Section A – Project Introduction
Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A PROJECT INTRODUCTION...... 1 A.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 A.2 PROJECT PROPONENT...... 2 A.2.1 Coal Valley Resources Inc...... 2 A.2.2 Sherritt International Corporation...... 2 A.2.3 Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board ...... 2 A.3 PROJECT NEED AND ALTERNATIVES ...... 3 A.3.1 Project Need...... 3 A.3.2 Project Alternatives...... 4 A.4 APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL ...... 5 A.4.1 Applicant Information...... 6 A.4.2 Existing Approvals...... 6 A.4.3 Request for Approval ...... 7 A.4.4 Application Guide and Description...... 9 A.5 REGIONAL AND LOCAL SETTING ...... 11 A.5.1 Mercoal West ...... 11 A.5.2 Yellowhead Tower Area...... 12 A.6 DEVELOPMENT PLAN...... 12 A.6.1 Mercoal West ...... 12 A.6.2 Yellowhead Tower...... 12 A.6.3 Development Schedule...... 13 A.6.4 Regulatory and Planning...... 16 A.7 SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION...... 16 A.7.1 Need for Public Involvement ...... 16 A.7.2 Objectives and Scope ...... 16 A.7.3 Results...... 17 A.7.4 Continuing Consultation...... 17 A.8 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION SUMMARY ...... 18 A.8.1 Air Quality...... 20 A.8.2 Fisheries ...... 21 A.8.3 Groundwater...... 24 A.8.4 Historical Resources ...... 26 A.8.5 Human Health...... 27 A.8.6 Hydrology ...... 31 A.8.7 Mammalian Carnivores...... 33 A.8.8 Noise ...... 37 A.8.9 Socio-economic...... 38 A.8.10 Soils...... 38 A.8.11 Surface Water Quality...... 41 A.8.12 Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Land Use ...... 45 A.8.13 Vegetation, Wetlands and Biodiversity...... 46 A.8.14 Wildlife ...... 47 A.8.15 Greenhouse Gas and Climate Change...... 50 A.8.16 Land and Resource Use...... 52
March 2008 A-i Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.9 MITIGATION AND MONITORING...... 53 A.9.1 Air Quality...... 53 A.9.2 Fisheries ...... 53 A.9.3 Groundwater...... 55 A.9.4 Historical Resources ...... 55 A.9.5 Human Health...... 55 A.9.6 Hydrology ...... 56 A.9.7 Mammalian Carnivores...... 57 A.9.8 Noise ...... 58 A.9.9 Socio-economic...... 58 A.9.10 Soils...... 58 A.9.11 Surface Water Quality...... 59 A.9.12 Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Land Use ...... 61 A.9.13 Vegetation, Wetlands and Biodiversity...... 61 A.9.14 Wildlife ...... 63
List of Tables
Table A.1.0-1 Key Project Parameters...... 2 Table A.3.2-1 Summary of Evaluation of Project Alternatives Considered for the Project ..... 4 Table A.4.2-1 CVM Existing Approvals...... 6 Table A.4.3-1 Proposed Mine Permit Areas ...... 8 Table A.6.2-1 Combined Production Plan for Existing, Proposed and Future Mine Development ...... 13 Table A.6.2-2 Mercoal West Development Schedule...... 14 Table A.6.2-3 Yellowhead Tower Development Schedule...... 15 Table A.8.2-1 Fish Species Captured during Baseline Investigations ...... 21 Table A.8.2-2 Fish Species Distribution in Watercourses in and Adjacent to the MW and YT Project ...... 22
List of Figures
Figure A.1.0-1 Project Location Figure A.1.0-2 Mercoal West Development Area Figure A.1.0-3 Yellowhead Tower Development Area
March 2008 A-ii Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A PROJECT INTRODUCTION
A.1 INTRODUCTION The Coal Valley Mine is located approximately 90 km south of Edson in the Coal Branch area of Alberta (Figure A.1.0-1). This area has an extensive coal mining history dating back to the early 20th century when coal extraction was carried out using conventional underground mining methods. Surface mining was introduced into the Coal Branch Area during the 1930’s.
The Coal Valley Mine (CVM) has been in operation since 1978 employing both truck/shovel and dragline mining methods. The mine has established a reputation as a dependable supplier of high quality thermal coal for overseas and domestic markets. Depleting coal reserves within the existing CVM permit area require further mine development to allow Coal Valley Resources Inc. (CVRI) to maintain its workforce and to continue to supply thermal coal to its customers.
CVRI is proposing to develop an extension of the CVM to include the Mercoal West (MW) and Yellowhead Tower (YT) areas. Current coal reserves within the existing mine areas will be depleted in early 2009.
The MW and YT Mine Extension Project is a not a new mining project as mining of coal reserves at the CVM will move from depleted pits to the MW and YT areas (Figure A.1.0-1). It is expected that CVM’s existing infrastructure and workforce will be used to service the proposed mine extension and that all office and maintenance facilities will be maintained at the present CVM site. The coal will be brought from the MW and YT mine areas to the existing processing plant where it will be cleaned and loaded into trains for transport to market.
CVM’s preliminary reserve estimate for each of the development areas indicate that the MW area contains approximately 3.6 million clean metric tonnes (CMT), and the YT area contains 13.3 million clean metric tonnes. This additional tonnage would provide CVM with enough coal to operate until 2015.
The proposed mining areas of MW and YT are west of Highway 40 and 47 (Figure A.1.0-2 and Figure A.1.0-3). There will be new road crossings, transportation and utility corridors required to join the mine extension to existing mining areas. CVRI will endeavour to develop these new road crossings, transportation and utility corridors having regard to the communities of Mercoal (for the MW extension) and Coalspur (for YT extension). Haul trucks accessing the mine area and transporting coal to the coal processing plant will need to cross Highways 40 and 47.
The key parameters for MW and YT are presented in Table A.1.0-1.
March 2008 A-1 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Table A.1.0-1 Key Project Parameters Parameter Mercoal West Yellowhead Tower Coal mining permitted Land Zoning Coal mining permitted Wildlife Zones present Nearest Community Mercoal Coalspur Moderate ridges and valleys Steep Ridges Terrain Mercoal & McCardell Creeks Chance Creek 3000 ha 1200 ha Project Area 16 km length 10 km length 13.3 million CMT 3.6 million CMT Val D’Or and Mynheer Estimated Reserves Val D’Or Seam Seams Steeply dipping monocline Faulted, Repeated seams Open Pit - dragline Open pit - backhoe/truck Mining Method Avg 34 km coal haul Avg 26 km coal haul
A.2 PROJECT PROPONENT A.2.1 Coal Valley Resources Inc. Headquartered in Edmonton, Alberta, CVRI is owned by the Coal Valley Partnership (CVP), a 50-50 partnership between Sherritt International Corporation (Sherritt) and the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board (Teachers’).
CVRI is the owner of the Coal Valley mine, Gregg River mine, Obed Mountain mine and Coleman properties, all located in Alberta. CVM has the capacity to produce more than 4 million tonnes of bituminous thermal coal annually.
Over its 30-year history in Alberta, CVM has established a track record of success in managing safe, efficient and environmentally responsible mining operations. CVM has been recognized locally, provincially, and nationally for its safety and environmental achievements.
A.2.2 Sherritt International Corporation Headquartered in Toronto, Ontario, Sherritt is a diversified Canadian natural resource company, with assets of $2.8 billion, that operates in Canada, and internationally. Sherritt, directly and through its subsidiaries, has significant interests in thermal coal production, a nickel/cobalt metals operation, oil and gas exploration, development and production, electrical generation, soybean-based food processing, tourism and agriculture.
A.2.3 Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board With $106 billion in net assets, Teachers’ is the largest single-professional pension plan in Canada. An independent organization, it invests the pension fund’s assets and administers the pensions of 271,000 active and retired teachers in Ontario.
March 2008 A-2 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.3 PROJECT NEED AND ALTERNATIVES A.3.1 Project Need CVM has been mining coal since 1978. Currently over 300 employees work at CVM, and to date it has supplied over 55 million tonnes of coal to the global market place. This has had a significant long term positive effect on the local and provincial economy.
CVM is committed to the continued development of coal reserves, particularly those in close proximity to existing mining operations. In 2004, CVM expanded its mine to nearly 4 million tonnes per year, doubling thermal coal production capacity at the mine. This project doubled the coal wash plant capacity, added additional mining equipment, and has created at least 150 new permanent jobs at the mine.
At current forecasted rates of coal production, CVM will require additional mining areas by early 2009. It is anticipated that acquiring the new mining areas will enable CVM to continue utilizing its newly refurbished coal wash plant, and workforce, to serve customers into the future.
CVM has supplied coal to the H.R. Milner power station in Alberta. In the past, CVM has shipped thermal coal to the southern Ontario market, which is also served by United States coal producers.
Over the years, the focus of CVM has shifted to supplying coal to customers in the Pacific Rim. Continued coal supply provided by the new mining areas will likely be shipped via rail to coal terminals on the coast of British Columbia, to be loaded on ships bound for Pacific Rim locations. CVM expects export coal markets to remain relatively strong into the future. High and volatile natural gas pricing in North America, the use of thermal coal in metallurgical markets, strong Chinese domestic requirements and increased demand in other north Asian countries contribute to strong coal sales.
The new mine areas will create economic benefits, thus enhancing the overall quality of life for a significant portion of the local and regional population. CVM strives to achieve economic development, employment, environmental responsibility and community benefits for the region.
Development of the new mine areas will provide the following benefits:
• continued receipt of revenue in the form of production royalties, license fees and taxes by municipal, provincial and federal governments; • local, regional and provincial contractors and retailers expect to receive benefits by providing goods and services to the mine. CVM expects to continue to support Alberta and Canadian engineering firms, contractors, manufacturers and suppliers and ensure that they receive full and fair opportunity to compete in the supply of goods and services; and • employment which includes skilled, well paid, full time positions.
March 2008 A-3 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.3.2 Project Alternatives A.3.2.1 Development of Alternate Coal Reserves A range of development alternative assessments were carried out for the MW and YT Project. Initially, CVM considered development of the various coal reserves in the region including those not held by CVM.
Some of the evaluation factors that were considered in assessing the project development alternatives include:
• coal leases – are they held by CVRI or not; • geological understanding of the coal reserves; • engineering and mining factors - technical feasibility, pit design, operating reliability, safety, operating and capital costs and abandonment and decommissioning; • safety; • haul distances – distance from the plant site • biophysical factors/environment - fisheries, vegetation, timber, wildlife, soils, air quality, noise, groundwater, surface water and hydrological; and • social factors including regulatory, land and resource uses, recreational uses, historical values, traditional use values, public response and safety, and economic considerations.
The evaluation of the different factors considered for the project alternatives are provided in Table A.3.2-1.
