January 2015

QUILL LAKES

Flood Mitigation Assessment

Submitted to: Water Security Agency 400-111 Fairford Street East Moose Jaw, SK S6H 7X9

Report Number: 1412194/1000 Rev.1 Distribution:

REPORT 1 Copy: Electronic File Format

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Executive Summary

The Quill Lakes are near-terminal water bodies in a semi-closed drainage basin. Although the Quill Lakes have likely had natural outflows to Last Mountain Lake in the past, there have not been recorded outflows since observations began during the 1880’s. This situation may change due to the recent wet period. The Quill Lakes are currently at record high water levels and are nearing the natural spill elevation. Overall, the combined lake area of about 730 square kilometres represents a significant volume of water with relatively high concentrations of dissolved solids which are currently about 10,000 milligrams per litre. The lake is threatening transportation corridors along Grid Road 640, Highway 16, Highway 6, and a CP railway line. Highway 35 is at a somewhat higher elevation but may in time also be threatened.

Key elevations are listed below:  521.47 metres (above sea level) is the natural drainage boundary after which Quill Lakes starts to spill towards Last Mountain Lake;  520.8 metres CP railway line elevation, based on available light detection and ranging topography (expected to be accurate within 0.1 metre);  520.74 metres Highway 6 minimum elevation of the road shoulder, after which waves likely overtop the highway and erode the shoulder;  520.23 metres current water level of Big Quill Lake (September 2014); and  520.14 metres Highway 6 sub-grade freeboard requirement level. Quill Lakes may overtop Highway 6 as soon as the spring of 2015, assuming that the current wet cycle continues. There is about a 20 percent likelihood of overtopping in 2015, and 25 percent within 2 years. As the Quill Lakes continue to rise, natural outflows toward Last Mountain Lake could begin as soon as 2 years from now, though estimates indicate that this has less than a 5 percent chance of occurring, because it would require the wettest year in the current cycle (i.e., 2014) to be repeated for another 2 years in a row. The natural outflows are more likely over a longer time frame, again dependent on the prevailing wet cycle. There is likely a 30 percent chance of natural outflows toward Last Mountain Lake in the next 5 years. These estimates are based on an analysis of the current wet cycle starting in 2005, assuming that this wet cycle is the new climate normal in the foreseeable future. The magnitude and frequency of subsequent outflows will be contingent on how long the wet conditions persist. A return to a drier climate cycle would result in lower Quill Lake levels.

The potential future water levels were based on a water balance analysis to simulate water storage and inflows/outflows to Quill Lakes using historical data. The water balance model was calibrated to match the historical water levels using pro-rated inflows from existing streamflow monitoring stations, surveyed topography and bathymetry as the basis for the lake stage-storage-area curves, plus measured precipitation and published evaporation rates. Several options were considered and evaluated for reducing the lake level. These options were defined in the Terms of Reference provided by the Saskatchewan Water Security Agency, and further refined as part of this study. Design concepts were developed in terms of locations, alignments, and quantities from available topographic information. The sizing basis and expected performance of these options were based on water balance model analysis, using a model that was developed as part of this work. The expected cost of each option was estimated roughly based on typical unit rates selected from Saskatchewan bid trend

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 i

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

reports available in Saskatchewan, plus 30 percent contingency. All costs are approximate and should be refined during the detailed design phase of work.

The options consist of the following:  Option 1: Natural Spills  Option 1a: Allow Quill Lakes to fluctuate naturally and outflow to Last Mountain Lake, potentially resulting in 18 million cubic metres per year of water volume conveyed along the natural lake outlet after Big Quill Lake starts to spill out. Relatively high concentrations of dissolved solids are expected to be discharged from Quill Lakes to Last Mountain Lake. The Quill Lakes outflow is expected have about 7,000 milligrams per litre total dissolved solids compared to the Last Mountain Lake natural concentration of 1,400 milligrams per litre. The additional total dissolved solids is equivalent to an increase of 70 milligrams per litre per year total dissolved solids at Last Mountain Lake. The expected cost of this option is $79 million in forced infrastructure improvements to highways and the CP railway line. If wet conditions persist once the natural spill elevation is achieved, water levels could rise as high as 522.2 metres and result in intermittent outlfows to Last Mountain Lake.

 Option 1b: The construction of a containment dam to hold back outflows would prevent downstream releases of high total dissolved solids water. Blocking outflows from the lake could result in an additional 0.15 m in water level above the level in Option 1a and may result in an additional $12 million in capital costs.  Option 2: Tributary Diversions  Divert tributary inflows away from Quill Lakes to reduce the long-term lake level. The diversion channels would direct (fresh) water to the Red Deer River or to Last Mountain Lake, while continuing to store high total dissolved solids water in Quill Lakes. There are several diversion configurations that could be considered. The arrangement of diversions that avoids further water level increases is to divert: Ponass Lake to the Red Deer River, and Ironspring Creek (via Lanigan Creek) plus Kutawagan Creek (via Saline Creek) to Last Mountain Lake. The assessment did not include a detailed evaluation of potential downstream erosion due to higher flow in Lanigan Creek or Saline Creek. The estimated capital cost of the diversion options ranges from $12 million to $163 million.  Option 3: Construct a Lake Outlet  The option to construct a lake outlet would reduce the risk of overtopping Highway 6 and would further stabilize the lake level near the current elevation. The cost of constructing a drainage outlet for Quill Lake is expected to be about $48 million. This option likely releases an average of 95 million cubic metres per year of high total dissolved solids water to Last Mountain Lake. The total dissolved solids of Quill Lakes releases are likely 10,000 milligrams per litre, equivalent to an increase of 530 milligrams per litre per year total dissolved solids at Last Mountain Lake. The length of the outlet channel is about 30 kilometres. This option would also require a grade raise along Highway 6 and the CP railway line.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 ii

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

 Option 4: Decommission Agricultural Drainage Works  Agricultural drains have been constructed over the years throughout the watershed. These drains are expected to increase the local runoff to Quill Lakes and result in slightly higher water level. A preliminary assessment of the potential water level rise due to agricultural drains estimated that the drains result in about 0.01 metre rise per year during wet years (+/- 50 percent). The drains have therefore caused an increase of about 0.1 metre during the recent wet period and are not a significant cause of the recent high water. Potential decommissioning of the drains was not considered further.

Overall, the assessment describes flood mitigation options that result in the following choices:  Allow the lake to continue rising as per the prevailing climate and construct grade raises along Grid Road 640, Highway 6, Highway 16, Highway 35, and the CP railway line. This “status quo” option is expected to cost about $79 million. The grade raise for Highway 6 and the CP railway line could occur before summer 2015 but the timeline is dependent on level of acceptable risk.  Allow the lake to continue rising as per the prevailing climate, obstruct outflow from Big Quill Lake and construct grade raises along Grid Road 640, Highway 6, Highway 16, Highway 35, and the CP railway line. This “status quo” option is expected to cost about $85 million. The grade raise for Highway 6 and the CP railway line could occur before summer 2015 but the timeline is dependent on level of acceptable risk.  Divert tributary inflows to prevent further lake level rises, expected to have construction related capital costs of up to $163 million. This option would require about 150 kilometres of new diversion channels to be constructed prior to spring 2015 to avoid forced grade raises along Highway 6 and the CP railway line. It is likely more feasible to construct the tributary diversions over a period of 2 or 3 years, and to accept a grade raise requirement in 2015.  Construct a shallow lake outlet and implement grade raises along Highway 6 and the CP railway line. This option is expected to cost about $48 million but result in relatively poor Last Mountain Lake water chemistry. This water will eventually be discharged to the Qu’Appelle River. A detailed environmental assessment has not been completed.

The decision to select one or more of these options will need to be made by the Government of Saskatchewan and local stakeholders, based on perceived long-term risk. The presented options are expected to be feasible, but subject to additional constructability assessments and detailed design.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 iii

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1

1.1 Background...... 1

1.2 Scope of Work ...... 1

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ...... 1

3.0 ASSESSMENT METHODS ...... 5

4.0 FLOOD MITIGATION OPTIONS ...... 6

4.1 Option 1: Natural Spills ...... 7

4.1.1 Overview ...... 7

4.1.2 Expected Performance ...... 7

4.1.3 Cost Estimate ...... 11

4.2 Option 2: Tributary Diversions ...... 11

4.2.1 Overview ...... 11

4.2.2 Performance and Estimated Costs ...... 13

4.2.3 Environmental Considerations ...... 14

4.3 Option 3: Construct a Lake Outlet ...... 14

4.3.1 Overview ...... 14

4.3.2 Performance ...... 14

4.3.3 Cost Estimate ...... 15

4.4 Option 4: Closure of Licensed and Unlicensed Drainage Works ...... 15

4.4.1 Overview ...... 15

4.5 Comparison of Options ...... 17

5.0 CLOSURE ...... 18

6.0 REFERENCES ...... 19

TABLES Table 1: Key Elevations...... 4 Table 2: Comparison of Diversion Options ...... 13

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 i

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Table of Contents (continued)

FIGURES Figure 1: The Quill Lakes Basin (WSA 2014) ...... 2 Figure 2: Recorded Annual Average Water Levels of the Quill Lakes from 1885 – Present ...... 3 Figure 3: Potential Big Quill Lake Levels in the Next 10 Years...... 7 Figure 4: Potential Little Quill Lake Levels in the Next 10 Years...... 8 Figure 5: Option 1: Natural Spills ...... 9 Figure 6: Potential Big Quill Lake Water Levels After the Start of Natural Spills (based on data from 2005 to 2014)...... 10 Figure 7: Option 2: Divert Tributary Streams ...... 12 Figure 8: Option 3: Construct a Lake Outlet ...... 16

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A Conceptual Design Details

APPENDIX B Cost Estimates

APPENDIX C Environmental Assessment

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 ii

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background The Quill Lakes are near-terminal waterbodies in a semi-closed drainage basin. Although the Quill Lakes have likely had natural outflows to Last Mountain Lake in the past, there have not been recorded outflows since observations began during the 1880’s. This situation may change due to the recent wet period. The Quill Lakes are flooding private land and threatening both highway and railway transportation corridors. Any outflows from the lake may have environmental sensitivities, because the lake has a relatively high total dissolved solids (TDS) due to accumulation of salts over the years. 1.2 Scope of Work Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) has been retained by the Water Security Agency of Saskatchewan (WSA) to provide a preliminary assessment of flood mitigation options for the Quill Lakes. The options were defined by WSA as part of the Terms of Reference, and the work was done with available information on a compressed time line during the month of September. WSA provided review comments for a preliminary draft report on October 8, 2014. WSA and other provincial ministries provided review comments on a second updated draft on October 31, 2014.

The work consisted of the following tasks:  Initial processing and interpretation of available information.  Development of the selected options in terms of configuration and layout as feasible options, including some consulting with specialists within Golder for key questions related to engineering and environmental considerations.  Estimated impact of licensed agricultural drains on Quill Lake levels.  Water balance analysis of the selected options in terms of potential future lake levels and outflow volumes to Last Mountain Lake.  Water chemistry of potential outflow volumes to Last Mountain Lake.  Capital cost estimates based on typical unit rates for earthworks and land purchase costs. 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS The Quill Lakes wetland complex consists of Big Quill Lake, Middle Quill Lake (also known as Mud Lake), and Little Quill Lake (Figure 1). The current surface area of Little Quill Lake and Big Quill Lake are 250 square kilometres (km2) and 480 km2, respectively. Water levels are normally higher in Little Quill Lake, but the levels have been rising steadily since 2005 and the lakes are currently functioning as one waterbody with close to the same water level. Although, the lakes currently communicate as one water body, Little Quill Lake is typically fresher than Big Quill Lake.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 1

Figure 1: Quill Lakes Basin – Gross and Effective Drainage QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

The Quill Lakes have a semi-closed drainage basin in which Big Quill Lake is the near-terminal water body. Water levels in a closed basin tend to drop during an extended dry cycle and to rise during an extended wet cycle. Like much of central Saskatchewan, the drainage network is usually poorly connected (Pomeroy et al. 2005) resulting in a gross drainage area of 8,760 km2 and an effective drainage area of 3,370 km2 (EC 2012, AAFC 2014). Therefore, 62% of the drainage area normally does not contribute runoff to Quill Lakes. A larger percentage of the watershed may now be contributing runoff (i.e., spilling from potholes towards Quill Lakes) during this wet cycle.

The Big Quill Lake water level has been observed intermittently between 1885 and the present day (EC 2012, EC 2014, Van der Kaamp 2008). In a recent upward trend, levels have risen from 513.73 metres (m) (above mean sea level) in 2004 to a peak of approximately 520.27 m in July 2014 (see Figure 2). Prior to the current wet period, the observed high water level was 519.6 m in 1914. The current Big Quill Lake level is 520.23 m (September 30, 2014). The water level of adjacent Little Quill Lake has historically been perched at a higher elevation between 516.60 m in 1965 and 520.27 m in 2014.

