A QUATIC E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING R EPORT

A LBIAN S ANDS E NERGY I NC. M USKEG R IVER M INE E XPANSION P ROJECT

SUBMITTED TO: SHELL CANADA LIMITED CALGARY, ALBERTA

S UBMITTED BY: AXYS ENVIRONMENTAL C ONSULTING LTD. C ALGARY, ALBERTA

I N A SSOCIATION W ITH: N ORTH/SOUTH C ONSULTANTS I NC. C AGARY, ALBERTA

AND H YDROCONSULTANT C ALGARY, ALBERTA

F EBRUARY 25, 2005

OS1182

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd.

Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT

Submitted to: Shell Canada Ltd. Calgary, Alberta

Submitted by: AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Calgary, Alberta

In association with: North/South Consultants Inc. Calgary, Alberta and Hydroconsultant Calgary, Alberta

February 25, 2005

OS1182

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Executive Summary

Albian Sands Energy Inc. (Albian) is proposing to expand the existing Muskeg River Mine (MRM) located in Shell Lease 13, in the Muskeg River watershed. The Expansion will involve development in the northwest portion of Lease 13 (the ‘West Pit Area’), in the south central portion of Lease 13, between Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek (the ‘Sharkbite’) and in Lease 90. These three development areas constitute the Expansion area or Muskeg River Mine Expansion (MRME) Development Area. This report provides a baseline description of the surface water hydrology, surface water quality, sediment quality and aquatic resources of the region, based on a compilation of available historical information and new baseline studies conducted in 2003-2004 designed to update and supplement the historical information. The aquatic systems in the area may be affected during various phases of the Expansion including construction, operation, and closure. The Expansion activities that may affect the aquatic conditions include: • Muskeg drainage • Overburden dewatering • Mine pit development • Close-circuit drainage systems • Reclamation drainage

Objectives The objectives of the environmental setting studies were to: • review, evaluate and summarize available historical information with an emphasis on updating the information base used to support the Shell Jackpine Mine – Phase 1 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) also located on Lease 13 (Shell 2002) • identify information gaps based on this review, and design and conduct field studies to supplement the existing information • provide an updated environmental setting description for the MRME Development Area to support an EIA

Local and Regional Study Areas The Local Study Area (LSA) used to describe the baseline environmental setting included the entire Muskeg River watershed; the Mills Creek drainage area, including Isadore’s Lake and a number of poorly drained/connected and isolated ponds in the West Pit Area; and the portion of the Athabasca River lying adjacent to the Lease 13 and Lease 90 boundaries (Figure 1-1). The LSA encompasses the entire MRME Development Area including the West Pit Area, the Sharkbite and the whole of Lease 90, including the narrow strip of land lying between Lease 13 and Lease 90. Portions of the LSA outside of the MRME Development Area were included because of: • proximity to the Expansion • potential for direct or indirect effects resulting from the Expansion • the general mobility of aquatic resources throughout the watershed. The Regional Study Area (RSA) considered for the environmental setting included the MRME Development Area, the LSA and the mainstem of the Athabasca River, from just upstream of the

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page i

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Clearwater River confluence, and downstream to the Embarras Portage/Old Fort area (Figure 1-2). This RSA is consistent with the RSA’s selected for other EIAs previously completed for oil sands projects located on Lease 13 (i.e., Shell Muskeg River Mine [Shell 1998] and Shell Jackpine Mine-Phase 1 [Shell 2002]).

Historical Data Review A large body of historical data and information regarding surface water quality, sediment quality and aquatic resources for lakes, ponds and streams in the LSA and RSA was reviewed as an initial step towards describing the existing environment and baseline conditions. The purpose of this review was to identify information gaps and guide the design process for the 2003/2004 field studies required to fill identified information gaps. The approach taken in writing this report was to provide an update to baseline conditions for the Muskeg River watershed and the Athabasca River in 2000/2001, as presented in the recent Shell Jackpine Mine – Phase 1 EIA and supporting documents (Shell 2002). Therefore, priority was given to recent historical information, while older sources were used mainly where information was sparse or where the older information had particular relevance to the current Expansion.

Baseline Field Studies A number of focused field studies were conducted during the fall, winter, spring and summer of 2003/2004, to address identified information gaps and update the existing environmental description. These studies included: • seasonal (fall, winter, spring and summer) collection of hydrological data on key watercouses • seasonal surface water quality studies on key watercourses and waterbodies • fall sediment quality studies • fall water and sediment toxicity studies • fall benthic invertebrate surveys • winter surveys to assess overwintering potential for watercourses and waterbodies • a winter sediment oxygen demand (SOD) study on the Muskeg River • a study of spring fish movements in Jackpine Creek using a two-way fish counting fence, and on an unnamed stream (designated Watercourse S1) with a two-way hoop net array • a spring larval fish drift fish study on Jackpine Creek • an early summer invertebrate drift study on four streams • seasonal (spring and summer) fish inventories on watercourse S1 • seasonal (spring and summer) habitat surveys on watercourse S1 • aquatic macrophyte surveys on three MRME Development Area waterbodies.

Results: Climate and Surface Water Hydrology Climatic variables analyzed in this study include air temperature, precipitation, evaporation and evapotranspiration, relative humidity, wind and solar radiation. Primary sources of climatic data include the long-term monitoring station data at Fort McMurray compiled by Atmospheric Monitoring Division of Environment Canada, and shorter-term data at the Aurora climate station, located in Lease 13, compiled by the Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program (RAMP) and oil sands operators.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page ii

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Hydrologic variables analyzed in this study include stream flows, basin water yields, suspended sediments in streams, basin sediment yields and stream geomorphology. Sources of hydrologic data include records of the long-term monitoring stations by Water Survey Division of Environment Canada and short-term monitoring stations by RAMP. Site-specific spot flow and geomorphic data were acquired in 2003/2004 on local streams in the LSA. Relevant annual, seasonal, monthly and daily values for the climatic and hydrologic variables were estimated from the available data. Stream flow analyses considered flood and low flow events of streams in the LSA. The key climatic and hydrologic parameters derived for the LSA are: • Mean annual temperature: 0.4 °C • Mean annual precipitation: 444 mm • Mean annual rainfall: 333 mm • Mean annual snowfall: 111 mm • Mean annual runoff for a typical upland area: 130 mm • Mean annual runoff for a typical lowland area: 50 mm • Mean annual lowland basin sediment yield: 0.0016 mm The key hydrologic statistics of the major streams and Isadore’s Lake in the MRME Development Area are summarized below.

Hydrologic Parameters of Streams and Rivers in the LSA Mean Annual 10-Year Maximum Daily 10-Year, 7-Day Name Discharge Discharge Low Flow (m³/s) (m³/s) (m³/s) Athabasca River below Muskeg River 643 3,780 100 confluence Muskeg River at Environment Canada 4.06 48 0.10 Station Jackpine Creek at its 1.14 15 0.003 Mouth Mills Creek at Hwy 63 0.019 0.7 0 Unnamed Tributary to 0.095 0.7 0.005 Muskeg River (S1)

Hydrologic Parameters of Isadore’s Lake Hydrologic Parameter Value Mean Annual Lake Surface Inflow 0.022 m³/s Mean Annual Lake Surface Outflow 0.013 to 0.022 m³/s Typical Water Level Fluctuation 0.3 m Mean Water Level 233.74 masl

Results: Surface Water Quality, Sediment Quality and Aquatic Resources

Muskeg River Watershed Surface Water Quality A number of watercourses and waterbodies were surveyed in 2003/2004 in the Muskeg River and Mills Creek watersheds, which together with the adjacent section of the Athabasaca River make up the LSA.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page iii

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

The unnamed streams located in the ‘Sharkbite area’ of the Muskeg River watershed were brown-water systems broadly similar in water quality characteristics to previously surveyed streams in the LSA (e.g., Muskeg Creek, Jackpine Creek, Stanley Creek, Khahago Creek and Wapasu Creek). Watercourses in the Muskeg River watershed were characterized by high colour and organic carbon levels, with periodic low dissolved oxygen (DO) and anoxic events (particularly in the winter). In general, pH only occasionally exceeded the recommended range for the protection of aquatic life (6.5-8.5). Winter concentrations of hardness, alkalinity, total dissolved solids (TDS), and some major ions were elevated in some streams relative to other seasons; whereas spring/summer concentrations of those parameters were lower in some streams relative to other seasons. Recommended chronic aquatic water quality guidelines (WQGs) for total nitrogen and phosphorus were periodically exceeded by some streams in the Muskeg River watershed across seasons, in particular the upstream section of the Muskeg River. Total iron and manganese levels were consistently above recommended aquatic and drinking WQGs in both Muskeg River and Mills Creek watersheds. Even though dissolved iron concentrations were substantially lower than total concentrations, they still exceeded aquatic and drinking WQGs on a frequent basis. There were periodic exceedences of aquatic WQGs for other total metals, but this was dependant on watercourse and season. Total phenolics periodically exceeded chronic aquatic WQGs. Naphthenic acids and total recoverable hydrocarbons were mostly below detection limits but were occasionally present at detectable levels. The water quality of waterbodies P1 and P4 in the ‘Three Ponds’ area of the Muskeg River watershed was similar. The surface DO concentrations in both ponds were below WQGs during all seasons, except spring. Surface pH was within the recommended range for the protection of aquatic life. P1 and P4 were stratified with a steep thermoclines in summer 2004; weakly stratified in the fall 2003; and were not stratified during other 2003/2004 seasons. The hypolimnetic waters in both ponds were anoxic during summer and fall. In winter, the entire water column was anoxic in both ponds. Nutrient levels were low to moderate and these ponds were classified as mesotrophic (Chambers et al. 2001). Both P1 and P4 were ranked to have low-least sensitivity to acid deposition, according to an Alberta ranking scheme based on pH, alkalinity and calcium data (Saffran and Trew 1996). Water quality profiles suggested that P4 was likely to receive greater groundwater input compared to P1. Waterbody P2 was a shallow pond located in Lease 90. DO levels showed seasonal variation: anoxic in winter; near saturation in spring; and low to moderate levels in fall and summer. The pH range was lower than identified for other LSA ponds (6.8-7.5). Spring concentrations of hardness, alkalinity, TDS and major ions were low relative to other seasons. Winter levels of total suspended solids (TSS), turbidity and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) were higher than other seasons. Nutrient levels were low to moderate and this waterbody can be classified as mesotrophic. P2 was ranked to have low-least sensitivity to acid deposition based on available pH, alkalinity and calcium seasonal data. Total iron and manganese were the only total metals to exceed relevant WQGs, and organic compounds were mostly undetectable.

Mills Creek Watershed Surface Water Quality The water quality characteristics of the Mills Creek watershed were different from those typical of the Muskeg River watershed in several respects. For example, both Mills Creek and Isadore’s Lake typically had lower levels of organic carbon (total organic carbon [TOC] and dissolved organic carbon [DOC]) and colour. Isadore’s Lake was also characterized by high levels of sulphate during all seasons. This lake was relatively shallow and the entire water column became anoxic in the winter. Total phosphorus and nitrogen levels in Isadore’s Lake were typically higher than other LSA ponds; occasionally exceeding aquatic WQGs. Isadore’s Lake was classified as mesotrophic and ranked to have low-least sensitivity to acid deposition. Although only total iron and manganese exceeded WQGs in 2003/2004, there have been historic exceedences for several total metals including: aluminum, chromium, cadmium, copper and zinc.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page iv

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Sediment Quality and Sediment Oxygen Demand (SOD) Watercourses and waterbodies were surveyed in 2003/2004 in the Muskeg River and Mills Creek watersheds. Stream sediments within these watersheds were predominantly sand substrate with low organic carbon. Hydrocarbons were present mainly in the higher molecular weight fractions, while PAH concentrations periodically exceeded sediment quality guidelines (SQGs; e.g., chrysene and benz(a)anthracene). Metal concentrations were typically below SQGs with some exceptions (e.g., nickel, chromium and zinc). Pond sediments within the Muskeg River and Mills Creek watersheds varied in their substrate composition; Isadore’s Lake was high in silt and low in organic carbon, whereas P1 was higher in sand and organic carbon. However, hydrocarbons in both ponds were present mainly in the higher molecular weight fractions and PAH concentrations did not exceed available SQGs. A winter SOD survey was conducted at two sites on the section of the Muskeg River between the Canterra Road crossing and the S1 confluence. The SOD rates of sediment cores collected from these two sites were low (0.2 and 0.3 g/m2/day), despite low water column DO levels at each site (3.7 and 3.3 mg/L). Thus, SOD did not appear to be a determining factor in the occurrence of low DO conditions in this section of the Muskeg River, in March 2004. Substrates at both sites were predominantly sand (>98%), with relatively low carbon (<0.5% organic carbon) compared to historical values. Organic carbon accumulation in sediments may have been reduced by unusually high flows experienced in the Muskeg River during fall and early winter of 2003/2004. SOD may be more of a contributing factor to water column DO depletion in the upstream section of the Muskeg River, where sediments are typically more enriched with organic carbon.

Surface Water and Sediment Toxicity Historical waterborne and/or sediment toxicity has occasionally been reported for watercourses in the LSA (e.g., Muskeg Creek, Shelley Creek and Muskeg River). Annual toxicity testing in the Muskeg River is part of the RAMP core monitoring program but they do not monitor waterborne toxicity in any LSA watercourses except for the Muskeg River, Therefore, additional samples were taken concurrent with water and sediment quality samples, from Jackpine Creek, S1 and Mills Creek to determine whether there was any background waterborne or sediment toxicity in these watercourses during fall/winter. Waterborne toxicity was not observed in Jackpine Creek (upstream section) or S1 during fall/winter 2003/2004. Likewise, no waterborne toxicity was reported by RAMP for the Muskeg River sites locates at the Canterra Road and upstream of Jackpine Creek in fall 2003/2004 (Hatfield et al. 2004). It should however be noted that fall 2003 was a high flow season and so the dilution capacities of watercourses would have been elevated, possibly ameliorating the potential toxic effects of any substances present. Waterborne toxicity was not reported for Mills Creek in fall 2003 (standard algal and fathead minnow tests) but low chronic waterborne toxicity was reported in winter 2004 according to a Ceriodaphia dubia standard 7-d test (IC25 = 82.7). Sediment toxicity was observed to occur in Jackpine Creek (downstream section), S1 and Mills Creek during fall/winter 2003/2004. Sediment toxicity was also identified at two Muskeg River sites in fall 2004 (Hatfield et al. 2004). In contrast to waterborne toxicity, sediment toxicity would have not been affected to any great extent by higher flows. Sediment act as contaminant sinks and accumulate contaminants over time, and so they can also accumulate naturally occurring substances such as PAHs and trace metals.

Benthic Invertebrate Communities and Invertebrate Drift Substrates in LSA watercourses were predominated by sand and so the dominant habitat was depositional. Mean total benthic invertebrate abundance was moderate-high in S1 and was similar to that previously estimated in the Muskeg River downstream of the S1 confluence. The community was dominated by Chironomidae and taxon richness was similar to Shelley Creek. The benthic community in S1 was more

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page v

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

abundant and diverse compared with that of Mills Creek. The Mills Creek benthic community was also dominated by Chironomidae, but contained higher proportions of other taxa associated with depositional habitats. The benthic community close to the mouth of Jackpine Creek was dominated by Chironomidae and taxon richness was similar to that observed for the upper Muskeg River (Hatfield et al. 2004). Isadore’s Lake and P1 supported depositional communities of relatively high abundance but low diversity. The community compositions of both waterbodies were dominated by very large populations of nematodes which co-existed with dipteran taxa. The depositional communities were comprised of taxa tolerant of prolonged low DO events and variable environmental conditions. Total daily invertebrate drift in Jackpine Creek was relatively high compared to historical studies on other LSA watercourses, and was double what would have been predicted based on stream discharge. The drift community was dominated by Baetidae (small minnow mayflies) and Simuliidae (blackflies), and showed nocturnal periodicity. Invertebrate drift in S1 was dominated by Baetidae and dipterans (all life stages combined). Amphipods were numerous during a nocturnal drift peak. The mean drift density estimates were similar to those calculated for Shelley Creek in 2002 (Golder 2002a). The total daily drift of this stream concurred with the daily drift that would have been predicted based on stream discharge. Invertebrate drift in Mills Creek was lower than the other LSA streams and was lower than what would have been predicted based on stream discharge. The drift was dominated by terrestrial and aquatic insect adults and pupae. Ephemeropteran, Plecopteran and Trichopteran (EPT) taxa only accounted for ~20% of the total drift. Watercourse S3 had the highest mean drift density of the four streams surveyed in 2003/2004, and total daily drift was substantially higher than what would have been predicted based on stream discharge. The drift composition was dominated by Nemouridae (stoneflies) and Simuliidae.

Fish Movements and Inventories The 2004 fish counting fence was located approximately 1.5 km upstream of the mouth of Jackpine Creek, near the first riffle/pool habitats. Early fence installation and length of survey allowed a nearly complete count of the upstream migration, although some fish likely passed through either before (i.e., under the ice) or after the survey. Cool spring weather resulted in a protracted and irregular run. A total of 111 fish were captured at the fence, including 78 longnose sucker, 22 white sucker, 8 Arctic grayling, and 3 northern pike. Results of the study indicated total fish numbers were substantially lower for Arctic grayling, white sucker and longnose sucker, relative to the only previous comparable study conducted in 1981 (O’Neil et al. 1982). The reduced numbers were likely due to an overall reduction in the Muskeg River run, as reported by Golder (1996a) and RAMP (Hatfield et al. 2004) for 1995 and 2003, respectively. Larval drift and invertebrate drift surveys conducted on Jackpine Creek in June, 2004, resulted in the capture of larval suckers, sculpins, cyprinids and one troutperch. The larval suckers were all captured at Site 1, approximately 1.5 km from the confluence with the Muskeg River, suggesting that spawning for white and longnose suckers was probably concentrated in the lower reaches (i.e., downstream of Canterra Road). All 104 sucker larvae were captured during the invertebrate drift surveys on June 21-22, indicating that the drift was just commencing at that time. No larval Arctic grayling or pike were captured. A total of eight fish species were recorded during the spring hoopnet survey conducted in watercourse S1 in 2004. Species captured included; brook stickleback, fathead minnow, fine scale dace, lake chub, northern pike, pearl dace, slimy sculpin and white sucker. Juvenile northern pike were the only sport fish species captured. A low number of small pre-spawning white sucker were captured moving upstream, and one larval sucker and four sucker eggs were captured in S1 on June 19-20, confirming that some white

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page vi

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report sucker spawning did occur in that stream in 2004. This was further supported by the fact that juvenile sucker were captured in upstream summer inventories. The S1 drift survey also captured larval sculpin, cyprinids and brook stickleback. Drift surveys on Mills Creek and S3 captured no fish, larval fish or fish eggs. Species composition in the spring and summer fish inventories conducted on S1 was similar to the hoop net results. The presence of forage fish species and juvenile white sucker and northern pike indicated that the stream provides spring and summer rearing and feeding habitat for these species. No fish were captured in a July fish inventory survey conducted on unnamed watercourse S3.

Aquatic Habitats Watercourse S1 originates at the outlet of waterbody P1, from where it flows approximately 0.9 km to its confluence with the Muskeg River. For the first half of this distance, S1 is low gradient and dominated by a series of beaver ponds. The lower half of the stream has a moderate to high gradient and features mostly Class 3 (R3) run habitat. The stream provides reasonably good cover and feeding/rearing habitat, especially for forage fish species, but shallow depth probably limits the quality of habitat for large-bodied species. Shallow depth may also limit overwintering potential in some or most years, although the stream did stay open throughout the winter of 2003/2004. Mills Creek is a small watercourse that flows into Isadore’s Lake. Habitat quality was considered low and dominated by Class 3 (R3) runs, with occasional shallow riffles and small beaver impoundments. Poor connectivity and generally shallow water limit the quality of potential fish habitat. Overwintering habitat would also be limited by shallow water and low under-ice DO levels, although the stream remained open during the winter of 2003/2004. Unnamed watercourse S3 originates in a large saturated fen within Lease 13, and flows into Jackpine Creek near it’s confluence with the Muskeg River. The stream provides low to moderate quality habitat for forage fish species in its lower reach, while upstream reaches were classified as low quality habitat for forage species. Habitat quality is limited by low flows, shallow depth and poor connectivity to downstream habitats (i.e., Jackpine Creek). Aquatic habitat descriptions for the Muskeg River were based on historical descriptions provided by numerous authors. Six distinct habitat reaches have been identified based on gradient. Headwater reaches (reaches 5 and 6), as well as the furthest downstream reaches (reaches 1 and 2) were described as high gradient. The middle reaches were described as moderate gradient (Reach 3) and low gradient (Reach 4). Fish habitat quality of the Muskeg River has been ranked for all reaches by Golder (2002a). Downstream of the confluence with Jackpine Creek to the mouth of the Athabasca River, reaches 1, 2 and 3 (i.e., within the MRME Development Area), are considered to be of moderate to high quality for sportfish, non-sportfish and forage fish species and ranked the highest for benthic invertebrate production and drift supply. Within Reach 4, between the confluence with Jackpine Creek and the confluence with Muskeg Creek, the river was ranked as moderate quality for sportfish, non-sportfish and forage fish species and likely provides suitable overwintering habitat in pool areas. The upper section of Reach 4 (between the confluence of Muskeg Creek and the end of the reach), Reach 5 and Reach 6 are ranked as moderate to high quality for sportfish, non-sportfish and forage fish, but have limited areas for spawning and cover. Habitat descriptions for Jackpine Creek were also based on historical reports. The creek has been described as having five distinct reaches delineated by changes in gradient. The headwaters (Reach 5) and the furthest downstream reach (Reach 1) were described as low gradient, while middle reaches were classed as moderate (reaches 2 and 4) or high (Reach 3) gradient. Jackpine Creek provides a wide diversity of habitat conditions and good quality habitat for forage species throughout its length (RL&L 1989). Habitat quality, both spawning and rearing, is good for sportfish species and suckers in the lower and middle reaches, particularly reaches 2 to 4. Overwintering potential for large-bodied species is

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page vii

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

probably limited by low winter flows and shallow depth. DO levels may limit overwintering potential in upstream reaches, but appear adequate in downstream reaches. A DO level of 7.66 mg/L was recorded near the mouth of Jackpine Creek in March of 2004. Isadore’s Lake is an oxbow located within the Athabasca River floodplain, adjacent to the Albian Sands Muskeg River Mine. A channel at the northwest end of the lake provides an outlet to the Athabasca River, and Mills Creek, which enters from the northeast, is the only stream contributing surface water inflow. The lake also receives groundwater inputs and direct surface runoff from the surrounding area. Reports of the lake’s area are inconsistent and it appears to be highly variable, ranging from a low of 6.49 ha to a high of 21.78 ha. Isadore’s Lake provides low to moderate habitat quality for forage fish species and low habitat quality for northern pike. Northern pike are known to occur in the lake. Habitat quality is probably determined by lake depth which varies annually, and by DO concentrations. Waterbody P1, located in the Sharkbite area of Lease 13, was described as a deep upland pond with two inlets and one outlet to watercourse S1. The reported maximum depth for this pond is 22.3 m. The pond is considered to provide low to moderate habitat for forage fish species. Overwintering capability is probably limited by low DO concentrations. Waterbody P2 is a shallow muskeg pond located within Lease 90. The pond has a maximum measured depth of 1.3 m and is considered to provide only low quality habitat for forage fish species due to shallow depth, poor connectivity and high potential for frequent summerkills and winterkills. The fact that the pond does occasional support forage fish was established with the observation of large numbers of young- of-the year finescale dace in August, 2004. It is assumed that these fish were spawned in the pond by adults that found their way in during the spring freshet, but it is believed unlikely that they would survive the coming winter. Waterbody P4 was characterized as a deep upland pond, connected to P1 by a narrow channel. The pond has a maximum depth of 20.2 m and is considered to provide low to moderate habitat for forage fish species. Overwintering capability is probably limited by low DO. Brook stickleback, lake chub, pearl dace and finescale dace have been reported to occur in P4. Waterbody P5 was described as a deep upland pond, connected to P4 by a narrow channel on the north end. The maximum depth was reported as 15.0 m and it provides low to moderate habitat for forage fish species. Overwintering capability is probably limited by low DO levels. Brook stickleback, lake chub and fathead minnow have been reported to occur in P5. Waterbody P6 is a deep upland pond with a maximum recorded depth of 17.7 m. The pond provides low to moderate habitat for forage fish species. Overwintering capability is probably limited by low DO levels, although an historical record for brook stickleback does exist. Waterbodies P7, P8, P9, P10, P11 and P12 were all classified as a shallow muskeg ponds, with maximum depths of 1.8 m, 1.5 m, 1.2 m, 1.2 m, 1.1 m and 1.5 m, respectively. All these ponds are considered to provide low habitat potential for forage fish species and no historical records of fish occurrence have been documented.

Aquatic Macrophytes Aquatic macrophyte surveys were conducted on three LSA waterbodies. One representative waterbody was selected in each of the three Expansion areas (i.e., West Pit, Sharkbite and Lease 90). The surveys focused on the Shallow Open Water (< 2 m) Land Cover Class. Isadore’s Lake had extensive beds of aquatic macrophytes in the shallow open water zone that occupied most of the lake area to a depth of approximately 2 m. Beyond the 2 m depth contour the plant communities dissipated abruptly. A total of 13 submergent or floating-leaved species were observed in either the quantitative survey or general reconnaissance. The dominant species were stonewort [Chara sp. [mean standing stock = 1156.9 g/m2]) and coontail or hornwort (Ceratophyllum demersum [mean standing stock = 251.4 g/m2]). No rare aquatic

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page viii

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report macrophytes were observed on this survey of Isadore’s Lake, although Hatfield et al. (2004) reported the occurrence of Canada waterweed (Elodea canadensis; S2, G5) and floatingleaf pondweed (Potamogeton natans; S2, G5). The aquatic macrophyte community was less diverse in P1, relative to Isadore’s Lake, due largely to the limited littoral zone in this waterbody. Only four species were identified among the three surveyed sites, and of these, stonewort represented almost 98% of the total mean standing stock. Waterbody P2 could not be quantitatively sampled but an extensive qualitative survey was conducted instead. A total of 15 submergent and floating-leaved macrophytes were observed in the shallow open water zone. The majority of these were abundant, but generally restricted to nearshore areas less than 1 m deep. The central portion of the lake was entirely covered with plants, almost exclusively coontail, interspersed with sparse or patchy northern watermilfoil (Myriophyllum exalbescens), burreed (Sparganium sp.) and Richardson’s pondweed (Potamogeton perfoliatus var. richardsonii). No rare aquatic macrophytes were observed on the P1 survey, but floating leaf pondweed was found to be abundant on P2.

Acid Sensitivity of Lakes A total of 141 lakes in the MRME Air Quality RSA were assessed for sensitivity to acid deposition according to the lake-specific critical load approach, and the use of acid sensitivity ranking based on pH and alkalinity (Saffran and Trew 1996; CASA 1999). A total of fourteen lakes were defined as highly sensitive to acid deposition according to their specific critical loads (where critical loads were not available; pH and alkalinity rankings were used). Nine of those lakes were located within a 100-200 km radius from the MRME Development Area, mainly in the Stony Mountains. The other six lakes were located within 100 km of the MRME Development Area, in areas including the Muskeg River Uplands and the Birch Mountains. There were eleven lakes located within a 50 km radius of the MRME Development Area. Two of these lakes were highly sensitive to acid deposition according to their specific critical loads, and were located in the Muskeg River Uplands. These lakes were headwater lakes. Three lakes within a 50 km radius had moderate sensitivity; one lake had low sensitivity, and six lakes were least sensitive to acid deposition.

Results: General The Aquatic Environmental Setting Report was based on information derived from a number of historical sources, as well as data collected in 2003/2004. A matrix of data sources and relevant locations within the Aquatic Environmental Setting Report is provided in the following table.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page ix

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Matrix Showing Historical and Current Information Sources for Surface Water, Sediment and Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Components, for LSA and RSA Watercourses and Waterbodies Surface Water & Larval Water Sediment Sediment Winter Aquatic Aquatic Benthic Invertebrate Fish Quality Quality Toxicity SOD Habitat Macrophytes Invertebrates Drift Fish Drift Watercourse: Athabasca R. H C H C H C H H C H Muskeg R. H C H C H C C H H C H Jackpine Cr. H C H C H C H H C C H C C Mills Cr. H C C H C H C C C C C S1 H C C C C C C C C S2 C C C C S3 C C C C C Waterbody: Isadore's Lake H C H C H H C H C C P1 H C C H C C C P2 C C C P4 H C H C P5 C H C P6 C C P7 C H C P8 C H C P9 C H C P10 C H C P11 C H C P12 C H C Notes: H = historical data sources C = 2003/2004 baseline field studies, plus RAMP 2003 data

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page x

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table of Contents

1 Introduction...... 1-1 1.1 Expansion Description and Setting...... 1-1 1.2 Objectives ...... 1-2 1.3 Study Areas...... 1-6 1.3.1 Local Study Area...... 1-6 1.3.2 Regional Study Area...... 1-6 2 Methods – Climate and Surface Water Hydrology ...... 2-1 2.1 Historical Data Review...... 2-1 2.2 Climate...... 2-2 2.2.1 Data Sources...... 2-2 2.2.2 Methods of Analyses...... 2-2 2.3 Surface Water Hydrology ...... 2-5 2.3.1 Data Sources...... 2-5 2.3.1.1 Hydrometric Monitoring Data ...... 2-5 2.3.1.2 Channel Section and Geomorphic Survey Data...... 2-6 2.3.2 Methods of Analysis ...... 2-6 2.3.2.1 Regional Stream Flow Analysis...... 2-6 2.3.2.2 Sediment Analysis ...... 2-6 2.3.2.3 Stream Geomorphic Assessment ...... 2-11 2.4 Muskeg River Mine Operational Water Management Data ...... 2-11 2.5 Baseline Hydrologic Monitoring ...... 2-11 3 Methods – Surface Water Quality, Sediment Quality and Aquatic Resources...... 3-1 3.1 Historical Data Review...... 3-1 3.2 Field Surveys and Analyses 2003/2004...... 3-1 3.2.1 Surface Water Quality and Toxicity Survey...... 3-1 3.2.2 Sediment Quality and Toxicity Survey...... 3-10 3.2.3 Winter Muskeg River Sediment Oxygen Demand (SOD) Survey ...... 3-13 3.2.4 Surface Water and Sediment Data Analyses ...... 3-14 3.2.5 Aquatic Resources...... 3-14 3.2.6 Aquatic Resources Habitat Evaluation ...... 3-20 3.2.7 Benthic Invertebrate Collection and Analyses...... 3-20 3.2.8 Invertebrate Drift Collection and Analyses ...... 3-23 3.2.9 Jackpine Creek Larval Drift Collection and Analyses...... 3-24 3.2.10 Jackpine Creek Spring Fish Movements and Analyses ...... 3-25 3.2.11 Watercourse S1 Spring Fish Movements and Analyses ...... 3-26 3.2.12 Watercourse S1 Seasonal Fish Inventories and Analyses...... 3-26 3.2.13 Aquatic Macrophyte Surveys and Analyses ...... 3-27 4 Results – Climate...... 4-1 4.1 Air Temperature...... 4-1 4.2 Precipitation ...... 4-2 4.3 Evaporation and Evapotranspiration...... 4-4 4.4 Relative Humidity...... 4-6 4.5 Solar Radiation...... 4-6

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page xi

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

4.6 Wind...... 4-6 5 Results – Surface Water Hydrology...... 5-1 5.1 Regional Study Area Watercourses ...... 5-1 5.1.1 Annual Water Yields...... 5-1 5.1.2 Flood Peak Discharges...... 5-1 5.1.3 Low Flows...... 5-1 5.2 Athabasca River...... 5-1 5.3 Local Study Area Watercourses (2003/2004)...... 5-3 5.3.1 Muskeg River...... 5-3 5.3.2 Jackpine Creek...... 5-4 5.3.3 Mills Creek...... 5-8 5.3.4 Watercourse S1...... 5-14 5.3.5 Low and Flood Flows of Streams in the Local Study Area...... 5-18 5.3.6 Lakes and Ponds ...... 5-18 5.3.6.1 Isadore’s’s Lake...... 5-18 5.3.6.2 Other Lakes and Ponds ...... 5-23 5.3.7 Stream Sediment Transport...... 5-24 5.3.8 Stream Geomorphic Conditions...... 5-27 6 Results – Surface Water Quality, Sediment Quality and Aquatic Resources...... 6-1 6.1 General Water Quality Considerations ...... 6-1 6.1.1 Trace Metal Partitioning ...... 6-1 6.1.2 Quality Assurance/Quality Control...... 6-4 6.1.3 Upstream LSA Watercourses...... 6-4 6.2 Local Study Area Watercourses...... 6-4 6.2.1 Muskeg River...... 6-4 6.2.1.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-4 6.2.1.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-8 6.2.1.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-9 6.2.1.4 Winter Sediment Oxygen Demand ...... 6-9 6.2.1.5 Aquatic Habitats...... 6-10 6.2.1.6 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 6-11 6.2.1.7 Invertebrate Drift ...... 6-12 6.2.1.8 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies...... 6-12 6.2.1.9 Larval Drift ...... 6-23 6.2.2 Jackpine Creek...... 6-23 6.2.2.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-23 6.2.2.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-24 6.2.2.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-24 6.2.2.4 Aquatic Habitats...... 6-25 6.2.2.5 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 6-25 6.2.2.6 Invertebrate Drift ...... 6-26 6.2.2.7 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies...... 6-36 6.2.2.8 Larval Drift ...... 6-37 6.2.3 Watercourse S1...... 6-38 6.2.3.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-38 6.2.3.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-40

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page xii

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.2.3.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-40 6.2.3.4 Aquatic Habitats...... 6-40 6.2.3.5 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 6-41 6.2.3.6 Invertebrate Drift ...... 6-44 6.2.3.7 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies...... 6-44 6.2.3.8 Larval Drift ...... 6-46 6.2.4 Mills Creek...... 6-47 6.2.4.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-47 6.2.4.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-47 6.2.4.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-47 6.2.4.4 Aquatic Habitats...... 6-48 6.2.4.5 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 6-48 6.2.4.6 Invertebrate Drift ...... 6-49 6.2.4.7 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies...... 6-49 6.2.4.8 Larval Drift ...... 6-50 6.2.5 Watercourse S2...... 6-50 6.2.5.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-50 6.2.5.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-50 6.2.5.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-50 6.2.5.4 Aquatic Habitats...... 6-50 6.2.5.5 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 6-50 6.2.5.6 Invertebrate Drift ...... 6-51 6.2.5.7 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies...... 6-51 6.2.5.8 Larval Drift ...... 6-51 6.2.6 Watercourse S3...... 6-51 6.2.6.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-51 6.2.6.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-51 6.2.6.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-51 6.2.6.4 Aquatic Habitats...... 6-52 6.2.6.5 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 6-52 6.2.6.6 Invertebrate Drift ...... 6-52 6.2.6.7 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies...... 6-53 6.2.6.8 Larval Drift ...... 6-53 6.3 Local Study Area Waterbodies ...... 6-53 6.3.1 Isadore’s Lake...... 6-53 6.3.1.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-53 6.3.1.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-54 6.3.1.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-54 6.3.1.4 Aquatic Habitats...... 6-55 6.3.1.5 Aquatic Macrophytes...... 6-55 6.3.1.6 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 6-57 6.3.2 Waterbody P1...... 6-57 6.3.2.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-57 6.3.2.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-58 6.3.2.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-58 6.3.2.4 Aquatic Habitats...... 6-58

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page xiii

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.3.2.5 Aquatic Macrophytes...... 6-59 6.3.2.6 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 6-59 6.3.3 Waterbody P2...... 6-59 6.3.3.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-59 6.3.3.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-60 6.3.3.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-60 6.3.3.4 Aquatic Habitats...... 6-60 6.3.3.5 Aquatic Macrophytes...... 6-61 6.3.3.6 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 6-61 6.3.4 Waterbody P4...... 6-61 6.3.4.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-61 6.3.4.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-62 6.3.4.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-62 6.3.4.4 Aquatic Habitats...... 6-62 6.3.4.5 Aquatic Macrophytes...... 6-62 6.3.4.6 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 6-63 6.3.5 Other Unnamed Waterbodies...... 6-63 6.3.5.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-63 6.3.5.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-63 6.3.5.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-63 6.3.5.4 Aquatic Habitats...... 6-63 6.3.5.5 Aquatic Macrophytes...... 6-64 6.3.5.6 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 6-64 6.4 Regional Study Area Watercourses ...... 6-64 6.4.1 Athabasca River...... 6-64 6.4.1.1 Surface Water Quality...... 6-64 6.4.1.2 Sediment Quality ...... 6-67 6.4.1.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity ...... 6-68 6.4.1.4 Aquatic Habitats Historical Data ...... 6-68 6.4.1.5 Benthic Invertebrates Historical Data...... 6-69 6.4.1.6 Fish Inventory and Movements Historical Data ...... 6-69 6.5 Regional Study Area Waterbodies...... 6-69 6.5.1 Acid Sensitivity of Lakes in the Air Quality RSA (MRME)...... 6-69 7 Glossary ...... 7-1 8 References...... 8-1 8.1 Surface Water Quality, Sediment Quality and Aquatic Resources...... 8-1 8.2 Surface Water Hydrology ...... 8-7

Appendix A Muskeg River RAMP Hydrology Stations S1 and S13 Appendix B Technical Procedure – Surface Water Quality and Toxicity Appendix C Laboratory Technical Procedure – Sediment Oxygen Demand Appendix D Benthic Invertebrate and Invertebrate Drift Methodology Appendix E Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedure and Analysis Appendix F Muskeg River Tributaries Upstream of the Development Area and the Alsands Drain

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page xiv

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Appendix G Water Quality and Toxicity Summary Tables Appendix H Sediment Quality and Toxicity Summary Tables Appendix I Water Quality Profile Data Appendix J Benthic Invertebrate Data Appendix K Invertebrate Drift Data Appendix L Stream and Pond Habitat Summary Sheets Appendix M Jackpine Creek 2004 Fish Fence Data Appendix N Jackpine Creek Larval Drift Data Appendix O Watercourse S1 2004 Fish Movement and Fish Inventory Data

List of Tables

Table 3-1 Historical Data Sources Relevant to the LSA and RSA ...... 3-2 Table 3-2 Water and Sediment Quality 2003/2004 Sampling Schedule...... 3-4 Table 3-3 Water Quality and Toxicity Parameters...... 3-7 Table 3-4 Sediment Quality and Toxicity Parameters ...... 3-11 Table 3-5 Water Quality Guidelines ...... 3-15 Table 3-6 Sediment Quality Guidelines ...... 3-18 Table 3-7 Aquatic Resources 2003/2004 Sampling Schedule ...... 3-19 Table 4-1 Recorded Monthly Temperatures and Daily Extremes...... 4-1 Table 4-2 Recorded Monthly Precipitation...... 4-2 Table 4-3 Monthly and Annual Range of Precipitation for the Area...... 4-3 Table 4-4 Estimated Rainfall Intensity–Duration–Frequency (IDF) Data for the Region...... 4-4 Table 4-5 Evaporation and Evapotranspiration...... 4-5 Table 4-6 Frequency Analysis of Annual Evaporation and Evapotranspiration...... 4-5 Table 4-7 Recorded Monthly Relative Humidity...... 4-6 Table 4-8 Daily Solar Radiation Rates by Month ...... 4-7 Table 4-9 Wind Speeds and Frequency of Occurrence at Aurora and Fort McMurray Climate Stations...... 4-7 Table 4-10 Frequency Analysis of Extreme Hourly Wind Speeds at Fort McMurray Airport Climate Station...... 4-8 Table 5-1 Athabasca River Monthly Recorded Flows near Fort McMurray and Embarras Airport ...... 5-2 Table 5-2 Athabasca River Mean and Flood Flow Statistics ...... 5-2 Table 5-3 Athabasca River Low Flow Statistics...... 5-3 Table 5-4 Muskeg River Near Fort Mackay – Monthly Recorded Flows (1974 to 2003) ...... 5-4 Table 5-5 Jackpine Creek Near the Mouth – Monthly Recorded Flows...... 5-7 Table 5-6 Comparative Discharge Data on Jackpine Creek...... 5-8 Table 5-7 Mills Creek Recorded Flows at RAMP S6 (1996 to 2003) ...... 5-13 Table 5-8 Miscellaneous Spot Discharge Measurements (2003-2004)...... 5-17

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page xv

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 5-9 Low and Flood Flow Statistics for Muskeg River, Jackpine Creek, Mills Creek and Stream 1...... 5-18 Table 5-10 Mean Annual Sediment Yields of Regional Gauged Basins ...... 5-24 Table 5-11 Summary of Stream Geomorphic Data in the Local Study Area...... 5-28 Table 6-1 Proportion of Dissolved Metal Concentrations Relative to Total Metal Concentrations for Watercourses and Waterbodies Sampled in 2003/2004...... 6-1 Table 6-2 Historical Data and Data Sources for Fish Inventory and Population Information ...... 6-15 Table 6-3 Fish Species Known to Occur in the LSA and RSA, Based on Historical Information Sources...... 6-17 Table 6-4 Comparison of Fish Movements in the Muskeg River (1976, 1977, 1995, and 2003) based on Spring Fish Counting Fence Data...... 6-18 Table 6-5 Discharge of Watercourse S1, Jackpine Creek, Mills Creek and Watercourse S3 During Invertebrate Drift Sampling Period (June 2004)...... 6-26 Table 6-6 Summary of Physical Characteristics of the Four LSA Streams Sampled for Invertebrate Drift (June 2004)...... 6-27 Table 6-7 Total Daily Drift by Each Taxon in Mills Creek, Jackpine Creek, Watercourse S1 and Watercourse S3 (June 2004)...... 6-29 Table 6-8 Total Daily Drift Abundance and Percentage in Mills Creek, Jackpine Creek, Watercourse S1 and Watercourse S3 (June 2004) ...... 6-33 Table 6-9 Comparison of Fish Movements in Jackpine Creek (1981 and 2004)...... 6-37 Table 6-10 Summary of Larval Fish Data from LSA Streams 2004...... 6-39 Table 6-11 Habitat Characteristics and Field Measurements for Benthic Invertebrate Sampling Sites (Fall 2003)...... 6-42 Table 6-12 Summary of Benthic Invertebrate Abundance for Isadore’s Lake, Waterbody P1, Watercourse S1 and Mills Creek (Fall 2003) ...... 6-42 Table 6-13 Summary of Benthic Data for Isadore’s Lake, Waterbody P1, Watercourse S1 and Mills Creek (Fall 2003)...... 6-43 Table 6-14 Aquatic Macrophyte Data for Isadore’s Lake and Waterbodies P1 and P2 (July 2004) ...... 6-56 Table 6-15 Acid Sensitivity Rankings for Lakes and Ponds...... 6-70 Table 6-16 Summary of Water Chemistry Data Related to Acid Sensitivity of Regional Lakes...... 6-72 Table B-1 2003–2004 Water Quality Sampling Schedule...... B-3 Table E-1 Occasions Where the Split/Duplicate Samples Were Significantly Different from Original Samples Collected from the Same Site in Fall 2003 (According to Criteria Described in Section E-2)...... E-5 Table E-2 Occasions Where the Split/Duplicate Samples Were Significantly Different from Original Samples Collected from the Same Site in Winter 2003 (According to Criteria Described in Section E-2)...... E-6 Table F-1 Water Quality and Toxicity in Khahago Creek (1985 - 2004) ...... F-6 Table F-2 Water Quality and Toxicity Muskeg Creek (1985 – 2004) ...... F-11 Table F-3 Water Quality and Toxicity Stanley Creek (1985 – 2004) ...... F-19 Table F-4 Water Quality and Toxicity Wapasu Creek (1985 – 2004) ...... F-27 Table F-5 Other Muskeg River Tributaries Sediment Quality and Toxicity (2003)...... F-35 Table G-1 Muskeg River Water Quality (1984 - 2004): Section 1 (at the Mouth)...... G-3

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page xvi

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table G-2 Muskeg River Water Quality (1985 - 2004): Section 2 (Between the Mouth and Jackpine Creek) ...... G-11 Table G-3 Muskeg River Water Quality (1985 - 2004): Section 3 (Upstream of Jackpine Creek)...... G-19 Table G-4 Jackpine Creek Water Quality (1985 – 2004): Section 1 (downstream of Canterra Road)...... G-27 Table G-5 Jackpine Creek Water Quality (1985 – 2004): Sections 2 and 3 (upstream of Canterra Road)...... G-35 Table G-6 Water Quality in Watercourse S1 and Mills Creek (1985 – 2004)...... G-41 Table G-7 Water Quality in Watercourses S2 and S3 (2003 - 2004)...... G-49 Table G-8 Isadore’s Lake Water Quality and Toxicity (1997 – 2004) ...... G-53 Table G-9 Waterbodies P1, P2 and P4 Water Quality and Toxicity (2001 – 2004) ...... G-59 Table G-10 Athabasca River Water Quality (1985 – 2004): Section 1 (Between Firebag River and Embarrass River)...... G-65 Table G-11 Athabasca River Water Quality (1985 – 2004): Section 2 (Between Muskeg River and Firebag River)...... G-73 Table G-12 Athabasca River Water Quality (1985 – 2004): Section 3 (Between Fort McMurray and the Muskeg River) ...... G-81 Table G-13 Athabasca River Water Quality (1985 – 2004): Section 4 (Upstream of Fort McMurray) ...... G-89 Table H-1 Muskeg River Sediment Quality and Toxicity (1985 – 2004)...... H-3 Table H-2 Muskeg River Sediment Oxygen Demand Survey (2004) ...... H-7 Table H-3 Jackpine Creek, Watercourse S1 and Mills Creek Sediment Quality and Toxicity (1985 – 2004) ...... H-8 Table H-4 Isadore’s Lake and Waterbody P1 Sediment Quality and Toxicity (1997 – 2004) ...... H-11 Table H-5 Athabasca River Sediment Quality and Toxicity (1997 – 2004)...... H-15 Table I-1 Seasonal Water Quality Profile Data from Isadore's Lake and Pond 2 ...... I-3 Table I-2 Summary of Seasonal Water Quality Profile Data for Waterbody P1...... I-7 Table I-3 Summary of Seasonal Water Quality Profile Data of Waterbody P4...... I-9 Table I-4 Summary of Winter Water Quality Profile Data for LSA Ponds (March 2004) ...... I-13 Table J-1 Preliminary Table – Benthic Invertebrate Abundances in Ekman Grab Samples Collected During October 2003 ...... J-3 Table K-1 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Watercourse S3, Site 2, Trap 1...... K-3 Table K-2 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Watercourse S3, Site 3, Trap 1...... K-9 Table K-3 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Mills Creek, Site 2, Trap 1 ...... K-15 Table K-3 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Mills Creek, Site 2, Trap 1 (cont’d)...... K-17 Table K-3 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Mills Creek, Site 2, Trap 1(cont’d)...... K-19 Table K-4 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Mills Creek, Site 3, Trap 1 ...... K-21 Table K-5 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Watercourse S1, Site 2, Trap 1...... K-27 Table K-6 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Watercourse S1, Site 2, Trap 2...... K-33 Table K-6 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Watercourse S1, Site 2, Trap 2 (cont’d)...... K-35

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page xvii

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table K-6 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Watercourse S1, Site 2, Trap 2 (cont’d)...... K-37 Table K-7 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Watercourse S1, Site 3, Trap 1...... K-39 Table K-8 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Watercourse S1, Site 3, Trap 2...... K-45 Table K-9 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Jackpine Creek, Site 2, Trap 1...... K-51 Table K-9 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Jackpine Creek, Site 2, Trap 1 (cont’d)...... K-53 Table K-9 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Jackpine Creek, Site 2, Trap 1 (cont’d)...... K-55 Table K-10 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Jackpine Creek, Site 2, Trap 2...... K-57 Table K-11 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Jackpine Creek, Site 3, Trap 1...... K-63 Table K-11 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Jackpine Creek, Site 3, Trap 1 (cont’d)...... K-65 Table K-11 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Jackpine Creek, Site 3, Trap 1 (cont’d)...... K-67 Table K-12 MRME 2004 Invertebrate Drift Survey – Jackpine Creek, Site 3, Trap 2...... K-69 Table M-1 Catch Data for Fish Captured During the Jackpine Creek Fish Fence Survey, Spring 2004...... M-3 Table M-2 Summarized Daily Record of Fish Captured During the Jackpine Creek Fish Fence Survey, Spring 2004...... M-6 Table M-3 Weight-length Relationships and K-factor (and Standard Deviation) for Longnose Sucker and White Sucker Captured at the Jackpine Creek Fish Fence (May 2004)...... M-7 Table N-1 Jackpine Creek Larval Drift Data ...... N-3 Table O-1 Catch Data for Fish Captured During the Watercourse S1 Hoopnet Survey (Spring 2004) ...... O-3 Table O-2 Summarized Daily Record of Fish Captured During the Watercourse S1 Hoopnet Survey (Spring 2004) ...... O-8 Table O-3 Catch Record for Fish Captured During the Watercourse S1 Electrofishing Inventory Surveys, Spring 2004...... O-9 Table O-4 Catch Record for Fish Captured During the Watercourse S1 Electrofishing Inventory Surveys, Summer 2004...... O-12 Table O-5 Summary Catch Record for Fish Captured During the Watercourse S1 Electrofishing Inventory Surveys (Spring and Summer 2004)...... O-14

List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Surface Water and Aquatic Resources Local Study Area ...... 1-3 Figure 1-2 Surface Water and Aquatic Resources Regional Study Area ...... 1-7 Figure 2-1 Locations of Local and Regional Climate Monitoring Stations ...... 2-3 Figure 2-2 Locations of Regional Hydrometric Monitoring Stations ...... 2-7 Figure 2-3 Locations of Ramp Hydrometric Stations In and Adjacent to the Local Study Area ...... 2-9 Figure 3-1 Water and Sediment Quality 2003/2004 Sampling Locations...... 3-5