Table A.3.2-1 Summary of Evaluation of Project Alternatives Considered for the Project
Coal Lease Areas Safety Geological Geological Environment Social Factors Social Factors Understanding Understanding Haul Distances Haul Distances Mining Factors Mining Factors CVRI Coal Leases Leases Coal CVRI
Mercoal West 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Yellowhead Tower 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 Robb Trend 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 Oppelt 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 McLeod East 3 1 2 2 2 2 3 Pits 31 W and 32 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 Bryan Mountain 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 Manalta McLeod 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 River 1. Fair 2. Good 3. Best Bold - CVM’s Choice
March 2008 A-4 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Of the options considered, the MW and YT areas were deemed the most suitable for development at this time. A.3.2.2 Other Development Alternatives Considered In addition to considering alternate coal leases for development, CVRI also considered underground mining as opposed to surface mining and relocation/construction of a new plant as opposed to continuing to use the existing plant. Some of the evaluation factors that were considered in assessing these alternatives include:
• surface mining – all existing staff at CVM are trained in surface mining techniques. All equipment is related to surface mining. The mine operates safely and efficiently as a surface mine, CVM has worked in excess of six years without a lost time accident. CVM has determined that continuing to use surface mining techniques is the best option at this time; • underground mining – CVM tested underground mining at the existing mine in the early 1980’s. While it was technically feasible, there were concerns with the geotechnical stability of the geological formations and the safety of the employees. The production rates were also of concern. CVM decided to abandon the underground mining and focused on surface mining. As a result of the previous underground mining tests, CVM does not consider it a viable alternative in the Coal Valley region; • construct new plant – this requires a significant capital investment that could be greater than $300 million compared to the small capital investment of developing the MW and YT areas of approximately $25 million; and • utilize existing plant - the recent updates to the plant make it attractive to continue utilizing the existing plant. The capital costs to continue using the plant would be negligible. All the infrastructure is in place to wash the coal, dry, store and load it on trains. There are even depleted pit areas to store the plant rejects and coal tailings materials. CVM has determined that using the existing plant is the best option at this time.
The primary factors of importance in determining the economic feasibility and mineability of a reserve are proximity to infrastructure, zoning (land use and regulatory), size, quality and geological setting of the reserve. To be economically feasible, the development of a thermal coal mine requires an adequate and a skilled workforce located close to infrastructure that will provide it with the required support facilities. Because the bulk of the thermal coal is exported, proximity to rail lines to transport the coal to ports on the west coast is essential.
A.4 APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL The MW and YT Project application will provide government decision-makers with the necessary information to determine whether the project is within the public’s best interest. The Application has been prepared by CVRI and is submitted to Energy Resources Conservation Board and Alberta Environment in support of request for approval to develop and operate the project. The project will also likely require Federal approvals and authorizations from two departments, Department of Fisheries and Oceans and Transport Canada (Navigable Waters
March 2008 A-5 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Protection Program (NWPP)), and the application has been prepared to satisfy these requirements as well.
A.4.1 Applicant Information The name and address of the applicant for the Project is:
Coal Valley Resources Inc. Coal Valley Mine Bag Service 5000 Edson, Alberta T7E 1W1
Correspondence concerning this application should be directed to the above address to the attention of:
Name: Les LaFleur, Engineering Manager Phone: (780) 794-8176 Fax: (780) 794-8150 E-Mail: [email protected]
A.4.2 Existing Approvals The CVM began development in 1978 and since then has received a number of government approvals for its operations. Some of the existing approvals held by the CVM are listed in Table A.4.2-1. Copies of these approvals are provided in Appendix 6.
Table A.4.2-1 CVM Existing Approvals Approval Description Issued Date Expiry Date Number EPEA 00011066-01-00 Coal Valley Mine Sep. 01, 1999 Dec. 11, 2013 00011066-01-01 Pit 27 Sep. 13, 2000 Dec. 11, 2013 00011066-01-02 Pit 27 West Sep. 18, 2001 Dec. 11, 2013 00011066-01-03 Pit 120 (South Pit) Dec. 18, 2001 Dec. 11, 201 00011066-01-04 Pit 130 Dec. 12, 2003 Dec. 11, 201 00011066-01-05 Lovett and Embarras Pits Feb. 20, 2004 Aug. 31, 2009 00011066-01-06 Pit 28 June 1, 2005 Aug. 31, 2009 00011066-01-07 Pit 132W and 142W Tech. Mod. June 9, 2005 Aug. 31, 2009 00011066-01-08 Mercoal Phase 2 Jan. 5, 2006 Aug. 31, 2009 00011066-01-09 Plant Expansion June 5, 2006 Aug. 31, 2009 00011066-01-010 Transfer Approvals to CVRI May 31, 2006 Aug. 31, 2009
March 2008 A-6 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Table A.4.2-1 CVM Existing Approvals Approval Description Issued Date Expiry Date Number Water Act 00080855-00-00 Reclamation of Pit 44 Mar. 07, 2000 Mar. 06, 2010 00150769-00-00 Coal Valley/Construction/Luscar Ltd. Jan. 23, 2002 Aug. 31, 2009 00154332-00-00 Coal Valley/Construction/Luscar Ltd. Sep. 24, 2001 Aug. 31, 2009 00154332-00-01 Pit 130 Drainage Works Dec. 16, 2003 Aug. 31, 2009 00215635-00-00 Pit 28 Drainage Works Jun. 1, 2005 Dec. 11, 2013 00222448-00-00 Divert water from Coal Creek May 25, 2006 May 24, 2016 00222449-00-00 Divert groundwater from 16-23 May 25, 2006 May 24, 2016 Coal Conservation Act #C2004-1 Mine Permit Rescinded and replaced by #C2005-6 #C2005-6 Mine Permit May 18, 2005
A.4.3 Request for Approval A detailed environmental impact assessment (EIA), to assess the environmental and socio- economic impacts of the proposed two new mining areas has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, the Coal Conservation Act and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.
This application is an integrated submission to the Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB), Alberta Environment (AENV) and Federal Agencies (i.e. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) and Transport Canada (Navigable Waters Protection Program), for approval to construct, operate and reclaim the MW and YT development areas. CVRI is currently seeking approval from the ERCB, AENV, DFO and Transport Canada. Separate submissions will be made for other approvals that may be required.
A.4.3.1 Energy Resources Conservation Board In accordance with Section 10 of the Coal Conservation Act, CVRI is requesting approval to amend the existing mine permit C2005-6. Lands covered by existing mine permit C2005-6 and lands required for development of the MW and YT Project are listed in Table A.4.3-1 and shown on Figure A.1.0-2 and Figure A.1.0-3.
In accordance with Section 11 of the Coal Conservation Act, CVRI will also require a mine licence from the ERCB prior to commencing mining at MW and YT. A mine licence application will be submitted at a later date.
March 2008 A-7 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Table A.4.3-1 Proposed Mine Permit Areas Mercoal West TWP-RGE Sec LSD/QTR Status 1 LSD 1, 5, 6, 7, 8; NE, NW Existing 2 NE; LSD 13, 14 Existing 3 LSD 16 Existing 9 LSD 8, 11, 13, 14; NE Existing 10 SE; NE; NW; LSD 3, 5, 6 Existing 49-23-W5M 11 SE; SW; NW; LSD 9, 10 Existing 12 LSD 1, 2; SW Existing 15 LSD 1, 2; SW Existing 16 SE; SW; NW; LSD 9, 10 Existing 17 LSD1, 8, 9, 16 Required 3 SW Existing 4 SE; SW Existing 5 SE; SW; LSD12 Existing 49-22-W5M 5 LSD 11 Required 6 SE; SW; NW; LSD 9, 10, 15 Existing 6 LSD 16 Required 7 LSD 4 Existing 24 LSD 9N, 15, 16 Required 25 SE; NW; LSD5, 6, 10 Required 26 LSD 5, 6, 7, 8; NE; NW Required 27 NE; LSD 13, 14 Required 31 NE; LSD 14 Existing 48-22-W5M 32 SE; NE; NW; LSD 6 Existing 33 NE; NW; SE; SW Existing 34 LSD 4, 5, 6; NW Existing 34 SE; LSD 3, 9, 10 Required 35 LSD 1, 2, 7, 12; SW Required 36 LSD 4 Required 48-21-W5M 30 LSD 4 Required Yellowhead Tower 48-22-W5M 35 LSD 11, 14,13 Required 1 LSD 16, 13 Required 2 LSD 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 11, 14; NE Required 11 LSD 1, 8, 13, 14; NE Required 49-22-W5M 12 NE; NW; SE; SW Required 13 LSD 1, 2; SW Required 14 LSD 10, 11, 12; SW, SE Required 4 LSD 4 Required 5 LSD 11, 12, 13; SW; SE Required 49-21-W5M 6 LSD 6; NE; NW; SE Required 7 LSD 1, 2, 7, 12; SW Required 28 LSD 13, 14, 15 Required 48-21-W5M 32 LSD 1, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14; NE Required 33 LSD 9, 10, 15; SW; NW Required
March 2008 A-8 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.4.3.2 Alberta Environment Pursuant to Part 2, Division 2 and Section 66 of the Alberta Environmental Enhancement and Protection Act, CVRI is applying for approval to open up, operate and reclaim the MW and YT pits and associated dumps.
Pursuant to Section 36 and 46 of the Water Act, CVRI is applying for an approval and a licence to construct drainage works required for the construction, operation and reclamation of the MW and YT mine areas, including end-pit lakes.
A.4.3.3 Department of Fisheries and Oceans The MW and YT Project will require federal authorizations under the Fisheries Act due to the potential harmful alteration damage or destruction of fisheries habitat. Although this application has been completed in accordance with the requirements outlined in the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, CVRI intends to submit a separate Section 35(2) application under the Fisheries Act at a later date.
A.4.3.4 Additional Approvals Required CVRI intends to file separate applications for those parts of the project that are legislated under various other statutes. Application and approval requirements applicable to the project that are intended to be submitted under separate cover are:
• mine licence requirements pursuant to the Coal Conservation Act; • surface rights requirements pursuant to the Public Lands Act; • site surface disturbance clearance pursuant to the Historical Resources Act; • development permits pursuant to the Municipal Government Act; • crossing of Highway 40 and 43 pursuant to the Public Highways Development Act; • electrical power interconnections issued pursuant to the Electrical Utilities Act; • removal of potential navigable waters pursuant to the Navigable Waters Protection Act; and • construction of works that may alter or disrupt fisheries habitat pursuant to the Federal Fisheries Act.
A.4.4 Application Guide and Description The application for approval to the ERCB and AENV has been integrated in accordance with ERCB and AENV guidelines to facilitate an efficient review of the application by the regulatory review agencies and the public. The MW and YT Project application is presented in five volumes that consist of the following components:
Volume I • Section A – Project Introduction • Section B – Geology • Section C – Mining and Development Plan
March 2008 A-9 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• Section D – EIA Methodology • Section E – Environmental Assessment Summary • Section F – Reclamation Plan • Section G – Stakeholder Consultation • Section H – EPEA Application • Section I – Water Act Application • Appendix 1 – Terms of Reference and Concordance Table • Appendix 2 – Project Team • Appendix 3 – Glossary and Acronyms
Volume II • Appendix 4 – References • Appendix 5 – Public Consultation • Appendix 6 – Existing Approvals • Appendix 7 – Comprehensive Study Checklist • Appendix 8 – Evaluation of Reclaimed Wetland & Riparian Resources • Appendix 9 – Sustainability of End Pit Lakes • Appendix 10 – Vegetation Development on Reclaimed Lands • Consultant Report #1 – Air Quality (CR# 1) • Consultant Report #2 – Fisheries (CR# 2)
Volume III • Consultant Report #3 – Groundwater (CR# 3) • Consultant Report #4 – Historical Resources (CR# 4) • Consultant Report #5 – Human Health (CR# 5)
Volume IV • Consultant Report #6 – Hydrology (CR# 6) • Consultant Report #7 – Mammalian Carnivores (CR# 7) • Consultant Report #8 – Noise (CR# 8) • Consultant Report #9 – Socio-economic (CR# 9) • Consultant Report #10 – Soils (CR# 10)
Volume V • Consultant Report #11 – Surface Water Quality (CR# 11) • Consultant Report #12 – Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Land Use (CR# 12) • Consultant Report #13 – Vegetation, Wetlands and Biodiversity (CR# 13)
March 2008 A-10 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• Consultant Report #14 – Wildlife (CR# 14)
A.5 REGIONAL AND LOCAL SETTING Regionally, the CVM and proposed extension areas are located within the Rocky Mountain Foothills physiographic region in west-central Alberta (Pettapiece, 1986). The existing minesite is approximately 90 km south-west of Edson, Alberta in an area where several mines (surface and underground) operated earlier in the 1900s. Many of these smaller mines have been re- mined in the current CVM operations to increase overall coal recovery.
