natural resources canada - ceaa.gc.ca · pdf filenatural resources canada (nrcan) seeks to...

Natural Resources Canada

Joslyn North Mine Project

Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry No. 08-05-37519

Edmonton, Alberta October 2010

Outline1. NRCan Mandate2. NRCan Role in the Joint Review Panel EA3. Summary4. Technical Presentation - Hydrogeology

BackgroundKey Issues and EffectsRecommendations


NRCan’s MandateNatural Resources Canada (NRCan) seeks to enhance the responsible development and use of Canada’s natural resources and the competitiveness of Canada’s natural resources products.

We are an established leader in science and technology in the fields of energy, forests, and minerals and metals and use our expertise in earth sciences to build and maintain an up-to-date knowledge base of our landmass.

NRCan develops policies and programs that enhance the contribution of the natural resources sector to the economy and improve the quality of life for all Canadians.

NRCan conducts innovative science in facilities across Canada to generate ideas and transfers technologies.

NRCan’s Mandate

Innovation and Energy Technology Sector – CANMET Energy

Canada is a leader in clean energy research and technology, working with industry, academia, and environmental stakeholders to develop and demonstrate energy-efficient, alternative and renewable energy technologies, fuels, and processes.Conducts research and technology development in the following areas:

extraction and tailingsbioprocessing oil sandsupgrading oil sands and heavy oilwater managementmultiphase systemsfuture fuels and emissions

NRCan’s Mandate

Provides Canadians with the acquisition, interpretation, maintenance and distribution of maps, information, technology, standards, and expertise concerning the Canadian landmass and offshore in the fields of geoscience, geodesy, mapping, surveying, and remote sensing.Recently initiated a five year research project on coal and oil sands resources environmental sustainability which will:

focus on organic, non-metallic inorganic and metallic contaminants from emissions in natural archive systems involve method development and analysis of samples from the Athabasca Delta and the eastern part of the Athabasca oil sands regionprovide a spatial and historical assessment of naturally-occurring substancesdevelop unique isotopic approaches to differentiate natural and oil sand extraction-related contamination

Earth Sciences Sector (ESS)

Expertise requested by the Joint Review Panel and other federal departments:

Tailings Management (IETS)Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emission Estimates from TailingsDry Stackable Tailings Approach

Hydrogeology (ESS)Groundwater Quality and QuantityNarrow Surficial AquiferBasal Water Sand Re-injectionMonitoring and Mitigation

NRCan Role as an Federal Authority in the Joslyn North Mine Project

NRCan SummaryOn September 7, the Proponent provided written responses to NRCan’s August 24 written submission. Based on the Proponent’s responses to that date:

Tailings Management .• NRCan has no further specific recommendations.

Hydrogeology • NRCan’s review has raised uncertainties in the Proponent’s

groundwater quality and quantity impact predictions and resultant changes in surface water quality and quantity.

• Given NRCan’s low confidence in model predictions, a well- designed monitoring plan should be developed and submitted by the Proponent.

• NRCan remains available to review any additional information provided by the Proponent and their groundwater monitoring plans.

Joslyn North Mine Project

Hydrogeology

Shawna Liao, M.Sc.

Geological Survey of Canada Earth Sciences Sector


OutlineNRCan’s presentation will address key issues raised in our August 24, 2010 submission and in the Proponent’s response as of September 7, 2010:

Groundwater Quality and Quantity Narrow Surficial Aquifer RemovalMonitoring and Mitigation

NRCan’s Review of EIS Hydrogeology

Hydrogeology Basics

The Hydrologic Cycle

Issue #1: Groundwater Quality/Quantity

Mining activities can affect groundwater (GW) quality and quantity through altered groundwater flow patterns and possible groundwater contaminant migration pathways.

To minimize the possible adverse effects to groundwater it is essential to establish groundwater quantity and quality baselines, formulate appropriate predictions, and implement detailed post-closure monitoring and mitigation plans.