Figure 2: Recorded Annual Average Water Levels of the Quill Lakes from 1885 – Present

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 3

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

The high water levels are threatening private and Crown land, private industry facilities, grid roads and provincial highways. At present, the Quill Lakes have reclaimed about 7,000 hectares (ha) of private farm land, 9,700 ha of land managed by WSA, and about 14,000 ha of Ministry of Agriculture Land (WSA 2014a) since 2006. The floodwaters are also threatening linear infrastructure around the lake, including key transportation routes:  Grid road 640 (between Little Quill Lake and Big Quill Lake);  Highway 35 crosses a low area at the southeast corner of Little Quill Lake;  Highway 16 (CS 16-18);  Highway 6 (CS 6-10); and  a Canadian Pacific (CP) railway line (shown on Figure 1 running between Lanigan, SK and Wynyard, SK). The Quill Lakes have the potential to eventually spill at the natural outlet located approximately 38 kilometres (km) southwest of Dafoe, SK into Peter Lake, Saline Creek, and eventually to Last Mountain Lake (Figure 1), a tributary of the Qu’Appelle River. The spill elevation has been estimated to be 521.47 m (WSA 2014a), based on light detection and ranging (LiDAR) aerial survey data and a ground verification survey. The key elevations are presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Key Elevations Location Elevation (m) Highway 35 road shoulder near Little Quill Lake 522.0 Existing Big Quill Lake Spill Elevation 521.47 Highway 6 minimum road surface at centerline (shoulder) 520.98 (520.74) CP Rail bed 520.8 (estimated) Existing Water Level (September 30, 2014) 520.23 (September 2014) Highway 6 maximum water level to comply with MHI Hydraulic Manual freeboard 520.14 requirements for sub-grade materials Highway 6 overtopping by 100-year wind setup 519.7 Little Quill Lake Spill Elevation (to Big Quill Lake) 518.16 m = metres above mean sea level

Any outflows from the Quill Lakes to Last Mountain Lake are expected to cause changes to the operation of Last Mountain Lake, and may cause changes to Last Mountain Lake water chemistry. Last Mountain Lake functions as an off-channel reservoir along the Qu’Appelle River. WSA owns and operates the Craven structure on the Qu’Appelle River which has the capability of controlling the level of Last Mountain Lake as well as inflows and outlfows at the south end of the lake. During high runoff periods, WSA leaves the Craven structure wide open to replicate natural flow patterns as much as possible. When the river is high runoff flows into the lake. The lake discharges when the river level recedes later on in the runoff event. On its own, Last Mountain Lake has relatively high concentrations of TDS. The measured average TDS in Last Mountain Lake is 1,400 milligrams per litre (mg/L) and the lake volume is roughly 1,800 million cubic metres (m3). Any releases from the Quill Lakes to Last Mountain Lake will likely have higher concentrations of TDS. Quill Lakes TDS depend on relative dilution at higher lake levels. The measured TDS data indicates that Quill Lakes TDS concentrations are roughly 70,000 mg/L at low lake levels below 515 m, and 10,000 mg/L at the current level of about 520 m. The TDS is expected to be further diluted to about 7,500 mg/L by the spill elevation of 521.47 m.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 4

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

The future Quill Lakes water level will depend on climatic conditions that are subject to natural cycles or climate change. Like much of the Western Canadian Interior, the climate of the Quill Lakes drainage basin is variable with pronounced wet periods and periods of drought. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and El Nino- Southern Oscillation (ENSO) both have a strong influence on the regional climate. The PDO is an inter-decadal pattern of climate variability that shifts between positive to negative phases every 20 to 35 years. Saskatchewan prairie drainages experience increased mean annual discharge during periods of negative PDO (St. Jacques et al. 2011). The regional climate has been in a negative PDO phase since about 2005, roughly corresponding with the recent increase in Quill Lakes levels. The negative PDO phase could persist for another 10 to 25 years. El Nino and La Nina southern oscillations are shorter period cycles that may also influence Saskatchewan prairie climates. Precipitation and streamflow on the Canadian Prairies are often reduced during El Nino periods and increased during La Nina. There is currently a 60% chance that an El Nino will develop during the northern hemisphere fall and early winter (NOAA 2014), potentially resulting in drier than normal conditions this winter. Other climate change factors may also modify the naturally-occurring climate cycles by increasing the long-term average precipitation and air temperature (Barrow 2009). 3.0 ASSESSMENT METHODS Several flood mitigation options were evaluated on a preliminary basis using available information. The assessment has been made without the benefit of detailed engineering designs.

The following information was used to interpret the cost and expected performance of selected flood mitigation options:  Previous reports supplied by Saskatchewan WSA.  Available LiDAR imagery and topographic data.  Natural Resources Canada Canadian Digital Elevation Model topographical dataset.  Lake level monitoring station information.  Environment Canada stream flow monitoring station information.  Environment Canada climate station information.  Saskatchewan Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure (MHI) bid trend reports.  Land value estimates for agricultural properties as provided by WSA. The available information for this assessment is listed in the References section at the end of this report.

Selected options were developed for the purpose of preventing a disruption to Highway 6 and the CP Rail transportation routes, and to limit the volume of poorer quality water to Last Mountain Lake. Disruptions to Highway 16 and 35 were also considered, along with Gridroad 640. The configuration of each option was arranged in terms of site geometry and feasible alignments for water conveyance. These options were then evaluated in terms of the expected capital cost, the expected performance in terms of lake levels, and in terms of the potential release of poor quality water to Last Mountain Lake. The expected performance was assessed using a water balance analysis to calculate the potential future Quill Lake levels and diversion volumes, including the potential outflow volumes from the Quill Lakes to Last Mountain Lake.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 5

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

The water balance model uses available lake level records to calibrate the water balance calculations for the Quill Lakes, by comparing the net change in storage over time due to measured precipitation, calculated lake evaporation, and estimated tributary inflows. The tributary inflows are partially measured at various locations around the Quill Lakes, and the lake inflows from ungauged tributaries were estimated by pro-rating the available stream flow measurements. The water balance calculations closely matched the measured water levels of Big Quill Lake. A nominal amount of groundwater interaction was added to Little Quill Lake to match the measured water levels.

As the water level in the Quill Lakes rises, the lake surface area expands substantially due to the relatively flat topography surrounding the lakes. This results in significantly greater storage capacity and a slower rate of lake level rise as more area is flooded around the lake. Calculated lake levels are based on a stage-area-storage curve for each of the Quill Lakes. The available storage curve was expanded or extrapolated for higher levels based on available topography developed from a LiDAR aerial survey.

Analysis of potential future lake levels assumed that the existing wet climate from 2005 to 2014 will be the new normal for the foreseeable future. The water balance model simulated future conditions for the configuration of each selected option with wet years such as 2011 ‘stacked’ to estimate the probability that key elevations will be exceeded. For this study, it was assumed that the wettest year in the past 10 years (i.e., the year with the greatest potential for lake level rise) has a roughly one-in-ten chance of repeating in any given year while the current wet cycle persists. A wet scenario and dry scenario were also used. The wet scenario simulated future levels using the past 10 years from 2005 to 2014. The dry scenario similarly used a span of 10 dry years (from 1983 to 1992) to represent the opposite limits of how quickly the lake levels might drop.

Environmental considerations focused on the potential for poor quality water releases to Last Mountain Lake, in terms of the loading of TDS. The measured TDS in Quill Lakes was used as a guide to estimate the potential TDS concentration in outflows. Other environmental issues were assumed to be mitigated as part of the design process.

Cost estimates for selected options were developed based on approximate estimates of required earthworks and structure sizes using the available topography plus preliminary hydraulic calculations. The costs were developed from simple design concepts and expected alignments or locations of structures. These cost estimates are not precise, and so have been assigned an additional contingency of 30%. All items included in the cost estimates are provincial costs that may be specifically funded by the province, the Provincial Disaster Assistance Program (PDAP), or the Emergency Flood Damage Reduction Program (EFDRP). Flood related compensation will require further discussion and assessment. 4.0 FLOOD MITIGATION OPTIONS The following conceptual options for managing water levels in the Quill Lakes were defined by the Terms of Reference:  Option 1: Allow natural spills to Last Mountain Lake.  Option 2: Control Quill Lake levels by diverting tributaries away from the Quill Lakes, based on a combination of diversions sufficient to maintain or reduce the lake levels.  Option 3: Construct a lake outlet from Big Quill Lake to Last Mountain Lake.  Option 4: Control Quill Lake levels by closing licensed and unlicensed drainage works.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 6

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

The various options are described in the following sections, plus their expected impact on lake level. 4.1 Option 1: Natural Spills 4.1.1 Overview The natural spill option or “status quo” allows the Quill Lakes to naturally rise from the existing lake level of 520.23 m according to the persistent climate conditions. At 521.47 m, water from Big Quill Lake would begin to flow toward Last Mountain Lake via Saline Creek. Some flood mitigation would be required to maintain existing infrastructure including raising Highway 6 and the CP railway line. Both linear infrastructures would need to be raised about 2 m to allow for higher lake levels. In both cases, the grade raises are assumed to be new embankments adjacent to the existing alignments. Construction may be affected by soft ground that is currently inundated by about 1 m of water. The soft ground may be a poor foundation for the new embankments, and additional geotechnical measures may need to be identified during the detailed design phase of work. 4.1.2 Expected Performance Quill Lake water levels are expected to continue to rise as the current wet cycle continues similarly to the previous 10 years. Without flood mitigation, the levels could inundate Highway 6 and the CP railway line, and spill to Last Mountain Lake. Selected future lake water level scenarios are presented on Figure 3 for Big Quill Lake levels and on Figure 4 for Little Quill Lake water levels. The natural spill option is presented on Figure 5.

There is a 20% chance that the Highway 6 embankment could be compromised or overtopped in spring of 2015. The existing lake level of 520.23 m is already non-compliant with MHI guidelines related to subgrade material inundation. There is about a 25% chance of overtopping Highway 6 within 2 years.

Figure 3: Potential Big Quill Lake Levels in the Next 10 Years.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 7

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Figure 4: Potential Little Quill Lake Levels in the Next 10 Years.

The Highway 35 embankment could be overtopped within two years in the summer of 2016, but this possibility is less than 5%, because it would require 2 more years as wet as 2014. It is more likely that the highway is overtopped in the next 5 to 10 years.

The Quill Lakes could begin spilling to Last Mountain Lake as early as the summer of 2016 if conditions persist similar to 2014. This possibility was roughly estimated as less than a 5% chance, requiring 2 more years as wet as 2014 (i.e., 1:10 likelihood for 2 consecutive years). The probability of natural spills to Last Mountain Lake in the next 5 years is about 30%.In the event that the Quill Lakes exceed the 521.47 m, Option 1 may be split into two sub-options depending on the presence or absence of additional flood mitigation measures:  Option 1a: Big Quill Lake exceeds 521.47 m with no additional flood mitigation measures; and,  Option 1b: Big Quill Lake exceeds 521.47 m but additional flood mitigation measures prevent outflows.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 8

Path: G:\2014\1412194 WSA Quill Lakes Flood Mitigation\Figures\FIG 5 Option 1 Natural Spill.mxd 500000 510000 520000 530000 540000 550000 560000 570000 580000 590000 TWP 42 !(773 Pleasantdale B a rr ie

r TWP 41 R iv e 5820000 652 Lenore r !( Lake

R e d

D

e

e Archerwill r

TWP 40

R i

349 v e

5810000 !(

Naicam r

!(368 !(777 Lake Lenore Nut Lake TWP 39 5800000 Annaheim Spalding !(756 Rose Valley TWP 38 5790000

760 Fosston !( Humboldt Muenster TWP 37 St. Englefeld 5780000 Gregor !(49 Watson TWP 36 !(758

5770000 35 Quill !( Lake J" !(6 !(5 Leroy TWP 35 !(667 " "

5760000 J J J" J" J" J" J" J" J" J" Wadena !(755 TWP 34 J" Little Quill Lake 5750000

640 761 Big Quill Lake !( Lanigan !( J" TWP 33 k ee Cr J" Big Quill an J" ig 5740000 n Resources a L Jansen Wynyard 16 745 Dafoe !( !( Drake J" Elfros TWP 32 5730000 TWP 31 !(20

5720000 !(743 TWP 30 !(639

k e re C e n 5710000 li a S TWP 29 Nokomis !(744 !(15

Peter 0 10 20

Lake TWP 28 5700000 1:400,000 KILOMETRES

RGE 22 W2M RGE 21 W2M RGE 20 W2M RGE 19 W2M RGE 18 W2M RGE 17 W2M RGE 16 W2M RGE 15 W2M RGE 14 W2M RGE 13 W2M RGE 12 W2M

LEGEND CLIENT WATER SECURITY AGENCY J" FARMYARD BELOW 522 mASL

FLOW DIRECTION PROJECT LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE GRADE RAISE QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION

QUILL LAKES AT 522 mASL

TITLE OPTION 1: NATURAL SPILLS

REFERENCE

IMAGERY SOURCE: ESRI, DIGITALGLOBE, GEOEYE, I-CUBED, USDA, USGS, AEX, THIS IF MEASUREMENT IS DOES THE WHAT SHOWN, MATCH NOT HAS SHEET BEEN SIZE MODIFIED FROM: ANSI B GETMAPPING, AEROGRID, IGN, IGP, SWISSTOPO, AND THE GIS USER CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2014-11-04

COMMUNITY 25mm NATIONAL TOPOGRAPHIC DATA BASE (NTDB) DATA: © DEPARTMENT OF PREPARED LMR NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA, 2007 CANVEC HIGHWAYS: © DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA, 2012. DESIGN RP ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REVIEW BT NAD 83 UTM ZONE 13N APPROVED MB PROJECT No. PHASE Rev. FIGURE 1412194 1000 0

5 0 QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Under Option 1a, where Big Quill Lake level exceeds 521.47 m and spills to Last Mountain Lake, the lake outflows are expected to occur slowly at first because the natural channel has a very low gradient with vegetation. The resulting conveyance capacity of the natural outlet is very low. Lake levels may therefore continue to rise until the lake inflows are roughly balanced with the outflows. Lake levels could exceed 521.8 m by 2016 due to this lack of conveyance capacity, as shown on Figure 6. Over the long term, the Big Quill Lake level likely oscillates around the spill elevation and generally stays below 522 m (see Figure 6). The average annual outflow volume to Last Mountain Lake is expected to be about 18 million m3 per year (0.58 cubic metres per second [m3/s]), with the majority of the outflow likely occurring in spring and summer. Some winter flow is possible due to high salinity.