The proposed extension areas are located adjacent to the existing CVM. The mine and extension areas are situated in the Upper Boreal - Cordilleran Ecoregion (Strong and Leggat 1981) in the Robb Highlands Resource Management Area as described in the Coal Branch Sub-Regional Integrated Resource Plan (Alberta Forestry, Lands and Wildlife. 1990). Topography is ridged to undulating and is dominated by northwest to southeast trending ridges and valleys.
Human occupation in proximity to the CVM includes the cottage communities of Coalspur and Mercoal and the community of Robb. Coalspur and Mercoal are cottage communities that have seasonal residents. Coalspur is located at the “Y” junction of the Coal Branch Rail Line and lies immediately east of the YT area development. Mercoal is adjacent to Highway 40 and is located to the east of the MW development area. The community of Robb, primarily full-time residents, is approximately 5 km to the north of the development areas and is located along Highway 47.
In the vicinity of the MW and YT areas, formal camping facilities are available at the Coalspur and Lovett Campgrounds. Other activities include oil and gas development, timber harvesting, outfitting, trapping and outdoor recreation.
A.5.1 Mercoal West The proposed MW development is located approximately 30 km southwest of the Coal Valley Mine (plant site). It is anticipated that the mining development will disturb approximately 522 ha within the MW area. The development area is located on the west side of Highway 40 in parts of Townships 48-49, Ranges 22-23; W5M (Figure A.1.0.1) The majority of the MW area is within the Middle McLeod Ecodistrict of the Rocky Mountain Foothills physiographic region which is characterized by a rolling, undulating and ridged landscape (Bentz et. al. 1986).
The MW development area is located within the McLeod River Watershed and is drained by Mercoal Creek and McCardell Creek. Luvisolic soils on medium textured till and glaciolacustrine material occupy most of the landscape with Brunisolic soils found on upper ridges, on shallow soils over bedrock and on steep slopes and Gleysolic and Organic soils occurring in the valleys.
Upland vegetation is found on 75% of the MW mine permit area and is dominated by evergreen coniferous forests composed primarily of lodgepole pine. Wetlands encompass 19% of the MW mine permit areas and are dominated by treed fens with black spruce and tamarack. Another 2% of the mine permit area is disturbed by current development.
March 2008 A-11 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.5.2 Yellowhead Tower Area The proposed YT development is located approximately 25 km northwest of the Coal Valley Mine (plant site). It is anticipated that the mining development will disturb approximately 822 ha within the YT area. The development area is located on the west side of Highway 47 in parts of Townships 48-49, Ranges 21-22; W5M (Figure A.1.0.1). The majority of the YT area falls primarily within the Yellowhead Ecodistrict of the Foothills Physiographic Region which is characterized by pronounced ridges with relief of 50 to 125 m (Bentz et. al. 1986).
The YT development area is also located within McLeod River Watershed and is drained primarily by Chance Creek and Jackson Creek. Luvisolic soils on medium textured till and glaciolacustrine material occupy most of the landscape with Brunisolic soils found on upper ridges, on shallow soils over bedrock and on steep slopes and Gleysolic and Organic soils occurring in the valleys.
The YT mine permit area consists of 90 % upland vegetation and 3% wetlands. Upland areas are dominated by evergreen coniferous forests composed primarily of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta). The relatively low occurrence of wetlands is probably due to the high topographic relief. The remaining 7% of the area is disturbed by current development.
A.6 DEVELOPMENT PLAN A.6.1 Mercoal West The MW area is located west of the community of Mercoal. Coal occurs along a NW/SE trending structure. Terrain is rolling with topography controlled by structural ridges and valleys draining to the McLeod River. Small creeks, Mercoal Creek and McCardell Creek, drain from the area into the nearby McLeod River.
The land is forested, forming part of the West Fraser Mills Ltd. Forest Management Area (FMA). Public access is limited since little timber harvesting or gas development has yet to occur directly on the proposed mining area. The area is favourably zoned for mining within the Alberta Energy Coal Branch Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) and the Coal Policy zones. No sensitive wildlife or landscape features occur within the area.
Additional details of the proposed mining are provided in Section C.2.
A.6.2 Yellowhead Tower The YT area is located between the community of Coalspur and the forestry fire lookout tower (Yellowhead Tower). The land consists of steep ridges oriented in a NW/SE trend. The proposed pit area drains to the south by Chance Creek, a tributary of the Embarras River.
This area is also within the West Fraser FMA and is favourably zoned for mining within the IRP and Coal Policy zones. Several gas wells and pipelines are located in the area therefore public access is more open. Local snowmobile and quad users access this area. Recreation areas (camp ground) and random camping spots are found along the highway and Embarras River corridor.
Additional details of the proposed mining are provided in Section C.3.
March 2008 A-12 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.6.3 Development Schedule It is anticipated that both the MW and YT areas will be developed in a number of stages using both dragline and truck and shovel/backhoe mining methods. The total production for the CVM from 2008 to 2015 is shown in Table A.6.2-1.
Table A.6.2-1 Combined Production Plan for Existing, Proposed and Future Mine Development Mine Area Mine Year Method 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total Dragline 1.80 1.80 Existing CVM Backhoe 2.20 1.00 0.30 3.50 Dragline 1.60 1.60 Mercoal West Backhoe 0.40 0.60 0.40 1.40 Dragline 0.40 1.60 2.00 Yellowhead Backhoe 0.60 1.50 1.90 2.30 2.30 2.10 0.60 11.30 Dragline 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 8.50 Robb Backhoe 0.20 1.70 1.90 Yearly Total 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
The development schedules for the MW and YT areas are shown in Table A.6.2-2 and Table A.6.2-3.
March 2008 A-13 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Table A.6.2-2 Mercoal West Development Schedule 2009 2010 2011 2012 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 SETUP Build Haulroad Build Powerline
PIT 124 - DRAGLINE Marion 7450 Drill Blast Page 752 Backhoe Reclamation Reslope Soil Placement Seeding Tree Planting
PIT 125 - TRUCK/SHOVEL Dozer Drill Blast Backhoes Reclamation Reslope Soil Placement Seeding Tree Planting
March 2008 A-14 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Table A.6.2-3 Yellowhead Tower Development Schedule 2009 2010 2011 2012 to 2014 2015 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 SETUP Build Haulroad Build Powerline
DRAGLINE PITS Marion 7450 Drill Blast Page 752 Backhoe
BACKHOE PITS Dozer Drill Blast Backhoes 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Reclamation Reslope Soil Placement Seeding Tree Planting
March 2008 A-15 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.6.4 Regulatory and Planning Due to geography and close proximity of the MW and YT areas, they have been combined into this application. In order to maintain production at the coal processing plant CVRI believes it needs to obtain all regulatory approvals by early 2009.
A.7 SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION A.7.1 Need for Public Involvement During 30 years of operation, the CVM has successfully consulted with stakeholders to make them aware of mine activities and to ensure that they have a forum for discussing concerns and issues. CVRI identified the following components of the public involvement program to support the EIA process:
• to make efforts to ensure CVRI’s corporate commitment to public involvement is met; • to make efforts to meet the requirements of the regulatory approval process for mine applications; • to make efforts to be a good corporate neighbour and be proactive in providing project information and public participation opportunities for the purpose of building trust and a good relationship with the public; • to make efforts to identify public issues and opportunities for the purpose of addressing project concerns as part of the mine expansion application process; and • to make efforts to gain the benefit of public comment and support for a better application.
A.7.2 Objectives and Scope CVRI has established the following objectives to guide the public involvement program for the proposed mine extension and environmental impact assessment:
• establish a program within the overall application, work scheduling and budget; • identify key community and interest groups and people and encourage their participation; • provide adequate information for people to learn about the project and weigh the advantages and disadvantages of its development; • obtain information from the public to assist in project decision making; • identify and understand the concerns and issues of stakeholders and make efforts to ensure they are addressed; and • enhance public understanding of the project and foster support through a credible and consistent involvement process.
The following broad range of community and public interests were identified and, wherever possible, local and regional representatives or organizations were the first point of contact for involvement.
March 2008 A-16 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• First Nations and Aboriginal Peoples; • residents and organizations in the Mercoal, Coalspur, Robb, Cadomin, and Edson communities; • business/resource holders; • environment; • health and wellness; • provincial, federal and municipal governments; • people with an interest in the area - historical patterns of use; • recreation users; • industry/professional associations; and • CVM employees.
The public consultation program methods included distribution of project information to area residents, interested groups and individuals in addition to the CVM employees. The project was discussed with stakeholders through direct contact, three newsletters and two open houses. A description of the stakeholder consultation methods is provided in Section G and Appendix 5.
A.7.3 Results From the various consultation methods, a list of comments and concerns regarding the proposed mining expansion was compiled. Complete results of the public consultation program can be found in Appendix 5. The main areas of concern identified to date include:
• reclamation – backlog of land to be reclaimed; • recreational access – reduced access to established all terrain vehicle (ATV) and snowmobile trails; • noise, dust and visual – impacts from mining operations and equipment; • wildlife – impact on wildlife populations in the area; • water supply – maintenance of drinking water quality; • mine operations – seasonal timing; • preservation of area history; • stakeholder contact - ongoing public involvement; and • property and other resource impacts.
A.7.4 Continuing Consultation A broad range of interests were identified during the preparation of this application. Should project development be approved, CVRI intends to involve the communities in decisions that affect them. CVRI’s goal is to carry forward the following public involvement principles as part of mine development operations:
During the CVM project, CVRI intends to engage in ongoing, open and co-operative dialogue with anyone who is interested.
March 2008 A-17 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• decisions which may affect the public will be clearly identified and explained; • public participants will be provided with opportunities to view, learn, question and understand the CVRI’s operating practices; • access will be provided to project representatives to provide information and discuss issues, needs and concerns; • a variety of mechanisms for involvement are possible and CVM will endeavour to adopt those that are receptive to the community of interest, and/or most effective and appropriate to the needs or issues at hand. There will be an ongoing relationship with government representatives who regulate, review and approve plans or issue permits or licences; • meaningful public involvement opportunities will be provided that are advertised, documented, and linked to the project decision making processes; and • project and application time requirements will be adhered to, to the extent possible.