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page xviii

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Figure 3-2 Aquatic Resources 2003/2004 Sampling Locations ...... 3-21 Figure 5-1 Muskeg River Flow Duration Curves...... 5-5 Figure 5-2 Water and Sediment Quality 2003/2004 Sampling Locations and Sub- basin Watersheds ...... 5-9 Figure 5-3 Mills Creek Comparative Streamflow Hydrographs (1996-2003) ...... 5-11 Figure 5-4 Comparison of 2003-2004 Runoff Rates in the Local Study Area...... 5-15 Figure 5-5 Isadore’s Lake Bathymetry...... 5-19 Figure 5-6 Isadore’s Lake Daily Water Level (2000-2003) ...... 5-21 Figure 5-7 Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek Total Suspended Solids Versus Discharge ...... 5-25 Figure 6-1 Relationship Between Total and Dissolved Concentrations of Select Trace Metal Samples from the 2003/2004 Survey...... 6-3 Figure 6-2 Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek Showing Habitat Reaches (after Sekerak and Walder 1980)...... 6-13 Figure 6-3 Population Structure for White Sucker in the Muskeg River in 2003, Derived from Spring Fish Counting Fence Data (RAMP 2004) ...... 6-20 Figure 6-4 Comparison of Historic and Recent Length-Frequency Distributions for White Sucker in the Muskeg River, Derived from Spring Fish Counting Fence Data ...... 6-22 Figure 6-5 Drift Density and Composition for Jackpine Creek and Watercourse S3, June 2004 ...... 6-35 Figure 6-6 Fish Movements and Maximum Daily Water Temperature Recorded at the Jackpine Creek fish fence (April – May 2004)...... 6-38 Figure 6-7 Drift Density and Composition for Mills Creek and Watercourse S1, June 2004...... 6-45 Figure 6-8 Fish Movements and Maximum Daily Water Temperature Recorded at Watercourse S1 (April – May 2004)...... 6-46 Figure A-1 Locations of RAMP Hydrometric Stations In and Adjacent to the Local Study Area ...... A-5 Figure L-1 Summary of Physical and Chemical Data for Watercourse S1 ...... L-3 Figure L-2 Photos and Summary of Biological Data for Watercourse S1...... L-5 Figure L-3 Location Information and Photos for Upper Jackpine Creek (JPC-4) and Watercourse S2 Water Quality Sites...... L-7 Figure L-4 Summary of Physical and Chemical Data for Watercourse S3 ...... L-9 Figure L-5 Photos and Summary of Biological Data for Watercourse S3...... L-11 Figure L-6 Location Information and Photos for Mills Creek Sampling Sites...... L-13 Figure L-7 Location Information and Photos for Jackpine Creek Sites, Downstream of Canterra Road ...... L-15 Figure L-8 Location Information and Photos for Isadore’s Lake ...... L-17 Figure L-9 Location Information and Photos for Waterbodies P1 and P2 ...... L-19 Figure L-10 Location Information and Photos for Waterbodies P4 and P5 ...... L-21 Figure M-1 Length Frequency Distribution of Longnose Sucker and White Sucker Cptured at the Jackpine Creek Fish Fence (May 2004)...... M-8

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page xix

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page xx

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Abbreviations

%...... percent <...... less than >...... greater than ºC...... degrees Celcius µg/g ...... microgram per gram µg/L ...... microgram per litre µm ...... micrometre µS/cm ...... microSiemens per centimetre 7Q10...... lowest 7-day consecutive flow that occurs, on average, once every 10 years AB ...... Alberta AENV...... Alberta Environment Albian Sands/Albian...... Albian Sands Energy Inc. ANC ...... acid neutralizing capacity AOSERP ...... Athabasca Oil Sands Environmental Research Project ARC...... Alberta Research Council ATV...... all terrain vehicle BC...... British Columbia BOD ...... biochemical oxygen demand CCME...... Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment CEMA ...... Cumulative Environmental Management Association cm...... centimetre CNRL ...... Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. COD ...... chemical oxygen demand CPUE...... catch per unit effort DFO...... Fisheries and Oceans Canada DL...... detection limit DO ...... dissolved oxygen DOC ...... dissolved organic carbon DP...... dissolved phosphorous e.g...... for example EIA ...... environmental impact assessment EPT...... ephemeropteran, plecopteran and trichopteran taxa ETL...... Enviro-Test Laboratories Golder...... Golder Associates Ltd. GPS...... Global Positioning System h...... hour ha ...... hectare Hydroconsult ...... Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. i.e...... that is IFN ...... instream flow needs ISQG...... interim sediment quality guideline K...... condition factor km...... kilometre LEL...... lowest observed effect level LSA ...... Local Study Area m...... metre m/s ...... metres per second m3/s...... cubic metres per second

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page xxi

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

masl ...... metres above sea level max ...... maximum MDL ...... method detection limit meq/L ...... microequivalants per litre mg/L ...... milligram per litre min...... minimum mL ...... millilitre mm...... millimetre MRM ...... Muskeg River Mine mV...... millivolts n...... number N/A and n/a ...... not applicable ng/g...... nannogram per gram ng/L ...... nannogram per litre NH4 ...... ammonia North/South ...... North/South Consultants Inc. NRBS ...... Northern River Basin Study NTU...... nepholometric turbidity unit OSLO ...... Other Six Leases Operation PAH...... polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons PAI ...... potential acid input PEL...... probable effect level pH...... the measurement of a substance’s acidity or alkalinity PMP...... probable maximum precipitation ppt...... parts per thousand PSA...... particle size analysis QA/QC...... quality assurance and quality control RAMP...... Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program RL&L ...... R.L. & L. Environmental Services RSA ...... Regional Study Area SE ...... standard error SEL...... severe effect level Shell...... Shell Canada Ltd. SOD...... sediment oxygen demand sp...... species SQG...... sediment quality guideline Syncrude...... Syncrude Canada Ltd. TC...... true colour TCU...... true colour units TDS ...... total dissolved solids TEH ...... total extractable hydrocarbons TKN...... total Kjeldahl nitrogen TN...... total nitrogen TOC...... total organic carbon TP ...... total phosphorus TRH...... total recoverable hydrocarbons TSS ...... total suspended solids USEPA ...... United States Environmental Protection Agency UTM ...... Universal Tranverse Mercantor W/m2...... Watts per meter squared WQ ...... water quality

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page xxii

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

WQG ...... water quality guideline

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page xxiii

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page xxiv

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

1 Introduction

1.1 Expansion Description and Setting Albian Sands Energy Inc (Albian) is proposing to expand the existing Muskeg River Mine (MRM) located in Shell Lease 13, in the Muskeg River watershed. The Expansion will involve development in the northwest portion of Lease 13 (the ‘West Pit Area’), in the south central portion of Lease 13 between Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek (the ‘Sharkbite’), and in Lease 90. These three development areas constitute the Expansion area or the Muskeg River Mine Expansion (MRME) Development Area. The West Pit Area is poorly drained with only one defined watercourse, Mills Creek, providing drainage to the Athabasca River via Isadore’s Lake. The Sharkbite area is drained by a number of small creeks and ephemeral watercourses that flow into the Muskeg River, either directly or via Jackpine Creek. Watercourse S1, the largest stream in the Sharkbite area, drains a group of deep upland ponds often referred to as the ‘Three Ponds’ area. Lease 90 is a poorly drained area with no clear discharge channel connecting it to the Muskeg River. The Muskeg River is one of the major tributaries to the Athabasca River downstream of Fort McMurray, and is the dominant hydrological feature in the MRME Development Area area. The Muskeg River originates in the Muskeg Mountain uplands, along with most of its tributaries, and flows for approximately 112 km (Walder et al. 1980) before joining the Athabasca River. Jackpine Creek (formerly known as Hartley Creek), the largest tributary to the Muskeg River, also originates from the southeast and flows in a generally northwesterly direction before joining the Muskeg River approximately 33 km upstream of the Athabasca River confluence. Relatively few tributaries enter the Muskeg River from the north side of the drainage basin (Figure 1-1). The region has a continental climate with seasonal and aerial variations in temperature and precipitation. Daily air temperature typically dips below 0°C in mid-October and remains below zero until the beginning of April. The terrain within in the MRME Development Area area is nearly flat with elevations ranging from 280 to 335 metres above seal level (masl) with an average elevation of about 310 masl. The Muskeg River basin is generally flat, except for Muskeg Mountain to the east in the headwaters of the basin. Ground slopes of less than 0.5% are typical of the poorly drained lowland areas in the MRME Development Area. Slopes of 1 to 3% are typical of better drained upland areas generally outside the MRME Development Area. The dominant surficial soils within the area are fen soils, which are highly absorbent, generally poorly drained and characterized by a high groundwater table, at or near the ground surface, following the spring snowmelt. The fen soils in the MRME Development Area are typically 0.5 to 2 m thick and overlie relatively impervious lacustrine deposits. Vegetation consists primarily of willow brush, shrubs, black spruce and sphagnum moss. Upland areas have a mixed forest cover of coniferous and deciduous trees. A great deal of beaver activity occurs in the area. Many well-defined and poorly defined streams are blocked by beaver dams at numerous locations. Beaver lodges are also present at permanently inundated lowland areas.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 1-1

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Albian plans to expand the MRM pits to the south and west of the existing mine area in the lower watershed of the Muskeg River. The three expansion pit areas lying within the MRME Development Area (Figure 1-1) include: • the West Pit located west of current mine operations in the upper Mills Creek basin and extending west to the Athabasca River valley • the Sharkbite Expansion bounded by the Muskeg River on the north and Jackpine Creek on the east • the Lease 90 Expansion Pit extending south and west in the lower Muskeg River watershed The Expansion will affect the aquatic systems in the area during various phases of the Project including construction, operation, and closure. The Expansion activities that may affect the aquatic conditions include: • muskeg drainage • overburden dewatering • mine pit development • close-circuit drainage systems • reclamation drainage

1.2 Objectives This report provides a baseline description of the surface water quality, sediment quality and aquatic resources of the region, based on a compilation of available historical information and new baseline studies designed to update and supplement the historical information. The objectives of the environmental setting studies were to: • review, evaluate and summarize available historical information with an emphasis on updating the 2001 information base used to support the Jackpine Mine – Phase 1 EIA • identify information gaps based on this review, and design and conduct 2003/2004 field studies to supplement the existing information • provide an updated environmental setting description for the Local Study Area (LSA) to support an EIA

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 1-2

461701 471701 481701 491701 501701 6365920 6365920 Twp 97 Rng 7

r

e

v i M R u s a k c e s g a R

b iv a e h t r

A

6355920 Twp 96 Twp 96 Twp 96 Twp 96 Twp 96 6355920 Rng 10 Rng 9 Rng 8 Rng 7 Rng 6

r e iv R W g Kearl ap e a West Musk Lake su C re Pit e k

We

6345920 s Twp 95 6345920 uk em Rng 7 in Isadore's a c Lake re e Sharkbite k

P em m Lease ic an C 90 ree Twp 94 6335920 k 6335920 Rng 7

A th a b a s c J E a a c a R k s i p t v i J e n e a r ck C pi re n e Cre ek ek Twp 93

6325920 Rng 7 6325920

Twp 92 Surface Water and Aquatic S Rng 7 6315920 Resources Local Study Area te 6315920 e p b a Access n k

R

i v MRME Development Area e r Albian As-Built Footprint (December 2003) and Additional Disturbances in MRME Development Area

461701 471701 481701 491701 501701

MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Surface Water Project Location 202468 DRAFT DATE SCALE BC AB SK and Aquatic Resources Scale in Kilometres 07/Sept/2004 1:300,000 REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. Local Study Area Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by 08/Feb/2005 OS1182 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL 1-1 Footprint provided by Albian Sands Energy Inc. CS AO JS -

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

To address these objectives, North/South Consultants Inc. (North/South) conducted a comprehensive literature review and information gap analysis, and designed and conducted a number of focused field studies during the fall, winter, spring and summer of 2003/2004. These studies included: • seasonal (fall, winter, spring and summer) surface water quality studies on key watercourses and waterbodies • fall sediment quality studies • fall water and sediment toxicity studies • fall benthic invertebrate surveys • winter surveys to assess overwintering potential for watercourses and waterbodies • a winter sediment oxygen demand (SOD) study on the Muskeg River • a study of spring fish movements in Jackpine Creek using a two-way fish counting fence, and on an unnamed stream (designated Watercourse S1) with a two-way hoop net array • a larval fish drift fish study on Jackpine Creek • an early summer invertebrate drift study on four streams • seasonal (spring and summer) fish inventories on Watercourse S1 • seasonal (spring and summer) habitat surveys on Watercourses S1 • aquatic macrophyte surveys on three MRME Development Area waterbodies Additionally, Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. (Hydroconsult) conducted studies to characterize the surface water hydrologic conditions, and to provide the data and information for quantifying future potential changes as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Expansion. The specific objectives of the surface water hydrologic studies were to: • identify major climatic and hydrologic variables • collect and analyze regional and local climatic data, hydrologic data and hydrologic information • define the statistical parameters for the major climatic and hydrologic variables to characterize the spatial and temporal variations based on the regional and local data • describe and characterize the baseline climatic and hydrologic conditions for both the LSA shown in Figure 1-1 and the Regional Study Area (RSA) shown in Figure 1-2 Characterization of climate conditions is included in this study because climatic variables such as precipitation and air temperature significantly affect basin runoff characteristics and streamflows.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 1-5

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

1.3 Study Areas

1.3.1 Local Study Area The LSA used to describe the baseline environmental setting included the entire Muskeg River watershed, the Mills Creek watershed, and the portion of the Athabasca River lying adjacent to the Lease 13 and Lease 90 boundaries. Within the Muskeg River watershed, 2003/2004 studies were conducted on: • Muskeg River; • Jackpine Creek and East Jackpine Creek • unnamed watercourses S1, S2 and S3 • unnamed waterbodies P1, P2, P4 and P5 Within the Mills Creek watershed, 2003/2004 studies were conducted on: • Isadore’s Lake • Mills Creek • unnamed waterbodies P6, P7, P8, P9, P10, P11 and P12 Information on the LSA portion of the Athabasca River was derived entirely from existing information. The LSA encompasses the entire MRME Development area including the West Pit Area, the Sharkbite and the whole of Lease 90, including that portion of Lease 13 lying between the Sharkbite and Lease 90 (Figure 1-1). Portions of the LSA outside of the MRME Development Area were included because of: • proximity to the Expansion • potential for direct or indirect effects resulting from the Expansion • the general mobility of aquatic resources throughout the watershed

1.3.2 Regional Study Area The RSA is the area selected for studying the environmental issues related to the cumulative effects of the Expansion and other regional developments. The Expansion is expected to have negligible effects beyond the RSA. The Expansion aquatic RSA was defined considering the potential contribution of the Expansion to the cumulative changes in flows, water levels and water quality in regional waterbodies, including streams, lakes and ponds. The northern boundary of the RSA represents the limit beyond which no potential changes are expected in hydrology or water quality resulting from oil sands development activities. The RSA encompasses the Muskeg River watershed and a study reach of the Athabasca River from its confluence with the Clearwater River in the south, to its confluence with the Embarras River in the north, as shown in Figure 1-2. The long reach of the Athabasca River is included in the RSA to account for the cumulative effects of the regional developments on river flows.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 1-6

402161 427161 452161 477161 502161 527161 552161

Twp 109 Rng 4

Lake Claire Lake A Twp 108 t h Richardson Rng 4 6471838 6471838 a

b

a

s 107 Twp 107 c Twp 107 Twp 107 a Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 g 18 Rng 17 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Rng 16 Rng 15 R Rng 14 Rng 13 Rng 12 Rng 11 Rng 10 Rng 9 Rng 8 Rng 7 Rng 6 Rng 5 Rng 4 Rng 3 Rng 2 Rng 1 i v

e

r

Twp 106 Rng 4 6446838 6446838 Twp 105 Rng 4

Twp 104 Rng 4

Twp 103 Rng 4 6421838 6421838

Twp 102 Rng 4

Eaglenest Lake Twp 101 Rng 4

6396838 Twp 100 6396838 Sand Rng 4 Lake

Gardiner Twp 99 Lakes Rng 4

McClelland Twp 98 Lake Rng 4 6371838 6371838

Namur Twp 97 Lake Rng 4

Twp 96 Rng 4 Kearl Lake

Twp 95 6346838 Rng 4 6346838

Twp 94 Rng 4

Twp 93 Rng 4 6321838 6321838

Twp 92 Rng 4

Twp 91 Surface Water and Aquatic Rng 4 Resources Regional Study Area

Access Twp 90 Rng 4 6296838 6296838 MRME Development Area

Albian As-Built Footprint r Twp 89 (December 2003) and Additional ive Cle R arwate Rng 4 Disturbances in MRME Development Area ca r River as ab th A Twp 88 402161 427161 452161 477161 502161 527161 552161

MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Project Surface Water Location 0 7.5 15 22.5 30 DRAFT DATE SCALE BC AB SK and Aquatic Resources Scale in Kilometres 07/Sept/2004 1:1,000,000 REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO.

Regional Study Area Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by 08/Feb/2005 OS1182 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL 1-2 Footprint provided by Albian Sands Energy Inc. CS AO JS -

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

The RSA boundaries were defined with consideration to: • the possible spatial extent of direct or indirect Expansion related effects on surface water quality, sediment quality or aquatic resources • the mobility and distribution of aquatic resources, particularly fish, that utilize the MRME Development Area or LSA • coordination with other aquatics disciplines (e.g., hydrology)

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 1-9

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 1-10

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

2 Methods – Climate and Surface Water Hydrology

2.1 Historical Data Review Numerous surface water hydrologic studies have been conducted within the region. These include studies for the following oil sands projects: • various studies for the existing Syncrude and Suncor mines west of the Athabasca River • the Syncrude Aurora North and South mines and Albian Sands Muskeg River Mine in the Muskeg River watershed east of the Athabasca River • the Jackpine Mine –Phase 1 in the Muskeg River watershed • the Suncor Steepbank and Millenium mines east of the Athabasca River • the Suncor Firebag In-Situ Project in the head watersheds of the Firebag, Muskeg and Steepbank rivers east of the Athabasca River • the TrueNorth Fort Hills Project in the watersheds of Fort Creek, Susan Lake outlet creek and McClelland Lake east of the Athabasca River Previous regional hydrologic baseline and overview studies providing relevant data include: • Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program (RAMP) • Overview of Water Quality in the Muskeg River Basin July 1972 to March 2001 (McEachern and Noton 2002) • Synthesis of Surface Water Hydrology (Neill and Evans 1979) These previous studies have defined the regional surface water hydrology based on the information available when the studies were conducted. This regional surface water hydrology was updated, where appropriate, in this study based on up-to-date data and information for the region and the LSA and RSA. This update was primarily conducted using the database developed from the oil sands regional climatic and hydrologic monitoring program under the Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program (RAMP). The latest RAMP Five Year Report (Golder 2003) summarizes the database providing information on the regional and local monitoring networks, including station locations and available periods of record. Data up to the end of 2003 with some site specific data in 2004 are used in this environmental setting report. RAMP includes site-specific hydrologic data collection for the Muskeg River Mine LSA and RSA. The database maintained by RAMP includes the up-to-date regional climatic and hydrologic data collected by Environment Canada. Data collected as part of Albian Sands Muskeg River Mine and Shell Jackpine Mine aquatic monitoring programs are also included in the database. The regional and local data collected and documented by RAMP provided the basis for defining the regional and local surface water hydrology.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 2-1

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

2.2 Climate

2.2.1 Data Sources Regional climatic data are available from a network of seasonally and continuously operated climatic monitoring stations gathered principally by Atmospheric Monitoring Division of Environment Canada and Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD). These stations generally have 20 or more years of record. Additional short-term climatic data are available from RAMP. The Forestry Lookout station data compiled by Environment Canada primarily collect summer rainfall and temperature data. Snowfall data have been recorded at only three stations, but two of these stations have been discontinued. The only year-round climate station that collects a more complete range of climatic parameters (wind, relative humidity, sunshine, snow in addition to temperature and precipitation) in the region with a long period of record (1953-2003) is located at the Fort McMurray Airport. The next longest (1973-82 and 1993-present) more complete year-round climate station is located at Mildred Lake. Figure 2-1 shows the locations of the regional climate stations, including: • ASRD seasonal precipitation monitoring stations • Environment Canada long-term, year-round monitoring stations • the oil sands industry year-round climate monitoring stations One of the oil sands industry year-round stations, the Aurora climate station is located within the LSA, as shown in Figure 2-1. The Aurora climate station is maintained by RAMP and has been in operation since 1995. Some prior data collected in 1988-89 as part of the OSLO project are included with this station data. Climatic variables monitored at this station include air temperature, rainfall, snowfall, global solar radiation, relative humidity, and wind speed and direction.

2.2.2 Methods of Analyses Regional climatic conditions have been characterized by analyzing the available historical data. Spatial variations in climate, data comparisons and correlations were analyzed to provide a basis for assessing and extending the short period of local climate data at the Aurora station and extrapolating the applicable regional information to the LSA. The Fort McMurray Airport station data were primarily applied for these extrapolations. Analyses were completed on major climate variables that affect the surface water hydrologic characteristics including precipitation, air temperature, evaporation, relative humidity and wind. Relevant annual, seasonal, monthly and daily statistics of the climate variables and key climatic parameters were defined to allow characterization of baseline climate conditions for the LSA.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 2-2

402424 427424 452424 477424 502424 527424 552424

Twp 109 Rng 4

Lake Claire Lake Twp 108 A t Rng 4 h Richardson 6471241 6471241 a

b

a 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 s Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 c Twp 107 g 18 Rng 17 Rng 16 Twp 107 Twp 107 aTwp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Rng 15 Rng 14 Rng 13 Rng 12 Rng 11 Rng 10 R Rng 9 Rng 8 Rng 7 Rng 6 Rng 5 Rng 4 Rng 3 Rng 2 Rng 1

i v

e

r

Twp 106 Rng 4 6446241 6446241 Twp 105 Rng 4

Twp 104 Rng 4

Twp 103 Rng 4 6421241 6421241 # Richardson Buckton Lookout # Lookout Twp 102 Rng 4

Eaglenest Twp 101 Lake Rng 4

# Birch Mountain

6396241 Lookout Twp 100 6396241 Rng 4 Sand # Lake Johnson Lake Lookout Gardiner Twp 99 Lakes Rng 4

McClelland Twp 98 Lake Rng 4 6371241 6371241

Namur Twp 97 Lake Calumet River : Rng 4

# Bitumount Lookout Twp 96 Rng 4 Kearl Lake

Twp 95 6346241 : " Rng 4 6346241 Fort Aurora Climate McKay ! Station # Ells Lookout Twp 94 Rng 4 # Alberta Sustainable Resource Development Seasonal Precipitation Monitoring Station # Muskeg Environment Canada Atmospheric Monitoring Mildred Lake Lookout " : Twp 93 Division Year-Round Long-Term Climate Rng 4 Monitoring Station Oil Sands Industry Year-Round Climate Tar Island :

6321241 " 6321241 Monitoring Station Twp 92 Oil Sands Industry Seasonal Precipitation Rng 4 : Monitoring Station

Access Twp 91 Rng 4

Project Data Twp 90 Surface Water and Aquatic Rng 4 6296241 Resources Local Study Area 6296241 Fort McMurray # Thickwood MRME Development Area Lookout r Twp 89 ive Cle Rng 4 Albian As-Built Footprint R arwate ca r River (December 2003) and Additional as Disturbances in MRME Development Area ab th Fort McMurray " A Twp 88 402424 427424 452424 477424 502424 527424 552424

MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Project Locations of Location 0 7.5 15 22.5 30 DRAFT DATE SCALE BC AB SK Local and Regional Scale in Kilometres 09/Sept/2004 1:1,000,000 REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. Climate Monitoring Stations Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by 08/Feb/2005 OS1182 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL 2-1 Footprint provided by Albian Sands Energy Inc. AO DC JS -

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

2.3 Surface Water Hydrology

2.3.1 Data Sources

2.3.1.1 Hydrometric Monitoring Data More than 30 Environment Canada Water Survey Division hydrometric stations have existed in the region. However, many of these stations have short-term or discontinuous periods of record and are of limited value in defining long-term regional hydrologic characteristics. The following ten stations within the RSA, as well as stations on major tributaries to the lower Athabasca River (Figure 2-2), have relatively long periods of record: • Muskeg River (07DA008, 1974-present) • Jackpine Creek (formerly Hartley Creek) (07DA009, 1975-1993, RAMP resumed in 1995) • Poplar Creek (07DA007, 1973-1986, RAMP resumed in 1996) • Beaver River (07DA018, 1975-2003) • Joslyn Creek (07DA016, 1975-1993) • Unnamed Creek (07DA011, 1975-1993) • Steepbank River (07DA006, 1972-present) • Ells River (07DA017, 1976-1986) • MacKay River (07DB001, 1972-present) • Firebag River (07DC001, 1971-present) The Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek stations are located in the LSA. Some of these stations have also recorded sediment data. Many of the RAMP hydrometric stations are located in or near the LSA, as shown in Figure 2-3. In addition to those currently or previously operated by Environment Canada Water Survey Division (Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek stations), the RAMP hydrometric stations within the LSA and period of record include: • Alsands Drain (S1) - 1980-83, 1995- until discharges stopped in 2002 • Albian Sands Settling Pond (S13)- 2000-until discharges stopped in 2002 • Mills Creek (S6) - 1996-present • Isadore’s’s Lake (L3) – 2000-present Several other RAMP stations in the upper Muskeg River basin shown in Figure 2-3 are not specifically discussed as part of this study. They include: Iyinimin Creek (S3), Muskeg River Aurora (S5A), Stanley Creek (S8), Kearl Lake Outlet (S9), Wapasu Creek (S10), Shelley Creek (S21), Muskeg Creek (S22), Khahgo Creek (S4A), Muskeg River Upland (S20), and Kearl Lake (L2).

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 2-5

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

2.3.1.2 Channel Section and Geomorphic Survey Data Channel cross-sectional surveys and hydraulic modelling of flood levels on the Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek have been conducted in support of the Muskeg River Mine EIA (Golder 1997b) and the Jackpine Mine-Phase 1 EIA (Golder 2002) and are not discussed further in this report. Geomorphic studies in the region include the studies of streams in the Muskeg River basin (W-E-R Engineering 1989; Golder 1997a), Beaver River basin (AGRA 1995), Fort Creek basin (Golder 2001a) and upper Muskeg River basin for the Jackpine Mine (Golder 2002). This information has been used to define stream geomorphologic variability and correlate with various hydrologic and basin parameters. Supplemental geomorphic descriptions of the small streams in the Muskeg River Mine Expansion areas were conducted to provide site-specific information and data to assist in defining the geomorphic characteristics of these local streams. Geomorphic descriptions include basin area, channel bed slope, valley slope, channel depth, channel width and bed material size.

2.3.2 Methods of Analysis

2.3.2.1 Regional Stream Flow Analysis The long-term streamflow data from the regional monitoring stations were analyzed and used to characterize the regional variations and trends in basin runoff and streamflow. These gauged basins have drainage areas ranging from 151 km² (Poplar Creek) to 5,990 km² (Firebag River). The hydrologic characteristics of the Athabasca River in the RSA were defined based on the records at the Environment Canada hydrometric gauging stations below Fort McMurray (07DA001, 1957-present) and at Embarras Airport (07DD001, 1971-1984). Short-term data (2001-present) are available from the RAMP station S24, located on the Athabasca River downstream of Eymundson Creek. Regional analyses were conducted using standard statistical methods, including derivation of long-term averages, extremes and probability of occurrence of extreme events. The Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek data provide a long-term record of flow conditions within the LSA and a basis for relative comparison of short-term data collected on smaller streams within the LSA.

2.3.2.2 Sediment Analysis Available stream sediment measurements for the large longer-term gauged watersheds in the RSA have been analyzed to derive sediment yield characteristics (e.g., the annual sediment yields). These watershed drainage areas range from 151 km² at Poplar Creek to 133,000 km² for the Athabasca River. The available measurements of sediment or total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations in the streams in the LSA were analyzed to quantify the ranges of variation and the TSS relationship with streamflows. These baseline data may be used to characterize the combined effects of watershed sediment yields and channel erosion rates. These streams include the Muskeg River and its major tributaries.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 2-6

402028 427028 452028 477028 502028 527028 552028

Twp 109 Rng 4

Lake Claire Lake A Twp 108 t h Richardson Rng 4

6471673 a 6471673

b

a

s 107 Twp 107 c Twp 107 a Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 g 18 Rng 17 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Twp 107 Rng 16 Rng 15 R Rng 14 Rng 13 Rng 12 Rng 11 Rng 10 Rng 9 Rng 8 Rng 7 Rng 6 Rng 5 Rng 4 Rng 3 Rng 2 Rng 1 i v

e

r

Twp 106 Rng 4 6446673 6446673 Twp 105 Rng 4

Twp 104 Rng 4

Twp 103 Rng 4 6421673 6421673

Twp 102 Rng 4

Eaglenest Lake Twp 101 Rng 4

6396673 07DA011 Twp 100 6396673 Sand .! 07DC001 Rng 4 Lake .!

Gardiner Twp 99 Lakes Rng 4 07DA012 .!

07DA019 McClelland Twp 98 .! Lake 07DA013 Rng 4 .! 6371673 6371673 07DA014 Namur .! Twp 97 Lake 07DA010 Rng 4 .! 07DA015.!

Twp 96 Rng 4 07DA016 Kearl ! .! Lake . .! ! 07DC002 07DA017 . 07DA009 Twp 95 6346673 07DB001 .! Rng 4 6346673 .! ! Fort ! 07DA008 . McKay 07DB002 Twp 94 Rng 4 .! 07DA005

Twp 93 Rng 4 .! 6321673 07DA006 .! Active Environment Canada 6321673 Hydrometric Station 07DA018 .! .! Discontinued Environment Canada 07DB004 ! Hydrometric Station .! . 07DA007 AccessTwp 91 07DB003 Rng 4 .! Project Data Twp 90 ! Surface RngWater 4 and Aquatic 6296673 07DB005 07DA001 . 6296673 .! Resources Regional Study Area Fort McMurray MRME Development Area e r Twp 89 iv Cle Albian As-BuiltRng 4 Footprint R arwate ca r River (December 2003) and Additional as ab Disturbances in MRME Development Area th A

402028 427028 452028 477028 502028 527028 552028

MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Project Location 0 7.5 15 22.5 30 DRAFT DATE SCALE BC AB SK Locations of Regional Scale in Kilometres 07/Sept/2004 1:1,000,000 REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO.

Hydrometric Stations Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by 08/Feb/2005 OS1182 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL 2-2 Footprint provided by Albian Sands Energy Inc. AO DC JS -

452141 462141 472141 482141 492141 502141 512141

Twp 98

6375113 S24 Rng 7 6375113

L1 !

S12 Twp 97 6365113 ! Rng 7 6365113 M u s k e g R iv r e r e

v i

R S8

a ! c

s

a Twp 96 b S10 Twp 96 a Twp 96 Twp 96 Twp 96 Twp 96 Twp 96 Rng 12 h ! Rng 11 t Rng 10 Rng 9 Rng 8 Rng 7 Rng 6

6355113 ! 6355113 A S20 r ! e S5A iv L2 R !

g e S22 Musk ! ! S9 S21 ! S1 ! S3 S6 ! ! " Twp 95 ! S2 Rng 7 6345113 ! S13 ! 6345113 L3 S4A !

Fort McKay ! S7-WSC Twp 94 ! Rng 7 6335113 6335113

Twp 93 Rng 7 6325113 6325113

A th a b a s c a R iv e r Twp 92 S1 Rng 7 ! Hydrometric Station 6315113 6315113 " Rain Gauge

Access

Project Data Twp 91 Surface Water and Aquatic Rng 7 Resources Local Study Area 6305113 6305113 MRME Development Area

Albian As-Built Footprint (December 2003) and Additional Disturbances in MRME Development Area

452141 462141 472141 482141 492141 502141 512141

MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Locations of RAMP Project Location 30369 DRAFT DATE SCALE Hydrometric Stations BC AB SK Scale in Kilometres 09/Sept/2004 1:400,000 In and Adjacent to the REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by 08/Feb/2005 OS1182 Local Study Area AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL 2-3 Footprint provided by Albian Sands Energy Inc. AO DC JS -

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

2.3.2.3 Stream Geomorphic Assessment Assessments of local streams were conducted as part of the baseline data collection program to characterize the stream geomorphic conditions within the LSA. The collected stream geomorphic data, including basin area, channel bed slope, valley slope, channel depth, channel width and bed material, were compiled with previous work to quantify the range of variation and to characterize channel geomorphic regimes in the LSA.

2.4 Muskeg River Mine Operational Water Management Data A detailed inventory of operational water management data has not been conducted as part of the baseline. A summary of data collected by Albian and provided by RAMP from the Alsands Drain (S1) and Albian Sands Settling Pond (S13) is presented in Appendix A. Discharges from these sites to the Muskeg River ceased in 2003 as the Muskeg River Mine is now a close-circuit operation.

2.5 Baseline Hydrologic Monitoring A helicopter fly-over survey was conducted in October 2003 to identify small drainage features and pond and beaver dam conditions in the LSA. As a result of the reconnaissance survey, site specific hydrologic monitoring focused on the small local streams within the LSA to supplement and compare with the existing and on-going RAMP data collection in the Muskeg River basin. The monitoring consisted of conducting spot flow measurements in combination with water quality sampling and aquatic studies. Measurements were conducted applying standard streamflow measurement methods with electromagnetic or mechanical style current meters. Because of the small stream sizes and low flows measured, the number of depth and velocity determinations across a stream section was limited from optimal at times. Measurements were conducted in October 2003 following a significant local storm event, in the winter to document low flow conditions in February-March 2004 and in the spring and summer of 2004 during other aquatic work programs. The monitoring sites and local watersheds within the LSA are identified in Figure 5-2. Emphasis was placed on collecting data from the main stream identified as S1 at the outlet of three ponds. This is the main inflow channel on the south side of the Muskeg River downstream of Jackpine Creek. Spot measurements and observations were conducted to document surface flows across the Canterra Road between the Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek. Other monitoring consisted of spot measurements on the two main forks of Jackpine Creek and on Mills Creek downstream of the RAMP station below Highway 63.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 2-11

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 2-12

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

3 Methods – Surface Water Quality, Sediment Quality and Aquatic Resources

3.1 Historical Data Review A large body of historical data and information regarding surface water quality, sediment quality and aquatic resources for lakes, ponds and streams in the LSA and RSA was reviewed as an initial step towards describing the existing environmental conditions. The purpose of this review was to identify information gaps and guide the design process for the field studies that are described in this report. Table 3-1 presents a comprehensive list of relevant data sources that were reviewed, although not all of these sources were used or cited in this subsequent report. The approach taken was to provide an update to the recent Shell Jackpine Mine – Phase 1 Environmental Stand-Alone Reports (Golder 2002b) and data sources used were therefore generally limited to recent reports. Information from older historic reports was used where current information was sparse or where historic data were relevant to the current baseline descriptions. A key source for recent historical information were the reports produced by the Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program (RAMP), a multi-stakeholder driven initiative started in 1997 to monitor the health of rivers and lakes in the Oil Sands Region of northeastern Alberta.

3.2 Field Surveys and Analyses 2003/2004

3.2.1 Surface Water Quality and Toxicity Survey Water samples and in situ field measurements were taken to characterize water quality at 10 locations within the LSA. Specifically: two locations on Jackpine Creek (upstream and downstream sites), and a single location on watercourses S1, S2, S3, and Mills Creek, and on waterbodies P1, P2, P4 and Isadore’s Lake (Figure 3-1). Additional samples were taken concurrently from Jackpine Creek (upstream), S1 and Mills Creek to determine whether there was any background waterborne toxicity in these watercourses during fall or winter. Historical waterborne toxicity has been reported for watercourses in the LSA on a few occasions (e.g., Muskeg Creek, Shelley Creek, Muskeg River) and it has been hypothesized that the presence of humic materials or other organics released from vegetation decay may have contributed to observed toxicity (Golder 2000, 2002a, 2002c). Annual toxicity testing in the Muskeg River is part of the RAMP core monitoring program but they do not monitor waterborne toxicity on any other watercourses in the MRME Development Area. Therefore, waterborne toxicity was assessed in three streams in 2003/2004 as part of this baseline study. The incorporation of toxicity testing into a water or sediment quality survey is advantageous because it allows the simultaneous assessment of contaminants and chemical/physical parameters, to provide an integrated measure of toxicity. This accounts for any interactions (antagonistic or synergistic) between contaminants, which cannot be determined by the use of aquatic life criteria alone. Further, if untested

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-1

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

contaminants are present in the sample, toxicity testing would still detect an effect, whereas chemical testing would not.

Table 3-1 Historical Data Sources Relevant to the LSA and RSA

Description Survey Year Reference Tar Sands fisheries survey 1972 Griffiths 1973 Fisheries survey of Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek 1974 O’Neil and Janzie 1974 Alberta Oil Sands Environmental Research Program (AOSERP) - 1976 Bond and Machniak 1977 Fish fauna of the Muskeg River Surface water quality study of the Muskeg River watershed 1976 - 1977 Akena 1979 Alsands project Environmental Impact Assessment 1977 Alsands Project Group 1978 AOSERP - Fish fauna of the Muskeg River 1977 Bond and Machniak 1979 AOSERP -Biophysical inventory of major tributaries in AOSERP 1979 Walder et al. 1980 AOSERP - Macrobenthic invertebrate communities in Hartley 1976 -1977 Hartland-Rowe et al 1979 Creek Alsands Project – Wildlife and fisheries protection and 1979 Webb 1981 management plan Baseline inventory for aquatic macrophyte species distributions in 1980 Thompson Crosby-Diewold. the AOSERP study area. Prep. AOSERP Report 100. 1980 AOSERP - Fish resources of the Athabasca River 1976 - 1977 Bond and Berry 1980 AOSERP - Fishery resources of the Athabasca River 1976 - 1977 Bond 1980 AOSERP - Aquatic biophysical inventory 1978 - 1979 Sekerak and Walder 1980 Aquatic investigations in the Hartley Creek area (SandAlta 1981 O’Neil et al. 1982 project) The fish and fisheries of the Athabasca River Basin. Their status 1984 Wallace and McCart. 1984. and environmental requirements. Other Six Leases Operation (OSLO) - Aquatic baseline survey 1985 Beak 1986 OSLO EIA 1988 RL & L 1989 Northern River Basins Study (NRBS) fish and riverine habitat 1992 RL & L 1994 survey Fish and Fish Habitat Bibliographic Database for the Peace, 1993 Barton and Courtney. 1993 Athabasca and Slave River Basins. NRBS Project Report No. 17. Steepbank/Aurora mine projects aquatic baseline survey 1995 Golder 1996a Aurora Mine Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 1995 BOVAR Environmental 1996 Syncrude/Aurora Mine Environmental Baseline Addendum 1996 Golder 1996b Environmental Overview of the Northern River Basins 1996 Lyons and MacLock 1996 Muskeg River Mine Project Aquatic Baseline Report 1997 Golder 1997 Fisheries and Aquatics for Mobil Lease 36 1997 KOMEX 1997 RAMP 1997 1997 Golder 1998 RAMP 1998 1998 Golder 1999 Muskeg River Mine Environmental Setting Reports 1997 Golder 1998 Muskeg River Mine Project EIA 1998 Shell 1998 Mildred Lake Upgrader Expansion Project EIA 1998 Suncrude 1998. Firebag In-Situ Oil Sands Project EIA 1998 Suncor 2000 RAMP 1999 1999 Golder 2000

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-2

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 3-1 Historical Data Sources Relevant to the LSA and RSA (cont’d)

Description Survey Year Reference Application of Critical, Target, and Monitoring Loads for the 1999 CASA 1999 Evaluation and Management of Acid Deposition. RAMP 2000 2000 Golder 2001 RAMP 2001 2001 Golder 2002c CNRL Horizon EIA 2001 CNRL 2002 CEMA Muskeg River Watershed Workshop Summary Report 2001 Ayles 2002 Review of surface water research and reports for Municipal 2002 Dillon 2002 District of Wood Buffalo - CEMA Analysis of the water quality of the Steepbank, Firebag and 1989 - 2001 WRS 2002 Muskeg rivers during spring melt Review of Predictive Modelling Tools for Wildlife and Fish Key 2001 Salmo Consulting Inc. 2001. Indicators in the Wood Buffalo Region. Fort Hills Oil Sands Project. EIA 2001 True North 2001. Jackpine Mine - Phase 1 - Environmental Setting Reports 2001 Golder 2002a Jackpine Mine - Phase 1 - EIA 2002 Shell 2002 Overview of Water Quality in the Muskeg River Basin, July 1972 2002 AENV 2002 to March 2001. Sustainability of the Muskeg River Watershed Workshop - 2002 Ayles 2002. Summary Report. Prepared for the Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA).

A Review and Assessment of Existing Information for Key 2002 Westworth 2002 Wildlife and Fish Species in the Regional Sustainable Development Strategy Study Area – Volume 2: Fish. RAMP 2002 2002 Golder 2003b RAMP - Five Year Report (1998 - 2002) 2003 Golder 2003a RAMP 2003 2003 Hatfield et al. 2004 CEMA Fish Overwintering Use of the Lower Athabasca River 2004 Golder 2004 2001 to 2004 Alberta Environment provincial water quality database Data from AENV 2004 1985-2004 Calculation of critical loads of acidity to lakes in the Athabasca 2004 WRS 2004 Oil Sands Region.

Seasonal water quality profiles were taken at three depths (shallow; mid-depth; maximum depth) at all four LSA ponds during all four seasons. Effort was made to revisit the exact location each season for both water quality sampling and the measurement of water quality profiles. The seasons, consistent with RAMP and previous regional EIAs were defined as: • Fall: September and October 2003 • Winter: November 2003 – March 2004 • Spring: April and May 2004 • Summer: June – August 2004

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-3

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

The sampling schedule is outlined in Table 3-2. The suite of water quality parameters and in situ field measurements was consistent with protocols used by RAMP and baseline studies from previous EIAs (Table 3-3). The program focussed on collecting consistent water quality data across all four seasons to aid the characterization of seasonal variability and to supplement historical data. Muskeg River and the Athabasca River were sampled seasonally in 2003/2004 and historically by RAMP. Jackpine Creek has been sampled less frequently by RAMP and in 2003/2004 was only sampled in the fall. Thus the 2003/2004 sampling program for this baseline study was designed to supplement the data gaps.

Table 3-2 Water and Sediment Quality 2003/2004 Sampling Schedule Sediment Water Sediment Sediment Oxygen Site Water Quality Toxicity Quality Toxicity Demand Muskeg River Mar 04 Jackpine Creek Mar, May, Jul 04 Mar 04 upstream of Canterra Road Jackpine Creek Mar, May, Jul 04 Mar 04 Mar 04 Mar 04 downstream of Canterra Road (close to the RAMP station) Mills Creek Oct 03, Mar, May, Jul 04 Oct 03 Oct 03 Oct 03 Watercourse S1 Oct 03 Mar, May, Jul 04 Oct 03 Oct 03 Oct 03 Watercourse S2 Oct 03, May, Jul 04 Watercourse S3 Oct 03, May, Jul 04 Isadore’s Lake Oct 03, Mar, May, Jul 04 Oct 03 Waterbody P1 Oct 03, Mar, May, Jul 04 Oct 03 Waterbody P2 Oct 03, Mar, May, Jul 04 Waterbody P4 Oct 03, Mar, May, Jul 04 Waterbody P5 Mar 04 Waterbody P6 Mar 04 Waterbody P7 Mar 04 Waterbody P8 Mar 04 Waterbody P9 Mar 04 Waterbody P10 Mar 04 Waterbody P11 Mar 04 Waterbody P12 Mar 04

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-4

RGE 11 RGE 10 RGE 9 W4M

TWP TWP 96 96

JPC-Mouth!.

TWP TWP 95 95 !.Mills Creek

S3 !. Isadore's Lake !.

!.S2 MUR-B S1 !. !. !.P4 !. P1 !.MUR-A

JPC-4 !.

A P2

t

ha !.

b a Sediment Oxygen Demand TWP s .! c Survey Location TWP 94 a 94

R .! Water and Sediment Quality iv Sampling Location e r .! Water and Sediment Quality and Toxicity Sampling Location

.! Water Quality Sampling Location

Gravel Road - 1 Lane (Each Direction)

Paved Road - Primary - Unimproved

MRME Development Area

Albian As-Built Footprint (December 2003) and Additional Disturbances in MRME Development Area

RGE 11 RGE 10 RGE 9 W4M

MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited NORTH Project PREPARED BY Water and Sediment Quality Location 1012 BC DRAFT DATE SCALE AB SK 07/Sept/2004 1:100,000 2003/2004 Scale in Kilometres REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. 08/Feb/2005 OS1182 Sampling Locations Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL 3-1 Footprint provided by Albian Sands Energy Inc. DC KK JS -

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 3-3 Water Quality and Toxicity Parameters

Category Parameter a Units Parameter a Units Field Measured Dissolved Oxygen mg/L Salinity ppt Dissolved Oxygen % Specific Conductance µS/cm pH pH units Temperature °C

Redox Potential mV Turbidity NTU

Conventional Parameters Colour TCU Total Alkalinity mg/L Conductance µS/cm Total Dissolved Solids mg/L Dissolved Organic Carbon mg/L Total Organic Carbon mg/L

Hardness mg/L Total Suspended Solids mg/L

pH pH units

Major Ions Bicarbonate mg/L Potassium mg/L Calcium mg/L Sodium mg/L Carbonate mg/L Sulphate mg/L

Chloride mg/L Sulphide mg/L

Magnesium mg/L Hydroxide mg/L

Nutrients and Chloropyll a Nitrate + Nitrite mg/L Phosphorus, total mg/L Nitrogen - ammonia mg/L Phosphorus, dissolved mg/L Nitrogen - Kjeldahl mg/L Chlorophyll a µg/L

Other Biochemical Oxygen Demand mg/L Gran Alkalinity meq/L

General Organics Naphthenic acids mg/L Total Recoverable Hydrocarbons mg/L Total Phenolics mg/L

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-7

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 3-3 Water Quality and Toxicity Parameters (cont’d)

Category Parameter a Units Parameter a Units Metals (Total and Dissolved) Aluminum (Al) µg/L Mercury (Hg) b µg/L Antimony (Sb) µg/L Methyl-mercury (Me-Hg) b µg/L Arsenic (As) µg/L Molybdenum (Mo) µg/L Barium (Ba) µg/L Nickel (Ni) µg/L Beryllium (Be) µg/L Selenium (Se) µg/L Bismuth (Bi) µg/L Silver (Ag) µg/L

Boron (B) µg/L Strontium (Sr) µg/L

Cadmium (Cd) µg/L Thallium (Tl) µg/L Chromium (Cr) µg/L Thorium (Th) µg/L Cobalt (Co) µg/L Tin µg/L Copper (Cu) µg/L Titanium (Ti) µg/L Iron (Fe) µg/L Uranium (U) µg/L Lead (Pb) µg/L Vanadium (V) µg/L Lithium (Li) µg/L Zinc (Zn) µg/L Manganese (Mn) µg/L

Target PAHs and Alkylated PAHs Acenaphthene µg/L C4 subst'd naphthalenes µg/L Acenaphthylene µg/L C4 subst'd phenanthrene/anthracene µg/L Anthracene µg/L Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene µg/L Acridine µg/L Dibenzothiophene µg/L Benzo(a)anthracene µg/L Fluoranthene µg/L Benzo(a)pyrene µg/L Fluorene µg/L Benzo(b)fluoranthene µg/L Indeno(c,d-123)pyrene µg/L Benzo(k)fluoranthene µg/L Methyl acenaphthene µg/L Benzo(g,h,i)perylene µg/L Methyl benzo(a)anthracene/chrysene µg/L Biphenyl µg/L Methyl benzo(b&k) fluoranthene/benzo(a)pyrene µg/L C2 subst'd benzo(a) anthracene/chrysene µg/L Methyl biphenyl µg/L C2 subst'd benzo(b& k) fluoranthene/benzo(a)pyrene µg/L Methyl dibenzothiophene µg/L C2 subst'd biphenyl µg/L Methyl fluoranthene / pyrene µg/L C2 subst'd dibenzothiophene µg/L Methyl fluorene µg/L C2 subst'd fluorene µg/L Methyl naphthalenes µg/L

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-8

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 3-3 Water Quality and Toxicity Parameters (cont’d)

Category Parameter a Units Parameter a Units Target PAHs and Alkylated PAHs C2 subst'd naphthalenes µg/L Methyl phenanthrene/anthracene µg/L (cont’d) C2 subst'd phenanthren/anthracene µg/L Naphthalene µg/L C3 subst'd dibenzothiophene µg/L Phenanthrene µg/L C3 subst'd naphthalenes µg/L Pyrene µg/L C3 subst'd phenanthrene/anthracene µg/L Quinoline µg/L C4 subst'd dibenzothiophene µg/L Retene µg/L

Toxicity Testing 72-h Algal Growth Inhibition Test (Selanastrum capricornatum) (standard RAMP test battery) Ceriodaphnia dubia (cladoceran) 7-d Survival and Reproduction Test Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) 7-d Survival and Growth Test Notes: a The exact combination of parameters measured was dependant on site and season b Only the total form was analyzed

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-9

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

All parameters were analyzed at analytical detection limits that were below available water quality guidelines (WQGs) to maximize the use of the data collected. A quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program was implemented that was consistent with RAMP and previous EIAs (Appendix E). Study design and sampling protocols were also consistent with RAMP and previous EIAs to facilitate the integration of the data collected. All samples were collected according to protocols specified by the designated commercial laboratories and shipped within the maximum hold times. Alberta Research Council (ARC, Vegreville) analysed water samples for total and dissolved metals, and ultra-low level mercury and silver. Flett Research (Winnipeg) analysed water samples for ultra-low level mercury and methylmercury and Hydroqual Laboratories (Calgary) performed the water toxicity testing according to standard protocols. All other water quality analyses were performed by Envirotest Laboratories (ETL, Edmonton). At each watercourse sampling location, a discrete hand dipped grab sample was taken at an approximate depth of 30 cm and the bottle was uncapped and recapped at depth. Prior to taking the sample, each bottle was rinsed three times with stream water. A composite sample from an approximate depth of 30 cm was taken from four sampling locations for each waterbody. The specific water quality sampling procedures employed are outlined in Appendix B. When sampling under ice in the winter, a hole was drilled into the ice with a hand auger to reach the water beneath and a peristaltic pump was used to collect the water samples. In situ measurements were taken with YSI 556 Multimeter and an Analite NEP 160 Turbidity meter. Both meters were field calibrated at least daily for all parameters. Sample site locations were taken and logged on a Garmin II Plus GPS unit and digital site photographs were taken. Sampling locations were accessed by helicopter, boat, snowmobile, all terrain vehicle (ATV) and/or four wheel drive vehicle.