The occurrence of outflow to Last Mountain Lake is an environmentally sensitive issue due to the high TDS in Quill Lakes. At the natural spill elevation of Big Quill Lake, the TDS is expected to be elevated to about 7,500 mg/L. The outflows may therefore contribute an average annual loading of 135 million kilograms (kg)/year of dissolved solids to Last Mountain Lake, equivalent to an annual increase of 75 mg/L per year or about 5% of the existing 1,400 mg/L TDS concentration in Last Mountain Lake. The increase is relatively small due to the size of Last Mountain Lake, which has a volume of about 1,800 million m3 or 100 times the Quill Lakes average outflow. The environmental consequences to Last Mountain Lake and downstream reaches of the Qu’Appelle River have not yet been evaluated.

Under Option 1b, additional flood mitigation measures to prevent outflows from Quill Lakes (for example, by constructing a dam near the natural outlet) would reduce the TDS loading to zero but could result in about 0.15 m higher lake levels in Quill Lakes, as illustrated on Figure 6. This option likely uses Highway 6 as a dam, raising the grade as required and blocking the existing bridge on the lake side of the highway.

Figure 6: Potential Big Quill Lake Water Levels After the Start of Natural Spills (based on data from 2005 to 2014).

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 10

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

4.1.3 Cost Estimate The estimated capital cost of allowing the Quill Lakes to spill naturally (Option 1a) is $79 million assuming that wet conditions persist once the Quill Lakes have reached the natural spill elevation in two to five years.

Further flood mitigation to prevent spills toward Last Mountain Lake (Option 1b), if selected, is expected to increase the cost to about $85 million primarily as a result of additional grade raise costs using Highway 6 as a dam. 4.2 Option 2: Tributary Diversions 4.2.1 Overview The intention of Option 2 is to stabilize and eventually to reduce long-term Quill Lakes levels by diverting some of the tributary inflows and thereby creating a net balance between natural inflows and natural lake evaporation. The candidate destination water bodies for the diversions included the Carrot River, Red Deer River, Whitesand River, and Last Mountain Lake on the Qu’Appelle River system via either Lanigan Creek or Saline Creek. The Carrot River drainage was not considered because only the headwaters border the Quill Lakes watershed and thus, present little opportunity for a downstream diversion. The Whitesand River was considered for a diversion downstream of Fishing Lake, but this diversion was discounted due to low gradients and corresponding low conveyance capacity along the possible diversion alignments. The Last Mountain Lake (Qu’Appelle River) and Red Deer River drainages are feasible outlets for diversions and were carried forward for further analyses. Diversion options are provided on Figure 7.

One other option for diversion was considered, based on controlling the flow between Little Quill Lake and Big Quill Lake by raising Grid Road 640 and building a control structure. This would be used to raise the Little Quill Lake level, and thereby lower the level of Big Quill Lake. This option was considered as an environmental mitigation after diverting other tributaries and was not investigated further.

Feasible diversion channel alignments were identified using available digital topography information, considering the required gradients for positive drainage by gravity and the variability of the topography (e.g. hills). Efficient alignments were identified in terms of earthworks quantities. Additional efficiencies may be found during the detailed design phase.

The diversion options that were considered include the following:  Ponass Lake diversion to Red Deer River (11 km).  Kutawagan Creek diversion to Saline Creek and eventually to Last Mountain Lake (30 km).  Kutawagan Creek plus tributaries along Highway 16 south of Quill Lakes.  Ironspring Creek diversion, including Romance Creek, to Lanigan Creek via Jansen Lake and eventually to Last Mountain Lake (57 km).  Ironspring Creek plus Wimmer Brook (69 km).  Combinations of the above diversions.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 11

Path: G:\2014\1412194 WSA Quill Lakes Flood Mitigation\Figures\FIG 7 Option 2 Divert Tributary Streams.mxd 500000 510000 520000 530000 540000 550000 560000 570000 580000 590000 TWP 42 773 Pleasantdale !(

B a rr ie r R TWP 41 iv e 5820000 r !(652 Lenore Lake R e d

D

e

e Archerwill r

TWP 40

R i

349 v e

5810000 !(

Naicam r

!(368 !(777 Lake Lenore Ironspring Creek Nut Diversion Area

Lake TWP 39 5800000 Annaheim Spalding !(756 Rose Ponass Lake Valley Diversion Area

P TWP 38

i p e s 5790000 t o n XWXWXW e C XW r e 760 e k Fosston !( Humboldt Wimmer Brook Muenster XW Diversion TWP 37 XW XW Area St. Englefeld XWXW 5780000 Gregor XWXW XW XW !(49 Romance Creek XW WatsonXW Diversion Area XW XW XW TWP 36 XW !(758

5770000 35 Quill !( XW XWXW Lake XW J" !(6 !(5 Leroy TWP 35 !(667 XW " 5760000 XW J XW J" J"J" Wadena XW XW !(755

Jansen Lake TWP 34 Diversion Little Quill Lake XW Area 5750000 XWXWXW XW 640 761 Big Quill Lake !( Lanigan !( TWP 33 k ee Cr Big Quill an ig 5740000 n Resources a L Jansen Wynyard 16 745 Dafoe !( !( Drake XW XW XW XW XWXW Elfros TWP 32 XW XW XW

5730000 XW Highway 16 XW Diversion Area TWP 31 !(20

5720000 !(743 TWP 30 !(639

Kutawagan Creek k XWXW e Diversion Area re C e n 5710000 li a S TWP 29 Nokomis XW XW !(744 !(15

Peter Lake 0 10 20 TWP 28 5700000 1:400,000 KILOMETRES

RGE 22 W2M RGE 21 W2M RGE 20 W2M RGE 19 W2M RGE 18 W2M RGE 17 W2M RGE 16 W2M RGE 15 W2M RGE 14 W2M RGE 13 W2M RGE 12 W2M

LEGEND CLIENT WATER SECURITY AGENCY J" FARMYARD BELOW 521 mASL

XW ROAD CROSSING PROJECT DIVERSION TO LANIGAN CREEK QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION

DIVERSION TO SALINE CREEK

DIVERSION TO RED DEER RIVER TITLE

FLOW DIRECTION OPTION 2: DIVERT TRIBUTARY STREAMS REFERENCE LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE GRADE RAISE IMAGERY SOURCE: ESRI, DIGITALGLOBE, GEOEYE, I-CUBED, USDA, USGS, AEX, THIS IF MEASUREMENT IS DOES THE WHAT SHOWN, MATCH NOT HAS SHEET BEEN SIZE MODIFIED FROM: ANSI B GETMAPPING, AEROGRID, IGN, IGP, SWISSTOPO, AND THE GIS USER CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2014-11-04

LANIGAN CREEK DIVERSION AREA COMMUNITY 25mm CANVEC HIGHWAYS: © DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA, 2012. PREPARED LMR SALINE CREEK DIVERSION AREA ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. NAD 83 UTM ZONE 13N DESIGN RP RED DEER RIVER DIVERSION AREA REVIEW BT APPROVED MB QUILL LAKES AT 521 mASL PROJECT No. PHASE Rev. FIGURE 1412194 1000 0

7 0 QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

The diversion channels were sized on a preliminary basis roughly equivalent to the 2-year peak flow for the drainage area to be diverted. In some cases, flood peak attenuation from water bodies along the diversions resulted in a reduction of the flood peak by approximately 30%, plus de-synchronization of the peak flow compared to the receiving water bodies. In every case, it was also assumed that control structures would be needed to re-divert or restore flow back to Quill Lakes during future dry years. The likely arrangement of each diversion option is illustrated on Figure 7. 4.2.2 Performance and Estimated Costs The expected lake level performance and estimated cost of each diversion option is provided in Table 2, which lists several possible diversions and combinations of diversions. The costs provided in Table 2 include capital costs associated with construction of diversion works and associated drainage structures only. Additional highway grade raises and other linear infrastructure improvements may be necessary if the selected diversions are not sufficient to maintain the lake level.

In general, up to 42% of the Quill Lakes watershed area can be diverted, at a capital cost of about $163 million. This “ultimate buildout” diversion would maintain lake levels below 520 m most of the time, and allow water levels as high as 520.1 m during extremely wet years (i.e., below the current initial lake level). Other options that divert smaller areas are expected to avoid a natural outflow toward Last Mountain Lake by maintaining the Quill Lakes level below 521.5 m. However, most diversion options likely require grade raises along key infrastructure such as Highway 6 and the CP railway line.

The time horizon for constructing an arrangement of diversions is expected to be between 2 to 3 years, depending on the selected combination of diversions. This time is needed for permitting, land purchase, and detailed design prior to construction in summer and/or winter.

Table 2: Comparison of Diversion Options

Percentage of Tributary Peak Lake Level Diversion Option Capital Cost(a) Inflow Diverted from the during a Prolonged Quill Lakes (%) Wet Period

No Diversion $0 - 521.5 Ponass Lake $12,000,000 5% 521.2 Kutawagan Creek to Saline Creek $19,000,000 9% 521.0 Kutawagan + Highway 16 $33,000,000 10% 520.9 Kutawagan + Ponass Lake $31,000,000 14% 520.8 Kutawagan + Highway 16 + Ponass Lake $45,000,000 15% 520.8 Ironspring Creek to Lanigan Creek $106,000,000 24% 520.6 Ironspring + Wimmer Brook $118,000,000 27% 520.5 Combination of Ironspring Creek, Kutawagan $137,000,000 38% 520.2 Creek, and Ponass Lake

Combination of Ironspring Creek + Wimmer Brook, Kutawagan Creek + Highway 16, and $163,000,000 42% 520.1 Ponass Lake

(a) Capital costs reflect construction costs associated with diversion works only.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 13

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

4.2.3 Environmental Considerations Each of the diversions would require land purchases and would alter the regional flows. The changes include:  reduced flow along diverted tributaries downstream of the diversion;  additional flow and potential erosion along receiving streams downstream of the diversion outlets; and  long-term lower lake levels in Quill Lakes. No water chemistry changes are expected along the receiving water bodies, because the Quill Lakes tributaries are assumed to convey “fresh” water similar to other regional streams. 4.3 Option 3: Construct a Lake Outlet 4.3.1 Overview The natural outlet or spill point for Quill Lakes is situated about 38 km southwest of the intersection of Highway 6 and Highway 16. Outflow from the Quill Lakes would drain into the Saline Creek drainage and ultimately to Last Mountain Lake. Under existing conditions, Big Quill Lake will outflow naturally toward Last Mountain Lake if the lake level rises above 521.47 m. If this occurs, the lake may continue to rise to about 522.2 m.

A more hydraulically efficient constructed outlet would provide a controlled release of water from Quill Lakes for the purpose of preventing additional flooding of infrastructure and property near the Quill Lakes. The selected alignment for the constructed lake outlet generally follows the natural outlet alignment (Figure 8) as the most efficient location in terms of earthworks that would be required to construct the channel. The channel would connect Big Quill Lake to Peter Lake, after which the flow would join the existing Saline Creek to Last Mountain Lake.

The lake outlet is designed to achieve a water level regime at or below the existing level of about 520.2 m if the current wet cycle persists. The elevation for the constructed outlet would be about 519 m; however, given the heavy vegetation and associated roughness, outflow would be governed by an effective invert elevation of about 519.5 m to maintain Quill Lakes near the existing level or roughly 520 m. The gradient of the outlet channel would be essentially flat for 30 km to the tie-in location at Peter Lake. The channel would likely have a bottom width of 10 m.