Where appropriate, CVM staff will also endeavour to serve as a participant or advisor in regional public land and resource planning. For example, over the operating life of the CVM, CVRI has used a wide range of opportunities to maintain a forum for exchange of information and ideas with stakeholders and the general public. Specific opportunities for public input include:
• CVM’s annual participation in the Edson & District Chamber of Commerce Trade Fair; and • CVM’s status as an active member on West Fraser Mills Ltd. Forest Resources Advisory Group.
Personal contact is encouraged and made with numerous stakeholder groups to discuss specific mine related activities such as off-permit exploration activities and reclamation/lake access considerations. Along the Silkstone and Lovett Lake public access route, a kiosk is maintained at the trail head with questionnaires made available for public input and comment into CVRI’s reclamation practices.
A.8 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION SUMMARY The MW and YT Mine Extension Project Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Cumulative Effects Assessment (CEA) have been prepared to comply with all relevant provincial and federal legislation. The EIA methodology and approach was selected to satisfy both federal and provincial requirements within the spirit of the Canada - Alberta Agreement on Environmental Assessment Cooperation.
The application was initiated with the main objective of providing a comprehensive and integrated technical and environmental document that would enable an expeditious review and approval process. This section of the application provides a summary of more detailed information that is contained in Section E and in the consultant reports (CR# 1 to 14). To assist in the review of this application, a common numbering scheme exists for each discipline between the sections of the report (e.g. Air Quality is discussed in Sections A.8.1, E.1, and CR #1; Fisheries is discussed in Sections A.8.2, E.2 and CR# 2…).
March 2008 A-18 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Valued Environmental Components (VECs)
The rigorous review of the proposed MW and YT Project identified a number of environmental aspects that were specific to the Project. Each of the various disciplines that were investigated developed a list of Valued Environmental Components (VECs). VECs for the Project are those environmental aspects associated with the proposed project development, which have been identified as a concern by CVM, the public, government and professional community. VECs consider both biological (i.e. ecosystem) and socio-economic attributes because of the broad- based definition of environmental effect as outlined both in federal and provincial legislation.
The EIA and CEA were focused on the effects that the Project would have on the identified VECs, in combination with other activities in the region, over the projected life of the Project. Application of the selected methodology provided the scope for the EIA and CEA.
VECs were assessed using three scenarios:
• baseline case –which includes existing environmental conditions and existing projects or “approved” activities; • application case – starts with the baseline case and adds only the MW and YT Project; and • planned (CEA) case – which includes past studies, existing and anticipated future environmental conditions, existing projects or activities, plus other “planned” projects or activities.
VECs have been identified within each of the following disciplines:
• air quality; • fisheries resource; • groundwater; • historical resources; • human health; • hydrology; • noise; • socio-economic; • soils; • surface Water Quality; • traditional land use; • vegetation, wetlands and rare plants; • wildlife; • greenhouse gas and climate change; and • land and resource use.
March 2008 A-19 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Study Areas
The “footprint” of the MW and YT Project is approximately 1344 ha (MW 522 ha, YT 822 ha). The local and regional study areas varied between different disciplines. The CEA for this project considered all the existing, approved and reasonably foreseeable projects. The study area boundaries defined within the scope of the EIA are shown on Figures D.2.3-1 and D.2.3-2. The projects considered in the CEA are discussed further in Section D (EIA Methodology). There are no announced projects within the CEA area and the reasonably foreseeable projects have very little detail developed for inclusion into the cumulative effects assessment and therefore numerous assumptions were made. All these assumptions were very coarse in nature.
Based on the input received during CVRI’s public involvement program, advice from regulatory agencies and the professionals working on the project, CVRI is confident that the approach used for the EIA and CEA for the MW and YT Project is comprehensive and accurately reflects the impacts of the Project. CVRI believes that the environmental effects assessment presented in the application provides the decision-makers with the necessary information to decide whether the Project is acceptable and in the public interest.
A summary of the EIA is provided in this section. The full EIA information is provided in Section E and the Consultant’s Reports which are listed in each sub-section below.
A.8.1 Air Quality The effects of the MW and YT Project on Air Quality are discussed in Section E.1 and Consultants Report #1 (CR# 1).
The operation of the project would result in combustion products from off-road vehicles (mine vehicles, mainly haul trucks) and fugitive dust being emitted into the atmosphere. Combustion products include trace elements of CO, SO2, particulates with diameter below 2.5 µm, 10 µm, and 30 µm, and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) that lead to the formation of NO2. Fugitive dust includes particulates with diameter below 2.5 µm, 10 µm, and 30 µm. These compounds are regarded as criteria air contaminants and as such, ambient concentrations should not exceed Alberta ambient air quality objectives (AAAQOs). Fugitive dust and combustion by-products contain trace metal elements. Combustion by-products also contain polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and other hazardous air pollutants.
There were two potential mining scenarios used for the air quality monitoring. With the first scenario there was active mining at the southeast end of MW and at a central location of YT occurring simultaneously. It is anticipated that this would be the worst possible case for impact to air quality in the vicinity of Mercoal. In this scenario, mining activities would begin in the MW pit at the southeast corner project area in the vicinity of the community of Mercoal. Mining will proceed northwest to the end of the proposed pit and will utilize both dragline and truck/shovel mining methods.
The second scenario involves the worst case condition for receptors near the YT area. The two pits closest to the community of Coalspur are expected to be in operation at the same time for approximately one month. Pit 160 would involve dragline operations and Pit 150 would involve
March 2008 A-20 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
truck/shovel mining. It was assumed the overburden would be placed in between the two pits and a dozer will maintain the pile. For this scenario, it was conservatively assumed that all haul trucks would be transporting coal from Pit 150 to the plant.
Emissions from mining activities are made up of fugitive particulate emissions and vehicle combustion emissions. Fugitive sources include emissions from dragline and shovel material handling, dozer material handling, and haul road traffic. Fugitive emission calculations are based on U.S. EPA AP-42 emission factors and adjusted for pits and haul road sources by particulate escape factors based on particle size and wind speed. Combustion related emission sources were modelled as area sources along haul roads and as volume sources within the pits. Combustion sources along the haul roads were given an initial height of 15 m to account for the plume rise and exhaust height from tailpipes.
The results of dispersion modelling showed that NO2, SO2, CO, and PM2.5 predicted concentrations for all emission scenarios all below AAAQOs or the Canada Wide Standards (CWS) beyond the permit boundary line and at all nearby residences. For total suspended particulates (TSP) and PM10 daily concentrations at MW and the daily PM10 concentrations at YT were slightly above the AAAQO and interim guidelines. However, it is expected that the actual impacts will be reduced given the conservative assumptions used in the ISCST3 modeling.
Given the results of the modeling, and the conservative assumptions used, the operation of the MW and YT Project is predicted to have an insignificant effect on air quality in the area.
A.8.2 Fisheries The effects of the MW and YT Project on the fisheries resource are discussed in Section E.2 and Consultants Report #2 (CR# 2).
Baseline aquatic resources investigations were conducted seasonally, during the spring, summer, fall, and winter. Table A.8.2-1 provides common and scientific names as well as species codes for all fish species captured during baseline investigations for the MW and YT Project.
Table A.8.2-1 Fish Species Captured during Baseline Investigations
Common Name Scientific Name Species Code Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis BKTR Bull trout Salvelinus confluentus BLTR Burbot Lota lota BURB Mountain whitefish Prosopium williamsoni MNWH Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss RNTR Spoonhead sculpin Cottus ricei SPSC
March 2008 A-21 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
During baseline field investigations, fish presence was confirmed in eight water bodies within the MW and YT local study area (LSA) including:
• McCardell Creek; • Unnamed tributary to McLeod River (MCT); • Unnamed tributaries to Mercoal Creek (MET1, MET2, and MET3); • Chance Creek; • Jackson Creek; and • Embarras River.
The McLeod River and Mercoal Creek, which border the MW area were not sampled during the baseline conditions assessment as it is expected that they will not be directly disturbed during mine development. Fish presence in these watercourses was determined from existing historical information. Fish distribution for water bodies within and adjacent to the MW and YT Project is presented in Table A.8.2-2.
Table A.8.2-2 Fish Species Distribution in Watercourses in and Adjacent to the MW and YT Project
Artic brook bull mountain longnose longnose rainbow spoonhead trout- white Water body Reach burbot grayling trout trout whitefish dace sucker trout sculpin perch sucker
McLeod River X X X X X X X X X X McCardell 1 Creek 2 √ √ X X √ X McLeod River √ X X √ X X √ X √ Tributary Mercoal Creek X X X X X X Mercoal Creek √ Tibutary 1 Mercoal Creek √ X X X Tributary 2 Mercoal Creek √ √ Tributary 3 1 Chance Creek 2 √ X X X √ X X Jackson Creek √ X Embarras X √ X √ X X √ X √ X √ X X River √ baseline field investigations X historical reference (FMIS, Blackburn et al. 2001, Hildebrandt 1988, Manalta 1982)
While both the McLeod River and the Embarras River support a relatively diverse fish species assemblage, the smaller streams draining the MW and YT areas were primarily populated by brook trout and rainbow trout. Brook trout were the most common and widespread within the study area and rainbow trout, while less abundant, where also found to occupy a number of the streams within the LSA; other species, including bull trout, burbot and spoonhead sculpin, were captured infrequently and were not abundant.
March 2008 A-22 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
The majority of streams within the LSA provided seasonal habitat and lacked sufficient deep water habitat to support fish during the winter. Overwintering habitat was determined to be present in Chance Creek and is likely available in the Embarras River, but was virtually absent in other small streams within the LSA. The headwaters of larger streams and the smaller tributaries in the LSA provided low quality habitat and exhibited common habitat limitations that were principally related to low stream flows and substrate composition. Habitat utilization in these streams was generally limited to widely-separated adult brook trout or rainbow trout that were likely on feeding excursions.
The significance of potential impacts to aquatic resources was assessed in relation to Valued Environmental Components (VECs) within the LSA and regional study area (RSA). The rationale for the selection of VECs included consideration of the results of baseline studies, results of the CVM stakeholder consultation program, professional opinion, and species status according to the Alberta Species at Risk Program. Typically, the selection of fish species as VECs also relies on Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Traditional Land Use (TEK/TLU). In the case of the MW and YT Project, the results of the TEK/TLU assessment indicate no traditional use of fisheries resources in the aquatics LSA or RSA. The VECs selected for the assessment of significance of effects include:
• Arctic grayling; • Brook trout; • Bull trout; • Burbot; • Mountain whitefish; • Rainbow trout; • Spoonhead sculpin; and • Benthic Invertebrates.
Project specific impacts relative to direct physical disruption or loss of habitat were determined using Project development plans and descriptions provided by CVM and the hydrology impact assessment (Section E.6 and CR# 6). The plans were examined to determine if the construction or location of facilities would directly impinge on or otherwise affect physical habitat components in or immediately adjacent to the watercourses in the LSA.
Other project specific impacts related to surface water quality (sediment and contaminant introduction that might enter the aquatic system and affect the biota), and surface water quantity (changes in flow regimes) were addressed in CR# 11 and CR# 6. Those impacts were then assessed in terms of potential effects on aquatic resources and habitat, and ultimately interpreted in terms of potential effects on VECs.