3.2.2 Sediment Quality and Toxicity Survey Sediment samples were taken to characterize sediment quality at five locations within the LSA. Specific locations were Jackpine Creek (mouth), S1, Mills Creek, Isadore’s Lake and P1 (Figure 3-1). All samples were taken in October 2003 with the exception of the Jackpine Creek sample which was taken in March 2004. Additional samples were taken concurrently from Jackpine Creek, S1 and Mills Creek to determine if there was background sediment toxicity in the fall or winter. Annual toxicity testing in the Muskeg River is part of the RAMP core monitoring program but they do not monitor sediment toxicity in any of the other watercourses located in the MRME Development Area. Therefore, sediment toxicity was assessed in three streams in 2003/2004, as part of this baseline study. The sediment sampling was conducted concurrently with seasonal water quality sampling and benthic invertebrate fall sampling at the same location. All parameters were analyzed at analytical detection limits that were below available sediment quality guidelines (SQGs) to maximize the use of the data collected. A QA/QC program was implemented that was consistent with RAMP and previous EIAs (Appendix E). The study design, sampling protocols and analytical parameters were also consistent with RAMP and previous EIAs to facilitate the integration of the data collected (see Table 3-4 for the parameter list). All samples were collected according to protocols specified by the designated commercial laboratories and shipped within the maximum hold times. Envirotest Laboratories (ETL, Edmonton) analysed all the sediment quality parameters with the exception of the Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) suite, which was analyzed by AXYS Analytical Services Ltd. (AXYS Sidney, BC). Hydroqual Laboratories (Calgary) performed the sediment toxicity testing according to standard protocols.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-10

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 3-4 Sediment Quality and Toxicity Parameters

Category Parameter Units Parameter Units Particle Distribution and Moisture Content % Sand % % Clay % % Silt % % Moisture %

Carbon Content Inorganic Carbon % Total Carbon % Total Organic Carbon %

Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHC) Benzene µg/g F1 (C6-C10) µg/g Toluene µg/g F1-BTEX µg/g Ethylbenzene µg/g F2 (C10-C16) µg/g Xylenes µg/g F3 (C16-C34) µg/g F4 (C34-C50) µg/g Total Hydrocarbons (C6-C50) µg/g

Metals (Total) Aluminum (Al) µg/g Mercury (Hg) µg/g Arsenic (As) µg/g Molybdenum (Mo) µg/g Barium (Ba) µg/g Nickel (Ni) µg/g Beryllium (Be) µg/g Potassium (K) µg/g Bismuth (Bi) µg/g Selenium (Se) µg/g Boron (B) µg/g Silver (Ag) µg/g Cadmium (Cd) µg/g Sodium (Na) µg/g Calcium (Ca) µg/g Strontium (Sr) µg/g Chromium (Cr) µg/g Thallium (Tl) µg/g Cobalt (Co) µg/g Tin (Sn) µg/g Copper (Cu) µg/g Titanium (Ti) µg/g Iron (Fe) µg/g Uranium (U) µg/g Lead (Pb) µg/g Vanadium (V) µg/g Magnesium (Mg) µg/g Zinc (Zn) µg/g Manganese (Mn) µg/g

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-11

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 3-4 Sediment Quality and Toxicity Parameters (cont’d)

Category Parameter Units Parameter Units Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) Acenaphthene µg/g C2-naphthalenes µg/g Acenaphthylene µg/g C3 phenanthrenes/anthracenes µg/g Anthrcene µg/g C3-dibenzothiophenes µg/g Benz[a]anthracene µg/g C3-fluoranthenes/pyrenes µg/g Benzo[a]pyrene µg/g C3-fluorenes µg/g Benzo[b/j/k]fluoranthene µg/g C3-naphthalenes µg/g Benzo[ghi]perylene µg/g C4-dibenzothiophenes µg/g Biphenyl µg/g C4-phenanthrenes/anthrcenes µg/g C1 phenanthrenes/anthracenes µg/g Chrysene µg/g C1-benz[a]anthrcenes/chrysenes µg/g Dibenz[ah]anthracene µg/g C1-benzofluoranthenes/pyrenes µg/g DiBenzothiophene µg/g C1-dibenzothiophenes µg/g Dimethyl-Biphenyl µg/g C1-fluoranthenes/pyrenes µg/g Fluoranthene µg/g C1-fluorenes µg/g Fluorene µg/g C1-naphthalenes µg/g Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene µg/g C2 phenanthrenes/anthracenes µg/g Methyl Acenaphthene µg/g C2-benz[a]anthracenes/chrysenes µg/g Methyl-Biphenyl µg/g C2-benzofluoranthenes/pyrenes µg/g Naphthalene µg/g C2-dibenzothiophenes µg/g Phenanthrene µg/g C2-fluoranthenes/pyrenes µg/g Pyrene µg/g C2-fluorenes µg/g Retene µg/g

Toxicity Testing a Hyalella azteca (amphipod) 14-d survival and growth sediment test (standard RAMP test battery) Chironomus tentans (midge) 10-d survival and growth sediment test Lumbriculus variegatus (oligochaete) 10-d survival and growth sediment test Note: a Toxicity testing was only conducted at stream sites

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-12

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Sediment samples were collected from depositional areas in the vicinity of the water quality sampling locations. At each sampling location at least six sediment grabs were taken with a 6” x 6” Ekman dredge (0.023 m2). The top 3-5 cm was removed with a stainless steel spatula and transferred to a large glass vessel. If the grab sample was visibly disturbed during collection the sample was discarded. Any relevant visual observations regarding the sediment samples or the sampling location were noted. The sample was homogenized with a stainless steel spoon and dispensed into the designated sample containers/bags for sediment quality and/or toxicity testing. The equipment was pre-cleaned according to standard protocols (i.e., soap and acid washed and/or rinsed with acetone), which are described in Appendix B.

3.2.3 Winter Muskeg River Sediment Oxygen Demand (SOD) Survey The Muskeg River typically experiences low dissolved oxygen (DO) conditions and episodic anoxia, particularly in the winter months where levels are often below Alberta aquatic life WQGs. AENV (2002) hypothesized that the oxidation of suspended solids and respiration in sediments (sediment oxygen demand [SOD]) may be responsible, at least in part for low winter DO events. They concluded there was insufficient data to confidently determine the factors responsible for low winter DO conditions. Low DO has been observed every winter since 1998 at the WSC site which is located at the Canterra Road bridge. Therefore a winter Sediment Oxygen Demand survey was undertaken at a site located upstream of the Canterra Road bridge (MUR-A) and a site located downstream of the confluence with Watercourse S1 MUR-B, on March 23 and 24, 2004 (Figure 3-1). The objective of this study was to provide SOD data for this section of the river to facilitate the identification of the principle factors responsible for the low winter DO conditions. At each site three sediment cores and one water core (blank) were collected. The cores were collected through 10 inch diameter holes drilled using a Jiffy ice auger. The sediment cores were collected in 5-cm diameter cellulose acetate core tubes using a 2-inch sediment corer (Wild-Co). The core tubes were pushed approximately 5 cm into the substrate. The sediment core samples were capped with river water (excluding air) and kept on ice in the dark during transport to the laboratory. The cores were then immediately incubated for 9-10 days within the period from March 23 to April 4, 2004, under controlled environmental conditions (Appendix C). At each site, triplicate sediment samples were also taken for characterization of particle size analysis (PSA) and total organic carbon (TOC). A further three water samples were taken for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) determination. These supporting water and sediment samples were submitted to Envirotest Laboratories (ETL, Edmonton) for analysis. At each site the following supporting measurements were also taken: • site location as UTMs, using a Garmin II Plus GPS unit • in situ water quality parameters (temperature, salinity, conductivity, total dissolved solids [TDS], dissolved oxygen [mg/L and % saturation], pH and ORP) measured at mid-depth at each sediment and water sample core hole using a YSI 556 multi-meter (field calibrated at least daily for all parameters) • turbidity using a calibrated Analite NEP 160 Turbidity meter • velocity at each core, using a Swoffer velocity meter • ice and water depth

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-13

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

3.2.4 Surface Water and Sediment Data Analyses Historical water and sediment data (post-1985) for LSA and RSA watercourses and waterbodies, where available, were compiled. The specific data sources included: RAMP, AENV, Albian Sands, RL&L (1982, 1989) and Golder (1997, 2001). Data were compiled for individual waterbodies and some smaller watercourses. Larger watercourses were divided into sections and data from sites within a section were merged for the relevant statistical calculations. Seasonal median, minimum and maximum values were calculated for each parameter and presented in tabular format, with the raw data collected from the present baseline study. For all results below detection limits, a value equivalent to half the detection limit was used to calculate the summary statistics. Over the years analytical detection limits have changed and this issue was resolved in two ways. First, data was only considered to be relevant from 1985 onwards because detection limits from analysis completed in the 1970s were considered to be too crude and could potentially affect the statisitical calculations. Secondly, where the median calculated value was less than the most conservative detection limit; the median value was reported as less than the most conservative detection limit. The calculated minimum and maximum values were reported and were not affected by the range in detection limits. Historical data and data collected as part of the present baseline study were evaluated qualitatively by comparison with applicable water and sediment quality guidelines (Tables 3-5 and 3-6), and using temporal and spatial comparisons (i.e., between waterbodies/watercourses and between historical and recent concentrations). Where applicable, other relevant studies in the area were referred to. The WQGs used pertained to the protection of aquatic life and those applicable to drinking water (Table 3-5). Some trace metals were assessed under average and minimum hardness conditions for the LSA (Table 3.5; Appendix G). Discussion regarding metal exceedences in LSA and RSA watercourse/waterbodies focused on exceedences under average hardness conditions. The Canadian Drinking Water Guidelines were all applied with the exception of the aesthetic objectives for turbidity and colour because both of these were generally exceeded by all waterbodies/watercourse for most seasons. Although both field and laboratory pH measurements were presented; discussion focused on in-situ measurements taken in the field. In addition, water and sediment quality trends in the Athabasca and Muskeg Rivers identified in the RAMP 2003 annual report and the RAMP 5-year report were also discussed (Hatfield et al. 2004; Golder 2003a)

3.2.5 Aquatic Resources Aquatic Resources studies included surveys to examine aquatic habitat, fish populations, invertebrates and aquatic macrophytes. The field sampling schedule for these surveys is provided in Table 3-7, and sampling locations are presented in Figure 3-2.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-14

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 3-5 Water Quality Guidelines Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life a Drinking Water Guidelines b Maximum Acceptable Aesthetic Parameter Units Acute Chronic Concentrations Objective Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 5.0 (1-day minimum) 6.5 (7-day mean) - - pH pH units 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 - 6.5-8.5 Colour TCU - - - ≤15 Turbidity NYU - - 1 ≤5 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L - - - ≤500 Major Ions Chloride mg/L 860 230 - ≤250 Sodium mg/L - - - ≤200 Sulphate mg/L - - - ≤500 Sulphide mg/L - 0.014 - ≤0.05 Nutrients Total Ammonia-N mg/L 5.6 (pH 8; 10C) 0.83 (pH 8; 10C) - - Nitrogen, Total mg/L - 1 - - Phosphorus, total mg/L - 0.05 - - Organics Total Phenolics mg/L - 0.005 - - Target PAHs and Alkylated PAHs Acenaphthene µg/L - 5.8 c - - Anthracene µg/L - 0.012 c - - Acridine µg/L - 4.4 c - - Benzo(a)anthracene µg/L - 0.018 c - - Benzo(a)pyrene µg/L - 0.015 c 0.01 - Fluoranthene µg/L - 0.04 c - -

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-15

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 3-5 Water Quality Guidelines (cont’d) Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life a Drinking Water Guidelines b Maximum Acceptable Aesthetic Parameter Units Acute Chronic Concentrations Objective Fluorene µg/L - 3 c - - Naphthalene µg/L - 1.1 c - - Phenanthrene µg/L - 0.4 c - - Pyrene µg/L - 0.025 c - - Metals (Total) hardness = hardness = hardness = hardness = 175 mg/L 50 mg/L 175 mg/L 50 mg/L Aluminum (Al) µg/L 750 750 100 100 - - Antimony (Sb) µg/L - - - - 6 c - Arsenic (As) µg/L 340 340 5 5 25 c - Boron (B) µg/L - - - - 5 c - Cadmium (Cd) d µg/L 3.8 1 0.053 0.018 5000 - Chromium (Cr) d µg/L 16 16 1 1 50 - Copper (Cu) d µg/L 25 7.3 3 2 10 c - Iron (Fe) µg/L - - 300 300 - ≤300 Lead (Pb) d µg/L 169 42 4 1 10 - Manganese (Mn) µg/L - - - - - ≤50 Mercury (Hg) µg/L 1.6 1.6 0.026 0.026 1 - Methyl-mercury (Me-Hg) µg/L - - 0.004 0.004 - - Molybdenum (Mo) µg/L - - 73 73 - - Nickel (Ni) d µg/L 751 261 110 25 - - Selenium (Se) µg/L - - 1 1 10 - Silver (Ag) d µg/L 10.6 1.2 0.1 0.1 - - Thallium (Tl) µg/L - - 0.8 0.8 - -

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-16

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 3-5 Water Quality Guidelines (cont’d) Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life a Drinking Water Guidelines b Acute Chronic hardness = hardness = hardness = hardness = Maximum Acceptable Aesthetic Parameter Units 175 mg/L 50 mg/L 175 mg/L 50 mg/L Concentrations Objective Uranium (U) µg/L - - - - 20 c - Zinc (Zn) d µg/L 194 66 30 30 - ≤5000 Notes: a Guidelines were applied according to the AENV (1999a) protocol. When multiple guidelines were available for a given substance, the most stringent guideline was applied and guidelines developed by AENV for the protection of aquatic life after 1996 were given preference over CCME (1999) and USEPA (2002) guidelines. The exceptions were: mercury and methyl-mercury, where the USEPA (2002) acute guideline and CCME (2003) chronic guidelines were applied; ammonia, where the CCME (2000) chronic guideline was applied; and cadmium where the USEPA (2002) acute guideline was applied. b Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (Health Canada, 2003) were applied. c Interim guideline d Guideline is dependant on water hardness. The guideline was calculated based on site-specific hardness according to methods described in AENV (1999a) and USEPA (2002). Guidelines were calculated for an intermediate site-specific hardness concentration (175 mg/L) and a minimum hardness concentration (50 mg/L) which was representative of periodic minimum hardness conditions in the spring and/or the fall at select sites. - = No relevant guideline was available.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-17

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 3-6 Sediment Quality Guidelines Alberta Tier 1 Hydrocarbon Guidelines (Coarse Surface Soil – Natural Area) b CCME Natural Area Protection of CCME Interim Probable Soil Contact Groundwater Sediment Quality Effect Level (Plants and for Aquatic Parameter Units Guideline (ISQG) a (PEL) a Invertebrates) Life Total Metals Arsenic µg/g 5.9 17 - - Cadmium µg/g 0.6 3.5 - - Chromium µg/g 37.3 90 - - Copper µg/g 35.7 197 - - Lead µg/g 35 91.3 - - Mercury µg/g 0.17 0.486 - - Nickel µg/g 16 (LEL) c 75 (SEL) c - - Zinc µg/g 123 315 - - PAHs Acenaphthene ng/g 6.71 88.9 - - Acenaphthylene ng/g 5.87 128 - - Anthracene ng/g 46.9 245 - - Benzo(a)anthracene ng/g 31.7 385 - - Benzo(a)pyrene ng/g 31.9 782 - - Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene ng/g 6.22 135 - - Fluoranthene ng/g 111 2355 - - Fluorene ng/g 21.2 144 - - Naphthalene ng/g 34.6 391 - - C1 subst’d ng/g 20.2 2011 - - naphthalenes Phenanthrene ng/g 41.9 515 - - Pyrene ng/g 53 875 - - Chrysene ng/g 57.1 862 - - Total Hydrocarbons & BTEX Volatile and Extractable F1 (C6-C10) µg/g - - 130 360 F1-BTEX µg/g - - 130 360 F2 (C10-C16) µg/g - - 450 230 F3 (C16-C34) µg/g - - 400 N/A F4 (C34-C50) µg/g - - 2800 N/A Total Hydrocarbons µg/g - - N/A N/A (C6-C50) Benzene µg/g - - 8.3 1.6 Toluene µg/g - - 24 0.16 Ethylbenzene µg/g - - 91 79 Xylenes µg/g - - 90 59 Notes: a CCME Sediment Quality Guidleines (CCME, 1999) b Alberta Environment (AENV, 2001) c Lowest Observed Effect Level (LEL), Severe Effect Level (SEL); Ontario Sediment Quality Guidelines (Persaud et al. 1993).

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-18

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 3-7 Aquatic Resources 2003/2004 Sampling Schedule Seasonal Seasonal Benthic Overwintering Fish Hoop Larval Habitat Fish Invertebrate Aquatic Invertebrates Potential Fence Net Drift Surveys Inventories Drift Macrophytes Jackpine Creek Mar 04 Apr/May Jun 04 Jun 04 04 Mills Creek Oct 03 Mar 04 Oct 03 Jun 04 Watercourse S1 Oct 03 Mar 04 Apr/May May 03/ July May 03/ July Jun 04 04 04 04 Watercourse S2 Mar 04 Watercourse S3 Mar 04 May 04 May 04 Jun 04

Isadore’s Lake Oct 03 Mar 04 Jul 04 Waterbody P1 Oct 03 Mar 04 Jul 04 Waterbody P2 Mar 04 Aug 04 Waterbody P4 Mar 04 Waterbody P5 Mar 04 Waterbody P6 Mar 04 Waterbody P7 Mar 04 Waterbody P8 Mar 04 Waterbody P9 Mar 04 Waterbody P10 Mar 04 Waterbody P11 Mar 04 Waterbody P12 Mar 04

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-19

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

3.2.6 Aquatic Resources Habitat Evaluation Habitat surveys were conducted for S1 in both the spring and summer of 2004; for S3 in the spring of 2004; and for Mills Creek in the fall of 2003. Evaluation of aquatic habitat characteristics were conducted for seven reaches on S1, three reaches on S3, and two reaches on Mills Creek. Habitat reaches were assessed for habitat type, channel characteristics, velocity and discharge, substrate type, and cover. Habitat classification was based on two habitat classification systems: • Department of Fisheries and Oceans and Ministry of Environment (BC). 1989. Stream Survey Field Guide. Fish Habitat Inventory and Information Program • O’Neil and Hildebrandt. 1986. Stream Habitat Classification and Rating System In: Fishery Resources Upstream of the Oldman River Dam. Report Prepared by RL&L Environmental Services Ltd. For Alberta Environment, Edmonton, AB The fisheries capability for each stream was based on a ranking system used for the Shell Jackpine Mine – Phase 1 baseline studies (Golder 2002a) and it was adopted from Golder (2002b).

3.2.7 Benthic Invertebrate Collection and Analyses Benthic invertebrate samples were collected concurrently with the fall water and sediment quality and toxicity surveys, at select sampling locations from October 9 to 12, 2003 (Table 3-2). Samples were taken from ten replicate stations at Isadore’s Lake, Mills Creek and S1 with an Ekman dredge (Figure 3-2). Only five samples were taken from P1 due to equipment limitations. Depositional habitat was the dominant habitat at all these locations. Benthic samples were taken at stations located in the 1.5 – 3 m depth range in Isadore’s Lake and P1. Samples were sieved through 210 µm mesh and preserved in the field with 10% formalin in 500 ml and/or 1L plastic containers. At each replicate station an accompanying sediment sample was collected for TOC and PSA analysis. These samples were transferred to double-bagged sealable plastic bags and frozen. All samples were labeled externally and internally. At each sampling location where applicable, the following supporting data were collected: • site location as UTMs • wetted channel width and other channel and flow characteristics • presence of macrophytes • current velocity (Swoffer velocity meter) • water depth • general habitat observations (e.g., stream bank characteristics, level of substrate embeddedness, valley features, etc.) • water quality, characterized as part of concurrent the fall water quality survey

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-20

RGE 11 RGE 10 RGE 9 W4M

TWP TWP 96 96

#0P12

#0P10 P9 P11 #0 #0 #0P8 #0P7 S3 S3 Jackpine Creek !.#0!. !.#0 S3 Jackpine Creek TWP TWP 95 95

!.#0Mills Creek Mills Creek #0Jackpine Creek

!.Isadore's Lake

#0!. !.#0 P5 #0!.P1 #0 P6

!. Aquatic Macrophyte Surveys

!. Fall Benthic Invertebrate Sites

!. Fish Fence

!. Fish Inventories !.P2 !. Habitat Survey TWP 0# Hoop Nets TWP 94 94 # S1 0 Invertebrate Drift r e #0 S1 Riv g !. 0# Larval Drift

e S1

k

s

u Winter Water Quality

M A S1 0# Profile Locations

t #0 ha

b Gravel Road - 1 Lane (Each Direction) a !. s S1

c

a Paved Road - Primary - Unimproved

R

iv e MRME Development Area r

Albian As-Built Footprint (December 2003) and Additional Disturbances in MRME Development Area

RGE 11 RGE 10 RGE 9 W4M

MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited NORTH Project PREPARED BY Aquatic Resources Location 1012 BC DRAFT DATE SCALE AB SK 07/Sept/2004 1:100,000 2003/2004 Scale in Kilometres REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. 08/Feb/2005 Sampling Locations Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by OS1182 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL 3-2 Footprint provided by Albian Sands Energy Inc. AO DC JS -

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

The benthic invertebrate laboratory at North/South (Winnipeg) performed sorting and taxonomic identification of all benthic samples, and analyzed the sediment samples for TOC and PSA. The procedures used and the QA/QC results are presented in Appendix D. Invertebrates were identified to the lowest practical level, typically genus, using recognized taxonomic keys by an experienced taxonomist. All collection and processing procedures were generally consistent with protocols used by RAMP, previous EIAs, and the Environmental Effects Monitoring program (Environment Canada 2002). The benthic invertebrate community composition data were summarized in terms of the following community descriptors: total abundance and density (numbers/m2) of all taxa; taxonomic richness (total and mean richness); total abundance and density (numbers/m2) of major invertebrate groups and dominant taxa; and community composition (%). Common invertebrates were defined as those that constituted >1% of the total invertebrate abundance at that sampling station. The results were discussed in the context of historical data, and comparisons were made with other LSA aquatic systems. Benthic communities in the Athabasca and Muskeg Rivers were described using existing data from the RAMP 2003 annual report (Hatfield et al. 2004).

3.2.8 Invertebrate Drift Collection and Analyses Invertebrate drift surveys were conducted at three sites on each of the four selected LSA watercourses in June, 2004. Specifically, the 24 hour drift surveys were conducted on Mills Creek (June 18 to 19), Watercourse S1 (June 19 to 20), Jackpine Creek (June 21 to 22), and S3 (June 22 to 23). Three sites were selected in each watercourse, located 30-40 m apart (Figure 3-2). In each case, sites were numbered from 1-3, starting with the most upstream site. Sampling was conducted using drift traps designed after Burton and Flannagan (1976), with trap opening dimensions of 15 x 15 cm, and a mesh size of 500 µm. The placement and number of traps set at each site was dependant on stream width and depth, according to the following: • Jackpine Creek: one trap at the surface and one trap at mid-depth; three sites, six traps in total • S1: two adjacent traps at the surface; three sites and six traps in total • Mills Creek: one trap at the surface; three sites and three traps in total • S3: one trap at the surface; three sites and three traps in total Surface traps were intended to capture invertebrates (aquatic and terrestrial) drifting on or near the surface and in the water column. To capture the surface drift, the traps were installed with the top of the trap projecting 3-4 cm above the surface. At all sites except those at Jackpine Creek, depths were shallow enough that the bottom of the trap opening was approximately 3-4 cm above the substrate; therefore, the traps were representatively sampling the entire vertical water column. The nets were positioned at least 3-4 cm above the substrate to prevent benthic invertebrates from crawling in (Smock 1996). Since Jackpine Creek was substantially deeper than the other streams, one trap at each site was placed at the surface and the second at mid depth (30-40 cm above the substrate), to ensure a representative sample of the water column when the data from trap pairs were combined. All traps at all sites were installed at or near the thalweg. At S3 and Mills Creek the traps effectively sampled the entire wetted width of these small streams. Similarly, the side-by-side arrangement at S1 also effectively sampled the wetted width.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-23

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

The drift traps were emptied hourly over one 24 hour period, for each watercourse, and drift samples were preserved with 10% formalin in 500 mL plastic jars. The nets were approached perpendicular to the bank to minimize disturbance. Additional supporting measurements taken included: • at each site: location (UTM) and substrate particle size distribution visually assessed as percentages of silt/fines/clay, sand, gravel, cobble and boulder • at each watercourse at 12-hour intervals: DO (mg/L and % saturation), water temperature, pH, conductivity, TDS, and salinity (taken just upstream of the farthest upstream site to avoid sampling disturbed waters) • at each watercourse at 6-hour intervals: stream width (m); stream velocities (m/s); water depths (cm); used to calculate stream discharge (taken just downstream of the farthest downstream site to avoid disturbing the section sampled) • at each site hourly, before and after each trap check: water depth within each trap opening (cm), height of trap opening exposed above the water (cm), and water velocity within the opening of each trap (m/s) • at each site hourly: air and water temperature (oC); and turbidity (NTU) • at each site hourly: wind direction and relative strength (low, med, high); precipitation (description); and cloud cover (%) Water quality measurements were taken with a YSI 556 Multi-meter and Analite 160 Turbidity meter. Both meters were calibrated at least daily for all parameters. Water velocity measurements were recorded with a Swoffer 2100 velocity meter. The benthic laboratory at North/South (Winnipeg) performed sorting and taxonomic identification of all invertebrate drift samples. The procedure used and the QA/QC control results are presented in Appendix D. Invertebrates were sorted and aquatic insects were identified to family, while benthic non-insects (e.g., oligochaeta, amphipoda) were identified to major taxon. Terrestrial organisms and semiaquatic invertebrates were identified as such. All invertebrates were identified using recognized taxonomic keys. Although samples were collected for three sites per watercourse, invertebrates were identified from the two downstream sites only (Sites 2 and 3). The third sample from each site was archived for later analysis if required. The invertebrate drift data were summarized in terms of drift density (per hour), total daily drift and drift composition. Drift density per hour was the number of invertebrates drifting per hour per cubic meter of stream water, and was calculated by dividing the number of invertebrates captured in a net by the volume of water filtered by that net in one hour. Total daily drift is defined as the total number of drifting invertebrates in 24 hours at a site. Total daily drift was calculated by multiplying the hourly drift densities by the mean 24 hour stream discharge (expressed as m3/h) and summing the hourly values. These metrics were consistent with drift studies previously conducted in the Muskeg River watershed (Golder 2002a).

3.2.9 Jackpine Creek Larval Drift Collection and Analyses A larval drift study was conducted between June 16 and 18, 2004, at three sites on Jackpine Creek. One site was located 1.5 km upstream of the confluence with the Muskeg River; the second site was located downstream of the Canterra Road bridge crossing; and the third site was located upstream of the Canterra Road bridge crossing (Figure 3-2)

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-24

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

At each site, two 15 x 15 cm drift traps of 500 µm mesh size were set, for a total of six traps for the watercourse. The traps were positioned in or near the thalweg, with the top of the trap opening approximately 5-10 cm below the surface of the water. The drift traps were emptied once per day for a total of four days. The samples were preserved in 500 mL plastic jars with 10% buffered formalin. Site location (UTM) was recorded for each site at the start of the survey. Additional supporting information recorded immediately before and after each check included: time, trap mouth water velocity and water depth, and depth from surface of water to the top of the trap mouth. To extend the larval drift survey period, the trap pair installed downstream of the Canterra Road bridge was maintained and checked daily during the course of the invertebrate drift survey (June 18 to 23). In addition, all fish, larval fish and fish eggs captured at all streams during the invertebrate drift survey were added to the larval drift database. Larval drift samples were sorted in the lab and all specimens were identified to species according to Auer (1982).

3.2.10 Jackpine Creek Spring Fish Movements and Analyses A two-way fish counting fence was installed on Jackpine Creek from April 22 to May 26, 2004, to monitor the migration of large-bodied spring spawning species. The fence was located 1.5 km upstream of the confluence with the Muskeg River (Figure 3-2). Design specifications for the fence were reported by Hatfield (2004) and were based on designs developed by Anderson and McDonald (1978) and Kristofferson et al. (1986). The main lead and wings of the fence consisted of sections of 96 vertical conduit pipes (1.8 m in height and 1.8 cm in diameter) held in place by two, three meter long, horizontal pieces of perforated aluminum channel. Channels were supported on brackets attached to 2.1 meter high tripods constructed of 5 cm diameter aluminum center poles braced by wooden A-frames. The tripods were held in place by rock and sand-filled woven polyethylene bags. Conduits were spaced at 3.4 cm centers, leaving 1.6 cm of spaces. Upstream and downstream trap boxes, consisting of conduit walls supported by wooden frames, were placed near shore and on opposite sides of the river. The traps were connected by a single centre span of conduit panels that served as the lead for both traps. All fish captured were enumerated and identified to species. Fork length was recorded for all fish collected and weight for a sub-sample of the total catch. All fish were examined for external pathology. If discernible by external examination, sex and state of maturity of individual fish were also recorded. Prior to release, all fish were marked by clipping a portion of the left pectoral fin to enable identification of recaptured fish. Additional supporting information recorded at each site included location (UTM), DO (mg/L and % saturation), water temperature, pH, conductivity, TDS, salinity, ORP, turbidity (NTU), stream velocity (m/s) and weather conditions. A Stowaway Tidbit Temperature Logger was installed at the fence site for the duration of the survey to record hourly water temperatures, and stream discharge was measured at approximately 4-day intervals. A staff gauge installed near the fence site was read daily and recorded changes in river level over the course of the survey. Data analysis included plotting daily movements over time, by species, and relating those movements to water temperature. Length-frequency distributions were plotted for all

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-25

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

species with sufficient sample size, based on 10 mm length intervals. Weight-length relationships were calculated from least squares regression analysis on logarithmic transformation of fork lengths and round weights, described as:

Log10W = a + b (Log10L) where: W = weight (g) L = length (mm) Where sample size was sufficient, relationships were calculated by sex. Relative condition factor (K) was calculated as:

K = W x 105/L3

3.2.11 Watercourse S1 Spring Fish Movements and Analyses Spring fish movements were conducted on watercourse S1 from April 27 to May 7, 2004. The survey was conducted using two, three-foot diameter hoop nets, one for upstream movements and one for downstream movements. The nets were located approximately 100 meters upstream of the confluence with the Muskeg River. Each net was checked daily for the duration of the survey. All fish captured were enumerated and identified to species. Fork length was recorded for all fish collected and weight for a sub-sample of the total catch. All fish were examined externally for pathology and, if discernible, sex and state of maturity of individual fish were recorded. Field recording of supporting information and data analyses were conducted as described for the Jackpine Creek fish fence.

3.2.12 Watercourse S1 Seasonal Fish Inventories and Analyses Fish inventories for S1 were conducted in spring and summer of 2004 using a backpack electrofisher. The surveys were conducted to determine seasonal fish species presence. The stream was surveyed from the mouth to the second beaver pond, including seven reaches and selected shoreline areas in the two beaver ponds. The summer survey was conducted on the seven stream reaches to the first beaver pond (Figure 3-2). Sampling was conducted by a two-person field crew using a Smith-Root, type 12B POW electrofishing unit. Captured fish were held in a bucket until completion of each reach survey, at which time they were enumerated and identified to species. Fork length was recorded for all fish collected and weight for a sub-sample of the total catch. All fish were examined externally for pathology and, if discernible by external examination, sex and state of maturity of individual fish were recorded. Supporting measurements recorded for each reach included location (UTM) and fishing effort (sec). All electrofisher settings were also recorded for each reach survey. Results were compiled and expressed as numbers of fish per reach for each season, and catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) for each reach for each season, where CPUE was expressed as number of fish caught per second of electrofishing effort.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-26

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

3.2.13 Aquatic Macrophyte Surveys and Analyses The MRME Development Area includes a number of waterbodies that support aquatic macrophyte communities in the Shallow Open Water Land Cover Class (Alberta Wetland Inventory [AWI] type WONN), described as open water less than 2 m deep. This zone approximates the open water littoral zone, typically the most productive zone within a waterbody, and critical habitat for fish. Historical information about aquatic macrophytes in MRME Development Area waterbodies is generally lacking, except for surveys conducted by RAMP on Isadore’s Lake. The 2003 RAMP program (Hatfield 2004), provided the only quantitative assessment of shallow open water aquatic macrophytes communities in Isadore’s Lake. However, of the 19 surveyed plots, most were located in fen and swamp classes with depths generally less than 1 m (mean depth was 47 cm). The 2004 baseline surveys were designed to collect aquatic macrophyte information from true open water areas, typically 1-2 m in depth, where submergent macrophytes are usually dominant. Aquatic macrophyte surveys were conducted on three representative LSA waterbodies in July and August of 2004. Isadore’s Lake was selected because it is the receiving waterbody for surface drainage from the West Pit area via Mills Creek. Waterbodies P1 and P2 were selected as representative ponds from the Sharkbite and Lease 90 areas, respectively. The survey design included three sampling sites per lake or pond, in water depths ranging from 1.5 m to 2.0 m. Sampling was conducted by a diver and consisted of harvesting all plants within a 0.75 m2 quadrat dropped indiscriminately from a boat. Plants were cut at the substrate interface with shears and collected in a mesh bag. At the surface all plants were transferred to a labeled plastic bag. A general reconnaissance was also conducted at each waterbody to identify additional plant species and aid in developing a general description of the aquatic plant communities. Exceptions to the sampling protocol occurred at P1 and P2. At two sites on P1 only one quarter of the quadrat was sampled due to the high density of Charaphytes (stoneworts or muskgrass). The field crew was unable to use the diver and quadrat approach at P2 due to unfavorable conditions. Dense plant growth and a highly unconsolidated and flocculent organic substrate made diving impractical. Therefore, the survey at P2 consisted of an extensive visual survey and descriptive assessment. Sample processing included initial sorting and separation by species. The sorted samples were then spun in a ‘salad spinner’ to remove surface moisture, and weighed to obtain a fresh weight (i.e., only surface moisture removed). Representative samples were pressed for later verification. Plant identifications were based on Crow and Hellquist (2000a, 2000b) and Brayshaw (1989, 2000). For Isadore’s Lake and P1, analysis included calculation of relative species abundance and mean standing stock (g of plant material/m2).

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 3-27

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 3-28

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

4 Results – Climate

4.1 Air Temperature The Aurora climate station is located within the Shell Jackpine Mine – Phase 1 development area just east of the Project at an elevation of 310 m. This station has over 8 years of data that can be used to define temperature statistics representative of the conditions in the LSA when considered in comparison with regional long-term data. The Fort McMurray Airport climate station has a continuous period of record of 51 years (1953 to 2003). A previous comparison (Golder 2002) between the recorded daily air temperatures at the Fort McMurray and Aurora climate stations showed similar variations suggesting that air temperature has little variation in the region. Table 4-1 summarizes monthly and daily extreme air temperatures at the two stations for the two periods of record now available. Considering the difference in the period of record (8 full years versus 51 years), the data are comparable. The mean annual daily temperature is slightly higher at 0.4°C for the more recent shorter period of record at the Aurora station compared to 0.0 °C for the longer record at Fort McMurray.

Table 4-1 Recorded Monthly Temperatures and Daily Extremes Aurora Climate Station Fort McMurray Airport Climate Station (ºC) (ºC) Monthly Daily Extreme Monthly Daily Extreme Month Maximum Mean Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum Mean Minimum Maximum Minimum January -9.8 -20.0 -27.0 13.1 -45.6 -8.4 -20.3 -42.1 15.1 -50 February -1.8 -12.2 -19.3 11.6 -44.9 -3.3 -15.1 -26.3 15.0 -50.6 March -2.8 -9.1 -15.3 17.3 -39.9 -1.1 -8.0 -17.0 18.9 -44.4 April 6.8 2.0 -3.2 27.5 -32.2 10.1 1.8 -37.5 30.2 -34.4 May 12.7 9.4 6.6 34.2 -19.2 12.8 9.7 5.2 34.8 -17.3 June 16.3 14.7 12.6 36.0 -4.4 16.7 14.1 11.4 36.8 -4.4 July 18.5 17.1 15.0 33.5 -0.9 18.9 16.6 14.3 35.6 -3.3 August 17.4 15.2 13.0 36.9 -2.7 18.9 15.0 11.3 37.0 -2.9 September 11.1 9.0 7.9 30.5 -11.2 12.7 9.2 3.9 32.4 -15.6 October 4.0 1.3 -3.0 27.4 -25.6 7.7 2.3 -27.5 28.6 -24.5 November -4.8 -8.7 -13.3 11.2 -33.6 -1.1 -8.4 -16.5 18.9 -37.8 December -9.7 -15.0 -22.0 12.3 -42.4 -7.0 -17.2 -47.6 10.7 -47.2 Annual Daily 0.4 36.9 -45.6 0 37 -50.6 Note: Periods of Record: 1995 to 2003 Aurora Climate Station, 1953 to 2003 Fort McMurray Climate Station

Based upon the Aurora station, mean monthly air temperatures in the LSA typically range from –20°C in January to 17.1°C in July. A maximum daily air temperature of 36.9° C was recorded in August and a minimum daily air temperature of –45.6 °C was recorded in January. A minimum daily extreme of -50.6°C has been recorded at Fort McMurray.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 4-1

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

4.2 Precipitation Table 4-2 provides monthly statistics of recorded precipitation at the Aurora and Fort McMurray Airport climate stations for the available period of record at each station. A correlation of coincident monthly precipitation data suggests negligible long-term average difference between the two stations (0.3% higher at Fort McMurray). Previous minor adjustments based on a correlation between precipitation and elevation, as determined by regional analysis suggest total average annual precipitation may by slightly lower in the LSA versus at Fort McMurray. This is because of a lower elevation of 310 m at the Aurora station and the Project area versus an elevation of 369 m at the Fort McMurray station. Current comparisons suggest minimal adjustment may be warranted and that the Fort McMurray station data may be taken as representative of long-term conditions in the LSA. Historical variations and climatic trends may be of greater significance than local regional variations. Average annual precipitation in the Project area is estimated to be 444 mm based on the Fort McMurray station data.

Table 4-2 Recorded Monthly Precipitation Fort McMurray Airport Climate Aurora Climate Station Station (mm) (mm) Month Maximum Mean Minimum Yrs Data(1) Maximum Mean Minimum January 26.0 13.7 5.7 8 48.4 19.8 3.4 February 35.9 16.3 1.3 9 48.5 16.1 3.2 March 59.5 17.5 0.0 10 59.2 17.3 2.7 April 25.3 11.2 2.2 9 52.5 20.7 0.2 May 63.2 37.9 15.6 9 105 35.4 2.3 June 83.2 61.0 34.0 10 188 68.3 20.3 July 150 80.0 38.6 10 146 78.3 18.6 August 106 63.2 13.6 8 174 67.7 7.4 September 86.4 40.8 5.2 9 128 49.8 12.2 October 58.5 25.0 2.2 10 83.7 27.3 0.5 November 45.6 18.2 0.3 10 55.8 23.1 0.5 December 32.9 15.0 0.0 10 53 21.2 5.8 Annual Total 474 422 283 8* 676 444 242

Notes: Periods of Record: 1988-1989 and 1995-2003 for the Aurora Climate Station and 1953 to 2003 for the Fort McMurray Climate Station. Years of complete monthly data give an indication of long-term relevance of the data. * Up to two missing months representing less than 10% of annual total filled in with Fort McMurray data.

Five years of complete precipitation data at the Aurora station indicate that about 20% occurred as snow versus nearly 26% as snow for the same period at Fort McMurray. Long-term records indicate snowfall has averaged one-third of total precipitation at Fort McMurray. The long-term data suggest that snow would have accounted for 25% (111 mm) of the long-term average historical annual precipitation in the LSA with about 75% (333 mm) occurring as rainfall.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 4-2

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 4-3 shows monthly and annual mean and extreme precipitation estimates for the Project area based upon the Fort McMurray station data. The 10-year wet year annual precipitation is estimated to be 570 mm and the 10-year dry year annual precipitation is 325 mm. By comparison, over eight years at the Aurora station, the maximum and minimum annual recorded precipitation have been more extreme at 574 mm in 1996 (one month filled in by correlation) and 283 mm in 1998.

Table 4-3 Monthly and Annual Range of Precipitation for the Area Total Precipitation Month (mm) 100 year Dry 10 year dry Average Year 10 Year Wet 100 Year Wet January 4.2 8.0 19.8 33.9 58.7 February 2.0 4.5 16.1 30.2 57.9 March 2.7 5.4 17.3 31.7 58.6 April 1.8 5.6 20.7 37.9 57.1 May 4.0 10.0 35.4 64.7 108 June 17.7 29.8 68.3 114 187 July 18.2 35.5 78.3 122 167 August 7.0 25.9 67.7 115 197 September 7.4 18.0 49.8 86.9 146 October 0.6 5.7 27.3 50.8 86.9 November 5.1 9 23.1 40.4 64.7 December 4.9 9.0 21.2 35.4 57.7 Annual 255 325 444 570 695

Note: Based on frequency analysis of Fort McMurray Airport precipitation data (1944-2003) with no site specific adjustment based upon Aurora and Fort McMurray climate station data comparisons.

Extreme rainfall intensities are expected to be comparable at the Fort McMurray and Aurora climate stations. The average of the maximum annual 1-day rainfall over the eight years of record at the Aurora climate station is 32.1 mm. This value is over 8% higher than recorded at the Fort McMurray station for the same period. Similarly, over this same period the average 10-day maximum annual rainfall value of 60.4 mm at the Aurora station is 4% lower than at the Fort McMurray station. Split sample statistics of the 60 years (1944-2003) of maximum annual 1-day to 10-day rainfall data at Fort McMurray indicates that the latter 30 years of 1-day to 10-day values averaged only slightly higher than the first 30 years. Although split sample testing for homogeneity shows no significant difference over the two periods, increases in the standard deviation at 5 to 26% and variance at 11 to 60% indicate greater variability in precipitation extremes over the past 30 years. In view of this, the last 30 years of data are applied to compute maximum 1-day to 10-day extreme event frequencies in Table 4-4. This table includes the 1966-1990 rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) data derived by Environment Canada Atmospheric Environment Service. These data are recommended for use in the Project area. The 24-hour rain with a 10-year return period is estimated to be 64.1 mm and the 24-hour rain with a 100-year return period is estimated to be 97.7 mm. By comparison, the maximum one-day rainfall recorded at the Aurora station has been 46.7 mm in 1988 and the maximum recorded at the Fort McMurray station was 94.5 mm in 1976.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 4-3

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 4-4 Estimated Rainfall Intensity–Duration–Frequency (IDF) Data for the Region Rainfall Amount (mm) Duration 2 Year 5 Year 10 Year 25 Year 50 Year 100 Year 5 minutes 4.9 6.8 8.1 9.7 10.9 12.0 10 minutes 7.0 9.3 10.8 12.7 14.1 15.6 15 minutes 8.2 11.1 13.0 15.3 17.1 18.8 30 minutes 10.6 15.0 17.9 21.6 24.3 27.0 1 hour 12.8 17.4 20.5 24.4 27.3 30.2 2 hours 16.6 22.7 26.7 31.8 35.6 39.3 6 hours 24.6 34.5 41.1 49.3 55.5 61.6 12 hours 31.2 44.7 53.7 65.0 73.4 81.7 24 hours 38.6 48.1 64.1 76.9 86.4 97.7 2 days 45.7 53.0 74.5 90 97 124 5 days 50.1 68.5 82.3 101 119 136 10 days 63 85 101 123 141 160 Note: Based on IDF data and recorded precipitation at Fort McMurray Airport climate station from 1966-1990 with no adjustment to the Muskeg River Mine based upon similarity of observed intensities at Aurora climate station and previous studies. 2 to 10 day values based on 1973- 2003 Fort McMurray data

A 24-hour probable maximum precipitation (PMP) value of 391 mm was derived for the region based on a study performed by Environment Canada for a catchment area of 150 km² in the Mildred Lake area (W-E-R Agra 1993). This could be used in combination with snowpack snowmelt to compute probable maximum flood flow values.

4.3 Evaporation and Evapotranspiration Table 4-5 provides estimated potential evaporation and evapotranspiration values for the LSA. These values were derived using the Morton evaporation model (Morton et al. 1985), based on the climate data recorded at the Fort McMurray Airport climate station between 1953 and 2003. Differences with previous estimates computed up to 2000 are noted in the table. Overall, long-term differences in the statistics of computed evaporation and evapotranspiration from several previous oil sands studies are negligible. Annual potential evaporation is estimated to be 812 mm for the LSA. Annual lake evaporation is estimated to range from 591 to 595 mm. Most of the lake evaporation occurs in summer with a peak monthly evaporation of 128 to 132 mm occurring in July. The timing of peak lake evaporation rates is a function of lake depth. The greater heat capacity of a deep lake delays seasonal warming and cooling, typically resulting in higher evaporation rates later in the summer season. Mean annual potential evapotranspiration is estimated to be 791 mm or nearly as high as potential evaporation. Actual areal evapotranspiration averages 315 mm per year, because of the limited water supply in a basin and the cooling effect of moving air. The peak mean monthly evapotranspiration is estimated to be 84 mm, occurring in July. Relatively little variation occurs in lake evaporation and areal evapotranspiration from year to year, as indicated by frequency analysis results in Table 4-6.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 4-4

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 4-5 Evaporation and Evapotranspiration Evaporation Evapotranspiration (mm) (mm) Lake Month Potential 1 m Depth 2 m Depth 5 m Depth Potential Areal January -3 -3 -3 -3 -3 -3 February -2 -2 -3 -3 -1 -1 March 16 13 8 1 24 14 April 84 57 46 20 92 29 May 148 101 93 66 151 43 June 162 120 118 105 161 68 July 169 132 131 128 162 84 August 138 107 112 122 127 57 September 79 55 64 86 65 19 October 27 21 27 49 18 11 November -1 -1 1 20 -3 -3 December -5 -5 -4 -1 -4 -4 Annual 812 595 592 591 791 315 Notes: Negative values denote condensation, when water vapour changes to liquid or solid state Based on 1953 - 2003 temperature and relative humidity data from Fort McMurray Airport climate station and 1953 - 2000 solar radiation data Annual lake evaporation is approximately 7% higher and areal evapotranspiration is 5.5% lower for the eight year 1993-2000 period using Cold Lake sunshine data versus using the Stony Plain radiation data

Table 4-6 Frequency Analysis of Annual Evaporation and Evapotranspiration

Annual Lake Annual Areal Return Period Evaporation Evapotranspiration (year) (mm) (mm) 2 591 312 5 633 341 10 654 359 20 670 375 50 686 394 100 696 408 Note: Based on 1953 - 2002 data from Fort McMurray Airport Climate Station

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 4-5

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

4.4 Relative Humidity Table 4-7 presents a comparison of the recorded maximum, minimum and mean relative humidity, by month, for the Aurora and Fort McMurray climate stations. Mean monthly relative humidity at the Aurora station has typically ranged from 59% in May to 86% in November versus 57% in May to 79% in November at Fort McMurray. Relative humidity is typically more than 15% higher in winter months than summer months.

Table 4-7 Recorded Monthly Relative Humidity Fort McMurray Aiport Climate Aurora Climate Station Station (%) (%) Month Maximum Mean Minimum Maximum Mean Minimum January 88 80 77 94 75 60 February 87 76 68 87 73 60 March 69 65 62 78 67 52 April 95 63 55 72 60 46 May 71 59 48 68 57 42 June 74 67 60 75 64 52 July 78 72 69 77 69 61 August 84 76 64 82 72 60 September 83 77 70 84 74 58 October 94 81 73 85 74 65 November 89 86 78 87 79 69 December 92 85 80 86 77 66 Annual 76 74 72 76 70 64 Note: Periods of Record: 1995 to 2003 Aurora Station, 1953 to 2003 Fort McMurray Station

4.5 Solar Radiation Solar radiation is important to hydrologic conditions because it affects the rate of snowmelt. The amount of solar radiation depends on daily sunshine hours, length of daytime, latitude and solar angle. Daily extreme and monthly solar radiation records available at the Aurora climate station from 1988-89 and 1995-2003 are summarized in Table 4-8. Mean monthly solar radiation in the LSA typically ranges from 8.6 kW/m² in December to 173 kW/m² in June and July.

4.6 Wind The recorded wind data at the Fort McMurray Airport, Mildred Lake and Aurora climate stations were compared for the same period of record from 1995 to 2003. Fort McMurray and Mildred Lake climate stations exhibit similar wind statistics, but the Aurora climate station wind data differed, possibly due to the influence of tall forest surrounding the station and differing influences from the Birch Mountains and the Athabasca ad Clearwater river valleys. Table 4-9 provides a comparative summary of recorded wind speed statistics and frequency of occurrence by direction based on the records at the Aurora and Fort

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 4-6

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

McMurray Airport climate stations. Table 4-10 presents a frequency analysis of extreme hourly wind speeds based on the Fort McMurray Airport station data from 1959-2000 (from Golder 2002). Table 4-8 Daily Solar Radiation Rates by Month Aurora Climate Station (kWh/m²) Daily Extremes Month Maximum Mean Minimum Maximum Minimum January 0.64 0.50 0.44 1.23 0.02 February 1.47 1.25 0.77 3.04 0.08 March 3.24 3.04 2.71 5.43 0.05 April 5.04 4.65 4.36 6.99 0.93 May 6.19 5.38 4.62 8.64 0.89 June 6.25 5.78 5.13 8.87 0.88 July 6.00 5.59 5.16 11.4 0.8 August 5.18 4.56 3.82 7.17 0.48 September 3.48 2.97 2.50 5.41 0.06 October 1.62 1.48 1.28 3.33 0.05 November 0.74 0.51 0.26 1.61 0.01 December 0.40 0.28 0.17 1.00 0.02 Annual 0.29 3.01 0.10 Note: Period of Record: 1988 and 1995 to 2003

Table 4-9 Wind Speeds and Frequency of Occurrence at Aurora and Fort McMurray Climate Stations Aurora Climate Station Fort McMurray Airport Station (May 1995 to Dec 2003) (1959-2002) Maximum Mean Wind Hourly Hourly Frequency of Mean Hourly Frequency of Direction Speed Speed Occurrence Speed Occurrence (km/h) (km/h) (km/h) N 20.8 4.5 4.7% 10.9 7.7% NE 28.2 4.5 51.5% 8.5 3.4% E 14.1 3.8 2.2% 10.9 20.1% SE 21.0 3.9 4.0% 11.2 8.3% S 21.4 4.4 19.8% 9.8 6.2% SW 15.5 3.5 6.4% 10.8 10.3% W 15.7 3.7 4.7% 12.9 15.9% NW 28.2 5.4 6.3% 11.1 11.9% Calm 0 0.4% 0 16.3% All 4.4 100% 9.5 100%

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 4-7

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 4-10 Frequency Analysis of Extreme Hourly Wind Speeds at Fort McMurray Airport Climate Station Extreme Hourly Wind Speed by Return Wind Period Direction (km/h) 2 Year 10 Year 100 Year N 32.1 41 51 NE 25.5 32.8 41.3 E 33.6 39.1 44.7 SE 32.8 39.7 46.8 SE 30 36.4 43.6 SW 34.7 42.3 49.6 W 43.9 55.9 69.9 NW 37.2 50.3 65.5 Note: Golder (2002) based on 1959-2000 Fort McMurray station data.

