section 6.0 – conservation and reclamation plan … · devon nec corporation pike 1 project...

Devon NEC Corporation Pike 1 Project Volume 1 – Project Description June 2012

Table of Contents – Page i

SECTION 6.0 – CONSERVATION AND RECLAMATION PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

6.0 CONSERVATION AND RECLAMATION ...................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 6-1

6.1.1 AEPEA Approval Request ................................................................. 6-1 6.1.2 Project Facility Overview .................................................................... 6-1 6.1.3 Project Planning and Design-Level Mitigation ................................... 6-3 6.1.4 Regional Initiatives & Research ......................................................... 6-5

6.2 Reclamation Planning ........................................................................................ 6-5 6.2.1 Goals and Guidelines ......................................................................... 6-6 6.2.2 Reclamation Strategy ......................................................................... 6-6 6.2.3 Environmental Capabilities in the TLSA ............................................. 6-8

6.3 Conservation and Reclamation Plan ................................................................ 6-14 6.3.1 Development Plan ............................................................................ 6-14 6.3.2 Low Impact Construction Techniques .............................................. 6-23 6.3.3 Restoration of Capability .................................................................. 6-24 6.3.4 Reclamation Approach and Sequencing .......................................... 6-34 6.3.5 Timber Salvage Plan ........................................................................ 6-35 6.3.6 Soil Handling Plan ............................................................................ 6-38 6.3.7 Operational Considerations ............................................................. 6-41 6.3.8 Reclamation Considerations ............................................................ 6-46 6.3.9 Facility-Specific Reclamation Plan ................................................... 6-48 6.3.10 Revegetation Plan ............................................................................ 6-55

6.4 Reclamation Monitoring Program ..................................................................... 6-64 6.4.1 Objectives ........................................................................................ 6-64 6.4.2 Criteria ............................................................................................. 6-64 6.4.3 Approach .......................................................................................... 6-65 6.4.4 Soil Monitoring ................................................................................. 6-65 6.4.5 Revegetation Monitoring .................................................................. 6-68 6.4.6 Wildlife Methodology ........................................................................ 6-70 6.4.7 Biodiversity Monitoring ..................................................................... 6-71

6.5 Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 6-72

6.6 References ....................................................................................................... 6-72


Table of Contents – Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont)

PAGE

LIST OF TABLES

Table 6.1-1: Project Development Footprint ........................................................................... 6-3

Table 6.2-1: Applicable Reclamation Guideline Documents................................................... 6-7

Table 6.2-2: Summary of Land Capability Class Changes for the Project .............................. 6-8

Table 6.2-3: Ecosite Phases Disturbed by the Project in the TLSA...................................... 6-11

Table 6.2-4: Timber Productivity Ratings for the Local Study Area ...................................... 6-13

Table 6.3-1: Summary of Predicted Land Capability Class with Reclamation in the TLSA ....................................................................................................... 6-25

Table 6.3-2: Summary of Predicted Ecosite Phase with Reclamation in the TLSA .............. 6-29

Table 6.3-3: Conceptual Project Development and Reclamation Schedule ......................... 6-36

Table 6.3-4: Reclamation Material Available for the Project ................................................. 6-40

Table 6.3-5: Pike 1 Estimate Gravel Requirements ............................................................. 6-45

Table 6.3-6: Summary of Materials Balance for the Project ................................................. 6-47

Table 6.3-7: Physical and Chemical Characteristics of Reclaimed Soil Profiles .................. 6-47

Table 6.3-8: Planting Prescription by Ecosite Phases .......................................................... 6-62


Table of Contents – Page iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont)

PAGE

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 6.1-1: Project Layout .................................................................................................... 6-2

Figure 6.2-1: Land Capability Classification – Baseline ........................................................... 6-9

Figure 6.2-2: Ecological Land Classification – Baseline ........................................................ 6-12

Figure 6.3-1: CPF Layout and Surface Drainage .................................................................. 6-15

Figure 6.3-2: Typical Well Pad Layout ................................................................................... 6-16

Figure 6.3-3: Typical Well Pad Access Corridor .................................................................... 6-17

Figure 6.3-4: Typical Source/Disposal Well Access Corridor ................................................ 6-18

Figure 6.3-5: Typical Clear Span Bridge Crossing................................................................. 6-19

Figure 6.3-6: Typical Clear Span Aboveground Pipeline Crossing ........................................ 6-20

Figure 6.3-7: Watercourse Crossing Directional Drill Stages ................................................. 6-21

Figure 6.3-8: Watercourse Crossing Directional Drill ............................................................. 6-22

Figure 6.3-9: Land Capability Classification – Reclamation ................................................... 6-27

Figure 6.3-10: Ecological Land Classification – Reclamation .................................................. 6-30

Figure 6.3-11: Conceptual Reclamation Cross Section – CPF ................................................ 6-49

Figure 6.3-12: Conceptual Reclamation Cross Section for Reclaimed Well Pads in Uplands ........................................................................................................ 6-50

Figure 6.3-13: Conceptual Reclamation Cross Section for Reclaimed Well Pads in Lowlands ...................................................................................................... 6-51

Figure 6.3-14: Conceptual Development and Reclamation Cross Section for Access Roads in Uplands ................................................................................ 6-53

Figure 6.3-15: Conceptual Development and Reclamation Cross Section for Access Roads in Lowlands .............................................................................. 6-54

Figure 6.3-16: Conceptual Reclamation Cross Section – Landscape Borrow Pit ................... 6-56

Figure 6.3-17: Conceptual Reclamation Cross Section – Dugout Borrow Pit .......................... 6-57


Page 6-1

6.0 CONSERVATION AND RECLAMATION

6.1 Introduction

Devon NEC Corporation (Devon) is proposing to develop a steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) project in the vicinity of Conklin, Alberta. The proposed Pike 1 Project (the Project) facilities are located in Townships 73, 74 and 75, Ranges 5, 6 and 7, West of the 4th Meridian, which is within Lac La Biche County (per the revised County boundaries effective 01 January 2012). The Project layout is presented in Figure 6.1-1 in the context of the terrestrial local study area (TLSA) applied for assessing potential terrestrial Project effects (Volume 2). The Project is centered on an area approximately 25 km southeast of the Hamlet of Conklin, Alberta, approximately 150 km south of the city of Fort McMurray, Alberta. This document provides the Project Conceptual Conservation and Reclamation (C&R) Plan. The format of the Project C&R plan follows the Guidelines for Development and Reclamation Applications for In-Situ Oil Sands Schemes (Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council 1991).

6.1.1 AEPEA Approval Request

Devon is applying for approval to construct, operate and reclaim the Project. The Project Conceptual C&R plan was prepared to meet the requirements outlined in the Project’s environmental impact assessment final Terms of Reference (Volume 3, Appendix A). The C&R plan takes into consideration current reclamation planning concepts, practices and lessons learned from insitu oil sands developments in the region, and particularly those applied at Devon’s adjacent Jackfish project.

6.1.2 Project Facility Overview

A central processing facility (CPF) will be constructed to separate the bitumen from residual water and prepare the sales bitumen for transport via pipeline. Steam will be generated at the CPF. It will be transported to the well pads via aboveground pipelines and injected into the oil sands formation to mobilize the bitumen. Recovered gas and liquids (water, bitumen) are separated, metered and sent to the CPF along the aboveground pipeline corridors. The Project is currently projected to produce 17 331 m3/d (109 000 bbl/d) of crude oil over a 25 to 30 year span. The CPF will include a temporary construction lay-down area, processing, steam generation and administration buildings, stormwater retention ponds, storage tanks and salvaged soil stockpiles. The main access to the Project will be via the existing all-weather gravel Kirby Road. Other facilities associated with the Project include production well pads, water source and disposal well pads, borrow sites and rights-of-way (ROW) that bundle access roads, pipelines and transmission lines into common corridors.

Kirby Road

Monda

y

HayLake

KirbyLake

Paul'

s Roa

d

Sandy

River

Cree

k

CPF

T73

T74

T75

R5W4R6W4R7W4

Project Layout

Pike 1 Project

May 31, 2012

Figure6.1-1

PROVIDED BY:

AMECFINAL MAPPING BY:

AMEC

Fig06.01-01 Project Layout TLSA.mxd

±M

ap P

ath:

S:\G

is\P

roje

cts\

CE

\Dev

on\0

4050

_Pik

e\A

rcG

IS P

roje

cts\

Volu

me

01 -

CnR

\Fig

06.0

1-01

Pro

ject

Lay

out T

LSA.

mxd

A

naly

st -

Tori

Mar

shal

l

Source: Devon, © Department of Natural Resources Canada.All rights Reserved, GeoBase®, Spatial Data Warehouse Ltd.

LegendTerrestrial LSA

Baseline Disturbance

Cold Lake Air Weapons Range

Open Water

Watercourse

Road

Borrow Pit

Central Processing Facility

Source / Disposal Well

Right-of-Way

Well Pad 1 0 1 20.5

Kilometres1:110000


-3

The total area of the Project footprint is 1 089 ha (Table 6.1-1). While soil disturbance necessitates removal of the vegetative cover, removal of the vegetation does not necessarily mean that the soils have been affected. Activities where both soils and vegetation will undergo disturbance generally include the CPF and related access, the production well pads and access roads and borrow pits. Activities for which only vegetation will be cleared include observation wells and their access trails, and above-ground utility corridors.

Table 6.1-1: Project Development Footprint

Project Footprint Total

Disturbance (ha)

New Vegetation

Disturbance (ha)

% of Footprint

New Soil Disturbance

(ha) % of

Footprint

Project Borrow Pit 192 187 17.2 188 17.3 Project CPF 97 94 8.6 95 8.7 Project ROW1 450 397 36.5 278 25.5 Project Source/Disposal Well 21 20 1.8 21 1.9 Project Well Pads 329 319 29.3 320 29.4 Existing Disturbance2 n/a 72 6.6 62 5.7

Total 1 089 1 089 100.0 964 88.5

Notes: 1 ROW comprises access road and buried pipelines requiring vegetation and soil disturbance, and transmission

lines and aboveground pipelines requiring only vegetation clearing. 2 For example, total area of well pads is 329 ha, 319 ha of which requires new disturbance (i.e., 10 ha of well

pads are planned over existing cleared disturbances and 9 ha are planned over existing graded disturbances). n/a Not applicable.

The following Project facilities are included in the development plan for the Project:

• a single CPF site that includes the central plant, access road, and construction lay-down area;

• 61 production well pads and associated access/utility corridors that will be located in uplands and peatlands;

• 17 source water wells and 11 water disposal wells (including 4 existing wells);

• 67 borrow pits; and

• observation well sites and associated winter access will be included; however, these sites utilize existing clearings (e.g., oil sands exploration (OSE) wells), and where new disturbance is required, construction will involve vegetation clearing and mulching but no placement of fill or soil disturbance, as these will have winter-only access.

6.1.3 Project Planning and Design-Level Mitigation

For the Pike application, Devon developed a cumulative constraints mapping approach to more fully integrate the environmental impact assessment with Project planning and operations. This approach allows for identification of potential environmental impacts prior to and during engineering design and also during Project development subsequent to approval. Constraints


Page 6-4

for environmental, engineering and economic parameters were identified with a risk weighting applied to those constraints that are spatial. Weighted spatial constraint layers were overlain in ArcGIS to create a map indicating areas on the landscape representing relatively higher constraints (i.e., more and/or higher weighted constraints present) compared to areas of relatively lower constraint, to assist with Project footprint planning. Extensive baseline data were used to develop the cumulative constraints map and to inform measures to mitigate environmental impacts in the early stages of Project design. Identification of these areas allows for planning to use existing clearings to minimize new disturbance, parallel existing linear disturbances to minimize habitat fragmentation, and shift facilities towards upland areas where possible. Conversely, development constraints were identified that would preclude or pose substantial challenges to safely constructing surface facilities. Such constraints included steeply sloping areas, existing active infrastructure and specific drainage areas identified in wet areas mapping. In addition to mapping environmental constraints, existing disturbances were mapped and Project facilities were located to utilize existing disturbance to the extent feasible, to minimize the amount of new ground disturbance, and to parallel existing linear disturbances to minimize habitat fragmentation. Additionally, linear infrastructure was bundled into a common corridor to reduce the number of linear disturbances (e.g., well pad access road, steam delivery and bitumen return pipelines, and electrical transmission lines in a common corridor). The Project layout was designed around known environmental and construction related limitations to the extent feasible. Examples of constraints that were considered in the development of the Project layout are:

• a setback from watercourses and waterbodies (100 m buffer zone from watercourses, 300 m buffer from Kirby Lake);

• wet areas mapping used to site facilities to minimize potential disruptions to surface water flows and minimize the need for drainage management measures;

• fish-bearing streams or streams with high fish-bearing potential;

• wetlands including areas of deep peat greater than 40 cm;

• areas of high rare plant potential and old growth forest;

• highly erodible soils and slopes greater than 10%;

• documented nesting sites of listed bird species; and

• habitat types for key indicator species/guilds (e.g., woodland caribou, moose and fisher guild).

Additional details regarding Devon’s application of cumulative constraints mapping to Project planning are provided in Volume 2, Section 3.4.


Page 6-5

6.1.4 Regional Initiatives & Research

Devon is active in a number of regional committees, working groups, and research initiatives related to reclamation. A complete review of regional initiatives and Devon’s involvement is provided in Volume 1, Section 3.0). Devon’s involvement in reclamation addresses the exploration footprint, wetlands and methods for assessing reclamation success for forested lands. The Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA) addresses reclamation success at a landscape level. These initiatives serve to benefit both mining and insitu developers. Insitu SAGD operations do not disturb the landscape on a scale similar to mining resulting in different effects on wetlands. To address these differences, a number of operators, including Devon, developed a wetland reclamation project to address the specific disturbance of wetlands associated with SAGD operations (Removing the Wellsite Footprint Phase II: Wetland Reclamation). Working collaboratively has allowed operators to pool resources including available sites for conducting reclamation trials. The intention is that information generated from the research will be available before many operators are required to reclaim wetland sites. Devon has also partnered with the University of Alberta on a project related to improving natural recovery of vegetation on OSE well sites. The Canadian Oil Sands Innovation Alliance (COSIA) is a commitment from 12 oil sands companies to improve environmental performance in the oil sands. Devon is a COSIA participant. The shared information generated through COSIA and other initiatives will be an important element in Devon’s adaptive management approach to oil sands development, contributing to the improvement of environmental and reclamation performance.

6.2 Reclamation Planning

Reclamation planning defines strategies and practices to be implemented in the final closure of Project facilities, towards the end goal of achieving overall equivalent land capability. Reclamation planning incorporates several steps throughout the Project lifespan. The first step is the development of a conceptual C&R plan, submitted here, which presents Project level information and overall landscape goals for the Project. Following Project approval, facility-specific C&R plans are developed based on the completion of pre-disturbance assessments (PDAs). At this level, detailed information is collected to support soil salvage and conservation planning and the development of site-specific revegetation targets in the facility-specific C&R plan. Immediately prior to facility closure, the final reclamation plan is confirmed based on the PDA recommendations and the as-built conditions of the facility. This final reclamation plan will be consistent with the regulations of the day, incorporating lessons learned and the base of knowledge available from past and ongoing reclamation initiatives.


Page 6-6

6.2.1 Goals and Guidelines

As stated in the “2010 Reclamation Criteria for Well sites and Associated Facilities for Forested Lands” (AENV 2010)

The goal of reclamation is to return a disturbed land to a state of equivalent capability. Equivalent capability for forested landscapes is defined as the condition in which ecosystem processes are functioning in a manner that will support the production of ecosystem goods and services consistent in quality and quantity as present prior to disturbance.

The reclamation objectives for the Project include:

• developed lands will be reclaimed to viable ecosystems or to a state that will provide for equivalent land capability, compatible with the surrounding environment including forested areas, wetlands and streams; and

• the reclaimed lands will provide a range of end uses including forestry, wildlife habitat and traditional use.

Devon will address the applicable requirements and guidelines related to reclamation of the Project, including those of Alberta Environment and Water (AEW), Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD) and the Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB). The applicable reclamation guidelines and regulatory documents for the Project are presented in Table 6.2-1.

6.2.2 Reclamation Strategy

To promote the restoration of equivalent land capability, the reclamation strategy will rely on the following:

• footprint planning to minimize impacts and re-use existing disturbances;

• incorporating low impact construction techniques;

• implementing progressive reclamation;

• reclamation monitoring;

• contributing to reclamation research; and

• implementing learning through an adaptive management approach. Sites developed on upland landscapes will be reclaimed to upland targets, while wetlands will be reclaimed to wetland targets. Devon will design and locate Project facilities to minimize new disturbance, and will plan for and implement progressive reclamation, incorporating adaptive management, during the life of the Project to minimize the extent of active disturbance.