Components of the project with the potential to result in direct habitat loss or alteration are related to temporary stream diversions, permanent stream realignment, and haulroad crossings. A total of nine diversions are expected to occur in the MW area (CR# 2, Figure 15). Six of the diversions (Diversions 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9) involve small headwater, or ephemeral drainages that do not provide fish habitat while the other three diversions would involve fish-bearing streams. The
March 2008 A-23 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project haulroad alignment crosses several ephemeral or undefined drainages and the headwaters of two defined watercourses (McCardell Creek and Mercoal Tributary 2). A total of six diversions are expected to occur in the YT area (CR# 2, Figure 16). Diversion 1 involves a small drainage that offers sub-marginal fish habitat; the other diversions involve Chance Creek and CHT1. The haulroad alignment requires two major watercourse crossings (Embarras River and lower Chance Creek). Settling ponds established on Jackson Creek will likely be situated upstream of viable fish habitat; it is not expected that other settling ponds will be established on water bodies.
Changes in water quality that impact aquatic habitat are primarily related to potential increases in sediment loads in streams within the LSA and RSA. Settling ponds will provide effective mitigation of habitat impacts related to potential sediment introduction. TSS concentrations in the McLeod and Embarras Rivers are not predicted to change as a result of the project and it is unlikely that predicted small increases in TSS concentrations in McCardell Creek, Mercoal Creek, Jackson Creek and Chance Creek due to impoundment discharge will exceed CCME guidelines.
Cumulative impacts were defined as those that were neither reversible nor mitigable, were medium to long term in duration and operated cumulatively with similar impacts resulting from existing or planned developments in the CEA.
Mitigation strategies employed for the MW and YT Project are based on proven, effective, methodologies that have been used by CVRI and other industry in the past; through proper implementation of these strategies the project specific effects arising from the MW and YT Project are expected to be fully mitigated and are not expected to contribute to cumulative effects.
Environmental effects on fisheries resources were assessed after accounting for relevant mitigation measures (Section A.9.2). Project-specific effects on fish and fish habitat will be fully mitigated by development of habitat enhancement plans to satisfy “No Net Loss Guiding Principle” of Fisheries and Oceans Canada. As such, there will be no residual impacts to fish and fish habitat associated with direct Project effects. With mitigation the effects of the project on fisheries resources will be insignificant.
A.8.3 Groundwater The effects of the MW and YT Project on groundwater are discussed in Section E.3 and Consultants Report #3 (CR# 3).
The methodology for the evaluation of potential environmental impact from the proposed mine extension was to analyze the existing data base from the area, collect selected core hydrogeological information (water levels, hydraulic conductivities and water chemistry) from the proposed mine area and synthesize all of this into an appropriate assessment. This type of assessment has the advantages of building on existing information and is therefore believed to be a reliable predictor of events.
Previous environmental assessments (Luscar 1999, 2005) have demonstrated that hydrogeological impacts of mining in this area will not extend beyond the boundary of the site.
March 2008 A-24 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Therefore, the local study area (LSA) will be the MW and YT proposed mine permit boundaries. There will be no differentiation between the LSA and RSA for the purposes of the hydrogeological assessment.
Coal mining in the Coal Valley area took place between the early 1900’s and 1952. The CVM began operations in the late 1970s. A considerable number of groundwater investigations were conducted during the 1970s and early 1980s to investigate dewatering issues, water supply and slope stability. During the 1990s, monitoring of groundwater levels and chemistries was undertaken in piezometers installed specifically for this purpose adjacent to some pits.
Major ion chemistry information in the South Block (Pits 120, 121, 130, 131, and 141) and Mercoal Phase 1 and 2 (Pits 122, 142, 123 and 143) was collected for 10 years and it was determined that shallow groundwater tends to be calcium – magnesium bicarbonate with relatively low total dissolved solids (TDS) while deeper groundwater is commonly sodium – potassium bicarbonate with relatively higher TDS. In terms of major ion chemistry, it is believed that all groundwater in this area is of good quality with respect to such guidelines as drinking water quality. The distinction between South Block and Mercoal Phase 1 and 2 is slight and reflects the overall freshness of groundwater to depths of up to 100 m.
Groundwater in the South Block and Mercoal East Phase 1 and 2 areas is very fresh to depths of approximately 100 m. The groundwater is potable and meets freshwater aquatic guideline with the occasional exception of an aluminum concentration. TDS are not observed to exceed 200 mg/L reflecting the rapid movement of water within the shallow system.
Water samples have been collected from a series of piezometers in the West Extension that were characterized as sodium bicarbonate with TDS ranging from 300 to 2,300 mg/L. There appears to be no issues with this water chemistry. The YT area, the subject of this application, is simply the northwest extension of the West Extension. The valley of the Embarras River forms a physiographic boundary between West Extension and YT.
The high topographic relief and lack of wetlands in the coal trend represented by West Extension is likely the cause of the difference in groundwater chemistry compared to South Block and Mercoal East Phases 1 and 2 since the geological units are the same.
The potential impacts that surface mining may have on the groundwater resource may be placed into two categories:
• the category dealing with groundwater levels; and • the category dealing with groundwater quality.
The groundwater levels category includes all phenomena that are a function of those levels such as production capacity of wells and groundwater movement.
The impacts of the Project on local water wells was completed for Mercoal as there are three water wells in service but was not completed for Coalspur as there are no local water wells. These wells are located on Lots 7, 9 and 17. All three are more than 500 m from the east end of the MW pit. It has been shown that lowering of water levels adjacent to mining pits does not
March 2008 A-25 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
extend beyond 100 m for the 30 m of water level drawdown in a pit. At the southeast end of MW the pits will be approximately 30 m deep. Since these wells are located at significantly greater distances there is no possibility of water level declines. The conclusion is that the impact on the wells in Mercoal will be insignificant.
There are a number of local springs that are used for water supply (i.e. Steeper spring, Yellowhead spring and Coalspur spring). No effect on the Steeper Spring is expected as it is located several kilometres south of the MW area and the impact on Steeper Spring will be insignificant. The Yellowhead spring may potentially be cut off by the proposed project. It is likely that this spring will cease to provide a source of water. There is no direct way to mitigate this situation. Residents will be able to obtain water from the Coalspur spring. Therefore, the impact of the removal of this source of local water supply will be insignificant. The Coalspur spring is located approximately 1,000 m southwest and across Chance Creek and Embarras River and is fed by entirely different water sources than those involved in either project. The impact on Coalspur Spring will be insignificant.
It has been shown that the impacts of drawdown of groundwater levels in the mine pits of this area do not extend as far as several hundred metres from the pit and they recover quickly after dewatering activities cease. The effects of groundwater drawdown are deemed to be insignificant.
With respect to how changes in groundwater quality could occur in the vicinity of the Project, these are related primarily to mine spoil and changes due to spills and leaks. Measuring of toe springs at the base of external rock dumps has demonstrated that there is an insignificant impact of spoiling on water chemistry. Major ion chemistry at toe springs and in the West Extension respectively shows that TDS, pH, bicarbonate and sodium have similar median concentrations in disturbed and natural situations. Nitrate levels may be elevated above background in mines (or portions of mines) where significant amounts of explosives were used. The nitrate concentrations get leached out after several years. Thus, the occurrence of nitrate is self- mitigating. The impact of nitrate on groundwater chemistry is insignificant. With regards to spills and leaks, rapid response and clean up will occur. The probability that such an event could cause an impact on groundwater quality is remote. The impact is therefore insignificant.
Environmental effects on groundwater were assessed after accounting for relevant mitigation measures (Section A.9.3). With mitigation the effects of the project on the groundwater resource will be insignificant.
A.8.4 Historical Resources The effects of the MW and YT Project on Historical Resources are discussed in Section E.4 and Consultants Report #4 (CR# 4).
Twenty-three archaeological sites were found within the MW study area. Of the known sites five are located within the project footprint and will be recommended for mitigation including sample excavations and detailed mapping, recording, and photographing. Since the assessment was completed additional areas have been proposed for development. CVM will ensure an
March 2008 A-26 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
assessment has been conducted on new development areas, in accordance with the Historical Resources Act, prior to any development taking place.
Approximately one third of the YT development area has been assessed with nine sites located. Assessment of the remaining development will be required. Nine sites have been identified within the YT area with seven potentially located on the project footprint. These seven sites will require either confirmation that they are outside of the project footprint or further mitigation.
Once completed, the Historical Resource Impact Assessment (HRIA) will be submitted to Alberta, Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture. (ATPRC) In the HRIA, mitigation measures will be proposed and undertaken with ATPRC approval. CVRI will ensure that ATPRC is made aware of the final development plans and has provided clearance for development before any activities take place.
A.8.5 Human Health The effects of the MW and YT Project on Human Health are discussed in Section E.5 and Consultants Report #5 (CR# 5).
The Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) describes the nature and significance of potential short-term (acute) and long-term (chronic) health risks to people associated with exposure to the Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) emitted or released from the proposed extension of the CVM into the MW and YT mining areas. The HHRA examines potential health risks attributable to the Project in combination with existing and approved regional developments, as well as with developments planned for the region.
Based on input received during the CVM stakeholder consultation program and the Traditional Land Use Assessment (Section E.12 and CR# 12), the following human health-related concerns were identified:
• concern over the potential impact of air emissions from the Project on human health, especially in relation to asthma; • concern over the possibility that dust generated by the Project will cause and/or aggravate asthma; • concern over the potential impact of the Project on water quality; and • concern over the consumption of local foods (i.e., vegetation, fish and wild game) that could be impacted by the deposition of air emissions from the Project.
The purpose of the following discussion on the baseline conditions in the Yellowhead County is to gain an understanding of potential human health risks associated with existing conditions in the region.
The MW and YT Project area is located in the Aspen Health Region, with a population of 178,134 based on 2005 data (ACB 2006). In a recent Alberta Health and Wellness (AHW) study on the health of Albertans (AHW 2006), the health status of people living in the Aspen Health Region were reported relative to other regions in Alberta.
March 2008 A-27 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Conservative assumptions were incorporated into the HHRA to minimize the likelihood of exposures being underestimated. Conservatism assumptions were used throughout the risk assessment.
For potential Project impacts, separate assessments were completed for acute and chronic exposures, based on the duration of exposure to each COPC. Risk estimates were summarized according to:
• acute inhalation; • chronic inhalation; and • chronic multiple pathways.
The discussion of the results focuses on risk estimates that exceeded 1.0, as these cases could signify potential health risks.
Acute Inhalation For the vast majority of the COPCs, predicted acute RQ values did not exceed 1.0 under any of the three development cases (i.e., Baseline Case, Project Case and Application Case). Where RQ values were less than 1.0, potential health risks for these COPCs and scenarios were considered to be negligible. Risk Quotients that were predicted to exceed 1.0, include:
• acrolein; at site boundary and for local community residents, and • “eye irritant” mixture for local community residents.
Risk Quotients (RQs) of 2.1 were predicted for acrolein for both the site boundary MPOI and for local community residents for both the Baseline and Application cases. Project Case RQ values were well below 1.0 (0.000012 – 0.000015) for both receptor types. Thus, the Project is predicted to have little influence on acrolein exceedances predicted for the region. This indicates that the MW and YT Project is not predicted to appreciably increase the risk of adverse health effects associated with the short-term exposure to acrolein in the region.
RQs of 2.7 were predicted for the eye irritant mixture for local community residents for the Baseline Case and Application Case. The RQ value predicted for the Project Case is 0.000035, which represents a 0.0013% increase over the Baseline Case predictions. This indicates that the Project is not predicted to appreciably increase the risk of adverse health effects associated with the short-term exposure to the eye irritant mixture.
