50 0.36 1.276 1.379 0.869

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.018 0.018 1.00

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.118 0.113 0.925

Boron 0 0 - 0.006 0.007 0.897

Cadmium 5 9 0.114 0.296 0.403 0.052

Chloride 0 0 - 0.009 0.009 0.815

Chromium 24 27 0.44 0.739 0.736 0.931

Cobalt 0 5 0.03 0.078 0.165 0.21

Copper 0 0 - 0.260 0.268 0.83

Iron 19 18 0.82 0.618 0.614 0.752

Lead 0 18 <0.01 0.04 18.07 0.18

Mercury 80 89 <0.01 6.5 6.9 0.26

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.007 0.041 0.307

Nickel 0 0 - 0.013 0.013 0.836

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.003 0.007 0.786


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.042 0.056 0.12

Selenium 0 5 0.03 0.102 0.316 0.035

Silver 0 5 0.03 0.033 0.099 0.322

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.031 0.048 0.406

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.00

Thallium 0 0 - 0.024 0.023 0.441

Titanium 0 0 - 0.018 0.210 0.789


TSS 0 1 0.235 0.199 0.362 0.334

Zinc 0 9 0.002 0.08 0.45 0.01



Table A3.16 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Chance Creek, Application Case, winter season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 9 9 1.00 0.412 0.432 0.832

Ammonia 0 0 0.018 0.018 1.00

Arsenic 0 0 0.050 0.0450 0.95

Boron 0 0 0.011 0.011 0.823

Cadmium 5 5 1.00 1.106 0.774 0.83

Chloride 0 0 0.003 0.003 0.65

Chromium 18 18 1.00 0.634 0.546 0.917

Cobalt 5 0 0.257 0.237 0.84

Copper 0 0 0.216 0.225 0.56

Iron 5 0 0.532 0.407 0.431

Lead 5 0 0.259 0.065 0.65

Mercury 79 79 1.00 5.9 5.8 0.45

Molybdenum 0 0 0.012 0.013 0.65

Nickel 0 0 0.027 0.030 0.84

Nitrate 0 0 0.007 0.007 0.885

Nitrate plus Nitrite 0 0 0.075 0.077 0.42

Nitrite 0 0 0.001 0.0005 0.705

Selenium 0 0 0.350 0.329 0.951

Silver 10 11 0.12 0.149 0.076 0.884

Sulphate 0 0 0.042 0.042 0.962

Sulphide 0 0 0.75 0.75 1.00

Thallium 23 23 1.00 4.12 2.95 0.98

Titanium 0 0 0.014 0.014 0.93


TSS 0 0 - 0.192 0.176 0.964

Zinc 0 2 0.03 0.09 0.77 0.02



Table A3.17 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Mercoal Creek, Application Case, spring season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 44 78 <0.01 0.988 1.807 0.05

Ammonia Insufficient data for analysis

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.128 0.163 0.35

Boron 0 0 - 0.012 0.012 0.97

Cadmium 0 0 - 0.167 0.278 0.03

Chloride 0 0 - 0.021 0.190 0.04

Chromium 0 0 - 1.30 1.23 0.89

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.087 0.103 0.17

Copper 0 0 - 0.25 0.293 0.30

Iron 100 89 <0.01 0.67 0.67 1.00

Lead 0 11 <0.01 0.025 8.59 0.03

Mercury 100 100 - 3.8 12.7 <0.01

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.020 0.022 0.40

Nickel 0 0 - 0.004 0.005 0.03

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.001 0.002 0.89

Nitrate plus Nitrite 0 22 <0.01 0.001 0.003 0.08

Nitrite 0 0 - 0.04 0.10 <0.01

Selenium 0 0 - 0.01 0.28 0.03

Silver 0 0 - 0.05 0.119 1.00

Sulphate 100 100 - 0.031 0.032 0.51


Thallium 0 0 - 0.0313 0.029 0.03

Titanium 0 0 - 0.016 0.027 0.27


TSS 0 0 - 0.148 0.244 0.04

Zinc 0 22 <0.01 0.017 6.52 0.03

Note: Total suspended sediments guideline is 12 mg/L.