Page 6-7

Table 6.2-1: Applicable Reclamation Guideline Documents

Guideline or Document Literature CitedGuidelines for Preparation of Applications and Reports for Coal and Oil Sands Operations ALC&R Council 1991 Regional Sustainable Development Strategy for the Athabasca Oil Sands Area AENV 1999 Borrow Excavations (C&R/IL/00-3) AENV 2000a Environmental Protection Guideline for Roadways AENV 2000b Code of Practice for Pipelines and Telecommunication Lines Crossing a Waterbody AENV 2000c Code of Practice for Watercourse Crossings AENV 2000d Environmental Protection Guidelines for Oil Production Sites – Revised January 2002 AENV 2002 Revegetation Using Native Plant Materials: Guidelines for Industrial Development Sites (R&R/03-03)

AENV 2003

A Guide to the Code of Practice for Pits AENV 2004 Code of Practice for Exploration Operations AENV 2005 Soil Monitoring Directive (Draft) AENV 2008 Notice of Changes to Alberta Environment’s Pre-Disturbance Assessment Administration Process

AENV 2009a

Guidelines For Submission of A Pre-Disturbance Assessment and Conservation & Reclamation Plan (PDA/C&R Plan)

AENV 2009b

2010 Reclamation Criteria for Wellsites and Associated Facilities for Forested Lands AENV 2010 Guidelines for Submission of an Annual Conservation and Reclamation Report AENV 2011 Environmental Protection Guidelines for Pipelines (C&R/IL/94-5) AEP 1994a Guide for Oil Production Sites (pursuant to the EPEA) AEP 1994b Environmental Protection Guidelines for Electric Transmission Lines (C&R/IL/95-2) AEP 1995 Conservation and Reclamation Regulation (Alberta Regulation 115/93, EPEA) AEP 1996a Guideline for Monitoring and Management of Soil Contamination Under EPEA Approvals (Environmental Regulatory Service)

AEP 1996b

Environmental Protection Guidelines for Pits (C&R/IL/96-5) AEP 1996c Fort McMurray-Athabasca Oil Sands Sub-regional Integrated Resource Plan AEP 1996dWeed Management in Forestry Operations - Land and Forest Directive 2001-06. ASRD 2001 SD 2009-01: Management of Wood Chips on Public Land ASRD 2009 SD 2010-02: Progressive Reclamation and Interim Cleanup ASRD 2010 Weed Control Act Government of

Alberta 2008 Weed Control Regulation Government of

Alberta 2010 Land Capability Classification for Forest Ecosystems in the Oil Sands. Volume 1: Field Manual for Land Capability Determination, 3rd Edition

CEMA 2006

Guidelines for Reclamation to Forest Vegetation in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region, 2nd Edition

CEMA 2009

Oilfield Waste Management Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry (ERCB Directive 058: Oilfield Waste Management Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry)

ERCB 1996

Storage Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry (ERCB Directive 055: Storage Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry)

ERCB 2001

Drilling Waste Management (ERCB Directive 050: Drilling Waste Management) ERCB 2012 Guideline for Wetland Establishment on Reclaimed Oil Sands Leases OSWWG 2000


Page 6-8

Another important component of the reclamation strategy includes consulting and discussing project development and reclamation activities with Aboriginal and local community members, and incorporating traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) from TEK studies into reclamation planning. 6.2.3 Environmental Capabilities in the TLSA Reclamation approaches may differ over areas with different land uses occurring in the TLSA. The baseline assessments for soil, vegetation, surface water, aquatic resources, wildlife and land use (Volume 2) provide key information for developing these approaches. Restoration of land capability and establishment of ecological functions are discussed in Section 6.3.3 and are based on an understanding of the existing conditions. The following sections summarize the baseline conditions and post-reclamation land capabilities anticipated for ecological attributes and land uses including forestry, vegetation, surface waters, fisheries, biodiversity, wildlife, traditional land use (TLU), and recreation. 6.2.3.1 Land Capability for Forestry The Project will primarily disturb organic parent materials associated with deep organic accumulations related to bog and fen development. These materials typically represent a broad depression in landscape, poor nutrient status and excessive soil moisture. Based on the Project footprint, the organic McLelland and Hartley soil series, and the mineral Horse River soil series will be subject to the majority of disturbance. Soils within the TLSA are described in detail in Volume 2, Section 10.0. Changes to the reclamation suitability and the land capability of the disturbed areas will be minimized by the application of soil conservation and mitigation measures outlined in the C&R Plan (Section 6.3.6). The predicted change in land capability for forestry due to the Project is presented in Table 6.2-2, indicating that non-productive Class 5 soils represent over half (53%) of the Project footprint, with productive Class 2 and 3 soils comprising 14% and 21% of the footprint, respectively. The current distribution of soils by land capability classification for forestry (LCC) is illustrated in Figure 6.2-1. Ratings for soil capability for forestry are based on the Land Capability Classification for Forest Ecosystems in the Oil Sands 3rd edition (CEMA 2006).

Table 6.2-2: Summary of Land Capability Class Changes for the Project

LCC Class Baseline Case Application Case Project

Footprint (ha) Area (ha) % of TLSA Area (ha) % of TLSA

2 1 743 7.1 1 588 6.5 155 3 5 038 20.6 4 812 19.6 226 4 2 091 8.5 2 012 8.2 79 5 13 759 56.1 13 193 53.8 566 Disturbed Land 887 3.6 824 3.4 63 Water 1 008 4.1 1 008 4.1 0 Project Footprint n/a n/a 1 089 4.4 n/a

Total 24 526 100.0 24 526 100.0 1 089

Note: n/a Not applicable.

Kirby Road

Monda

y

HayLake

KirbyLake

Paul'

s Roa

d

Sandy

River

Cree

k

CPF

T73

T74

T75

R5W4R6W4R7W4

Land Capability ClassificationBaseline

Pike 1 Project

June 04, 2012

Figure6.2-1

PROVIDED BY:


AMEC

Fig06.02-01 B TLSA Land Capability.mxd

±M

ap P

ath:

S:\G

is\P

roje

cts\

CE

\Dev

on\0

4050

_Pik

e\A

rcG

IS P

roje

cts\

Volu

me

01 -

CnR

\Fig

06.0

2-01

B T

LSA

Land

Cap

abili

ty.m

xd

Ana

lyst

- To

ri M

arsh

all





Open Water

Watercourse

Road

Borrow Pit



Right-of-Way

Well Pad

Land Capability ClassificationClass 2

Class 3

Class 4

Class 5 1 0 1 20.5

Kilometres1:110000


Page 6-10

6.2.3.2 Vegetation

Delineation of vegetation communities within the TLSA was based on Alberta Vegetation Inventory map units. Each vegetated polygon was assigned an Ecological Land Classification (ELC) category. These included ecosite phases (Beckingham and Archibald 1996) as well as shrublands, recent burn, open water classes and disturbed sites not represented in the ecosite phase classification. Upland and lowland ELC are delineated in the Project TLSA. The area and percent coverage of the ecosite phases in the TLSA, and the extent of Project disturbance to each ELC are presented in Table 6.2-3. The baseline ecosite phases are illustrated in Figure 6.2-2. Vegetation within the TLSA is described in detail in Volume 2, Section 11.0. Devon collected detailed vegetation data within the TLSA to support vegetation mapping for the Project Application, with PDA-intensity data collected over the CPF to assist with construction planning. Further detailed soil and vegetation data collection will be completed over the Project footprints to support development of site-specific PDA/C&Rs as the Project proceeds. The data will be used to guide determination of appropriate final target ecosites and appropriate seeding and planting prescriptions with an objective of establishing conditions similar to or compatible with pre-disturbance conditions.

6.2.3.3 Forest Resource Use

Reclamation of upland areas to provide commercial forest potential will be based on the document Guidelines for Reclamation to Forest Vegetation in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region (CEMA 2009). A commercial forest is defined in the guidelines as:

• land with an LCC of 1 to 3 that can support sustainable forest growth;

• land stocked with native tree species such as white spruce, black spruce, jack pine, aspen poplar, balsam poplar, white birch or tamarack; and

• forest stands not limited by operating requirements such as stream buffers, potential recreation lakes, stand size or accessibility.

Terrestrial areas on reclaimed lands generally should have the potential for commercial forestry based on reclamation practices and management inputs. The revegetation plan calls for planting of tree species included in the commercial forest species list. To define areas as acceptable for commercial forestry, factors such as slope, subsoil matrix, tree species, stand width and stand size are considered. For the Project, the potential for commercial forestry in the development area was assessed using the Alberta Vegetation Inventory system. The extent of lands having a capability for commercial forestry for pre-development compared to post-reclamation forms a basis for assessing the effect on forest capability. A summary of the baseline and application case productivity ratings (timber productivity rating (TPR)) is presented in Table 6.2-4 (refer to Volume 2, Section 13.0 for additional information related to land use).


Page 6-11

Table 6.2-3: Ecosite Phases Disturbed by the Project in the TLSA

Ecosite Phase Baseline Application Disturbed

ha %1 ha %1 ha a1 857 3.5 814 3.3 43 b1 572 2.3 548 2.2 24 b2 160 0.7 156 0.6 4 b3 239 1.0 221 0.9 18 b4 30 0.1 27 0.1 3 c1 3 930 16.0 3 751 15.3 179 d1 1 096 4.5 1 010 4.1 86 d2 296 1.2 284 1.2 12 d3 49 0.2 40 0.2 9 e1 80 0.3 79 0.3 1 g1 4 480 18.3 4 230 17.2 251 h1 126 0.5 106 0.4 20 i1 4 0.0 4 0.0 0 i2 87 0.4 84 0.3 3 j1 1 467 6.0 1 403 5.7 64 j2 4 256 17.4 4 085 16.7 171 k1 2 113 8.6 2 038 8.3 75 k2 1 537 6.3 1 498 6.1 39 k3 321 1.3 320 1.3 1 l1 6 0.0 6 0.0 0 Disturbed 1 068 4.4 2 085 8.5 722 Flooded 34 0.1 34 0.1 0 Open Water 1 008 4.1 1 008 4.1 0 Shrubland / Regen 708 2.9 694 2.8 14

Total 24 526 100.0 24 526 100.0 1 089

Notes: 1 Represents area of each ecosite phase as a percent of the TLSA. 2 Project disturbance is additive to existing disturbance. The Project will utilize 72 ha of existing

disturbance resulting in 1 017 ha of net new disturbance. n/a Not applicable.

Kirby Road

Monda

y

HayLake

KirbyLake

Paul'

s Roa

d

Sandy

River

Cree

k

CPF

T73

T74

T75

R5W4R6W4R7W4

Ecological Land ClassificationBaseline

Pike 1 Project

June 04, 2012

Figure6.2-2

PROVIDED BY:


AMEC

Fig06.02-02 B TLSA ELC.mxd

±M

ap P

ath:

S:\G

is\P

roje

cts\

CE

\Dev

on\0

4050

_Pik

e\A

rcG

IS P

roje

cts\

Volu

me

01 -

CnR

\Fig

06.0

2-02

B T

LSA

ELC

.mxd

A

naly

st -

Tori

Mar

shal

l





Open Water

Watercourse

Road

Borrow Pit



Right-of-Way

Well Pad

Ecological Land Class (ELC)

a1

b1

b2

b3

b4

c1

d1

d2

d3

e1

g1

h1

i1

i2

j1

j2

k1

k2

k3

l1

Shrubland/Regen

Flooded

1 0 1 20.5

Kilometres1:110000


Page 6-13

Table 6.2-4: Timber Productivity Ratings for the Local Study Area

Timber Productivity Rating (TPR)

Baseline Application ProjectArea(ha)

% ofTLSA

Area(ha)

% of TLSA

Area(ha)

Good TPR (ha) 3 430 14.0 3 305 13.5 126 Moderate TPR (ha) 12 749 52.0 12 105 49.4 644 Fair TPR (ha) 4 088 16.7 3 903 15.9 184 Unproductive 2 120 8.6 2 057 8.4 63 Shrubland/Regen 28 0.1 28 0.1 0 Open Water 1 008 4.1 1 008 4.1 0 Disturbed 1 103 4.5 2 120 8.6 72

Total 24 526 100.0 24 526 100.0 1 089

Notes: 1 Estimate based on baseline dominant and subdominant TPRs calculated for each ecosite phase applied to

the ELC map. 2 Unproductive includes non-forested and forested wetlands (i1, j1, k3, l1).

6.2.3.4 Surface Water, Fisheries and Wetlands

The main watercourses within the TLSA are Sandy River, Monday Creek and the watercourses draining Hay Lake and Kirby Lake. The drainage systems collect surface drainage primarily from ephemeral draws and poorly defined channels through treed fens and muskeg. The gradients of the main channels of these creeks are low and beaver dams are common features along the watercourses, resulting in very low flow conditions (Volume 2, Sections 7.0 and 9.0). In general, the streams sampled in the ALSA were shallow (mean sampling depths were less than 1.5 m) with low water current and bed substrates dominated by silt and sand. Over-wintering fisheries habitat is limited, typically with low to no winter flows. The capability and use of these creek systems for sport fishing is rated as low (Volume 2, Section 9.0). Wetland types in the TLSA were interpreted in accordance with Alberta Wetland Inventory (AWI) with eleven AWI classes including shallow open water (1 type), marshes (1 type), swamps (3 types), fens (5 types) and bogs (1 type) identified. Wooded fen (FTNN) is the most common AWI class in the TLSA comprising 64% of all wetlands.

6.2.3.5 Biodiversity and Wildlife

The TLSA supports wildlife populations and habitats associated with the Central Boreal Mixedwood Natural Subregion. The TLSA is dominated by lowland habitat, particularly shrubby and treed fens. The upland areas are mainly coniferous forest with mixes of black spruce and jack pine. Deciduous and mixed-wood forests are uncommon. Typical wildlife species adapted to upland areas include moose, white-tailed deer, black bear, and fisher. Typical lowland species include western toad, woodland caribou, river otter, beaver and muskrat. The capability of the area for wildlife is moderate.


Page 6-14

The Project will result in localized changes in some terrain and vegetation community types, with an associated effect on biodiversity. An increase in terrain diversity and edge habitat has the potential to result in increased diversity of vegetation and wildlife species. Monitoring soils, vegetation and wildlife conditions in reclaimed areas will support evaluation of post-reclamation biodiversity in the area (Volume 2, Sections 11.0 and 12.0).

6.2.3.6 Traditional Land Use

Traditional resource use in the region includes hunting, trapping, fishing, plant collection, and the use of trail networks and cabins. Additional information regarding traditional uses of lands in the vicinity of the Project is provided in Volume 2, Section 14.0. Devon has engaged eight Aboriginal communities for the Project in order to identify potential effects to TLU and TEK. Devon will use results of these studies as input to their cumulative constraints mapping and as input to the determination of final reclamation targets and component species. Devon will continue to engage Aboriginal communities to review ongoing development and reclamation activities with respect to incorporating TLU and TEK.

6.2.3.7 Recreation

The Project has the potential to result in increased access within the TLSA. The primary effect of land cleared for industrial use is a reduction in the available land base for other land uses. During progressive reclamation and following decommissioning, Devon will reclaim and re-vegetate cleared areas making them available for other land use activities. Non-consumptive recreational activities that occur within the region include camping, boating, canoeing, kayaking, all-terrain vehicle use, hunting, fishing, ski-dooing, dog-sledding, hiking, cross-country skiing and horse riding. Recreational activities are generally focused along waterways, on lakes and along vehicular trails. Water borne access in the study region is minimal to non-existent due to the low flow conditions and common logjams and beaver dams associated with the watercourses. Sport fishing and recreational boating occur at larger lakes within the RSA that can be accessed by road (e.g., Christina Lake, Winefred Lake, Grist Lake). Additional information related to recreational land use is contained in Volume 2, Section 13.0. 6.3 Conservation and Reclamation Plan 6.3.1 Development Plan Devon has provided a facility layout for the plant site, well pads, roadways and related project infrastructure. Devon will continue to assess the bitumen resource for the Project, and results from planned seismic and core-hole programs may require modifications to the positioning and development timing of some well pads. As required by the approval, site-specific PDA/C&Rs will be developed. The conceptual facility layouts for the CPF (showing soil stockpile and stormwater pond locations) and production well pads (showing typical soil stockpile and stormwater collection area locations), ROWs and road and pipeline watercourse crossings schematics are presented in Figures 6.3-1 through 6.3-8.

Pike 1 Project

CPF Layout And Surface Drainage

Figure

6.3�1

MAY 15, 2012

PROVIDED BY:

FINAL MAPPING BY:

AMEC

AMEC

CE04050M09.dwg

Pike 1 Project

Typical Well Pad Layout

Figure

6.3�2

MAY 15, 2012

PROVIDED BY:

FINAL MAPPING BY:

AMEC

AMEC

CE04050M08.dwg

Typical Wellpad Access Corridor

Pike 1 Project

May 22, 2012

Figure6.3-3

PROVIDED BY:

DEVON CANADAFINAL MAPPING BY:

AMEC

Fig06.03-03 Typical Wellpad Access.mxd

Map

Pat

h: S

:\Gis

\Pro

ject

s\C

E\D

evon

\040

50_P

ike\

Arc

GIS

Pro

ject

s\Vo

lum

e 01

- C

nR\F

ig06

.03-

03 T

ypic

al W

ellp

ad A

cces

s.m

xd

Ana

lyst

- C

laud

ia F

uent

es

Source: Devon.

Typical Source/Disposal WellAccess Corridor

Pike 1 Project

May 22, 2012

Figure6.3-4

PROVIDED BY:


AMEC

Fig06.03-04 Typical SourceDisposal Access.mxd

Map

Pat

h: S

:\Gis

\Pro

ject

s\C

E\D

evon

\040

50_P

ike\

Arc

GIS

Pro

ject

s\Vo

lum

e 01

- C

nR\F

ig06

.03-

04 T

ypic

al S

ourc

eDis

posa

l Acc

ess.

mxd

A

naly

st -

Cla

udia

Fue

ntes

Source: Devon.