Chronic Inhalation Assessment Chronic inhalation health risks were estimated based on the assumption that an individual is continuously exposed to a predicted annual air concentration. The predicted chronic RQ values did not exceed 1.0 in most instances, with the exceptions of:
• acrolein; and • nasal irritants mixture.
March 2008 A-28 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
RQs of 9.0 were predicted for chronic acrolein exposures for both the Baseline and Application cases. The predicted Project Case RQ value was very low (0.0000084), signifying the small incremental contribution from the project.
A RQ of 9.0 was predicted for the nasal irritants for the Baseline and Application cases. Project Case RQ values were almost negligible (0.0000099). The primary chemical contributor to the nasal irritants mixture is acrolein. The risk estimate predicted under the Application Case (9.0) was entirely attributable to the existing conditions represented by the Baseline Case.
Chronic Multiple Exposure Pathway Assessment The multiple exposure pathway assessment focused on those COPCs emitted into the air with the potential to persist or accumulate in environmental media (i.e., PAHs and metals).
The risk estimates, presented as RQ values, are only provided for the most sensitive life stage (i.e., age class) for each of the receptor exposure scenarios. The most sensitive life stage is defined as the life stage with the greatest exposure per unit body weight per day (Health Canada 2004). On this basis, young children were typically identified as the most sensitive on a per unit body weight basis.
The predicted chronic multiple pathway RQ values did not exceed 1.0 for most COPCs and mixtures in most instances, with the exceptions of:
• methyl mercury (baseline and application RQ = 1.5); • the “neurotoxicants” mixture (baseline and application RQ = 2.0); and • the “reproductive and developmental toxicants” mixture (baseline and application RQ = 1.5).
In all cases the RQ for the project case was extremely low (0 to 0.00052).
For Methyl Mercury a RQ of 1.5 were predicted for local community residents for the Baseline and Application cases. Predicted RQ for the Project Case were 0.0. Potential health risks associated with long-term exposure to methyl mercury are not expected to change as a result of the Project since no changes in RQ values were predicted between the Baseline Case and the Application Case.
The conclusions of the risk assessment also indicate low baseline case health risks associated with methyl mercury exposure, considering the following:
• predicted RQ values under the Baseline Case were attributed entirely to local fish consumption, and predicted fish tissue concentrations were within the range of mercury concentrations measured in freshwater fish collected from other regions of North America; • estimates of daily exposure in the region appear to be within the range predicted for typical Canadians (Health Canada 2007);
March 2008 A-29 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• the degree of conservatism incorporated in the U.S. EPA RfD relative to other regulatory agencies; and • the conservative assumption that community residents obtain all (100%) of their fish from local water bodies
RQ for neurotoxicants were 2.0 for the Baseline Case and Application Case. RQ for the Project Case were very low (0.00039). Potential health risks associated with long-term exposure to neurotoxicants are not expected to change as a result of the MW and YT Project since no changes in RQ values were predicted between the Baseline Case and the Application Case.
The conclusions of the risk assessment also indicate low baseline case health risks associated with neurotoxicants mixture exposure, considering the following:
• the RQ values associated with methyl mercury, which is the primary contributor to the mixture RQ values, are conservative estimates based on the assumptions made in the HHRA; • most of the RQ contributions (77 %) the Baseline Case were the result of assumed fish consumption; and • it was conservatively assumed that residents would obtain all (100%) of their fish from the local waterbodies over their lifetimes.
RQ for reproductive and developmental toxicants of 1.5 were predicted for the Baseline Case and Application Case, and an RQ of 0.00052 was predicted for the Project Case. Potential health risks associated with long-term exposure to reproductive and developmental toxicants are not expected to change as a result of the MW and YT Project since no changes in RQ values were predicted between the Baseline Case and the Application Case.
The conclusions of the risk assessment also indicate low baseline case health risks associated with reproductive and developmental toxicants exposure, considering the following:
• the RQ values associated with methyl mercury, which is the primary contributor to the mixture RQ values, are conservative estimates based on the assumptions made in the HHRA; • most of the RQ values (96%) under the Baseline Case were the result of assumed fish consumption; and • it was conservatively assumed that residents would obtain all (100%) of their fish from the local water bodies over their lifetimes.
The proposed Project is a continuation of existing mining activities. As the mine development progresses, emission sources will cease in the one area and move to another. Therefore, the Project related effects are projected to be the same as the cumulative effects for air quality for the MW and YT Project and are expected to be insignificant.
March 2008 A-30 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.8.6 Hydrology The effects of the MW and YT Project on Hydrology are discussed in Section E.6 and Consultants Report #6 (CR# 6).
The surface hydrology assessment component addresses the potential impact of the MW and YT Project on sediment concentrations in relation to runoff and sediment control. It provides input and background to other environmental assessments including water quality, aquatics and groundwater. The conceptual designs of water management aspects for the MW and YT Project were included in the assessment and are summarized in Section C – Mining and Development Plan.
The MW and YT areas are located entirely within the McLeod River watershed. Therefore, the regional study area (RSA) focuses on the McLeod River basin upstream of its confluence with the Embarras River.
The local study area (LSA) includes:
• Mercoal Creek, McCardell Creek and an Unnamed Creek between these named streams in the MW area that all drain to the McLeod River; and • Chance Creek and Jackson Creek which both flow southeast into the Embarras River near the community of Coalspur, in the YT area.
The baseline data consists of local data from the following sources:
• long-term regional flows and data on small to large watersheds; • historic mine operations data and experience (primarily sediment and precipitation data); and • short term site-specific streamflows in the project areas.
Extensive historical flow monitoring data has been compiled at CVM since operations started in 1978. CVM submits annual water management reports to AENV documenting precipitation, flow, sediment concentrations and extraordinary or extreme hydrologic events, particularly as they affect the operation and management of the impoundments and water management works.
Over the current life of CVM, it is anticipated that at least 18 lakes and numerous wetland areas will be formed. At present Silkstone, Lovett, Stirling and end-pit lakes 44, 45 and 35 are reclaimed and reclamation is proceeding on Pits 43W, 43-2 and 34, 25S and 25E plus several wetland areas. Recent and active mine areas in the South Block and Mercoal East blocks will create additional small lakes and wetlands. In the upper Embarras River basin five end pit lakes (122W, 132E and W, 141 and 142) are planned totalling 31.5 ha in area. In the upper Mercoal Creek basin the Upper and Lower Mercoal lakes are planned for pits 123 and 143 totalling 59 ha in area.
Streamflow monitoring was conducted in 2006 on four streams (at six sites) expected to be affected by mining operations in MW and YT. The six sites are:
March 2008 A-31 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• Mercoal Creek at Pembina Road; • Mercoal Creek near the mouth at ConocoPhillips Canada Resources Corp. (ConocoPhillips) pipeline crossing; • McCardell Creek below the mine permit boundary; • Chance Creek upstream of Highway 47, downstream of mine operations/activities; • Upper Chance Creek near the portion of the creek within the mine permit boundary; and • Jackson Creek near the mouth.
Previous streamflow monitoring in MW has been conducted on Mercoal Creek (various sites) and McCardell Creek. Some spot data has also been collected on Lost Creek; however, mine operations and plans may only affect a small portion of the headwaters of this creek. As part of existing mine developments within Mercoal Creek watershed, CVM installed continuous, open water flow monitoring on Mercoal Creek to monitor long–term flow conditions on the creek as mining proceeds in the watershed. A continuous water level logger (levelogger) was installed at the Pembina Road crossing site in May to October 2006 and will be re-installed each year. Leveloggers were also installed on McCardell Creek and Lower Chance Creek.
Available total suspended sediment (TSS) concentration or sediment concentration data were reviewed and summarized for the region and from existing mine operations. Sediment concentrations are not uniquely related to flow magnitude. Streams can generate high sediment concentrations because of snowmelt, windblown sources, unstable banks and slopes, dirt filled gullies and natural bed material movement that may be independent of flow and variable from stream to stream. Maximum recorded concentrations at the long-term WSC stations were 622 mg/L at Eunice Creek, the unlogged watershed, and 1,370 mg/L at Wampus Creek, the partially logged watershed. Maximum concentrations recorded at the mine from 1992 to 2005 were 691 mg/L from Coal Creek impoundment, 706 mg/L from Pit 15 impoundment and 711 mg/L in the Lovett River downstream of the mine. The above values are one time extreme magnitudes. The average and maximum sediment concentrations from the impoundments are well within the range of those measured on the regional watersheds.
Sediment concentration compliance limits for CVM operations (EPEA Approval 11066-01-05) are as follows:
• monthly average maximum - 50 mg/L; and • daily maximum - 350 mg/L.
No monthly average exceedances have occurred over the 1992 to 2005 period from controlled impoundment releases. Daily maximum exceedances from impoundments have occurred a couple of times – at Halpenny West at 387 mg/L in 1998 and from Pit 15 at 706 mg/L in 2001.
The Project impacts were assessed in accordance with the methodology outlined in Section D. For the hydrology assessment the VECs selected include water availability (i.e. flow) and water quality. Elements of the project that could have an effect on runoff and sediment include:
March 2008 A-32 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• cleared land; • waste rock piles; • haul roads; • mine pits and dewatering; • water impoundments during and after mining; • water diversions (during mining and restoration); and • water withdrawals.
During the hydrology assessment a number of water management facilities were developed as mitigation for potential impacts to surface water flow and sedimentation. The water management plans were considered when determining the potential impacts of the project. The historical record of operations at CVM shows that TSS levels from mine operations are highly variable with average and maximum sediment concentrations within the range of those measured on the regional watersheds. Based on the design basis, the mines operations history and the proposed mitigation measures, applying sound sediment control mechanisms can ensure that runoff affected by normal project operations can be controlled and routed to settling ponds, before being released to external watersheds. Upsets such as blocked culverts, or washout of berms may at times occur but these are the exception and not the rule.
Provided sound sediment control measures are implemented at the mines, roads, pipelines and other projects in the basins, the cumulative effects on sediment loading will be insignificant compared to natural variations.
Environmental effects on surface hydrology were assessed after accounting for relevant mitigation measures (Section A.9.6). With mitigation, the effects of the project on the surface hydrology (particularly sedimentation) will be insignificant.
A.8.7 Mammalian Carnivores The effects of the MW and YT Project on Carnivores are discussed in Section E.7 and Consultants Report #7 (CR# 7).
Eighteen species of mammalian carnivore are either known to be present or are assumed to exist in the regional area surrounding the MW and YT Project. All were initially considered to be candidates as Valued Environmental Components (VEC) for this impact assessment. Seven of the 18 species are listed as species of concern by provincial or federal governments. The species selected as VECs for the Project include:
• grizzly bear; • marten; • lynx; and • wolf.
March 2008 A-33 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Three nested study areas were used to assess Project-specific and cumulative impacts on mammalian carnivore VECs:
• the Principle Development Area (PDA) - the disturbance footprint for the project (1,351 ha); • the local study area (LSA) - includes the proposed mine permit areas (5,420 ha); • RSA is the same as the cumulative effects assessment area (CEA) (265,845 ha) and is based on seven Bear Management Units (BMU). BMUs were based on tailoring of watershed units to a size similar to an adult grizzly bear home range (300 to 400 km2). The overall size of the RSA (2,658 km2) is similar to the RSA used for other grizzly bear EIAs in the Coal Branch region including the Cheviot (Bios 1996) and Coal Valley Mine Extension (Kansas and Herrero 1999) projects.