The dominant wind at the Fort McMurray Airport climate station is an easterly wind, with the highest probability of occurrence (20%). The mean wind speed is about 9.5 km/h. The westerly wind typically has the highest speed, with a mean value of about 13 km/h and the 100-year return period of extreme hourly wind speed is about 70 km/h, also from the west. The maximum hourly wind speed recorded at the Fort McMurray station is 67 km/h from the west January 18, 1991. By comparison, the dominant wind at the Aurora climate station, based on recorded data from 1995 to 2003, is from the northeast with a frequency of occurrence of nearly 52%. A secondary wind from the south has a 20% frequency of occurrence. The mean wind speed is much lower than at Fort McMurray at 4.4 km/h. The northwest wind has the highest average speed with mean value of 4.5 km/h and the maximum recorded hourly wind speed at the Aurora climate station is 28.2 km/h from the northwest and northeast. The maximum recorded 5-second gust over the 1995-2003 period has been 60.7 km/h and the maximum 10-minute gust has been 30.5 km/h.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 4-8

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

5 Results – Surface Water Hydrology

5.1 Regional Study Area Watercourses

5.1.1 Annual Water Yields Recorded mean annual water yields show no distinct correlation between annual water yield and basin area. Other basin characteristics such as slope and elevation affect water yield. Mean annual water yields of the large gauged basins in the region range from 49 to 135 mm with the Muskeg River in the middle at 89 mm.

5.1.2 Flood Peak Discharges Frequency analyses of flood peak discharges of the long-term gauged basins show rainfall runoff events typically produce higher peak flows than the snowmelt runoff events for most basins. Snowmelt events in the Muskeg River typically produce higher peak flows than the rainfall events, because of the relatively large percentage of lowland area and relatively high storage capacity in the Muskeg River basin.

5.1.3 Low Flows Daily low flows of the large gauged streams primarily occur in the winter in February- March but may occur during late fall and during initial freeze-up in November-December when a large portion of the flow may be temporarily taken up to make ice. Once a thermal ice cover has developed, ice growth slows and the flow increases. The summer daily low flow is usually an order of magnitude higher than the winter daily low flow. Low flow statistics of the large gauged basins show that winter low flows can drop to zero flow at the 10 year return period for basins the size of or smaller than Jackpine Creek. Flows may drop to zero in the summer at the 100 year return period for basins of this size or smaller.

5.2 Athabasca River Streamflow characteristics of the Athabasca River along the study reach in the RSA are defined by the Environment Canada hydrometric stations located below Fort McMurray downstream of its confluence with the Clearwater River and at the Embarras airport (Figure 1-1). The drainage area of the Athabasca River in this reach increases by about 17% from 133,000 km² downstream of its confluence with the Clearwater River to 155,000 km² near the Embarras airport. The drainage basin at the RAMP station (S24) below Eymundson Creek is 146,000 km2. The historical monthly flow conditions recorded at these two hydrometric stations are detailed in Table 5-1. Near Fort McMurray, the maximum mean monthly flow is in July at 1,400 m³/s and the minimum monthly flow is in February at 160 m³/s. Table 5-2 presents estimated mean annual and flood flow statistics for four locations along the study reach. Intermediate values along the river were obtained by prorating the difference in flow below Fort McMurray and at the Embarras Airport station based on differences in drainage areas. Table 5-3 presents the low flow statistics for the same locations. Flow data and the quality of the rating curve for the RAMP station (S24) are too preliminary to provide valid comparisons at this time.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 5-1

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 5-1 Athabasca River Monthly Recorded Flows near Fort McMurray and Embarras Airport Monthly Discharge (m³/s) Month Water Survey of Canada Water Survey of Canada Station near Fort McMurray Station at Embarras Airport Maximum Mean Minimum Maximum Mean Minimum January 261 175 101 269 224 143 February 266 160 99.0 240 198 134 March 271 167 97.3 220 202 181 April 1030 506 128 1050 617 436 May 2080 1010 432 1970 1110 626 June 2210 1300 671 2060 1500 823 July 2740 1400 731 2790 1640 948 August 1740 980 547 1360 1130 845 September 1510 738 382 1760 943 530 October 1040 555 273 1210 711 376 November 635 323 155 590 427 325 December 353 200 107 322 250 197 Annual 633 749 Note: Periods of Record: 1957 to 2003 near Fort McMurray (07DA001) and 1971 to 1984 at Embarras Airport (07DD001)

Table 5-2 Athabasca River Mean and Flood Flow Statistics Estimated Floods for Specified Return Periods Date of Mean (m³/s) Extreme Extreme Locations Along Drainage Annual 2 10 100 Maximum Maximum Athabasca River Area Discharge Years Years Years Discharge Discharge (km²) (m³/s) (m³/s) Below Fort McMurray(a) 133,000 633 2,370 3,720 5,490 4,700 15-Jul-71 Below confluence with Muskeg 135,200 643 2,410 3,780 5,580 River(b) Muskeg River Mine Water Intake (below MacKay River 141,600 679 2,530 3,890 5,840 confluence)(b) Below Eymundson Creek(c) 146,000 Embarras Airport(d) 155,000 749 2,505 3,570 5,070 4,190 17-Jul-71 Notes: Athabasca River at the Embarras Airport data as reported in Golder 2002. Near Fort McMurray: Floods calculated using peak daily data and Log Pearson Distribution (a) Dischages estimated based on analysis of Environment Canada hydrometric streamflow record from 1957 to 2003 (b) Mean and annual flood peak discharges estimated based on the ratios of drainage areas (c) Available RAMP data is too short to define at present (d) Based on the period of record from 1971 to 1984 at the Embarras Airport

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 5-2

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 5-3 Athabasca River Low Flow Statistics Locations Along the Athabasca River Muskeg River Below Mine Water Confluence Intake (below At the Flow Return Near Fort With Muskeg Confluence with Embarras Parameter Season Period McMurray River (a) Mackay River) (a) Airport (Years) Daily low-flow Open-water 2 258 261 272 322 (m³/s) season (mid April 10 163 165 172 202 to mid 100 111 112 117 156 November) Ice-cover season 2 126 128 134 155 (mid November 10 93 94 99 113 to mid April) 100 67 68 71 91 7-day low-flow Open-water 2 258 262 276 366 (m³/s) season (mid April 10 161 163 172 231 to mid 100 107 108 114 179 November) Ice-cover season 2 133 135 142 159 (mid November 10 99 100 106 118 to mid April) 100 78 79 83 95 Extreme 75 n/a n/a 123 minimum recorded 2-Dec-01 5-Feb-72 flow (m³/s) Note: (a) Low-flow statistics estimated based on drainage area ratios and period of record at the gauged stations to 2003.

The estimated mean annual flow of the Athabasca River below the confluence with the Muskeg River is 643 m³/s. The 100 year flood peak discharge is estimated to be 5,490 m³/s as compared to a historical maximum recorded daily flow of 4,700 m³/s on July 15, 1971 below Fort McMurray. The 10-year return period 7-day low flow (7Q10) is estimated to be 99 m³/s below Fort McMurray and 106 m³/s at the Muskeg River Mine intake. The minimum recorded daily flow below Fort McMurray has been 75 m³/s on December 2, 2001. Short one- to two-day low flow periods can occur during ice formation at freeze-up in November to December with more sustained low flow periods typically coming at the end of the flow recession hydrograph in February-March. The minimum measured flow at the RAMP station (S24) was 90.8 m3/s on March 22, 2002.

5.3 Local Study Area Watercourses (2003/2004)

5.3.1 Muskeg River The Muskeg River basin has a total drainage area of 1,483 km² at its mouth and 1,460 km² at the long term Environment Canada gauging station. The total basin has an upland area of 795 km² (54%) and a lowland area of 688 km² (46%) (Golder 2002) where upland areas are typically defined as having slopes greater than 0.75% supporting poplar, spruce and birch vegetation. The mean annual water yield of the Muskeg River is estimated to be 89 mm, corresponding to a mean annual discharge of 4.1 m³/s.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 5-3

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 5-4 presents the distribution of recorded monthly mean, maximum and minimum flows at the Environment Canada hydrometric station on the Muskeg River. The table also shows the monthly values are based on from 13 to 30 years of monthly data reflecting that winter flow monitoring ceased in 1987. The highest mean monthly flow occurs in May and the lowest in February. The maximum daily recorded flow was 66.1 m³/s on May 9, 1985 and the minimum was 0.04 m³/s on January 2, 1984. Annual peaks occur due to both snowmelt in May and June and rainstorm events in August and September. Muskeg River monthly and annual flow duration curves are provided in Figure 5-1.

Table 5-4 Muskeg River Near Fort Mackay – Monthly Recorded Flows (1974 to 2003) Monthly Discharge (m³/s) Years of Month Maximum Mean Minimum Data(1) January 0.648 0.354 0.049 15 February 0.490 0.306 0.082 15 March 1.60 0.462 0.180 30 April 16.6 4.47 0.955 30 May 34.3 10.2 0.622 30 June 19.5 7.58 0.657 30 July 14.4 6.54 0.739 30 August 21.0 4.65 0.353 30 September 22.1 5.78 0.170 30 October 21.0 5.48 0.370 30 November 5.72 2.13 0.376 13 December 1.16 0.496 0.150 13 Annual* 4.06 Notes: * based on mean monthly values (1) years data give a relative indication of long-term relevance of values.

Correlation estimates to fill in ungauged winter flows from 1988 on were used to estimate annual yields (McEachern and Noton 2002). Applying this correlation, annual yields over the 30 years from 1974-2003 have ranged from a low of 14.4 mm in 1999 to a high of 169 mm in 1997. The recent low runoff observed in 1998-1999 is considered comparable to lows first simulated from climatic records in the 1950’s (AGRA 1996a).

5.3.2 Jackpine Creek Jackpine Creek is one of the major tributaries of the Muskeg River and has a total drainage area of 358 km² including an upland area of 220 km² (62%) and a lowland area of 138 km² (38%). The mean annual water yield of Jackpine Creek at its mouth is estimated to be 100 mm, corresponding to a mean annual discharge of 1.14 m³/s. This basin contributes approximately 28% of the total flow in the Muskeg River compared to 24% of the basin area. Annual water yield is highly variable ranging from 13.3 mm in 1983 to 184 mm in 1989 (winter flow monitoring ceased in 1987 and has been recently resumed by RAMP). Evidence of groundwater discharge to Jackpine Creek was previously observed (Golder 2002) above the Pleistocene Channel Aquifer identified in the LSA. Estimates of the base flow contribution from this aquifer to Jackpine Creek represents 0.05 to 0.9 percent of the mean annual discharge (Golder 2002).

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 5-4

Monthly and Annual Flow Duration Curves 70

Annual

60 Apr May June July 50 Aug Sep Oct

) 40 Nov s / ³ m (

e g r a h

c 30 s i D

20

10

0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of Time Flow is Exceeded (%)

Winter Month Flow Duration Curves 3.5

Jan Feb 3.0 Mar Dec

2.5 )

s 2.0 / ³ m (

e g r a h

c 1.5 s i D

1.0

0.5

0.0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of Time Flow is Exceeded (%)

814-04-09-08-A1 MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Project Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. Location 100 0 100 200 DRAFT DATE SCALE BC Muskeg River AB SK 08/September/2004 N.T.S. Scale in Metres Flow Duration Curves REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by 08/September/2004 OS1182 Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL GE DC DC - 5-1

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

The temporal distribution of the combined record of monthly flows at the Environment Canada and RAMP hydrometric stations on Jackpine Creek is detailed in Table 5-5 based on 12 to 28 years of mean monthly flow data. The highest mean monthly flow occurs in May and the lowest occurs in February, the same as the Muskeg River. The maximum daily recorded flow was 17.2 m³/s on May 8, 1985 and zero flow has frequently been recorded for periods of over two months between December and March.

Table 5-5 Jackpine Creek Near the Mouth – Monthly Recorded Flows Monthly Discharge Years (m³/s) of Month Data(1) Maximum Mean Minimum January 0.030 0.008 0 12 February 0.024 0.005 0 12 March 0.105 0.025 0 18 April 3.93 1.25 0.104 19 May 9.86 2.92 0.118 26 June 6.71 2.14 0.020 27 July 6.57 1.79 0.029 28 August 7.38 1.50 0.070 26 September 9.22 1.96 0.005 25 October 5.69 1.53 0.027 19 November 1.11 0.451 0.001 12 December 0.154 0.036 0 12 Annual* 1.14 Notes: * based on mean monthly values WSC data Jackpine Creek near the mouth (1975 to 1993) and RAMP data (1995 to 2003 (1) years data give a relative indication of long-term relevance of values. Current oil sands developments in the Muskeg River basin do not affect the existing natural flows on Jackpine Creek. Jackpine Creek has two main stems that join south of the Sharkbite Expansion Pit area. The east fork or East Jackpine Creek is the smaller of the two with a drainage area of 108 km². The main stem of Jackpine Creek at their confluence has a drainage area of 209 km². Available historic spot monitoring data on these streams is shown in Table 5-6. These data show that the flow in East Jackpine is about one-quarter the flow of the main stem above the confluence. Further, comparison with flow data downstream near the mouth suggest that a net loss in surface flow may occur in this reach (0.22 m³/s on average over the 14 data points). This may be due in part to ponding and evaporative losses, changes in groundwater interflow or recharging of an underground aquifer in this area. Measurement error may also account for differences because some of the spot flow data were estimated based only on level observations with stage-discharge relations. Another intermittent tributary (monitoring stream 3) along the west side of Jackpine Creek within the Sharkbite Expansion Pit area is almost exclusively lowland area with extensive wetlands and beaver ponds. Drainage boundaries are not clearly defined on this tributary and at times, depending upon beaver dam, debris and flow conditions, it could partly drain southwest into the Stream 1 watershed or even northwest directly to the

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 5-7

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Muskeg River. The maximum estimated drainage area of this tributary is 6.8 km². Measured flows in 2003-2004 on this tributary at the S3 sampling site at the Canterra Road, where the drainage area is estimated at 4.0 km², were from 3 to 9 L/s.

Table 5-6 Comparative Discharge Data on Jackpine Creek 1 2 3 = 1+2 4 Jackpine Upstream East Jackpine of East Jackpine Below at the Date Jackpine Creek Confluence mouth 28-Jul-76 0.563 0.119 0.682 0.385 08-Sep-76 2.770 0.869 3.639 3.650 25-Apr-77 1.190 0.467 1.657 2.243 17-May-77 0.762 0.200 0.962 0.810 21-Jun-77 0.671 0.160 0.831 1.000 11-Oct-77 0.580 0.391 0.971 1.195 28-Apr-80 0.654 0.289 0.943 0.790 06-Jun-80 0.422 0.045 0.467 0.036 04-Jul-80 0.222 0.003 0.225 0.027 30-Jul-80 0.024 0.019 0.043 0.067 09-Sep-80 3.300 0.610 3.910 2.790 23-Sep-80 4.190 0.800 4.990 4.200 14-Oct-80 1.614 0.429 2.043 2.200 08-May-04 1.891 0.460 2.351 1.229 Notes: Column 1 (drainage area 208.5 km²) and 2 (108 km²) data sources are 1976-77 from Froelich (1979), some data estimated by stage-discharge relations 1980 spot measurements from Stanley, 1980 2004 flow measurements by North/South Column 4 (358 km²) from Environment Canada/RAMP station

5.3.3 Mills Creek Mills Creek is the main drainage basin in the Muskeg River Mine Expansion West Pit area and the main inflow to Isadore’s Lake. The total drainage basin area was reported as 23.8 km² consisting almost exclusively of lowland terrain (Golder 1997 and 2003). The upper portions of the basin have been affected by muskeg and overburden drainage ditches and gravel mining of the Susan Lake gravel deposit in the middle of the basin. As a result, the contributing drainage basin area has been reduced to some extent. The estimated drainage area of 10.9 km² is shown in Figure 5-2. A muskeg drainage ditch system in the headwaters constructed in 1980 as part of the Alsands project drained west into the basin. This system now backs up and drains east removing this upper portion of the basin. Other developments reducing downstream runoff include drainage for the southwest disposal area in the Muskeg River Mine and the gravel pit operation. Figure 5-3 shows the historic flow data for the period of record at RAMP station S6 on Mills Creek.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 5-8

RGE 11 RGE 10 RGE 9 W4M

TWP TWP 96 96

!. JPC-Mouth

TWP TWP M us 95 95 ke g R r iv Mills Creek e e !. iv r R g e k s u M S3 !. !. Isadore's Isadore's Lake Lake

S1 !. !. S2 !. !. P4 MUR-B !. P1 MUR-A !.

!. JPC_4

k e e r

C

e

n i

p

k

c

a !. J Water Flow or Discharge P2 !. Measurement and Sediment TWP Quality Sampling Location TWP 94 Sub-basin Watershed Boundaries 94

Known Boundary Location

Approximate Boundary Location

Gravel Road - 1 Lane (Each Direction)

Paved Road - Primary - Unimproved

Project Data

MRME Development Area

Albian As-Built Footprint (December 2003) and Additional Disturbances in MRME Development Area

RGE 11 RGE 10 RGE 9 W4M

MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited NORTH Water and Sediment Quality Project PREPARED BY Location 1012 BC DRAFT DATE SCALE 2003/2004 AB SK 09/Sept/2004 1:100,000 Scale in Kilometres REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. Sampling Locations 08/Feb/2005 Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by OS1182 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL and Sub-basin Watersheds Footprint provided by Albian Sands Energy Inc. AO DC JS - 5-2

Mills Creek Discharge Data (1997 to 2003) 0.8

RAMP Station S6

0.7

0.6

0.5 ) s / ³ m (

e g

r 0.4 a h c s i D 0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 7 7 8 8 9 9 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / l l l l l l l t t t t t t t r r r r r r r n n n n n n n c c c c c c c u u u u u u u p p p p p p p a a a a a a a J J J J J J J O O O O O O O A A A A A A A / / / / / / / J J J J J J J / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Muskeg River, Jackpine Creek and Mills Creek Streamflow (1996-2003) 100

10 ) s / ³ m (

e

g 1 r a h c s i D

0.1

Muskeg River Muskeg River and Jackpine Mills Creek 3 Creek data in m /s and Mills Jackpine Creek Creek is 100 times m3/s value. 0.01 05-Feb-96 01-Dec-96 27-Sep-97 24-Jul-98 20-May-99 15-Mar-00 09-Jan-01 05-Nov-01 01-Sep-02 28-Jun-03

814-04-09-08-A1 MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Project Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. Location 100 0 100 200 DRAFT DATE SCALE BC Mills Creek Comparative AB SK 08/September/2004 N.T.S. Scale in Metres Streamflow Hydrographs REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by 08/September/2004 OS1182 Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL GE DC DC - 5-3

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Mean annual water yield estimates, with data gaps filled in by interpolation and regional comparisons, and based upon a total drainage area of 23.8 km² from Golder (2003) are as follows: Year Runoff (mm) Regional Conditions 1997 107 wet year 1998 111 dry year 1999 28 dry year 2000 25 average 2001 28 average 2002 19 average 2003 27 average Water yields in 1997 and 1998 were well above the other years, which may be partly due to climatic conditions and storage in the fen area but also due to changes in mine drainage. The average runoff rates over the years 2000 to 2003 are considered representative of average runoff years based upon regional runoff and precipitation records. This period implies that the mean annual runoff for Mills Creek, for its original drainage area of 23.8 km², is 25 mm and for the reduced drainage basin area of 10.9 km² is 54 mm. This latter value is consistent with long term estimates of average regional runoff rates for lowland areas. The current average annual discharge of Mills Creek at RAMP station S6 near Highway 63 is estimated to be 0.019 m³/s. The temporal distribution of recorded monthly flows at the RAMP hydrometric station on Mills Creek is detailed in Table 5-7. The highest mean monthly flow appears to occur in August–September due to rainfall rather than in May. However, the short period of record and changing basin conditions limit the value of these statistics. The maximum daily flow recorded at this site was 0.774 m³/s on September 12, 1997.

Table 5-7 Mills Creek Recorded Flows at RAMP S6 (1996 to 2003)

Monthly Discharge Years of Month (m³/s) Data(1) Maximum Mean Minimum January 0 February 0 March 0 April 0.117 0.046 0.008 3 May 0.091 0.039 0.008 7 June 0.101 0.042 0.014 6 July 0.085 0.042 0.014 6 August 0.241 0.080 0.010 7 September 0.274 0.074 0.014 6 October 0.045 0.032 0.019 2 November 0 December 0 Apr-Oct* 0.051 Notes: * based on mean monthly data (1) years data give a relative indication of long-term relevance of values.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 5-13

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

The upstream fen area tends to sustain a low flow in the winter. Winter low flow measurements and observations are limited to a couple of years as follows: March 15, 1997 0.034 m³/s (Golder, 1997c) March 28, 1997 0.044 m³/s (Golder, 1997c) March 14, 2004 0.008 m³/s (North/South) Regional data and current basin conditions suggest zero flow conditions may now be expected to occur at times in the winter at this station.

5.3.4 Watercourse S1 Watercourse S1 drainage basin, as shown in Figure 5-2, has a total estimated drainage area of 46.2 km² that is almost exclusively (95%) lowland terrain. The basin drains north and northeast towards a fen area located north of the existing Canterra Road and south of the Muskeg River. Streamflow is highly regulated by the extensive lowland and fen wetland terrain and three ponds located just upstream of the outlet channel to the Muskeg River. The ground contours and potential drainage paths on both the west and northeast ends of the basin indicate drainage directions and the contributing drainage area may change (in the order of 10 to 20%) at times due to beaver dam and water level conditions. Spot flow measurements from October 2003 to August 2004, detailed in Table 5-8, are compared with flows on the Muskeg River, Jackpine Creek and Mills Creek in Figure 5-4. Correlation of coincident flow data on the Muskeg River over this period suggest that the mean annual water yield is expected to be approximately 65 mm corresponding to a mean annual discharge of 0.095 m³/s. The lower expected yield reflects the regulated effect of the wetlands and ponds in the basin. Monitoring by Alberta Environment of this stream in 1998-99 reported a low average runoff of 49 mm (McEachern and Noton 2002). Actual flow data were not available to review or present these data here. The surface flow observed at the outlet of the ponds is expected to primarily come from surficial groundwater flow into these ponds. Flow measurements of surface flows observed along the Canterra Road, accounting for nearly 90% of the contributing drainage basin area of Stream 1, tend to confirm this observation. The total combined surface flow measured along the road was 0.022 m³/s on October 6, 2003 following a recent fall storm event. By comparison, the measured flow downstream at the mouth on October 7, 2003 was much larger at 0.194 m³/s. In addition, the drainage pattern and road culverts directly south of the three ponds on watercourse S1 show evidence of previous flow from the extensive beaver pond / marsh complex just to the south. In October 2003 no surface flow was observed across the road at this location suggesting that surface drainage may now be towards the west or the main flow is subsurface. Low flows are expected to be sustained in the winter by the regulating wetland and pond areas. In fact, S1 did not freeze over in 2003/04. The minimum measured flow of 0.044 m3/s on April 2, 2004 is expected to be representative of, or just above average annual minimum flow conditions based upon hydrologic conditions occurring at the time.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 5-14

35

Jackpine Ck (358 km²) Stream 1 (46.2 km²) 30 Muskeg R (1460 km²) Mills Ck (10.9 km²)

25 Note: 2004 data are preliminary. Drainage areas indicated in brackets. ) ²

m 20 k / s / L ( f f o n u 15 R

10

5

0 20/03/2003 09/05/2003 28/06/2003 17/08/2003 06/10/2003 25/11/2003 14/01/2004 04/03/2004 23/04/2004 12/06/2004 01/08/2004

814-04-09-08-A1 MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Project Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. Location 100 0 100 200 Comparison of 2003- DRAFT DATE SCALE BC AB SK 08/September/2004 N.T.S. 2004 Runoff Rates in Scale in Metres REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. 08/September/2004 the Local Study Area Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by OS1182 Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL GE DC DC - 5-4

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 5-8 Miscellaneous Spot Discharge Measurements (2003-2004)

Date Discharge Runoff Measurement by (m3/s) (L/s/km2) Stream 1 near mouth (46.2 km², 468065E 6341870N) 07-Oct-03 0.194 4.2 North/South* 01-Feb-04 0.065 1.4 Mack & Slack 18-Mar-04 0.082 1.8 North/South 02-Apr-04 0.044 1.0 Mack & Slack 29-Apr-04 0.102 2.2 North/South 02-May-04 0.128 2.8 North/South 04-May-04 0.091 2.0 North/South 07-May-04 0.092 2.0 North/South 01-Jun-04 0.162 3.5 Mack & Slack 19-Jun-04 0.207 4.5 North/South 20-Jun-04 0.266 5.8 North/South 21-Jun-04 0.178 3.9 North/South 26-Jul-04 0.070 1.5 North/South Mills Creek (transects below S6), area used 23.8 km² 12-Oct-03 0.071 3.0 North/South 05-May-04 0.044 1.8 North/South 27-Jul-04 0.036 1.5 North/South Stream 2 (at Canterra Road, 8.5 km²) 06-Oct-03 0.011 1.3 Hydroconsult 05-May-04 0.0121 1.4 North/South 26-Jul-04 <0.005 0.6 North/South Stream 3 (Jackpine Tributary at Canterra Rd., 4.0 km² ) 06-Oct-03 0.003 0.8 Hydroconsult 06-May-04 0.0089 2.2 North/South 26-Jul-04 0.071 17.8 North/South** Jackpine Creek upstream of mouth at fish fence, 358 km² 04-Apr-04 3.193 8.9 North/South 16-Jun-04 4.875 13.6 North/South 17-Jun-04 5.735 16.0 North/South 18-Jun-04 4.878 13.6 North/South Jackpine Creek upstream of East Jackpine Ck., 208.5 km² 08-May-04 1.898 9.1 North/South East Jackpine Creek upstream of confluence, 108 km² 08-May-04 0.460 4.3 North/South Jackpine Creek below confluence with East Jackpine, 316.5 km² 08-May-04 2.283 7.2 North/South Notes: * measurement result may be high due to aquatic vegetation in channel ** measurement expected to be high due to backwater and extreme low velocities

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 5-17

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

5.3.5 Low and Flood Flows of Streams in the Local Study Area Table 5-9 summarizes estimated high and low flow statistics of the main streams in the LSA. Low flow characteristics of these streams are represented by the 7-Q-10 low flow parameter. Regional flood frequency analysis and comparison of flows with the Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek flood frequency estimates are used to estimate flood flows for Mills Creek and watercourse S1.

Table 5-9 Low and Flood Flow Statistics for Muskeg River, Jackpine Creek, Mills Creek and Stream 1

Muskeg Jackpine Return River near Creek near Mills Creek Stream 1 at Flow Parameter Period Fort Mackay the Mouth at RAMP S6 the Mouth (m³/s) (year) Maximum Daily Flood 2 23 8 0.3 0.33 Flow 10 48 15 0.7 0.7 100 80 23 1.7 1.1 7-Day, 10 Year Low Flow 10 0.10 0.003 0 0.005 Recorded Extreme 66.1 17.2 0.774 Maximum 9-May-85 8-May-85 12-Sep-97 Recorded Extreme 0.04 0 0.005 Minimum 2-Jan-84 9-Nov-82(a) 09-Apr-02(b) Notes: Flood values shown based on recorded peak daily data. Mills Creek and Stream 1 are estimated values from regional analyses and comparisons considering current basin conditions. (a) multiple periods from this date on report a minimum flow of 0 m³/s. (b) limited observations - expected to be 0 on occasion.

5.3.6 Lakes and Ponds

5.3.6.1 Isadore’s’s Lake Isadore’s’s Lake is an oxbow lake formed by the Athabasca River as the river has downcut over geologic time. The current total drainage area at the lake outlet is estimated at 15.6 km² with Mills Creek as the main surface inflow. The lake surface area is estimated at 0.35 km² however, the total wetland area making up the oxbow floodplain area is approximately 1.3 km² in area. Figure 5-5 shows the lake bathymetry and area-capacity curves based on sounding surveys conducted July 20, 2004. The maximum lake depth was 4.3 m and average depth is about 1.45 m. The lake level monitoring data by RAMP from February 2000 to December 2003 in Figure 5-6 show the average lake water level is 233.74 masl. Levels typically fluctuate by about 0.3 m between 233.9 and 233.6 masl. A characteristic rise in the spring water level due to snowmelt followed by a recession thereafter is not evident from the plot. Abrupt changes in the lake water level may be attributable to the influence of the Athabasca River and in particular ice conditions with rapid staging and drops in the river level.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 5-18

Wetland / Seepage Outflow

1 1 Isadore's Lake Area Capacity Curve 2 3 4

Volume (m³) 1

2 0 72500 145000 217500 290000 362500 435000 507500 3 Mills Creek 0.0 Inflow 1 2 0.5

3 1.0 1 2

1.5 ) m ( h t 2.0 p e 2 D 2.5

1

3.0

3 3.5 Area 1 Volume 2

4.0 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 3 Area (m²)

3

Athabasca River (Seepage / High Contours are depth in metres Level Inflow)

814-04-09-08-A1 MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Project Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. Location 100 0 100 200 DRAFT DATE SCALE BC Isadore's Lake AB SK 08/September/2004 1:10,000 Scale in Metres= Bathymetry REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by 08/September/2004 OS1182 Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL GE DC DC - 5-5

234.00

233.95

233.90

233.85

233.80 ) m (

l

e 233.75 v e L

233.70

233.65

233.60

Expected icing error 233.55

233.50 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------l l l l r r r r v v v v y y y y p p p p n n n n u u u u a a a a o o o o a a a a e e e e a a a a J J J J - - - - J J J J M M M M N N N N S S S S M M M M ------1 1 1 1 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

814-04-09-08-A1 MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Project Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. Location 100 0 100 200 Isadore's Lake DRAFT DATE SCALE BC AB SK 08/September/2004 N.T.S. Daily Water Level Scale in Metres REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. 08/September/2004 (2000-2003) Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by OS1182 Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL GE DC DC - 5-6

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Interpolation of flood risk and high ice levels on the Athabasca River from previous flood studies for various facilities (bridges and water intakes) from Fort McMurray to Embarras suggest that Isadore’s’s Lake is subject to flooding as well as seepage inflows/outflows from the Athabasca River. The mean lake level is estimated to correspond to about 3.7 m above the average river water level and about equal to the 20-year flood level on the river. The 100-year flood level is about 1.2 m higher at approximately 235 m. The high ice level is estimated at more than 3 m above the lake level at about 237 m. The water balance of Isadore’s’s Lake is affected by several complex components that are difficult to define. These include: seepage and surface inflows from the Athabasca River, outflow seepage to the river, seepage inflow from the river valley and extensive changes in lake area or the saturated extent of the wetland area with small changes in lake level. Lake surface outflows are minor based the observed characteristics of the outlet channel and the flat wetland conditions approaching the Athabsaca River bank (see photos in Appendix L. Seepage may in fact be the main outflow component from the lake. Estimated mean annual water balance components for Isadore’s’s Lake and the basin are as follows: • Surface Runoff Inflow = 680,000 m³ (590,000 m³ from Mills Creek based on the 2000-2003 average runoff plus 90,000 m³ other runoff from 3.4 km²) • Net Evaporative Losses = 192,000 m³ (lake evaporation and evapotranspiration at 592 mm less 444 mm precipitation applied times the entire wetland area of 1.3 km²) • Groundwater Inflow = 32,000 to 315,000 m³ (range of 1 L/s to 10 L/s based upon a typical 5 to 10% percentage of precipitation inflow to groundwater and range of contributing areas) • Groundwater Outflow = 95,000 m³ (based upon average net gradient to the river, potential permeability rates and lake area) • Surface Outflow = 425,000 to 708,000 m³ (balance of the above components) equal to 13 to 22 L/s average annual flow.

5.3.6.2 Other Lakes and Ponds Several other small lakes and ponds are present in the LSA. These have primarily formed from runoff being retarded by vegetation and organic material deposits in the low gradient wetlands. The locations of the lakes and ponds with an areal extent greater than one hectare are identified in Figure 5-2 and are discussed in the Aquatic Resources report. Numerous other small marsh areas and beaver ponds have minor amounts of open water and typically have an average depth of less than 0.3 m. These water bodies are fed by a combination of overland drainage, seepage and groundwater discharge. Waterbodies P1 and P5 are supplied by the watercourse S1 intermittent drainage system, with P4 draining into P5 and then into P1. P2 is also supplied by an intermittent stream. The pond sizes, depths, substrate and habitat characteristics are described in the Aquatic Resources report. The water bodies defined as deep upland type lakes (ponds) are P1, P4 and P5 and P6 (Webb 1981). The other lakes are defined as shallow muskeg type lakes (ponds). Other than the three lakes on S1 (P1, P4 and P5) the water bodies do not have defined outlets with the main outflow occurring via seepage and surficial groundwater flow. These water bodies therefore can have a significant local regulating affect on runoff on the small local watersheds. Typical annual water level fluctuations are less than 0.3 m, as evident from the shoreline vegetation.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 5-23

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

5.3.7 Stream Sediment Transport Basin sediment yield is a function of climatic, hydrologic, basin physiographic and channel geomorphic conditions. The sediment yield characteristics of the large basins in the region based on the available stream sediment measurements are detailed in Table 5-10.

Table 5-10 Mean Annual Sediment Yields of Regional Gauged Basins Mean Annual Hydrometric Station Drainage Area Sediment Yield (km²) (mm) Poplar Creek (07DA007)(1) 151 0.0193 Beaver River (07DA018) 165 0.0236 Joslyn Creek (07DA016) 257 0.0647 Jackpine Creek (07DA009) 358 .00027 Steepbank River (07DA006) 1,320 0.0246 Muskeg River (07DA008) 1,460 0.0016 Ells River (07DA017) 2,450 0.0928 MacKay River (07DB001) 5,570 0.0175 Firebag River (07DC001) 5,990 0.0114 Athabasca River (07DA001) 133,000 0.159 Note: (1) Poplar Creek sediment data are prior to diversion of flow from the Beaver River Table taken from Golder, 2002.

The sediment yields in Table 5-10 are based upon partial data sets from manual sampling primarily conducted over the 1974-1983 period. Subsequent data collection has been discontinued or is too sparse to provide further updates. The mean annual sediment yields for the large regional gauged basins vary by two orders of magnitude from about 0.0016 to 0.16 mm. There is no strong correlation with drainage area because of the varying basin and channel conditions. The mean annual sediment yield for the Muskeg River, at about 0.0016 mm, is the lowest in the region and indicative of the influence of the large percentage of lowland area in the basin. The Athabasca River, as a large sand bed river in the study reach, has the highest mean annual sediment yield (0.16 mm). Stream sediment or total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations in combination with stream discharge are used to determine watershed sediment yields and channel erosion rates. Figure 5-7 shows measured TSS concentrations versus discharge data for the Environment Canada stations on the Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek. This figure shows the expected wide scatter representing varying hydrologic conditions and times of the year but show the general trend of increasing concentrations with discharge. Sediment concentrations are typically high during the snowmelt period with values approaching 100 mg/L. The sediment concentrations are typically lower and less than 10 mg/L in the spring and summer period. TSS concentrations of spot samples from the streams and water bodies in the LSA during the 2003-2004 aquatic field programs were all less than 10 mg/L. TSS Muskeg River monitoring by Albian Sands (stations Albian Upstream North - J6N and Albian and Aurora Downstream - J3) from 2000 to present have typically recorded levels from undetectable to 15 mg/L. Maximum recorded spot values by Albian were 42 mg/L April 2002 and 24 mg/L April 22, 2003 both at J3.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 5-24

1000 07DA008 Muskeg River (1976-1983) 07DA009 Jackpine Creek (1976-1983)

100 ) L / g m (

n o i t a r t n e c n o C

S S T 10

1 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 Discharge (m³/s)

814-04-09-08-A1 MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Project Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. Location 100 0 100 200 Muskeg River and Jackpine DRAFT DATE SCALE BC AB SK 08/September/2004 N.T.S. Creek Total Suspended Scale in Metres REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO. 08/September/2004 Solids versus Discharge Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by OS1182 Hydroconsult EN3 Services Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL GE DC DC - 5-7

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

5.3.8 Stream Geomorphic Conditions Geomorphic observations conducted to supplement the available geomorphic data previously collected for the MRM are provided in Table 5-11. The previous data summarized the available stream geomorphic data throughout the Muskeg River basin (Golder 2002). The streams in the LSA are smaller intermittent streams with more extensive lowland terrain than those previously summarized. Geomorphic conditions are highly variable on these smaller streams due to beaver activity, ponding conditions and changes in vegetation. Differentiation between the channel and floodplain may be highly variable but is generally well defined by changes in vegetation type. The valley flats vary from grass-covered muskeg or marsh areas to thick brush and moderately forested areas. An exception to this is Mills Creek, which flows through a moderately forested area of coniferous trees. The stream bank material in all of the small streams except Mills Creek is primarily organic with silt and some sand. The channel bed material primarily consists of silt and sand in varying portions and occasional fine gravel deposits present on larger streams. Most of the streams in the LSA may be subjected to extensive backflooding and significant changes in channel conditions due to beaver activity. Most of the streams have one main channel. Mills Creek originates as a defined channel downstream of its fen area starting about 1 km upstream of Highway 63 and RAMP station S6. Upstream of the highway, the channel varies from 0.5 to 2.5 m in width as it begins to become incised in a valley section that is 10 to 30 m wide at the bottom and up to 2.5 m deep. A 1 m high terrace has developed in this valley section in places. Channel bed and bank material changes from a fine sand and silt to a course sand material that is exposed and eroding from the valley wall sections. Occasional gravel and cobble sections are present. Extensive coarse sand material is being introduced into the channel by an unstable road ditch just upstream of the highway. Downstream of the highway, the channel is much more incised as it cuts down to the Athabasca River valley. Several recent and active beaver dams are present along this channel reach. Where beaver dam back flooding is not present the bankfull channel section is typically 3 m wide and 0.4 m deep. Bed material is primarily silt. Stream 1 at the outlet of the ponds to the Muskeg River is a single defined channel with a wide grassed floodplain section that occasionally conveys some flow via seepage in the muskeg/grass floodplain area. The 2 to 3 m wide channel has silt bed and banks with extensive aquatic vegetation. Because water level fluctuations are small bank definition is poor in places with minimal height developed.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 5-27

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 5-11 Summary of Stream Geomorphic Data in the Local Study Area Basin Bed Valley Mean Bankfull Entrenchment Width / (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Site No. Stream Name Area Slope Slope Depth Width Sinuosity Ratio Depth D50 D100 (km2) (m) (m) (mm) (mm) RAMP S6 Mills Ck. (Golder 2002 23.8* 0.019 0.0286 0.28 4.9 1.5 1.5 17 0.22 1.25 data) M2 Mills Ck. below Hwy. 63 >23.8* 0.015 0.019 0.4 3 1.3 3 7.5 0.1 5 M3 Upper Mills Ck to fen 23.8* 0.0077 0.009 0.3 2.5 1.2 4 8 0.1 to - 0.3 S1 Stream 1 near mouth 46.2 0.012 - 0.012 0.25 2.6 1 to 2.4 2 to >10 10 0.1 - 0.005 S2 Unnamed Ck. Below 8.5 0.014 0.0167 0.38 1.9 1.2 >3 5 0.2 10 Canterra Rd. S2 Unnamed Ck. U/S Canterra 8.5 0.014 0.0167 Ponding <1 & >6 - - - <1 2 Rd. S3 Jackpine Trib. at Canterra 4.0 0.012 0.0143 0.2 & <1 & >6 1.4 - - <1 2 Rd. pond M4** Unnamed Ck. 6.75 0.0102 0.0143 0.4 1.05 1.4 >2.2 7.6 - - M5** Unnamed Ck. 6.75 0.0095 0.0143 0.26 2.4 1.5 >2.2 7.6 - - Notes: 1 mean bankfull depth across channel 2 channel width at bankfull stage 3 ratio of stream length to valley length 4 width of flood-prone area at an elevation of twice the maximum bankfull depth / bankfull width 5 bankfull width / mean bankfull depth 6 estimated median particle size of bed material 7 estimated maximum particle size of bed material * original basin area, reduced now ** Golder (2002) sites on Jackpine tributary near the Canterra Road

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 5-28

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6 Results – Surface Water Quality, Sediment Quality and Aquatic Resources

6.1 General Water Quality Considerations

6.1.1 Trace Metal Partitioning For both total and dissolved metals, seasonal data collected from all streams sampled in 2003/2004 as part of this study, were compiled into two datasets. The same was done for all ponds sampled in 2003/2004. For both streams and ponds, the proportional percentage of the dissolved relative to the total metal concentration was calculated for each metal analyzed. The metals were divided into three categories: • mainly occurred in dissolved form • typically occurred in dissolved and particulate forms and thus was not associated with either • were typically associated with particulates (Table 6-1)

Table 6-1 Proportion of Dissolved Metal Concentrations Relative to Total Metal Concentrations for Watercourses and Waterbodies Sampled in 2003/2004 Metals Not Associated Metals Typically Metals Typically in with Dissolved Form Associated with Dissolved Form or Particulates Particulates (Dissolved/Total >80%) (Dissolved/Total 20 - 80%) (Dissolved/Total <20%) Watercourses Arsenic (As), Barium (Ba), Antimony (Sb), Beryllium (Be), Aluminum (Al), Iron (Fe) Bismuth (Bi), Boron (B), Cobalt (Co), Lead (Pb) Cadmium (Cd), Chromium (Cr), Manganese (Mn), Nickel (Ni), Copper (Cu), Lithium (Li), Silver (Ag), Titanium (Ti), Molybdenum (Mo), Vanadium (V), Zinc (Zn) Selenium (Se), Stronium (Sr), Thallium (Tl), Thorium (Th) Waterbodies Arsenic (As), Barium (Ba), Antimony (Sb), Beryllium (Be), Aluminum (Al) Bismuth (Bi), Boron (B), Cobalt (Co), Iron (Fe), Cadmium (Cd), Chromium (Cr), Lead (Pb), Nickel (Ni), Copper (Cu), Lithium (Li), Selenium (Se), Silver (Ag), Manganese (Mn), Thorium (Th), Titanium (Ti), Molybdenum (Mo), Vanadium (V), Zinc (Zn) Stronium (Sr), Thallium (Tl)

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-1

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Particulate associated metals are metals with an affinity for suspended particles >0.45 µm, while dissolved species are able to pass through a 0.45 µm filter. Dissolved metal forms/species have been shown to be the most bioavailable and therefore the most toxic forms to aquatic biota (O’Donnel et al. 1985; Hare 1992). Almost identical patterns were observed for both streams and ponds, which indicated that trace metal partitioning was similar in both aquatic habitats. The largest proportion of trace metals typically existed as dissolved species. These included arsenic, boron, chromium, copper and cadmium. There was a strong linear relationship between total and dissolved concentrations of these metals as shown for chromium in Figure 6.1 (pond and stream data pooled). The majority of other metals were not observed to be predominantly associated with particulates or to occur as dissolved species; rather, they existed in both forms. These metals included lead, manganese, nickel, silver and zinc. Aluminum was determined to be mainly associated with particulate matter and dissolved concentrations were generally less than 20% of total concentrations. Hence there was a very weak relationship between total and dissolved concentrations (Figure 6-1). A weak relationship also existed between total and dissolved iron concentrations (Figure 6-1). In streams, iron was generally associated with particulates with typically less than 20% present in the dissolved phase. In general, dissolved iron concentrations in ponds were typically greater than 20% but less than 80% of total concentrations. Thus, iron could not be identified to occur predominantly in either particulate or dissolved phases, and occurred in both. The results of this analysis implied that, where total aluminum was observed at high concentrations above WQGs, the majority was associated with particulates and so was less likely to exert toxicity on aquatic biota than for example, chromium levels above WQGs. In LSA streams and ponds, chromium was predominantly present in the bioavailable dissolved phase. For iron, both total and dissolved concentrations exceeded WQGs (300 µg/L) on a number of occasions, but this appeared to be typical of the Muskeg River watershed (Figure 6-1). For each sampled waterbody/watercourse, both total and dissolved concentrations were given. The relative concentrations of total mercury and methylmercury were also compared. Both of these parameters were analysed with detection limits below AENV and CCME WQGs (AENV 1999a; CCME 2003). Historically the assessment of mercury concentrations in the oil sands area has been limited by total mercury analyses being conducted at detection limits above WQGs. Recently, routine analyses with improved detection limits for mercury have solved this problem, but large data gaps still exist in the long-term mercury data set. Mercury is persistent in aquatic systems and biomagnifies in aquatic food chains as methylmercury. Methylmercury is more toxic and bioavailable to aquatic biota than inorganic mercury, as reflected in the WQGs (AENV 1999a; CCME 2003). Methylmercury occurs in natural waters as a result of the bacterial methylation of inorganic mercury present in the sediment and/or the water. Wetlands in particular are regarded as sources of methylmercury, due to optimum conditions for the methylation of inorganic mercury (e.g., low DO conditions, high DOC; UNEP 2002; CCME 2003). Studies indicate that methylmercury levels, along with pH and DOC in natural waters, strongly influence methylmercury levels in fish, (e.g., Moore et al. 2003).

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-2

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

9 2 8 Aluminum (r =0.379; n=36) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Dissolved AluminiumDissolved (ug/L) 0 0 20406080100120 Total Aluminium (ug/L)

2500 2 2250 Iron (r =0.324; n=34) 2000 1750 1500 1250 1000 750

Dissolved Iron (ug/L) Iron Dissolved 500 250 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Total Iron (ug/L) 2.50 2 2.25 Chromium (r =0.980; n=26) 2.00 1.75 1.50 1.25 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 Dissolved Chromium (ug/L) 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75

Total Chromium (ug/L) Figure 6-1 Relationship Between Total and Dissolved Concentrations of Select Trace Metal Samples from the 2003/2004 Survey

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-3

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Total mercury and methylmercury concentrations in the LSA watercourses sampled seasonally in 2003/2004 were all below AENV and CCME aquatic WQGs. Where actual concentrations were determined (above analytical detection limits), the relative proportion of methylmercury of the total mercury concentration was calculated. Available data for the LSA watercourses and waterbodies sampled in 2003/2004 indicated that methylmercury concentrations represented between 2.7 and 20.6% of total mercury concentrations. In undisturbed aquatic systems, methylmercury typically represents <10% of the total mercury concentration, but in perturbed systems the percentage can exceed 30% (CCME 2003). Overall, the mercury partitioning in watercourses and waterbodies located in the MRME Development Area was typical of undisturbed aquatic systems. Only during summer in P1 and Isadore’s Lake was the relative percent of methylmercury higher than 10% (11.4% and 20.6%, respectively).

6.1.2 Quality Assurance/Quality Control The details and findings of the water and sediment QA/QC program results are discussed in Appendix E.

6.1.3 Upstream LSA Watercourses The water and sediment quality and toxicity of other LSA watercourses is presented and discussed in Appendix F. These Muskeg River tributaries were located upstream of the MRME development area and include Muskeg Creek, Khahago Creek, Stanley Creek and Wapasu Creek. For the most part, a larger amount of sampling has occurred on these streams from 1985 to 2004, compared with all the LSA watercourses located in the MRME Development Area, with the exception of Jackpine Creek. The water quality of the Alsands Drain was also discussed in addition to the upstream LSA watercourses. This man-made drainage system previously discharged muskeg drainage and overburden dewatering water into the middle reach of the Muskeg River but it is now decommissioned (Hatfield et al. 2004).

6.2 Local Study Area Watercourses

6.2.1 Muskeg River

6.2.1.1 Surface Water Quality

At the Mouth (Section 1) The water quality data for this downstream section of the Muskeg River were limited to the period prior to and inclusive of winter, spring and summer 1999/2000, but fall data were available from 1989 to 2003 (Appendix G, Table G-1). This section of the Muskeg River, was generally well oxygenated through all four seasons with periodic low winter DO events. Median pH values ranged from 7.0-8.15 and median temperatures ranged from -0.01 ºC in the winter to 19.33 ºC in the summer. This section and in fact the Muskeg River as a whole, can be categorized as a brown-water system with relatively high colour and carbon (DOC and TOC) levels. There were differences in water quality between typically low flow sampling periods (fall and winter) and high flow sampling periods (spring and summer). In particular, levels of water hardness, total alkalinity, TDS and bicarbonate were lower in the spring and

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-4

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

summer seasons. Turbidity was higher in the winter but was still relatively low (<12 NTU). Levels of ammonia tended to peak in the winter but did not exceed chronic aquatic WQGs. The 11-year median and maximum total nitrogen levels in the winter exceeded chronic aquatic WQGs. Nutrient (i.e., total nitrogen; total phosphorus; dissolved phosphorus) concentrations were generally low and within the typical ranges found in the Muskeg River watershed. Naphthenic acids were generally below detections limits, while total phenolics historically exceeded the aquatic WQG in the winter and summer. Concentrations of some total metals periodically exceeded chronic aquatic WQGs during all seasons. Notably, chromium and iron concentrations have exceeded chronic aquatic WQGs to different extents. Iron levels also exceeded the drinking WQG but were within the typical range reported for the Muskeg River watershed. Maximum concentrations of some metals have occasionally exceeded chronic (i.e., aluminum, copper, lead and zinc) and acute (i.e., aluminum, cadmium and copper) aquatic WQGs. Manganese concentrations tended to exceed the drinking WQG, particularly in the winter. PAHs were largely below analytical detection limits but where detectable, they did not exceed chronic aquatic WQGs.

Between the Mouth and Jackpine Creek (Section 2) Water quality data for this downstream section of the Muskeg River was generally limited to the years between 1998 and 2001 (Appendix G, Table G-2). This section of the Muskeg River was well oxygenated during all seasons except winter, where low DO conditions and episodic anoxia prevailed. Median pH values ranged from 7.2-8.0 and median temperature ranged from -0.02 ºC in the winter to 17.4 ºC in the summer. Differences in some water quality parameters were more pronounced between typically high flow and low flow seasons, for this section compared with the mouth. Levels of water hardness, total alkalinity, TDS and some major ions (e.g., calcium, magnesium, sulphate and bicarbonate) were lower in the spring and summer compared with the fall and winter. Levels of ammonia tended to peak in the winter but did not exceed chronic aquatic WQGs. Nutrient levels were generally low, with only winter and summer maximum total nitrogen concentrations exceeding chronic aquatic WQGs. Total phenolics were present throughout all seasons but only the single summer measurement exceeded aquatic WQGs. Although limited, naphthenic acids data suggest that this group of organic compounds was present at levels within the range typical of the Muskeg River watershed. Total iron concentrations were similar to those found at the mouth and were within the typical range reported for the Muskeg River watershed. Winter concentrations of chromium exceeded chronic aquatic WQGs (median and maximum); and the historical maximum lead concentration in winter exceeded acute aquatic WQGs. Both iron and manganese concentrations tended to exceed drinking WQGs. PAHs were largely below analytical detection limits but where detectable, they exceeded chronic aquatic WQGs.