Typical Clear Span Bridge Crossing

Pike 1 Project

May 22, 2012

Figure6.3-5

PROVIDED BY:


AMEC

Fig06.03-05 Clear Span Bridge.mxd

Map

Pat

h: S

:\Gis

\Pro

ject

s\C

E\D

evon

\040

50_P

ike\

Arc

GIS

Pro

ject

s\Vo

lum

e 01

- C

nR\F

ig06

.03-

05 C

lear

Spa

n Br

idge

.mxd

An

alys

t - T

ori M

arsh

all

Source: Devon

Typical Clear Span Aboveground Pipeline Crossing

Pike 1 Project

June 04, 2012

Figure6.3-6

PROVIDED BY:


AMEC

Fig06.03-06 Clear Span Pipeline.mxd

Map

Pat

h: S

:\Gis

\Pro

ject

s\C

E\D

evon

\040

50_P

ike\

Arc

GIS

Pro

ject

s\Vo

lum

e 01

- C

nR\F

ig06

.03-

06 C

lear

Spa

n Pi

pelin

e.m

xd

Ana

lyst

- To

ri M

arsh

all

Source: Devon

Watercourse CrossingDirectional Drill Stages

Pike 1 Project

May 22, 2012

Figure6.3-7

PROVIDED BY:


AMEC

Fig06.03-07 Water Crossing Stages.mxd

Map

Pat

h: S

:\Gis

\Pro

ject

s\C

E\D

evon

\040

50_P

ike\

Arc

GIS

Pro

ject

s\Vo

lum

e 01

- C

nR\F

ig06

.03-

07 W

ater

Cro

ssin

g S

tage

s.m

xd

Ana

lyst

- To

ri M

arsh

all

Text

STAGE 1: PILOT HOLE DIRECTIONAL DRILLING

STAGE 2: REAMING AND PULLING BACK

PROFILE(Not to Scale)

ENTRYPOINT

HORIZONTALDRILLING RIG

DRILLPIPE

GENERAL DIRECTION OFPROGRESS PILOT HOLE DRILLING

PILOTHOLE

WATERCOURSE

DESIGNEDDRILL PATH

EXIT POINT


WATERCOURSE

WATERCOURSE

DRILLING FLUIDRETURNS

REAMERGENERAL DIRECTION OFPROGRESS PREREAMING


DRILLING FLUIDRETURNS STRUNG PIPE

(WELDED, TESTEDAND PRECOATED)

SWIVELGENERAL DIRECTION OFPULLING BACK

Notes:1. Utilize the directional drill technique on watercourse listed in the Project Description Construction Agreement A-6123.2. Obtain geotechnical data prior to initiating drilling. Drilling may not be feasible in some materials such as unconsolidated gravels.3. Set up drilling equipment outside the riparian zone of the watercoruse; do not clear or grade within the riparian zone, except along the workside, if temporary vehicle crossing is utilized.4. Assign full time inspectors to observe for an inadvertent mud release into or adjacent to the watercourse.5. Ensure that only bentonite based drilling mud is used. Do not allow the use of any additives in the drilling mud without the approval of Natural Resources Service.6. Install suitable drilling mud tanks or sumps to prevent contamination of watercourse.7. Install berms downslope from the drill entry and anticipated exit points to contain any release of drilling mud. Have vacuum trucks onsite to recover excess mud when pulling back.8. Dispose of drilling mud in accordance with ERCB guidelines. Source: Devon GS-7310-EPP Forest Lands 26

Watercourse CrossingDirectional Drill

Pike 1 Project

May 22, 2012

Figure6.3-8

PROVIDED BY:


AMEC

Fig06.03-08 Water Crossing Directionall Drill.mxd

Map

Pat

h: S

:\Gis

\Pro

ject

s\C

E\D

evon

\040

50_P

ike\

Arc

GIS

Pro

ject

s\Vo

lum

e 01

- C

nR\F

ig06

.03-

08 W

ater

Cro

ssin

g D

irect

iona

ll D

rill.m

xd

Ana

lyst

- To

ri M

arsh

all

Source: Devon

General Notes:1. The pipeline shall be installed so that the entire pipe is outside the shaded zone.2. Crossing Type Selection: A) Single SAG Bend crossing shall be used where minimum cover can be provided on narrow streams. B) Double SAG Bend crossing shall be installed where width prohibits the use of a single SAG to provide minimum cover during the lifetime of the pipeline.


Page 6-23

Pending regulatory approval, the development schedule for the Project includes plans to begin construction in 2014, with operations commencing in 2016. The productive life of the Project is estimated at 25 to 30 years. Interim or temporary conservation and reclamation activities will also be completed for some areas. Examples include the edges of roads and corridors, around and under aboveground pipelines, around the outside edges of well pads, and on reclamation material stockpiles. Reclamation of specific facilities is described in Section 6.3.7. Some existing clearings will be used for locating new Project facilities (e.g., roads on seismic lines, well pads on core-hole locations) and reclaimed as part of this Project. Reclamation of existing seismic and core-hole disturbances is addressed under the specific approval or reclamation requirements from ASRD for these activities. Changes to the reclamation program for ongoing exploratory activities will be incorporated as techniques are further improved and employed within the region.

6.3.2 Low Impact Construction Techniques

Devon will employ low impact construction techniques during both the exploration and development phases of the Project. Low impact construction techniques have become standard practice for Devon’s Thermal Heavy Oil operations. During exploration, OSE wells minimize the footprint by using existing clearings (seismic lines/pipelines) for access (roads), reducing access ROW (8 m or less), reduced well pad size (0.54 ha) and reducing soil disturbance. When soil disturbance is avoided the time required to naturally vegetate a site is decreased, as native species will re-establish from intact roots, shoots and seed materials. Sites are constructed in winter by mulching vegetation and freezing in access and pad surfaces with water. Low impact seismic operations avoid soil disturbance and a combination of mulching and hand cutting is used to minimize vegetation removal. Low ground pressure vehicles are used from start to finish. Innovative strategies for underground pipeline construction include: using soil cutting tools to more accurately delineate topsoil and subsoil, mulching spoil before replacing in trench and using various specialized equipment for trench compaction. Devon will continue to investigate improved construction techniques including improved management of non-merchantable wood fibre. Alternative uses of non-merchantable wood fibre material will be developed and implemented in consultation with ASRD. Low impact construction techniques for the CPF and production well pads will include the use of soil cutting tools such as an in-ground soil mulcher to enhance topsoil and subsoil conservation. Geo-cells may be used on well pads to improve pad stability, reduce the amount of gravel that is lost into the pad and enhance the potential for recovering gravel from the pad prior to reclamation. Observation wells, like other Project components, will be located on existing clearings to the extent possible. Access roads will be 8 m wide or less, well pads will be 0.54 ha and soil disturbance will be avoided. When soil disturbance is avoided the time required to naturally


Page 6-24

vegetate a site is decreased, as native species will re-establish from intact roots, shoots and seed materials. Sites will be constructed in winter by mulching vegetation and freezing in access and pad surfaces with water. In addition to the development of site-specific PDA/C&Rs, Devon will retain a soil monitor onsite during soil salvage and stockpiling activities to ensure appropriate practices are implemented and documented.

6.3.3 Restoration of Capability

Mitigation measures will be implemented as described in the mitigation sections presented for each discipline in Volume 2 of this Application. The intent of these mitigations will be the minimization of the potential effects of the Project on the environment, and to enhance reclamation success in terms of achieving equivalent land capability. Reclamation approaches are planned to maintain or restore the following environmental capabilities:

• soil land capability classification;

• vegetation and timber productivity;

• wetlands;

• surface water;

• fisheries;

• biodiversity and wildlife;

• TLU; and

• recreation.

6.3.3.1 Soil Land Capability

The conceptual reclamation land capability classes expected to be replaced are presented in Table 6.3-1. A decrease in LCC 2 rated soils is expected. At reclamation LCC 3 will be achieved on the majority of upland sites (with well drained conditions). Following reclamation a change from baseline soil moisture conditions and soil profile properties is expected. The establishment of some soil conditions that support the LCC 2 rating will not occur immediately upon soil replacement, but may be achieved over time by natural pedogenetic processes. As such, a conservative approach at the conceptual level is presented, indicating a change from LCC 2 to LCC 3 soil condition, but maintenance of an equivalent capability for productive forest. Facility-specific baseline soil conditions identified through the PDA process, will be used to refine the closure land capability goals.


Page 6-25

Table 6.3-1: Summary of Predicted Land Capability Class with Reclamation in the TLSA

LCC Class Baseline Case Application Case Area

Disturbed (ha)

Area of Reclamation

(ha)

Reclamation Net Change After

Reclamation (ha)

Area (ha)

% of TLSA

Area (ha)

% of TLSA

Area (ha)

% of TLSA

2 1 743 7.1 1 588 6.5 155 0 1 588 6.5 -155 3 5 038 20.6 4 812 19.6 227 416 5 228 21.3 190 4 2 091 8.5 2 012 8.2 79 65 2 077 8.5 -14 5 13 759 56.1 13 193 53.8 566 546 13 739 56.0 -20 Disturbed land 887 3.6 824 3.4 62 62 887 3.6 0 Water 1 008 4.1 1 008 4.1 0 0 1 008 4.1 0 Project Application n/a n/a 1 089 4.4 0 0 0 0.0 0

Total 24 526 100.0 24 526 100.0 1 089 1 089 24 526 100.0 0

Notes: n/a Not applicable. Marsh associate with lowland borrow closure is rated LCC5. All previous disturbance will be reclaimed as part of project reclamation.


Page 6-26

A decrease in organic soils rated as LCC 5 is also expected; however some of this decrease will be compensated by reclaiming facilities in wetlands to marsh land conditions (i.e., dugout borrow sites). The distribution of reclamation LCC classes is illustrated in Figure 6.3-9.

6.3.3.2 Vegetation and Timber Productivity

Vegetation

The following ELC classes were classified in the baseline vegetation assessment for the Pike Project TLSA, including;

• Upland: lichen (a1); blueberry (b1, b2, b3, b4); Labrador tea-mesic (c1); low-bush cranberry (d1, d2, d3); dogwood (e1); Labrador tea-subhygric (g1); and Labrador tea/horsetail (h1).

• Lowland: bog (i1, i2); poor fen (j1, j2); rich fen (k1, k2, k3); and marsh (l1).

Devon plans to reclaim upland disturbances to upland ecosites. Wetland ecosites affected by the placement of fill material (ROW, well pads, source/disposal wells) will be initially reclaimed to marsh, with an expected succession trajectory over the long-term towards other wetland ecosites, including peatlands. Conceptual reclamation targets are planned to achieve equivalent capability, and where feasible, based on the reclaimed soil and site conditions, post-reclamation ELC targets will be similar to the pre-disturbance ecosite phases. The reclaimed soil moisture conditions may differ from baseline resulting in different soil/vegetation interactions. This potential change in soil conditions may not support the baseline ecosite phase at initial reclamation. It is expected that reclaimed ecosite phases will be of equivalent capability to the pre-disturbance conditions, and will be selected in part, based on their potential for long term successional trajectory towards the baseline ecosite phases. This conceptual approach will be refined in the facility-specific PDA/C&Rs developed for the Project.

Kirby Road

Monda

y

HayLake

KirbyLake

Paul'

s Roa

d

Sandy

River

Cree

k

CPF

T73

T74

T75

R5W4R6W4R7W4

Land Capability ClassificationReclamation

Pike 1 Project

May 22, 2012

Figure6.3-9

PROVIDED BY:


AMEC

Fig06.03-09 A TLSA Land Capability.mxd

±M

ap P

ath:

S:\G

is\P

roje

cts\

CE

\Dev

on\0

4050

_Pik

e\A

rcG

IS P

roje

cts\

Volu

me

01 -

CnR

\Fig

06.0

3-09

A T

LSA

Land

Cap

abili

ty.m

xd

Ana

lyst

- To

ri M

arsh

all



Pike Project Footprint



Open Water

Watercourse

Road

Land Capability ClassificationClass 2

Class 3

Class 4

Class 5 1 0 1 20.5

Kilometres1:110000


Page 6-28

The conceptual plan for upland ecosite replacement will be the replacement of a1 ecosites to c1; all b ecosites to b3; all d ecosites to d2; g1 ecosites to g1 and h1 ecosites to h1. For the wetland ecosites, it is assumed all i, j, and k ecosites will be reclaimed to an l1 (marsh) ecosite. The conceptual ecosite distribution following reclamation is presented in Table 6.3-2 and Figure 6.3-10. Devon will maintain a database of detailed pre-disturbance vegetation conditions that will guide selection of the most appropriate final target ecosite phases. Seeding and planting prescriptions will be selected with the objective of establishing conditions similar to or compatible with pre-disturbance conditions.

6.3.3.3 Wetlands

Some of the Project facilities are located within wetland and peatland (muskeg) areas including fens and bogs. Since water movement is essential to maintaining the biological integrity of the fens, the following measures will be applied in constructing facilities in wetland ecosites:

• culverts will be installed along roads in wetlands to facilitate drainage under the roads; and

• ditches will be constructed to control and direct the flow of surface water along roads and from the CPF.

In areas of muskeg deeper than 0.5 m, it will be necessary to add material to construct structurally secure foundations for access roads and well pads. The intention is to lay down a layer of geo-textile and build the well pad or roadway with fill material on top of the geo-textile. This will require fill material to be placed on the muskeg, thus altering the landform by creating a hummock or ridge. Access roads and well pad working surface areas will be capped with a gravel layer that will be maintained throughout the operation phase. Culverts will be placed as needed to maintain surface drainage. Seismic lines that occur within peatlands are expected to return to pre-disturbance conditions over time, since seismic development involves only vegetation clearing with no excavation of organic soils (winter access development). Buried pipelines will require ditch-line excavation of organic soil which will then be replaced directly over the ditch-line. Small areas of open water wetlands will be created along reclaimed roadbeds following the removal of culverts and overlying fill to facilitate surface drainage in low-lying and peatland areas. These areas will provide increased habitat diversity for use by wildlife (e.g., bird nesting and/or rest areas) and will preserve wetland functions. Devon intends to reclaim all pads in wetland environments back to a wetland environment. Pads built up on deep peat will be reclaimed by removal of gravel, fill and geo-textile, followed by reclamation of the original peat, including planting with hydrophilic species, as appropriate.


Page 6-29

Table 6.3-2: Summary of Predicted Ecosite Phase with Reclamation in the TLSA

Baseline Ecosite Phase

Area (ha)

% of TLSA

Application Ecosite Phase

Area (ha)

% of TLSA

Reclamation Ecosite Phase

Replacement Ecosite Area

(ha)

Area at Reclamation

(ha) % of TLSA

Net Change After

Reclamation (ha)

Borrow Pit 1 0.0 Borrow Pit 193 0.8 Borrow Pit 0 1 0.0 0 Industrial/Clearing 41 0.2 Industrial/Clearing 40 0.2 Industrial/Clearing 0 41 0.2 0 Powerline 63 0.3 Powerline 61 0.3 Powerline 0 63 0.3 0 Road 152 0.6 Road 140 0.6 Road 0 152 0.6 0 ROW 479 2.0 ROW 892 3.6 ROW 0 479 2.0 0 Seismic 181 0.7 Seismic 171 0.7 Seismic 0 181 0.7 0 Trail 35 0.1 Trail 34 0.1 Trail 0 35 0.1 0 Wellsite 119 0.5 Wellsite 457 1.9 Wellsite 0 119 0.5 0 CPF 0 0 CPF 97 0.4 CPF 0 0 0.0 0 Flooded 34 0.1 Flooded 34 0.1 Flooded 0 34 0.1 0 Open Water 1 008 4.1 Open Water 1 008 4.1 Open Water 0 1 008 4.1 0 Shrubland/Regen 708 2.9 Shrubland/Regen 694 2.8 Shrubland/Regen 0 694 2.8 -14 a1 857 3.5 a1 814 3.3 a1 0 814 3.3 -43 b1 572 2.3 b1 548 2.2 b1 0 548 2.2 -24 b2 160 0.7 b2 156 0.6 b2 0 156 0.6 -4 b3 239 1.0 b3 221 0.9 b3 50 271 1.1 32 b4 30 0.1 b4 27 0.1 b4 0 27 0.1 -3 c1 3 930 16.0 c1 3 751 15.3 c1 222 3 973 16.2 43 d1 1 096 4.5 d1 1 010 4.1 d1 0 1 010 4.1 -86 d2 296 1.2 d2 284 1.2 d2 107 391 1.6 95 d3 49 0.2 d3 40 0.2 d3 0 40 0.2 -9 e1 80 0.3 e1 79 0.3 e1 0 79 0.3 -1 g1 4 480 18.3 g1 4 230 17.2 g1 251 4 480 18.3 0 h1 126 0.5 h1 106 0.4 h1 19 126 0.5 0 i1 4 0.0 i1 4 0.0 i1 0 4 0.0 0 i2 87 0.4 i2 84 0.3 i2 0 84 0.3 -3 j1 1 467 6.0 j1 1 403 5.7 j1 0 1 403 5.7 -64 j2 4 256 17.4 j2 4 085 16.7 j2 0 4 085 16.7 -171 k1 2 113 8.6 k1 2 038 8.3 k1 0 2 038 8.3 -75 k2 1 537 6.3 k2 1 498 6.1 k2 0 1 498 6.1 -39 k3 321 1.3 k3 320 1.3 k3 0 320 1.3 -1 l1 6 0.0 l1 6 0.0 l1 368 374 1.5 368

Total 24 526 100.0 Total 2 4526 100.0 Total 1 017 24 526 100.0 0

Kirby Road

Monda

y

HayLake

KirbyLake

Paul'

s Roa

d

Sandy

River

Cree

k

CPF

T73

T74

T75

R5W4R6W4R7W4

Ecological Land ClassificationReclamation

Pike 1 Project

May 22, 2012

Figure6.3-10

PROVIDED BY:


AMEC

Fig06.03-10 R TLSA ELC.mxd

±M

ap P

ath:

S:\G

is\P

roje

cts\

CE

\Dev

on\0

4050

_Pik

e\A

rcG

IS P

roje

cts\

Volu

me

01 -

CnR

\Fig

06.0

3-10

R T

LSA

ELC

.mxd

A

naly

st -

Tori

Mar

shal

l



Pike Project Footprint



Open Water

Watercourse

Road

1 0 1 20.5

Kilometres1:110000

Ecological Land Class (ELC)

a1

b1

b2

b3

b4

c1

d1

d2

d3

e1

g1

h1

i1

i2

j1

j2

k1

k2

k3

l1

Shrubland/Regen

Flooded


Page 6-31

Practices for reclaiming sites developed in wetland areas will be informed through Devon’s involvement in the joint industry wetland reclamation research trials program (Circle T Consulting 2010). The Project was initiated in 2008 and is a multi-year joint industry research Project funded by forestry and the oil and gas industry. The research will focus initially on assessing suitable practices for decommissioning well pads and roads constructed of clay fill in wetlands and restoring ecological function to these sites. Objectives of the study include the following:

• increase understanding of effects of well pads and roads on wetlands;

• develop practical techniques for construction and reclamation of pads and roads in wetlands (tool box to address effects); and

• evaluate and document effects of roads and pads in wetlands. The study focuses on wetland areas classified as graminoid fen, shrubby fen, and open forested peatland, and reclamation of these areas by either complete or partial removal of fill material. Various revegetation treatments will be implemented in different microhabitats. Monitoring of vegetation and hydrological conditions in relation to the various treatments will occur annually. Data will be used to evaluate the re-establishment of wetland characteristics and functions and to inform future landscape-specific construction methods.