Grade raises along Grid Road 640, Highway 6, and the CP railway line are necessary to meet long-term safety and operational requirements. 4.3.2 Performance Constructing a new outlet for Quill Lakes is expected to stabilize the Big Quill Lake level to about 520 m, while allowing it to fluctuate during the wettest years to about 520.7 m. The annual outlet flow to Last Mountain Lake would be approximately 95 million m3 per year (3 m3/s) assuming that the channel flows year-round due to the high TDS concentration. The peak flow in the spring is expected to be about 12 m3/s. This peak flow is relatively small for the large size of the watershed area, but the Quill Lakes provide a massive flow attenuation capacity whereby short-term inflows will force a gradual change in storage with much smaller peak outflows.

The environmentally sensitive issue of high TDS loading from Quill Lakes was assessed. At the constructed channel outflow elevation of Big Quill Lake, the TDS is expected to be about 10,000 mg/L. The outflows may therefore contribute an average annual loading to Last Mountain Lake equivalent to 530 mg/L per year in addition to the existing 1,400 mg/L TDS concentration in Last Mountain Lake. The long-term change of Last

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 14

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Mountain Lake TDS will depend on mixing efficiency within the lake plus the operation of managed inflows and outflows at the downstream control structure connecting Last Mountain Lake to the Qu’Appelle River. TDS concentration will likely be highest in the initial mixing zone at the north end of Last Mountain Lake near the National Wildlife Area, assuming that mixing in the lake will be relatively inefficient. The environmental consequences to Last Mountain Lake and downstream reaches of the Qu’Appelle River have not yet been evaluated. A full environmental impact assessment would be required to evaluate the impact of increasing the TDS loading to Last Mountain Lake. An assessment of impacts to Last Mountain Lake hydrology and existing cottage infrastructure around the lake would also be required.

Other environmental consequences may include local channel erosion along Saline Creek, due to more persistent flow along a channel that currently has low or intermittent flow. The addition of Quill Lake water is not expected to increase the peak conveyance requirements for the downstream culvert structures at the Highway 20 crossing, however other cross drainage structures grid roads may need to be upgraded. 4.3.3 Cost Estimate The estimated capital cost of constructing a lake outlet is $48 million. The largest cost component of this work is expected to be the channel earthworks at about $10 million. The other significant cost component is expected to be the cost of an environmental impact assessment, estimated to be about $5 million. Other costs are expected to be relatively small. A temporary pumping system was considered, however the expected cost was estimated to be $70 million, assuming that 1 m3/s pump capacity can be maintained over 10 years. Such a pumping system would only reduce water levels by approximately 0.3 m over the next ten years. This option was not developed further. 4.4 Option 4: Closure of Licensed and Unlicensed Drainage Works 4.4.1 Overview Agricultural drains have been constructed over the years throughout the Quill Lakes watershed, similar to Fishing Lake and other nearby watersheds. The drains tend to increase the peak flow in the spring and otherwise deliver some water to Quill Lake that might otherwise evaporate, contribute to soil moisture, or be taken up by plants. One flood mitigation option that was considered as part of the study Terms of Reference is to manage or change the agricultural drains to reduce the overall water volume to Quill Lakes.

A preliminary assessment of drainage impacts on Quill Lakes has been conducted to provide a rough approximation of the potential change in Quill Lakes water level due to agricultural drainage activities. The assessment was based on a pro-rating of the estimated Fishing Lake water level changes compared to Quill Lakes. The comparison relied on two datasets:  “Agricultural Drainage Impacts on Fishing and Waldsea Lakes” by the Saskatchewan Watershed Authority (2008); and  Wetland_Drainage_subset, a GIS dataset provided by the WSA as part of this study.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 15

R e d

D

e

e

r

R

i

v

e Path: G:\2014\1412194 WSA Quill Lakes Flood Mitigation\Figures\FIG 8 Option 3 Constructed Lake Outlet.mxd r 490000 500000 510000 520000 530000 540000 550000 560000 570000 580000

Lake Lenore TWP 39 5800000 !(368 Annaheim Spalding !(756 Rose Valley

Ponass TWP 38 Lakes 5790000

Humboldt St. Fosston !(760 Muenster Gregor TWP 37 Englefeld 5780000 !(49 Watson !(20 TWP 36 !(758 5770000 Quill Lake J" !(5

Leroy TWP 35 !(667 "

5760000 J J" J"J" Wadena !(755 TWP 34 Little Quill Lake 5750000

761 Big Quill Lake Lanigan !( 640 TWP 33 ek !( re C 6 Big Quill 35 an !( !( ig 5740000 n Resources a L Jansen TWP 32 Wynyard 745 Dafoe !(16 !( Drake Elfros TWP 32

5730000 XW TWP 31

5720000 !(743 TWP 30

k XWXW e re C e n 5710000 li a S TWP 29 Nokomis XW XW !(744 !(639 XW XW

5700000 Peter XW

Lake TWP 28 XW Raymore Semans

Quinton 15 Punnichy !( 5690000 TWP 27 Last Mountain Lestock Govan 641 Lake !( Leross TWP 27A

5680000 Kelliher 0 10 20 TWP 26 1:400,000 KILOMETRES

RGE 23 W2M RGE 22 W2M RGE 21 W2M RGE 20 W2M RGE 19 W2M RGE 18 W2M RGE 17 W2M RGE 16 W2M RGE 15 W2M RGE 14 W2M RGE 13 W2M

LEGEND CLIENT WATER SECURITY AGENCY J" FARMYARD BELOW 521 mASL

XW ROAD CROSSING PROJECT CHANNEL ALIGNMENT QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION

FLOW DIRECTION

LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE GRADE RAISE TITLE

QUILL LAKES AT 521 mASL OPTION 3 : CONSTRUCTED LAKE OUTLET REFERENCE

IMAGERY SOURCE: ESRI, DIGITALGLOBE, GEOEYE, I-CUBED, USDA, USGS, AEX, THIS IF MEASUREMENT IS DOES THE WHAT SHOWN, MATCH NOT HAS SHEET BEEN SIZE MODIFIED FROM: ANSI B GETMAPPING, AEROGRID, IGN, IGP, SWISSTOPO, AND THE GIS USER CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2014-11-04

COMMUNITY 25mm NATIONAL TOPOGRAPHIC DATA BASE (NTDB) DATA: © DEPARTMENT OF PREPARED LMR NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA, 2007 CANVEC HIGHWAYS: © DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA, 2012. DESIGN RP ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REVIEW BT NAD 83 UTM ZONE 13N APPROVED MB PROJECT No. PHASE Rev. FIGURE 1412194 1000 0

8 0 QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

The change in the Quill Lakes level due to agricultural drainage is estimated to be about 1 centimetre (cm) per year during wet years (+/- 50%). By comparison, Fishing Lake level changes were estimated by WSA to be 8 to 13 cm per year. The differences are due to the relative differences in areas that are impacted by agricultural drainage, and by the relative size of the lakes within the watershed. First, there is a relatively dense agricultural drainage network around the entire Fishing Lake watershed. The drains have correspondingly increased the effective or contributing drainage area to Fishing Lake by about 20%. Drainage works in the Quill Lakes watershed affect about 25% of the watershed area. Therefore, it could be argued that 25% of the Quill Lakes watershed may have a 20% increase in effective drainage area. The resulting change in the Quill Lakes effective drainage area could be calculated as 20% of 25% or a 5% overall change. Secondly, the Quill Lake surface area is a relatively large 22% of the effective drainage area within the watershed, compared to Fishing Lake at 11%. The relative differences in lake area are expected to result in equivalent differences in the lake level response to changes in effective drainage area. A larger lake area should result in a smaller lake level change, as a result of storage capacity. Together, these differences between Quill Lakes and Fishing Lake are expected to result in a much smaller lake level response at Quill Lakes as a result of the level of agricultural drain development within the Quill Lakes watershed.

This comparison was possible because of the relatively close proximity of the Fishing Lake watershed to Quill Lakes, and because of the previous Fishing Lake assessment report. This assessment assumes that the previous SWA 2008 study is representative of actual field conditions at Fishing Lake, and that the Fishing Lake and Quill Lakes watersheds are sufficiently similar to allow for a direct comparison. The two lakes are similar in other aspects, such as their near-terminal lake status (i.e., highly intermittent outflows) and in terms of climate. A more detailed assessment was not possible at this time, due to time constraints and data availability. 4.5 Comparison of Options Overall, the assessment describes flood mitigation options that result in the following choices:  Allow the lake to continue rising as per the prevailing climate and construct grade raises along Highway 6 and the CP railway line. This “status quo” option is expected to cost about $79 million. The grade raise for Highway 6 and the CP railway line will need to occur before summer 2015. Additional grade raises may be required if lake levels rise.  Allow the lake to continue rising as per the prevailing climate, obstruct outflow from Big Quill Lake and construct grade raises along Highway 6 and the CP railway line. This option is expected to cost about $85 million. The grade raise for Highway 6 and the CP railway line will need to occur before summer 2015. Additional grade raises on Highway 16 and Highway 35 may be required if lake levels continue to rise. The timing of these grade raises will depend on acceptable levels of risk.  Divert tributary inflows to prevent further lake level rises. The capital cost of diverting tributaries is expected to range from $12 million to $163 million, exclusive of additional grade raise costs. This option would require the construction of between 12 to 150 km of new diversion channels to be constructed prior to spring 2015 to avoid forced grade raises along Highway 6 and the CP railway line. It is likely more feasible to construct the tributary diversions over a period of 2 or 3 years, and to accept a grade raise requirement in 2015.  Construct a shallow lake outlet and implement grade raises along Highway 6 and the CP railway line. This option is expected to cost about $48 million but resulting in elevated TDS levels in Last Mountain Lake.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 17

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

This water will eventually be discharged to the Qu’Appelle River. A detailed environmental assessment has not been completed.

The decision to select one or more of these options will need to be made by the Government of Saskatchewan, based on perceived long-term risk. The options presented are feasible, but subject to additional constructability assessments and detailed design. 5.0 CLOSURE This report represents the preliminary findings of a flood mitigation assessment to support short-term decisions by the Government of Saskatchewan. Further work will be needed to confirm and refine the results of this assessment prior to construction.

GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD.

Ross Phillips, B.A.Sc., M.Sc. Michael Bender, Ph.D., P.Eng. Engineer-in-Training Principal, Senior Water Resources Engineer

Brent Topp, B.Sc., P.Geo. Associate, Senior Hydrologist

RP/MB/jlb/pls n:\active\2014\geoscience\1412194 - wsa quill lakes flood mitigation\05 - reporting\1412194 rpt 26 jan 2015 quill lakes flood mitigation.docx

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 18

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

6.0 REFERENCES AAFC (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada). 2014. Watershed Delineation Tool. Available at: http://atlas.agr.gc.ca/agmaf/index_eng.html#context=wdt-odbh_en.xml&extent=-14537160.120644, 6027865.351299,-9582839.8793557,8872134.648701&layers=wdtExtent;gaugingStations;reference: placenames;reference:boundaries;usaRoadNetwork100K,usaRoadNetwork5K,usaStates,populatedPlac eUsa5M,populatedPlaceUsa2M,populatedPlaceUsa1M;nrn:roadnetwork;reference:roads;nhn:hydrograp hy; Last accessed: February 25, 2013.

Barrow. E. 2009. Climate scenarios for Saskatchewan. Prairie Adaptation Research Collaborative. Regina, SK. Pp. 131

DOE (Saskatchewan Department of the Environment). 1979. Quill Lakes Drainage Impact Study. 38pp.

EC (Environment Canada). 2014a. Climate Data for Wynyard, SK

• 4019035 – WYNYARD - 1973 to 2005 • 40190LN – WYNYARD (AUT) – 2005 to 2014

EC (Environment Canada). 2014b. Environment Canada Data Explorer – HYDAT Version 1.0.

• 05MA010 - Big Quill Lake near Kandahar – 1973 to 2013 • 05MA002 - Little Quill Lake near Wynyard – 1973 to 2013 • 05MA012 - Ironspring Creek near Watson – 1973 to 2013 • 05MA016 - Romance Creek near Watson – 1973 to 2013 • 05MA011 - Birch Creek near Elfros 1973 to 2013 • 05MA021 - Magnusson Creek near Wynyard – 1973 to 2013 • 05MA020 - Quill Creek near Quill Lake – 1973 to 2013

EC. 2014c. Real-time Hydrometric Data. Available at: http://www.wateroffice.ec.gc.ca. Last Accessed on October 21, 2014.

• 05MA010 - Big Quill Lake near Kandahar – 2014 • 05MA002 - Little Quill Lake near Wynyard – 2014 • 05MA012 - Ironspring Creek near Watson – 2014 • 05MA016 - Romance Creek near Watson – 2014 • 05MA011 - Birch Creek near Elfros - 2014 • 05MA021 - Magnusson Creek near Wynyard – 2014 • 05MA020 - Quill Creek near Quill Lake – 2014

MHI (Saskatchewan Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure). 2014. Hydraulic Manual. Pp. 283

NOAA (National Oceonographic and Atmospheric Administration). 2014. El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) Diagnostic Discussion issued by the Climate Prediction Center/National Center for Environmental Prediction/ National Weather Service and the International Research Institute for Climate and Society. Available at: http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/ensodisc.pdf. Last accessed October 7, 2014.