Table A3.18 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Mercoal Creek, Application Case, summer season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 11 11 1.00 0.803 0.859 0.45


Arsenic 0 0 - 0.134 0.133 0.83

Boron 0 0 - 0.014 0.015 0.56

Cadmium 0 0 - 0.167 0.243 0.32

Chloride 0 0 - 0.005 0.005 0.97

Chromium 0 0 - 0.25 0.247 0.32

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.056 0.065 0.32

Copper 0 0 - 0.25 0.268 0.32

Iron 0 0 - 0.418 0.471 0.40

Lead 0 0 - 0.082 0.413 0.57

Mercury 0 111 <.01 0.76 3.6 0.02

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.034 0.083 0.51

Nickel 0 0 - 0.007 0.094 0.69

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.002 0.002 0.57


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.42 0.42 1.00

Selenium 0 0 - 0.010 0.115 0.32

Silver 0 0 - 0.050 0.049 0.32

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.040 0.055 0.97


Thallium 0 0 - 0.031 0.031 0.32

Titanium 0 0 - 0.016 0.023 0.76


TSS Insufficient data for analysis

Zinc 0 0 - 0.067 0.072 0.32


Table A3.19 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Mercoal Creek, Application Case, fall season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 0 0 - 0.363 0.360 0.89


Arsenic 0 0 - 0.094 0.094 0.97

Boron 0 0 - 0.011 0.011 0.97

Cadmium 0 0 - 0.167 0.168 0.32

Chloride 0 0 - 0.012 0.012 0.34

Chromium 67 78 <0.01 1.25 1.43 0.51

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.284 0.269 0.97

Copper 0 0 - 0.25 0.25 0.35

Iron 0 0 - 0.78 0.77 0.69

Lead 0 0 - 0.173 0.161 0.76

Mercury 100 100 - 2.0 3.74 0.16

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.048 0.048 0.97

Nickel 0 0 - 0.007 0.007 0.76

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.001 0.001 0.76


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.041 0.042 0.32

Selenium 0 0 - 0.01 0.011 0.32

Silver 0 0 - 0.05 0.05 0.32

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.031 0.311 0.83


Thallium 0 0 - 0.031 0.034 0.32

Titanium 0 0 - 0.021 0.021 0.89


TSS 0 0 - 0.148 0.167 0.35

Zinc 0 0 - 0.109 0.105 0.63



Table A3.20 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Mercoal Creek, Application Case, winter season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 0 0 - 0.452 0.448 1.00


Arsenic 0 0 - 0.094 0.097 0.93

Boron 0 0 - 0.011 0.011 0.86

Cadmium 0 0 - 0.167 0.167 1.00

Chloride 0 0 - 0.012 0.012 1.00

Chromium 56 56 1.00 1.29 1.31 0.93

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.359 0.316 0.54

Copper 0 0 - 0.25 0.25 1.00

Iron 0 0 - 0.801 0.802 0.86

Lead 0 0 - 0.176 0.183 0.93

Mercury 0 0 - 0.769 0.769 1.00

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.051 0.05 0.66

Nickel 0 0 - 0.007 0.007 0.59

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.001 0.001 0.79


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.0002 0.0002 1.00

Selenium 0 0 - 0.01 0.01 1.00

Silver 0 0 - 0.05 0.05 1.00

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.031 0.032 0.54


Thallium 0 0 - 0.0313 0.0313 1.00

Titanium 0 0 - 0.022 0.022 1.00


TSS 0 0 - 0.148 0.167 1.00

Zinc 0 0 - 0.092 0.103 0.79



Table A3.21 Predicted changes in surface water quality, McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River, Application Case, spring season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 100 100 - 2.060 2.08 0.78