6.3.3.4 Surface Water

The Project is designed to reduce the overall effect to surface water. Design level mitigation implemented during Project planning will limit alteration of the natural drainage systems resulting in reduced reclamation requirements for restoration of these areas. Crossings of streams by proposed underground pipelines will be directionally drilled to prevent instream disturbance, while road and aboveground pipeline crossings will be constructed using clear span bridges; no instream disturbances are anticipated for construction of Project facilities. Preservation of site drainage during operations will help facilitate restoration of the development area drainage at reclamation. Maintenance of surface drainage within wetlands during operations will be facilitated by the installation of culverts in roads. Culverts will be removed during reclamation. During operations, spill prevention and containment measures will be designed and implemented to prevent contamination of the groundwater by routine operations. Monitoring wells will be installed at appropriate locations to evaluate the performance of these measures and to provide indication of deterioration of water quality or change in water table depth. Treatment of water discharges from the plant site (e.g., stormwater pond) along with pre-release water quality testing, management of discharge rates, use of appropriate discharge methods that encourage infiltration, and regular monitoring will mitigate potential impacts of released waters on fundamental wetland functions.


Page 6-32

6.3.3.5 Fisheries

No in-stream activities (i.e., excavation for pipelines, road construction, or in-stream bridge piers) are planned for the Project. New pipeline crossings of streams will be directionally drilled or will be elevated on clear span pipe racks or bundled with roads over clear span bridges, in accordance with applicable AEW Code of Practice guidelines and DFO Operational Statements. A 100 m development buffer will be maintained from stream banks, and appropriate sediment and erosion controls will be implemented during construction to minimize sedimentation potential. Progressive reclamation of facilities will further limit impacts to water quality during Project operations, as areas adjacent to existing riparian zones, no longer in operational use are stabilized and re-vegetated.

6.3.3.6 Biodiversity and Wildlife

The Project’s C&R Plan is designed to promote establishment of a diverse herbaceous cover soon after reclamation, followed by establishment of woody species. An initial herbaceous cover will provide erosion protection while the establishment of native herbaceous species will provide a source of food and low-growing cover for wildlife. Most of the woody plant species required for establishment of a mature forest ecosystem will be planted following soil placement, to accelerate the establishment of the desired ecosite phases. As this habitat develops, wildlife utilization is expected to increase as food and shelter become available on the reclamation sites (i.e., with maturing vegetation). Devon has conducted wildlife monitoring activities in and around the Jackfish project for the past 10 years (2002 to 2012), including two years within the Pike TLSA. This monitoring encompasses pre-disturbance, construction, and operations phases of Project development. Devon’s winter monitoring results generally indicate stable wildlife abundances in the Jackfish leases over a 10-year duration of increasing development footprint. Monitoring of the Jackfish projects will continue in conjunction with monitoring of the Project through reclamation to provide a substantial dataset for evaluating species habitat use in the area. An adaptive management approach will continue to be used, such that this information, along with reclamation best practices at the time of decommissioning, will inform final planting prescriptions for facilities sites to enhance reclaimed areas as viable wildlife habitat. Devon is committed to reclaiming seismic lines and other linear features to mitigate Project effects on caribou. As part of this commitment, reclamation of priority footprints may be required to deter predator or primary prey (moose, deer) access into otherwise-secure caribou calving habitats. Seismic lines that are determined or predicted to be within identified fine-scale caribou calving features will be addressed as soon as possible. The data from Devon’s current and ongoing seismic line re-growth monitoring will indicate the conditions under which natural regeneration is sufficient, and the conditions under which active management prescriptions may be necessary.


Page 6-33

There are a number of mitigation tools, techniques and strategies may be implemented to block predator and human use of conventional seismic lines and other linear features in caribou habitat. These may include any one or combination of the following techniques:

• line-blocking using woody debris (or slash) spread across or piled on the ROW;

• constructing earthen berms to control access and break the line-of-sight;

• tree planting, willow staking, and/or excavator mounding at strategic locations (including

• creating doglegs at intersections with access roads;

• encouraging shrub bands across the ROW (native and tall shrub species);

• implementation of directional drilling or boring under streams to leave riparian vegetation in place;

• minimizing root mat and duff disturbance to promote revegetation (e.g., winter construction);

• avoiding the cutting of large diameter trees; and

• meandering linear features through forested areas.

6.3.3.7 Traditional Land Use

To maintain native vegetation including species associated with traditional uses, areas that are cleared for development will be reclaimed to vegetation communities that will include a variety of plant species with value for traditional uses. For example, many of the woody plants used for traditional purposes are incorporated into the planned planting prescriptions for reclaiming areas to target ecosite phases. Progressive reclamation efforts will ensure reclamation is conducted as soon as practical on disturbed sites. Devon’s exploration techniques involve using mulching for vegetation removal during frozen ground conditions to promote successful reclamation by leaving soils and root zones intact, thereby facilitating natural recovery of native species in these areas. Devon will also consider input regarding TEK during the design of site-specific, final reclamation plans. For example, Elders and Traditional Resource users will be generally consulted regarding the types of human use, animal use or other natural vegetation appropriate in replanting during the reclamation of sites where feasible.

6.3.3.8 Recreation

Following reclamation, restoration of wildlife habitat would restore potential for related recreational uses. Target recreational uses of reclaimed lands could be consumptive (e.g., hunting and berry picking) or non-consumptive (e.g., nature observation). Site-specific reclamation planning will incorporate these target uses and address defined regional planning objectives.


Page 6-34

6.3.4 Reclamation Approach and Sequencing

Devon is committed to progressive reclamation for the Project. Upon completion of the producing life of well pads and facilities they will be reclaimed. Devon’s strategy for reclaiming borrow pits will mirror the progressive reclamation of well pads. Borrow pits have been located near clusters of well pads. This results in more individual borrow sites, but of reduced size. As the production life of well pads in an area ends, the borrow pits utilized for their development will no longer be required and they will be reclaimed. Final reclamation will be undertaken when Project operations are completed and all of the facilities removed. The general decommissioning and reclamation process for the Project facilities is as follows:

• prior to abandonment, a final detailed decommissioning and reclamation plan will be prepared for the Project and reviewed with regulators to finalize plans and goals. The final plan will incorporate TEK identified through consultation with community stakeholders;

• site assessments of facilities will be undertaken to determine if contamination is present. Remediation will be undertaken, as required, prior to and during the removal of facilities and equipment;

• initial restoration will involve the removal of surface structures and equipment. Gravel will be salvaged for use on subsequent development areas as practicable.

• well bores will be cemented with steel casing cut off a minimum of 1.0 m below the surface. Production and monitoring wells will be abandoned according to ERCB and AEW standards;

• access roads will be abandoned by initially salvaging gravel from road surfaces and then removing the fill material over culverts. Culverts will be removed to facilitate drainage and organic materials encountered will be spread on the road surface for use as reclamation material;

• borrow pits will be reclaimed according to AEW regulations in place at the time of reclamation. The preferred end land use will be determined at that time. Borrow pits will be re-contoured to blend with the surrounding terrain and will be either revegetated to suitable upland vegetation or will be reclaimed as a wetland marsh, to enhance wildlife habitat within the area (AEP 1995c);

• production well pads, roadways and facility areas will be mechanically deep-ripped or disced, as required, to alleviate surface compaction;

• following ripping, the site will be re-contoured to restore natural drainage patterns and topography. Stockpiled subsoil and topsoil that was previously salvaged will be redistributed to provide a suitable medium for plant establishment and growth. The area will be worked and track packed to create good tilth;


Page 6-35

• following surface soil preparation the disturbed areas will be seeded, as required, and planted with tree and shrub species consistent with the revegetation plan; and

• following revegetation, regular monitoring and maintenance activities will be undertaken to assess and track reclamation success and to identify areas of concern.

6.3.4.1 Sequencing

The Project will progressively increase production as the wellpairs are brought into production. First production is targeted for 2016, ramping up to full production in 2022. The expected useful production life of each well pad will be approximately seven to eight years. As well pads complete their operational lifespan; new well pads will be developed to maintain peak production. Each well pad will be reclaimed sequentially and progressively as they are decommissioned from the Project, thereby offsetting disturbance associated with new pads. Table 6.3-3 provides a conceptual plan development and reclamation schedule for the Project assuming an average 8 year life for each well pad. Construction/drilling timeframes are in addition to the 8 year productive life shown; approximately two years are assumed for drilling and well pad construction. Two years following production are assumed for decommissioning and reclamation of well pads, and five years for decommissioning and reclamation of the CPF. Observation well pads associated with a given production well pad will be reclaimed concurrently with production pad reclamation. The construction of observation wells will not require soil disturbance. Reclamation will involve abandoning the well and the natural establishment of vegetation. Advances in recovery technology may delay the reclamation schedule if well pads remain in production for a longer period. The integrated development and reclamation schedule demonstrates Devon’s coordinated approach to planning and operations of the Project.

6.3.5 Timber Salvage Plan

All merchantable timber will be salvaged from the areas to be constructed. Non-merchantable timber and brush will typically be coarse-mulched (nominal 15 to 30 cm length). Wood chips will not be mixed with salvaged surface soils. Devon has effectively coordinated harvest activities for the Jackfish project with Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc. (Al-Pac), and will continue this for the Project, focusing on access to the Project and ensuring the clearing plan timelines are feasible for both the Project development and the forestry companies. Discussions will continue throughout the Project as part of Devon’s approach to reclamation. Timber salvage operations are scheduled to begin in 2014 to meet the development schedule. Timber will be salvaged and decked in accordance with ASRD requirements and in consultation with Al-Pac.


Page 6-36

Table 6.3-3: Conceptual Project Development and Reclamation Schedule

Year

Central Facilities1 Production Well Pads

Producing Well Pads #

Active Pads

Area Disturbed (ha)

Area Reclaimed (ha)

Net Total (ha) Developed Reclaimed Developed2 Reclaimed3 Annual

Gross Area

Disturbed (ha)

Annual Total

2014 1 0 0 0 No Production 0 96.8 96.8 0.0 0.0 96.8

2015 0 0 0 0 No Production 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 96.8

2016 0 0 1 0 2014-1 1 5.4 102.2 0.0 0.0 102.2

2017 0 0 4 0 2014-2, 2014-3, 2015-1, 2015-2 5 21.6 123.8 0.0 0.0 123.8

2018 0 0 7 0 2016-1, 2016-2, 2016-3, 2017-1, 2017-2, 2017-3, 2017-4

12 37.8 161.6 0.0 0.0 161.6

2019 0 0 0 0 No New Well Pads 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

2020 0 0 2 0 2018-1, 2018-2 14 10.8 172.4 0.0 0.0 172.4

2021 0 0 3 0 2019-1, 2019-2, 2020-1 17 16.2 188.6 0.0 0.0 188.6

2022 0 0 3 0 2020-2, 2021-1, 2021-2 20 16.2 204.8 0.0 0.0 204.8

2023 0 0 3 1 2021-3, 2022-1, 2022-2 22 16.2 221.0 5.4 5.4 215.6

2024 0 0 2 4 2023-1, 2023-2 20 10.8 231.8 21.6 27.0 210.2

2025 0 0 3 7 2023-3, 2024-1, 2024-2 16 16.2 248.0 37.8 64.8 210.2

2026 0 0 3 0 2025-1, 2025-2, 2025-3 19 16.2 264.2 0.0 64.8 210.2

2027 0 0 2 2 2026-1, 2026-2 19 10.8 275 10.8 75.6 210.2

2028 0 0 3 3 2026-3, 2027-1, 2027-2 19 16.2 291.2 16.2 91.8 210.2

2029 0 0 3 3 2028-1, 2028-2, 2028-3 19 16.2 307.4 16.2 108.0 210.2

2030 0 0 3 3 2028-4, 2028-5, 2029-1 19 16.2 323.6 16.2 124.2 210.2

2031 0 0 3 2 2029-2, 2030-1, 2030-2 20 16.2 339.8 10.8 135.0 210.2

2032 0 0 4 3 2030-3, 2031-1, 2031-2, 2031-3 21 21.6 361.4 16.2 151.2 215.6

2033 0 0 4 3 2031-4, 2031-5, 2032-1, 2032-2 22 21.6 383.0 16.2 167.4 221.0

2034 0 0 4 2 2033-1, 2033-2, 2033-3, 2033-4 24 21.6 404.6 10.8 178.2 226.4

2035 0 0 4 3 2033-5, 2034-1, 2034-2, 2035-1 25 21.6 426.2 16.2 194.4 231.8

2036 0 0 0 3 No New Well Pads 22 0.0 426.2 16.2 210.6 215.6


Page 6-37

Year

Central Facilities1 Production Well Pads

Producing Well Pads #

Active Pads

Area Disturbed (ha)

Area Reclaimed (ha)

Net Total (ha) Developed Reclaimed Developed2 Reclaimed3 Annual

Gross Area

Disturbed (ha)

Annual Total

2037 0 0 0 3 No New Well Pads 19 0.0 426.2 16.2 226.8 199.4

2038 0 0 0 3 No New Well Pads 16 0.0 426.2 16.2 243.0 183.2

2039 0 0 0 4 No New Well Pads 12 0.0 426.2 21.6 264.6 161.6

2040 0 0 0 4 No New Well Pads 8 0.0 426.2 21.6 286.2 140.0

2041 0 0 0 4 No New Well Pads 4 0.0 426.2 21.6 307.8 118.4

2042 0 1 0 4 No New Well Pads 0 0.0 426.2 21.6 329.5 96.8

2043 0 0 0 0 CPF Reclamation 0 0.0 426.2 96.8 329.4 0.0

2044 0 0 0 0 Final Reclamation 0 0.0 426.2 0.0 329.4 .0.

2045 0 0 0 0 Final Reclamation 0 0.0 426.2 0.0 329.4 0.0

2046 0 0 0 0 Final Reclamation 0 0.0 426.2 0.0 329.4 0.0

Totals 1 1 61 61 – 0 0.0

Notes: 1 Central Facilities include plant site, excludes access/utility corridor. 2 Includes well pad site, excludes associated access/utility corridor and observation well pads. 3 Reclamation assumed to commence immediately following production (year 8). Construction/drilling and reclamation are in addition to production period.