NRCan (Natural Resources Canada). 2014. Canadian Digital Elevation Model. Last Accessed August 15, 2014. Available at: http://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/data/cded/description.html

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 19

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

PFRA (Prairie Farm and Rehabilitation Administration). 2009. Gross Evaporation Data for WYNYARD 1973 to 2008. Available at http://www.pfra.ca/indexe351.html?id=techinfo/hydrology.html.

Pomeroy, J.W., D. De Boer, L.W. Martz. 2005. Hydrology and Water Resources of Saskatoon. Centre for Hydrology, University of Saskatchewan. Saskatoon, SK.

Sauchyn, D. and W. Skinner. 2001. A Proxy Record for Drought Severity for the Southwestern Canadian Prairies. Canadian Water Resources Journal. Vol: 26, No. 2. Pp 253-2781.

SE (Saskatchewan Environment). 1984. Hydrology of the Quill Lakes Basin. Pp. 36.

SERM (Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management). 1997. Southern Digital Land Cover.

St. Jacques, J.M., Y.A, Huang, Y. Zhao., S. Lapp, and D.J. Sauchyn. 2011. The Effects of Atmosphere-Ocean Climate Oscillations on and Trends in Saskatchewan River Discharges. Report prepared for the Saskatchewan Watershed Authority.

SWA (Saskatchewan Watershed Authority). 2008. Agricultural Drainage Impacts on Fishing and Waldsea Lakes. 17 pp.

Van der Kaamp, G. D. Keir, and M. S. Evans. 2008. Long-Term Water Level Changes in Closed-Basin Lakes of the Canadian Prairies. Canadian Water Resources Journal. Vol. 33(1): 23-28 (2008).

Van der Kaamp, G. 2014. Personal Email Communication from Garth Van der Kaamp. January 2014.

Whiting, J. 1979. The Hydrological and Chemical Balance of the Big Quill Lake Basin. Pp. 89.

WSA (Water Security Agency). 2012. Drainage Management Strategy.

WSA. 2014a. 1962 Survey of Kutawagan Creek Stream Profile

WSA. 2014b. Quill Lakes Flood Mitigation Assessment: Request for Qualifications.

WSA. 2014c. Wetland_Drainage_subset GIS data set.

WSA. 2014d. Area and Capacity Curve for Big Quill Lake.

WSA. 2014e. Area and Capacity Curve for Little Quill Lake.

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1 20

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX A Conceptual Design Details

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Option 1

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1

Path: G:\2014\1412194 WSA Quill Lakes Flood Mitigation\Figures\Appendix Figures\FIG A1 Option 1 Natural Spill.mxd 500000 510000 520000 530000 540000 550000 560000 570000 580000 590000 TWP 42 !(773 Pleasantdale B a rr ie

r TWP 41 R iv e 5820000 652 Lenore r !( Lake

R e d

D

e

e Archerwill r

TWP 40

R i

349 v e

5810000 !(

Naicam r

!(368 !(777 Lake Lenore Nut Lake TWP 39 5800000 Annaheim Spalding !(756 Rose Valley TWP 38 5790000

760 Fosston !( Humboldt Muenster TWP 37 St. Englefeld 5780000 Gregor !(49 Watson TWP 36 !(758

5770000 35 Quill !( Lake J" !(6 !(5 Leroy TWP 35 !(667 " "

5760000 J J J" J" J" J" J" J" J" J" Wadena !(755 TWP 34 J" Little Quill Lake 5750000

640 761 Big Quill Lake !( Lanigan !( J" TWP 33 k ee Cr J" Big Quill an J" ig 5740000 n Resources a L Jansen Wynyard 16 745 Dafoe !( !( Drake J" Elfros TWP 32 5730000 TWP 31 !(20

5720000 !(743 TWP 30 !(639

k e re C e n 5710000 li a S TWP 29 Nokomis !(744 !(15

Peter 0 10 20

Lake TWP 28 5700000 1:400,000 KILOMETRES

RGE 22 W2M RGE 21 W2M RGE 20 W2M RGE 19 W2M RGE 18 W2M RGE 17 W2M RGE 16 W2M RGE 15 W2M RGE 14 W2M RGE 13 W2M RGE 12 W2M

LEGEND CLIENT WATER SECURITY AGENCY J" FARMYARD BELOW 522 mASL

FLOW DIRECTION PROJECT LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE GRADE RAISE QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION

QUILL LAKES AT 522 mASL

TITLE OPTION 1: NATURAL SPILLS

REFERENCE

IMAGERY SOURCE: ESRI, DIGITALGLOBE, GEOEYE, I-CUBED, USDA, USGS, AEX, THIS IF MEASUREMENT IS DOES THE WHAT SHOWN, MATCH NOT HAS SHEET BEEN SIZE MODIFIED FROM: ANSI B GETMAPPING, AEROGRID, IGN, IGP, SWISSTOPO, AND THE GIS USER CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2014-11-04

COMMUNITY 25mm NATIONAL TOPOGRAPHIC DATA BASE (NTDB) DATA: © DEPARTMENT OF PREPARED LMR NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA, 2007 CANVEC HIGHWAYS: © DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA, 2012. DESIGN RP ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REVIEW BT NAD 83 UTM ZONE 13N APPROVED MB PROJECT No. PHASE Rev. FIGURE 1412194 1000 0

A1 0

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Option 2

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1

Path: G:\2014\1412194 WSA Quill Lakes Flood Mitigation\Figures\Appendix Figures\FIG A2 Option 2 Divert Tributary Streams.mxd 500000 510000 520000 530000 540000 550000 560000 570000 580000 590000 TWP 42 773 Pleasantdale !(

B a rr ie r R TWP 41 iv e 5820000 r !(652 Lenore Lake R e d

D

e

e Archerwill r

TWP 40

R i

349 v e

5810000 !(

Naicam r

!(368 !(777 Lake Lenore Ironspring Creek Nut Diversion Area

Lake TWP 39 5800000 Annaheim Spalding !(756 Rose Ponass Lake Valley Diversion Area

P TWP 38

i p e s 5790000 t o n XWXWXW e C XW r e 760 e k Fosston !( Humboldt Wimmer Brook Muenster XW Diversion TWP 37 XW XW Area St. Englefeld XWXW 5780000 Gregor XWXW XW XW !(49 Romance Creek XW WatsonXW Diversion Area XW XW XW TWP 36 XW !(758

5770000 35 Quill !( XW XWXW Lake XW J" !(6 !(5 Leroy TWP 35 !(667 XW " 5760000 XW J XW J" J"J" Wadena XW XW !(755

Jansen Lake TWP 34 Diversion Little Quill Lake XW Area 5750000 XWXWXW XW 640 761 Big Quill Lake !( Lanigan !( TWP 33 k ee Cr Big Quill an ig 5740000 n Resources a L Jansen Wynyard 16 745 Dafoe !( !( Drake XW XW XW XW XWXW Elfros TWP 32 XW XW XW

5730000 XW Highway 16 XW Diversion Area TWP 31 !(20

5720000 !(743 TWP 30 !(639

Kutawagan Creek k XWXW e Diversion Area re C e n 5710000 li a S TWP 29 Nokomis XW XW !(744 !(15

Peter Lake 0 10 20 TWP 28 5700000 1:400,000 KILOMETRES

RGE 22 W2M RGE 21 W2M RGE 20 W2M RGE 19 W2M RGE 18 W2M RGE 17 W2M RGE 16 W2M RGE 15 W2M RGE 14 W2M RGE 13 W2M RGE 12 W2M

LEGEND CLIENT WATER SECURITY AGENCY J" FARMYARD BELOW 521 mASL

XW ROAD CROSSING PROJECT DIVERSION TO LANIGAN CREEK QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION

DIVERSION TO SALINE CREEK

DIVERSION TO RED DEER RIVER TITLE

FLOW DIRECTION OPTION 2: DIVERT TRIBUTARY STREAMS REFERENCE LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE GRADE RAISE IMAGERY SOURCE: ESRI, DIGITALGLOBE, GEOEYE, I-CUBED, USDA, USGS, AEX, THIS IF MEASUREMENT IS DOES THE WHAT SHOWN, MATCH NOT HAS SHEET BEEN SIZE MODIFIED FROM: ANSI B GETMAPPING, AEROGRID, IGN, IGP, SWISSTOPO, AND THE GIS USER CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2014-11-04

LANIGAN CREEK DIVERSION AREA COMMUNITY 25mm CANVEC HIGHWAYS: © DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA, 2012. PREPARED LMR SALINE CREEK DIVERSION AREA ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. NAD 83 UTM ZONE 13N DESIGN RP RED DEER RIVER DIVERSION AREA REVIEW BT APPROVED MB QUILL LAKES AT 521 mASL PROJECT No. PHASE Rev. FIGURE 1412194 1000 0

A2 0

Path: G:\2014\1412194 WSA Quill Lakes Flood Mitigation\Figures\FIG A2 Option 2 Divert Tributary Streams.mxd 500000 510000 520000 530000 540000 550000 560000 570000 580000 590000 TWP 42 773 Pleasantdale !(

B a rr ie r R TWP 41 iv e 5820000 r !(652 Lenore Lake R e d

D

e

e Archerwill r

TWP 40

R i

349 v e

5810000 !(

Naicam r

!(368 !(777 Lake Lenore Ironspring Creek Nut Diversion Area

Lake TWP 39 5800000 Annaheim Spalding !(756 Rose Ponass Lake Valley Diversion Area

P TWP 38

i p e s 5790000 t o n e C r e 760 e k Fosston !( Humboldt Wimmer Brook Muenster XW Diversion TWP 37 XW XW Area St. Englefeld XWXW 5780000 Gregor XWXW XW XW !(49 Romance Creek XW WatsonXW Diversion Area XW XW XW TWP 36 XW !(758

5770000 35 Quill !( XW XWXW Lake XW J" !(6 !(5 Leroy TWP 35 !(667 XW " 5760000 XW J XW J" J"J" Wadena XW XW !(755

Jansen Lake TWP 34 Diversion Little Quill Lake XW Area 5750000 XWXWXW XW 640 761 Big Quill Lake !( Lanigan !( TWP 33 k ee Cr Big Quill an ig 5740000 n Resources a L Jansen Wynyard 16 745 Dafoe !( !( Drake XW XW XW XW XWXW Elfros TWP 32 XW XW XW

5730000 XW Highway 16 XW Diversion Area TWP 31 !(20

5720000 !(743 TWP 30 !(639

Kutawagan Creek k XWXW e Diversion Area re C e n 5710000 li a S TWP 29 Nokomis XW XW !(744 !(15

Peter Lake 0 10 20 TWP 28 5700000 1:400,000 KILOMETRES

RGE 22 W2M RGE 21 W2M RGE 20 W2M RGE 19 W2M RGE 18 W2M RGE 17 W2M RGE 16 W2M RGE 15 W2M RGE 14 W2M RGE 13 W2M RGE 12 W2M

LEGEND CLIENT WATER SECURITY AGENCY J" FARMYARD BELOW 521 mASL

XW ROAD CROSSING PROJECT DIVERSION TO LANIGAN CREEK QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION

DIVERSION TO SALINE CREEK DIVERSION TO RED DEER RIVER DRAFT TITLE FLOW DIRECTION OPTION 2: DIVERT TRIBUTARY STREAMS REFERENCE LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE GRADE RAISE IMAGERY SOURCE: ESRI, DIGITALGLOBE, GEOEYE, I-CUBED, USDA, USGS, AEX, THIS IF MEASUREMENT IS DOES THE WHAT SHOWN, MATCH NOT HAS SHEET BEEN SIZE MODIFIED FROM: ANSI B GETMAPPING, AEROGRID, IGN, IGP, SWISSTOPO, AND THE GIS USER CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2014-10-24

LANIGAN CREEK DIVERSION AREA COMMUNITY 25mm CANVEC HIGHWAYS: © DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA, 2012. PREPARED LMR SALINE CREEK DIVERSION AREA ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. NAD 83 UTM ZONE 13N DESIGN RP RED DEER RIVER DIVERSION AREA REVIEW APPROVED QUILL LAKES AT 521 mASL PROJECT No. PHASE Rev. FIGURE 1412194 1000 E

A2 0

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Option 3

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1

R e d

D

e

e

r

R

i

v

e Path: G:\2014\1412194 WSA Quill Lakes Flood Mitigation\Figures\Appendix Figures\FIG A3 Option 3 Constructed Lake Outlet.mxd r 490000 500000 510000 520000 530000 540000 550000 560000 570000 580000

Lake Lenore TWP 39 5800000 !(368 Annaheim Spalding !(756 Rose Valley

Ponass TWP 38 Lakes 5790000

Humboldt St. Fosston !(760 Muenster Gregor TWP 37 Englefeld 5780000 !(49 Watson !(20 TWP 36 !(758 5770000 Quill Lake J" !(5

Leroy TWP 35 !(667 "