For the baseline information, the MW portion of the LSA encompasses a total of 35.5 km2. This accounts for 1.3% of the RSA. Sixteen of the 20 land cover types mapped within the RSA are found within the LSA. The most abundant vegetation cover types within the MW LSA were dense conifer forest (30.6%), moderately closed coniferous forest stands (16.7%), closed forest regenerating stands (16.2%), open forest regenerating stands (8.7%) and shrubby habitats (5.1%). The YT portion of the LSA encompasses a total of 18.8 km2 which accounts for 0.7% of the RSA. Land cover types that were most common in the YT LSA included dense conifer forest (30.1%), moderately closed coniferous forest stands (18.6%), dense mixed forest (18.5%), moderately closed mixed forest (7.8%) and shrub (6.2%).
Several carnivore species were chosen for focussed backtrailing surveys. Trails detected during tracking transects were randomly selected and backtrailed. Carnivore backtrailing was stratified such that sampling occurred within the proposed mining areas and transportation corridors as well as recently reclaimed mine operation areas. The animal’s path of travel was mapped using the track-log function in handheld GPS unit. The purpose was to delineate fine-scale travel paths, record habitat use and to document behavioural observations. Recorded observations included: direction of travel, bedding, feeding, defecation, trail interactions with other species as well as general behaviour.
Twelve wildlife species or species groups were recorded on transects within the RSA. These included three ungulate species (moose, elk and deer spp.), five carnivore species (weasel, marten, coyote, lynx and wolf), three small mammal species (microtine rodent spp., red-squirrel and varying hare) and one bird (grouse spp.).
The assessment of the proposed project on the four carnivore VECs addressed five potential effects on wildlife habitat and populations (CR# 7, Section 5.1):
• habitat alteration; • sensory disturbance and effective habitat loss; • habitat fragmentation; • direct mortality; and • barriers to movement.
March 2008 A-34 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Project-specific effects were considered to be those that will occur during the life of the project. The magnitude and significance of Project-specific effects were assessed after taking into account mitigation measures (i.e. residual effects). Residual effects are defined as those that occur after mitigation measures (including reclamation) have been applied and the project has ceased. Assessments of magnitude and significance assume successful implementation of proposed mitigation. Increased Mortality • The development of the mine extensions is unlikely to cause an increase in direct marten mortality. • Overall, it is predicted that development of the MW and YT mine extensions is unlikely to cause an increase in direct lynx mortality. • Project-specific mortality of wolves is predicted to be minimal because hunting and the carrying of firearms is not permitted on the mine permit areas; and, vehicle traffic speeds on the mine and haul roads are limited to less than 70 kph. • Direct mortality of grizzly bears from the proposed mine extensions are unlikely. Neither legal hunting nor firearms are allowed on the mine permit areas. There are no records of grizzly bear deaths (radio-collared or otherwise) on mine lands in the last 30+ years of active mining in the Coal Branch area.
Habitat Alteration • After the immediate maximum effect of mining, the losses of marten habitat are ameliorated over time by natural aging (‘succession’) of forests. • After the immediate maximum effect of construction, the losses of lynx habitat are ameliorated over time by natural aging of existing forests and regeneration of forest on reclaimed lands. • After the immediate maximum effect of construction, a gain of 19.8% (MW) and 49.4% (YT) of combined high/very high suitability wolf habitat occurs during the stand initiation and as reclaimed areas mature, at years 25 and 50 wolf habitat suitability declines. • There is strong evidence to suggest that ungulates and plants used for reclamation are sought and used extensively by grizzly bears occurring in the vicinity of the CVM areas. If similar reclamation measures are used at the MW and YT extensions then impacts on grizzly bears from a habitat alteration perspective will likely be positive within 10 years post-construction.
Sensory Disturbance • Marten will possibly avoid some high quality habitat during blasting and coal hauling during active mining, but this is expected to be a short to medium-term effect. • Lynx will likely temporarily avoid areas within the mine permit adjacent to active mining (blasting and active hauling). This effect will be short-term and will not likely persist beyond the actual period of the effect (i.e. active mining).
March 2008 A-35 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• Wolves are not particularly prone to sensory disturbance as evidenced by their regular use of active roads and logging/mining areas. • Grizzly bears will likely be displaced from the active mining time period for the Mercoal and Yellowhead mines. Displacement will result from construction noise and blasting. At some point shortly after reclamation grizzly bears will be attracted to the herbaceous forage and ungulates on the reclaimed areas.
Movement Obstruction • Marten movements will be limited on the mine site until forest cover re-establishes, likely sometime between 10 and 25 years post-reclamation. • Lynx movements will be limited on the mine site until medium to tall shrub or forest cover re-establishes, likely sometime between 10 and 25 years post-construction. • Grey wolves are wide ranging animals that in general are able to disperse across fragmented landscapes to occupy or reoccupy habitat provided they are not excessively trapped or shot. Wolves routinely travel through reclaimed mine lands in the Coal Branch region including the existing CVM in areas of little or no security cover. • The mined lands are not expected to act as a serious barrier to grizzly bears, with the possible exception of during active blasting and hauling.
Habitat Fragmentation • Marten are adapted to and can tolerate a degree of habitat fragmentation within their home range. • Increased edge and proportion of landscape in early seral condition can result in increased coyote abundance in the boreal forest (Murray and Boutin 1991). Coyotes have the potential to affect lynx directly through interference (i.e. aggression or killing) and through exploitation of shared resources (i.e. eating hares). • Fragmentation related to the Project is thus not expected to affect wolf populations in the region.
The greatest threat to regional grizzly bear populations is human-caused mortality caused by legal and illegal hunting, self defence kills by ungulate hunters, and vehicle/train collisions. Any land use that results in increased access or use of access by individuals carrying firearms is a threat to grizzly bear population persistence. Any roads with vehicle speeds greater than 70 kph also have potential to result in increased grizzly bear mortality.
Without consideration of the proposed Project, the draft Alberta Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan (2005) states that “based on recent estimates of grizzly bear mortality rates there is a concern that the population may decline”.
Environmental effects on carnivores were assessed after accounting for relevant mitigation measures (Section A.9.7). With mitigation, the effects of the project on carnivores are predicted to be insignificant.
March 2008 A-36 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.8.8 Noise The effects of the MW and YT Project on noise levels at nearby receptors are discussed in Section E.8 and Consultants Report #8 (CR# 8).
The proposed project consists of two mining areas. Each proposed mine area and nearby receptors are far enough from the other that, in terms of noise assessments, each one can be treated independently of the other (i.e. noise levels from one will not be audible at receptors for the other).
Receptors in the area include cottages at Mercoal and Coalspur. Many of these cottages are seasonally occupied (i.e. used as weekend and short term vacation spots). The assessment, however, has been conducted assuming that these residents will be there full time. This provides a conservative analysis.
Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) Directive 038 on Noise Control sets the permissible sound level (PSL) at the receiver location based on population density and relative distances to heavily traveled road and rail. The PSLs for both Mercoal and Coalspur are 45 dBA LeqNight and 55 dBA LeqDay. When the mining operations are beyond 1.5 km from either community, the PSL is 40 dBA LeqNight at a distance of 1.5 km from the operational boundary.
The results of the baseline noise monitoring indicated night-time noise levels which were generally quiet in the absence of vehicle or rail traffic, as expected. However, when vehicles passed by on the nearby highways or when trains passed by, the night-time noise levels were significantly higher. Other than the road and rail noises, there were no stationary noise sources and the dominant sources during the quiet times were local birds and leaf rustling in the light wind.
Two mining scenarios were modelled for MW. In the first scenario it was assumed there would be full mining operations taking place nearest to the Community of Mercoal. In the second scenario haul road related noise was modelled without mining operations. This will depict the noise climate once the mining equipment has moved far enough to the northwest to result in noise levels far below those of the haul trucks. The noise modeling for the MW resulted in noise levels below the receptor permissible sound levels for both modeling scenarios.
Because of the varying options with mining operations in YT, three different modeling scenarios have been generated. The first scenario included coal haul and backhoe mining operations in the northern southeast pit (Pit 150), closest to the north Coalspur receptors. The second scenario included coal haul and full mining in the southern southeast pit (Pit 160). The third scenario included haul road related noise without mining operations which depicts the noise climate during the initial operation stage of the mine as it starts in the northwest.
The noise modeling for the YT resulted in noise levels in exceedance of both the PSL-Night and PSL-Day for some Coalspur receptors when a single backhoe and two haul trucks are operating in Pit 150 (Scenario 1). As such, a minimum 7.0 m spoil pile is required on the east side of the pit to reduce the noise levels such that day-time only operations are allowed. All other scenarios modeled resulted in night-time sound levels under the PSL-Night for all receptors.
March 2008 A-37 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
From the results obtained through the baseline noise monitorings and modeled mining equipment and haul truck noise levels, it is predicted that mining activity will be within the ERCB’s permissible sound level but may be audible by nearby receptors. As such, additional recommendations have been provided for noise mitigation (Section A.9.8).
A.8.9 Socio-economic The effects of the MW and YT Mine Extension Project on socio-economic conditions are discussed in Section E.9 and Consultants Report #9 (CR# 9).
Generally, an economic impact assessment has two purposes. One is to estimate how much the Project will contribute to the local and provincial economies in the form of employment, income and fiscal revenues. The second purpose of the analysis is to determine the amount of new employment that the Project will generate in local communities, directly and indirectly, so that an estimate can be made of the increases in population that these communities can expect.
The Project being considered in this analysis is not a new enterprise but an undertaking that will allow the continuation of an existing venture. The Project is not expected to create any new employment nor, therefore, any increase in population or change in social conditions in the local or regional area. Its approval will likely not create increased demand for local infrastructure or services and an understanding of community capacity is therefore not relevant.
The assessment focuses on the economic impacts that will likely continue as a result of project approval and impacts that will likely occur due to project denial.
It is anticipated that approval of the MW and YT Project will ensure the continuation of the following economic impacts:
• the provision of 510 direct, indirect and induced jobs every year for residents of the RSA; • the generation of $42 million annually in labour income for RSA residents; • property taxes for Yellowhead County of about $314,000 per year; • the continuation in the province as a whole each year of 925 P-Y of employment, $64 million in associated labour earnings and additions to GDP of $115 million; and • total provincial revenues from direct and indirect personal income taxes, royalties and municipal and education taxes of about $5 million per year.
It is predicted that denial of the Project would not only result in the loss of the positive impacts noted above but could also lead to out-migration from the local area which would have further economic effects on the region by leading to declines in municipal revenues and public service employment. It would also create a certain amount of social dislocation and a potential increase in the demand for social services related to this dislocation.
A.8.10 Soils The effects of the MW and YT Mine Extension Project on the soils resources are discussed in Section E.10 and Consultants Report #10 (CR# 10).
March 2008 A-38 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
The soil inventory methods employed followed current procedures and protocols used in Alberta. Mapping was done at more than one scale, in response to planning needs at various levels of detail. The RSA (mineral permit boundary) was mapped at a "project planning" scale of 1:10,000. The LSA (planned disturbance area) was mapped at an "operational scale" of 1:5,000. Soils were investigated at a minimum of 382 locations in the MW study area, at 249 locations in the YT study area and 14 locations along the dragline walk road which are sufficient for both operational planning and decision-making (LSA) and for regional evaluation and project-level planning (RSA).