Page 6-38

Devon will consult with Al-Pac to determine salvage requirements. Devon will also comply with ASRD Directive Number SD 2009-01 (ASRD 2009) by implementing the following practices for managing non-merchantable timber:

• volumes of non-merchantable timber will not be excessive;

• the coarse material comprises primarily black spruce, tamarack and shrubby vegetation; and

• non-merchantable timber will be mulched to facilitate a coarse woody material. All merchantable timber will be salvaged. Timber salvage and ROW clearing in areas with merchantable timber will be completed in the following steps:

• feller-bunchers will be used to cut and gather merchantable timber;

• skidders will collect the fallen trees to a common work area;

• delimbers will be used to prepare the logs for hauling;

• merchantable timber will be decked, measured and hauled as per discussions with Al-Pac. Options as per discussions with Al-Pac to date include:

deliver salvage to Al-Pac; or stock pile timber at all-season location for pick-up by Al-Pac. The stockpile would

be at a location agreed upon between Al-Pac and Devon. Devon minimizes the potential for removing the LFH or A horizon by completing clearing and vegetation removal in the winter season. Devon does not intend to clear sites by raking during summer. If raking the woody debris from the site is required, Devon uses an excavator with a brush rake and fingers. The soil passes between the fingers and remain onsite. For larger pieces of woody debris that may remain onsite (stumps), the excavator is used for extraction and the debris is shaken from the roots during extraction to ensure as much of the A horizon as possible is left for removal during soil salvage.

6.3.6 Soil Handling Plan

Surface soil in the TLSA generally consists of duff (LFH), Ae and B horizons for mineral soils with a range of textures. Luvisolic soils (Horse River, Winefred soil series) contain a finer textured B horizon derived from till, while Brunisolic (Mildred series) are coarse textured soils derived from glaciofluvial deposits. Gleysolic (Bitumont and Steepbank series) soils may or may not contain both an A or B horizon and can vary greatly in texture. These soils generally also have a layer of surface peat material. Organic soils comprise varying thicknesses of peat (Of, Om) that can range from 40 cm to depths greater than 2 m (Muskeg, Mariana, Hartley and McClelland series). All suitable upper lift material will be salvaged from areas constructed on mineral soils.


Page 6-39

Upper lift material (topsoil) is defined for the Project as all LFH and/or surficial peat (for mineral soils) plus all underlying A horizon mineral material. Based on soil data collected for the Project, an average stripping depth of 30 cm applies for moderately well to rapidly drained upland soils in the TLSA (Horse River, Winefred, Sutherland, and Mildred series), and of 43 cm for imperfectly to poorly drained upland soils (Ells River, and Steepbank peaty Gleysols) (refer to Volume 2, Section 10.0 for a description of soils in the TLSA). Organic soil will be left in place for facilities constructed on deep peatlands (>40 cm; Hartley, Mariana, McLelland and Muskeg series) to permit construction of stable pads in these areas. Where shallow peat (<40 cm; peaty Ells River and Steepbank variants) is encountered over stable mineral soil, the peat will be salvaged to a maximum depth of 40 cm for use as a reclamation soil amendment. As thin mineral A horizons are typically present at the peat-mineral contact of organic soils, peat will be over-stripped to include up to 25% of underlying mineral material (i.e., 10 cm mineral soil salvaged with 40 cm peat), to create a peat-mineral mixture. This approach is expected to provide a suitable growth medium for vegetation at reclamation, in conjunction with initial and maintenance fertilizer application as appropriate. Over the CPF and well pads, upper subsoil will be salvaged from all stripped mineral soil areas to a maximum depth of 30 cm, to provide a suitable root zone medium and minimize the potential for compaction issues at reclamation. Salvaged topsoil will be stockpiled separately from subsoil to prevent admixing, and stockpiles will be signed to indicate the type of soil material stockpiled (Figures 6.3-1 and 6.3-2). Along access roads, Devon will windrow salvaged topsoil as the preferred approach, versus spreading topsoil in the ditches. Windrows will be located on the opposite side of the corridor from pipelines. Windrows will be set back from the road to the extent possible while also accounting for a powerline that may be located in the corridor. Devon does not propose separate salvage and storage of subsoil during access road construction, but plans to utilize subsoil as fill material for grading of the roadbed. The graded subsoil will be capped with a layer of gravel. Inspection of topsoil windrows along roadways will be included as a component of soil stockpile inspections completed periodically for the Project. If it is determined that windrows are being impacted by gravel or other debris, efforts will be made to remove the material without impacting the windrows (e.g., using hand tools). The volumes of stripped surface materials and balances for reclamation materials are summarized in Table 6.3-4. Estimates are based on average LFH and upper horizons in the mineral soil and average peat depths associated with organic soils. Detailed PDA level (>SIL1) soils information will be collected as part of PDA/C&R development prior to construction, to more accurately estimate salvage volumes on a site-specific basis. To support development planning of the Pike CPF, however, PDA level soil information was collected over the CPF site and was applied in the estimation of available reclamation material.


Page 6-40

Table 6.3-4: Reclamation Material Available for the Project

Project Component Peat (BCM1,2) MineralMaterial (BCM1, 2) Subsoil (BCM,4)

Borrow 1 104 575.1 272 806.4 337 078.6 CPF 589 165.0 141 675.1 179 283.2 ROW 0 453 782.5 543 777.9 Source/Disposal Wells 0 30 440.6 31 218.6 Well Pads 0 283 417.9 335 061.0

Total 1 693 740.5 1 182 122.4 1 426 419.3Notes: 1 Deep peat material will be salvaged from only the CPF and borrow pit areas. 2 Based on average salvage depths as follows: BMT - 0.46 m; HLY – 1.06 m; HRR - 0.23 m; MIL - 0.24 m;

MLD – 2.05 m; MRN - 0.91 m; MUS – 2.06 m STP - 0.48 m; SUT - 0.26 m; WNF - 0.24 m.

Reliance will be placed on detailed PDA information in order to select pads and portions of pads for selective peat and mineral topsoil salvage, to ensure that sufficient material is available for reclamation. The general soil salvage plan for the Project is summarized as follows:

• on shallow peatland soils (i.e., peaty Gleysols), peat up to 40 cm depth will be salvaged and stored onsite for use as reclamation material;

• surface soil salvage on mineral soils will consist of all LFH and/or surficial peat (for mineral soils) plus all underlying A horizon mineral material (described above). This material will be stored at the reclamation material stockpile for the CPF or onsite for the well pads. Material salvaged from the roadway will be windrowed within the road ROW while surface soil salvaged for pipeline construction will be replaced immediately following construction;

• subsoil (upper B horizon(s)) will be salvaged to a maximum 30 cm depth over all upland areas on facility sites. If the B horizon depth is less than 30 cm, subsoil will only be salvaged to the depth of the B horizon. Subsoil over most upland areas will be stockpiled and replaced prior to topsoil replacement during reclamation. Subsoil salvaged from upland areas associated with road development will be graded, to minimize the requirement for borrow material. This subsoil will be de-compacted as required and re-contoured during reclamation prior to topsoil replacement; this will minimize subsoil handling and minimize the potential for admixing;

• shallow (<40 cm) and deep peat (>40 cm) will be salvaged from the CPF and borrow pit locations. No peat will be salvaged for the other facilities to be constructed on deep peatlands (i.e., peat deeper than 40 cm) as a cap and fill construction approach is intended; and

• appropriate erosion and sediment control measures will be applied to stabilize all stockpiles, including seeding to establish a protective vegetation cover. A forestry grass seed mix approved by ASRD will be used, and if required, may be supplemented by fertilizer application (e.g., for subsoil stockpiles).


Page 6-41

Site-specific soil storage plans will be developed for each facility based on pre-disturbance site assessments and facility designs. Cut and fill may be necessary to construct a level, stable well pad or plant site. Where required, borrow material, will be sourced from local borrow pits associated with the Project. The construction of pipelines will follow specific techniques to ensure low impact to the landscape. In areas of good construction conditions (uplands), underground pipeline clearing widths will be minimized and construction will include the following:

• steeper trench walls (90 degrees – results in minimal trench width and less work space); • trench stepped at defined layer of topsoil and subsoil to prevent admixing if sluffing

occurs); and • adequate spacing between soil piles (0.5 m). Underground pipelines in muskeg or poor construction conditions will employ the following techniques:

• trench walls 45 degrees; • trench stepped at defined layer of topsoil and subsoil to prevent admixing if sluffing

occurs); and • adequate spacing between soil piles (0.5 m). The LFH and/or surface peat and mineral topsoil will be salvaged and stockpiled separately, where practical. Pipeline construction will be done in progressive segments to minimize the area of exposed soil and open trench at a given time. Narrow trench width (20 to 40 cm) buried pipeline construction will be used, where practical, to minimize trench line soil disturbance and the volume of soil handled during construction. Following lowering in of the pipe, all spoil (subsoil) is replaced and compacted in the trench. Trench spoil is broken up to facilitate backfill and packing in the trench. Salvaged topsoil materials are replaced after trench spoil is compacted. Salvaged peat is also spread over the replaced spoil.

6.3.7 Operational Considerations

The following sections describe operational considerations including mitigation, management and maintenance measures planned towards ensuring reclamation objectives are met. Experience from Devon’s existing Jackfish operations will be carried forward to inform adaptive management strategies for the Project as applicable.


Page 6-42

6.3.7.1 Maintenance of Erosion and Sediment Controls

It is Devon’s intention to manage soil salvage operations in a manner that reduces the potential for surface erosion. Site-specific erosion controls will be assessed at the facility level to ensure the appropriate measures are implemented at each site. Interim revegetation of the reclamation material stockpiles, and other non-operational areas (e.g., ditches), will be undertaken with a seed mix approved by ASRD, suitable for providing rapid cover for erosion control. Stockpiles will be broadcast seeded at an approximate application rate of 20 to 25 kg/ha. Higher application rates may be required for soil stabilization or to prevent erosion. Facility-specific seed mixes and application rates will be provided in the PDA/C&R report for each facility, and will be developed in consultation with ASRD at that time. Stockpiles will be established with a surface slope of 3H:1V. A water truck will be available to address wind erosion prior to vegetation establishing on the stockpiles. A third party soil specialist will be present during soil salvage operations and will assess operations for early indicators of erosion (dust plumes, rill erosion, wheel slippage, etc.). The third party soil specialist will report concerns to Devon's onsite construction supervisor and a decision, based on field judgment, will be jointly made to determine whether or not to temporarily halt operations. Coarse woody debris for erosion control will also be used; Devon considers this as an effective use of excess non-merchantable timber. Devon has spread coarse woody debris on exposed soils for erosion control on a number of Jackfish well pads with positive results. Coarse woody debris will not be placed on the soil stockpiles. Where necessary, ditches will be constructed at crest and toe cuts to control erosion. Cut and fill slopes, portions of the reclamation material stockpile, or any other disturbed land surface that will remain exposed during operations and will not be immediately utilized for reclamation, will be seeded to provide a vegetated surface that will help minimize erosion. Where mineral soil is exposed because of construction activities, the potential for accelerated erosion exists until a sufficient vegetation cover can be established. Where non operational exposed soil is identified, Devon proposes implementing an erosion-control program using a number of techniques:

• where slopes are gentle to moderately steep (<30%) and short in length (<10 m), seeding to an ASRD approved seed mix will be undertaken to provide erosion protection. The area will be fertilized as required and harrowed to encourage rapid germination of the cover crop; and

• on steeper slopes, or slopes longer than 30 m in length, seeding of a cover crop and the use of fertilizer will still be implemented. In addition, erosion blankets with an application of an approved native grass mixture may be used on areas where the greatest erosion potential is evident.

Implementation of the erosion control plan will stabilize the land as rapidly as possible while encouraging the invasion of native plants from the adjacent undisturbed sites. Seed and fertilizer will be applied by hydro-seeding or broadcast cyclone spreading.


Page 6-43

The reclamation material stockpiles will be stabilized and seeded to establish a protective vegetation cover for erosion control. At the time of vegetative control measures, Devon will contact ASRD to confirm the appropriate seed mix and application rates. Devon currently uses an ASRD approved seed mixture that includes awned wheatgrass, hair wild rye, tufted hairgrass, rocky mountain fescue, fowl bluegrass, junegrass-coated; and ticklegrass.

6.3.7.2 Fertilization

On reclamation areas and soil stockpiles, fertilizer is to be applied and incorporated into the surface followed by maintenance applications where soil and vegetation monitoring indicates nutrient deficiencies exist. Annual fertilization is not intended to be part of the standard revegetation program to prevent herbaceous species from becoming overly competitive with invading tree and shrub species, and to discourage rapid establishment by weed species. Where maintenance fertilizer is needed, application rates will be determined through annual monitoring of cover performance and cover objectives. Typical maintenance periods, which depend on the rate of ground cover establishment, are expected to be limited to one to three years after reclamation.

6.3.7.3 Site Drainage

Stormwater runoff on facility areas will be controlled and collected to prevent erosion and sedimentation of adjacent areas. Runoff water in the CPF area will be collected by a series of ditches and culverts, which will feed into the storm water ponds. The storm water retention ponds will be designed to meet standards current at the time of construction. In the event that extra capacity is required, the ponds will be sampled, as per AEW operating conditions, and released in a controlled manner to the watershed through an overland discharge designed to reduce erosion and reduce sedimentation in the surrounding environment. Well pads will be graded to ensure runoff can be collected and sampled as per AEW operating conditions. The water will be released to adjacent areas in a controlled manner to manage erosion concerns.

6.3.7.4 Weed Management

Weed Management

Devon requires that any equipment arriving at a construction site is cleaned by the contractor prior to arrival. Devon will inspect the equipment to ensure it has been cleaned prior to unloading at site. Unclean equipment will be refused access to the site. Fill material is sourced from local borrow pits which will also reduce the potential for importing noxious weeds into the area. Gravel for the Project will be sourced from outside the Project Area. Devon’s current gravel supplier spot sprays for weeds within the gravel pits when they are encountered. Devon will continue to coordinate with suppliers to ensure material is clean and free of weeds. Existing weed infestations, if present on planned development areas, will be identified and documented


Page 6-44

during PDA field surveys. Weed occurrences will be controlled prior to commencing construction activities when possible. Construction equipment used on these sites will be cleaned onsite prior to relocating to other areas within or outside the Project Area. A combination of hand-picking, mechanical and chemical methods will be used to control noxious weeds on operational sites. ASRD’s Directive 2001-06 Weed Management in Forestry Operations (ASRD 2001) and the list of restricted and noxious weeds, as listed pursuant to the Alberta Weed Control Act will be maintained at the Project office.

Herbicide Use and Management

Devon minimizes the use of herbicide through a preference to control vegetation by mechanical methods (mowing and grading) and by handpicking. Blanket applications of herbicides are used: 1) in accordance with regulatory requirements to keep operational areas free and bare of vegetation; and 2) when the infestation level of noxious and prohibited noxious weeds exceeds moderate (i.e., handpicking and spot applications of herbicides have proven ineffective). The areas that would be addressed by a blanket application are as follows:

• wellheads, pump-jacks and buildings – maintain a 10 m radius clear of vegetation;

• flare stacks – maintain a 10 m radius blackened area. Control vegetation within a radius of 2.5 times the stack height in forested areas; and

• moderate Infestation level of noxious or prohibited noxious weeds. If herbicides are required the objective is to minimize the volume applied. This is accomplished by minimizing the size of the area of application and by reducing the potential for over-application. Minimizing the area for herbicide application is accomplished through mechanical means such as grading. Herbicide application is limited to areas that equipment cannot physically access. This would include areas immediately adjacent to equipment and buildings that must be kept free and bare of vegetation. For example, herbicide application would be limited to an area within 1 m from the base of buildings. To reduce the potential for over-application, a highlight spray indicator is used to visually identify the area where the application has been made. This reduces the potential to spray over an area twice. To minimize the potential for offsite impacts, applications are not conducted within 30 m of a watercourse or when winds are sufficient to spread sprayed material. A certified applicator licensed by the province is used to ensure proper techniques are followed.

6.3.7.5 Gravel Requirements

All-weather roads and facilities requiring a surface to support all-weather traffic will normally be surfaced with a minimum of 15 cm of gravel. Little to no gravel resource has been identified in the Project Area. As a result, the gravel resources required for the development will be obtained outside of the Project area.


Page 6-45

The Project will require approximately 495 000 m3 of aggregate, comprising aggregate requirements for the CPF (117 000 m3), well pads (280 000 m3) and for access roads (77 000 m3). The conceptual gravel requirements for the Project are presented in Table 6.3-5. Devon will progressively salvage and reuse aggregate whenever practical. This could be achieved where a well pad is decommissioned and the aggregate is salvaged and moved to a well pad under construction.

Table 6.3-5: Pike 1 Estimate Gravel Requirements

Project Component Number Graveled Area Total (m3) CommentCPF 1 69 ha 117 100 Graveled in 3 phases CPF Access Road 1 1 010 m (10 m) 1 010 10 m @ 10 cm Production Pads 61 329 ha (.85) 279 990 85% of pad @ 10 cm Source Well Pads 9 8 ha (.85) 6 800 85% of pad @ 10 cm Disposal Well Pads 11 14 ha (.85) 12 155 85% of pad @ 10 cm Well Pad Access Roads -- 96 289 m (8 m) 77 031 8 m @ 10 cm

Total 494 086 Gravel will be transported by rail or by truck. Gravel source contractors will be required to outline procedures or guidelines in place to address noxious weeds as a component of a contract or scope of work. The Project development components that require gravel as well as the estimated volumes required are provided in the table below.