Upstream of Jackpine Creek (Section 3) Water quality data available for this section of the Muskeg River extended from 1985 to 2003 (Appendix G, Table G-3). Compared with the two downstream sections, this stretch of river tended to be less well oxygenated and was subject to very low winter DO levels or anoxia. Low DO events were also likely to occur during the rest of the year. Median

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-5

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

pH values ranged from 7.07-7.7 and median temperatures ranged from 0.15 ºC in the winter to 16.7 ºC in the summer. Differences in water chemistry existed between typically low flow sampling periods (fall and winter) and high flow sampling periods (spring and summer). In particular, levels of water hardness, total alkalinity and TDS were lower in the spring and summer seasons; and levels of major ions were lower in the spring (e.g., calcium, magnesium and bicarbonate). Turbidity reached a peak in the winter, and TSS occasionally reached historic high levels in winter. Ammonia also peaked in the winter with the 19-year median value just below the chronic aquatic WQG. Winter and spring maximum values exceeded the ammonia aquatic WQG. Total nitrogen and phosphorus maximum values exceeded chronic aquatic WQGs for all seasons. Nitrogen concentrations were particularly elevated in the winter, when all recorded concentrations exceeded the chronic aquatic WQG. The winter sulphide maximum concentration exceeded the aquatic WQG. Levels of total phenolics periodically exceeded the aquatic WQG during all seasons except summer. Naphthenic acids were generally close to or below detection limits. Irrespective of season, median total iron concentrations were within the range typically found in the Muskeg River watershed, which tended to exceed chronic aquatic and drinking WQGs. Seasonal maximum iron values were, however, an order of magnitude greater than those observed downstream. Total manganese concentrations also tended to exceed the drinking WQG. Median concentrations of total chromium and cadmium exceeded chronic aquatic WQGs in the winter and summer, respectively. Across seasons, maximum total concentrations of several metals exceeded acute and/or chronic aquatic WQGs (chronic only: aluminum, chromium, copper, mercury and lead; acute and chronic: silver and zinc). PAHs were consistently below analytical detection limits.

Identified Trends from Regional Water Quality Monitoring The Muskeg River is considered to be a well buffered system dominated by calcium and bicarbonate ions. Nevertheless, pH at the WSC site (section 2) has decreased in recent years from 7.8 (1997) to 7.3 (2001), indicative of a downward trend. This downward trend in pH appeared to coincide with lower recorded flows in the Muskeg River. Yet, despite subsequent increases in flow, pH continued to decline (AENV 2002). In a subsequent review, Golder (2003a) noted that this trend analysis did not adequately account for the potential influence of flow, and recommended that this issue should undergo further study. RAMP data collected upstream of Wapasu Creek indicated that after a low pH in 1999 (~7.25), pH steadily climbed, and measured >8 in 2003 (Hatfield et al. 2004). Downstream of current development, pH at the mouth of the Muskeg River has remained above 7.75 since 1997.Between 1985 and 2003 the minimum pH value recorded during spring was 6.6 but it was not clear if that measurement was made during spring melt (Appendix G, Table G-3). During spring melt, available data indicated that the maximum recorded pH decrease was 0.23 pH units and the minimum observed pH was 7.01 (WRS 2003). WRS (2003) concluded that there was a pronounced decline in conductivity and acid neutralizing capacity (ANC) in the Muskeg Firebag and Steepbank rivers, during spring melt. The ANC decline in both the Steepbank and Firebag rivers was mainly due to a reduction in base cation concentration by spring melt waters. Although insufficient data precluded a similar data analysis on the Muskeg River, it is likely that the observed reduction in ANC in the Muskeg River was due to the dilution of base cation concentrations (WRS 2003).

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-6

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

DOC and colour levels are typically high due to the extensive network of peatlands in the basin. A major contribution to surface water flow in the Muskeg River is made by shallow groundwater which has previously traversed organic and mineral soils. This groundwater input is likely, at least in part, to be responsible for elevated DOC and mineral concentrations in the river system (AENV 2002). Low DO events and episodic anoxia are commonplace upstream of the mouth, especially in winter months where DO levels are typically below Alberta aquatic life WQGs. Channel characteristics and associated low velocities are partly responsible for these low DO events. In addition, lower flows and prolonged winter ice cover which prevents surface re-aeration, exacerbate DO depletion. AENV (2002) concluded that although low DO events are likely to be natural, there is a lack of long-term data (i.e., data prior to 1997). AENV (2002) also hypothesized that respiration in sediments (sediment oxygen demand) and the oxidation of suspended solids, may also be partly responsible for low winter DO events, particularly in normal flow years such as 2000. In addition, AENV also hypothesized that the following factors may contribute to DO depletion in the river: • anoxic water draining from peatlands • oxygen depletion in beaver ponds • water contact with sediments with high oxygen demand • denitrification of nitrate from decomposing organic matter and/or groundwater input Insufficient data currently exists to confidently determine the factors responsible for low winter DO conditions, however reduced streamflow does exacerbate DO depletion in the Muskeg River. River gradient and beaver pond presence can reduce phosphorus, DOC and TSS concentrations through increased sedimentation and biotic assimilation, in addition to potentially reducing DO levels. Consequently, total phosphorus concentrations are historically higher in the stretch of river upstream of Muskeg Creek compared with downstream (Golder et al. 2003a). In general, total phosphorus and metals were less influenced by TSS levels in the Muskeg River compared to the Athabasca River (Golder 2003a). Overall, total metal concentrations have historically been lower in the Muskeg River compared to other Athabasca tributaries monitored under RAMP Golder (2000). Between 1998 and 2003/2004, TSS and total aluminum remained low when compared to considerably higher values measured in 1997 (Hatfield et al. 2004). Aluminum predominantly occurs in the particulate phase which is less bioavailable to biota. Furthermore, the high hardness, DOC and pH conditions typical of the Muskeg River would likely ameliorate dissolved aluminum toxicity to some extent (O’Donnel et al. 1985). Within the river itself, both pre and post-development concentrations of total aluminum, boron and sulphate have been consistently higher downstream of the Muskeg Creek confluence compared to upstream (Golder 2003a). In 2003/2004, water quality in the Muskeg River was generally similar to previous years (Hatfield et al. 2004). RAMP monitoring to date (1997-2004) has indicated that, with the exception of sulphate concentrations (significantly elevated from 1998-2000), water quality in the Muskeg River has not substantially changed. Sulphate levels were likely elevated by drainage from the now decommissioned Alsands Drain (Golder 2003a). More recently in 2003/2004, the occurrence of elevated levels of total phenols, TDS, sulphate, alkalinity and conductivity in Stanley Creek did not appear to affect downstream Muskeg River water quality (sites MUR 1-5). Elevated levels of these

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-7

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

constituents were attributed to the initiation of clean water discharge (CWD) into Stanley Creek by Syncrude Canada Ltd. in 2003 (Hatfield et al. 2004). Continued RAMP monitoring in the Muskeg River will determine whether Muskeg River water quality continues to be unaffected.

Water Quality Parameters of Potential Concern Based on available data, water quality parameters of potential concern in the Muskeg River may include: DO, pH and some total metals (e.g., aluminum, chromium, cadmium, copper, lead, iron and manganese). The typical partitioning of trace metals between particulate and dissolved phases was discussed in Section 6.1. Due to the tendency of aluminum to occur in the particulate form; dissolved concentrations were typically well below WQGs (for the total form). On the other hand, although dissolved iron concentrations were lower than total concentrations, they still exceeded WQGs on many occasions. Total nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations may also be of potential concern, as well as total phenolics and naphthenic acids. Naphthenic acids were included due to the uncertainty associated with their occurrence, fate and toxicity. Mercury should also be highlighted as a potential parameter of concern due to the lack of long term data with detection limits below aquatic life WQGs.

6.2.1.2 Sediment Quality In 2003/2004, sediment quality at the most upstream station in the Muskeg River was similar to that recorded at the mouth and was within historical thresholds (Hatfield et al. 2004). A summary of sediment quality data from 1997 to 2003 presented in Table H-1 (Appendix H) indicates that sediments from the upper, lower and middle sections of the Muskeg River were predominantly sand The two lower sections were low in total carbon compared with the upstream section. Hatfield et al. (2004) noted that the upper Muskeg River watershed has some of the highest total organic carbon levels (>10%) in the oil sands region. Historically, Muskeg River sediments upstream of the mouth have also contained relatively high levels of total hydrocarbons (Hatfield et al. 2004). In fall 2003, concentrations of PAHs were naturally high in the Muskeg River (upstream of the Canterra Road crossing) likely due to nearby exposed bitumen. Exposed bitumen and resultant elevations in sediment PAH concentrations occur periodically throughout the oil sands region (Hatfield et al. 2004). Sediments from sites located upstream of the mouth have historically been reported to have elevated chrysene levels (Appendix H, Table H-1). SQGs were exceeded by 7-year maximum concentrations of the following PAHs: benzo[a]anthracene, chrysene, phenanthrene and pyrene. Hatfield et al. (2004) concluded that higher sediment metal concentrations occurred in fall 2003, in the section of the Muskeg River from Stanley Creek to Jackpine Creek, compared with those measured in the lower or upper parts of the river. Concentrations in this Muskeg River section were also lower than some Athabasca River sites but higher than sites on other tributaries sampled by RAMP in 2003. This was generally reflective of greater organic carbon and fine sediment in this Muskeg River section. Nevertheless, 7- year median total metal concentrations did not exceed SQGs. Only 7-year maximum concentrations of nickel and chromium exceeded SQGs at the mouth and/or in the upper section of the Muskeg River. Metal concentrations in sediments collected from the Muskeg River between 1997 and 2002 were also comparatively lower than those reported for the same time period in the Athabasca River (Golder 2003a).

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-8

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

No significant temporal trends were identified for sediment quality at the mouth of the Muskeg River (the site with longest data record; Hatfield et al. 2004). However, spatial trend analysis by Golder (2003a) indicated that concentrations of mercury, lead and PAHs, excluding naphthalene and C1 naphthalene, tend to be lower in sediment collected from the Muskeg River compared to other tributaries. Sediment quality parameters of potential concern in the Muskeg River may include: target and alkylated PAHs, and other hydrocarbons and some metals (e.g., nickel and chromium).

6.2.1.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity Water samples collected from the Muskeg River mouth during fall, spring and summer (1995-2000) did not indicate waterborne toxicity, according to the standard 15-minute Microtox® test (Appendix G, Table G-1). Sediment collected from the mouth was subject to the RAMP standard battery of sediment toxicity tests (the amphipod Hyalella azteca, the midge Chironomus tentans and the oligochaete Lumbriculus variegates) on three occasions (fall 1999, 2002 and 2003; Appendix H, Table H-1). The 1999, 2002 and 2003 sediments were not acutely or chronically toxic to C. tentans, H. azteca or L. variegates in 10-14 day tests. Although significant effects were not identified on C. tentans survival when exposed to 2003 sediment, survival was reduced to 50%. There has been no incidence of either acute or chronic water toxicity recorded for sites sampled between the mouth and Jackpine Creek, according to the RAMP standard battery of toxicity tests (algal, daphnid and fathead minnow) and Microtox® (Appendix G, Table G-2). Sediment toxicity testing was limited to one sample taken in 2003 from upstream of the Canterra Bridge. The sediment from that site was not acutely or chronically toxic to any of the three test species. The highest frequency of background waterborne toxicity in the Muskeg River has been recorded in the upstream section of the river (upstream of Jackpine Creek; Appendix G, Table G-3). Water samples collected at sites upstream of Muskeg Creek and Wapasu Creek in fall and winter from 1998 and 2001, were chronically toxic (either in terms of Ceriodaphnia dubia reproduction and/or fathead minnow growth). There were also several instances of acute toxicity in terms of fathead minnow survival. In 2002, fall toxicity in this downstream section of river was assessed once by Albian Sands and once by RAMP. Toxicity was not observed for these water samples (Golder 2003b). Water samples taken in 2003 by RAMP were also non-toxic according to the RAMP standard battery of water toxicity tests (Hatfield et al. 2004). In 2003, RAMP expanded their sediment toxicity program to include this downstream section of the Muskeg River. Sediment collected from upstream of Stanley Creek did not elicit adverse toxic effects in either H. azteca or L. variegates, but exposure did significantly reduce C. tentans survival and growth (i.e., acute and chronic toxicity; Appendix H, Table H-1). Sediment toxicity (H. azteca and C. tentans tests) was also observed by Brua et al. (2003) in the lower reaches of the Ells and Steepbank rivers.

6.2.1.4 Winter Sediment Oxygen Demand Results of a sediment oxygen demand (SOD) survey conducted in winter 2004 indicated low but similar rates for the two Muskeg River sites located between the mouth and the S1 confluence (upstream of the Canterra Road Bridge [MUR-A]; downstream of the S1 confluence [MUR-B]; Appendix H, Table H-2). The 9/10-day SOD estimates for MUR-

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-9

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

A and MUR-B were 0.2 and 0.3 g/m2/day, respectively. These estimates cannot be directly compared with those measured at sites on the Athabasca River by Monenco (1993) because the incubation time was longer in the present study (9/10 days vs 2 days). A longer incubation period was employed due to the low rates of oxygen consumption observed in the collected samples (SOD was not detectable for the first 2 days of incubation). It was therefore concluded that the SOD was negligible during this period. The SOD rates were lower in these Muskeg River sediments in winter 2004 than all Athabasca River sites examined in winter 1992, with the exception of the reference location at Windfall bridge. There were no historical SOD data available for the Muskeg River. The DO levels at MUR-A and MUR-B at the time of sampling were 3.7 and 3.3 mg/L, respectively; substantially lower than the acute Alberta aquatic life WQG (5.0 mg/L). Both turbidity and water velocities were relatively low at both sites indicating that minimal suspended solids existed under slow flow conditions. The substrates at both sites were predominantly sand (>98%), with relatively low carbon (<0.5% organic carbon) compared to the historical range reported for this section of the river in fall (1.1-2.8%; Appendix H, Table H-2). The relatively low organic carbon levels observed in winter 2004 may have been a consequence of unusually high flows experienced in the Muskeg River in the fall and early winter of 2003/2004. Those flows may have served to scour accumulated organic debris from the stream bed and prevent new debris from settling. Levels of organic carbon in excess of 10% have been reported for the upstream section of the Muskeg River in fall (upstream of Jackpine Creek; (Appendix H, Table H-2). Organic carbon in other watercourses monitored by RAMP in fall 2003, typically ranged from <0.1 to 4.5%, with some exceptions (Hatfield et al. 2004). The results reported here indicate that SOD was not a determining factor in the occurrence of low DO conditions in this section of the river in March 2004. SOD may be more of an issue in the upstream section of the river, where sediments are typically more enriched with organic carbon. It is currently unclear why low DO conditions were observed at these sites but potential contributing factors may include: • increased groundwater input under winter conditions • anoxic water draining from peatlands • slow water flow caused by channel characteristics • oxygen depletion in beaver ponds (from AENV 2002)

6.2.1.5 Aquatic Habitats The aquatic habitats of the Muskeg River have been investigated and described in a number of studies since the 1970s. Cumulatively, these studies have delineated six distinct reaches, largely based on gradient (Figure 6-2). Detailed reach descriptions were provided by Bond and Machniak (1979) (Reaches 1-5); Sekerak and Walder (1980) (Reaches 1-6); Beak (1986) (Reach 4); RL&L (1989) (Reaches 1-6); Golder 1996a (Reaches 1-3); and Golder (1997) (Reach 4). Three distinct gradient types, low, moderate and high, have been described. Low gradient is the dominant type in Reach 4, which represents approximately 63.5 km (56.7%) of the river’s total length. This long middle reach of the river is generally unconfined and flows in an irregular to tortuously meandering pattern (Sekerak and Walder 1980). Upstream reaches 5 and 6 are described as high gradient, but the profusion of beaver dams restricts flow to a series of placid pools (Sekerak and Walder 1980, Golder 2002a). In contrast, downstream Reach 2 has high gradient, flows confined between steep valley

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-10

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

walls, and consists predominantly of shallow riffles. Reach 1 also has high gradient, but flows through the Athabasca floodplain and is therefore often influenced by flows on that river. Reach 3 has moderate gradient and represents a transition between high gradient Reach 2 and low gradient Reach 4. Low gradient Reach 4 is generally flat and poorly drained (Sekerak and Walder 1980), with low stable banks and the substrate of mainly fines (RL&L 1989). The moderate gradient reach, Reach 3, has localized areas of gravel and rock substrate and the high gradient reaches, reaches 1 and 2, have areas of cobble, rock and boulder substrates (RL&L 1989). Fish habitat quality of the Muskeg River has been ranked for all reaches by Golder (2002a). Downstream of the confluence with Jackpine Creek to the mouth of the Athabasca River, reaches 1, 2 and 3 (i.e., within the MRME Development Area), are considered to be of moderate to high quality for sportfish, non-sportfish and forage fish species, and ranked the highest for benthic invertebrate production and drift supply. Within Reach 4, between the confluence with Jackpine Creek and the confluence with Muskeg Creek, the river was ranked as moderate quality for sportfish, non-sportfish and forage fish species, and likely provides suitable overwintering habitat in pool areas. The upper section of Reach 4 (between the confluence of Muskeg Creek and the end of the reach), as well as reaches 5 and 6 are ranked as moderate to high quality for sportfish, non-sportfish and forage fish, but have limited areas for spawning and cover.

6.2.1.6 Benthic Invertebrates Surveys have been conducted to characterize benthic communities in the Muskeg River since the late 1980s (e.g., RL&L 1989; Golder 1996a, 2000, 2001, 2002b, 2003b; Hatfield et al. 2004). However, as noted by Golder (2003b), significant changes in study design and methodologies over this time period resulted in some of the data not being directly comparable. Thus, the RAMP approach was adopted here, where only data collected by RAMP between 2000-2003 have been considered (Golder, 2001, 2002b, 2003b; Hatfield et al. 2004). Four years of fall data were available for three reaches in the Muskeg River: a lower reach (close to the mouth); a lower to mid reach (downstream of S1); and an upper reach (downstream of Wapasu Creek). The lower reach comprised of shallow, well oxygenated habitat with high current velocities. The erosional substrate was dominated by gravel and thus supported a community dominated by Chironomids, with high numbers of EPT (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Tricoptera) relative to upstream reaches. Over the last four years, fall abundance in this reach has generally been low (5-12,000 organisms/m2). The middle and upper reaches are deeper and have been defined as depositional habitat with slower flow; subject to episodic low DO conditions and periodic winter anoxia. In fall 2003, substrate in the middle reach was dominated by sand and was low in organic carbon, whereas substrate in the upper reach was dominated by sand combined with smaller portions of silt and clay. The upper reach was substantially higher in TOC (Hatfield et al. 2004). Communities in the mid and upper reaches comprised of depositional taxa (e.g., oligochaetes, amphipods) and were dominated by Chironomid species, with few EPT taxa relative to the lower reach. Over the last four years, abundance in the upper reach has been comparable to that recorded for the lower reach, whereas abundance in the middle reach has been more variable (ranging from ~12,000 organisms/m2 in 2003 to ~60,000 organisms/m2 in 2000).

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-11

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Taxonomic richness has tended to significantly increase from the upper reach to the lower reach (Hatfield et al. 2004). Long term trends have not yet been identified for any tributaries of the Athabasca River due to highly variable data and limited comparable data (Golder 2003a).

6.2.1.7 Invertebrate Drift No invertebrate drift data were available for the Muskeg River.

6.2.1.8 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies Fish inventory surveys have been conducted on the Muskeg River on a number of occasions and have been reported by Griffiths (1973), O’Neil and Janzie (1974), Bond and Machniak (1977, 1979), Walder et al. (1980), O’Neil et al. (1982), Beak (1986), RL&L (1989, 1994), Golder (1996, 1997, 1998, 2002c, 2003b) and Komex (1997). These investigators utilized a wide variety of capture gear and provided a significant body of historic data describing the fish communities that utilize the river during the open water season. A summary of historical data sources for fish inventory and population information for the Muskeg River, LSA and RSA is presented in Table 6-2. A comprehensive compilation and summary of this information was presented by Golder (2002b) in the Aquatic Resources Environmental Setting support document for the Jackpine Mine – Phase 1 EIA. Table 6-3 provides a list of all fish species known to occur in the LSA and RSA, based on historical information sources. A total of 22 fish species have been reported from the Muskeg River, including resident species, species that use the river for part of their life- cycle, and occasional migrants. White sucker, longnose sucker, lake chub and Arctic grayling have most frequently been reported as the dominant species. Seven species are considered resident, including brook stickleback, fathead minnow, longnose sucker, northern pike, pearl dace, slimy sculpin and white sucker (Golder 2002a). The large- bodied species, suckers and northern pike, are generally resident only as juveniles, as overwintering habitat for large adult fish is limited by low flows and shallow depth (Golder 2002a). It is likely that overwintering potential is limited further by occasionally or frequently depressed winter DO levels (RL&L 1989). Walder et al. (1980) suggested that Reach 4, which includes the portion of the river that flows through the Project area, offered the best opportunities for fish overwintering.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-12

470000 480000 490000 500000 Twp 97 Rng 7

M U S K E G

R 5

6360000 IV 6360000 E R

4

ER IV R Twp 96 Twp 96 Twp 96 Twp 96 6 G Rng 10 Rng 9 E Rng 8 Rng 7 K S U M

Kearl Lake 6350000 6350000

1 2 J A C K Twp 95 P I Rng 7 N 3 E

C

R

E

Sharkbite E

K 4 6340000 6340000

Lease 3 90

Twp 94 Rng 7

1 2

5

A J T A 1 Habitat Reach Number 6330000 H C 6330000 A K B P A IN S E C C Habitat Reach Boundary R A E E R K IV E Upstream Limit of Survey R Twp 93 Rng 7 6 Surface Water and Aquatic Resources Local Study Area

Access

MRME Development Area

Albian As-Built Footprint S (December 2003) and Additional T E Disturbances in MRME Development Area 6320000 E 6320000 P B A N 7 K RIV ER

470000 480000 490000 500000

MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION - YT NT ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STUDIES Shell Canada Limited

NORTH PREPARED BY Project Location Muskeg River and Jackpine Creek 0246 BC DRAFT DATE SCALE AB SK 07/Sept/2004 1:230,000 Showing Habitat Reaches Kilometres REVISION DATE PROJECT FIGURE NO.

(after RL & L 1981) Acknowledgements: Original Drawing by 08/Feb/2005 OS1182 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED VOL 6-2 Footprint provided by Albian Sands Energy Inc. CS AO JS -

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-2 Historical Data and Data Sources for Fish Inventory and Population Information

aa) orthern edbelly Waterbody Waterbody Reference Year Season Method N R D Pearl Dace Fathead Minnow Flathead Chub Goldeye Lake Chub Emerald shiner Spottail Shiner Trout-Perch Slimy Sculpin Spoonhead Sculpin Brook Stickleback Ninespine stickleback Comments Arctic Arctic Grayling Mountain Whitefish Northern Pike Walleye Yellow Perch Burbot Lake Whitefish Cisco Bull Trout Longnose Sucker White Sucker Longnose Dace Athabasca River Hatfield 2004 2003 Spring EF Athabasca River Hatfield 2004 2003 Spring SN Athabasca River Hatfield 2004 2003 Fall EF Athabasca River CEMA 2003 2001 Fall BP, SN, MT,FN Athabasca River CEMA 2003 2002 Winter GN, SL, MT Athabasca River Golder 2003a 2002 Spring EF Jackpine Creek Golder 2003a 2002 Summer BP, MT, EF, GN Jackpine Creek Golder 2002 2001 Summer BP, MT Jackpine Creek Shell 2002a 2001 Spring BP Jackpine Creek Shell 2002a 2001 Summer BP Jackpine Creek Golder 2001 2000 Spring SS Khahago Creek Shell 2002a 2001 Spring BP Khahago Creek Shell 2002a 2001 Summer BP Muskeg Creek Golder 2003a 2002 Spring BP, FN, MT Muskeg Creek Golder 2003a 2002 Fall BP, FN, MT Muskeg Creek Shell 2002a 2001 Spring BP Muskeg Creek Shell 2002a 2001 Summer BP Muskeg River Hatfield 2004 2003 Spring FF Muskeg River Kearl Oil Sands 2003 Spring EF,MT Muskeg River Kearl Oil Sands 2003 Summer EF,MT Muskeg River Kearl Oil Sands 2003 Fall BP Muskeg River Kearl Oil Sands 2004 Winter MT Muskeg River Golder 2003a 2002 Summer EF, GN Muskeg River Golder 2002a 2001 Summer EF Muskeg River Golder 2002a 2001 Spring FF Shelley Creek Shell 2002a 2001 Spring BP Lake Chub/Pearl Dace Shelley Creek Shell 2002a 2001 Summer BP Wapasu Creek Golder 2003a 2002 Spring BP, FN, MT Wapasu Creek Golder 2003a 2003 Fall BP, FN, MT Notes: (a) Method: BP=backpack electrofishing, EF=boat electrofishing, FF=fish fence, FN=fyke net, GN=gill net, MT=minnow trap, SS=spawning survey

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-15

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-3 Fish Species Known to Occur in the LSA and RSA, Based on Historical Information Sources Occurrence Species Reported In Family Common Name Scientific Name Code LSA RSA Catostomidae longnose sucker Catostomus catostomus LNSC white sucker Catostomus commersoni WHSC Cottidae slimy sculpin Cottus cognatus SLSC spoonhead sculpin Cottus ricei SPSC Cyprinidae brassy minnow Hybognathus hankinsoni BRMN emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides EMSH fathead minnow Pimephales promelas FTMN finescale dace Phoxinus neogaeus FNDC flathead chub Platygobio gracilis FLCH (a) lake chub Couesius plumbeus LKCH longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae LNDC northern redbelly dace Phoxinus eos NRDC pearl dace Margariscus margarita PRDC river shiner Notropis blennius RVSH spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius SPSH Esocidae northern pike Esox lucius NRPK Gadidae burbot Lota lota BURB Gasterosteidae brook stickleback Culaea inconstans BRST ninespine stickleback Pungitius pungitius NNST (a) Hiodontidae goldeye Hiodon alosoides GOLD Percidae Iowa darter Etheostoma exile IWDR walleye Sander vitreus WALL yellow perch Perca flavescens YLPR (a) Percopsidae trout-perch Percopsis omiscomaycus TRPR Salmonidae Arctic grayling Thymallus arcticus ARGR bull trout Salvelinus confluentus BLTR (a) lake cisco Coregonus artedi CISC lake whitefish Coregonus clupeaformis LKWH mountain whitefish Prosopium williamsoni MNWH Note: (a) based on one reported capture

Six fish species have been reported to use the Muskeg River for part of their life cycle, including Arctic grayling, lake chub, longnose sucker, mountain whitefish, northern pike and white sucker. Spring spawning and summer juvenile rearing are the principal habitat uses for these species. Five additional species fish species, including burbot, lake whitefish, spottail shiner, troutperch, and walleye, have been designated as occasional migrants into the Muskeg River (Golder 2002a), while a number of other fish apparently

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-17

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

are rare incidental visitors. This last group includes three bull trout, one cisco, one ninespine stickleback, and thirty-three yellow perch (Bond and Machniak 1979). Fish movement studies have been conducted using radio telemetry (Golder 2002c), and two-way fish counting fences (Bond and Machniak 1977, 1978), Golder (1996a) and RAMP (Hatfield et al. 2004). The two studies by Bond and Machniak were conducted under the AOSERP program using counting fences installed near the mouth of the Muskeg River, and provided historical information detailing the upstream spring migration runs prior to any development in the Muskeg River watershed. A 1995 survey (Golder 1996a) was conducted farther upstream, near the Canterra Road crossing, and was therefore not directly comparable. However, the study did provide a reasonably thorough determination of the species and numbers of spring migrants utilizing the river just prior to significant development in the watershed. The 2003 study conducted by RAMP (Hatfield et al. 2004) again used a fence installed near the mouth of the river and provided a recent and comprehensive assessment of the spring migrant population. The results of the 1995 and 2003 studies and compared in Table 6-4.

Table 6-4 Comparison of Fish Movements in the Muskeg River (1976, 1977, 1995, and 2003) based on Spring Fish Counting Fence Data 1995 (b) 2003 (c) Species (a) Upstream Trap Downstream Trap Upstream Trap Downstream Trap WHSC 299 1 647 234 LNSC 308 36 162 47 NRPK 126 3 79 27 ARGR 14 49 1 1 LKWH 2 MNWH 4 WALL 1 2 LKCH 5 TRPR 1 TOTAL 748 95 893 313 Notes: (a) Species codes: WHSC = white sucker, LNSC = longnose sucker, NRPK = northern pike, ARGR = Arctic grayling, LKWH = lake whitefish, MNWH = mountain whitefish, WALL = walleye, LKCH = lake chub, TRPR = trout-perch (b) Golder (1996) (c) RAMP (2004)

Although the information collected in the 1970s indicates that historical spring runs may have been substantially larger than recent runs, the 1995 data suggest that the migrant population has been relatively stable since at least the mid-1990s. As no quantitative studies were conducted in the intervening period or prior to the AOSERP studies, it is not possible to determine if population numbers were cyclical prior to the mid-1990s or if there was a declining trend. For the purpose of this description of the environmental setting, the results of the 1995 and 2003 surveys have been used to represent baseline conditions. The species composition was similar between 1995 and 2003 (Table 6-4), with white and longnose suckers constituting the largest proportion. Northern pike was the third most abundant species while Arctic grayling were captured in low numbers in both surveys. Low numbers of lake whitefish and mountain whitefish were also caught. These species are not spring spawners and likely enter the river primarily for feeding purposes.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-18

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

A summary of known life history information for the large bodied spring spawning species utilizing the Muskeg River is provided below.

White Sucker White sucker begin to gather at the mouth of the Muskeg River at around the time of ice break-up and initiate upstream migration when water temperatures reach approximately 6-8 oC (Hatfield et al. 2004). Migration is closely linked to water temperature and peak activity does not occur until temperatures reach 10-12 oC (Bond and Machniak 1977). Temperature drops following the onset of upstream migration can interrupt the run, as was observed in 1977 (Bond and Machniak 1979), 2003 (Hatfield et al. 2004) and during the current study (Section 6.2.2.7). Suitable spawning gravels occur throughout most of the lower 16.5 km (i.e., Reaches 1-3) and discontinuously into Reach 4 (RL&L 1989). White sucker spawning areas within these reaches have been reported by Bond and Machniak (1977), and Sekerak and Walder (1980). Spawning also occurs in Jackpine Creek and likely other tributaries as well. In smaller tributaries, low flows and instream barriers probably limit spawning potential to lower reaches. In the current study, a small number of small but mature white sucker were captured during the spring hoop net survey at S1, and both larva and juveniles were captured during subsequent larval drift and electrofishing surveys. The white sucker spawning migration is apparently somewhat partitioned, with smaller and younger fish tending to move earlier than larger, older fish (Bond and Machniak 1977). This partitioning extends to spawning location as well, with larger fish utilizing the Muskeg River and smaller fish spawning in the tributaries, primarily Jackpine Creek (O’Neil et al. 1982). The duration of egg incubation is dependent on stream temperature but is probably in the range of 14-21 days. White sucker larvae drift downstream shortly after hatching and many probably drift as far as the Athabasca River. Larvae that are spawned farther upstream or in tributaries are probably more likely to remain within the system and spend at least some time as juveniles either in the Muskeg River mainstem or its tributaries. Most post-spawning adults migrate out of the Muskeg River system shortly after completion of spawning, but some out-migration continues throughout the remainder of the open water season (Bond and Machniak 1977). Although some overwintering likely occurs in years when winter flow conditions are suitable, it is believed that all adults and most juveniles migrate to the Athabasca River to overwinter. Adults do not appear to remain in the Athabasca River and are believed to overwinter in Lake Athabasca (Bond and Machniak 1979). White sucker have a tendency to display fidelity toward their natal stream and this appears to be the case with the population that utilizes the Muskeg River system. Bond and Machniak (1979) reported 20.6% return rate in 1977 for fish that were tagged there in 1976. All species that undergo spawning migrations into the Muskeg River have apparently declined in abundance since the 1970s. Since white sucker consistently have been the most abundant species and the best historic and recent databases exist for this species, it was selected for the following analysis and comparison of population structure over time. Figure 6-3 illustrates the age-frequency distribution (i.e., population structure) for white sucker enumerated at the RAMP fish fence in 2003. The RAMP 2003 Annual Report (Hatfield et al.2004) presented a sex-differentiated age-frequency distribution based on a

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-19

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

stratified aged sub-sample. Figure 6-3 is based on the same database, but with the entire population represented. The distribution of ages among unaged fish was calculated according to the Ketchen stratified subsampling method (in Ricker 1975). Also, for simplicity, the sexes were combined.

Figure 6-3 Population Structure for White Sucker in the Muskeg River in 2003, Derived from Spring Fish Counting Fence Data (RAMP 2004) The resultant histogram indicates a modal age for the spawning population of 10 years (i.e., the 1993 year-class or cohort). The 2003 RAMP data showed that most fish were mature by age 5-6 and all were mature by age 7 (i.e., the 1996 year-class). Since spawning populations typically show the strongest year-classes among the youngest recruited age-classes (i.e., young adults), the suggestion is that the 1993-1995 year- classes may have been weak and that the Muskeg River population may have been experiencing recruitment difficulties since the mid-1990s or earlier. The apparent weakness among younger adult year-classes in the 2003 sample is further suggested by analysis of the length-frequency distribution. Figure 6-4 compares length- frequency distributions for 1977, 1995 and 2003, and shows a shift towards larger and presumably older fish, while smaller length classes are poorly represented. Since no comparable studies were conducted between the mid-1970s and mid-1990s, it is not possible to determine if Muskeg River white sucker abundance is cyclical or if there has been a declining trend over time. Although the 1995 fence was located farther upstream than the 2003 fence and may therefore have missed some fish, the 2003 data suggest an increase in the number of white sucker since 1995 (Hatfield et al. 2004).

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-20

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Longnose Sucker Longnose sucker share similar spawning requirements with white sucker and, as is commonly the case, both species have similar life histories in the Muskeg River system. Overall, longnose sucker tend to be less numerous than white sucker in the Muskeg River spawning run. Timing of spawning and relation to water temperature are similar for both species. Longnose sucker apparently spawn in similar areas as white sucker, although they may be less likely to utilize the lowermost reaches (Bond and Machniak 1979). Tributary spawning has been reported in Jackpine Creek (Bond and Machniak 1977, 1979; and O’Neil et al. 1982). In 2004, the spawning run in Jackpine Creek was dominated by longnose sucker which represented 74% of the catch. As with white sucker, most longnose sucker leave the Muskeg River to overwinter in the Athabasca River or Lake Athabasca (Bond and Machniak 1979). The majority of adults leave shortly after completion of spawning, while some adults and most juveniles emigrate over the course of the summer. Longnose sucker also display fidelity toward their natal stream. Bond and Machniak (1979) reported 20.7% return rate in 1977 for fish that were tagged there in 1976. Northern Pike Northern pike have been the third most abundant fish species in the Muskeg River spring migration in recent years. Optimal spawning habitat conditions for this species are not abundant in the Muskeg River system, and are generally limited to the middle and upper reaches where instream vegetation is more common and spring flooding of riparian vegetation is more likely. Some spawning may also occur in tributary streams such as Jackpine Creek. Spawning in smaller tributaries may be limited by low flows and instream barriers (e.g., beaver dams), and frequently restricted to lower reaches. Bond and Machniak (1979) suggested that northern pike spawning in the Muskeg River system was limited and that a significant proportion of the upstream run consisted of immature individuals engaged in summer feeding migrations. This was apparently not the case in 2003, as the majority of northern pike were large spawning adults (Hatfield et al. 2004). Northern pike return to the Athabasca River to overwinter (Bond and Machniak 1979, RL&L et al. 2004). Arctic Grayling Arctic grayling were historically a significant component of the migrant Muskeg River fish population (Bond and Machniak 1977, 1979; O’Neil et al. 1982), but have been comparatively rare since at least the mid-1990s (Golder 1996a, Table 6-5). Only one Arctic grayling was recorded moving upstream at the RAMP fish fence in 2003 (Hatfield et al. 2004) and, although it is likely that some fish were missed prior to fence installation, it is likely that the overall run was small. Suitable spawning habitat occurs in much of reaches 1-3 of the Muskeg River, and it is likely that some spawning occurs here. Historically, however, most spawning apparently occurred in tributaries, particularly in Jackpine Creek (O’Neil et al. 1982). Muskeg River and its larger tributaries provide suitable summer feeding and rearing habitat for Arctic grayling (Sekerak and Walder 1980). Adults leave the system to overwinter in the Athabasca River, but Bond and Machniak (1979) suggested that many juveniles overwintered in the Muskeg River or its tributaries during their first year.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-21

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Figure 6-4 Comparison of Historic and Recent Length-Frequency Distributions for White Sucker in the Muskeg River, Derived from Spring Fish Counting Fence Data

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-22

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.2.1.9 Larval Drift No larval drift data were available for the Muskeg River.

6.2.2 Jackpine Creek

6.2.2.1 Surface Water Quality The downstream section of Jackpine Creek (between the mouth and Canterra Road) has previously experienced periodic anoxia, notably under ice conditions in the winter (15- year median=0.97 mg/L; Appendix G, Table G-4). In 2003/2004, DO levels appeared to remain close to saturation during all sampling periods, with the exception of summer where DO was just below the chronic aquatic WQG. The pH of this stream section has remained fairly constant; ranging between 7.1 and 8.64 over a 16-year period. Water temperature measured during the 2003/2004 surveys ranged from 0.13 ºC in the winter to 21.09 ºC in the summer. Jackpine Creek can be classified as a brown-water stream due to elevated colour and organic carbon levels. Typically watercourses/waterbodies in the Muskeg River watershed fit this classification. Overall, fall 2003 to summer 2004 represented a high flow year and this was reflected in the water quality results, particularly in the fall and spring. Notably, spring 2004 levels of alkalinity, conductivity, hardness and some major ions (bicarbonate, calcium, magnesium and sodium) were measured at levels below 15-year historic minimum values. Levels of these parameters in fall 2003 were also measured in the lower range of historical values. Historic sulphide and total phenolic concentrations have occasionally exceeded aquatic WQGs in the downstream section of Jackpine Creek during the open water period. In 2003/2004, sulphide remained below, but total phenolics exceeded aquatic WQGs during fall and summer. Total nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations were generally low between 1989 and 2004. Only phosphorus measured in winter 2004, and historic nitrogen and phosphorus maximum concentrations exceeded chronic aquatic WQGs. BOD has historically remained at fairly low levels (<6 mg/L). Naphthenic acids were recorded at or below current analytical detection limits and PAHs were not detectable. Historically, the total concentrations of some metals in the lower section of Jackpine Creek have periodically exceeded chronic and/or acute aquatic WQGs (e.g., aluminum, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, and zinc). Chromium concentrations exceeded aquatic WQGs in spring 2004, and iron concentrations exceeded drinking and aquatic WQGs in winter, spring and summer 2004. Iron concentrations have historically exceeded drinking and aquatic WQGs, and manganese occasionally exceeded drinking WQGs between 1989 and 2004. Water quality data collected from upstream sections of Jackpine Creek (limited to 1989 and 2004), indicated that water quality was generally similar to that described for the downstream section (Appendix G, Table G-5). Some notable differences were: total iron and lead were the only metals found to exceed available aquatic WQGs, and total phosphorus exceeded the aquatic WQG in winter 2004. PAH concentrations in section 2 of Jackpine Creek were not detectable which was consistent with data from section 1. The water quality parameters of potential concern in Jackpine Creek include but may not be limited to: DO (particularly in winter); pH; alkalinity (particularly in spring); ANC; total phenolics; total aluminum, iron, chromium and phosphorus; and dissolved iron and

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-23

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

chromium. AENV (2002) reported that Jackpine Creek had the lowest capacity ANC of any Muskeg River tributaries. This was partly attributed to the high proportion of peatlands in the surrounding basin (~80%). Indeed, in spring 2004, total alkalinity dropped to 59 mg/L (as CaCO3) which was below the historic 15-year minimum value of 76 mg/L (as CaCO3). In their overview of water quality in the Muskeg River watershed, AENV (2002) considered water quality data collected between 1972-2001. The calculated minimum alkalinity value for this time period was 46 mg/L (as CaCO3); while -1 pH and ANC values remained above 7.0 and 1.0 meq.L , respectively. pH values have continued to remain above 7.0 since 2001.

6.2.2.2 Sediment Quality Sediment quality data from the mouth of Jackpine Creek, limited to sampling conducted in 1997 and 2003/2004, indicated that sediments from lower Jackpine Creek were predominantly sand and low in carbon (Appendix H, Table H-3). The more detailed petroleum hydrocarbon characterization in 2003/2004 found that hydrocarbons mainly existed as higher molecular weight compounds and the F3 (C16-C34) fraction exceeded Alberta Tier 1 soil guidelines. All total metals and PAHs were present at concentrations below available SQGs for both years, with the exception of benz(a)anthracene in 1997. The identification of sediment quality parameters of concern for Jackpine Creek was limited by the very small data set (n=2). However, sediment toxicity was observed in sediment from the lower section of Jackpine Creek, so PAHs are likely parameters of concern as they have been suspected of causing sediment toxicity (Brua et al. 2003). High molecular weight hydrocarbons may also be of concern as they exceeded provincial guidelines but may be from a natural source.

6.2.2.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity There has been no incidence of either acute or chronic water toxicity in all sections of Jackpine Creek according to the RAMP standard battery of toxicity tests across seasons (Appendix G, Tables G-4 & G-5). Similarly, results of the standard 15-minute Microtox® test indicate an absence of toxicity upstream of Canterra Road in sections 2 and 3. There was, however, one reported incidence of Microtox® toxicity for one sample taken in 2003/2004 by Albian Sands as part of their routine monitoring program (IC50=71.9%). The single water sample collected during this baseline study in winter 2004 at JPC-4 (Section 2 of Jackpine Creek) did not exhibit acute or chronic toxicity. The only available data indicating sediment toxicity are data generated from toxicity testing completed as part of this baseline study (Appendix H, Table H-3). Sediment collected from JPC-1 (winter, 2004) was acutely toxic to Hyalella azteca in a 14-day test (50% survival). However, the collected sediment was not acutely or chronically toxic to either Chironomus tentans or Lumbriculus variegates in 10-day tests. Although significant effects on C. tentans survival were not identified when exposed to sediment from JPC-1; mean percent survival was half that recorded for sediment collected from Stream 1 and Mills Creek (40% vs. 80% mean survival). In summary, although data was only available from one sampling event, waterborne toxicity did not appear to be of potential concern. Sediment toxicity was however identified and is therefore of potential concern.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-24

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.2.2.4 Aquatic Habitats Originating in the hummocky moraine area that separates the Muskeg River and the Steepbank River watersheds, Jackpine Creek flows in a northwest direction to its confluence with the mainstem of the Muskeg River (Golder 2002b). The creek has been described as having five distinct reaches delineated by changes in gradient (Figure 6-2). These reaches are described in detail by Bond and Machniak (1979), Sekerak and Walder (1980), RL&L (1989) and Golder (1997, 2002a). The following reach descriptions were derived largely from RL&L (1989). Reach 1, from the Muskeg River to 3.4 km upstream, is described as predominantly low gradient with slow runs, flats and tortuous meanders. The substrate is composed of fine sands and silts. Numerous reports of beaver activity have been documented for this reach, a feature that could have implications for fish movement. One beaver dam was observed in this reach in the fall of 2003, but it had been breached in the spring of 2004 and was not presenting a barrier to fish movement. Reach 2 extends from km 3.4 to km 7.4 and is predominantly of moderate gradient and an irregular meander pattern. The reach is characterized by generally flat flow interspersed with riffle-run-pool habitat. Beaver dams are common and the substrate is dominated by fines. Reach 3 extends from km 7.4 to km 9.4 and has high gradient resulting in a sinuous pattern, dominated by riffle-run- pool sequences. The substrate is made up of fines and cobble/gravel. Reach 4 extends from km 9.4 to km 14.9 and has a medium gradient with an irregular meander pattern. Flow characteristic of this reach are similar to Reach 2, having a flat flow characteristic interspersed with riffle-run-pool habitat. The substrate for this reach consists of some fines and cobble/gravel. Reach 5 extends from km 14.9 to the headwaters and is characterized by low gradient, a tortuously meandering channel, flat flow characteristics and substrate consisting predominantly of fines. East Jackpine Creek was surveyed and described by Golder (2002a) as being predominantly pools and runs, with a substrate of mostly organics, silt and sand. Jackpine Creek provides a wide diversity of habitat conditions and good quality habitat for forage species throughout its length (RL&L 1989). Habitat quality, both spawning and rearing, is good for sportfish species and suckers in the lower and middle reaches, particularly reaches 2 to 4. Overwintering potential for large-bodied species is probably limited by low winter flows and shallow depth. Dissolved oxygen levels may limit overwintering potential in upstream reaches (O’Neil et al. 1982), but appear adequate in downstream reaches. A DO level of 7.66 mg/L was recorded near the mouth of Jackpine Creek in March of 2004.

6.2.2.5 Benthic Invertebrates Jackpine Creek has undergone benthic community surveys since the 1980’s (e.g., RL&L 1989; Golder 1996, 2002a, 2003b; Hatfield et al. 2004). When comparing pre-1999 with post-1999 data, the same limitations previously decribed for the Muskeg River applied (Section 6.2.1.6). Thus, only data collected by RAMP during fall 2002 and 2003 were directly compared. Fall data were available for two reaches in Jackpine Creek. Two years of data were available for a lower reach (close to the mouth) and one year was available for an upper reach (far upstream of the East Jackpine confluence). Both reaches comprised of depositional habitat dominated by sand with low organic carbon. In fall 2003, water depth was at an intermediate level and velocities were typically low. The lower reach was

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-25

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

well oxygenated at the time of sampling but DO levels in the upper reach were below the AENV chronic aquatic WQG (Hatfield et al. 2004). For 2003, upper reach abundance was similar to that of the lower reach (<5,000 organisms/m2). However, lower reach abundance varied between years; ~4,000 organisms/m2 in 2003 compared with ~30,000 organisms/m2 the previous year. Community composition was similar in both reaches and typically comprised of taxa associated with depositional sandy habitats (e.g., clams [Pisidium, Sphaerium]; nematodes; coleopterans). Chironomids dominated community composition in both reaches and very few EPT taxa were present. Taxonomic richness was similar between years and between reaches, and was generally comparable to the Muskeg River upper reach (Hatfield et al. 2004). Golder (2002a) also conducted a fall benthic community survey at two locations in Jackpine Creek (one depositional site at the mouth and one erosional site upstream of the Canterra Road). Total abundance was lower at both sites compared with reaches sampled by RAMP, but mean taxanomic richness at the depositional site was comparable to that reported by RAMP (Golder 2003b; Hatfield et al. 2004). Mean richness at the erosional site sampled by Golder (2002a) was higher than that observed for the depositional site, and that observed by RAMP.

6.2.2.6 Invertebrate Drift The 24-h mean discharge for the period from 6 am on June 21 to 6 am on June 22 was 3.899 m3/s and the 6-h discharge measurements ranged from 3.272-4.353 m3/s (Table 6-5). The discharge was within the range of flow conditions identified for Jackpine Creek (0.5-7.0 m3/s) by Hartland-Rowe et al. (1979). It was however, still relatively high, partly due to the fact 2003/2004 flows were above average for the region. Despite this, turbidity levels at both sites during the survey remained relatively low and did not vary to any degree (24-h means: 2.61±0.49 NTU and 3.04±0.78 NTU). Water temperature also remained fairly constant over 24-h at both sites (11-15 ºC). DO levels remained relatively high (7-8 mg/L), while pH remained between 7 and 8, and TDS and salinity levels were relatively low (Table 6-6). The substrate at Site 1 was predominantly sand, whereas Site 2 mainly comprised of cobble/boulder substrates.