Background

The proponent has provided a groundwater flow model. However, the 2010 Project Update does not include:

A complete conceptual model and cross-sectionsDocumentation of assumptions used in the model and discussion of model’s limitationsSensitivity analysis

NRCan Analysis of Key Issues and Effects


Proponent’s particle tracking model assessed seepage from Pond 1, Dedicated Disposal Area 1 (DDA1), Sand Beach Area 1 (SBA-1), in-pit disposal areas and the pit lake. However,

Chemistry in disposal areas was not well definedModeling did not include predictions of water quality (chemical concentrations) in groundwater and surface water receptors

NRCan Analysis of Key Issues and Effects cont’d…


Conceptual Model:A conceptual model is a pictoral representation of the GW flow system, often in the form of a block diagram or cross-section. Most crucial step in GW modeling is development of the conceptual model. If the conceptual model is incomplete, the derived numerical model will not make accurate predictions.Absent from Proponent’s conceptual model:

elevations of aquifer and aquitard unit basespotentiometric map for surficial sand aquifersurface water-GW interactionmaps/cross sections showing storage properties of aquifers and aquitardsextent, thickness, and K values for stream and river sedimentsspatial/temporal distribution of rates of evapotranspirationGW recharge and discharge



Proponent’s Hydrogeological Cross Section (after F.B2.6-3, Proponent’s Feb2006 Application, Section B)

Devonian

McMurray FmWabiska member

Clearwater Fm

BWS

BWS

Quaternary sediments

Quaternary- Holocene organic material, Pleistocene glaciolacustrine clays, glacial tills and localized surficial sand aquifer (K~10-5 to 10-9 m/s).

Upper Cretaceous Clearwater Formation- fine-grained sandstone/mudstone, Wabiska member (K~10-11 m/s)

Lower Cretaceous McMurray Formation- BWS (K ~10-5 m/s) and bitumen-bearing Oil sands (K~10-10 m/s), shales

Upper Devonian Waterways Formation- impervious marine carbonates (K~10-9 m/s)

Disposal areas

Sensitivity Analysis:The purpose of a sensitivity analysis is to quantify the uncertainty in the calibrated model caused by uncertainty in the estimates of hydraulic conductivity, storage parameters, recharge, and boundary conditions and is essential for all models.

Calibration is a demonstration that the model is capable of producing/predicting field-measured heads and flows.

The Proponent has not provided a sensitivity analysis.



Sensitivity Analysis Example

Gerhart, S.M. and Lazorchick, G.J., 1988, Evaluation of the ground-water resources of the Lower Susquehanna River Basin, Pennsylvania and Maryland, USGS, Water Supply Paper 2284, 128p.

Chemistry in Disposal Areas:

Tailings is the byproduct remaining after bitumen is extracted from oil sands, and is a mixture of sand, silt, clay, water, residual hydrocarbon and heavy metals, and additives.

The extraction plant will generate 3 tailings streams: coarse sand tailings, froth treatment tailings (FTT), and thickened tailings (TT). The proponent also plans to dispose of mature fine tailings (MFT).

Predicted concentrations in the pit lake are given for 2044 and the far future. However,

It is not clear how these pit lake concentrations were derivedConcentrations were not given for any of the other disposal areas



Site Layout (after F.3.3-1, Proponent’s Feb2010 AI Project Update)

Tailings disposal areas:DDA 1, DDA2:

•Dedicated disposal areas for TT

•Beached above water

Ponds 1 & 2:

•Recycle water (RCW) pond, FTT MFT, some TT

SBA 1, 2, 3:

•Sand beach areas

•Coarse sand tailings

Tailings Deposition Timeline (F.6.4-1, p6-8, Feb2010 AI Project Update)

TT TT

RCW, FTT, MFT, TT RCW,

FTT, MFTcoarse sand

coarse sand

Steady State Particle Tracking from Disposal Areas (F.E1-16, Feb2010 AI Project Update, Appendix E)

DDA 1

Pond 1

SBA 1

In-pit disposal

areas

Ells

Riv

erJCR

Ath

abas

ca R

iver

After 50-100 yrs seepage from pit lake to Ells River at 0.06-0.6 m/yr. Total seepage to Ells River of 3-5 m3/dayNo GW/surface water predictions

End pit

lake

Proponent provided no predictions of water quality in groundwater and surface water:

NRCan notes that small errors and uncertainties in input parameters can greatly affect model predictions.