6.3.7.6 Borrow Pits

Construction of well pads, roadways and Project facilities will require large volumes of mineral borrow fill material. Borrow pits required to meet this need have been located to reduce overall impacts, and to optimize use of the fill material resource. During the life of the Project, fill from decommissioned pads will be removed and used to construct new pads, thus reducing development of new borrow pits. Borrow sites were located in proximity to well pads in well drained upland areas which are likely to yield usable material. Two sizes of borrow areas have been identified in the footprint. The 2.5 ha site represents the dimensions necessary to generate the volume of material to construct a production well pad (5.4 ha) with 1 m of fill. The well pad has been assumed to provide no in-place material that would offset fill requirements. The 2.8 ha site represents the size required to support construction of one well pad and 1 km of access road. Confirmation of borrow source locations will be finalized with further geotechnical investigation. When fill and gravel are removed from pads efforts will be made to reuse this material to support future or concurrent road and pad construction. As production operations progress, Devon will be constructing and reclaiming pads concurrently. Fill requirements for new pads will be offset with fill reclaimed from pads in wetland locations. When fill material is removed from a pad to be reclaimed it will be removed to a central location for drying, most likely an existing borrow pit. Once dried the material will be assessed for its reuse potential and where feasible, it will be reused to offset future borrow requirements and the footprint associated with borrow pits.


Page 6-46

Reclaimed borrow sites will be integrated into the regional drainage regime and are expected to be reclaimed as gently sloped uplands or wetlands, providing increased wildlife use potential and habitat diversity for the area. Reclamation will focus on restoring land capability and wetland values for these areas as an integral part of the program. 6.3.8 Reclamation Considerations The following sections present general reclamation considerations which will be implemented to assist and ensure reclamation targets and capabilities are achieved. 6.3.8.1 Reclamation of Compacted Areas Areas receiving gravel surface treatment, such as the working surface areas of access roads, central facilities and well pads, will all be subjected to significant load applications and traffic. These soils will become relatively compacted, compared to the soil density of undisturbed adjacent lands. After removing salvageable gravel, the sub-grade will be deep-ripped and re-graded prior to replacement of topsoil. These activities will help ensure that the soil densities of the former roadbed areas are not substantially different from the soil density of subsoil on nearby undisturbed lands. 6.3.8.2 Soil Replacement Plan The goal of the soil replacement plan is to reconstruct soils to an equivalent land capability that existed prior to disturbance. Reconstructed soil is a mixture capable of sustaining an initial erosion-controlling plant cover, and of supporting vegetation species found in adjacent forest communities. Thus, the replacement soil will provide:

• adequate moisture supply;

• adequate nutrient supply; and

• capability to support an erosion-resistant vegetative cover. Soil salvage and its placement on reclamation areas is designed to follow the guidelines provided in “Land Capability Classification for Forest Ecosystems in the Oil Sands Region” (CEMA 2006). Forest capability development is the primary consideration for soil reclamation. This focus is not expected to drastically alter soil salvage criteria, but it will assist in managing the appropriate placement of reclamation amendments. Estimates for soil replacement are conceptually based on an average replacement depth of 20 cm of reclamation material on all reclaimed upland sites. This replacement depth is consistent with the average of the baseline upland topsoil depths. The material balance presented below is based on the following assumptions; CPF and upland borrow sites will be returned to upland regardless of baseline conditions; lowland borrow will return to 50% marsh and 50% upland; access roads and ROW will be returned to baseline condition and all well pads will be returned to the baseline upland or lowland conditions. All subsoil salvaged from the Project footprint will be replaced, resulting in a neutral subsoil material balance over the Project footprint.


Page 6-47

The conceptual material balance is presented in Table 6.3-6. The conceptual material balance indicates an excess of reclamation material is estimated for the Project. This excess material is generally related to the salvage of deep peat from the CPF and lowland borrow sites. Where possible excess material will be returned to the upland reclamation sites to increase the overall topsoil replacement depth (>20 cm) and improve the overall capability of the reclaimed landscape. Detailed information within each facility PDA will provide site specific material balances and reclamation material handling plans in accordance with the soil salvage and replacement approaches described herein.

Table 6.3-6: Summary of Materials Balance for the Project

Reclamation Material1 Estimated Volume Available (BCM)

Estimated Volume Required (BCM) 2

Estimated Volume Excess 5

(BCM) Peat 3 1 693 740 151 363 1 542 377 Mineral Material 1 182 122 1 147 899 34 222 Total 2 875 862 1 299 262 1 576 599

Notes: 1 See notes to Table 6.3-4. 2 Assumes the replacement of 20 cm of reclamation material on all upland sites; the entire CPF area

(mineral and peat); and upland borrow sites 3 Estimated volume based on the salvage of deep peat from the CPF and borrow pits only. 4 Excess peat volume based on reclaiming 50% of the wetland borrow sites to uplands. Remainder of area

will be marsh with no soil replacement. 5 Conceptual estimate only based on available information. Refinement will occur through the PDA process.

A summary of predicted physical and chemical characteristics of reclaimed soils is outlined in Table 6.3-7.

Table 6.3-7: Physical and Chemical Characteristics of Reclaimed Soil Profiles

Reclaimed Soil Properties1

Land Capability Rating for Forestry Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 4-5

Texture (UL/LL)2 Si-SiL/Si-SiL SiL-SL/C-HC LS-S/LS-S peat/peat pH (UL/LL) 5-7/5-6.5 5-7/5-6.5 4.5-6/4.5-5.5 3.5-6/3.5-6

Structure (UL/LL) Loose-Friable/ Friable-Firm

Loose-Friable/ Friable-Firm

Loose-Friable/ Loose-Friable Peat

Salinity/Sodicity (UL/LL) Non-saline/Non-sodic

Non-saline/Non-sodic



Nutrient Regime Medium-rich Medium-rich Poor-very poor Poor

Drainage Class Well to moderately well

Well to moderately well Rapidly to well Poorly to very

poorly

Notes: 1 UL = Upper Lift; LL = Lower Lift. 2 Si = silt; SiL = silt loam; SL = sandy loam; C = clay; HC = heavy clay; LS = loamy sand; S = sand. Source: Golder Associates; Adapted from CEMA 2009.


Page 6-48

The overall soil replacement plan for the Project is outlined below:

• for the majority of well pads and other facilities constructed on shallow peat, salvaged peat will be used as reclamation material over reclaimed upland areas to enhance soil properties and promote vegetation establishment;

• for the central plant site, well pads and other facilities constructed on mineral soil, soil replacement will consist of the application of the salvaged subsoil, followed by replacement of surface soil (LFH, A horizon) previously salvaged and stored at the sites. Soil will be spread evenly across the ground surface and depth will be consistent with control points taken from around the facility;

• for the portions of access roads that were constructed on mineral soil, subsoil stored in the upper roadbed will be de-compacted as required and re-contoured as appropriate based on final target ecosite phases. Soil replacement will consist of all surface lift material (LFH, A horizon) that was windrowed within the road ROW;

• for the portions of access roads constructed on peatland, salvaged peat will be replaced over the disturbed areas. Additional mineral and peat material will be available from the removal of the culverts on the roads and any excess material from salvage in other areas. The mineral fill will be applied to the reclaimed roadbed on either side of the culvert. Any organic materials encountered will be used as surface reclamation material; and

• site-specific soil replacement for each facility will be based on the pre-disturbance site assessments of landform and soil features.

6.3.9 Facility-Specific Reclamation Plan

6.3.9.1 Central Facilities and Well Pads

The Project central facilities will be located within upland ecosite phases that will be reclaimed to upland ecosite phases. Areas of deep peat are identified within the CPF footprint and are expected to be salvaged as part of the CPF construction. Similarly, production well pads located in upland ecosite phases will be reclaimed to upland ecosite phases. Figure 6.3-11 and Figure 6.3-12 present conceptual reclamation cross sections for the CPF and upland well pads, respectively. For production well pads located within areas of peat, fill will be removed and used for development of subsequent well pads where feasible. The sites will be graded to a lowland marsh and reclaimed to target ecosite phases that are compatible with the moisture and soil nutrient regime of similar surrounding terrain. These areas will be assessed prior to reclamation to assign the specific planting prescription and end ecosite development goal. Species common to the ecosite phase will be planted. Figure 6.3-13 presents a conceptual reclamation cross section for well pads constructed in lowland areas.

Pike 1 Project

Conceptual Reclamation

Cross�Section � CPF

Figure

6.3�11

May 15, 2012

PROVIDED BY:

FINAL MAPPING BY:

Devon

AMEC

CE04050M01.dwg

Pike 1 Project


Cross Section

For Reclaimed Well Pads In Uplands

Figure

6.3�12

MAY 15, 2012

PROVIDED BY:

FINAL MAPPING BY:

AMEC

AMEC

CE04050M06.dwg

Pike 1 Project

Conceptual Reclamation Cross Section

For Reclaimed Well Pads In Lowlands

Figure

6.3�13

MAY 15, 2012

PROVIDED BY:

FINAL MAPPING BY:

AMEC

AMEC

CE04050M03.dwg


Page 6-52

Partial new upland habitat will be created on areas where fill materials remain from the construction of roads and the CPF. When and where practical, as part of progressive reclamation activities, the surface layer of gravel and fill materials will be recovered for re-use elsewhere on the site. Elevated areas will be reclaimed such that final contours will be similar to natural hummocks occurring in the area, in accordance with AEW’s well site reclamation criteria (AENV 2010).

6.3.9.2 Rights-of-Way

The reclamation of access roads will follow the requirements outlined in the publications Environmental Protection Guidelines for Roadways (AENV 2000b) and Environmental Protection Guidelines for Electric Transmission Lines (AEP 1995). Equipment will be removed from the ROW and the gravel will be removed from the road or covered with suitable subsoil materials. Salvaged reclamation material (mineral or peat) will be replaced on the disturbed areas following the amelioration of any subsoil compaction. Power supply lines and poles will be removed. Base structures supporting the poles or guy wires will be removed to a depth of 1.2 m and the area covered with suitable subsoil materials and reclamation material (mineral or peat). Reclamation of the roads will involve the removal of culverts. This activity will result in the creation of approximately 10 to 25 m wide depressions that will become lowland areas. Initially, small shallow open water areas may develop where the culverts have been removed. Cattails, bulrushes and sedge may initially invade these areas. Over time, however, as the moss layer re-establishes, fen plant species (e.g., sedge, willow, and black spruce) are expected to naturally encroach into these depressions. These depressions will also serve as natural drainage for the surrounding lowlands. Organic material excavated from the culvert locations will be placed on the adjacent road as reclamation material. The remaining road areas will be re-contoured into irregular shaped linear ridges and will be reclaimed towards achieving the planned target ecosite phase based on considerations of surrounding vegetation and the site’s drainage and soil characteristics. Figures 6.3-14 and 6.3-15 present a conceptual construction and reclamation cross section (in uplands and peatlands, respectively) for the proposed ROWs.

6.3.9.3 Observation Well Pads and Access

Observation wells will be installed on 50 x 80 m well pads (typical) in association with production well pads (approximately two observation wells per production well pad), to monitor the bitumen resource areas. Not all planned observation wells may be required, pending the resource recovery data obtained from the initial observation wells installed. Disturbance related to the construction of observation well pads and access trails involves clearing vegetation from these areas. Where possible, observation wells are located over existing OSE sites to minimize the requirement for any additional clearing. Soils and the root zone will be left intact as access to these areas is planned for winter-only.

Pike 1 Project

Conceptual Development And

Reclamation Cross�Section

For Access Roads In Uplands

Figure

6.3�14

MAY 15, 2012

PROVIDED BY:

FINAL MAPPING BY:

AMEC

AMEC

CE04050M04.dwg

Pike 1 Project

Conceptual Development And

Reclamation Cross�Section

For Access Roads In Lowlands

Figure

6.3�15

MAY 15, 2012

PROVIDED BY:

FINAL MAPPING BY:

AMEC

AMEC

CE04050M05.dwg


Page 6-55

Prior to reclamation of observation well pads, wells will be cut and capped 1.2 m below the ground surface and holes will be backfilled. Because the surface soils will not be disturbed, reclamation of these areas will employ a similar approach as that proposed for any future seismic and/or exploratory disturbances. Woody debris will be rolled back over the cleared areas. The disturbed areas are expected to re-vegetate naturally back to pre-disturbance conditions through the germination and growth of root propagules and surface seeds. These areas will be monitored and areas of erosional concern will be seeded to a cover crop or to an approved native seed mix. 6.3.9.4 Borrow Pits Landscape and dugout borrows can be reclaimed to upland ecosystems if they do not intercept the water table or receive substantial runoff. Upland borrow sites will be reclaimed to conditions and ecosites similar to the surrounding topography. In situations where water accumulates, development of a wetland (marsh) will be the preferred reclamation option. The intention is to contour such areas to include shallow shore area, mounds, islands and irregularity in wetland shape. This, along with natural revegetation or planting with emergent species is intended to develop a wetland system similar to marshes occurring in the area. With a predominance of peatland types of wetlands in the region, this conversion to shallow open water and marsh wetlands would result in an increase in this type of ecosystem relative to baseline, and therefore, also an increase in this habitat type for wildlife. Figures 6.3-16 and 6.3-17 present a conceptual construction and reclamation cross section for the proposed landscape and dugout borrow pits. 6.3.10 Revegetation Plan Devon will integrate the applicable findings of CEMA’s Reclamation Working Group in preparation of specific revegetation programs. The report prepared by the Reclamation Working Group, ‘Guidelines for Reclamation to Forest Vegetation in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region (CEMA 2009) forms the basis for future revegetation activities on reclaimed sites. The primary objective of Devon's revegetation program is to:

Establish a permanent, viable plant community at the start of reclamation which will be capable of developing into a self-sustaining cover of forest species suitable for commercial forestry, traditional land uses, wildlife use and with possibilities for recreation and other end uses.

The revegetation plan is intended to follow an ecosystem approach for establishment of a suitable cover type on each of the following developments:

• Project central facilities; • well pads (production, observation); • borrow pits; • roads; and • utility and pipeline corridors.

Pike 1 Project


Cross�Section � Landscape Borrow Pit

Figure

6.3�16

MAY 15, 2012

PROVIDED BY:

FINAL MAPPING BY:

AMEC

AMEC

CE04050M06.dwg

Pike 1 Project

Conceptual Reclaimed Cross�Section �

Dugout Borrow Pit

Figure

6.3�17

MAY 15, 2012

PROVIDED BY:

FINAL MAPPING BY:

AMEC

AMEC

CE04050M07.dwg


Page 6-58

As part of this reclamation program, Devon is committed to use a range of techniques to optimize tree growth along linear features, recognizing that there is considerable variation among ecosites for both natural and managed vegetation re-growth. Practices such as mounding, deep tillage, subsoiling, mixing, scarification, etc. will all be investigated for their effectiveness in promoting tree establishment and growth. Devon is actively engaged in a number of research programs and reclamation trials that will provide the data required to implement an effective reclamation program that benefits caribou across Devon’s operations. For example, Devon is currently measuring the recovery of vegetation structure, vegetation composition and wildlife (wolf and caribou) hiding cover on low impact seismic lines and well pads cut and constructed in the winter of 2003 to determine the influence of ecological site type on vegetation and hiding cover recovery, and to identify those ecosites most suitable for natural recovery versus those that might require active management (e.g., silvicultural or site preparation). Devon expects that small areas of open water wetlands may be created along reclaimed roadbeds following the removal of culverts and fill to facilitate surface drainage in low-lying and peatland areas. These areas are expected to re-vegetate naturally by encroachment of native species, potentially including cattails, sedges, rushes and other hydrophilic species. Agronomic species will not be used. Any sites that may have potential for erosion will be monitored, and the need for erosion prevention methods such as use of erosion mats and planting with hydrophilic species will be assessed on a site-specific basis. The edges of borrows reclaimed to upland vegetation will be planted with species appropriate in terms of the surrounding upland vegetation. Where borrows are reclaimed to marsh wetlands, the edges of the borrow area may be appropriate for either wetland or upland species, depending on the specific contours of the site and vegetation in surrounding areas. Upland areas in these situations will be planted and could include plantings in sloped transitional areas, as required, to reduce erosion potential. Shore and emergent areas are expected to re-vegetate from placement of sediment, muskeg or vegetative materials. Methods of re-vegetating borrows reclaimed to open marsh include natural recovery, planting and seeding, transplantation from donor wetlands, and introduction of sediment or muskeg material from donor wetlands to introduce species (Oil Sands Wetlands Working Group 2000). A variety of wetland vegetation species (e.g., reeds, rushes, sedges, shrubs) are expected to become established through the introduction of sediment or muskeg material. The need for transplantation of seedlings will be assessed near the time of reclamation, so that site-specific conditions can be taken into consideration. If seeding or transplantation methods are applied, natural encroachment of adjacent native species is also expected, further enhancing revegetation of the site.


Page 6-59

6.3.10.1 Revegetation Practices

Revegetation of reclaimed landform surfaces is dictated by the nature of landform morphology, slope, aspect, soil type, nutrient and moisture regime and soil drainage conditions. The types of vegetation communities that will successfully establish and develop under various combinations of these factors has been the subject of research and monitoring programs conducted over the last twenty-five years in the oil sands region. Establishment of woody plants in reclamation areas will be implemented in consultation with Al-Pac and other stakeholders. Selection of species and the proportion of each species in the supplemental planting mix are based on:

• woody stemmed species common to the targeted ecosite phases;

• existing field conditions;

• vegetation type or types desired for development on the site, based on end land use objectives and terrain features;

• expected growth of woody stemmed species from seeds and root fragments in the soil amendment layer; and

• success of establishing desired species of target ecosite phases in previous revegetation programs.