Table 6-5 Discharge of Watercourse S1, Jackpine Creek, Mills Creek and Watercourse S3 During Invertebrate Drift Sampling Period (June 2004)

S1 Jackpine Creek Mills Creek S3 Time Discharge Time Discharge Time Discharge Time Discharge (m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s) Start (23:00) 0.226 Start (6:00) 4.353 Start (20:00) 0.037 Start (11:00) 0.057 6h (5:00) 0.240 6h (12:00) 4.466 6h (2:00) 0.055 6h (17:00) 0.064 12h (11:00) 0.220 12h (18:00) 4.062 12h (8:00) 0.036 12h (23:00) 0.037 18h (17:00) 0.294 18h (0:00) 3.272 18h (14:00) 0.029 18h (5:00) 0.017 24h (23:00) 0.151 24h (6:00) 3.345 24h (20:00) 0.033 24h (11:00) 0.008 Mean 0.226 Mean 3.899 Mean 0.038 Mean 0.037

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-26

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-6 Summary of Physical Characteristics of the Four LSA Streams Sampled for Invertebrate Drift (June 2004)

Stream 1 Jackpine Mills Creek Stream 3 Variable Units Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Location (UTM Coordinates, Zone 12V) Easting m 468089 468084 473047 473047 463764 463788 472123 472112 Northing m 6341986 6342010 6346307 6346331 6344628 6344621 6346211 6346240 Field Water Quality mean dissolved oxygen mg/L 8.09 7.64 11.11 7.12 mean pH pH unit 7.84 7.71 7.89 6.41 mean conductivity µs/cm 307.15 140.67 746.00 164.67 mean total dissolved solids g/L 0.30 0.10 0.49 0.12 mean salinity ppt 0.22 0.07 0.37 0.09 mean temperature (± SD) ºC 13.64 (1.06) 13.62 (1.04) 13.65 (1.24) 13.38 (1.30) 10.29 (1.82) 10.15 (1.72 7.54 (1.57) 7.50 (1.53) mean turbidity (± SD) NTU <5 <5 3.04 (0.78) 2.61 (0.49) 5.22 (0.38) 5.37 (1.03) <1 <1 Physical features maximum depth m 0.53 0.542 0.17 0.12 mean current velocity m/s 0.48 0.746 0.38 0.34 Substratum sand % 100 100 95 10 90 87 - - gravel % - - 1 - - - - - cobble/boulder % - - 3 80 5 10 - - silt/fines/clay % - - 1 10 5 3 - - Comments large woody woody debris detritus/muck detritus/muck debris in stream

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-27

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

The total numbers of invertebrates that drifted in 24 h were similar between sites (815,755 and 872,314 organisms/stream/day; Table 6-7), and they reflected the relatively high discharge at that time. At Site 1, dipteran larvae accounted for 40.3% of the total drift while mayfly larvae accounted for 30.2% (Table 6-8). Simuliids were the most abundant dipterans in the drift followed by Chironomids, whereas Baetids were the most abundant mayflies in the drift followed by Ephemerellids. At Site 2, terrestrial invertebrates (including non-dipteran aquatic insect adults) accounted for 30.8% of the drift, while dipteran adults and pupae accounted for 22.6%. Of the aquatic larvae, dipterans accounted for 16.5% and mayflies accounted for 16%. Again, the same dipteran and mayfly families described for Site 1 were the most abundant. Caddisfly larvae were also numerous in the drift at both sites (~4% of the total daily drift), with the cased caddisfly, Limnephilidae, the most common. The hourly drift density estimates for Jackpine Creek ranged from 1.1–4.5 organisms/m3, with a 24-h mean of 2.5 organisms/m3 (Figure 6-5). This average drift density estimate and range for Jackpine Creek were both within the range calculated for Muskeg Creek in 2002 (0.7-4.0 organisms/m3) by Golder (2002a). There appeared to be no pronounced peaks in either Jackpine Creek (2004) or Muskeg Creek (2002) densities during the sampling period. There did appear to be a propensity for nocturnal drift in Jackpine Creek (from 11 pm to 4 am) with a maximum drift density of 4.8 organisms/m3 from 2–3 am (Figure 6-5). Nocturnal peaks in drift are common and mainly occur due to behavioural avoidance of visual predators (Allan 1995). There was an increase in the drift of Baetids and Simuliids during this time. Both aquatic insect families are known to be particularly common invertebrate drift components. The mayfly genera Baetis are known to exhibit nocturnal periodicity in drift because they enter the drift as part of their foraging behaviour and to actively avoid predators (Allan 1995). There were individual daylight peaks in drift in Jackpine Creek, but these were due to increases in the terrestrial invertebrate drift component. Terrestrial invertebrates were negligible during the nocturnal drift peak. Approximately double the number of taxa drifted over 24-h in Jackpine Creek in 2004, compared to Muskeg Creek in 2002 (47 and 52 vs 29 and 27). The drift composition of non-zooplankton taxa in Muskeg and Jackpine creeks were similar, and both were dominated by dipterans, caddisflies and mayflies. The dominant dipterans (Simuliids and Chironomids) and mayflies (Baetids and Ephemerellids) were the same in both creeks, but Hydroptilidae was the most numerous caddisfly larvae in Muskeg Creek, compared with Limnephilidae in Jackpine Creek. The total daily drift in Jackpine Creek (2004) exceeded that reported for Muskeg Creek in 2002 (844,035 vs 373, 985 organisms). Golder (2002a) reported a strong relationship between stream discharge and total daily drift for drift studies in the oil sands region and concluded that discharge had a large influence on invertebrate drift in streams in this region. The observed total daily drift estimates calculated for Jackpine Creek by the present study are higher, but within the approximate range that would have been predicted using the drift-discharge relationship established by Golder (~800,000 vs ~400,000 organisms). The only historical drift study for Jackpine Creek was conducted as part of the AOSERP program by Hartland-Rowe et al. (1979). The 1979 study reported lower total daily drift estimates and stream discharge than the 2004 estimates reported here for Jackpine Creek. However, due to methodological differences it is difficult to directly compare the results of these studies.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-28

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-7 Total Daily Drift by Each Taxon in Mills Creek, Jackpine Creek, Watercourse S1 and Watercourse S3 (June 2004)

Mills Creek S3 S1 Jackpine Creek Taxon Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Annelida Amphipoda (scuds/water lice) 19 38 53 49 28 122 10,078 1,532 Hirudinea (leeches) 0 0 36 8 115 168 198 170 Crustacea Amphipoda (scuds/water lice) 0 0 127 0 3,402 3,923 2,569 1,532 Ostracoda (seed shrimps) 0 0 129 16 67 37 988 0 Arachnida 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Araneae (aquatic) (spiders) 16 5 0 0 0 11 198 170 Hydracarina (water mites) 0 0 2,032 609 448 290 9,486 8,339 Collembola (springtails) 13 11 139 61 2,648 231 790 42,714 Insecta Megaloptera (alderflies or dobsonflies) (larval) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Megaloptera (alderflies or dobsonflies) (adult) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 170 Odonata (dragonflies & damselflies) Anisoptera (dragonflies) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Aeshnidae (darners) 10 4 0 0 54 32 9,881 0 Corduliidae (green-eyed skimmers) 0 0 14 0 39 89 5,928 4,084 Gomphidae (clubtails) 0 0 0 0 25 15 13,043 10,381 Libellulidae (common skimmers) 0 0 8 7 0 11 0 0 Zygoptera (damselflies) Calopterygidae (broadwinged damselflies) 0 0 0 0 0 0 395 170 Coleoptera (beetles) (adults) 348 185 155 109 449 169 1,779 13,444 Coleoptera (beetles) (larvae) Chrysomelidae (leaf beetles) 0 0 0 0 6 40 395 170 Curculionidae (snout beetles) 7 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 Dytiscidae (predaceous diving beetles) 148 80 382 235 348 363 790 511 Elmidae (riffle beetles) 0 0 0 0 0 5 395 681 Gyrinidae (whirligig beetles) 0 0 0 0 0 0 198 170

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-29

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-7 Total Daily Drift by each Taxon in Mills Creek, Jackpine Creek, Watercourse S1 and Watercourse S3 (June 2004) (cont’d)

Mills Creek S3 S1 Jackpine Creek Taxon Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Haliplidae (crawling water beetles) 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 511 Hydraenidae (minute moss beetles) 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hydrophilidae (water scavenger beetles) 0 0 0 0 5 6 0 851 Lampyridae (lightningbugs or fireflies) 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 Hemiptera (water bugs) (adults) 14 0 0 0 288 89 0 3,744 Hemiptera (water bugs) (larvae) Corixidae (water boatmen) 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 511 Gerridae (water striders) 0 0 0 0 16 10 593 1,872 Veliidae (ripple bugs) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ephemeroptera (mayflies) (adults) 19 28 0 0 623 694 1,186 2,723 Ephemeroptera (mayflies) (larvae) Baetidae (small minnow mayflies) 64 130 557 313 10,439 8,538 228,443 129,333 Baetiscidae (armored mayflies) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 170 Caenidae (small squaregills) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 340 Ephemerellidae (spiny crawlers) 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,797 8,168 Heptageniidae (flatheaded mayflies) 0 0 0 0 13 11 988 340 Leptophlebiidae (pronggills) 0 0 799 874 105 139 0 0 Siphlonuridae (primitive minnow mayflies) 4 0 0 8 99 267 198 1,021 Trichoptera (caddisflies) (adults) 0 0 6 0 203 116 1,383 2,723 Trichoptera (caddisflies) (pupae) 0 0 0 0 64 51 0 0 Trichoptera (caddisflies) (larvae) Brachycentridae (humpless case makers) 0 0 0 0 6 69 3,755 2,212 Glossosomatidae (saddlecase makers) 0 0 0 0 12 0 1,383 511 Hydropsychidae (common netspinners) 0 0 0 0 76 78 988 0 Hydroptilidae (micro caddisflies) 0 0 0 0 13 135 17,588 8,339 Lepidostomatidae (lepidostomatid case makers) 0 0 0 0 124 1,084 3,162 1,361 Limnephilidae (northern case makers) 4 4 213 523 322 282 2,371 20,761 Phryganeidae (giant case makers) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Polycentropodidae (trumpetnet and tubemaking caddisflies) 0 0 0 0 0 6 1,186 170

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-30

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-7 Total Daily Drift by each Taxon in Mills Creek, Jackpine Creek, Watercourse S1 and Watercourse S3 (June 2004) (cont’d)

Mills Creek S3 S1 Jackpine Creek Taxon Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Psychomyiidae (nettube caddisflies) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,976 340 Rhyacophilidae (freeliving caddisflies) 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera (caddisflies) (unidentifiable) 0 0 0 0 18 71 198 170 Plecoptera (stoneflies) (adults) 6 0 0 0 0 0 198 681 Plecoptera (stoneflies) (larvae) Chloroperlidae (green stoneflies) 0 0 0 0 0 0 198 340 Nemouridae (nemourid broadbacks) 26 63 11,342 15,131 40 111 5,336 1,191 Perlidae (common stoneflies) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,186 170 Perlodidae (perlodid stoneflies) 12 0 0 0 0 0 198 340 Pteronarcyidae (giant stoneflies) 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,497 5,446 Diptera (flies) (adults) 523 967 160 367 6,472 2,582 25,295 162,687 Diptera (flies) (pupae) 320 159 200 35 1,244 1,301 55,727 34,886 Diptera (flies) (larvae) Ceratopogonidae (biting midges) 8 3 6 0 0 10 0 681 Chaoboridae (phantom midges) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chironomidae (non-biting midges) 91 102 461 405 1,427 1,394 62,249 29,270 Culicidae (mosquitoes) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dixidae (dixid midges) 0 0 130 146 0 0 0 0 Dolichopodidae (aquatic longlegged flies) 0 0 0 0 51 5 0 0 Empididae (aquatic dance flies) 0 4 0 4 29 46 5,533 1,872 Ephydridae (shore flies) 0 5 0 0 6 0 0 0 Muscidae (aquatic muscids) 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 Phoridae (humpback flies) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tipulidae (craneflies) 0 4 0 0 68 163 790 1,191 Sciomyzidae (marsh flies) 0 0 0 0 12 24 0 0 Simuliidae (black flies) 0 0 9,907 3,200 3,134 3,515 260,259 111,294 Stratiomyidae (aquatic soldier flies) 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-31

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-7 Total Daily Drift by each Taxon in Mills Creek, Jackpine Creek, Watercourse S1 and Watercourse S3 (June 2004) (cont’d)

Mills Creek S3 S1 Jackpine Creek Taxon Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Hymenoptera (sawflies, ichneumons, chalcids, ants, wasps and bees) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mymaridae (fairyflies) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scelionidae (scelionids) 0 0 0 0 32 25 0 0 Mollusca Bivalvia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sphaeriidae (fingernail clams) 0 0 6 8 0 469 0 0 Unionidae (large clams) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gastropoda (snails) 49 11 92 31 737 805 198 340 Platyhelminthes (flatworms) 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hydrozoa (hydras) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Semi-Aquatic 19 42 48 5 63 45 395 6,296 Terrestrial (a) 554 1,040 169 163 1,177 853 50,392 245,221 Total (b) 2,292 2,889 27,177 22,306 34,561 28,516 815,755 872,314 Total number of Taxa 25 21 26 23 45 50 47 52 Notes: (a) Terrestial organisams include the adult life stage of aquatic insects and all life stages of terrestial insects. (b) Some numbers are rounded for presentation purposes. Therefore, it may appear that the totals do not equal the sum of the individual values.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-32

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-8 Total Daily Drift Abundance and Percentage in Mills Creek, Jackpine Creek, Watercourse S1 and Watercourse S3 (June 2004) Total Daily Drift Total Daily Drift (abundance) (percentages) Mills Creek S3 S1 Jackpine Creek Mills Creek S3 S1 Jackpine Creek Group Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Site 1 Site 2 Ephemeroptera (mayflies) (larvae) 67 130 1,357 1,194 10,656 8,955 246,426 139,373 2.9 4.5 5.0 5.4 30.8 31.4 30.2 16.0 Plecoptera (stoneflies) (larvae) 38 63 11,342 15,131 40 111 15,414 7,488 1.7 2.2 41.7 67.8 0.1 0.4 1.9 0.9 Trichoptera (caddisflies) (larvae) 13 4 213 523 634 1,775 32,606 33,865 0.6 0.1 0.8 2.3 1.8 6.2 4.0 3.9 Diptera (flies) (larvae) 99 118 10,508 3,754 4,727 5,162 328,832 144,308 4.3 4.1 38.7 16.8 13.7 18.1 40.3 16.5 Amphipoda (scuds/water lice) 0 0 256 16 3,470 3,960 3,557 1,532 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.1 10.0 13.9 0.4 0.2 Mollusca (clams/snails) 49 11 99 39 737 1,274 198 340 2.2 0.4 0.4 0.2 2.1 4.5 0.0 0.0 Oligochaeta (aquatic earthworms) 19 38 53 49 28 122 10,078 1,532 0.8 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.4 1.2 0.2 Hydracarina (water mites) 0 0 2,032 609 448 290 9,486 8,339 0.0 0.0 7.5 2.7 1.3 1.0 1.2 1.0 Collembola (springtails) 13 11 139 61 2,648 231 790 42,714 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.3 7.7 0.8 0.1 4.9 Diptera (flies) (adults+pupae) 843 1,126 361 402 7,716 3,883 81,022 197,572 36.8 39.0 1.3 1.8 22.3 13.6 9.9 22.6 Terrestrial (a) 942 1,252 329 272 2,740 1,920 54,937 268,705 41.1 43.3 1.2 1.2 7.9 6.7 6.7 30.8 Other groups 210 136 488 255 716 831 32,409 26,547 9.2 4.7 1.8 1.1 2.1 2.9 4.0 3.0 Total (b) 2,292 2,889 27,177 22,306 34,561 28,516 815,755 872,314 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Notes: (a) Terrestial organisams include the adult life stage of aquatic insects and all life stages of terrestial insects (b) Some numbers are rounded for presentation purposes. Therefore, it may appear that the totals do not equal the sum of the individual values

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-33

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Figure 6-5 Drift Density and Composition for Jackpine Creek and Watercourse S3, June 2004

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-35

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.2.2.7 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies There have been numerous fish inventory surveys conducted on Jackpine Creek (Bond and Machniak 1977, 1979; Sekerak and Walder 1980; O’Neil et al. 1982; RL&L 1989; Golder 1996a, 1997), and a total of 13 fish species have been reported. Of these, the 10 most commonly captured species include Arctic grayling, brook stickleback, fathead minnow, lake chub, longnose dace, longnose sucker, mountain whitefish, pearl dace, slimy sculpin and white sucker (Golder 1998). A comprehensive compilation and summary of fish population information was presented by Golder (2002a) in the Aquatic Resources Environmental Setting support document for the Jackpine Mine – Phase 1 EIA. The 2004 fish fence was sited approximately 1.5 km upstream of the mouth, near the first riffle/pool habitats. Downstream of this location, Jackpine Creek consists almost exclusively of run habitat with sand/silt substrates. As this is generally considered to be relatively poor spawning habitat for all the large-bodied species that constitute the spring run, the survey results are considered to accurately represent the spawning population that entered the creek in 2004. Although the lower reaches of Jackpine Creek have often been described as being blocked by beaver dams, this was not the case in 2004. Only one beaver dam was present between the fence site and the confluence of the Muskeg River and, as this dam was breached throughout the spring survey period, it created no impediment to fish movement. Timing of spring fence surveys is always an important consideration as some species initiate upstream spawning migrations early, before conditions are suitable for site access or fence installation. Arctic grayling in particular tend to migrate early, often before ice break-up is complete, and are consequently often absent from or misrepresented in the data. To avoid this, the 2004 fence was installed while most of the winter ice cover was still in place, although a substantial amount of water was flowing both over and under the ice. Consequently, it is likely that at least some early migrating Arctic graying were missed in the survey. These conditions were similar to those described by O’Neil et al. (1982) in their discussion of the conditions during fence installation in Jackpine Creek in 1981. Meteorological conditions in the spring of 2004 also did not favour a complete survey of upstream migrants. Although early and warm spring weather initiated a relatively early onset of the spring freshet (approximately April 15), cool weather throughout most of May resulted in numerous water temperature drops and consequent interruptions in the spawning migration. Therefore, although the fence was maintained for 30 days (April 27 – May 26) it was assumed that the run was substantially though possibly not entirely complete by the time the program was terminated. The summary results of the 2004 fence survey are presented in Table 6-9, along with comparable data from the only other fence survey conducted on Jackpine Creek by O’Neil et al. (1982) in 1981. A total of 86 fish were captured moving upstream, including longnose sucker (64), white sucker (16), Arctic grayling (5) and northern pike (3). An additional 25 fish were captured moving downstream, including longnose sucker (14), white sucker (6) and Arctic grayling (5). The dominance of longnose sucker in the run represents a change from 1981, when 814 white sucker were captured versus 583 longnose sucker. The largest difference, however, was the small size of the Arctic grayling run in 2004 relative to 1981, when 904 upstream migrants were recorded.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-36

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-9 Comparison of Fish Movements in Jackpine Creek (1981 and 2004) 1981 (b) 2004 Species (a) Upstream Trap Downstream Trap Upstream Trap Downstream Trap WHSC 814 38 16 6 LNSC 583 1 64 14 NRPK 1 3 ARGR 904 85 3 5 LKWH MNWH WALL TOTAL 2,302 124 86 25 Notes: (a) Species codes: WHSC = white sucker, LNSC = longnose sucker, NRPK = northern pike, ARGR = Arctic grayling, LKWH = lake whitefish, MNWH = mountain whitefish, WALL = walleye (b) Source: O’Neil (1982)

Timing of the run relative to water temperature is illustrated in Figure 6-6. The figure illustrates the relationship between water temperature and the timing of longnose sucker and white sucker movement. As was the case on the Muskeg River in 2003 (Hatfield et al. 2004), little movement occurred at water temperatures below 5°C and peak movements occurred at temperatures exceeding 10°C. Too few Arctic grayling were captured to establish a temperature dependant relationship but it was evident that upstream movement probably commenced at temperatures below 5°C, as the migration was already underway before ice break-up. The capture of five Arctic grayling in the downstream trap towards the end of study suggests that the downstream migration had likely begun. Similar to the discussion in Section 6.2.1.8, the overall size of the spawning run has declined substantially since 1981. In the case of white sucker, the decline is likely related to the reduced number of younger adults observed in the Muskeg River in 2003, since the Jackpine Creek run has been shown to consist primarily of smaller, younger fish (Bond and Machniak 1979, O’Neil et al. 1982). The low number of Arctic grayling is consistent with reduced abundance observed in Muskeg River surveys between 1976 and 2003 (Bond and Machniak 1977; Golder 1996; Hatfield et al. 2004).

6.2.2.8 Larval Drift The larval drift and invertebrate drift surveys conducted on Jackpine Creek in June, 2004 resulted in the capture of larval suckers, sculpins, cyprinids and one troutperch (Table 6-10). The larval suckers were all captured at Site 1, approximately 1.5 km from the confluence with the Muskeg River, suggesting that spawning for white and longnose suckers was probably concentrated in the lower reaches (i.e., downstream of Canterra Road). All 104 sucker larvae were captured during the invertebrate drift surveys on June 21-22, indicating that the drift was just commencing at that time. No larval Arctic grayling or pike were captured.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-37

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

50 15 ) C

upstream downstream o ( n=86 n=25 Arctic grayling 40 12 Longnose sucker

White sucker erature

Northern Pike p m

30 9 e

Water temperature T ater h W

20

is 6 y F f o . Dail o m N 10 3 u m axi

0 0 M

10

20

27-Apr 2-May 7-May 12-May 17-May 22-May

Figure 6-6 Fish Movements and Maximum Daily Water Temperature Recorded at the Jackpine Creek fish fence (April – May 2004)

6.2.3 Watercourse S1

6.2.3.1 Surface Water Quality Water quality data for S1 were limited to fall and/or winter seasons in 1998 and 1999, and all four seasons in 2003/2004 (Appendix G, Table G-6). During these sampling periods, the stream appears to have been well oxygenated and the pH ranged from 7.3 to 8.42. Water temperature in 2003/2004 ranged between 1.18 ºC in the winter to 20.06 ºC in the summer and the stream did not appear to freeze during winter 2004. TSS and turbidity tended to be low, both historically and in 2003/2004 (≤7 mg/L and <16 NTU, respectively). Colour and organic carbon levels were similar to those measured in Jackpine Creek; thus S1 can also be categorized as a brown-water stream. Unlike Jackpine Creek, levels of hardness and TDS in S1 were fairly similar across all seasons in 2003/2004 (236-252 mg/L and 249-320 mg/L, respectively). The same seasonal consistency was also true for all major ion concentrations measured in 2003/2004. Nutrient concentrations were low for all sampling periods and did not exceed aquatic WQGs. Naphthenic acids and total recoverable hydrocarbons were below analytical detection limits for the available sampling period. Total phenolics were also undetectable except for a measurement taken in summer 2004, where the aquatic WQG was exceeded. Historical and 2003/2004 total iron levels in S1 were elevated above aquatic and drinking WQGs as reported for other LSA watercourses. Manganese also consistently exceeded the drinking WQG. All other detectable total metals were below available aquatic WQGs

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-38

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

with the exception of chromium in winter 1999. PAHs were only measured in fall 1998 and were below analytical detection limits.

Table 6-10 Summary of Larval Fish Data from LSA Streams 2004

From Larval Fish Drift Study Jackpine Creek. Site 2 Jackpine Creek Site 1 (a) (b) Jackpine Creek Site 3 (b) sculpin fathead minnow sculpin pearl dace sculpin Date larval larval juv/adult larval juv/adult larval sucker juvenile June 16 1 1

June 17 2 1

June 18 1 1 1

June 19 traps pulled 2

June 20 traps pulled 2

June 21 invertebrate drift study June 22 8 3 1

June 23 traps pulled 6

From Invertebrate Drift Study

Watercourse S1 finescale brook sucker sucker cyprinid dace stickleback unidentified sucker cyprinid Date larval juvenile larval juv/adult juv/adult larval eggs eggs June 19-20 1 1 10 12 3 2 4 1

Jackpine Creek Site 1 brook sucker sculpin cyprinid stickleback unidentified sucker larval larval larval larval trout-perch larval larval eggs June 21-22 104 15 16 9 1 1 1

Mills Creek June 18-19 no fish or fish eggs

Watercourse S3 June 22-23 no fish or fish eggs

Notes: (a) two traps June 16-18 (b) two traps June 16-18; one trap June 19-23

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-39

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

The identification of parameters of concern for S1 was limited by the quantity of water quality data available (n≤2 for each season). Total iron and manganese and dissolved iron may be of concern but this appeared to be generic to the area. Total and dissolved chromium may also be of concern due to a historical WQG exceedence.

6.2.3.2 Sediment Quality Sediment quality data from S1, limited to 2003/2004, indicated that this stream was predominantly sand with low carbon (Appendix H, Table H3). Hydrocarbons were present mainly in the higher molecular weight fractions and the F3 (C16-C34) fraction exceeded Alberta Tier 1 soil guidelines. Total metals and PAHs were present at concentrations below available SQGs with the exception of chrysene. The identification of sediment quality parameters of concern for S1 was limited by the fact there was only one data point for each parameter (fall 2003). However, sediment toxicity was observed in sediment from S1, so PAHs are likely parameters of concern as they have been suspected of causing sediment toxicity (Brua et al. 2003). The PAH chrysene exceeded SQGs guidelines and may be of potential concern. High molecular weight hydrocarbons may also be of concern as they exceeded provincial guidelines but may be from a natural source.

6.2.3.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity The only available water or sediment toxicity data for S1 are those generated from toxicity testing completed in fall 2003 as part of the present baseline study. No toxicity was observed according to the RAMP standard battery of water toxicity tests (Appendix G, Table G-6). However sediment collected from S1 was chronically toxic to the dipteran Chironomus tentans in a 10-day sediment toxicity test, in terms of exerting significant effects on growth (Appendix H, Table H3). The same sediment sample was not acutely toxic to all three standard RAMP sediment species (Hyalella. azteca C. tentans and Lumbriculus variegates) or chronically toxic to H. azteca or L. variegates. In summary, although data was only available from one sampling event, waterborne toxicity did not appear to be of potential concern. It should however be noted that fall 2003 was a high flow season and so the dilution capacity of the stream would have been elevated, possibly ameliorating the potential toxic effects of any substances. Sediment toxicity was however identified and is therefore of potential concern. Sediment toxicity would have not been affected to any great extent by higher flows.

6.2.3.4 Aquatic Habitats Watercourse S1 was surveyed in the spring and summer of 2004, as no previous habitat information has been reported. The stream originates in a cluster of small connected ponds (Figure 2-2) described as deep upland by Webb (1981) [Note: Webb (1981) classified numerous local waterbodies as ‘deep upland lakes’ and ‘shallow muskeg lakes’. To maintain consistency with current standards for waterbody classification, these small waterbodies are referred to as ‘deep upland ponds’ and ‘shallow muskeg ponds’ in this document]. The stream’s source is the outlet from P1, from where it flows approximately 0.9 km to its confluence with the Muskeg River. For the first half of this distance S1 is low gradient and dominated by a series of beaver ponds. The lower half of the stream has a moderate to high gradient and features mostly Class 3 (R3) run habitat. In many places the stream bed is strewn with woody debris, and areas of accumulated woody debris combined with the remains of old beaver dams result in numerous low

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-40

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

step-pool sequences. Small areas of boulder, gravel and cobble occur, but the majority of the streambed consists of sands and silts. Several areas of exposed bitumen were also observed in the streambed. The 2003/2004 surveys were focused in the lower section of S1, downstream of several beaver ponds. The length of stream surveyed was approximately 500 m. Although most of the stream in this section was similar in terms of habitat characteristics, it was divided into seven reaches for the purpose of habitat assessment and conducting fish inventories. Only the lowermost reach (Reach 1) at the Muskeg River confluence exhibited habitat characteristics different from the rest of the surveyed reaches. Reach 1 is a backwater habitat, strongly influenced by levels and flows in the Muskeg River. Slow run habitat with depths up to 0.6 m dominated, and the substrate was uniformly compacted sand/silt with small amounts of embedded cobble and boulders. In reaches 2 to 7, 2003/2004 average pool depth ranged from 0.3 m (Reach 4, spring 2004) to 0.7 m (Reach 5, summer 2004), and discharge ranged from 0.044 m3/s (April 2, 2004) to 0.266 m3/s (June 20, 2004). The profusion of woody debris, along with substantial instream and overhanging vegetation, and undercut banks, provide good cover as well as spawning and rearing habitat for a variety of forage fish species. Shallow depth probably limits the quality of habitat for large large-bodied species. Shallow depth may also limit overwintering potential in some or most years, although the stream did stay open throughout the winter of 2003/2004.

6.2.3.5 Benthic Invertebrates The section of S1 sampled for benthic invertebrates was dominated by run habitat which connected periodic pool habitat (Table 6-11). Beaver activity was evident at the time of sampling and the channel was flooded due to elevated fall water levels. Run habitat was shallower (mean depth=0.24 m) than pool habitat (mean depth=0.88 m), and had a mean current velocity of 0.34 m/s. The dominant habitat was depositional substrate which was primarily sand with a low silt/clay content. Substantial instream vegetation was present thoughout the run sections (~90% with occasional woody debris). The organic content at half the sites was low (<5%) but was moderate to high at the other five sites (9-85%). Mean total invertebrate abundance was moderate to high (57,178 organisms/m2; Tables 6-12 and 6-13). Total abundance in this stream was similar to that estimated by RAMP in fall 2000 (Golder 2001) for the Muskeg River downstream from S1. Total invertebrate abundance in S1 was in the same broad range as that estimated by Golder (2002a) for Shelley Creek (~23,000 organisms/m2). Mean taxa richness was similar to that estimated for Khahago and Shelley creeks by Golder (2002a). S1 had a depositional community dominated by Chironomids (midge larvae; 62%) which was also typical of other LSA streams. No historical benthic invertebrate data were available for S1. Based on data collected in fall 2003, the benthic invertebrate community surveyed in S1 appears to be broadly similar to that described for Shelley Creek by Golder (2002a).

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-41

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-11 Habitat Characteristics and Field Measurements for Benthic Invertebrate Sampling Sites (Fall 2003)

Variable Isadores Lake P1 Mills Creek S1 Sample Date Oct 9 2003 Oct 9 2003 Oct 12 2003 Oct 11 2003 Sample Type Ekman Ekman Ekman Ekman Easting 463529 468636 463731 468080 Northing 6342926 6341140 6344652 6341986 Mean water depth (m) 2.24 2.05 0.25(run); 0.4 (pool) 0.24(run); 0.88 (pool) Wetted channel width (m) n/a n/a 5 1.9 depositional depositional Habitat type depositional depositional (pool/run) (pool/run) Mean current velocity (m/s) nil nil 0.13 0.34 Substrate compostion (%) Mean ± SE Gravel (lab) 0 0.02 ± 0.02 2.1 ± 0.08 0.4 ± 0.4 Sand (lab) 0.7 ± 0.2 8.2 ± 3.7 73.3 ± 8.3 82.2 ± 9.0 Silt/Clay (lab) 99.3 ± 0.2 91.8 ± 3.7 24.6 ± 8.6 17.4 ± 9.0 Sediment organic carbon (%) Mean ± SE 7.3 ± 0.6 41.3 ± 4.6 5.1 ± 1.3 14.7 ± 8.1 Note: SE=Standard Error

Table 6-12 Summary of Benthic Invertebrate Abundance for Isadore’s Lake, Waterbody P1, Watercourse S1 and Mills Creek (Fall 2003)

Isadore's Lake (Pond 3) P1 Mean Standard % of Mean Standard % of Taxon (no./m2) Error Total Taxon (no./m2) Error Total Nemata 27,909 186 73.0 Nemata 79,165 500 61.3 Culicoides 35 1 0.1 Naididae 3,200 29 2.5 Pisidium 552 7 1.4 Orthocladius 43,965 111 34.0 Naididae 1,574 16 4.1 Chironomus 1,391 12 1.1 Chironomus 1,513 14 4.0 Total of Common Taxa 98.9 Macroplea 1,283 9 3.4 Uncommon Taxa 1.1 Procladius 713 5 1.9 Total Abundance 129,183 25,295 100.0 Cladopelma 1,100 10 2.9 Tanytarsus 409 3 1.1 Endochironomus 665 10 1.7 Paratanytarsus 1,257 27 3.3 Total of Common Taxa 96.8 Uncommon Taxa 3.2 Total Abundance 38,230 7,407 100.0

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-42

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-12 Summary of Benthic Invertebrate Abundance for Isadore’s Lake, Waterbody P1, Watercourse S1 and Mills Creek (Fall 2003) (cont’d)

S1 Mills Creek Mean Standard % of Mean Standard % of Taxon (no./m2) Error Total Taxon (no./m2) Error Total Nemata 2,352 17 4.1 Nemata 265 3 4.7 Pisidium 3,804 24 6.7 Culicoides 304 2 5.4 Naididae 6,870 48 12.0 Bezzia 70 1 1.2 Lepidostoma 552 5 1.0 Hexatoma 113 1 2.0 Simulium 3,500 46 6.1 Pisidium 117 2 2.1 Macroplea 1,096 12 1.9 Naididae 948 10 16.9 Procladius 1,443 10 2.5 Chironominae I/D 235 3 4.2 Ablabesmyia 478 7 0.8 Chironomus 78 1 1.4 Tanytarsus 14,983 84 26.2 Macroplea 1,026 9 18.3 Paratanytarsus 6,887 65 12.0 Cladopelma 61 1 1.1 Odontomesa 3,800 29 6.6 Ablabesmyia 135 1 2.4 Parakiefferiella 2,122 31 3.7 Tanytarsus 626 7 11.1 Polypedilum 2,043 20 3.6 Odontomesa 348 4 6.2 Paracl 1,009 16 1.8 Parakiefferiella 687 6 12.2 Total of Common Taxa 89.1 Polypedilum 378 5 6.7 Uncommon Taxa 10.9 Larsia 70 1 1.2 Total Abundance 57,178 7,789 100.0 Total of Common Taxa 97.1 Uncommon Taxa 2.9 Total Abundance 5,622 1,186 100.0

Table 6-13 Summary of Benthic Data for Isadore’s Lake, Waterbody P1, Watercourse S1 and Mills Creek (Fall 2003)

S1 Jackpine Creek Mills Creek S3 Discharge Discharge Discharge Discharge Time (m3/s) Time (m3/s) Time (m3/s) Time (m3/s) Start (23:00) 0.226 Start (6:00) 4.353 Start (20:00) 0.037 Start (11:00) 0.057 6h (5:00) 0.240 6h (12:00) 4.466 6h (2:00) 0.055 6h (17:00) 0.064 12h (11:00) 0.220 12h (18:00) 4.062 12h (8:00) 0.036 12h (23:00) 0.037 18h (17:00) 0.294 18h (0:00) 3.272 18h (14:00) 0.029 18h (5:00) 0.017 24h (23:00) 0.151 24h (6:00) 3.345 24h(20:00) 0.033 24h (11:00) 0.008 Mean 0.226 Mean 3.899 Mean 0.038 Mean 0.037

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-43

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.2.3.6 Invertebrate Drift The 24-h mean discharge for the period from 11 pm on June 19 to 11 pm on June 20 was 0.226 m3/s and the 6-h discharge measurements ranged from 0.151-0.24 m3/s (Table 6-6). Turbidity levels at both sites remained below 5 NTU and water temperatures at both sites also remained fairly constant over 24 h (12-15 ºC). DO levels were variable but relatively high (6.9-9.77 mg/L), while pH remained between 7 and 8, and TDS and salinity levels were relatively low (Table 6-7). The substrate at both sites was 100% sand. The total daily drift estimates were similar for both sites (34,561 and 28,516 organisms/stream/day; Table 6-8). Over 24 h the drift composition at sites 1 and 2 was similar (Table 6-9). Mayfly larvae dominated the drift composition (~30%), while dipterans (all life stages combined) accounted for approximately 35%. Amphipods accounted for a significant proportion of the drift at both sites (10-14%), and the majority of amphipods drifted nocturnally between 11 pm and 4 am. Trichopteran larvae were also numerous at Site 2, while Collembola (springtails) were present in substantial numbers at Site 1. There was a prominent peak in nocturnal drift between 11 pm (the beginning of the survey) and 4 am (Figure 6-7). Numbers of Baetidae and amphipods increased several-fold and they dominated the nocturnal drift. A maximum drift density of 5.1 organisms/m3 was reached between 1 and 2 am. The mean 24-h drift density for S1 was 1.6 organisms/m3. For 19 of the 24 hours, the mean drift density generally remained below that mean value. There was a small peak in drift at dusk towards the end of the sampling period but it was not as pronounced as that of the previous night. There are no historical drift data for S1 but the drift estimates can be compared to Shelley Creek; a similar LSA watercourse that was surveyed by Golder (2002a). There were approximately double the number of taxa drifting over a 24 h period in S1 in 2004 compared to Shelley Creek in 2002 (45 and 50 vs 23 and 20). The total daily drift estimates were also greater in S1 in 2004 compared to Shelley Creek in 2002 (34,561 and 28,516 vs 16,123 and 12,764). This is likely due to a higher discharge in S1 compared to Shelley Creek (0.226 vs 0.070 m3/s) because the mean drift densities were similar for the two streams (1.6 and 1.8 organisms/m3, respectively). The drift composition of both streams was dominated by Baetid mayflies but there were differences in the other dominant taxa (e.g., Simuliidae was more common in S1). Both streams exhibited a nocturnal peak in drift. The mean total daily drift estimate calculated by the present study for S1 was very close to what would have been predicted using the drift-discharge relationship established by Golder (2002a; 31,539 vs 31,383 organisms).

6.2.3.7 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies A total of eight fish species were recorded during the spring hoopnet survey conducted on S1 in 2004 (Figure 6-8; Appendix O). Species captured included; brook stickleback, fathead minnow, finescale dace, lake chub, northern pike, pearl dace, slimy sculpin and white sucker. Of the large-bodied species, the northern pike were all juveniles, while at least four of the white sucker were small pre-spawning adults (Appendix O). Species composition in the spring and summer fish inventories was similar to the hoopnet results (Appendix O). The presence of forage fish species and juvenile white sucker and northern pike indicated that the stream provides spring and summer rearing and feeding habitat for these species.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-44

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Figure 6-7 Drift Density and Composition for Mills Creek and Watercourse S1, June 2004

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-45

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

50 15 ) C 12 o

40 (

30 9

20 6

10

3 Maximum Daily ish F

Water Temperature Temperature Water f 0 0 o . o

N 10

20

30

40

50 29-Apr 30-Apr 1-May 2-May 3-May 4-May 5-May 6-May 7-May

upstream Minnows: Fathead minnow 2 Suckers: Sculpins: Brook Northern Finescale dace 87 White sucker 63 Slimy sculpin 2 stickleback 11 pike 2 Lake chub 21 Unidentified 3 Unidentified 3 Pearl dace 18 downstream

Water temperature

Figure 6-8 Fish Movements and Maximum Daily Water Temperature Recorded at Watercourse S1 (April – May 2004)

Although the it is possible that the two large beaver dams did not preclude all fish movement into the beaver ponds and upper S1 reaches, the presence of forage species in the beaver ponds suggests that they overwintered there. The capture of juvenile white suckers in the beaver ponds indicates that these species also overwintered there, although it is unknown whether these fish were spawned in the upper reaches or moved upstream during the previous year.

6.2.3.8 Larval Drift No historical larval drift information exists for S1. One larval sucker and four sucker eggs were captured in S1 on June 19-20 during the invertebrate drift survey, confirming that some white sucker spawning did occur in that stream in 2004 (Table 6-10). The S1 survey also captured larval sculpin, cyprinids and brook stickleback.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-46

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.2.4 Mills Creek

6.2.4.1 Surface Water Quality Water quality data for Mills Creek were limited to three seasons in 1997/1998 and all four seasons in 2003/2004 (Appendix G, Table G-6). During these sampling periods, the pH ranged between 7.46 and 7.9. During 2003/2004 the water temperature ranged from 1ºC in the winter to 11.96 ºC in the summer and the stream did not freeze during winter 2003/2004. DO levels were close to saturation for all seasons except fall 2003, when the DO level was below the chronic aquatic WQG. TOC and DOC concentrations were similar and were lower than either Jackpine Creek or S1, indicating that Mills Creek was lower in natural organic carbon than other LSA streams. Hardness, conductivity and TDS concentrations remained fairly constant across seasons in 2003/2004 (412-449 mg/L and 450-530 mg/L, respectively) and historical values were similar. The drinking WQG for TDS was exceeded in fall 1997 and 2003, winter 2004 and spring 2004. Seasonal consistency was also true for both historic and 2003/2004 major ion concentrations. Concentrations of all these parameters were substantially higher in Mills Creek compared with other LSA watercourses. Nutrient concentrations were below chronic aquatic WQGs for all sampling periods, except for total nitrogen in spring 2004. Total iron concentrations were typically above chronic aquatic and drinking WQGs, but were within the natural range observed for LSA watercourses. Manganese consistently exceeded the drinking WQG. All other detectable total metals were below available chronic aquatic WQGs for all sampling periods. The identification of parameters of concern is limited by the quantity of water quality data available (n≤2 for each season). Total iron and manganese and dissolved iron may be of concern but this appeared to be generic to the area. A single low DO reading was taken in fall 2003 but more measurements would have to be taken in order to identify DO as a parameter of concern. Relatively high TDS concentrations were found in Mills Creek.

6.2.4.2 Sediment Quality Sediment quality data from Mills Creek, limited to sampling conducted in 2003/2004 indicated that this stream was mostly sand with low carbon (Appendix H, Table H3). Hydrocarbons were present mainly as higher molecular weight fractions and the F3 (C16- C34) fraction exceeded Alberta Tier 1 soil guidelines. Total metals and PAHs were present at concentrations below available SQGs with the exception of chrysene and zinc. The identification of sediment quality parameters of concern was limited by the fact there was only one data point for each parameter (fall 2003). However, sediment toxicity was observed in sediment from Mills Creek, so PAHs are likely parameters of concern as they have been suspected of causing sediment toxicity (Brua et al. 2003). High molecular weight hydrocarbons may also be of concern as they exceeded provincial guidelines but may be from a natural source. Chrysene and zinc exceeded SQGs guidelines and may be of potential concern.

6.2.4.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity Toxicity was not observed according to the RAMP standard battery of water toxicity tests conducted on a water sample taken in fall 2003, from Mills Creek. This was consistent

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-47

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

with the only other available toxicity data for Mills Creek; a non-toxic Microtox® result from a water sample taken in spring, 1997 (Appendix G, Table G6). However, the Ceriodaphnia dubia toxicity test conducted on the fall 2003 sample was invalid because control reproduction did not meet the required criteria. Therefore, the C. dubia 7-day survival and reproduction test was repeated on a water sample collected from Mills Creek in the winter. This sample was not acutely toxic to C. dubia but chronic toxic effects on reproduction were observed (IC25=82.7%), albeit at a relatively low level. Reproduction was only inhibited in the 100% stream water treatment. Prior to the present baseline study, toxicity testing had not previously been conducted on sediment samples from Mills Creek. The data from the this study indicates that sediment collected from Mills Creek was chronically toxic to Hyalella azteca and Chironomus tentans, in terms of significant effects on growth (Appendix H, Table H3). The same sediment sample was not acutely toxic to all three standard RAMP sediment species (H. azteca, C. tentans, Lumbriculus variegates) or chronically toxic to L. variegates. In summary, although data were only available from three sampling events, waterborne toxicity did not appear to be of potential concern. It should however be noted that one sampling event (fall 2003) was a high flow season and so the dilution capacity of the stream would have been elevated, possibly ameliorating the potential toxic effects of any substances. Some chronic toxicity was observed for the one waterborne test conducted in winter 2004 when water levels would have been lower. Sediment toxicity was identified and is therefore of potential concern. Sediment toxicity would have not been affected to any great extent by higher flows.

6.2.4.4 Aquatic Habitats Mills Creek is a small watercourse that flows into Isadore’s Lake. It has a well-defined meandering channel where it intersects Highway 63 and becomes interspersed with flooded areas a few hundred meters above and below Highway 63 (Golder 1997). Habitat quality was considered low. Of the portion of Mills Creek that extends downstream from Highway 63 to the Isadore’s Lake fen shore, the upstream section had a series of shallow Class 2 pool areas created by small (<1 m high) beaver dams interspersed with Class 3 flat areas. These pool areas had soft, organic substrate and the flat sections were dominated by sand. The downstream section was dominated by Class 3 (R3) runs with occasional shallow riffles, and was primarily associated with sand substrate interspersed with small areas of boulder and cobble. There was a moderate level of instream cover and overhead cover provided by woody debris and aquatic vegetation. Mills Creek dissipates through a large fen area where it meets Isadore’s Lake. The resultant poor connectivity and generally shallow water limit the quality of potential fish habitat. Overwintering habitat would also be limited by shallow water and low DO levels, although the stream remained open during the winter of 2003/2004.

6.2.4.5 Benthic Invertebrates The section of Mills Creek sampled for benthic invertebrates was dominated by run habitat which connected periodic pool habitat (Table 6-11). The run habitat was shallower (mean=0.25 m) than pool habitat (mean=0.4 m) and had a mean current velocity of 0.13 m/s. Beaver activity was evident at the time of sampling. The dominant habitat was depositional, and the substrate was generally sand with some silt/clay and gravel. The proportion of silt and gravel was variable in the run habitat (2.8-31.3% and

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-48

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

0.1-4.9%, respectively). The organic content at half of the sites was generally low (<5%) but was higher at other sites (7.5-13%). Mills Creek was not as productive as S1, in terms of invertebrate total abundance (mean=5,622 organisms/m2; Tables 6-12 and 6-13). The benthic community was also less diverse and was characterized by a mean taxon richness similar to its receiving waterbody (Isadore’s Lake). The benthic community in Mills Creek was depositional and dominated by Chironomids (midge larvae; 47%), but Macroplea (beetles; 18.3%) and Naididae (oligichaetes; 16%) were also abundant. No historical benthic invertebrate data were available for Mills Creek.

6.2.4.6 Invertebrate Drift The mean discharge for the period from 8 pm on June 18 to 8 pm on June 19 was 0.038 m3/s and the 6-h discharge measurements ranged from 0.033-0.055 m3/s (Table 6-6). Turbidity levels at both sites were more variable than those reported for other LSA streams but they were still relatively low (4.22-9.35 NTU). Water temperature remained fairly constant over the 24-h sampling period at both sites (7.5-12.5 ºC). DO levels remained close to saturation (9.83-12.02 mg/L), while pH remained between 7 and 8, and TDS and salinity levels were relatively low (Table 6-7). Conductivity in Mills Creek was higher than the other three streams but was within the seasonal range reported for Mills Creek (Appendix G, Table G-6) . The substrate at both sites was predominantly sand (>87%). The total daily drift estimates were similar for both sites (2,292 and 2,889 organisms/stream/day; Table 6-8) and were lower than the other three streams surveyed. This was partly reflective of the lower discharge in Mills Creek but also the drift composition, which was quite different to the other three streams (Table 6-9). The drift was dominated at both sites by terrestrial invertebrates (including non-dipteran aquatic insect adults), and dipteran adults and pupae (accounting for ~80% combined). Aquatic larvae only accounted for ~20% of the drift and the aquatic larvae present were dominated by Baetids and Chironomids. There were no prominent peaks in drift density or nocturnal periodicity. There appeared to be an unexplained increase in drift between 11 am and 8 pm Figure 6-7). The mean total daily drift estimate calculated for Mills Creek in 2004 was less than half what would have been predicted using the drift-discharge relationship established by Golder (2002a; 2,590 vs 6,306 organisms). This was not unexpected given that benthic communities in Mills Creek are depositional and are characterized by low diversity, and the drift mainly comprised of terrestrial invertebrates and depostional taxa (Table 6-12). Typically invertebrate drift tends to be dominated by EPT taxa, as opposed to taxa associated with depositional communities (Allan 1995).

6.2.4.7 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies Historical fish inventory surveys conducted on Mills Creek reported that no fish have been captured or observed in this stream (Golder 1998a). Similarly, no fish were observed in Mills Creek in the current study during numerous visits to the creek. No fish, larval fish or fish eggs were captured during the 24-hour invertebrate drift survey conducted in June, 2004. It is assumed that Mills Creek is a non-fish-bearing stream, and that the preponderance of shallow, low quality habitat is the likely reason for the absence of any fish species (Golder 1998).

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-49

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.2.4.8 Larval Drift No historical larval drift data were available for Mills Creek. The 2004 invertebrate drift survey yielded no larval fish.

6.2.5 Watercourse S2

6.2.5.1 Surface Water Quality Water quality data for S2 was limited to three seasons in 2003/2004 because the stream was frozen to the bottom during winter (Appendix G, Table G-7). During the open water seasons the water temperature ranged from 3.73 ºC (spring) to 18.84 ºC (summer) and the pH ranged from 7.3-7.5. DO concentrations were below the acute aquatic WQG in fall and the chronic aquatic WQG in summer. Both colour and organic carbon levels (DOC and TOC) were within the range observed for other LSA watercourses. Water hardness, TDS and some major ion concentrations were lower in the spring than other seasons. Total nitrogen concentrations were elevated above chronic WQGs during spring 2004, but otherwise nutrient levels were below aquatic WQGs. Chlorophyll a was higher in fall 2004, but was similar to the other LSA streams. Naphthenic acid, total phenolics and total recoverable hydrocarbons measured in the fall were below analytical detection limits. Apart from iron and manganese, the only other total metal that exceeded relevant aquatic and/or drinking WQGs was aluminum in the spring. The identification of parameters of concern is limited by the quantity of water quality data available (n=1 for each season). DO may be of concern in the fall and summer but more measurements would have to be taken to confirm this. Total nitrogen and aluminum may be of potential concern in the spring but dissolved aluminum was low. Total iron and manganese and dissolved iron may also be of concern but this appeared to be generic to the area.

6.2.5.2 Sediment Quality At this time, there are no current or historical data related to sediment quality available for S2.

6.2.5.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity At this time, there are no current or historical data related to water or sediment toxicity available for S2.

6.2.5.4 Aquatic Habitats No historical information was available for S2. Watercourse S2 is a very small stream with no potential to support fish, and therefore no habitat surveys were conducted.

6.2.5.5 Benthic Invertebrates At this time, there are no current or historical data related to benthic invertebrate communities available for S2.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-50

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.2.5.6 Invertebrate Drift At this time, there are no current or historical data related to invertebrate drift available for S2.

6.2.5.7 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies No historical information was available for S2. Watercourse S2 is a very small stream with no potential to support fish.

6.2.5.8 Larval Drift No historical information was available for S2. Watercourse S2 is a very small stream with no potential to support fish.

6.2.6 Watercourse S3

6.2.6.1 Surface Water Quality Water quality data for S3 were also limited to three seasons in 2003/2004 because the stream was frozen to the bottom during winter (Appendix G, Table G-7). During these open water seasons the water temperature ranged from 0.45 ºC (spring) to 13.55 ºC (summer) and the pH ranged from 7.32-7.64. Colour and organic carbon levels (DOC and TOC) were within the range observed for other watercourses in the Muskeg River watershed. DO levels were close to saturation during spring and summer but were very low in the fall (below the acute aquatic WQG). Similar to other LSA watercourses, levels of water hardness, alkalinity, TDS and some major ions in S3 were lower in the spring compared to other seasons. Total nitrogen levels exceeded the chronic aquatic WQG during spring and were equivalent to the guideline level during summer. Otherwise nutrient levels were below aquatic WQGs. Chlorophyll a was higher in fall 2004 compared to other seasons. Total iron was within the range reported for other LSA streams but only exceeded aquatic and drinking WQGs in the summer. Dissolved iron in the summer was low. Manganese concentrations consistently exceeded the drinking WQG. All other total metals were below available WQGs. The identification of parameters of concern is limited by the quantity of water quality data available (n=1 for each season). DO may be of concern in the fall but more measurements would have to be taken to confirm this. Total nitrogen may be of potential concern in the spring and total manganese may also be of concern but this appeared to be generic to the area.

6.2.6.2 Sediment Quality At this time, there are no current or historical data related to sediment quality available for S3.

6.2.6.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity At this time, there are no current or historical data related to water or sediment toxicity available for S3.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-51

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.2.6.4 Aquatic Habitats Originating in a large saturated fen within Lease 13, S3 flows in a northwesterly direction to its confluence with Jackpine Creek. The stream was surveyed at three sites, one upstream of the Canterra Road crossing (Reach 1) and two near the confluence with Jackpine Creek (reaches 2 and 3). Reach 1, from Canterra Road to approximately 100 m upstream, had a well defined channel, with a channel width and wetted width of 1.54 m. The substrate consists of mainly soft muck and organic debris. Reach 2, from the confluence with Jackpine Creek to 100 m upstream, had a defined channel with a width of 1.26 m and a wetted width of 0.65 m. The substrate was similarly dominated by organic muck, but areas of sand represented approximately 25% of the total area. Reach 3 was an unconfined, irregularly meandering channel flowing through a saturated fen. The substrate was uniformly comprised of muck with a high organic debris content. The stream provides low to moderate quality habitat for forage fish species in reaches 2 and 3, while Reach 1 was classified as low quality habitat for forage species. Habitat quality is limited by low flows, shallow depth and poor connectivity to downstream habitats (i.e., Jackpine Creek).

6.2.6.5 Benthic Invertebrates At this time, there are no current or historical data related to benthic invertebrate communities available for S3.