The Proponent should provide:A conceptual model for the updated 2010 groundwater model including:

elevations of aquifer and aquitard unit basespotentiometric maps for all aquiferssurface water-GW interactionmaps/cross sections showing storage properties of aquifers and aquitardsextent, thickness, and K values for stream sedimentsspatial/temporal distribution of rates of evapotranspirationGW recharge and discharge;

NRCan Recommendations


Documentation of assumptions used in the model and limitations of the model;A sensitivity analysis for the updated 2010 groundwater model for hydraulic conductivity, storage parameters, recharge, and boundary conditions; andEstimates of water chemistry in all process-affected surface water ponds/deposits, groundwater and surface water receptors (including a discussion on the fate of potential contaminants).

NRCan Recommendations cont’d…


The Proponent proposes to remove the Quaternary Sand Aquifer located in the north central to northeastern portion of the local study area.This aquifer is:

shallowlimited in extent up to 15 m thickthe only source of potable water on the lease

(TDS < 500 mg/L)a source of fresh groundwater discharge to surface water (ultimately the Athabasca River)

Background

Issue #2: Narrow Surficial Aquifer

Quaternary Sand Deposit Thickness (F.2.2-4, p2-7, Feb2010 AI Proponent’s Project Update)

Ells

Riv

er

Ath

abas

ca R

iver

Joslyn Creek

Removal of this aquifer will eliminate this source of fresh groundwater discharge to surface water (ultimately the Athabasca River) and local muskeg.Removing this aquifer could lower water quality and quantity in the Athabasca River. Further delineation of the aquifer is required to quantify the effects.



To delineate the aquifer and quantify the effects of aquifer removal on water quality and quantity in surface water and the local muskeg, the Proponent should provide:Elevation of the base of the aquifer unit;Potentiometric map for this aquifer;Delineation of GW-surface water interactions; Natural recharge to this aquifer; andThe total volume of water to be removed from this aquifer.



Issue #3: Monitoring and Mitigation

What is groundwater monitoring?Groundwater monitoring is an opportunity to verify the Proponent’s predictions of groundwater flow direction, velocities, discharge, and quality, as well as predictions of impacts to groundwater and surface waters via groundwater-surface water interactions.A well-designed monitoring plan alerts the Proponent to any discrepancies in predicted versus actual conditions in a timely manner and provides the opportunity for mitigativeactions to be taken.

Background

There is minimal discussion of groundwater in the “Closure, Conservation and Reclamation Plan”. The Proponent has stated that a final monitoring plan will be submitted under its Alberta Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act.It is unclear what kind of GW monitoring will be conducted.A monitoring plan alerts the Proponent of any deviations from modeled water quality predictions in the pit lake and groundwater, so that contingency plans are most effective.Given the uncertainties in the model predictions, a well-designed and implemented monitoring program is even more crucial.



The Proponent’s Monitoring Plan should:Include the location of monitoring and sampling sites, an indication of new and/or existing wells to be sampled, parameters that will be sampled and frequency and duration of sampling;Provide a justification of the length of the monitoring period and triggers that would necessitate extending this monitoring period;Provide a plan to compile and assess the monitoring data on a regular basis in the post closure period; and



Indicate how this information will be used to regularly update the groundwater model.

NRCan will continue to make its expertise available to other federal agencies and the ERCB during monitoring plan development.

NRCan Recommendations cont’d…


NRCan Summary

NRCan’s review has raised uncertainties in the Proponent’s groundwater quality and quantity impact predictions and resultant changes in surface water quality and quantity.

Given NRCan’s low confidence in model predictions, a well- designed monitoring plan should be provided.

NRCan remains available to review any additional information provided by the Proponent and their groundwater monitoring plans.

natural resources canada - ceaa.gc.ca · pdf filenatural resources canada (nrcan) seeks to...

Documents