Development areas will be re-vegetated to ecosite phases (upland or wetland) following re-contouring, soil replacement and site preparation. Revegetation targets will ultimately be determined such that target ecosite phases will consider pre-disturbance vegetation types and will reflect ecosite phases in adjacent areas. Sites will be re-vegetated following final contouring and soil replacement. Reclamation targets will be confirmed and/or updated in consultation with ASRD and AEW. Prior to reclamation, the seed mix composition will be reviewed with ASRD to ensure recent seed mix recommendations appropriate for the area are incorporated. Devon currently uses an ASRD approved seed mixture that includes awned wheatgrass, hair wild rye, tufted hairgrass, rocky mountain fescue, fowl bluegrass, junegrass-coated; and ticklegrass. To stabilize slopes more susceptible to erosion Devon uses an ASRD approved fescue grass mix (50% creeping red fescue, 50% rocky mountain fescue). Plant species representative of the final reclamation ecosite phases will be planted at appropriate densities, as described in the CEMA guidelines (2009). An ASRD approved seed mix will be used in areas that require erosion control. Prior to completing reclamation activity Devon will update and confirm reclamation targets with ASRD and AEW and obtain input regarding the species for revegetation. Devon’s reclamation practices will be guided by relevant ongoing reclamation research, such as the “Removing the Wellsite Footprint” study (Osko and Glasgow 2010).


Page 6-60

Revegetation may incorporate some or all of the following approaches:

• topsoil and upper subsoil salvage and storage on well pads, to be replaced at reclamation. This material will enhance natural recovery of native grasses, forbs and woody species from seeds and viable vegetative propagules present in the native soil;

• application of an approved seed mix, typically comprising appropriate grass species, but potentially including forb species, if available;

• live staking of appropriate shrub species (e.g., willow) using stakes gathered from plants in adjacent or nearby vegetation communities with preference being from areas planned for future development;

• planting shrubs and/or trees obtained from a nursery, with preference given to nurseries closest to the Project that can provide the required inventory. Devon will also explore options for obtaining nursery stock of forbs, sedge and aquatic species, as appropriate, for use in reclaiming wetland areas; and

• transplanting native plants from similar vegetation communities, with preference being from areas planned for future development. This approach may be most applicable for reclamation efforts in wetland areas, and could include transplanting sedge plugs, peat sod, shrubs (in conjunction with or in place of live staking), and tree saplings.

• Devon will obtain a temporary field authority from ASRD as required prior to undertaking any proposed transplanting.

Along pipeline corridors, a natural recovery approach will be utilized. To enhance natural recovery, soil disturbance in these areas will be restricted to the ditch line for buried pipelines and to pile locations for aboveground pipelines. Revegetation will occur over time by encroachment of native vegetation from adjacent undisturbed areas into the ROW. It is expected that natural recovery by these processes will result in the regeneration of pre-existing vegetation types over the ROW. Given that pipeline construction will not appreciably alter the existing soils, slopes and drainage patterns, post-reclamation land capability within the ROW is expected to remain unchanged. Monitoring and maintenance will be undertaken as required to assess and facilitate long-term reclamation success.

6.3.10.2 Biodiversity Potential

Some areas disturbed by the Project will be reclaimed to a target ecosite phase including b3, c1 and d2. Other areas, such as drainage openings in reclaimed roadways and areas of exposed peat following fill removal on well pads in muskeg, may be reclaimed to a target ecosite of l1 or shallow open water wetland classes (e.g., ponds or marshes). These reclamation vegetation types have high to moderate biodiversity potential and will begin to mimic vegetation types that currently exist in the region. Because these reclaimed areas will be interspersed throughout the landscape, it is expected native plants and animals will use and colonize reclaimed sites and surrounding areas soon after reclamation.


Page 6-61

The integrity of fens and bogs in the area surrounding the Project will be maintained by facilitating continued surface drainage through culvert installation and by re-vegetating newly exposed upland soils with a an ASRD approved seed mix to control erosion. These measures will help to maintain the function and biodiversity of these areas.

6.3.10.3 Revegetation Procedures

Revegetation of disturbances will coincide with construction activities to the extent possible to limit the area of exposed soil at any one time. Temporary revegetation will be undertaken for soil stockpiles, exposed mineral soil, and ditches. These sites will be re-vegetated using the previously identified seed mixtures (Section 6.3.10.1). Seeding of these areas will be undertaken upon completion of construction to limit erosion. The revegetation of long-term disturbed areas will occur following reclamation material replacement as follows:

• an approved seed mix will be used to establish an initial vegetation cover for erosion control;

• tree and shrub species will be planted during the first year whenever possible; and • weed control will be undertaken as required. The process for establishing vegetation (ecosites) for different land use objectives will be used as a guide for determining the planting prescription. Table 6.3-8 outlines the planting prescription, which is adapted from Guidelines for Reclamation to Forest Vegetation in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region (CEMA 2009). The prescription was modified to accommodate a change from mining landscape features to those expected for an insitu operation. Where possible, when a roadway or cutline crosses an ecosite phase in an upland area, effectively cutting through an ecosite phase polygon, the disturbance will be re-vegetated to a similar ecosite phase as that which was disturbed. This will be implemented in an attempt to restore the continuity of the remaining undisturbed ecosystem. It is anticipated that not all target ecosites will be applied to the Project. The primary conceptual successional ecosites include the c1, d2, b3, g1, h1, and l1 ecosites. The planting prescriptions are presented in Table 6.3-8, and provide details only for the tree and shrub species associated with potential target ecosite phases. Adaptations of the presented prescriptions include:

• target ecosite phases indicated in Table 6.3-8 were equated with site types in CEMA (2009);

• substitute species from CEMA (2009) were used as a guide, but these were refined by examining the species composition of ecosite phases in Beckingham and Archibald (1996);

• the planting density of substitute species was approximated from the percentages of these species in the different ecosite phases as presented in Beckingham and Archibald (1996);

• higher rather than lower crown closure types in CEMA (2009) were assumed in the prescriptions; and

• under-storey species recommendations are presented in CEMA (2009) for target ecosites; this was refined by selecting those species corresponding to ecosite phases, according to Beckingham and Archibald (1996).


Page 6-62

Table 6.3-8: Planting Prescription by Ecosite Phases

Landscape Feature1 Soil Capability2 and Moisture Regime

Target Ecosite Phase3

Tree Species(Total Density of 1 800 to 2 000 Stems/ha)

Planting Density

(Minimum) (Stems/ha)

Planting Density (Maximum) (Stems/ha)

Substitute Species (Percentage of Total Planting Density)

Shrubs4

(Total Density of 500 to 700 Stems/ha)

Upland pads, roads, CPF, laydown area, borrow pits (sandy)

4, subxeric to xeric

a1-lichen -jack pine Jack Pine 1 400 2 000 n/a Bearberry

Upland pads, roads, CPF, laydown area, borrow pits

4-3, mesic to subxeric

b1-blueberry-jack pine-aspen

Jack Pine Aspen

800 600

1 500 1 000

White Spruce – up to 10% substitution for Jack Pine

Blueberry, Bog Cranberry


4-3, mesic to xeric

b2-blueberry-aspen-white birch

Aspen 2 500 5 000 White Birch -up to 20% substitution for Aspen

Blueberry, Bearberry, Green Alder


3-2, subxeric to mesic

b3-blueberry-aspen-white spruce

Aspen White Spruce

1 800 400

4 000 600

White Birch - up to 10% substitution for Aspen

Blueberry, Bearberry


3-2, subxeric to mesic

b4-blueberry-white spruce, jack pine

White Spruce Jack Pine

800 600

1 200 800

n/a Blueberry, Bearberry

Upland pads, roads, CPF, laydown area, borrow pits (sandy)

3, submesic to subhygric

c1-Labrador tea (mesic), jack pine-black spruce

Jack Pine Black Spruce

1 000 400

1 500 500

n/a Bog Cranberry


3-2, submesic to mesic

d1-low-bush cranberry, aspen

Aspen 2 500 5 000 Balsam Poplar-up to 10% substitution for Aspen

White Birch-up to 10% substitution for Aspen

Low-bush Cranberry, Green Alder, Rose, Beaked or Pussy Willow, Saskatoon, Pincherry


3-2, submesic to subhygric

d2-low-bush cranberry, aspen-white spruce

Aspen White Spruce

2 100 400

4 300 700

n/a Low-bush Cranberry, Pincherry, Rose, Buffalo Berry, Green Alder


3-2, mesic to subhygric

d3-low-bush cranberry-white spruce

White Spruce 1 400 2 000 n/a Low-bush Cranberry, Rose, Buffalo Berry, Green Alder, Currant



e1-dogwood, balsam poplar-aspen

Aspen Balsam Poplar

2 500 2 500

5 000 5 000

n/a Low-bush Cranberry, Dogwood, Rose, Currant, Wild Red Raspberry



e3-dogwood white spruce

White Spruce 2 500 5 000 n/a Dogwood, Rose, Green Alder, Currant, Low-bush Cranberry, Wild Red Raspberry


Page 6-63

Landscape Feature1 Soil Capability2 and Moisture Regime

Target Ecosite Phase3

Tree Species(Total Density of 1 800 to 2 000 Stems/ha)

Planting Density

(Minimum) (Stems/ha)

Planting Density (Maximum) (Stems/ha)

Substitute Species (Percentage of Total Planting Density)

Shrubs4

(Total Density of 500 to 700 Stems/ha)

Transitional Upland/Lowland pads, roads, CPF, laydown area, borrow pits


f1-horsetail, balsam poplar-aspen

Aspen Balsam Poplar

1 250 1 250

2 500 2 500

White Birch- up to 10% substitution for Aspen and Poplar

Beaked or Pussy Willow, Rose, Green Alder or River Alder, Low-bush Cranberry



f3-white spruce White Spruce 2 500 5000 n/a Low-bush Cranberry, Rose, Currant, Beaked or Pussy Willow


4-3, subhygric to hygric

g1-Labrador tea-jack pine-black spruce

Black Spruce Jack Pine

900 500

1 800 1 000

n/a n/a


4-3, subhygric to hygric

h1-Labrador tea/horsetail- white spruce-black spruce

White Spruce Black Spruce

600 800

1 100 1 300

n/a Bog Cranberry, Beaked or Pussy Willow, Rose, Labrador Tea

Former culverts and drainage gaps in roads

5, subhydric to hydric

l-marsh n/a n/a Willow spp.

Notes: 1 Pads include well pads, observation wells; lay down area, source wells and disposal wells. 2 Soil capability for forestry according to CEMA (2006). 3 Ecosites according to Beckingham and Archibald (1996). 4 At a late successional phase (i.e., crown closure at 40% or greater) should have a small percentage of balsam fir as part of the under storey. Adapted from CEMA (2009).


Page 6-64

6.4 Reclamation Monitoring Program

The standard AEW oil sands approval requirements will form the basis of Devon’s reclamation planning. These requirements include, but are not limited to, an approved AEW Reclamation Monitoring Plan, approved Revegetation Plan and regular reporting of footprint status in the Annual C&R report. Monitoring sites to assess reclamation success will include an analysis and evaluation of soils, vegetation and wildlife suitability. The information generated through these assessments will determine if adaptive management in reclamation techniques is required.

6.4.1 Objectives

The objectives of the reclamation monitoring program are to evaluate the success of reclamation measures and to adjust or modify those measures where necessary and will include assessments of the following:

• erosion control and slope stability;

• revegetation and sustainability of disturbed areas;

• achievement of desired reclamation targets (e.g., ecosite phase);

• weed control; and

• re-establishment and use of wildlife habitat. Each reclaimed area will be inspected after the first growing season following revegetation. The inspection will be used to gauge the success of reclamation and to evaluate the initial establishment of the target ecosite phases and wetlands classes. Subsequent inspections will be undertaken to monitor the establishment of the vegetative cover, as well as to identify requirements for followup remedial and/or maintenance activities. Once active reclamation is complete and vegetation has been re-established, progress towards maturation of ecosystems will be monitored and evaluated by the reclamation monitoring program, to provide the basis for reclamation certification.

6.4.2 Criteria

The 2010 Reclamation Criteria for Well sites and Associated Facilities for Forested Lands (AENV 2010) provide a basis for the reclamation monitoring program. These criteria specify the primary goal of reclamation as being the return of a disturbed land “to a state of equivalent capability… defined as the condition in which ecosystem processes are functioning in a manner that will support the production of ecosystem goods and services consistent in quality and quantity as present prior to disturbance.” The certification criteria describe the allowable changes in site conditions from the pre-disturbance conditions and typically require an assessment of terrain, soil and vegetation conditions. These forested lands criteria (AENV 2010) are generally applicable to the types of disturbances associated with the Project.


Page 6-65

6.4.3 Approach

The pre-disturbance vegetation mapping and field sampling programs conducted for the development areas will be used as a reference to compare reclamation success and to assess reclamation progress. The monitoring program will consist of site inspections of reclaimed areas to assess soil properties, soil stability and erosion controls, vegetation types, vegetative establishment, and wildlife use. Reclaimed areas will be monitored to assess soil stability, soil quality and the status of herbaceous vegetation growth, including dominant species composition. Monitoring of soil and vegetation will be accomplished by means of permanent plots established on reclaimed areas in the year of reclamation. The location of the plots will be such that they represent the reclaimed area, and this will be determined through site inspection of each reclaimed area and by review of aerial photographs and site maps. At each location, permanent plots will be established to cover the range of variability within the reclaimed site. These plots will be inspected to collect data for input into a reclamation database and evaluation of reclamation effectiveness within the reclaimed areas. A description of the proposed monitoring programs for vegetation, soils, wildlife and biodiversity is provided in the following sections.

6.4.4 Soil Monitoring

6.4.4.1 Rationale

A primary objective of reclamation for the Project is to ultimately produce plant communities that are compatible with their surroundings by grading reclaimed areas to terrain that blends with surrounding areas and by using native species in revegetation. Reclamation activities will attempt to return disturbed lands to an equivalent land capability, though individual land use will not necessarily be identical to pre-disturbance conditions. The types of land use in the TLSA before and after development will be essentially the same. The dominant land uses currently include small-scale commercial forest production, wildlife production and recreational opportunities. Reclamation activities undertaken to restore equivalent land capability include recontouring to restore natural drainage, replacement of salvaged subsoil and topsoil and the re-vegetating disturbed areas with species compatible with the end land use. The monitoring program for soil and terrain has been designed to demonstrate the return of land capability based on soil and terrain features. It is consistent with the requirements for monitoring listed in the 2010 Reclamation Criteria for Wellsites and Associated Facilities for Forested Lands (AENV 2010) and provides soil and vegetation information that will ultimately be required to obtain reclamation certification. It also includes measures to monitor the site for soil and terrain stability and for invasive species, particularly during the initial years following reclamation.


Page 6-66

6.4.4.2 Monitoring Protocol

The soil monitoring program comprises three types of soil monitoring on reclaimed sites:

• annual observations of all reclaimed facilities;

• a landscape assessment of reclaimed facilities; and

• soil inspection and sampling over reclaimed facilities. Soil and slope stability monitoring of reclaimed sites will be undertaken in conjunction with the vegetation assessment, using a combination of site observations and systematic monitoring plots. Monitoring will include early annual assessments of soil stability to identify erosional issues, in conjunction with annual vegetation assessments described in Section 6.4.5. The performance of reconstructed soils is a key element of erosion control and ecosystem sustainability. Devon will monitor the sustainability of reclaimed soils to support vegetation growth by comparing soil physical and chemical parameters against reference soils (pre-disturbance conditions).

6.4.4.3 Annual Observations

Annual observations will be carried out after site reclamation to ensure that surfaces are stable and drainage is controlled. It is anticipated that this program will normally be conducted in conjunction with the revegetation monitoring program for either the first five years after permanent reclamation or until reclamation certificate is received for the site, whichever occurs first. It consists of a visual assessment of reclaimed sites to identify areas of erosion or impeded drainage. If during this period there is a need to repair areas subject to erosion or slumping, monitoring may be extended until these areas are stabilized.

6.4.4.4 Landscape Assessment

The landscape assessment will be completed at each reclaimed facility according to the criteria outlined in AENV (2010). The criteria require that reclaimed sites demonstrate surface and near surface drainage patterns that are consistent with the surrounding landscape and that landscape characteristics are suitable to support the end land use. Documentation of landscape characteristics including drainage, erosion, contour, terrain stability, surface stoniness and debris will be made in conjunction with the soil survey. At each reclaimed and control soil inspection point, slope position, slope (%), aspect, drainage class, and depth, presence, type and severity of rooting restrictions will be documented. Water permeability and soil aeration restriction indicators will be noted in addition to root restrictions due to high water table (i.e., poor to very poor drainage).