6.2.6.6 Invertebrate Drift The mean discharge for the period from 11 am on June 22 to 11 pm on June 23 was 0.037 m3/s and the 6-h discharge measurements ranged from 0.008-0.064 m3/s (Table 6-6). Turbidity levels at both sites over the 24-h sampling periods were <1 NTU, and water temperatures remained fairly constant (6.0-9.5 ºC). DO levels ranged from 6.37 to 8.66 mg/L. The lower end of that DO range was below the chronic aquatic WQ guideline, but was within the typical range found in the Muskeg River watershed. Stream pH ranged from 6.09-6.65 which was largely below the range recommended for the protection of aquatic life (AENV 1999a). The pH recorded upstream of the drift sites during the water quality surveys ranged between 7 and 8 for all seasons. The pH measurements taken during the drift sampling period in S3 were lower than typically reported for the Muskeg River watershed, although instances of pH measurements below 7.0 have occurred (AENV 2002). TDS and salinity were relatively low (Table 6-7). The substrate at both sites was 100% sand. The total daily drift estimates were similar for both sites (27,177 and 22,306 organisms/stream/day; Table 6-8) and were relatively high considering the size and discharge of this stream. The drift was dominated by Nemourid stoneflies (41.7 and 67.8% for sites 1 and 2, respectively; Table 6-9). There was also a high proportion of dipteran larvae (38.7 and 16.8%) comprised mostly of Simuliids with some Chironomids. On the other hand, compared to other streams, there was a lower proportion of mayflies, (5.0 and 5.4%) typically Leptophlebiids and Baetids, and a lower number of terrestrial and aquatic insect adults. S3 had the highest drift densities of all four streams; mainly due to the large number of Nemourid stonefly and Simuliidae larvae (Figure 6-5). There was a very prominent nocturnal peak in the Nemouridae drift between 11 pm and midnight, which contributed substantially to the maximum drift density of 21.8 organisms/m3. The mean 24-h drift density for the entire 24-h period was 7.8 organisms/m3, with a minimum

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-52

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

3 of 3.9 organisms/m . The 24-h mean drift density excluding the 1-h nocturnal peak was still relatively high (7.2 organisms/m3). The mean total daily drift estimate calculated for S3 by the present study was four times what would have been predicted using the drift-discharge relationship established by Golder (24,742 vs 6,157 organisms). The relatively high drift estimates for S3 and the composition of the drift (typically EPT taxa) suggests that S3 may provide a substantial invertebrate input to Jackpine Creek. However, since the drift was heavily dominated by Nemourid stoneflies, it is possible that a population peak occurred at this time. Hartland- Rowe et al. (1979) noted that stoneflies tended to be univoltine in Jackpine Creek. Furthermore, relatively low pH conditions occurred during the sampling period which may have promoted drift. Further studies would resolve this issue.

6.2.6.7 Fish Inventories and Movement Studies During the fish inventory conducted on July 20, sampling by backpack electrofishing did not result in the capture of any fish on this stream. One brook stickleback was captured by means of hand dipping near the confluence of S3 with Jackpine Creek, but this individual was likely from Jackpine Creek and was using the backwater habitat in the lower-most reach as refuge or feeding habitat.

6.2.6.8 Larval Drift No historical information was available for S3. Larval drift was not surveyed in S3 since this stream offers only limited habitat for forage fish species and no habitat for large- bodied fish species. The 2004 invertebrate drift survey yielded no larval fish or eggs.

6.3 Local Study Area Waterbodies

6.3.1 Isadore’s Lake

6.3.1.1 Surface Water Quality Water quality data for Isadore’s Lake was available from: fall, winter and summer 1997/1998; fall 2000 and 2001; summer 2001; and all four seasons for 2003/2004 (Appendix G, Table G-8). During these sampling periods, the pH ranged between 6.9 and 9.02, and the surface water temperature ranged from 1.3 ºC in the winter to 24.3 ºC in the summer. The lake was anoxic in winter 2004 (<0.3% saturation throughout the entire water profile), and was characterized by low DO conditions in fall 2004 and summer 2001. DO levels were close to saturation in spring 2004. Water quality sampling sites were located at depths between 2.4 and 3.3 m and there was no evidence of stratification during any season (Appendix I, Table I-1). However, the temperature near the lake bottom (4.38-4.9 ºC) was approximately double that measured close to the surface (1.52-2.17 ºC) under ice-cover. According to rankings based on pH, alkalinity and calcium, Isadore’s Lake can be classified as least sensitive to acid deposition (Saffran and Trew 1996). Sulphide concentrations were substantially greater in winter compared with the other three seasons, and were above aquatic and drinking WQGs (Appendix G, Table G-8). Historical summer sulphide concentrations also exceeded aquatic WQGs. Sulphate concentrations were an order of magnitude greater than concentrations measured in other LSA

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-53

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

waterbodies, and were similar to Mills Creek. Sulphate concentrations were however below the drinking WQG. Levels of water hardness, TDS and some major ions were higher in winter and lower in summer and fall for all sampling periods. Measurements of BOD and chlorophyll a concentrations collected in 2004 were generally lower than historical medians and maximum values, although data were limited. Total nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations periodically exceeded aquatic WQGs in fall, winter and summer from 1997-2004. Although data are limited, Isadore’s Lake can be provisionally classified as mesotrophic according to phosphorus (Chambers et al. 2001) and chlorophyll a thresholds (Thomann and Mueller 1987). It should however be noted that some phosphorus measurements exceeded the mesotrophic threshold of 0.03 mg/L (Chambers et al. 2001). Naphthenic acids were below analytical detections limits for all sampling periods except summer 1998 (2 mg/L). With the exception of fall 2001, total phenolics were below aquatic WQGs. Total metals concentrations measured in 2003/2004 did not exceed available aquatic WQGs. There were however some historical exceedances; notably median concentrations of silver, zinc, copper and mercury during fall and summer. Historical fall maximum values of cadmium, chromium, copper, selenium and zinc, and historical summer maximum values of aluminum, chromium, copper and mercury also exceeded available aquatic WQGs The summer historical maximum copper concentration (12 µg/L) was the only measurement to exceed acute guidelines. Manganese levels consistently exceeded the drinking WQG. The identification of parameters of concern is limited by the quantity of water quality data available (n≤3 for each season). Parameters potentially of concern may include: DO (particularly in the winter); sulphide, sulphate, phosphorus and some metals (some historical exceedances). Although it should be noted that only total manganese exceeded WQGs in 2003/2004.

6.3.1.2 Sediment Quality Sediment quality studies, conducted in 2001 and 2003, indicated that sediments from Isadore’s Lake were high in silt with lower levels of clay and sand, and were low in carbon (Appendix H, Table H-4). Similar to other LSA waterbodies/watercourses, Isadore Lake’s sediment was characterized by higher molecular weight hydrocarbons. Data from both years indicate that sediments were high in aluminum, magnesium and iron, and that nickel and arsenic concentrations exceeded SQGs. PAH concentrations did not exceed available SQGs. The identification of sediment quality parameters of concern was limited by the fact there was only two data points for each parameter (fall 2001, 2003). Based on this data it appears that arsenic, nickel and PAHs may be of potential concern.

6.3.1.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity The only toxicity testing that has been conducted on Isadore’s Lake was an assessment of waterborne toxicity utilizing the standard Microtox® test. This test was conducted on water collected during winter 1997 and the results indicated that the water did not show any toxicity.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-54

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.3.1.4 Aquatic Habitats Isadore’s Lake (also referred to as Cree Burn Lake) is an oxbow located within the Athabasca River floodplain, adjacent to the Albian Sands Muskeg River Mine. The lake shore consists of open water fen complexes dominated by sedges and cattail, with low shrub and wooded fens occurring along the outer perimeter. A channel at the northwest end of the lake provides an outlet to the Athabasca River, and Mills Creek, which enters from the northeast, is the only stream contributing surface water inflow. The lake also receives groundwater inputs and direct surface runoff from the surrounding area. The substrate consists exclusively of organic muck, and the maximum depth was found to be 4.3 meters in 2004. Reports of the lake’s area are inconsistent and it appears to be highly variable. The lake area was reported to be 33.90 ha (Webb 1981), but a review conducted by (Hatfield et al. 2004) indicated that the historical record from 1949 to 2001 documents the lake area to vary between a low of 6.49 ha and a high of 21.78 ha. Site surveys conducted in fall, winter, spring and summer of 2003/2004 provided information that is presented in Appendix I and Appendix L. Isadore’s Lake provides low to moderate habitat quality for forage fish species and low habitat quality for northern pike. Northern pike are known to occur in the lake as they have been reported by Webb (1981) and Golder (1996b). Habitat quality is probably determined by lake depth which varies annually, and by DO concentrations. Isadore’s Lake has extensive submerged aquatic macrophyte communities that likely contribute significantly to winter BOD, thereby creating the risk of chronically depressed winter DO concentrations. This would be exacerbated in years with low lake levels. Winter water quality profiles conducted in March, 2004, at three sites indicated anoxic conditions (<0.5 mg/L) throughout the water column. The abundance of aquatic macrophytes, especially if in association with summer algal blooms, would also contribute to the risk of sporadic summer oxygen depletion events, resulting in at least partial summerkills. Evidence of a summerkill event was observed during the July, 2004 survey when large numbers of dead stickleback and fathead minnows were observed among macrophyte beds throughout the lake.

6.3.1.5 Aquatic Macrophytes Isadore’s Lake had extensive beds of aquatic macrophytes in the shallow open water zone that occupied most of the lake area to a depth of approximately 2 m. Beyond the 2 m depth contour the plant communities dissipated abruptly. A total of 13 submergent or floating-leaved species were observed in either the quantitative survey or general reconnaissance. The three sites sampled quantitatively all ranged from 1.7-1.8 m in depth and had similar assemblages of plant species, although the relative abundance for the key species varied somewhat between sites. Based on mean values for the three sites, Chara sp. was the most abundant, with a mean standing stock of 1156.9 g/m2. Ceratophyllum demersum was the next most abundant species with a mean standing stock of 251.4 g/m2. Other species in the quadrat plots were less abundant and included Potamogeton foliosus, P. perfoliatus var. richardsonii, P. zosteriformis and Stukenia pectinata. These six species generally dominated the 1.5-2.0 m depth range, while the remaining observed species (Table 6-14) were less abundant and favoured the shallower nearshore areas.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-55

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-14 Aquatic Macrophyte Data for Isadore’s Lake and Waterbodies P1 and P2 (July 2004) P1 Isadore’s Lake Fresh Weight Mean Fresh Weight Mean (g) Standing (g) Standing Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Stock Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Stock Quantified Species 1.9 m 1.7 m 1.8 m Mean S.E. (g/m2) 1.7 m 1.8 m 1.8 m Mean S.E. (g/m2) Ceratophyllum demersum 0 0 0 0 0 107.7 24.8 2.3 350.0 125.7 112.3 251.4 Myriophyllum exalbescens 1.5 80.0 80.0 53.8 26.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chara sp. 0.0 5000.0 6200.0 3733.3 1898.5 7466.7 388.0 1267.6 79.7 578.4 355.9 1156.9 Lemna minor 0 0 1.5 0.5 0.5 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Potamogeton foliosus 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 86.7 28.9 28.9 57.8 P. perfoliatus var. richardsonii 0.4 0 0 0.1 0.1 0.3 8.0 3.5 0.0 3.8 2.3 7.7 P. zosteriformis 0 0 0 0 0 0 13.0 15.3 0.0 9.4 4.8 18.9 Stukenia pectinata 0 0 0 0 0 0 13.0 10.4 16.7 13.4 1.8 26.7

Observed Species P1 P2 Isadore’s Lake Ceratophyllum demersum X X X Chara spp. X X X Glyceria borealis X Hippuris vulgaris X X Lemna minor X X Myriophyllum exalbescens X X Nuphar variegatum X X Polygonum amphibium X X Potamogeton friesii X X P. natans X P. perfoliatus var. richardsonii X X X P. pusillus X P. obtisifolius Ranunculus aquatilis X X X Sagittaria sp. X Scirpus sp. X X X Sparganium spp. X X Utricularia intermedia X Utricularia vulgaris X X X

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-56

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

No rare aquatic macrophytes were observed on this survey of Isadore’s Lake, although Hatfield et al. (2004) reported the occurrence of Elodea canadensis (S2, G5) and Potamogeton natans (S2, G5). Elodea canadensis has not been recorded as occurring in Alberta (Kershaw 2001) and has previously been listed as falsely reported (Hatfield et al. 2004). Although its occurrence in northern Alberta would represent a significant northern range extension, this is not uncommon for aquatic macrophytes, due largely to a general lack of survey effort in remote areas. Potamogeton natans may be more common in the oil sands region than its S2 ranking suggests. It was observed in abundance on P2, and in several roadside ponds along the Canterra Road. The author also observed this species on several ponds in the Anzac area, south of Fort McMurray, in the summer of 2004.

6.3.1.6 Benthic Invertebrates The replicate sampling stations in Isadore’s Lake were located in depositional habitat at water depths ranging from 1.9 to 2.9 m (Table 6-11). The substrates at all stations were dominated by silt/clay (>99%) and were low in organic carbon. Macrophytes were abundant throughout the lake at the time of sampling (fall 2003). Isadore’s Lake had a moderate total invertebrate abundance (mean=38,230 organisms/m2), and a depositional community dominated by Nematoda (round worms; 73%) that co-existed with a variety of dipteran genera (midge larvae; 14.9%; Tables 6-12 and 6-13). This type of benthic community is typical of silt/clay environments that often experience low DO conditions, such as those that frequently occur in Isadore’s Lake (Appendix G, Table G-8). Taxon richness was low to moderate and similar to that recorded by RAMP for Kearl Lake in fall 2003 (mean=8.3; Hatfield et al. 2004). Total abundance was substantially higher in Isadore’s Lake when compared to Kearl Lake, but that was primarily due to large numbers of nematodes that were absent from Kearl Lake. There were no historical benthic invertebrate data available for Isadore’s Lake.

6.3.2 Waterbody P1

6.3.2.1 Surface Water Quality Water quality data for P1 was limited to that collected over four seasons in 2003/2004, and historical data collected in spring and summer 2001 (Appendix G, Table G-9). Surface water temperatures ranged from 3.51 ºC in the winter to 14.38 ºC in the summer and surface pH ranged from 7.06-8.13. This waterbody was stratified during summer 2004, with a steep thermocline in the upper 1.0-1.5 m, where the temperature dropped approximately 6-10 ºC (Appendix I, Table I-2). DO levels also fell sharply in this depth range; from 3-4 mg/L to <0.25 mg/L. The pond was more weakly stratified in fall 2003, with a weaker thermocline (3 ºC drop between 1 and 3 m). This waterbody was not stratified during winter and spring 2004. During fall 2003 and spring 2004, DO levels were <1 mg/L below depths of 2 and 5 m (depending on depth profile), and in the winter, the entire water column below 0.5 m was anoxic. The pond bottom was anoxic for the deep (10-14 m) and mid-depth (6-8 m) profiles during all four seasons. Surface and bottom DO levels were comparable in the shallower (1.25-1.5 m) profiles for all seasons in 2003/2004. Conductivity and TDS levels generally increased with depth irrespective of season, which may reflect groundwater input into this waterbody. There was a larger increase of pH with depth in the mid-depth and deep profiles in the summer (1.11 pH units), than in fall and spring (<0.5 pH unit). Salinity remained relatively constant with depth for all

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-57

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

seasons. The surface water was reflective of an oxidizing environment, while the deeper water reflected reducing conditions. Surface water levels of hardness, alkalinity, TDS and major ions were consistent between seasons for all sampling periods (Appendix G, Table G-9). According to rankings based on pH, alkalinity and calcium, P1 can be classified as low-least sensitive to acid deposition (Saffran and Trew (1996). TSS concentrations were typically low during all sampling periods, with the exception of summer 2004 where the level was elevated (24 mg/L). Nutrient concentrations were generally low, with the exception of total nitrogen in spring 2004, which was measured at the chronic aquatic WQG. Although data are limited, P1 can be provisionally classified as mesotrophic according to phosphorus (Chambers et al. 2001) and chlorophyll a thresholds (Thomann and Mueller 1987). Naphthenic acids were only detected in summer 2001 (3 mg/l), total phenolics were only detected in spring 2001 (0.003 mg/L), and total recoverable hydrocarbons have not been detected in P1. Total iron concentrations exceeded the chronic aquatic and drinking WQGs during all sampling periods, but were within the range found in the Muskeg River watershed. Copper concentrations in spring 2001 exceeded the chronic aquatic WQG. No other metals exceeded aquatic WQGs. Manganese levels consistently exceeded drinking WQGs. The identification of parameters of concern is limited by the quantity of water quality data available (n≤2 for each season). Parameters potentially of concern may include: DO, total iron and manganese, and dissolved iron. There was a single elevated total concentration of copper but low levels were recorded in 2003/2004.

6.3.2.2 Sediment Quality Sediment quality data collected in 2003/2004 indicated that sand and organic carbon were higher in P1 than Isadore’s Lake (Appendix H, Table H-4). Sediment from P1 was also characterized by higher molecular weight hydrocarbons and the F3 (C16-C34) fraction exceeded Alberta Tier 1 soil guidelines. Similar to Isadore’s Lake, nickel concentrations exceeded SQGs but most other metals were present at lower concentrations in P1 compared with Isadore’s Lake. Sediments from this pond were however characterized by high calcium and magnesium concentrations. Sediment PAH concentrations in P1 were below available sediment quality guidelines. The identification of sediment quality parameters of concern was limited by the fact there was only one data point for each parameter (fall 2003). The parameters of potential concern may include: higher molecular weight hydrocarbons, nickel and PAHs.

6.3.2.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity At this time, there are no current or historical data related to water or sediment toxicity available for P1.

6.3.2.4 Aquatic Habitats Waterbody P1, located in the Sharkbite area of Lease 13, was described as a deep upland pond by Webb (1981). The pond has two inlets, one from the southeast and one from the northeast which connects it to P4. The southeast inlet channel may at times drain part of the Lease 90 area, although it was dry for the duration of the current project. There is one outlet in the northwest that empties into watercourse S1. Historical information indicates a maximum depth of 22.3 m and surface area of 4.21 ha (Webb 1981). The deepest site

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-58

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

measured in 2003/2004 was 15.6 m. The pond substrate is comprised almost exclusively of organic muck, although Webb (1981) reported areas of boulder, cobble, gravel and sand. Site surveys conducted in fall, winter, spring and summer of 2003/2004 provided information that is summarized in Appendix I and Appendix L. The pond is considered to provide low to moderate habitat for forage fish species. Overwintering capability is probably limited by low DO levels. Golder (2002a) reported that brook stickleback occurred in P1.

6.3.2.5 Aquatic Macrophytes The aquatic macrophyte community was less diverse in P1, relative to Isadore’s Lake. This is undoubtedly due, at least in part, to the morphometry of the pond that dictates a very narrow littoral zone around its margin. Although a total of nine species were observed (Table 6-14), the majority were only sparsely distributed. Only four species were identified among the three surveyed sites, and of these Chara sp. represented almost 98% of the total mean standing stock. The Chara sp. was ubiquitous and dense to a depth of 1.8 m, but virtually absent below 2.0 m. Myriophyllum exalbescens was the next most abundant species at a mean standing stock of 26.2 g/m2. Other than Chara sp., the distribution of all species was sparse or patchy, and generally limited to the shallower nearshore waters. No rare aquatic macrophytes were observed on the 2004 survey of P1.

6.3.2.6 Benthic Invertebrates The replicate sampling stations in P1 were located in depositional habitat at water depths that ranged from 1.7 to 2.9 m (Table 6-11). The substrates at all stations were dominated by silt/clay (>86%) and were high in organic carbon. P1 had a very high total benthic invertebrate abundance (mean=129,183 organisms/m2) and a depositional community dominated by nematoda (roundworms; 61%) and the dipteran Orthocladius (34%). Taxon richness was low and the community was less diverse than that present in either Kearl or Isadore’s lakes. The silty/clay substrate combined with high organic content supported a less diverse community that was tolerant of low DO conditions such as those which frequently occurred in P1 (Appendix I, Table I-2). No historical benthic invertebrate data were available for P1.

6.3.3 Waterbody P2

6.3.3.1 Surface Water Quality Water quality data for P2 was limited to information obtained for four seasons in 2003/2004 (Appendix G, Table G-9). Surface water temperature ranged from 0.47 ºC in the winter to 16.57 ºC in the summer and surface pH ranged from 6.78-7.47. This waterbody was anoxic under ice cover throughout the entire water profile (<0.5% saturation [<0.07 mg/L]), but by spring the DO levels had increased to near saturation (9-10 mg/L) (Appendix I, Table I-2). Lower DO conditions occurred in fall and summer; approximately 4-5 mg/L and 3-7 mg/L throughout the water column, respectively. Thus, with the exception of the spring, DO levels in this waterbody were seasonally below acute (fall and winter) and chronic (summer) DO guidelines. Water quality at sampling sites located at depths between 0.75 and 1.5 m, was similar throughout the water column in this shallow pond (Appendix G, Table G-9). Water

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-59

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

hardness, total alkalinity, TDS and all major ion concentrations were lower in the spring compared with other seasons. According to rankings based on pH, alkalinity and calcium, P2 can be classified as low-least sensitive to acid deposition (Saffran and Trew 1996). Winter water quality was characterized by higher colour, TSS (35 mg/L), turbidity, total alkalinity and some major ion concentrations. Concentrations of ammonia, and total nitrogen and phosphorus in winter exceeded chronic aquatic WQGs, but were low during other seasons. Although data are limited, P2 can be provisionally classified as mesotrophic according to phosphorus (Chambers et al. 2001) and chlorophyll a thresholds (Thomann and Mueller 1987). The total iron concentration measured in winter was more than an order of magnitude higher than concentrations measured in fall and spring, and nine times higher those measured in summer. Although total iron concentrations exceeded the aquatic and drinking WQGs in fall, winter and summer; only the winter concentration was outside of the typical range for the Muskeg River watershed. All other total metals were below available aquatic WQGs. Manganese levels exceeded drinking WQGs for all seasons except for spring 2004. Naphthenic acids and total phenolics were undetectable during all seasons except summer (2 mg/L) and winter (0.011 mg/L), respectively. BOD was elevated in winter (11 mg/L), relative to other sampling periods (<2-5 mg/L). The identification of parameters of concern is limited by the quantity of water quality data available (n=1 for each season). Parameters potentially of concern may include: DO, winter ammonia and total nitrogen; total and dissolved iron and manganese; and winter BOD.

6.3.3.2 Sediment Quality At this time, there are no current or historical data related to sediment quality available for P2.

6.3.3.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity At this time, there are no current or historical data related to water or sediment toxicity available for P2.

6.3.3.4 Aquatic Habitats Waterbody P2 is a shallow muskeg pond located within Lease 90. The aerial reconnaissance conducted in the fall of 2003 determined this to be the only pond in the Lease 90 area with significant open water and adequate depth for water quality sampling by helicopter, and it was therefore selected as the representative survey pond for that area. The pond has a maximum measured depth of 1.3 m. Site surveys were conducted in fall, winter, spring and summer of 2003/2004, and results are presented in Appendix I and Appendix L. The pond is considered to provide only low quality habitat for forage fish species due to shallow depth, poor connectivity and high potential for frequent summerkills and winterkills. The fact that the pond does occasionally support forage fish was established with the observation of large numbers of young-of-the year finescale dace in August, 2004. It is assumed that these fish were spawned in the pond by adults that found their way in during the spring freshet, but it is believed unlikely that they would survive the coming winter. DO levels in March of 2004 were measured to be 0.01–0.07 mg/L (Appendix I).

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-60

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.3.3.5 Aquatic Macrophytes Waterbody P2 was shallow throughout, with a maximum measured depth of 1.3 m during the August 8, 2004, survey. Although a quantitative survey was attempted, it proved impractical due to difficult conditions. The bottom of the pond was highly unconsolidated, consisting of thick deposits of flocculent organic debris, primarily accumulated deposits of decaying Ceratophyllum demersum. Difficulty in distinguishing the water/substrate interface and poor visibility caused by suspension of organic debris when disturbed, precluded the use of the diver and quadrat harvesting method. As an alternative, the field crew conducted a qualitative assessment of aquatic macrophyte distribution. A total of 15 submergent and floating-leaved macrophytes were observed in the shallow open water zone. The majority of these were abundant, but generally restricted to nearshore areas less than 1 m deep. The central portion of the pond was entirely covered with plants, almost exclusively Ceratophyllum demersum, interspersed with sparse or patchy Myriophyllum exalbescens, Sparganium sp. and Potamogeton perfoliatus var. richardsonii. No rare aquatic macrophytes were observed on this survey of P2 except for Potamogeton natans as discussed previously.

6.3.3.6 Benthic Invertebrates At this time, there are no current or historical data related to benthic invertebrate communities available for P2.

6.3.4 Waterbody P4

6.3.4.1 Surface Water Quality Water quality data for P4 was limited to that collected in spring, summer, fall and winter 2003/2004, and historical data collected in spring and summer 2001 (Appendix G, Table G-9). P4 was linked via a small channel to P1 and had similar water quality characteristics to the latter. Surface water temperature ranged from 1.49 ºC in the winter to 21.13 ºC in summer, and surface pH ranged from 7.3-7.83. This waterbody was stratified during the summer with a steep thermocline from 2-5 m, where the temperature dropped 12-15 ºC in all three profiles (shallow, mid-depth and deep; Appendix I, Table I-3). DO levels also fell sharply in this depth range; from ~4 mg/L to <0.07 mg/L. The pond was also stratified in the fall with a weaker thermocline (~4 ºC drop between 3 and 6 m), but no stratification was observed in the winter or spring. In fact, in winter 2004, the temperature gradually increased with depth from approximately 1ºC under the ice to approximately 4 ºC at the bottom. During fall and spring, DO levels were <1mg/L below depths of 4 and 5 m (depending on depth profile), and the entire water column below 0.5 m depth was anoxic in the winter. Deep (11-19 m) and mid-depth (6.5-14 m) profiles indicated that the pond bottom was anoxic during all four seasons. Surface and bottom DO concentrations were comparable in the shallower (0.5-5.75 m) profiles for all seasons except summer where stratification occurred. The groundwater input into this pond is likely greater than that of P1 because during seasons, levels of conductivity, TDS and salinity increased 2 or 3-fold for the deep and

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-61

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

mid-depth profiles, relative to the surface. The water at 19 m could be classified as slightly saline (Weiner 2000). In summer, there was a gradual drop in pH from 7.61 at the surface to 6.09 at the pond bottom (9 m), but no changes with depth were observed in spring, fall or winter. The surface water was reflective of an oxidizing environment, while the deeper water reflected reducing conditions. Surface levels for hardness, alkalinity, TDS and major ions were consistent for all sampling periods. According to rankings based on pH, alkalinity and calcium, P4 can be classified as low-least sensitive to acid deposition (Saffran and Trew 1996). Nutrient concentrations were generally low during all sampling periods. Nitrogen concentrations in 2003/2004 were lower than those measured in spring and summer 2001, which exceeded aquatic WQG. Although data are limited, P4 can be provisionally classified as mesotrophic according to phosphorus (Chambers et al. 2001) and chlorophyll a thresholds (Thomann and Mueller 1987). Total iron concentrations in winter and spring 2004 exceeded aquatic and drinking WQGs. Nonetheless they remained within the range typically found in the Muskeg River watershed. No other metals exceeded aquatic WQGs during 2003/2004. Manganese levels exceeded the drinking WQG for all seasons except for summer 2004. The identification of parameters of concern is limited by the quantity of data available (n≤2 for each season). Parameters potentially of concern may include: DO, total and dissolved manganese, and total iron (though dissolved concentrations were low).

6.3.4.2 Sediment Quality At this time, there are no current or historical data related to sediment quality available for P4.

6.3.4.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity At this time, there are no current or historical data related to water or sediment toxicity available for P4.

6.3.4.4 Aquatic Habitats Waterbody P4 was characterized as a deep upland pond by Webb (1981). The pond is connected to P1 by a narrow channel, and it also receives inflow from a defined channel that drains a large saturated fen near the Canterra Road. According to Webb (1981), the pond has a maximum depth of 20.2 m and a surface area of 5.54 ha (Webb 1981). The maximum recorded depth in 2003/2004 was 20.0 m. The substrate is predominantly organic muck, although Webb (1981) also reported areas of sand, mud and boulders. Site surveys conducted in fall, winter, spring and summer of 2003/2004 provided information that is summarized in Appendix I and Appendix L. The pond is considered to provide low to moderate habitat for forage fish species. Overwintering capability is probably limited by low DO levels. Brook stickleback, lake chub, pearl dace and finescale dace have been reported to occur in P4 (Golder 2002a).

6.3.4.5 Aquatic Macrophytes No historical information was available and no surveys were conducted in 2003/2004.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-62

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

6.3.4.6 Benthic Invertebrates At this time, there are no current or historical data related to benthic invertebrate communities available for P4.

6.3.5 Other Unnamed Waterbodies

6.3.5.1 Surface Water Quality Current and historical surface water quality data for the other unnamed waterbodies (P5-P12) is discussed in Section 6.3.5.4, Aquatic Habitats.

6.3.5.2 Sediment Quality At this time, there are no current or historical data related to sediment quality available for the other unnamed waterbodies (P5-P12).

6.3.5.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity At this time, there are no current or historical data related to water or sediment toxicity available for the other unnamed waterbodies (P5-P12).

6.3.5.4 Aquatic Habitats Waterbody P5 was described as a deep upland pond by Webb (1981). The pond is connected to P4 by a narrow channel on the north end. The maximum depth was reported as 13.4 m and the area covered was 6.65 ha by Webb (1981). Golder (2002a) reported a depth of 15.0 m, and the deepest site measured in 2003/2004 was 10.9 m (Appendix I). The substrate was reported by Webb (1981) to be predominantly organic muck with local areas of sand, boulder, rubble and mud. The pond provides low to moderate habitat for forage fish species. Overwintering capability is probably limited by low DO levels. Brook stickleback, lake chub and fathead minnow have been reported to occur in P5 (Golder 2002). Waterbody P12, located in the northwest corner of Lease 13, was classified as a shallow muskeg pond by Webb (1981). Webb reported a maximum depth of 1.5 m and a surface area of 4.88 ha. The pond substrate consists of organic muck and mud (Webb 1981). The winter survey in the winter of 2004 found an ice depth 0.52 m and a total depth of 0.98 m (Appendix I). Habitat quality is low for forage fish species. Waterbody P7 was classified as a shallow muskeg pond with a maximum depth of 1.8 m and surface area of 10.64 ha (Webb 1981). The pond substrate consists of organic muck (Webb 1981). Historical fish inventory surveys did not find any fish species in this waterbody. Aerial reconnaissance in fall 2003, documented an abundance of aquatic macrophytes throughout the pond. The winter survey of 2004 determined ice thickness to be 0.64 m and the total depth to be 1.05 meters. Habitat quality is low for forage fish species. Waterbody P8 is as a shallow muskeg pond with a maximum measured depth of 1.5 m and surface area of 2.22 ha (Webb 1981). The pond substrate consists of organic muck (Webb 1981). Historical fish inventory surveys did not find any fish species in this waterbody. Aerial reconnaissance in the fall of 2003 documented an abundance of aquatic macrophytes throughout the pond. The winter survey conducted in March of 2004

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-63

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

observed an ice thickness of 0.48 m and a total depth of 1.15 m. Habitat quality is low for forage fish species. Waterbody P9 is a shallow muskeg pond with a maximum measured depth of 1.2 m and surface area of 7.09 ha (Webb 1981). The substrate consists of organic muck (Webb 1981). Historical fish inventory surveys did not find any fish species in this waterbody. The aerial reconnaissance flight in the fall of 2003 documented an abundance of aquatic macrophytes throughout the pond. The winter survey of 2004 found an ice thickness of 0.52 m and total depth of 0.62 m. Habitat quality is low for forage fish species. Waterbody P10 is a shallow muskeg pond with a maximum measured depth of 1.2 m and surface area 2.88 ha (Webb 1981). The substrate consists of organic muck. Historical fish inventory surveys did not find any fish species in this waterbody (Webb 1981). The winter site survey in 2004 found an ice thickness of 0.60 m and total depth of 0.89 m. Habitat quality is low for forage fish species. Waterbody P11 is a shallow muskeg pond with a maximum measured depth of 1.1 m and surface area of 5.10 ha (Webb 1981). The substrate consists of organic muck (Webb 1981). Aerial reconnaissance in the fall of 2003 documented a limited amount of aquatic macrophyte coverage. The winter site survey of 2004 found this waterbody frozen to the bottom. Habitat quality is low for forage fish species. Waterbody P6 is a deep upland pond with a maximum recorded depth of 17.7 m and surface area of 1.55 ha (Webb 1981). The substrate is predominantly organic muck with local areas of sand, boulders, rubble or mud. Golder (2002) reported capturing no fish in this pond in 2001, but indicated an historical record for brook stickleback. The winter site survey in March, 2004, observed an ice thickness of 0.55 m and total depth of 17.2 m (Appendix I). The DO concentrations, were 7.38 mg/L at 1.0 m and 5.61 mg/L at 1.5 m, but dropped to <0.5 mg/L for the remainder of the water column. The pond provides low to moderate habitat for forage fish species. Overwintering capability is probably limited by low DO levels.

6.3.5.5 Aquatic Macrophytes No historical information was available for these unnamed waterbodies and no surveys were conducted in 2003/2004.

6.3.5.6 Benthic Invertebrates At this time, there are no current or historical data related to benthic invertebrate communities available for the other unnamed waterbodies (P5-P12).

6.4 Regional Study Area Watercourses

6.4.1 Athabasca River

6.4.1.1 Surface Water Quality

Section 1: Between Firebag River and Embarrass River Water quality data for all four sections of the Athabasca River upstream of Fort McMurray were available from 1985 to 2004. The furthest downstream reach of the

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-64

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Athabasca River (between the Firebag and Embarrass rivers) was well oxygenated throughout all seasons and pH generally remained within the recommended range for the protection of aquatic life (6.5-8.5; Appendix G Table G-10). Median organic carbon (TOC and DOC) levels were lower than those reported for the LSA (7-11 mg/L vs 10-30 mg/L, respectively). Water hardness levels were also generally lower than those reported for the LSA. Levels of hardness, TDS, alkalinity and bicarbonate showed consistency across seasons but tended to peak in the winter. Concentrations of some major ions also peaked in the winter (e.g., chloride, calcium, magnesium, sodium, sulphate). Across seasons, TSS loads were higher than those recorded in the LSA. Furthermore, spring and summer 20-year median loads were notably higher than those measured in the fall and winter seasons (4 and 19 mg/L vs 49.4 and 116 mg/L, respectively). Sulphide levels in this section of the Athabasca River were consistently below chronic aquatic WQGs. Seasonal maximum values of total nitrogen and phosphorus exceeded chronic aquatic WQGs, while the 20-year median levels of total phosphorus exceeded the WQG during spring and summer. Naphthenic acid and PAH levels remained below analytical detection limits, but the detection limits for some PAHs were above current WQGs (anthracene, benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, fluoranthene, phenanthrene and pyrene). Total recoverable hydrocarbons and total phenolic concentrations were similar to those reported for LSA watercourses, with concentrations of total phenolics occasionally exceeding the relevant chronic aquatic WQG. Total metal concentrations measured over a 20-year period in this downstream section of the Athabasca River were generally higher than those recorded in LSA watercourses. Median and/or maximum concentrations of aluminum, chromium, copper and iron exceeded aquatic WQGs, and median concentrations of iron and manganese exceeded drinking WQGs. Aluminum and iron were reported to occur mostly in the particulate form with a relatively small percentage present in the dissolved phase. Total iron concentrations were substantially higher than those reported for LSA watercourses but this was not the case for the dissolved fraction. Total iron concentrations in the Athabasca River also tended to be higher in the spring and summer, coinciding with increased suspended sediment loads. Although 20-year median concentrations of mercury, silver, zinc, cadmium and lead were relatively low and did not exceeded aquatic WQGs; 20-year maximum concentrations did. The assessment of mercury was limited by the fact that median concentrations were reported below detection limits that are above current aquatic WQGs.

Section 2: Between Muskeg River and Firebag River Water quality in this section of the Athabasca River immediately downstream of the LSA (between the Muskeg and Firebag rivers) was similar to that described for Section 1 in most respects (Appendix G, Table G-11). However, ammonia levels tended to be lower in this stretch of river compared to the upstream section and they remained below the aquatic WQG. Total nitrogen concentrations also generally remained below the chronic aquatic WQG. A maximum fall concentration of 5 mg/L naphthenic acids was detected, but all other measurements were below analytical detection limits. Total metal exceedances were generally similar to those described for Section 1. The exceptions being: a 20-year spring maximum concentration of total boron (30,000 µg/L) which exceeded the drinking WQG; maximum concentrations of arsenic (winter, spring, and summer) which exceeded the chronic aquatic WQG; and summer median and maximum

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-65

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

antimony concentrations which exceeded the drinking WQG. PAH concentrations were below detection limits but often these detection limits were above current aquatic WQGs.

Section 3: Between Fort McMurray and Muskeg River Water quality in this section of the Athabasca River immediately upstream of the LSA (between Fort McMurray and the Muskeg River) was similar to that described for sections 1 and 2 in most respects (Appendix G, Table G-12). The following exceptions were noted. For all seasons except summer, 20-year maximum total selenium concentrations exceeded the chronic aquatic WQG. Naphthenic acids were largely undetectable and the spring maximum concentration of total boron (70,000 µg/L) exceeded the drinking WQG.

Section 4: Upstream of Fort McMurray Overall, the 20-year data summary presented in this study indicates that water quality in the Athabasca River section immediately upstream of most oil sands development and Fort McMurray, does not substantially differ from the water quality described for the three downstream sections (Appendix G, Table G-13). For all four sections of the Athabasca River, similar guideline exceedances appear to have occurred and no major differences in water quality characteristics were identified.

Identified Trends from Regional Water Quality Monitoring Golder (2003a) concluded that oil sands development downstream of Fort McMurray had not resulted in cumulative effects on Athabasca River water quality. More recently, Hatfield et al. (2004) also concluded that 2003 water quality at Athabasca River stations was generally similar to that previously reported, and so the mainstem of the Athabasca River did not appear to have been affected by tributary inputs. Yet, the authors also noted that some parameters measured in 2003 increased as the river flowed downstream (e.g., chloride and conductivity), possibly as a consequence of tributary input. An integrated assessment conducted by Hatfield et al (2004) reported that fall water quality upstream of the Muskeg River had potential for moderate effects on human and aquatic receptors. However, natural exceedances in water quality parameters were not differentiated from exceedances related to anthropogenic activities. Hence, the authors emphasized the need to consider natural contaminant sources when assessing effects in the oil sands region. Overall, although there was some potential for effects on human and aquatic receptors in the Athabasca River for most components, there was no consensus between components at particular stations. Golder (2003a) was also unable to identify any distinct spatial water quality patterns in the Athabasca River. Limited cross channel mixing occurs in the river and so water quality characteristics along each bank can be substantially different (Hatfield et al. 2004). Golder (2003a) was however, able to conclude that levels of total alkalinity, sulphate and pH were higher upstream of development (i.e., upstream of Fort McMurray) compared with the most downstream station close to the Athabasca Delta. In contrast, TSS and total phosphorus were marginally higher downstream of development. The Athabasca River exhibits distinct seasonal differences in water quality. Under high flow conditions, elevated levels of DOC, TSS, TKN and total metals tend to prevail. Whereas, under low flow conditions, greater concentrations of major ions and other dissolved constituents tend to occur; likely due to proportionally greater groundwater

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-66

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

input and reduced dilutive capacity. In general, TSS and total metals tend to be higher in the Athabasca River compared to its tributaries, with TSS loadings periodically reaching high levels. TSS levels were strongly associated with total aluminum, arsenic, iron, phosphorus and manganese, but not dissolved constituents. Dissolved metals and nutrients are considered to be the most bioavailable forms and therefore the most toxic to aquatic biota (Golder 2003a; Hatfield 2004). Naphthenic acids have largely remained below or close to analytical detection limits in the mainstem of the Athabasca River. In 2003, total recoverable hydrocarbons were not detected and PAHs were either undetectable, or present at concentrations close to analytical detection limits (Hatfield et al. 2004). Based on available data, water quality, parameters of potential concern in the Athabasca River may include: TSS, pH, sulphate, total phosphorus, chloride, total phenolics and several total metals (e.g., aluminum, arsenic, chromium, iron, boron and managanese). As previously discussed, aluminum, phosphorus and iron were typically found to be associated with particulate matter and dissolved concentrations were substantially lower than total concentrations. Unlike the Muskeg River watershed, dissolved iron concentrations did not exceed WQGs in the Athabasca River, and there was a greater disparity between total and dissolved concentrations. Mercury should also be highlighted as a potential parameter of concern due to the lack of long-term data that has detection limits below aquatic life WQGs. Although naphthenic acids have largely been undectable in the Athabasca River, they were also identified as a parameter of potential concern due to the uncertainty associated with their occurrence, fate and toxicity.

6.4.1.2 Sediment Quality Historically, Athabasca River sediments from upstream of Fort McMurray to the Embarrass River have been largely dominated by sand and generally low in carbon (Appendix H, Table H-5). Overall hydrocarbon levels have been lower than those found in LSA watercourses. Seven-year median PAH concentrations were below available SQGs, while 7-year maximum values of naphthalene, pyrene, anthracene, chrysene and dibenz(a,h)anthracene exceeded available SQGs (mostly from Fort McMurray to upstream of the Firebag River). Total recoverable metals were below available SQGs with the exception of 7-year maximum levels of chromium and arsenic, and 7-year median and maximum levels of nickel. The sediments in the Athabasca River from upstream of Fort McMurray to the Embarrass River also appear to be characterized by relatively high levels of magnesium and calcium (Appendix H, Table H-5). As expected, sediment metal concentrations were related to sediment composition. They were strongly associated with sand and silt content and moderately associated with carbon. On the other hand, sediment metal concentrations were found to be negatively correlated with sand content. As a result, total metal concentrations in sediments collected within or in the vicinity of the Athabasca Delta, tended to be elevated above concentrations in Athabasca River sediments collected upstream of Fort McMurray (Hatfield et al. 2004). This was reflective of the high silt/clay depositional environment close to the delta, compared with the more sand dominated substrates typical of the mainstem Athabasca River. Cross-channel sediment quality was variable in 2003 and in previous years, and this was attributed to the transitional nature of sediment deposition in the Athabasca River. Substrate conditions in this river were characterized by shifting sand and re-deposition by river flow. According to Hatfield et al (2004), the majority of sediments sampled in the

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-67

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Athabasca River in fall have generally comprised of sand covered in a very thin layer of fine sediment likely deposited after the spring freshet. The authors considered it unlikely that the same sediments were sampled year after year due to instream transport processes. It appears likely that RAMP may have been monitoring the quality of newly deposited sediment rather than the potential accumulation of substances over time. Sediments collected from the Athabasca River station upstream of Donald Creek in 2003, were characterized by elevated concentrations of PAHs (dominated by alkylated PAHs) and total recoverable hydrocarbons, but no detectable low molecular weight target PAHs (Hatfiled et al. 2004). A dominance of alkylated PAHs indicates that the PAHs originated from a petrogenic source, likely from the erosion of natural oil sands deposits (Brua et al. 2003). Sediments collected upstream of Fort McMurray and upstream of Fort Creek were particularly high in dibenzothiophenes which are indicative of a bitumen source. Exposed bitumen was visible on the river banks in the vicinity of these stations (Hatfield et al. 2004). Higher concentrations of target and alkylated PAHs tended to occur in tributary sediments compared to those from the Athabasca River mainstem. The PAH content of tributary sediments were also dominated by alkylated PAHs (Brua et al. 2003). In general, sediment quality in 2003 was comparable to that reported for previous years (Hatfield et al. 2004). Golder (2003a) concluded that sediment PAH concentrations in the Athabasca River were variable and did not exhibit a clear spatial pattern. Likewise no clear temporal trends were identified.

6.4.1.3 Water and Sediment Toxicity Fall waterborne toxicity was evaluated between 1997 and 2003 at sites situated between Fort McMurray and the confluence of the Embarrass River, using the standard 15 minute Microtox® bacterial test procedure. Toxicity was not observed in any of the samples taken. In contrast, sediment toxicity has been periodically observed at several sites on the Athabasca River from 1997 to 2003, according to the RAMP standard battery of sediment toxicity tests. Hatfield et al. (2004) reported that there was no apparent relationship between metals or PAH concentrations and observed toxicity for sediments collected in fall 2003 from the Athabasca River or other locations in the regional study area. Brua et al. (2003) concluded that their studies suggested that exposure to PAHs (originating from exposed oil sands deposits in tributaries) may have a detrimental effect on benthic invertebrates. They observed reduced density and community composition and reduced survival and growth in sediment toxicity tests. However, the authors stress that their findings do not indicate a major impact on benthic invertebrates and suggest that future, more intensive studies may be more conclusive.

6.4.1.4 Aquatic Habitats Historical Data Golder (1997, 1998, 2002a) described the section of the Athabasca River within the LSA as turbid, cool-water habitat with shifting channels and substrate consisting mainly of sand, with localized areas of bedrock. Unobstructed single channels dominate, but islands, sandbars and multiple channels are also common. Studies conducted by RAMP in 1997 defined the major habitat categories as: sandy erosional habitats; armoured habitats with flat bedrock slabs or sandstone; cliffs; and depositional shorelines composed of fine sediments (Golder 1998). They also provided an analysis of species- habitat associations, with the finding that fish species preferred armoured (cobble/rock) and depositional habitats.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-68

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Aquatic habitats within the larger RSA have been most recently described by Golder (2004) in a report prepared for the IFN Sub-Group, Surface Water Working Group, CEMA. To support the sub-groups aim of determining winter in-stream flow needs (IFN) for the lower Athabasca River, a major study was undertaken to describe habitat characteristics and define discrete river segments for a portion of the river that correlates with the RSA boundaries for this project. In addition to the large-scale habitat descriptions, the project has also accumulated a significant base of information describing fish species associations with specific mesohabitats and microhabitats Golder (2004). The program is ongoing and continues to gather habitat and habitat use information at the time of this writing.

6.4.1.5 Benthic Invertebrates Historical Data The lower Athabasca River downstream of Fort McMurray generally provided low quality habitat for benthic invertebrates. This large river was characterized by high suspended sediment loads in the summer, with a dominant shifting sand substrate. The 1997 RAMP benthic survey reported low to moderate invertebrate densities and relatively low taxonomic richness at the sites surveyed upstream of Fort McMurray (at the Donald Creek confluence and at the Fort Creek confluence). Donald Creek is upstream of the LSA and Fort Creek is downstream of the LSA (Golder 1998). Communities typically associated with depositional substrates were present at these sites (i.e., dominated by Chironomidae, Oligochaeta and nematodes). These taxa are considered to be pollution tolerant and are typically able to withstand low DO levels, organic enrichment and variable environmental conditions (Allan 1995). Golder (1996) reported that artificial substrates deployed in the Athabasca River were colonized by communities dominated by Plecoptera and Chironomidae. Benthic community surveys have not been conducted at a regional scale on the Athabasca River in recent years, likely due to difficulties associated with conducting studies on large rivers with shifting substrates. Thus, long term trends in the benthic invertebrate community data from the Athabasca River have yet to be assessed by RAMP.

6.4.1.6 Fish Inventory and Movements Historical Data Historical investigations of the fish populations in the lower Athabasca River were conducted by Bond (1980), and Bond and Berry (1980a, 1980b ) under the AOSERP program. More recent information has been added through the ongoing RAMP program, as well as by individual industries through studies conducted to support project EIAs. In addition to collecting habitat and habitat use information, the CEMA IFN program has also reported a large body of information describing local and regional fish movements along the Athabasca River, based on an extensive multi-year radio telemetry program.

6.5 Regional Study Area Waterbodies

6.5.1 Acid Sensitivity of Lakes in the Air Quality RSA (MRME) According to Kalff (2002), the degree to which lakes and their catchments are susceptible to acidification is affected by: • the ability of catchment soils and rocks to neutralize incoming acids • lake morphometry and catchment attributes • organic acids in runoff • neutralizing agents and processes within aquatic systems

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-69

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Additionally, Kalff (2002) states that the inland waters most sensitive to acidification have the following characteristics: • transparent • low salinity • low HCO3- concentration • small acid neutralizing capacity or alkalinity of <50 µeq/L One of the simplest ways to determine how sensitive lakes are to acidification is to rank their acid sensitivity based on alkalinity and pH as defined for Alberta by Saffran and Trew (1996; Table 6-15). However, in recent years, the calculation of lake-specific critical loads of acidity has been adopted as the primary method for assessing the sensitivity of regional waterbodies to acidification. In 1999, Alberta developed a provincial framework for the management of acid deposition based on the application of critical and monitoring loads (CASA 1999; Foster et al. 2001). The critical load can be defined as “the highest load of acid deposition that will not cause chemical changes leading to long-term harmful effects on the most sensitive ecological systems” (CASA 1999). The critical load represents the deposition rate that should maintain the acid neutralizing capacity (ANC) above 75 µeq/L and the pH above 6 (CASA 1999). Calculated loads were used to characterize geographical grid cells (1º latitude x 1º longitude) as having high, moderate or low sensitivity (Table 6-15). Target and monitoring loads were set below the critical load thresholds (CASA 1999).