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.0182 0.0186 0.001

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.062 0.063 0.52

Boron 0 0 - 0.009 0.0094 0.001

Cadmium 33 36 0.532 0.816 0.861 0.308

Chloride 0 0 - 0.0043 0.0044 0.092

Chromium 35 35 1.000 0.87 0.871 0.828

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.09 0.096 0.092

Copper 0 0 - 0.395 0.396 0.638

Iron 0 0 - 0.607 0.612 0.744

Lead 0 0 - 0.035 0.038 0.093

Mercury 50 50 1.000 1.40 1.388 0.924

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.015 0.017 0.002

Nickel 0 0 - 0.004 0.0044 0.03

Nitrate Insufficient data for analysis


Nitrite Insufficient data for analysis

Selenium 23 22 0.81 0.89 0.897 0.742

Silver 0 0 - 0.015 0.019 0.139

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.275 0.276 0.904

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.000

Thallium 0 2 0.153 0.016 0.108 0.016

Titanium 0 0 - 0.0247 0.025 0.673


TSS 0 0 - 0.249 0.255 0.241

Zinc 0 0 - 0.193 0.193 0.939

Note: total suspended sediments guideline is 13.33 mg/L.


Table A3.22 Predicted changes in surface water quality, McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River, Application Case, summer season.









p


in Baseline Dataset to

Guideline Value



Value

p

Aluminum 36 40 0.414 0.949 1.023 0.177

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.0182 0.0184 <0.0001

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.059 0.062 0.106

Boron 0 0 - 0.0105 0.0108 0.017

Cadmium 0 3 0.07 27.87 28.31 <0.001

Chloride 0 0 - 0.0049 0.005 0.97

Chromium 0 0 - 0.2941 0.3102 0.378

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.0644 0.0719 0.044

Copper 0 0 - 0.2066 0.2122 0.306

Iron 0 0 - 0.3404 0.3509 0.559

Lead 0 0 - 0.0452 0.0489 0.225

Mercury 47 47 1.000 2.1996 2.1749 0.921

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.0173 0.0206 0.034

Nickel 0 0 - 0.0186 0.0185 0.618

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.002 0.0021 0.372


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.2020 0.2048 0.807

Selenium 100 100 - 1.1351 1.1528 0.392

Silver 0 0 - 0.0136 0.0294 0.003

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.3044 0.3042 0.9202


Thallium 0 7 0.006 0.0172 0.1699 <0.001

Titanium 0 0 - 0.0221 0.0220 0.143


TSS 0 0 - 0.367 0.1489 <0.001

Zinc 0 0 - 0.0604 0.0638 0.361



Table A3.23 Predicted changes in surface water quality, McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River, Application Case, fall season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 98 98 1.000 11.21 11.18 0.924

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.0182 0.0183 <0.001

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.1443 0.1448 0.921

Boron 0 0 - 0.0092 0.0094 0.096

Cadmium 64 65 0.834 1.1405 1.1571 0.643

Chloride 0 0 - 0.0087 0.0087 <0.001

Chromium 100 100 - 2.3262 2.3202 0.675

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.5500 0.5502 0.988

Copper 36 33 0.523 0.9654 0.9629 0.751

Iron 82 82 1.000 2.7836 2.7766 0.944

Lead 0 0 - 0.3021 0.3049 0.561

Mercury 48 48 1.000 2.3766 2.3647 0.207

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.0237 0.0245 0.343

Nickel 0 0 - 0.0263 0.0263 0.907

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.000008 0.00008 <0.001



Selenium 0 0 - 0.7059 0.7116 0.853

Silver 0 0 - 0.0254 0.0293 0.264

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.3203 0.3197 0.8402

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.000

Thallium 0 2 0.153 0.0372 0.1026 0.092

Titanium 0 0 - 0.098 0.0977 0.974


TSS 0 38 - 0.759 0.756 0.924

Zinc 0 0 - 0.1939 0.1952 0.712

Note: Total suspended sediments guideline is 41.5 mg/L


Table A3.24 Predicted changes in surface water quality, McLeod River above confluence with Embarras River, Application Case, winter season.