5760000 J J" J"J" Wadena !(755 TWP 34 Little Quill Lake 5750000

761 Big Quill Lake Lanigan !( 640 TWP 33 ek !( re C 6 Big Quill 35 an !( !( ig 5740000 n Resources a L Jansen TWP 32 Wynyard 745 Dafoe !(16 !( Drake Elfros TWP 32

5730000 XW TWP 31

5720000 !(743 TWP 30

k XWXW e re C e n 5710000 li a S TWP 29 Nokomis XW XW !(744 !(639 XW XW

5700000 Peter XW

Lake TWP 28 XW Raymore Semans

Quinton 15 Punnichy !( 5690000 TWP 27 Last Mountain Lestock Govan 641 Lake !( Leross TWP 27A

5680000 Kelliher 0 10 20 TWP 26 1:400,000 KILOMETRES

RGE 23 W2M RGE 22 W2M RGE 21 W2M RGE 20 W2M RGE 19 W2M RGE 18 W2M RGE 17 W2M RGE 16 W2M RGE 15 W2M RGE 14 W2M RGE 13 W2M

LEGEND CLIENT WATER SECURITY AGENCY J" FARMYARD BELOW 521 mASL

XW ROAD CROSSING PROJECT CHANNEL ALIGNMENT QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION

FLOW DIRECTION

LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE GRADE RAISE TITLE

QUILL LAKES AT 521 mASL OPTION 3 : CONSTRUCTED LAKE OUTLET REFERENCE

IMAGERY SOURCE: ESRI, DIGITALGLOBE, GEOEYE, I-CUBED, USDA, USGS, AEX, THIS IF MEASUREMENT IS DOES THE WHAT SHOWN, MATCH NOT HAS SHEET BEEN SIZE MODIFIED FROM: ANSI B GETMAPPING, AEROGRID, IGN, IGP, SWISSTOPO, AND THE GIS USER CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2014-11-04

COMMUNITY 25mm NATIONAL TOPOGRAPHIC DATA BASE (NTDB) DATA: © DEPARTMENT OF PREPARED LMR NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA, 2007 CANVEC HIGHWAYS: © DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CANADA, 2012. DESIGN RP ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REVIEW BT NAD 83 UTM ZONE 13N APPROVED MB PROJECT No. PHASE Rev. FIGURE 1412194 1000 0

A3 0

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX B Cost Estimates

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Option 1

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1

Option 1a: Natural Spill, Quill Lakes Maximum Water Elevation of 522.2 masl

Item Description Unit Qnty. Rate Amount Comment Compensation 1 Flooded Farmyards # 18 $ 500,000 $ 9,000,000 All farmyards flooded below 522.2 masl. 2 Flooded Marginal Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 3 Flooded Pasture Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 4 Flooded Crop Land acres 0 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 9,000,000 Capital Costs 5 Clearing, grubbing, stripping ha 0 $ 2,000 $ - - 6 Channel Earthworks (Cut) m3 0 $ 6 $ - - 7 Embankment Dams (Fill) m3 0 $ 25 $ - - 8 Embankment Dam Drains # 0 $ 50,000 $ - - 9 Road Crossings # 0 $ 350,000 $ - - 10 Control Structure # 0 $ 1,000,000 $ - - 11 Land Acquisition acres 0 $ 2,000 $ - - 12 Reclamation ha 0 $ 10,000 $ - - 13 Big Quill Resources Dyke L.S. 1 $ 260,000 $ 260,000 Raise perimeter dykes to 523.3 masl. 14 CN Rail Line Cost not included for provincial funding purposes. Raise CP Rail average of 1.5 m over 5.3 km to 523.3 masl 15 GR640 L.S. 1 $ 17,000,000 $ 17,000,000 Raise GR640 average of 2.8 m over 13 km to 523.3 masl 16 HWY6 L.S. 1 $ 9,000,000 $ 9,000,000 Raise HWY6 average of 1.7 m over 5.5 km to 523.3 masl 17 HWY16 L.S. 1 $ 7,000,000 $ 7,000,000 Raise HWY16 average of 1.2 m over 4 km to 523.3 masl 18 HWY35 L.S. 1 $ 1,700,000 $ 1,700,000 Raise HWY35 average of 0.9 m over 3.3 km to 523.3 masl Subtotal $ 35,000,000 19 Construction Management 10% $ 3,500,000 20 Water Management 10% $ 3,500,000 21 Mobilization / Demobilization 5% $ 1,800,000 22 Engineering 18% $ 6,300,000 23 Permitting 1% $ 350,000 24 Environmental 5% $ 1,800,000 Note: Costs are approximate. Expected cost $ 61,000,000 Overall project contingency (30%) $ 18,000,000 Total cost for budget purposes $ 79,000,000

Assumptions § Clearing, grubbing, and stripping $2,000 per hectare § Earth excavation $6 per cubic metre § Asphalt concrete in place $590 per cubic metre § Base course in place $56 per cubic metre § Sub-base course in place $26 per cubic metre § Common fill in place $26 per cubic metre § Embankment dam fill in place $25 per cubic metre § Hwy Watercourse crossings (Culverts) $500,000 lump sum § Hwy Watercourse crossings (Bridge) $2,000,000 lump sum § General Land acquisition $2,000 per acre § Marginal Land acquisition $500 per acre § Pasture Land acquisition $1,000 per acre § Crop Land acquisition $2,000 per acre Option 1b: Natural Spill, Quill Lakes Maximum Water Elevation of 522.3 masl

Item Description Unit Qnty. Rate Amount Comment Compensation 1 Flooded Farmyards # 19 $ 500,000 $ 9,500,000 All farmyards flooded below 522.3 masl. 2 Flooded Marginal Land acres 90 $ - $ - All flooded marginal land above natural spill. 3 Flooded Pasture Land acres 1,200 $ - $ - All flooded pasture land above natural spill. 4 Flooded Crop Land acres 2,000 $ - $ - All flooded crop land above natural spill. Subtotal $ 9,500,000 Capital Costs 5 Clearing, grubbing, stripping ha 0 $ 2,000 $ - - 6 Channel Earthworks (Cut) m3 0 $ 6 $ - - 7 Embankment Dams (Fill) m3 0 $ 25 $ - - 8 Embankment Dam Drains # 0 $ 50,000 $ - - 9 Road Crossings # 0 $ 350,000 $ - - 10 Control Structure # 0 $ 1,000,000 $ - - 11 Land Acquisition acres 0 $ 2,000 $ - - 12 Reclamation ha 0 $ 10,000 $ - - 13 Big Quill Resources Dyke L.S. 1 $ 280,000 $ 280,000 Raise perimeter dykes to 523.4 masl. 14 CN Rail Line Cost not included for provincial funding purposes. Raise CP Rail average of 1.6 m over 5.3 km to 523.4 masl 15 GR640 L.S. 1 $ 18,000,000 $ 18,000,000 Raise GR640 average of 2.9 m over 13 km to 523.4 masl 16 HWY6 L.S. 1 $ 9,300,000 $ 9,300,000 Raise HWY6 average of 1.8 m over 5.5 km to 523.4 masl 17 HWY16 L.S. 1 $ 7,300,000 $ 7,300,000 Raise HWY16 average of 1.3 m over 4 km to 523.4 masl 18 HWY35 L.S. 1 $ 1,900,000 $ 1,900,000 Raise HWY35 average of 1 m over 3.3 km to 523.4 masl Subtotal $ 37,000,000 19 Construction Management 10% $ 3,700,000 20 Water Management 10% $ 3,700,000 21 Mobilization / Demobilization 5% $ 1,900,000 22 Engineering 18% $ 6,700,000 23 Permitting 1% $ 370,000 24 Environmental 5% $ 1,900,000 Note: Costs are approximate. Expected cost $ 65,000,000 Overall project contingency (30%) $ 20,000,000 Total cost for budget purposes $ 85,000,000

Assumptions . Clearing, grubbing, and stripping $2,000 per hectare . Earth excavation $6 per cubic metre . Asphalt concrete in place $590 per cubic metre . Base course in place $56 per cubic metre . Sub-base course in place $26 per cubic metre . Common fill in place $26 per cubic metre . Embankment dam fill in place $25 per cubic metre . Hwy Watercourse crossings (Culverts) $500,000 lump sum . Hwy Watercourse crossings (Bridges) $2,000,000 lump sum . General Land acquisition $2,000 per acre . Marginal Land acquisition $500 per acre . Pasture Land acquisition $1,000 per acre . Crop Land acquisition $2,000 per acre QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Option 2

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1

Option 2: Reduce Inflow by Diverting HWY 16 and Kutawagan Creek

Item Description Unit Qnty. Rate Amount Comment Compensation 1 Flooded Farmyards # 4 $ 500,000 $ 2,000,000 All farmyards flooded below 520.9 masl. 2 Flooded Marginal Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 3 Flooded Pasture Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 4 Flooded Crop Land acres 0 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 2,000,000 Capital Costs 1 Clearing, grubbing, stripping ha 120 $ 2,000 $ 240,000 - 2 Channel Earthworks (Cut) m3 1,900,000 $ 6 $ 11,400,000 - 3 Embankment Dams (Fill) m3 133,000 $ 25 $ 3,000,000 - 4 Embankment Dam Drains # 4 $ 50,000 $ 200,000 - 5 Road Crossings # 5 $ 350,000 $ 1,800,000 - 6 Control Structure # 1 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 - 7 Land Acquisition acres 1,500 $ 2,000 $ 3,000,000 - 8 Reclamation ha 120 $ 10,000 $ 1,200,000 - 9 Big Quill Res. Containment Dyke L.S. 1 $ 39,000 $ 39,000 Raise perimeter dykes to 522.0 masl. 10 CN Rail Line Cost not included for provincial funding purposes. Raise CP Rail average of 0.2 m over 3.5 km to 522.0 masl. 11 GR640 L.S. 1 $ 12,000,000 $ 12,000,000 Raise GR640 average of 1.5 m over 11 km to 522.0 masl 12 HWY6 L.S. 1 $ 7,500,000 $ 7,500,000 Raise HWY 6 average of 0.5 m over 4.5 km to 522.0 masl. 13 HWY16 L.S. 1 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 Replace two watercourse crossings. 14 HWY35 L.S. 1 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 43,000,000 15 Construction Management 10% $ 4,300,000 16 Water Management 10% $ 4,300,000 17 Mobilization / Demobilization 5% $ 2,200,000 18 Engineering 18% $ 7,700,000 19 Permitting 1% $ 430,000 20 Environmental 5% $ 2,200,000 Note: Costs are approximate. Expected cost $ 66,000,000 Overall project contingency (30%) $ 20,000,000 Total cost for budget purposes $ 86,000,000

Assumptions § Clearing, grubbing, and stripping $2,000 per hectare § Earth excavation $6 per cubic metre § Asphalt concrete in place $590 per cubic metre § Base course in place $56 per cubic metre § Sub-base course in place $26 per cubic metre § Common fill in place $26 per cubic metre § Embankment dam fill in place $25 per cubic metre § Hwy watercourse crossings (culverts) $500,000 lump sum § Hwy watercourse crossings (bridges) $2,000,000 lump sum § General Land acquisition $2,000 per acre § Marginal Land acquisition $500 per acre § Pasture Land acquisition $1,000 per acre § Crop Land acquisition $2,000 per acre Option 2: Reduce Inflow by Diverting Ironspring Creek

Item Description Unit Qnty. Rate Amount Comment Compensation 1 Farmyard Flood Compensation # 1 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 All farmyards flooded below 520.6 masl. 2 Flooded Marginal Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 3 Flooded Pasture Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 4 Flooded Crop Land acres 0 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 500,000 Capital Costs 1 Clearing, grubbing, stripping ha 90 $ 2,000 $ 180,000 - 2 Channel Earthworks (Cut) m3 9,000,000 $ 6 $ 54,000,000 - 3 Embankment Dams (Fill) m3 220,000 $ 25 $ 6,000,000 - 4 Embankment Dam Drains # 6 $ 50,000 $ 300,000 - 5 Road Crossings # 19 $ 350,000 $ 6,700,000 - 6 Control Structure # 1 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 - 7 Land Acquisition acres 2,700 $ 2,000 $ 5,400,000 - 8 Reclamation ha 90 $ 10,000 $ 900,000 - 9 Big Quill Res. Containment Dyke L.S. 1 $ 26,000 $ 26,000 Raise perimeter dykes to 521.7 masl. 10 CN Rail Line Cost not included for provincial funding purposes. Raise CP Rail Line average of 0.2 m over 1 km. 11 GR640 L.S. 1 $ 8,900,000 $ 8,900,000 Raise GR640 average of 1.3 m over 11 km to 521.7 masl. 12 HWY6 L.S. 1 $ 6,300,000 $ 6,300,000 Raise Hwy 6 average of 0.2 m over 4.2 km to 521.7 masl. 13 HWY16 L.S. 1 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Replace two watercourse crossings. 14 HWY35 L.S. 1 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 91,000,000 15 Construction Management 10% $ 9,100,000 16 Water Management 10% $ 9,100,000 17 Mobilization / Demobilization 5% $ 4,600,000 18 Engineering 18% $ 16,000,000 19 Permitting 1% $ 900,000 20 Environmental 5% $ 4,600,000 Note: Costs are approximate. Expected cost $ 140,000,000 Overall project contingency (30%) $ 42,000,000 Total cost for budget purposes $ 180,000,000