Table 6-15 Acid Sensitivity Rankings for Lakes and Ponds Alkalinity 1 Critical load 2 1 + -1 -1 Acid Sensitivity pH (mg/L as CaCO3) keq H ha yr High 0 to 6.5 0 to 10 0.25 Moderate 6.0 to 6.7 11 to 20 0.5 Low 7.1 to 7.5 21 to 40 1.0 Least >7.5 >40 >1.0 Notes: 1 thresholds defined by Saffran and Trew (1996) 2 thresholds defined by CASA (1999)

One of the significant advantages of adopting the lake-specific criticial load approach is that critical loads can be compared to modelled Potential Acid Input (PAI) values to assess the potential affects of acid deposition on an individual lake under a given exposure scenario. PAI can be defined as “the sum of the wet and dry deposition of sulphur and nitrogen oxides minus the wet and dry deposition of base cations” (Hatfield et al. 2004). A waterbody could potentially undergo acidification if the modeled PAI exceeds the calculated critical load under the conditions of the given modelled scenario. In a regional context there have been several recent advances in the development of a regional framework for the management of acid deposition in the oil sands region (Golder 2004; WRS 2004). The development of this framework has been the responsibility of the NOxSOx Management Working Group of CEMA (NSMWG). Critical loads have been calculated for a large number of ponds (94) and lakes (355) in the oil sands region, including a number of the 50 regional lakes and ponds monitored by RAMP since 1999 (WRS 2004). Alkalinity, pH and critical load data for 147 lakes located in the aquatics RSA for the Expansion have been summarized in Table 6-16. The lakes were rated as having high sensitivity, moderate sensitivity, low sensitivity and least sensitivity according to

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-70

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-16. Although pH and alkalinity have been used to catorgorize the lakes, the critical load thresholds will take priority as this is now the accepted approach to assess acid sensitivity in Alberta. Where critical load data were not available for a particular lake, the lake was assessed using the pH and alkalinity thresholds. Eleven lakes were located within 50 km of the MRME Development Area, including Kearl and McClelland lakes which were ranked as having the lowest sensitivity to acid deposition. Two unnamed headwater lakes located in the Muskeg River Uplands (L1 and L4) were ranked as highly sensitive with low critical loads and alkalinity. The critical loads in the other lakes ranged from 0.405 to 1.554 keq H+ha-1yr-1. Three lakes had moderate sensitivity, one lake had low sensitivity and the remaining three were the least sensitive. The largest proportion of lakes were located within 50 to 100 km of the MRME Development Area and only four were rated as highly sensitive (Legend, Otasan and two unnamed lakes). Otasan and Legend lakes were located in the Birch Mountains. A total of twelve lakes were ranked as having moderate sensitivity (Namur, Pearson, Waterlily, Bayard and eight unnamed lakes). Twenty lakes had low sensitivity, including: Big Snuff, Otter, Clear, Gardiner North and South, Sand, Eaglenest, Kress, and ten unnamed lakes; the remainder lakes showed the lowest sensitivity. The largest proportion of highly sensitive lakes were located 100 to 200 km from the MRME Development Area, mainly in the Stony Mountains. Both pH and alkalinities were low in these lakes (4.4-6.91; 0-11 mg/L as CaCO3). Six lakes were classified as having moderate sensitivity and nine lakes were classified as having low sensitivity. The remaining lakes were the least sensitive.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-71

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-16 Summary of Water Chemistry Data Related to Acid Sensitivity of Regional Lakes Easting Northing Distance Alkalinity Alkalinity Critical Load Data Source Lake Identifier Lake Name (UTM)(a) (UTM)(a) (km)(b) Direction(b) pH (ueq/L) (mg/L) (keqH+/ha/y) (S)(d) Alberta Lakes L35, 171,418 Kearl 485,680 6,350,281 10.3 NE 8.13 1689 84 1.416 A,B,C,I L3, 449 unnamed 503,318 6,346,082 26.2 E 7.8 806 40 1.255 A,B,I L34, 173, 419 McClelland 480,014 6,371,239 26.9 NE 8.45 2554 128 1.419 A,B,C,I L1, 428 unnamed 505,040 6,349,733 28.4 E 6.4 86 4 0.200 A,B,D,E,I L2, 438 unnamed 505,830 6,347,137 28.8 E 7.8 1020 51 1.554 A,B,I L4 (A-170), 170, 452 unnamed 509,378 6,334,094 33.9 ESE 6.44 208 10 0.243 A,B,C,D,E,I L5, 458 unnamed 507,163 6,322,123 37.4 SE 7.02 622 31 0.748 A,B,I L6, 463 unnamed 510,357 6,325,686 38.2 ESE 7.65 1030 52 1.463 A,B,I L7, 470 unnamed 515,418 6,327,897 41.7 ESE 6.67 262 13 0.405 A,B,D,E,I 163, 411 unnamed 506,989 6,374,907 42.6 NE 8.35 1715 86 1.448 C,I E15 (L 15b), 2, 268 unnamed 505,889 6,305,609 48.4 SE 7.36 435 22 0.656 C,D,E,I L8, 471 unnamed 524,421 6,322,560 52.1 ESE 7 284 14 0.626 A,B,D,E,I L37, 156, 404 Audet 505,273 6,389,470 53.0 NNE 8.18 2644 132 2.005 A,B,C,I 157, 405 unnamed 508,959 6,356,971 53.1 NE 8.3 2959 148 2.536 C,I L33, 451 unnamed 425,152 6,365,352 56.0 WNW 8.24 2687 134 2.258 A,B,I L9, 472 unnamed 533,212 6,338,082 56.4 E 8.5 1560 78 1.960 A,B.I 4, 270 unnamed 506,113 6,291,417 60.5 SSE 7.71 1403 70 1.129 C,I L10, 164, 429 unnamed 533,759 6,369,382 61.8 ENE 8.8 1360 68 1.246 A,B,C.I L25, 444 Legend 442,157 6,292,276 62.9 SW 6.65 204 10 0.112 A,D,E,I E25, 1, 267 unnamed 441,917 6,290,888 64.2 SSW 7.39 637 32 0.726 C,I 161, 409 unnamed 528,887 6,384,281 65.3 NE 8.48 2294 115 1.028 C,I 160, 408 unnamed 527,872 6,387,057 66.2 NE 8.31 1804 90 1.584 C,I L63, 467 Canopener 420,463 6,379,855 66.8 WNW 7.64 1380 69 1.232 A,B,I 153, 403 unnamed 513,888 6,400,901 67.3 NNE 8.66 934 47 0.775 C,I L12, 166, 431 unnamed 544,338 6,349,567 67.4 E 8.16 806 40 0.847 A,B,C,I 165, 413 Big Snuff 542,056 6,363,058 67.5 ENE 7.54 608 30 0.741 C,I L45, 453 unnamed 491,985 6,411,122 68.2 NNE 8.02 1489 74 0.992 A,B,I L11, 430 unnamed 543,213 6,362,606 68.5 ENE 8.1 560 28 0.596 A,B,I

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-72

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-16 Summary of Water Chemistry Data Related to Acid Sensitivity of Regional Lakes (cont’d) Easting Northing Distance Alkalinity Alkalinity Critical Load Data Source Lake Identifier Lake Name (UTM)(a) (UTM)(a) (km)(b) Direction(b) pH (ueq/L) (mg/L) (keqH+/ha/y) (S)(d) 158, 406 unnamed 527,846 6,390,768 68.6 NE 8.54 2568 128 1.773 C,I L62, 466 Buoy 418,473 6,380,141 68.7 WNW 8.31 2080 104 1.898 A,B,I L13,167, 432 Otter 545,727 6,348,191 68.7 E 7.6 720 36 0.752 A,B,C,I L32, 450 Clear 433,256 6,399,419 70.3 NW 7.38 734 37 0.841 A,B,I L48, 456 unnamed 429,234 6,396,488 70.7 NW 7.43 1160 58 1.020 A,B,I L14, 168, 433 unnamed 548,189 6,346,766 71.1 E 9.5 1020 51 1.073 A,B,C,I L15, 434 unnamed 548,424 6,332,450 72.3 E 7.47 510 26 1.202 A,B,I L19, 437 Gardiner S. 410,108 6,374,038 73.3 WNW 7.63 1066 53 0.937 A,B,I L22, 441 Sand 418,436 6,390,659 74.7 NW 8.01 1035 52 0.927 A,B,I L20, 439 Gardiner N. 410,556 6,378,483 74.8 WNW 7.76 1050 53 0.970 A,B,I L38, 159, 407 Johnson 536,119 6,390,617 74.9 NE 8.53 3066 153 2.296 A,B,C,I L24, 443 Eaglenest 432,607 6,405,152 75.2 NW 7.49 673 34 0.775 A,B,I 133N, 424 Dianne 463,959 6,419,595 76.2 N 7.91 2377 119 1.709 C,I 143, 393 unnamed 498,025 6,419,433 77.8 NNE 8.05 1657 83 0.876 C,I L18, 436 Namur 402,703 6,368,021 78.1 WNW 7.35 378 19 0.302 A,B,D,E,I 144, 394 unnamed 499,506 6,419,433 78.2 NNE 8.11 1619 81 1.034 C,I L21, 440 unnamed 410,374 6,386,066 78.7 WNW 7.85 887 44 0.619 A,B,I L23, 442 Otasan 417,735 6,396,961 79.3 NW 6.74 127 6 0.058 A,B,D,E,I 145, 395 unnamed 511,855 6,417,594 80.9 NNE 8.4 2428 121 1.123 C,I 137, 389 Pearson 486,195 6,425,023 81.0 N 8.05 1599 80 0.433 C,I 131, 385 unnamed 458,576 6,424,286 81.9 NNW 8.02 2707 135 1.341 C,I 134, 387 unnamed 467,960 6,426,055 82.1 N 8.1 2432 122 0.695 C,I 132, 386 Ronald 460,558 6,425,194 82.4 NNW 7.97 2737 137 1.942 C,I 136, 388 unnamed 484,230 6,426,886 82.7 N 8.01 1836 92 0.329 C,I CBL Caribou Horn 501,467 6,246,562 83.6 SSE 8.3 - (84.2) - F 138, 390 Kress 492,115 6,426,862 83.7 N 7.92 920 46 0.652 C,I L61, 465 Waterlily 407,519 6,391,915 84.2 NW 7.16 414 21 0.455 A,B,I 139N, 425 unnamed 499,014 6,425,927 84.3 NNE 8.07 1321 66 0.428 C,I 141, 391 unnamed 503,945 6,424,692 84.5 NNE 8.3 1951 98 1.150 C,I L46, 454 Bayard 416,941 6,404,239 84.8 NW 6.6 138 7 0.333 A,B,D,E,I 142, 392 unnamed 505,917 6,424,694 85.2 NNE 8.29 1933 97 1.501 C,I AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-73

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-16 Summary of Water Chemistry Data Related to Acid Sensitivity of Regional Lakes (cont’d) Easting Northing Distance Alkalinity Alkalinity Critical Load Data Source Lake Identifier Lake Name (UTM)(a) (UTM)(a) (km)(b) Direction(b) pH (ueq/L) (mg/L) (keqH+/ha/y) (S)(d) L60, 464 unnamed 403,686 6,391,107 87.0 WNW 8.74 314 16 0.427 A,B,D,E,I L102, 11, 276 Gregoire (Willow) 489,731 6,258,033 87.4 S 8.07 1063 53 1.113 A,B,C,F,I 152, 402 unnamed 519,740 6,421,337 87.8 NNE 8.28 1971 99 0.791 C,I 149, 399 unnamed 522,212 6,420,422 88.3 NNE 8.33 2678 134 1.380 C,I 3, 269 unnamed 554,892 6,301,050 89.1 ESE 9.59 1804 90 2.070 C,I 146, 396 unnamed 519,237 6,423,190 89.2 NNE 7.93 1142 57 0.114 C,I CAL Canoe 498,210 6,257,515 89.5 SSE 8.4 - 38 - F 148, 398 unnamed 521,709 6,422,275 89.6 NNE 8.19 1552 78 0.812 C,I L69, 469 unnamed 419,593 6,414,486 90.6 NW 7.97 2180 109 1.787 A,B,I KIL Kiskatinaw 499,562 6,256,374 90.9 SSE 8.2 - (89) - F L68, 468 unnamed 413,279 6,411,462 92.5 NW 6.86 228 11 0.315 A,B,I L49, 457 unnamed 404,995 6,403,111 93.0 NW 6.5 156 8 0.361 A,D,E,I FRL Frog 504,488 6,254,133 94.4 SSE 8.4 - (63) - F 147, 397 Poplar 522,664 6,427,847 95.0 NNE 8.37 1979 99 1.674 C,I POL Poison 505,212 6,252,653 96.0 SSE 8.6 - (135) - F LOL Long (3) 502,017 6,251,357 96.4 SSE 8.4 - 35 - F SUL Sucker 508,895 6,252,653 97.2 SSE 8.1 - 106 - F 151, 401 unnamed 541,491 6,417,792 97.5 NE 7.17 308 15 0.363 C,I RAL Rat 507,487 6,251,545 97.8 SSE 8.5 - (96) - C,I BIL Birch (2) 504,672 6,250,565 97.9 SSE 8.2 - 46 - F 10, 275 Nora 526,688 6,259,959 98.0 SSE 9.11 1589 79 0.937 C,I 6, 271 unnamed 549,064 6,277,785 98.1 SE 9.38 1209 60 0.887 C,I UNL2 unnamed 502,570 6,249,730 98.1 SSE 7.8 - 9 - F UNL1 unnamed 502,641 6,249,587 98.3 SSE 8.3 - 15 - F L103, 7, 272 Gordon 530,780 6,261,842 98.5 SSE 8.36 2811 141 1.112 C,D,E,I L39, (A-150), 150, 400 unnamed 535,535 6,424,303 98.9 NE 7.12 265 13 0.271 A,C,D,E,I PUL Pushup 503,226 6,248,721 99.3 SSE 8.3 - 40 - F UNL3 unnamed 509,942 6,244,399 105.3 SSE 7.7 - (79) - F 17, 281 unnamed 487,105 6,238,562 106.4 S 7.35 553 28 0.917 C,I A21, 168 unnamed 483,819 6,235,130 109.6 S 4.62 15 1 0.132 C,D,E,I 9, 274 Shortt 548,243 6,260,150 110.3 SE 7.93 2652 133 1.513 C,I February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-74

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-16 Summary of Water Chemistry Data Related to Acid Sensitivity of Regional Lakes (cont’d) Easting Northing Distance Alkalinity Alkalinity Critical Load Data Source Lake Identifier Lake Name (UTM)(a) (UTM)(a) (km)(b) Direction(b) pH (ueq/L) (mg/L) (keqH+/ha/y) (S)(d) L104, 15, 279 Birch (1) 535,727 6,249,019 112.0 SSE 8.67 3206 160 1.775 A,B,C,F,I 22, 285 unnamed 489,154 6,232,991 112.2 S 6.91 210 11 0.237 C,I 18, 282 Georges 513,417 6,236,708 113.7 SSE 8.44 3096 155 3.755 C,I A24, 169 unnamed 484,387 6,230,872 113.9 S 4.4 0 0 0.036 C,D,E,I A26, 170 unnamed 489,502 6,230,877 114.3 S 6.46 187 9 0.025 C,D,E,I 8, 273 unnamed 559,468 6,264,932 114.5 SE 8.86 2466 123 2.725 C,I 12, 277 Gipsy 546,271 6,252,707 114.9 SE 8.52 2904 145 0.625 C,I 25, 287 unnamed 487,594 6,229,285 115.7 S 5.23 40 2 0.031 C,I 27, 289 unnamed 477,250 6,228,400 116.1 S 6.55 125 6 0.112 C,I 31, 293 unnamed 480,352 6,228,385 116.2 S 5.61 54 3 0.058 C,I 52, 312 Algar 420,104 6,242,074 117.3 SSW 7.46 439 22 0.567 C,I 30, 292 unnamed 487,068 6,226,504 118.4 S 5.17 41 2 0.036 C,I 13, 278 Baker 554,473 6,254,660 118.5 SE 8.71 2666 133 1.929 C,I 20, 283 unnamed 525,807 6,235,838 119.1 SSE 7.88 1926 96 2.358 C,I 28, 290 unnamed 487,066 6,225,576 119.3 S 6.09 90 4 0.130 C,I E2, 32, 294 unnamed 493,516 6,226,026 119.6 S 8 1362 68 2.056 C,G,I 54, 314 unnamed 423,113 6,237,380 120.0 SSW 7.2 410 21 0.630 C,I 33, 295 unnamed 491,198 6,222,320 123.0 S 6.61 148 7 0.331 C,I 56, 316 unnamed 432,713 6,224,230 128.2 SSW 7.14 455 23 0.868 C,I 35, 297 unnamed 540,312 6,230,385 130.4 SSE 7.9 2044 102 2.195 C,I 34, 296 unnamed 474,058 6,213,578 131.0 S 7.47 626 31 0.869 C,I 16, 280 Garson 561,829 6,243,629 131.7 SE 8.05 1733 87 1.438 C,I 38, 299 Watchusk 543,469 6,224,850 136.8 SSE 8.64 1795 90 1.896 C,I 36, 298 Formby 559,898 6,234,325 137.8 SE 8.11 1935 97 1.808 C,I 57, 317 unnamed 420,620 6,214,232 142.0 SSW 7.01 334 17 0.584 C,I 37N, 426 unnamed 559,459 6,228,753 142.0 SE 8.51 2683 134 1.637 C,I 40, 301 unnamed 521,815 6,208,917 142.8 SSE 8.14 2082 104 2.652 C,I 39, 300 unnamed 554,877 6,223,126 144.1 SSE 7.87 1381 69 1.389 C,I 81, 341 unnamed 471,892 6,199,679 144.9 S 7.57 624 31 1.041 C,I 88, 348 unnamed 438,646 6,204,661 145.1 SSW 7.95 1008 50 1.348 C,I 63, 323 unnamed 437,499 6,197,257 152.5 SSW 7.46 580 29 0.914 C,I AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 6-75

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Table 6-16 Summary of Water Chemistry Data Related to Acid Sensitivity of Regional Lakes (cont’d) Easting Northing Distance Alkalinity Alkalinity Critical Load Data Source Lake Identifier Lake Name (UTM)(a) (UTM)(a) (km)(b) Direction(b) pH (ueq/L) (mg/L) (keqH+/ha/y) (S)(d) 89, 349 Bohn 520,834 6,196,855 154.0 SSE 8.74 2018 101 1.996 C,I 78, 338 unnamed 444,222 6,193,454 154.6 SSW 7.31 815 41 1.201 C,I 91, 351 unnamed 538,501 6,201,614 155.5 SSE 9.46 1494 75 1.622 C,I 90, 350 unnamed 530,203 6,197,838 156.0 SSE 8.03 1613 81 1.835 C,I 92, 352 Cowpar 534,391 6,195,087 160.0 SSE 9.07 1489 74 1.683 C,I 60, 320 unnamed 413,542 6,197,669 160.0 SSW 7.5 688 34 1.191 C,I 93, 353 unnamed 533,413 6,186,731 167.5 SSE 7.89 1168 58 1.389 C,I 94, 354 unnamed 515,689 6,197,212 169.7 SSE 7.26 429 21 0.319 C,I 95, 355 unnamed 516,749 6,175,506 173.6 SSE 7.72 608 30 0.852 C,I 100, 358 unnamed 547,077 6,178,511 180.1 SSE 8.09 1640 82 2.404 C,I Saskatchewan Lakes - Patterson 598,819 6,389,537 129.7 ENE 6.9 - 19 - H - Forrest 604,633 6,383,668 133.4 ENE 6.9 - 24 - H - Preston 612,119 6,365,312 136.6 E 6.8 - 25 - H - Beet 611,405 6,319,278 142.2 ENE 6.9 - 22 - H - La Loche 592,417 6,259,032 143.5 SE 8.1 - 119 - H - McLean 607,818 6,259,397 155.9 ESE 7.9 - 98 - H - unnamed 635,067 6,306,584 162.4 ESE 7 - 43 - H - Cluff 595,873 6,468,054 171.3 NE 8.1 - (73.9) - H - Turnor 648,429 6,273,616 185.4 ESE 7.3 - 57 - H Notes: (a) UTM coordinates are NAD 83, Zone 12 (b) The distance and direction are relative to the Project (d) Data sources are as follows: A=Saffran and Trew (1996) F=OPTI (2000) B=Syncrude (1998) G=Erickson (1987) C=WRS (WRS 2000) H=ESQUADAT databse maintained by SERM (2000) D=Golder (2000) I=WRS (WRS 2004) E=Golder (2002a) White text - indicates that this lake was rated as having high acid sensitivity (CASA, 1999; Saffron and Trew 1996) White text - indicates that this lake was rated as having moderate acid sensitivity (CASA, 1999; Saffron and Trew 1996) White text - indicates that this lake was rated as having low acid sensitivity (CASA, 1999; Saffron and Trew 1996) Lakes with unhighlighted values were considered to have the lowest acid sensitivity (CASA, 1999; Saffron and Trew 1996)

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 6-76

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

7 Glossary acid neutralizing capacity (ANC) measure of the ability of water (or soil) to resist changes in pH acidic (acid) a pH value of less than 7.0 (pH is measure of the acidity or alkalinity of a solution) adult sexually mature life history stage of species alkaline (basic) a pH value of greater than 7.0 (pH is measure of the acidity or alkalinity of a solution) alkalinity the capacity of water for neutralizing an acid solution, generally expressed in terms of calcium carbonate units (mg/L); alkalinity of natural waters is due largely due to the presence of hydroxides, bicarbonates, and carbonates. anoxic deficiency of oxygen anoxia little to no dissolved oxygen in the water sample; waters with <2 mg/L of dissolved oxygen experience anoxia aquatic living or found in water aquatic environment areas that are permanently under water, or that are under water for a sufficient period to support organisms that remain for their entire lives, or a significant portion of their lives, totally immersed in water aquatic habitat the place where an aquatic plant or animal lives; often related to a function such as breeding, feeding, etc aquatic macrophyte large, rooted plants that live in water (e.g., pond weeds) backpack electrofisher a unit equipped with a power source which makes use of electrical current to capture fish in shallow water baseline information information about an area, over a period of time, that is used as background for detecting and/or comparing potential future changes. basin a depressed area having no, or very limited outlets for surface water or, a region drained by a single river system bed slope the inclination of the channel bottom, measured as elevation drop per unit length of channel benthic of, or pertaining to, the bottom of a water body

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 7-1

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

benthic invertebrate a small animal (without a backbone) that lives on or in the bottom of water body (e.g., insect larvae, clams)

benthos animals and plants that live on or in the bottom of a water body

biochemical/biological oxygen an indicator of organic content in water or sediment measures demand (BOD) how much dissolved oxygen is consumed by microorganisms (e.g., bacteria) as they break down organic matter (e.g., plants)

brown-water system freshwaters with elevated colour and dissolved organic carbon concentrations. According to the Atlas of Alberta Lakes, freshwater lakes with colour levels >55 mg/L are considered highly coloured (i.e., brown-water systems)

chlorophyll a group of green pigments present in plants cells that are essential in the trapping of light energy during photosynthesis

clay the finest particles in soils, having a particle diameter of less than 0.002 mm

cobble rocks larger than gravel but smaller than boulders, having a particle diameter between 64 and 256 mm

colour the colour of water is the result of backscattering of light upward from a water body after it is selectively absorbed at various depths

concentration the density or amount of a material suspended or dissolved in a fluid (aqueous) or amount of a material in a solid (e.g., sediments).

condition factor (K) a relationship between length and weight (fork length X 105 / weight3) that can be used to compare the relative condition of a particular species of fish in different bodies of water and within the same water body over time.

conductivity a measure of the ability of a solution to conduct electrical flow; units are measured in microSiemens per centimeter

confluence the meeting place of two streams

critical load the highest load of acid deposition that will not cause chemical changes leading to long-term harmful effects on the most sensitive ecological systems deposition to settle out of the water column onto the bottom

Ekman dredge a box shaped device used to collect organisms living on or in the soft bottom of a water body

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 7-2

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

emergent an aquatic plant having most of its vegetative parts (leaves/stems) above water environment 1) the total of all the surrounding natural conditions that affect the existence of living organisms on earth, including air, water, soil, minerals, climate and the organisms themselves; and, 2) the local complex of such conditions that affects a particular organism and ultimately determines its physiology and survival environmental impact assessment an evaluation of the likely adverse environmental effects of a project evaporation the loss of molecules as a liquid changes into a gaseous phase evaporation, lake the evaporation from the surface of a large body of water evaporation, potential a measure of the degree to which the weather or climate of a region is favorable to the process of evaporation evapotranspiration the movement of water form the soil, an individual plant, or plant communities to the atmosphere by evaporation of water from the soil and transpiration of water by plants; the combined loss of water to the atmosphere via the processes of evaporation and transpiration evapotranspiration, areal evapotranspiration that occurs over a large area potential evapotranspiration is a measure of the ability of the atmosphere to remove water from the surface through the processes of evaporation and transpiration assuming no limitation on water supply footprint the surface area occupied by a structure or activity frequency analysis based upon the available record, frequency analysis involves the choice of a frequency distribution to describe the phenomena of interest and the estimation of the parameters of that distribution, so as to obtain a description of the relationship between different values of a variable and their exceedance probability geomorphology the study of the origin of landforms, the processes whereby they are formed, and the material of which they consist gradient the slope of a stream or land surface gravel an accumulation of loose or unconsolidated, rounded rock fragments larger than sand, and between 10 and 100 mm in diameter; rock larger than sand but smaller than cobble having a particle diameter between 2 and 64 mm

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 7-3

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

gran alkalinity alkalinity in a water sample measured by the gran method which does not rely on the presence of inflection points in the titration curve; therefore, it is particularly useful for waters with low alkalinity

hydrometric station a station on a river, lake, estuary, or reservoir where water quantity and quality data are collected and recorded

hypoxic deficiency of oxygen

ice scouring removal of material from the banks or bottom of a lake or stream by moving ice larva drift traps traps placed in the water column (either fixed near the substrate or suspended) which collect larval fish drifting downstream

lentic pertaining to very slow moving or standing water, as in lakes or ponds

lotic pertaining to moving water

macrophyte multi-celled aquatic and terrestrial plants major ions major cations (e.g. Ca2+; Mg2+; Na+; and, K+) and anions (e.g., - 2- Cl ; and SO4 ) that together comprise the total ionic salinity of water. They typically occur at higher concentrations than other ions in aquatic systems

metals an element yielding positively charged ions in aqueous solutions of its salts

monitoring any ongoing process or program for measuring the actual effects of constructing or operating a development

NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Units; a unit of measurement that describes the turbidity of water

oil sands a stratum of sand or sandstone containing petroleum or bitumen

organic carbon measure of organic matter (in dissolved or particulate forms in water or in sediments)

organism an individual living thing

overwintering remaining through the winter months

particle size the size of a mineral particle in sediment

pH method of expressing acidity or basicity of a solution. pH is the logarithm of the reciprocal of the hydrogen ion concentration, with pH 7.0 indication neutral conditions

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 7-4

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons class of highly stable organic molecules comprised of only (PAHs) carbon and hydrogen, found in coal tar, crude oil, creosote, roofing tar, dyes, plastics, and pesticides and may be present in the aquatic environment in association with heavy boat traffic. They are formed from incomplete combustion of coal, oil and gas, garbage and other organic substances (e.g., tobacco) pool an artificially confined body of water above a dam or weir; a deep, slow moving area of a stream potential acid input (PAI) the sum of the wet and dry deposition of sulphur and nitrogen oxides minus the wet and dry deposition of base cations probable maximum precipitation the theoretical depth of precipitation for a given duration that (PMP) is physically possible over a particular area rearing the raising of young relative humidity the ratio expressed as percentage, of the amount of water vapour or moisture in the air to a maximum amount of moisture that the air would hold at the same dry-bulb temperature and atmospheric pressure riffle a shallow area where the water flows swiftly over partially or completely submerged materials to produce surface agitation; generally of lower slope and velocity than rapids sand 1) a small, somewhat rounded fragment or particle of rock ranging from 0.05 to 2 mm in diameter, and commonly composed of quartz; 2) a loose aggregate or more or less unconsolidated deposit, consisting essentially of sand-sized rock particles or medium-grained clastics scour erosion along the bottom and sides of water bodies

Secchi depth the depth to which water is transparent sediment material, usually soil or organic detritus, which is deposited on the bottom of a waterbody sediment transport the movement of eroded material in the medium of air, water or ice; one of three distinct processes involved in erosion sediment yield the quantity of soil, rock particle, organic mater or other dissolved or suspended debris that is transported through a cross-section of stream in a given period

Seven-Day-10-Year Low Flow (7Q10) lowest 7-day consecutive flow that occurs, on average, once every 10 years

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 7-5

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

silt a very small rock fragment or mineral particle, smaller than a very fine grain of sand and larger than coarse clay; usually having a diameter of 0.002 to 0.06 mm; the smallest soil material that can be seen with the naked eye

sinuosity the ration of channel length to straight line distance between two points on a channel

solar radiation the total electromagnetic radiation emitted by the sun

spawning the act of reproducing in fish

Standard Error (SE) standard error of the mean

stratification - 1) division of a water body into distinct layers (strata) on the basis of temperature, salinity, light penetration or density or some other attribute; 2) division of an aquatic or terrestrial community into distinguishable layers on the basis of vegetative structure, temperature, moisture and light; and, 3) in statistics, the categorization of data into groups

submerged beneath the surface of water

submergents aquatic plants that live below the surface of the water

substrate the surface or material on which an organism lives or to which it is attached

taxa a group of any valid taxonomic categories (i.e. plural of taxon) used in taxonomy

thalweg the deepeset part of the channel of a river or stream

total dissolved solids (TDS) measure of the amount of material dissolved in water (primarily inorganic salts)

total kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) total concentreation of nitrogen in the form of ammonia and organic nitrogen

total suspended solids (TSS) the amount of particulate matter that is held in the water column by turbulence in the water; measured as the dry weight of suspended material per litre of water

true colour true colour is used as an indicator of dissolved and suspended materials in water

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 7-6

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

turbidity measure of the reduced transparency of water due to suspended materials (e.g., clay, silt, organic matter, plankton), with reference to the interference of these materials on the passage of light thorough the water column. Turbidity is a measure of the optical properties of water that cause light to be scattered and absorbed,; the higher the turbidity, the higher the intensity of scattered light velocity a measurement of speed of flow water hardness the presence of dissolved minerals, generally expressed as calcium carbonate water yield the quantity of water derived from a unit area of watershed; the precipitation minus the evapotranspiration watershed the entire surface drainage area that contributes water to a lake or river

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 7-7

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 7-8

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

8 References

8.1 Surface Water Quality, Sediment Quality and Aquatic Resources AENV (Alberta Environment). 1999a. Surface Water Quality Guidelines for use in Alberta. Environmental Service Publication No: T/483. AENV (Alberta Environment). 1999b. Regional Sustainable Development Strategy for the Athabasca Oil Sands Region. Alberta Environment. Fort McMurray, AB. AENV (Alberta Environment). 2001. Alberta Soil and Water Quality Guidelines for Hydrocarbons at upstream Oil and Gas Facilities. Volume 3: User Guide. Publication No: T/622. AENV (Alberta Environment). 2002. Overview of Water Quality in the Muskeg River Basin, July 1972 to March 2001. Publication No: T/657. AENV (Alberta Environment). 2004. Data obtained from AENV Water Data System. Environmental Service, Environmental Sciences Division. Edmonton, AB. Akena, A.M. 1979. An intensive surface water quality study of the Muskeg River watershed. Volume 1: water chemistry. Alberta Environment, Edmonton, AB. Allan, J. D. 1995. Stream Ecology - Structure and function of running waters. Chapman & Hall. New York, NY. Alsands Project Group. 1978. Alsands project Environmental Impact Assessment. Presented to Alberta Environment. Anderson, T.C. and B.P. McDonald. 1978. A portable weir for counting migrating fishes in rivers. Fish. Mar. Serv. Tech. Rep. 773. Auer, N.A. (ed.). 1982. Identification of larval fishes of the Great Lakes basin with emphasis on the Lake Michigan drainage. Spec. Pub. 82-3, Great Lakes Fish. Comm., Ann Arbor, MI. Ayles, G.B. 2002. Sustainability of the Muskeg River Watershed Workshop - Summary Report. Prepared for the Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA). Barton, B.A. and R.F. Courtney. 1993. Fish and Fish Habitat Bibliographic Database for the Peace, Athabasca and Slave River Basins. NRBS Project Report No. 17. Prepared for the Northern River Basins Study, Edmonton, Alberta. Beak (Beak Associates Consulting Ltd). 1986. Aquatic baseline survey for the OLSO Oil Sands Project, 1985. Final Report for Esso Resources Canada Ltd. Project 10-141-01. Bond, W. 1980. Fishery resources of the Athabasca River downstream of Fort McMurray, Alberta. Alberta Oil Sands Environmental Research Program, AOSERP Report. Bond, W. and D. Berry. 1980a. Fishery resources of the Athabasca River downstream of Fort McMurray, Alberta: Volume II. Prepared for the Alberta Oil Sands Environmental Research Program by Department of Fisheries and Oceans and Alberta Department of the Environment. RMD Report L-53.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 8-1

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Bond, W. and D. Berry. 1980b. Fishery resources of the Athabasca River downstream of Fort McMurray, Alberta: Volume III. Prepared for the Alberta Oil Sands Environmental Research Program by Department of Fisheries and Oceans and Alberta Department of the Environment. RMD Report L-54. Bond, W. and K. Machniak. 1977. Interim report on an intensive study of the fish fauna of the Muskeg River watershed of northeastern Alberta. Alberta Oil Sands Environmental Research Program, AOSERP Report 26. Bond, W. and K. Machniak. 1979. An intensive study of the fish fauna of the Muskeg River watershed of northeastern Alberta. Alberta Oil Sands Environmental Research Program, AOSERP Report 76. Borror, D.J. and R.E. White. 1970. Peterson field guide series: a field guide to insects. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA and New York, NY. BOVAR Environmental. 1996. Environmental Impact Assessment for the Syncrude Canada Ltd Aurora Mine. Prepared for Syncrude Canada Ltd by BOVAR Environmental, Calgary, AB. Brayshaw, T.C. 2000. Pondweeds, bur-reeds and their relatives of British Columbia. Royal British Columbia Museum, Victoria, BC. Brayshaw, T.C. 1989. Buttercups, waterlilies, and their relatives in British Columbia. Royal British Columbia Museum, Victoria, BC. Brua, R.B., K.J. Cash and J.M. Culp. 2003. Ecological effects of natural releases of oil sands contaminants on benthic macroinvertebrates. In: Assessment of Natural and Anthropogenic Impacts of Oil Sands Contaminants within the Northern River Basins. Unpublished report to the Panel on Energy Research and Development. Burton, W. and J.F. Flannagan. 1976. An improved river drift sampler. Can. Fish. Mar. Serv. Tech. Rep. 641. CNRL (Canadian Natural Resources Ltd.). 2002. CNRL Horizon Project: Environmental Impact Assessment. Application to the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board. Prepared by Golder Associates Ltd., Calgary, AB. CASA (Clean Air Strategic Alliance) 1999. Application of Critical, Target, and Monitoring Loads for the Evaluation and Management of Acid Deposition. Publication of the Target Loading Subgroup (CASA) and Alberta Environment, Environmental Sciences Division. Edmonton, AB. CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 1999. Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, Winnipeg, MB. CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 2000. Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines – update 1. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, Winnipeg, MB. CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 2003. Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines – update 3.1. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, Winnipeg, MB. Chambers, P.A., M. Guy, E.S. Roberts, M.N. Charlton, R. Kent, C. Gagnon, G. Grove, and N. Foster. 2001. Nutrients and their impact on the Canadian Environment. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Health Canada and Natural Resources Canada. Clifford, H.F. 1991. Aquatic Invertebrates of Alberta. The University of Alberta Press, Edmonton, AB. Crow, G.E. and C.B. Hellquist. 2000. Aquatic and wetland plants of Northeastern North America – Volume 1 Pteridophytes, Gymnosperm, and Angiosperms: Dicotyledons. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 8-2

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Crow, G.E. and C.B. Hellquist. 2000. Aquatic and wetland plants of Northeastern North America – Volume 2 Angiosperms: Monocotyledons. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin. DFO (Department of Fisheries and Oceans and Ministry of Environment (BC)). 1989. Stream Survey Field Guide. Fish Habitat Inventory & Information Program. Dillon (Dillon Consulting Ltd). 2002. Review and compilation of surface water research and reports for selected waterbodies in the Municipal District of Wood Buffalo. Report prepared for CEMA. Environment Canada 2002. Guidance document for aquatic environmental effects monitoring. http://www.ec.gc.ca/eem. Erickson, P.K. 1987. An Assessment of the Potential Sensitivity of Alberta Lakes to Acidic Deposition. Environmental Protection Services, Alberta Environment. Edmonton, AB. Flett, L., L. Bill, J. Crozier and D. Surrendi. 1996. A Report of Wisdom Synthesized from the Traditional Knowledge Component Studies. NRBS Synthesis Report No. 12. Prepared for the Northern River Basins Study, Edmonton, Alberta. Foster, K.R., K. McDonald and K. Eastlick. 2001. Development and application of critical, target and monitoring loads for the management of acid deposition in Alberta, Canada. Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 1:135-151. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 1996a. Aquatic baseline report for the Athabasca, Steepbank and Muskeg Rivers in the vicinity of the Steepbank and Aurora Mines. Prepared for Suncor Inc., Oil Sands Group. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 1996b. Addendum to Syncrude Aurora Mine environmental baseline program: Spring and summer 1996 fisheries investigations. Submitted to Syncrude Canada Ltd. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 1997. Muskeg River Mine Project Aquatic Baseline. Prepared for Shell Canada Ltd and submitted to Alberta Energy and Utilities Board and Alberta Environment. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 1998. Oil Sands Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program (RAMP) 1997. Annual Report. Submitted to RAMP Steering Committee. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 1999. Oil Sands Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program (RAMP) 1998. Annual Report. Submitted to RAMP Steering Committee. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2000. Oil Sands Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program (RAMP) 1999. Annual Report. Submitted to RAMP Steering Committee. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2001. Oil Sands Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program (RAMP) 2000. Annual Report. Submitted to RAMP Steering Committee. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2002a. Jackpine Mine – Phase 1 baseline stand alone reports. Prepared for Shell Canada Ltd. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2002b. Oil Sands Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program (RAMP) Program Design and Rationale – Version 2. Submitted to RAMP Steering Committee. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2002c. Oil Sands Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program (RAMP) 2001. Annual Report. Submitted to RAMP Steering Committee. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2003a. Oil Sands Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program (RAMP), Five Year Report. Submitted to RAMP Steering Committee. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2003b. Oil Sands Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program (RAMP) 2002. Draft Report. Submitted to RAMP Steering Committee.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 8-3

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2004. Fish overwintering use of the Lower Athabasca River 2001 to 2004. Submitted to CEMA Water Working Group. Griffiths, W.E. 1973. Preliminary fisheries survey of the Fort McMurray tar sands area. Alberta Department of Lands and Forest, Fish & Wildlife Division. Hall, G.E.M. 1998. Cost-effective protocols for the collection, filtration and preservation of surface waters for detection of metals and metalloids at ppb (µg/L) and ppt (ng/L) levels. Phase I: Evaluation of bottle type, bottle cleaning, filter and preservation technique. Aquatic Effects Technology Evaluation Program, Ottawa, ON. Hare, L. 1992. Aquatic insects and trace metals: bioavailability, bioaccumulation, and toxicity. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 22:327-369. Hartland-Rowe, R., Davies, R., McElhone, M., and R. Crowther. 1979. The Ecology of macrobenthic invertebrate communities in Hartley Creek, northeastern Alberta. Alberta Oil Sands Environmental Research Program, AOSERP Report 49. Hatfield Consultants Ltd., Jacques Whitford Environment Ltd., Mack, Slack & Associates Inc. and Western Resource Solutions. 2004. Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program (RAMP) 2003 Annual Report. Prepared for RAMP Steering Committee. Health Canada. 2003. Summary of Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality. Prepared by the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Drinking Water, Safe Environments Programme. Kalff, J. 2002. Limnology: inland water ecosystems. Prentice Hall. New Jersey, NJ Kershaw, L., J. Gould, D. Johnson and J. Lancaster. 2001. Rare Vascular Plants of Alberta. University of Alberta Press, Edmonton, Alberta and Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, AB. KOMEX (KOMEX International Ltd.). 1997. Fisheries and Aquatics Component for the Mobil Lease 36 Baseline Environmental Assessment. Prepared for Mobil Oil Canada Ltd. Kristofferson, A.H., D.K. McGowan and W.J. Ward. 1986. Fish weirs for the commercial harvest of sea run Arctic char in the Northwest Territories. Can. Ind. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 174. Lyons, B. and B. MacLock. 1996. Environmental Overview of the Northern River Basins. NRBS Synthesis Report No. 8. Prepared for the Northern River Basins Study, Edmonton, AB. Lutz, A. and M. Hendzel. 1977. A survey of baseline levels of contaminants in aquatic biota of the AOSERP study area. Report prepared for the Alberta Oil Sands Environmental Research Program by Freshwater Institute, AOSERP Report 17. MacLock, B. and J. Thompson. 1996. Characterization of Aquatic Resources within the Peace, Athabasca and Slave River Basins. NRBS Synthesis Report No. 7. Prepared for the Northern River Basins Study, Edmonton, AB. McAlpine, J.F.(Ed). 1981. Manual of nearctic diptera. Agriculture Canada Research Branch, Monograph No.27, 28 & 32, Ottawa., ON. McCafferty, W.P. 1998. Aquatic entomology: the fishermen’s and ecologists’ illustrated guide to insects and their relatives. Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, MA. Merritt, R.W. and K.W. Cummins. 1996. An introduction to the aquatic insects of North America. Third Edition. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. Dubuque, IA.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 8-4

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Monenco Inc. 1993. Sediment Oxygen Demand Investigations, Athabasca River, January to March, 1992. Northern River Basins Study Project Report No. 3. Prepared for the Northern River Basins Study, Edmonton, AB. Moore, D.R.J., R.S. Teed and G.M. Richardson. 2003. Derivation of an ambient water quality criterion for mercury: taking account of site-specific conditions. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 22, 12:3069-3080. O’Donnel, J.R., B.M. Kaplan and H.E. Allen. 1985. Bioavailability of trace metals in natural waters. In: R.D. Cardwell, R.Purdy, and R.C. Bahner (eds.). Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard Assessment: seventh symposium. ASTM STP 854. American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia, PA. 485-501pp. O’Neil, J., and L. Hildebrand. 1986. Fishery resources upstream of the Oldman River Dam. Prepared for Alberta Environment, Planning Division. RL&L Report No. 181. O’Neil, J.P., L. Noton and T. Clayton. 1982. Aquatic investigations in the Hartley Creek area, 1981 (Sand Alta Project). Prepared for Gulf Canada Resources Inc. O’Neil, J.P. and T. Janzie. 1974. Fisheries Investigations of the Muskeg River and Hartley Creek, 1974. Prepared for Shell Canada Ltd by Renewable Resources Inc. OPTI (OPTI Canada Inc.). 2000. Long Lake Project Application for Approval to Alberta Energy and Utilities Board and to Alberta Environment. Volume 1 (Application) and Volumes 2 to 7 (EIA). December 2000. Calgary, AB. Persaud, D.R., R. Jaagumag and A. Hayton. 1993. Guidelines for the protection and management of aquatic sediments in Ontario. Report No. ISBN 0772992487. Standard Development Branch. Ontario Ministry of environment and Energy. Toronto, ON. RAMP (Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program). 2004. Data obtained from the Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program Water and Sediment Quality Database. Ricker, W.E. 1975. Computation and interpretation of biological statistics of fish populations. Fish. Res. Board Can. Bull. 191. RL&L (RL & L Environmental Services Ltd.). 1982. Aquatic investigations in Hartley Creek Area, 1981 (SandAlta Project). Report No. Phase II-18. RL&L (RL & L Environmental Services Ltd.). 1989. OSLO Project Environmental Impact Assessment – Water Quality and Fisheries Resources Baseline Studies – Supplemental Report #1. Prepared for OSLO Joint Venture. Fort McMurray, AB. RL&L (RL & L Environmental Services Ltd.). 1994. A General Fish and Riverine Habitat Inventory, Athabasca River, April to May, 1992. Northern River Basins Study Project Report No. 32. Prepared for the Northern River Basins Study, Edmonton, AB. RL&L (RL & L Environmental Services Ltd.). 1996. An information review of four native sportfish species in west-central Alberta. Prepared for Foothills Model Forest and the Fisheries Management and Enhancement Program. Saffran, K.A. and D.O. Trew. 1996. Sensitivity of Alberta Lakes to Acidifying Deposition: An Update of Maps with Emphasis on 109 Northern Lakes. Water Management Division. Alberta Environment. Edmonton, AB. Salmo Consulting Inc. 2001. Review of Predictive Modelling Tools for Wildlife and Fish Key Indicators in the Wood Buffalo Region. Prepared for the Cumulative Environmental Management Association – Wood Buffalo Region Wildlife and Fish Working Group.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 8-5

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

SERM (Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management). 2000. Data Obtained from Environment Saskatchewan Quality Data (ESQUADAT) Database. Environmental Protection Branch, Data Management Unit. Regina, SK. Sekerak, A.D., and G.L. Walder. 1980. Aquatic biophysical inventory of major tributaries in the AOSERP study area. Volume 1: Summary report. Prep. For the Alberta Oil Sands Environmental Research Program by LGL Ltd Environmental Research Associates. AOSERP 114. Shell (Shell Canada Ltd). 1998. Muskeg River Mine Project EIA. Prepared by Golder Associates Ltd. Shell (Shell Canada Ltd). 2002. Jackpine Mine Phase 1 Environmental Impact Assessment . Prepared by Golder Associates Ltd. Smock, L.A. 1996. Macroinvertebrate Movements: Drift, Colonization, and Emergence. In Hauer, F. Richard and G.A. Lamberti (ed). Methods in Stream Ecology. Academic Press. San Diego, CA. 371-390pp. Suncor 2000. Firebag In-situ Oil Sands Project Application. Volumes 1, 2a, 2b, 3, 4a, and 4b. Submitted to Alberta Energy and Utilities Board and Alberta Environment. Prepared by Golder Associates Ltd. Suncrude (Syncrude Canada Ltd.). 1998. Mildred Lake Upgrader Expansion Project Environmental Impact Assessment. Application to the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board. Prepared by Conor Pacific Environmental Technologies Inc. Calgary, AB. Thomann, R.V. and J.A. Mueller. 1987. Principles of surface water quality modeling and control. Harper Collins Publishers Inc. New York, NY. Thompson, M.D. and J. Crosby-Diewold. 1980. Baseline inventory for aquatic macrophyte species distributions in the AOSERP study area. Prep. For the Alberta Oil Sands Environmental Research Program by INTERA Environmental Consultants Ltd. And BEAK Consultants Ltd. AOSERP Report 100. True North (True North Energy L.P.) 2001. Fort Hills Oil Sands Project. Environmental Impact Assessment . Application to the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board. Prepared by AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Calgary, AB. UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme).2002. Global Mercury Assessment. UNEP Chemicals. Geneva, Switzerland. USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2002. National Recommended Water Quality Criteria: 2002. Offcie of Water, Office of Science and Technology. EPA-822-R-02-047. Walder, G.L., P.L. Strankman, E.B. Wattom and K.A. Bruce. 1980. Aquatic biophysical inventory of major tributaries in the AOSERP study area. AOSERP Report WS 3.4. Volume II: Atlas. Prepared by LGL Ltd, Environmental Research Associates for Alberta Oil Sands Environmental Research Program. Calgary, AB. Wallace, R. and P. McCart. 1984. The fish and fisheries of the Athabasca River Basin. Their status and environmental requirements. Prepared for Alberta Environment. Webb (R. Webb Environmental Services Ltd.). 1981. Wildlife and Fisheries Protection Management Plan for the Alsands Project. Waterbody. Prepared for Alsands Energy Ltd. Calgary, AB. Westworth (Westworth Associates Environmental Ltd.). 2002. A Review and Assessment of Existing Information for Key Wildlife and Fish Species in the Regional Sustainable Development Strategy Study Area – Volume 2: Fish. Prepared for the Cumulative Environmental Management Association – Wildlife and Fish Working Group.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 8-6

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Wetzel, R. G. 1983. Limnology, 2nd Edition. Saunders College Publishing. Toronto, ON. Weiner, E.R. 2000. Applications of environmental chemistry: a practical guide for environmental professionals. Lewis Publishers. Boca Raton, FL. WRS (Western Resource Solutions). 2000. Critical Loads of Acidity to 162 Lakes Sampled by Alberta- Pacific Forest Industries during 1998. Prepared for Syncrude Canada Ltd. Fort Mc Murray, AB. WRS (Western Resource Solutions). 2003. Analysis of the water quality of the Steepbank, Firebag and Muskeg rivers during the spring melt (1989-2001). Prepared for the Wood Buffalo Environmental Association, Ft. McMurray, AB. WRS (Western Resource Solutions). 2004. Calculation of critical loads of acidity to lakes in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region. Final Report submitted to the NOx-SOx Management Working Group, CEMA. Wrona, F.J., Wm.D. Gummer, K.J. Cash and K. Crutchfield. 1996. Cumulative Impacts within the Northern River Basins. NRBS Synthesis Report No. 11. Prepared for the Northern River Basins Study, Edmonton, AB.

8.2 Surface Water Hydrology AGRA (AGRA Earth and Environmental Ltd.). 1995. Baseline Geomorphologic Data Collection for Syncrude Mine Site Near Fort McMurray, AB. AGRA (AGRA Earth and Environmental Ltd.). 1996a. Water Balance of Suncor’s Mine Closure Drainage System – Chapter 4. Prepared for Suncor Inc., Oil Sands Group. Calgary, AB. AGRA (AGRA Earth and Environmental Ltd.). 1996b. Climate and Surface Water Hydrology Baseline Data for Aurora Mine EIA. Prepared for Syncrude Canda Ltd. Calgary, AB. Froelich, C. R. 1979. An Intensive Surface Water Quality Study of the Muskeg River Watershed, Volume II Hydrology. AOSERP Project Hy 2.5. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 1997a. Environmental Baseline Study – Surface Water Hydrology. Prepared for Shell Canada Ltd. Calgary, AB. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 1997b. Summer Data Collection Program and Baseline Hydrologic and Hydraulic Studies for the Muskeg River Mine Project. Prepared for Shell Canada Ltd. Calgary, AB. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 1997c. Muskeg River Mine Project. Volume 1: Water. Prepared for Shell Canada Ltd. Calgary, AB. Golder. 1999. Muskeg River Area Climatic and Hydrologic Monitoring Program in 1998. Prepared for Syncrude Canada Ltd., Shell Canada Ltd, Mobil Oil Canada Properties, and Suncor Energy Inc. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2000. Oil Sands Area Climatic and Hydrologic Monitoring Program in 1999. Prepared for Syncrude Canada Ltd, Albian Sands Energy Inc., Mobil Oil Canada Properties Ltd, Suncor Energy Inc., Koch Canada Ltd and Petro-Canada Oil and Gas. Calgary, AB. 55 pp + Appendices. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2001a. Fort Hills Oil Sands Project. Volume 2: Environmental Baseline Study – Surface Water Hydrology. Prepared for TrueNorth Inc. Calgary, AB.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. February 2005 Page 8-7

ALBIAN SANDS ENERGY INC MUSKEG RIVER MINE EXPANSION PROJECT Aquatic Environmental Setting Report

Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2001b. Oil Sands Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program (RAMP) 2000, Volume II: Climatic and Hydrologic Monitoring. Prepared for Syncrude Canada Ltd., Albian Sands Energy Ltd, Mobil Oil Canada Properties Ltd, Suncor Energy Inc., Koch Canada Ltd and Petro-Canada Oil and Gas Ltd, Calgary, AB. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2002. Surface Water Hydrology Environmental Setting for Jackpine Mine – Phase 1. Prepared for Shell Canada Ltd., Calgary, AB. Final Report. Golder (Golder Associates Ltd.). 2003. Oil Sands Regional Aquatic Monitoring Program (RAMP) Five Year Report. Draft. Prep. for RAMP Stering Committee. Calgary AB. McEachern, P. and L. Noton. 2002. Overview of Water Quality in the Muskeg River Basin July 1972 to March 2001. Alberta Environment, Science and Standards Environmental Assurance. Edmonton Morton, F.I., F. Richard and S. Fogarasi. 1985. Operational Estimates of Areal Evapotranspiration and Lake Evaporation – Program WREVAP. National Hydrology Research Institute. Inland Waters Directorate. Environment Canada. Ottawa, ON. Neill, C.R. and Evans B.J. 1979. Synthesis of Surface Water Hydrology. Northwest Hydraulics Consultants Ltd. AOSERP Report 60. Stanley Associates Engineering Ltd. 1988 OSLO Streamflow Monitoring Program. Prep. for The OSLO Project. Calgary, Alberta. Webb (R. Webb Environmental Services Ltd.). 1981. Wildlife and Fisheries Protection Management Plan for the Alsands Project. Waterbody. Prepared for Alsands Energy Ltd. Calgary, AB. W-E-R AGRA. 1993. Hydrological Study of Surface Drainage Plan for Abandonment of the Syncrude Project. Prepared by W-E-R AGRA for Syncrude Canada Ltd., December, 1993. W-E-R Engineering. 1989. Environmental Evaluation of Alternative Headwater Diversions for the OSLO Project. Calgary, AB. W-E-R Engineering. 1991. Surface Water Diversion and Drainage Works. Design Report – Volume 2, Appendix D - Analysis of Kearl Lake Outlet Control System. Prepared for OSLO Alberta Ltd. Calgary, AB.

February 2005 AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Page 8-8