Dataset Concentrations Exceeding Guidelines

%Predicted Concentrations Exceeding Guidelines

p

Mean Ratio of Concentrations in Baseline

Dataset to Guideline

Value



Value

p

Aluminum 0 1 0.315 0.2076 0.238 0.107

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.0182 0.0186 0.002

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.0318 0.034 0.386

Boron 0 0 - 0.0096 0.0098 0.493

Cadmium 0 2 0.153 0.2416 0.3058 0.183

Chloride 0 0 - 0.0063 0.0063 0.929

Chromium 0 0 - 0.1478 0.1569 0.524

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.0656 0.0687 0.54

Copper 0 0 - 0.2903 0.2923 0.598

Iron 0 0 - 0.1762 0.1832 0.6

Lead 0 0 - 0.0177 0.0233 0.056

Mercury 53 53 1.000 2.6511 2.6327 0.402

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.0182 0.0205 0.351

Nickel 0 0 - 0.0066 0.0067 0.055




Selenium 100 100 - 1.583 1.5883 0.981

Silver 0 0 - 0.0139 0.0228 0.049

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.4680 0.4675 0.71

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.000

Thallium 0 0 - 0.0117 0.0341 0.04

Titanium 0 0 - 0.0381 0.0384 0.85


TSS 0 0 - 0.227 0.119 0.413

Zinc 0 0 - 0.0666 0.0718 0.699



Table A3.25 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, Application Case, spring season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 99 100 - 2.9533 2.9684 0.896

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.0161 0.0167 0.357

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.6678 0.6594 0.026

Boron 0 0 - 0.006 0.0064 0.246

Cadmium 90 92 0.461 6.4285 6.4347 0.193

Chloride 0 0 - 0.0103 0.0102 0.782

Chromium 21 21 1.000 0.7853 0.7924 0.508

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.3081 0.3127 0.383

Copper 0 0 - 0.3180 0.3217 0.002

Iron 44 47 0.548 1.0507 1.0531 0.93

Lead 15 16 0.785 0.5031 0.5013 0.946

Mercury 95 96 0.61 3.4922 3.4423 <0.001

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.0084 0.0127 <0.001

Nickel 0 0 - 0.018 0.0178 0.857

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.0004 0.0009 0.001


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.1505 0.1547 0.0072

Selenium 54 55 0.841 0.8846 0.8955 0.74

Silver 0 0 - 0.3536 0.3559 0.188

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.0436 0.0483 0.002

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.000

Thallium 64 66 0.673 1.8916 2.0390 0.905

Titanium 0 0 - 0.063 0.0630 0.997


TSS 0 0 - 0.355 0.361 0.745

Zinc 0 0 - 0.0505 0.0535 0.117



Table A3.26 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, Application Case, summer season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 93 93 1.000 3.1393 3.2083 0.662

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.0202 0.0206 0.093

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.7022 0.6913 <0.001

Boron 0 0 - 0.0059 0.0064 0.05

Cadmium 69 75 0.166 28.3078 27.8701 0.714

Chloride 0 0 - 0.0114 0.0112 0.623

Chromium 25 25 1.000 0.6181 0.6382 0.454

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.2498 0.2590 0.814

Copper 0 0 - 0.2809 0.2885 0.001

Iron 53 55 0.688 1.1103 1.1111 0.945

Lead 0 0 - 0.3738 0.3728 0.131

Mercury 98 98 1.000 3.6419 3.5575 0.001

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.0073 0.0135 0.001

Nickel 0 0 - 0.0138 0.0139 0.453


Nitrate plus Nitrite 0 0 - 0.0018 0.0032 <0.001


Selenium 64 64 1.000 1.8758 1.8870 0.727

Silver 0 0 - 0.3389 0.3601 0.416

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.0467 0.0540 <0.0001


Thallium 63 68 0.284 2.6391 2.8644 0.548

Titanium 0 0 - 0.0592 0.0597 0.903


TSS 0 1 0.314 0.367 0.386 0.608

Zinc 0 0 - 0.1022 0.1076 0.582



Table A3.27 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, Application Case, fall season.