Assumptions

§ Clearing, grubbing, and stripping $2,000 per hectare § Earth excavation $6 per cubic metre § Asphalt concrete in place $590 per cubic metre § Base course in place $56 per cubic metre § Sub-base course in place $26 per cubic metre § Common fill in place $26 per cubic metre § Embankment dam fill in place $25 per cubic metre § Hwy watercourse crossings (culverts) $500,000 lump sum § Hwy watercourse crossings (bridge) $2,000,000 lump sum § General Land acquisition $2,000 per acre § Marginal Land acquisition $500 per acre § Pasture Land acquisition $1,000 per acre § Crop Land acquisition $2,000 per acre Option 2: Reduce Inflow by Diverting Kutawagan Creek

Item Description Unit Qnty. Rate Amount Comment Compensation 1 Flooded Farmyards # 5 $ 500,000 $ 2,500,000 All farmyards flooded below 521.0 masl. 2 Flooded Marginal Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 3 Flooded Pasture Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 4 Flooded Crop Land acres 0 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 2,500,000 Capital Costs 1 Clearing, grubbing, stripping ha 110 $ 2,000 $ 220,000 - 2 Channel Earthworks (Cut) m3 1,400,000 $ 6 $ 8,400,000 - 3 Embankment Dams (Fill) m3 38,000 $ 25 $ 1,000,000 - 4 Embankment Dam Drains # 1 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 - 5 Road Crossings # 5 $ 350,000 $ 1,800,000 - 6 Control Structure # 1 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 - 7 Land Acquisition acres 600 $ 2,000 $ 1,200,000 - 8 Reclamation ha 110 $ 10,000 $ 1,100,000 - 9 Big Quill Res. Containment Dyke L.S. 1 $ 13,000 $ 13,000 Raise perimeter dykes to 522.1 masl. 10 CN Rail Line Cost not included for provincial funding purposes. Raise CP Rail average of 0.3 m over 3.5 km to 522.1 masl. 11 GR640 L.S. 1 $ 13,000,000 $ 13,000,000 Raise GR640 average of 1.6 m over 11 km to 522.1 masl 12 HWY6 L.S. 1 $ 7,600,000 $ 7,600,000 Raise HWY 6 average of 0.6 m over 4.5 km to 522.1 masl. 13 HWY16 L.S. 1 $ 1,900,000 $ 1,900,000 Replace two watercourse crossings 14 HWY35 L.S. 1 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 37,000,000 15 Construction Management 10% $ 3,700,000 16 Water Management 10% $ 3,700,000 17 Mobilization / Demobilization 5% $ 1,900,000 18 Engineering 18% $ 6,700,000 19 Permitting 1% $ 400,000 20 Environmental 5% $ 1,900,000 Note: Costs are approximate. Expected cost $ 58,000,000 Overall project contingency (30%) $ 17,000,000 Total cost for budget purposes $ 75,000,000

Assumptions . Clearing, grubbing, and stripping $2,000 per hectare . Earth excavation $6 per cubic metre . Asphalt concrete in place $590 per cubic metre . Base course in place $56 per cubic metre . Sub-base course in place $26 per cubic metre . Common fill in place $26 per cubic metre . Embankment dam fill in place $25 per cubic metre . Hwy watercourse crossings (culverts) $500,000 lump sum . Hwy watercourse crossings (bridge) $2,000,000 lump sum . General Land acquisition $2,000 per acre . Marginal Land acquisition $500 per acre . Pasture Land acquisition $1,000 per acre . Crop Land acquisition $2,000 per acre Option 2: Reduce Inflow by Diverting Ponass Lake

Item Description Unit Qnty. Rate Amount Comment Compensation 1 Flooded Farmyards # 7 $ 500,000 $ 3,500,000 All farmyards flooded below 521.2 masl. 2 Flooded Marginal Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 3 Flooded Pasture Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 4 Flooded Crop Land acres 0 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 3,500,000 Capital Costs 1 Clearing, grubbing, stripping ha 10 $ 2,000 $ 20,000 - 2 Channel Earthworks (Cut) m3 600,000 $ 6 $ 3,600,000 - 3 Embankment Dams (Fill) m3 44,000 $ 25 $ 1,000,000 - 4 Embankment Dam Drains # 1 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 - 5 Road Crossings # 5 $ 350,000 $ 1,800,000 - 6 Control Structure # 1 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 - 7 Land Acquisition acres 100 $ 2,000 $ 200,000 - 8 Reclamation ha 10 $ 10,000 $ 100,000 - 9 Big Quill Res. Containment Dyke L.S. 1 $ 13,000 $ 13,000 Raise perimeter dykes to 522.3 masl. 10 CN Rail Line Cost not included for provincial funding purposes. ww. 11 GR640 L.S. 1 $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 Raise GR640 average of 1.8 m over 11 km to 522.3 masl 12 HWY6 L.S. 1 $ 8,600,000 $ 8,600,000 Raise HWY 6 average of 0.8 m over 4.5 km to 522.3 masl. 13 HWY16 L.S. 1 $ 2,900,000 $ 2,900,000 Raise Hwy16 average of 0.2 m over 2.3 km to 522.3 masl. 14 HWY35 L.S. 1 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 34,000,000 15 Construction Management 10% $ 3,400,000 16 Water Management 10% $ 3,400,000 17 Mobilization / Demobilization 5% $ 1,700,000 18 Engineering 18% $ 6,100,000 19 Permitting 1% $ 340,000 20 Environmental 5% $ 1,700,000 Note: Costs are approximate. Expected cost $ 54,000,000 Overall project contingency (30%) $ 16,000,000 Total cost for budget purposes $ 70,000,000

Assumptions . Clearing, grubbing, and stripping $2,000 per hectare . Earth excavation $6 per cubic metre . Asphalt concrete in place $590 per cubic metre . Base course in place $56 per cubic metre . Sub-base course in place $26 per cubic metre . Common fill in place $26 per cubic metre . Embankment dam fill in place $25 per cubic metre . Hwy watercourse crossings (culverts) $500,000 lump sum . Hwy watercourse crossings (bridges) $2,000,000 lump sum . General Land acquisition $2,000 per acre . Marginal Land acquisition $500 per acre . Pasture Land acquisition $1,000 per acre . Crop Land acquisition $2,000 per acre Option 2: Reduce Inflow by Diverting Ironspring Creek + Wimmer Brook

Item Description Unit Qnty. Rate Amount Comment Compensation 1 Farmyard Flood Compensation # 1 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 All farmyards flooded below 520.5 masl. 2 Flooded Marginal Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 3 Flooded Pasture Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 4 Flooded Crop Land acres 0 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 500,000 Capital Costs 1 Clearing, grubbing, stripping ha 100 $ 2,000 $ 200,000 - 2 Channel Earthworks (Cut) m3 10,000,000 $ 6 $ 60,000,000 - 3 Embankment Dams (Fill) m3 230,000 $ 25 $ 6,000,000 - 4 Embankment Dam Drains # 9 $ 50,000 $ 450,000 - 5 Road Crossings # 27 $ 350,000 $ 9,500,000 - 6 Control Structure # 1 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 - 7 Land Acquisition acres 3,200 $ 2,000 $ 6,400,000 - 8 Reclamation ha 100 $ 10,000 $ 1,000,000 - 9 Big Quill Res. Containment Dyke L.S. 1 $ 26,000 $ 26,000 Raise perimeter dykes to 521.6 masl. 10 CN Rail Line Cost not included for provincial funding purposes. Raise CP Rail Line average of 0.1 m over 1 km. 11 GR640 L.S. 1 $ 10,000,000 $ 10,000,000 Raise GR640 average of 1.2 m over 11 km to 521.6 masl. 12 HWY6 L.S. 1 $ 5,500,000 $ 5,500,000 Raise Hwy 6 average of 0.2 m over 4 km to 521.6 masl. 13 HWY16 L.S. 1 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Replace two water course crossings. 14 HWY35 L.S. 1 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 100,000,000 15 Construction Management 10% $ 10,000,000 16 Water Management 10% $ 10,000,000 17 Mobilization / Demobilization 5% $ 5,000,000 18 Engineering 18% $ 18,000,000 19 Permitting 1% $ 1,000,000 20 Environmental 5% $ 5,000,000 Note: Costs are approximate. Expected cost $ 150,000,000 Overall project contingency (30%) $ 45,000,000 Total cost for budget purposes $ 200,000,000

Assumptions

. Clearing, grubbing, and stripping $2,000 per hectare . Earth excavation $6 per cubic metre . Asphalt concrete in place $590 per cubic metre . Base course in place $56 per cubic metre . Sub-base course in place $26 per cubic metre . Common fill in place $26 per cubic metre . Embankment dam fill in place $25 per cubic metre . Hwy watercourse crossings (culverts) $500,000 lump sum . Hwy watercourse crossings (bridge) $2,000,000 lump sum . General Land acquisition $2,000 per acre . Marginal Land acquisition $500 per acre . Pasture Land acquisition $1,000 per acre . Crop Land acquisition $2,000 per acre QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

Option 3

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1

Option 3: Construct a Lake Outlet

Item Description Unit Qnty. Rate Amount Comment Compensation 1 Flooded Farmyards # 2 $ 500,000 $ 1,000,000 All farmyards flooded below 520.7 masl. 2 Flooded Marginal Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 3 Flooded Pasture Land acres 0 $ - $ - - 4 Flooded Crop Land acres 0 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 1,000,000 Capital Costs 5 Clearing, grubbing, stripping ha 80 $ 2,000 $ 160,000 - 6 Channel Earthworks (Cut) m3 700,000 $ 6 $ 4,000,000 - 7 Embankment Dams (Fill) m3 0 $ 25 $ - - 8 Embankment Dam Drains # 1 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 - 9 Road Crossings # 5 $ 350,000 $ 1,800,000 - 10 Control Structure # 1 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 - 11 Land Acquisition acres 500 $ 2,000 $ 1,000,000 - 12 Reclamation ha 80 $ 10,000 $ 800,000 - 13 Big Quill Res. Containment Dyke L.S. 1 $ 39,000 $ 39,000 Raise perimeter dykes to 521.8 masl. 14 CN Rail Line Cost not included for provincial funding purposes. Raise CP Rail average of 0.8 m over 1.0 km to 521.8 masl. 15 GR640 L.S. 1 $ 7,200,000 $ 7,200,000 Raise GR640 average of 1.6 m over 9.0 km to 521.8 masl 16 HWY6 L.S. 1 $ 4,100,000 $ 4,100,000 Raise HWY 6 average of 0.4 m over 4.0 km to 521.8 masl. 17 HWY16 L.S. 1 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Replace 2 watercourse crossings. 18 HWY35 L.S. 1 $ - $ - - Subtotal $ 21,000,000 19 Construction Management 10% $ 2,100,000 20 Water Management 10% $ 2,100,000 21 Mobilization / Demobilization 5% $ 1,100,000 22 Engineering 18% $ 3,800,000 23 Permitting 24% $ 5,000,000 24 Environmental 5% $ 1,100,000 Note: Costs are approximate. Expected cost $ 37,000,000 Overall project contingency (30%) $ 11,000,000 Total cost for budget purposes $ 48,000,000

Assumptions § Clearing, grubbing, and stripping $2,000 per hectare § Earth excavation $6 per cubic metre § Asphalt concrete in place $590 per cubic metre § Base course in place $56 per cubic metre § Sub-base course in place $26 per cubic metre § Common fill in place $26 per cubic metre § Embankment dam fill in place $25 per cubic metre § Hwy watercourse crossings (culverts) $500,000 lump sum § Hwy watercourse crossings (bridge) $2,000,000 lump sum § General Land acquisition $2,000 per acre § Marginal Land acquisition $500 per acre § Pasture Land acquisition $1,000 per acre § Crop Land acquisition $2,000 per acre QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX C Environmental Assessment

January 2015 Report No. 1412194/1000 Rev.1

QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT – FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) is currently working with the Water Security Agency (WSA) to develop and assess options to reduce water storage in the Quill Lakes and mitigate flooding issues affecting the many stakeholders in the vicinity of the Quill Lakes by one or more options. One of the options being considered is to lower the spill elevation at the outlet of the Quill Lakes. The conceptual design of the outlet configuration and design spill elevation would be established based on a combination of local topographic constraints, downstream capacity, and stakeholder input/priorities, and would result in diversion of saline water from Big Quill Lake into Last Mountain Lake, a freshwater system.