6.4.4.5 Soil Assessment

One soil inspection and sampling event is proposed for each reclaimed site to demonstrate that soils have been replaced to an appropriate depth and measures have been taken to restore soil capability. This program is intended to target all facilities with the exception of well pads constructed over peat deposits greater than 40 cm (Typic or deep Terric Organic soils). Because


Page 6-67

facilities in these areas are built up over the peat to provide foundational stability, minimal topsoil will be available for salvage and ultimately, for reclamation. Available best practices will be implemented to reclaim these sites to an appropriate upland target ecosite phase. The assessment density and level of detail applied in evaluating each reclaimed facility and its representative controls are based on the AENV (2010) and the Guide for Oil Production Sites (AEP 1994b). Locations where topsoil has not been disturbed will not require a soil assessment. Soil inspection and sampling sites will generally be distributed based on a 40 m x 40 m grid for non-linear facilities (e.g., well pads, borrow areas) over the portion of the site where the surface soil was disturbed prior to development. A minimum of 4 inspections will also be undertaken in adjacent areas representative of pre-disturbance conditions (i.e., control or reference points). Along linear disturbances (i.e., access roads), inspections will be conducted at 100 m intervals on the reclaimed road and in the adjacent undisturbed lands. For facilities larger than 120 m x 120 m or with high terrain variability, additional inspection and control locations will be incorporated as specified in AENV (2010). At sites where adjacent controls are not representative of the pre-disturbance terrain conditions, control points may be established at nearby locations that are representative of the pre-existing terrain. Composite samples of the surface soil and subsoil will be collected after the first growing season within each plot and assessed for parameters to allow for calculation of the soil’s forest capability rating. Parameters may include:

• texture;

• structure;

• bulk density;

• saturation percentage;

• pH;

• salinity (as indicated by electrical conductivity and sodium adsorption ratio);

• cation exchange capacity;

• macronutrient levels;

• soluble ions; and

• organic carbon. This monitoring information will be used for evaluating the reclamation techniques and measures used for various sites and for variable moisture conditions to achieve target ecosite phases. Reclaimed soil profiles will be assigned three principle soil ‘horizons’: topsoil (0 to 20 cm), upper subsoil (20 to 50 cm), and lower subsoil (50 to 100 cm), based on the assessment requirements outlined in Land Capability Classification for Forest Ecosystems in the Oilsands (CEMA 2006). Reclamation success will be evaluated based on the similarity of the properties of the reconstructed soil layers within the upper 50 cm (rooting zone) of soil to the control soils. Soil


Page 6-68

samples will be collected for laboratory analysis from each of the principle soil layers at a minimum of four reclaimed inspection locations and at four control locations for pads and a minimum of one inspection and one control location for access roads. These samples will be stored in plastic bags until shipment to the laboratory for processing and analysis. Each layer will be analyzed for pH, sodium adsorption ratio and electrical conductivity. Total organic carbon content and total nitrogen will be determined in the topsoil layer only. Particle size analysis will be completed on a subset of the samples collected (approximately 10%) to confirm the soil textures identified in the field. Horizonation, texture, structure and soil consistency will be observed and recorded at each of the inspection locations. The topsoil (0 to 20 cm) and upper subsoil (20 to 50 cm) layers will also be assessed for degree of compaction and coarse fragment content.

6.4.4.6 Data Analysis

Data collected from the soil inspection and sampling program will be analyzed to compare the reclaimed area to the adjacent offsite controls to ensure that the area has been reclaimed to the standards listed in AENV (2010) and AEP (1994b). For both the topsoil and subsoil, measurements will be used to confirm that coarse fragment content and the degree of compaction are comparable to conditions in the adjacent undisturbed controls. The more detailed observations on the three soil layers to a depth of 100 cm will be used to compare the forest capability of the reclaimed lands to the surroundings based on the techniques described in AENV (2010) and AENV (2006).

6.4.5 Revegetation Monitoring

6.4.5.1 Rationale

Re-vegetated areas will be monitored following reclamation to ensure that the areas are developing into self-sustaining plant communities compatible with the end land use. For most reclaimed areas the end land use will include a potential for small-scale commercial forest production and the monitoring program has been designed to demonstrate establishment of capability for this end land use. The monitoring program for vegetation has been designed in accordance with the requirements of AENV (2010) and AEP (1994b). Information will be used to assess revegetation success and will ultimately be required for reclamation certification. The reclamation monitoring program will include an annual inspection program to assess revegetation success on each of the reclaimed areas within each stage of the Project. The program will include a routine maintenance component to address, where necessary, site erosion repair and control as well as supplemental seeding and fertilizing of reclaimed sites. Noxious weeds will also be identified during this annual inspection and removed. The monitoring program will include the disturbed lands and margins within the Devon leases. Annual


Page 6-69

monitoring would be undertaken for at least the first two years after initial reclamation, until vegetation has fully established (e.g., at least 80% ground cover), soils have stabilized and no further annual maintenance is required.


Revegetation monitoring will comprise a herbaceous vegetation establishment survey and a woody vegetation establishment survey. The Project revegetation plan calls for establishment of an initial herbaceous cover to stabilize reclaimed areas, followed by planting of woody species, likely within the following year. When possible, the herbaceous and woody species establishment surveys will be conducted concurrently. The herbaceous vegetation establishment survey will be conducted either annually for the first five years after permanent reclamation (revegetation) or until a reclamation certificate is received for the site, whichever occurs first. This survey will be used to verify that vegetation cover is developing at an acceptable rate to control erosion. If it is necessary to implement measures to enhance vegetation cover (e.g., seeding) at a particular facility, the monitoring period will be extended until these areas are well vegetated (e.g., minimum 40% cover). Vegetation percent cover (by species) will be recorded along permanent linear transects established in representative locations one year after reclamation. Data will be collected at nested plots at regular intervals along transects. Each site will include a treatment transect and a control transect of the same length. Litter depths and areas of vegetation stress, including excessive wildlife browse, drought, disease or other factors will be recorded at each site. Transects will be placed at a density of approximately 1 per 2 ha (e.g., 2 per well pad and 1 per 800 m of access road). A woody vegetation establishment survey will be conducted after woody species planted on reclaimed areas have had an opportunity to establish. It is anticipated that this survey would be carried out approximately five years after tree planting; however, this time period may be adjusted based on site-specific conditions including seedling survival rates and observations of seedling health. Information will be used to verify that the reforested sites are progressing towards a forested end land use. Inspection sites will generally be distributed based on an approximate 40 m by 40 m grid spacing. Each sampling unit will consist of a circular plot with a 1.78 m radius totaling 10 m2. At each site the dominant desirable woody species will be identified, and average height, percent canopy cover, woody stem count and plant count, and branch leader growth measurement will be recorded. The dominant desirable herbaceous species, their percent canopy cover and total canopy cover for all desirable species will be recorded at the same time, along with any invasive species identified.

6.4.5.3 Data Analysis

Data on vegetation establishment, species composition and cover, tree productivity and volume of coarse woody debris will be collected from within each assessment plot. Species composition and percent cover measurements will be recorded for herbaceous and woody stem species to estimate vegetation density by species and by strata (i.e., grasses, forbs, low shrubs, tall shrubs


Page 6-70

and trees). Out-planted trees and shrubs will be tagged and their heights and mortality recorded for calculation of site indices. Photographic records will be taken from fixed photo stations to provide a vegetative succession progress record. This monitoring would be conducted one full growing season following initial reclamation and as required thereafter, likely in conjunction with the soils and wildlife monitoring activities. Monitoring will be conducted for all reclamation areas. The initial focus of monitoring will be the reclaimed buried pipeline areas and the reclaimed areas along road ditches and around well pad areas. Data collected during the annual surveys of herbaceous vegetation cover will be analyzed to determine if the plant community is providing an acceptable cover to control erosion (minimum 40% cover for certification) and whether the appropriate species are developing. This information will help to determine the need for additional maintenance (e.g., fertilizer, over-seeding areas of poor catch, weed control). Results of the woody species establishment survey will be analyzed to compare the reclaimed area to the adjacent offsite controls to ensure that the area has been reclaimed to satisfy reclamation certification criteria.

6.4.6 Wildlife Methodology

6.4.6.1 Rationale

Devon will include a wildlife monitoring program as a component of its operation and reclamation activities. Monitoring wildlife use of both natural and reclaimed areas will provide information on the success of re-establishing wildlife habitat. Previous experience has shown that wildlife will begin using the reclaimed area as soon as herbaceous vegetation cover has established. The diversity of wildlife use tends to increase over time as the vegetation cover increases and both shrub and tree species naturally colonize the area. Given the sequential nature of the reclamation schedule, a variety of successional stages of reclaimed sites will develop over the life of the Project. Monitoring of wildlife species representative of the various stages of reclaimed sites will indicate the degree to which reclaimed areas are developing into productive ecosystems. Each stage of habitat development and wildlife use will be compared to reference ecosite phases and wetlands, or natural habitat conditions adjacent to the reclaimed area.


Monitoring the use of reclamation areas by wildlife species will primarily be accomplished by using an observational approach, in which operators and personnel working onsite in general, but particularly on reclamation areas, will report wildlife sightings. A standard form will be available onsite to record observations in a consistent manner. Given the potential for Woodland Caribou to use the area, particular emphasis will be placed on recording observations made by operators, while at the plant site or while traveling to and from the site.


Page 6-71

A systematic approach to evaluate the use of reclamation areas by wildlife through ungulate browse, pellet count and track surveys will be developed in conjunction with the revegetation monitoring program as required. However, wildlife monitoring will not be initiated in the year of reclamation, but may begin after some herbaceous vegetation has established at the reclaimed sites (e.g., at least two full growing seasons following revegetation). This survey program may be further developed over time to include assessments of the presence of wildlife species on different types of available reclamation areas (e.g., seismic areas and borrow pit areas). The wildlife monitoring sites will be identified in conjunction with the vegetation monitoring program, but may also extend to include adjacent sites and non-disturbed areas to serve as reference or control sites. Initially, the wildlife monitoring program will largely be confined to observational recordings and incidental information on general wildlife use of the area. Monitoring sites will be added as the areas included in the reclamation program expand.

6.4.7 Biodiversity Monitoring

Monitoring for biodiversity will be the combined results of the soils, vegetation and wildlife monitoring programs. Soils, vegetation, terrain, and wildlife are all components that affect the return of the pre-development biodiversity to the reclaimed lands.

6.4.7.1 Rationale

The suitability of reclaimed and naturally recovering sites for wildlife is dependent in large part on the degree to which these sites return to naturally occurring vegetation structure and composition. Wildlife species in the region are many and varied and each species favours particular vegetation community types and stages in the natural succession sequence. The goal of reclamation for wildlife is to place disturbed sites on a trajectory that results in a naturally occurring sequence of vegetation stages. Wildlife monitoring will be conducted in accordance with Devon’s Wildlife and Biodiversity Plans (Devon 2009). Devon’s approach to wildlife habitat enhancement will be to introduce various enhancement techniques on a trial basis in selected reclamation areas and monitor their success. If techniques prove to be successful, their use will be expanded as appropriate during on-going reclamation activities. Examples of focused wildlife habitat enhancement include creation of snags and nest boxes, coarse woody debris enhancement, and construction of rock and brush piles. Monitoring for wildlife will compare wildlife structural and compositional attributes over time using a paired sampling design with sampling controls and treatments.


Wildlife habitat attributes will be measured at the same paired sampling sites used for vegetation sampling. Selection of treatment sites will be stratified by site type (ecosite phase), age since disturbance and reclamation/recovery treatment type (e.g., planting, seeding, natural recovery). Adjacent control transects will be located in the same Ecosite Phase as the treatment transect and no more than 50 m from the edge of the disturbance. Wildlife habitat attribute data


Page 6-72

collected along permanent established transects will include (but not be limited to): downed woody debris, horizontal foliar cover (hiding cover), snags, percent cover and heights of each major vegetation layer (i.e., lichens, forbs, low and tall shrubs, ericaceous shrubs), litter cover and depth, bare soil cover, sphagnum vs. feathermoss cover (measure of water table change), standing water, grass vs. sedge. Wildlife monitoring will include a baseline survey concurrent with the first soils/vegetation survey, and subsequent monitoring will track the establishment of habitat attributes.

6.4.7.3 Data Analysis The sampling protocol is designed to allow for quantitative, scientifically rigorous analysis. The analysis will address differences between sites and between years. Species abundance and diversity on reclamation sites will be compared to other habitat types in the region. The analysis will yield information regarding how site and spatial factors, such as degree and size of disturbance and surrounding habitats may affect reclamation success. The analysis will also be used to describe changes in habitat use and/or effectiveness over time, as sites mature through successional vegetation stages. And finally, the program will yield information regarding how reclaimed habitats contribute to the overall wildlife community in the region.

6.5 Conclusion The C&R Plan for the Project outlines the vision, goals, approach and detailed plans for reclaiming areas disturbed through the life of this Project. Devon has provided an overview of the development and reclamation aspects of this Project including:

• Project activities and schedule; • restoration of land capability; • surface drainage; • soil salvage and replacement; • revegetation plan; • decommissioning and abandonment; and • reclamation monitoring and reporting. The information contained in the C&R plan has been prepared to satisfy the requirements outlined in the Project terms of reference. Based on the objectives, approaches and plans contained herein, Devon requests approval for the C&R plan.

6.6 References Alberta Environment (AENV). 1999. Regional Sustainable Development Strategy for the

Athabasca Oil Sands Area. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2000a. Borrow Excavations. C&R/IL/00-3. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2000b. Environmental Protection Guidelines for Roadways. C&R/IL/00-5. Edmonton, AB.


Page 6-73

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2000c. Code of Practice for Pipelines and Telecommunication Lines Crossing a Waterbody. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2000d. Code of Practice for Watercourse Crossings. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2002. Environmental Protection Guidelines for Oil Production Sites – Revised January 2002. C&R/IL/02-1. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2003. Revegetation Using Native Plant Materials: Guidelines for Industrial Development Sites. R&R/03-03. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2004. A Guide to the Code of Practice for Pits. Alberta Environment, Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2005. Code of Practice for Exploration Operations. Province of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2008. Soil Monitoring Directive. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2009a. Notice of Changes to Alberta Environment’s Pre-Disturbance Assessment Administration Process. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2009b. Guidelines for Submission of a Pre-Disturbance Assessment and Conservation and Reclamation Plan (PDA/C&R Plan). Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2010. 2010 Reclamation Criteria for Wellsites and Associated Facilities for Forested Lands. Alberta Environment, Edmonton, Alberta.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2011. Guidelines for Submission of an Annual Conservation and Reclamation Report (Annual C&R Report). Alberta Environment, Edmonton, Alberta.

Alberta Environmental Protection (AEP). 1994a. Environmental Protection Guidelines for Pipelines. C&R/IL/94-5. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environmental Protection (AEP). 1994b. Guide for Oil Production Sites: Pursuant to the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environmental Protection (AEP). 1995. Environmental protection guidelines for electric transmission lines. C&R/IL/95-2. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environmental Protection (AEP). 1996a. Conservation and Reclamation Regulation. Alberta Regulation 115/93, Alberta Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environmental Protection (AEP). 1996b. Guideline for Monitoring and Management of Soil Contamination under EPEA Approvals (Environmental Regulatory Service). Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environmental Protection (AEP). 1996c. Environmental Protection Guidelines for Pits. C&R/IL/96-5. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environmental Protection (AEP). 1996d. Fort McMurray-Athabasca oil sands subregional integrated resource plan. Edmonton, AB.


Page 6-74

Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council (ALC&R Council). 1991. Guidelines for the Preparation of Applications and Reports for Coal and Oil Sands Operations. Section 9 – Guidelines for development and reclamation applications for in-situ oil sands schemes. Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council, Edmonton, AB. 244 pp.

Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD). 2001. Weed Management in Forestry Operations - Land and Forest Directive 2001-06. Land and Forest Division. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD). 2009. SD 2009-01: Management of Wood Chips on Public Land. Lands Division. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD). 2010. SD 2010-02: Progressive Reclamation and Interim Cleanup. Lands Division. Edmonton, AB.

Beckingham, John D. and J.H. Archibald. 1996. Field Guide to Ecosites of Northern Alberta. 1996. Canadian Forest Service, Northwest Region, Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, AB.

Circle T Consulting. 2010. Gap Analysis of Wetland Reclamation Knowledge And Practices In Northern Alberta. Prepared for the Cumulative Environmental Management Association.

Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA). 2006. Land Capability Classification for Forest Ecosystems in the Oil Sands. Volume 1: Field manual for land capability determination, 3rd edition. Alberta Environment. Edmonton, AB.

Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA). 2009. Guidelines for Reclamation to Forest Vegetation in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region, 2nd Edition. Terrestrial Subgroup. Fort McMurray, AB.

Devon Canada Corporation. 2009. Wildlife & Biodiversity Mitigation & Monitoring Plans: Jackfish 2 In-Situ Project.

Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB). 1996. Oilfield Waste Management Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry. Directive 58. Calgary, AB.

Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB). 2001. Storage Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry. Directive 55. Calgary, AB.

Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB). 2012. Drilling Waste Management. Directive 50. Calgary, AB.

Government of Alberta. 2008. Weed Control Act and Weed Control Regulation. Chapter W-5.1. Edmonton, Alberta. Available at website: www.qp.alberta.ca.

Government of Alberta. 2010. Weed Control Regulation. Alberta Regulation 19/2010. Edmonton, Alberta. Available at website: www.qp.alberta.ca.

Oil Sands Wetlands Working Group (OSWWG). 2000. Guideline for Wetland Establishment on Reclaimed Oil Sands Leases. Neil Chymko (editor). Report No. ESD/LM/00-1. ISBN 0-7785-1042-5. Fort McMurray, AB.