p

Mean Ratio of Concentrations in Baseline Dataset

to Guideline Value



Value

p

Aluminum 59 56 0.546 3.1861 3.2064 0.524

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.0182 0.0183 <0.001

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.5207 0.5169 0.39

Boron 0 0 - 0.0054 0.0057 0.032

Cadmium 50 47 0.548 3.7640 3.7766 0.829

Chloride 0 0 - 0.0088 0.0088 0.581

Chromium 0 0 - 0.6225 0.6293 0.74

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.3895 0.3917 0.886

Copper 0 0 - 0.3004 0.3030 0.03

Iron 57 55 0.688 1.633 1.6386 0.82

Lead 0 0 - 0.3221 0.3269 0.971

Mercury 98 95 0.169 3.5422 3.5084 <0.001

Molybdenum 9 9 1.000 1.0541 1.0534 0.06

Nickel 0 0 - 0.0134 0.0135 0.286

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.0111 0.0111 1.000


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.0549 0.0587 0.013

Selenium 45 44 0.84 0.7757 0.7842 0.765

Silver 0 0 - 0.2378 0.2432 0.919

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.0481 0.0512 0.025

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.000

Thallium 45 43 0.686 1.0889 1.2024 0.626

Titanium 0 0 - 0.0977 0.0973 1.000


TSS 0 21 <0.0001 0.607 0.602 0.926

Zinc 0 0 - 0.1082 0.1113 0.942



Table A3.28 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, Application Case, winter season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 45 0 - 1.0145 1.0590 0.448

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.0182 0.0189 0.002

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.0760 0.0793 0.115

Boron 0 0 - 0.0137 0.0140 0.429

Cadmium 48 100 - 6.662 6.6497 0.914

Chloride 0 0 - 0.0094 0.0093 0.596

Chromium 42 1 <0.001 1.0927 1.0959 0.966

Cobalt 25 0 - 0.3798 0.3814 0.482

Copper 0 0 - 0.2225 0.2271 0.206

Iron 0 0 - 0.5253 0.5347 0.526

Lead 30 0 - 0.4734 0.4794 0.281

Mercury 0 0 - 0.7803 0.7750 0.072

Molybdenum 22 0 - 1.2862 1.2879 0.08

Nickel 0 0 - 0.0084 0.0086 0.693

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.0538 0.05682 0.57


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.4167 0.4167 1.000

Selenium 0 38 <0.001 0.2236 0.2511 0.257

Silver 38 100 - 0.8742 0.8796 0.362

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.074 0.0746 0.686

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.000

Thallium 45 100 <0.001 11.1838 11.1503 0.554

Titanium 0 0 - 0.0347 0.0354 0.492

Total phosphorus 0 100 <0.0001 0.1210 0.1262 0.201

TSS 0 0 - 0.2265 0.2271 0.968

Zinc 0 0 - 0.1078 0.1166 0.441



Table A3.29 Predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, CEA Case, spring season.









p



Value


Concentrations to Guideline Value

p

Aluminum 99 99 1.00 2.82 2.89 0.81

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.167 0.018 0.85

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.711 0.696 0.127

Boron 0 0 - 0.006 0.0076 0.162

Cadmium 87 88 0.76 6.57 6.69 0.502

Chloride 0 0 - 0.011 0.011 0.706

Chromium 21 21 1.00 0.76 0.78 0.846

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.33 0.34 0.694

Copper 0 0 - 0.31 0.33 0.949

Iron 26 36 0.04 0.96 0.98 0.814

Lead 14 12 0.54 0.46 0.471 0.944

Mercury 98 98 1.00 3.61 3.52 <0.001

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.0077 0.017 0.003

Nickel 0 0 - 0.017 0.018 0.998

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.0004 0.001 0.112


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.149 0.161 0.511

Selenium 53 54 0.84 0.882 0.91 0.66

Silver 0 1 0.31 0.354 0.38 0.205

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.44 0.06 <0.001

Sulphide 0 0 0.31 0.75 0.76 0.017

Thallium 60 65 0.29 1.57 1.99 0.987

Titanium 0 0 - 0.060 0.062 0.964


TSS 67 0 - 0.35 0.36 0.584

Zinc 0 0 - 0.056 0.071 0.156



Table A3.30 Magnitude of predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, CEA Case, summer season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 95 95 1.00 3.27 3.36 0.651