A high level cost estimate to complete the environmental and socio-economic baseline studies, stakeholder engagement, and environmental assessment associated with the conceptual option of lowering the Quill Lake spill elevation (e.g., the Project) is provided in Table 1. A brief description of each task, and assumptions used to generate the cost estimate have also been provided. Baseline Field Programs Aquatics The objective of the aquatics baseline data collection program would be to characterize surface water (spring, summer, and fall) and sediment quality (fall) in watercourses (e.g., Saline and Lanigan creeks) and waterbodies (e.g., Big Quill Lake, Kutawagan lakes, Last Mountain Lake) along the drainage pathway between Big Quill Lake and Last Mountain Lake. In addition, current fish use of Saline Creek would be investigated during spring, summer and fall. Costs associated with the aquatics baseline program include the cost of the field assessment and laboratory analysis of collected samples.

The Aquatic assessment of effects would include water quality modelling along the Big Quill Lake to Last Mountain Lake drainage corridor, as well as for lakes in the Qu’Appelle River system downstream of Last Mountain Lake to the confluence of the Qu’Appelle River with the Assiniboine River in Manitoba. It is assumed that WSA will provide publically available water quality and fish/fish habitat baseline information for Last Mountain Lake and the Qu’Appelle River and lakes below Last Mountain Lake to the confluence with the Assiniboine (Manitoba border. No baseline field work data collection is proposed for the Qu’Appelle River or lakes along the Qu’Appelle River. Hydrology The baseline hydrological investigation will gather information on snow melt runoff, document water retention and flow volumes over the course of one year to provide site specific data that will be used for water management purposes and the effects assessment. Flow data used for runoff volume estimates would be compiled from existing Water Survey of Canada and Saskatchewan Watershed Authority hydrometric data collected from long-term hydrometric stations which operate in the region. Data from these stations would be

Golder Associates Ltd. 1721 8th Street East, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada S7H 0T4 Tel: +1 (306) 665 7989 Fax: +1 (306) 665 3342 www.golder.com Golder Associates: Operations in Africa, Asia, Australasia, Europe, North America and South America

Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation. Brent Topp, Associate, Senior Hydrologist 1412194/2000 Golder Associates Ltd. September 19, 2014 analysed and used to create regional flood frequency curves, and document runoff variability over time and within seasons. In addition to regional hydrometric data, climatic parameters will be compiled and derived from existing data where required. Terrain and Soils The objective of the terrain and soils baseline study is to characterize the physical and chemical properties of soils in the Project area so that the potential effects to soils can be assessed. Calculations of reclamation suitability, soil sensitivity to acidification, soil sensitivity to compaction, wind erosion risk and water erosion potential will be completed. The costs associated with the terrain and soil baseline program include the cost of the field assessment and lab analysis, and assumes that the anticipated effects to the terrain and soil are confined to a corridor between the southern portion of the Quill Lakes, and the northern portion of Last Mountain Lake. Vegetation The vegetation baseline program will include field surveys during the spring, early summer, and late summer, to capture plant species which mature and flower at different times. Detailed vegetation surveys will be carried out to obtain site-specific, descriptive information on the nature and characteristics of plant communities within all vegetation units present within the Project area, including listed plant species. Weed surveys will be completed within the Project area as well to document the distribution and types of prohibited, noxious, and nuisance species within the Project area. The cost provided assumes that the potential effects to vegetation are confined to a corridor between the southern portion of the Quill Lakes, and the northern portion of Last Mountain Lake. Wildlife The wildlife baseline studies are required to describe the existing wildlife habitat and wildlife prior to the development of the Project. Given that the northern shores of Last Mountain Lake are designated as a National Wildlife Area and Bird Sanctuary, the baseline program will have a strong focus on waterfowl, semi-aquatic mammals, and listed wildlife species that may inhabit the area. The cost provided assumes that the potential effects to wildlife and wildlife habitat are confined to a corridor between the southern portion of the Quill Lakes, and the northern portion of Last Mountain Lake. Heritage The heritage baseline study involves the completion of a Heritage Resource Impact Assessment (HRIA) screening assessment, the completion of field studies, and the preparation of a report summarizing the results with recommendations (e.g., mitigation options) for any heritage issues identified during the field assessment. The cost provided assumes that the potential effects to heritage resources are confined to a corridor between the southern portion of the Quill Lakes, and the northern portion of Last Mountain Lake. If there is potential for changes in water levels in other locations, additional field studies may be required. Socio-economics Detailed baseline information on existing social and economic conditions, as well as social and physical infrastructure will be compiled to assess how the Project and its workforce during construction may affect the local population, economic base, labour market conditions, and capacity and accessibility of services and infrastructure. Publicly available socio-economic data and information will be augmented with data collected during interviews with local and provincial government representatives, service providers, and other key informants.

2/5 Brent Topp, Associate, Senior Hydrologist 1412194/2000 Golder Associates Ltd. September 19, 2014

Stakeholder Engagement Regulatory Engagement The regulatory engagement program includes regular meetings with regulatory agencies at the provincial and federal levels throughout the environmental assessment process. It is assumed that up to eight meetings may be required each year (e.g., four at the provincial level, and 4 at the federal level), and two years of meetings have been included in the cost estimate. Each meeting has been estimated to cost approximately $5,000 to facilitate. Public/Municipal Engagement The objective of meeting with local Rural Municipalities (RM) is to engage the local government and communities in the Project area. It is assumed that up to five RMs may be directly affected by water diversion activity within the corridor between the southern portion of the Quill Lakes, and the northern portion of Last Mountain Lake. The purpose of meetings with these RM councils will include introducing the Project to the RM council members, discussing potential Project-specific details, and the potential effects from the Project. It is assumed that a minimum of four meetings would be held with each RM over the curse of the Project development and assessment, and that Golder representatives would be required to participate in these meetings. Community Information Sessions The objective of the community information sessions is to foster an understanding of the Project and provide an opportunity for people in the area to show support and/or identify concerns about the potential effects of the Project through public notification and involvement. The information collected during these sessions will be included in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Project, along with an indication of how concerns will be addressed. Four rounds of community information sessions in up to eight communities have been included in this cost estimate. The timing of each round of community information sessions will approximately follow key milestones of the project (e.g., Project announcement, submission of the Project Description, submission of the EIS, and Project approval). It has been assumed that each session will cost approximately $10,000 to facilitate, and approximately $7,500 per round will be required for materials. Aboriginal Engagement The objectives of the First Nations and Métis community engagement activities is to establish a solid foundation for the First Nations and Métis community engagement that will occur throughout the environmental assessment process and Project development, and identify any specific issues early in the process that will be of interest locally. It is assumed that up to 25 First Nations and Métis communities may be involved in the engagement program and that Golder will be required to participate in up to five meetings with each community (e.g., to describe the environmental assessment process, document meeting proceedings). Each meeting has been estimated to cost approximately $5,000 to facilitate. Traditional Land Use Baseline Data Collection Traditional land use baseline data collection is required to collect traditional knowledge and land use information within each in the Project area that will be used in the EIS. Golder will request to meet with and interview Elders from each First Nations and Métis community to gather as much information as possible regarding the historical and present day use of the Project area. A one day group session will be scheduled with Elders from each community. It is estimated that up to 25 meetings will be needed. Each meeting has been estimated to cost approximately $5,000 to facilitate. Additional funds are required for material preparation and data entry.

3/5 Brent Topp, Associate, Senior Hydrologist 1412194/2000 Golder Associates Ltd. September 19, 2014

Neighbour Relations The purpose of the neighbour relations program is to provide an opportunity to present findings of the environmental assessment with people living nearest to the proposed Project. Golder will assist the WSA in the planning, execution and documentation of all the neighbour relations meetings throughout the environmental assessment process. Engagement Tracking The purpose of tracking engagement activities is to document information for use in the environmental assessment documents and for other Project activities. Golder will be responsible for tracking and identifying action items that will require follow-up. All Project team members, regardless of company, will play an important part in ensuring that public contact information is captured appropriately. The costs associated with this task include the cost of the software subscription, and data entry. Duty to Consult The WSA may be required to fulfill certain aspects of the Duty to Consult if a trigger is identified for the Project. If a Duty to Consult is triggered the WSA will be notified and will be provided with a list of First Nations and Métis communities that the WSA will need to contact, and information on the procedural aspects of consultation. The First Nations and Métis communities identified will also be notified that the Duty to Consult has been triggered. The costs associated with the Duty to Consult include the development of a consultation plan, meetings with each First Nation and Métis community identified, documentation of consultation efforts, and preparation of a consultation report. Project Description The Project Description/Technical Proposal is used to determine whether an environmental assessment may be required under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) or under Saskatchewan’s Environmental Assessment Act (EEA). This strategic document serves as the formal “application” upon which the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) and the Ministry of Environment (MOE) will initiate their internal government technical review teams, consult with federal and provincial authorities, and begin their public consultation activities specific to the proposed Project. The costs for this task include preparation of the Project Description/Technical Proposal; preparation of the Terms of Reference (required by MOE); and preparation and execution of meetings with the Agency, MOE, and other regulatory agencies to discuss the Project Description/Technical Proposal. Environmental Impact Statement Preparation The overall goal of the EIS is to objectively and transparently present a comprehensive assessment of the potential environmental effects of the Project, in a manner that supports a positive decision for approval of the Project, while limiting the WSA’s exposure to regulatory conditions that may be placed on the Project. This task includes the costs associated with the overall planning, coordination, and technical direction of the environmental assessment, preparation of the baseline reporting for each discipline, preparation of the EIS, technical and editorial review and finalization, participation in regulatory workshops, printing of the EIS and production of CDs, preparation of visualization products, and preparation of responses to regulatory comments. Environmental Assessment Project Management This task includes the costs associated with attending project meetings (e.g., between the Golder team and WSA), budget and schedule tracking, and keeping track of activities performed over the course of the Project. It has been assumed that the Project will occur over two years.

4/5 Brent Topp, Associate, Senior Hydrologist 1412194/2000 Golder Associates Ltd. September 19, 2014

Table 1: High Level Cost Estimate to complete an Environmental Assessment Task High-level Cost ($) Baseline Field Programs 1,005,000 Stakeholder Engagement 1,515,000 Duty to Consult 160,000 Project Description 150,000 Environmental Impact Statement Preparation 1,315,000 TOTAL 4,145,000 $ = Canadian Dollars; * = exclusive of GST.

5/5 QUILL LAKES FLOOD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) is currently working with the Water Security Agency (WSA) to develop and assess options to reduce water storage in the Quill Lakes and mitigate flooding issues affecting the many stakeholders in the vicinity of the Quill Lakes by one or more options. One of the options being considered is to divert tributaries around the Quill Lakes. The conceptual design would result in diversion of fresh water from these tributaries to Last Mountain Lake, a freshwater system.

A Technical Proposal would be used to determine whether an environmental assessment may be required under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) or under Saskatchewan’s Environmental Assessment Act (EEA). This strategic document serves as the formal “application” upon which the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) and Ministry of Environment (MOE) will initiate their internal government technical review teams, consult with federal and provincial authorities, and begin their public consultation activities specific to the proposed Project.

The Technical Proposal typically provides a detailed description of the Project, summary of the environmental baseline conditions, identification of potential effects and planned mitigation strategies to eliminate or reduce adverse effects. In regards to the environmental baseline component of the Technical Proposal, field surveys in the vicinity of the Project are usually required and expected to be completed at the appropriate growing or life cycle time period. Detailed site assessments to identify listed plant and/or wildlife species, soil conditions, water courses, aquatic habitat, and potential heritage resources that may be present in the areas to be disturbed, will be completed and the results of these site assessments will be included in the Technical Proposal. If listed plant or wildlife species or heritage resources are observed, appropriate mitigation will be implemented. Information gained through completion of the detailed site assessments, and engineering activities completed by the Water Security Agency (WSA) will be used to describe the Project in detail, and focus the Technical Proposal on the identified key Project issues. The objectives of the Technical Proposal are to:  introduce the WSA and the Project;  demonstrate that the WSA understands the key issues and Project environment interactions;  demonstrate that WSA has an understanding of the key concerns identified during ongoing public and First Nations and Métis engagement;  demonstrate WSA’s understanding of the existing environment;  provide preliminary details from the technical baseline data collection that is underway to support effects predictions; and  present the environmental assessment approach used to assess the potential effects of the Project.

Golder Associates Ltd. 1721 8th Street East, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada S7H 0T4 Tel: +1 (306) 665 7989 Fax: +1 (306) 665 3342 www.golder.com Golder Associates: Operations in Africa, Asia, Australasia, Europe, North America and South America

Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation. Brent Topp, Associate, Senior Hydrologist 1412194/2000 Golder Associates Ltd. September 19, 2014

If the Agency determines that a federal environmental assessment is required under CEAA, the Agency will provide the WSA with Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) guidelines. These guidelines will identify the information requirements for the preparation of the EIS. If the Project is considered a ‘development’ under the EEA, then the WSA will be required to draft the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Project. The TOR outlines the required scope of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and provides a set of criteria for the regulatory agencies to judge the completeness of the EIA. If the Project is considered not to be a ‘development’ under the EEA, then the WSA could proceed directly to the permitting and approvals process.

2/2

Golder Associates Ltd. 1721 8th Street East Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada S7H 0T4 Canada T: +1 (306) 665 7989