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.02 0.0226 0.102

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.687 0.662 0.002

Boron 0 0 - 0.006 0.007 0.001

Cadmium 67 69 0.67 29.24 27.47 0.541

Chloride 0 0 - 0.01 0.011 0.476

Chromium 30 30 1.00 0.635 0.6714 0.365

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.278 0.304 0.272

Copper 0 0 - 0.33 0.343 0.005

Iron 42 44 0.69 1.001 1.026 0.655

Lead 0 0 - 0.342 0.3442 0.442

Mercury 100 100 - 3.64 3.432 <0.001

Molybdenum 0 0 - 0.007 0.0193 <0.001

Nickel 0 0 - 0.014 0.0144 0.461


Nitrate plus Nitrite 0 0 - 0.0017 0.0061 <0.001


Selenium 51 52 0.84 1.842 1.839 0.454

Silver 0 0 - 0.336 0.375 0.736

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.0455 0.0594 <0.001


Thallium 64 69 0.28 2.65 3.06 0.735

Titanium 0 0 - 0.06 0.062 0.502


TSS 0 57 - 0.35 0.35 0.841

Zinc 0 0 - 0.111 0.126 0.382



Table A3.31 Magnitude of predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, CEA Case, fall season.









p



Value



Value

p

Aluminum 76 81 0.20 4.43 4.39 0.999

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.0182 0.0184 <0.001

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.5087 0.499 0.543

Boron 0 0 - 0.0056 000064 0.002

Cadmium 48 51 0.55 3.72 3.8 0.447

Chloride 0 0 - 0.0084 0.0083 0.212

Chromium 0 1 0.31 0.624 0.632 0.720

Cobalt 0 0 - 0.339 0.349 0.659

Copper 0 0 - 0.294 0.3 0.042

Iron 62 62 1.00 1.69 1.67 0.991

Lead 0 0 - 0.305 0.319 0.738

Mercury 100 100 - 3.64 3.54 <0.001

Molybdenum 12 12 1.00 1.22 1.13 0.003

Nickel 0 0 - 0.014 0.0138 0.266

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.0107 0.0108 0.863


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.061 0.072 0.001

Selenium 36 36 1.00 0.675 0.721 0.214

Silver 0 0 - 0.248 0.275 0.329

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.0483 0.056 <0.001

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.00

Thallium 40 44 0.42 0.971 1.248 0.384

Titanium 0 0 - 0.093 0.092 0.742


TSS 12 12 1.00 0.51 0.50 0.806

Zinc 0 0 - 0.109 0.116 0.382



Table A3.32 Magnitude of predicted changes in surface water quality, Embarras River above confluence with McLeod River, CEA Case, winter season.









p

Mean Ratio of Concentrations in Baseline

Dataset to Guideline

Value



Value

p

Aluminum 42 48 0.23 0.9716 1.091 0.235

Ammonia 0 0 - 0.0182 0.019 0.004

Arsenic 0 0 - 0.076 0.0789 0.015

Boron 0 0 - 0.0128 0.0136 0.291

Cadmium 52 57 0.313 2.115 2.072 0.862

Chloride 0 0 - 0.0011 0.0011 0.278

Chromium 38 40 0.683 0.0004 0.0004 0.628

Cobalt 35 32 0.52 0.0004 0.0004 0.484

Copper 0 0 - 0.1744 0.178 <0.001

Iron 0 0 - 0.0009 0.0009 0.462

Lead 31 31 1.00 0.0001 0.00001 0.404

Mercury 46 36 0.037 0.0848 0.0798 <0.001

Molybdenum 25 25 1.00 0.0006 0.0007 0.609

Nickel 0 0 - 0.009 0.0092 0.586

Nitrate 0 0 - 0.054 0.0568 0.648


Nitrite 0 0 - 0.4167 0.4167 1.00

Selenium 0 3 0.079 0.209 0.267 0.054

Silver 37 37 1.00 0.871 0.881 0.294

Sulphate 0 0 - 0.0718 0.0835 0.026

Sulphide 0 0 - 0.75 0.75 1.00

Thallium 48 52 0.42 11.699 11.638 0.416

Titanium 0 0 - 0.0338 0.035 0.375


TSS 0 0 - 0.22 0.22 0.742

Zinc 0 0 - 0.101 0.115 0.603


Date post:	09-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project ... · 2.1 SURFACE WATER QUALITY ISSUES...

Documents