In order to evaluate the effects of mining on the soil and terrain in the area the following activities were undertaken:
• mapping of the baseline soil resources of the MW and YT areas; • testing and evaluation the overburden, for reclamation suitability, acid mine drainage potential, and trace elements within the proposed mine area; • review of mining, operating and reclamation plans; • identification of valued environmental components (VECs); • development of an initial assessment of environmental effects (negative or positive) to the soil and terrain; • development of the soil salvage and reclamation plan to mitigate adverse effects where possible; and • evaluation of the significance of any residual and cumulative adverse effects to the soil and terrain.
A key mitigative measure is to conserve the soil resource in advance of mining and to replace the soil on the recontoured landscape after mining, creating minesoil landscapes. The operational goal of this reclamation is to achieve equivalent land capability. Equivalent land capability must be provided for the key land uses, which are:
• watershed protection; • wildlife; and • forestry.
Soil profiles and landscapes cannot be restored to original condition or "structure". Reclamation builds minesoil landscapes and profiles using salvaged surface soil (coversoil) and spoil that are appropriate for the intended land use. The design and construction of appropriate minesoil landscapes and minesoil profiles is a key initial step in re-establishing ecosystem function.
A large amount of reclamation technology has been developed at mountain-foothills coal mines in Alberta and British Columbia over the past 30 years. With regards to the MW and YT projects, the most relevant technology and demonstration of achievability is the soil reclamation program at the CVM. Knapik and Rosentreter (1999) reviewed minesoil characteristics and quality at the CVM and Strong (1998) assessed the re-vegetation and reforestation results. These
March 2008 A-39 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
findings demonstrate that reclamation practices are providing for the establishment of soil function and the progression of reforestation.
One lift of soil material (“surface soil rootzone”) will be salvaged, stored and used to construct minesoils. Surface soil, for the MW and YT project, is defined as suitable soil rootzone material that is salvaged, stored, and used as a coversoil material to build minesoils. The salvaged surface soil includes some of the tree slash, stumps and roots; the forest duff or litter layer (L, F, and H organic layers); the soil solum (A and B soil horizons); and suitable subsoil (C soil horizon). Surface soil will be salvaged prior to excavation of pits, building of external dumps or construction of roads. Salvage is expected to be completed with a combination of dozers, backhoes and truck and shovel while a dragline is sometimes used to lift piled soil to the stockpile location.
Coversoil is the term applied to the soil material that is placed on prepared spoil to construct the minesoil profile. A minesoil profile is constructed by placing coversoil (salvaged surface soil) over spoil. Spoil, for the MW and YT Project, is defined as glacial deposits, weathered (soft) rock, and broken bedrock material which has been mined and placed in a dump or backfill, and has usually been bulldozed to shape the spoil surface. Spoil varies greatly in fines and rock content and other characteristics, and therefore varies in suitability as a deep rootzone in a minesoil profile.
Alberta Environment has approved a number of minesoil profiles that are currently used at the CVM:
Sodic areas:
• 0.5 metres of surface soil on areas used for commercial timber; • 0.3 metres of surface soil on areas used for general forest/ wildlife; and • 0.15 metres of surface soil on reclaimed lowland areas.
Non-sodic areas:
• 0.3 metres of surface soil on areas used for commercial timber and general forest/ wildlife; and • 0.15 metres of surface soil on reclaimed lowland areas.
There is approximately 10 million bank cubic metres (BCM) of soil resource available in the Project area and CVM will need approximately 4.1 million bank cubic metres (BCM) to reclaim the entire site.
The valued environmental components (VEC’s) were identified as a result of the soil and terrain inventory and input from the public; from governments; and from other project team members. VECs related to soil resources include:
• the soil resource (including topsoil) and the natural diversity of the soil landscapes; • land capability for preferred land uses plus future productivity; and
March 2008 A-40 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• soil and surficial geologic materials support good water quality and have normal concentrations of trace elements.
In the extended term the newly constructed minesoils will be subject to modifying influences. Erosion, transport, and re-deposition of sediments in local areas (which are natural landscape processes) will modify textures and thickness of surface layers. The frequency and magnitude of modification will diminish as re-vegetation cover becomes complete and provides effective protection. As a grass cover develops (two to five years) minesoil profiles will change as a turf layer grows and organic carbon accumulates; soil structure and soil horizons develop; soil chemistry changes; and nutrient cycling is established. As the initial grass cover is succeeded by forest cover the minesoils will change from having grassland soil properties to having forest soil properties, similar to the pre-mining situation.
There is a short-term, adverse effect due to complete disruption of soil profiles and soil landscapes. The complete disruption to the soils lasts for approximately five to ten years. Mitigation and protection of the soil resource in a surface mine operation is achieved by two strategies; a) minimizing disturbance, and b) soil conservation and construction of new soils after mining.
The strategy for soil salvage and minesoil construction is based on the best available reclamation technology, and on the demonstrated reclamation success at the CVM and at other mine operations in the region.
The initial minesoil profiles, with grassland soil characteristics, may continue as grassland soils or will develop into forest soils, or wetland soils, depending on site location and re-vegetation treatments. Some minesoil landscape and minesoil profile attributes, such as surface form and soil layer thickness are developed immediately. Some of the "early pioneering attributes" can be developed over one to three years (grass cover, tree seedlings); and some of the "early succession attributes" take five to 20 years or longer to develop (nutrient cycling, native plant invasion, wildlife hiding cover, forest stands).
Environmental effects on the soils resource were assessed after accounting for relevant mitigation measures (Section A.9.10). With mitigation, the effects of the project will be insignificant.
A.8.11 Surface Water Quality The effects of the MW and YT Mine Extension Project on the surface water quality are discussed in Section E.11 and Consultants Report #11 (CR# 11).
The scoping phase of the Project determined numerous surface water quality variables to be evaluated. The assessment of surface water quality determined the frequency of exceedance of surface water quality guideline values; and the ratio of concentrations of water quality variables to water quality guideline values. The guidelines for the protection of aquatic health are used in the assessment.
March 2008 A-41 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
The assessment considered:
• soil erosion, sediments entering streams via surface runoff, increased sedimentation of surface waters; • leaching of nitrates into surface waters; • discharges of water from impoundments to natural watercourses; and • effects on end-pit lakes on surface water quality.
The LSA for the Project is defined by the small drainages that begin within the mine permit boundaries of the proposed MW or YT mines and discharge into the McLeod or Embarras River systems. Watercourses considered in the LSA include:
• Mercoal Creek, Unnamed Mercoal Creek Tributary No. 1, Unnamed Mercoal Creek Tributary No. 2, Unnamed McLeod River Tributary, and McCardell Creek for the MW mine; and • Chance Creek, Jackson Creek, Fenton Creek, and White Creek for the Yellowhead Tower mine.
The RSA for the Project is defined by the LSA plus the following watercourses:
• McLeod River from its confluence with Mercoal Creek to downstream of its confluence with the Embarras River; and • Embarras River from its confluence with Chance Creek downstream to its confluence with the McLeod River.
As part of the baseline sampling, CVRI has measured surface water quality in many watercourses throughout the LSA and RSA as part of various routine/operational surface water sampling programs. Additional surveys were also conducted of watercourses in the LSA and RSA specifically for this Project. Water quality baseline surveys were conducted in June (spring), July (summer), September (fall), December (winter) 2006, as well as August (summer), and October (fall) 2007.
Many surface water quality variables in the Baseline Case dataset are below detection limits in many parts of the LSA, with concentrations of 33% of all combinations of measured water quality variables, seasons, and sampling locations being below detection limits. There is little seasonal variability to the frequency with which concentrations of water quality variables are below detection limits; the proportion of water quality variables in the LSA that are below detection limits ranged from 30% in winter to 36% in the spring.
Concentrations of 4.5% of all combinations of measured water quality variables with guidelines, seasons, and sampling locations are above guideline values. Ten of the 29 surface water quality variables with guidelines have guideline exceedances at least once in the Baseline Case dataset. The highest frequency of guideline exceedance occurs in the fall season (5.1%) and the lowest in the spring season (3.7%). The frequency with which surface water quality guidelines for total metals are exceeded is 3.2% of all cases.
March 2008 A-42 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Like the LSA, surface water quality in the RSA is also of generally good quality. With respect to detection limits, 29% of the 2,319 combinations of measured water quality variables, seasons, and sampling locations in the RSA are below detection limits. With respect to guideline exceedance, the frequency with which surface water quality guidelines are exceeded is low for the RSA in the Baseline Case, with 8% of all water quality variables exceeding surface water quality guidelines.
During the construction phase of the Project activities such as tree clearing, soil salvage, construction of roadways and watercourse crossings have the potential to impact water quality within the LSA. With implementation of the mitigation measures summarized in Section A.9.11, potential impacts of the construction phases are predicted to be insignificant for the following reasons:
• impacts from construction activities which have been identified as potentially adverse are mitigable using standard engineering and environmental design applications; • short-term impacts on surface water quality during culvert crossing installation are inevitable. Those impacts are temporary and localized; • potential adverse effects associated with sedimentation are expected to be localized and will be confined to the immediate and downstream areas of the construction activities; • potential effects on water quality associated with sediment input will be temporary and will occur mainly during the period of construction and until bank slopes are stabilized; and • construction of haul roads, mine dewatering systems and overburden dumps are expected to follow mining plans and schedules. CVRI expects to carry out these activities sequentially, at intervals, before the development of new areas.
There will be changes in surface water quality as a result of construction activities. However, with the effective application of well-accepted and regulated mitigation measures, these changes are expected to be within established protective standards and to cause no detectable change in surface water quality beyond short-term, local effects. These effects will also diminish quickly once construction activities have been completed. The residual effects (after mitigation) of the Project on surface water quality from construction activities of the Project are assessed as insignificant in the LSA.
Explosives containing ammonium nitrate will be used during the mine operations to break-up the overburden material for easier removal. Broken rock and unconsolidated material will be deposited in piles, or be used to backfill previously mined areas. These rock piles and backfilled areas are potential sources of leaching of nitrates into surface waters.
While increases in concentration of nitrogen compounds downstream of active mines has been documented in a number of cases, elevated concentrations have often been below surface water quality guidelines. The residual effects of the Project on surface water quality via increases in nitrogen caused by the use of explosives containing ammonium nitrate are assessed as insignificant in the LSA and the RSA.
March 2008 A-43 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Because of the potential influence of the mining activities on the surface water quality, CVRI intends to use water collection and impoundment structures to attenuate the impacts of the mining activities on the local water courses, including increased sediment loads and deposition of those sediments. The water from these impoundments will be released into local streams which will eventually merge with the larger systems. A water quality model was developed and applied to simulate the effects of impoundment discharges into receiving waters for four creeks in the LSA: Jackson Creek and Chance Creek for the YT; and McCardell Creek and Mercoal Creek for the MW. The model was developed from empirical data gathered as part of baseline conditions, as well as from compliance data reported by Coal Valley.
The model scenarios used as basis of the impact analysis contain a number of conservative assumptions:
• all impoundments would be discharging at the maximum rate at all time, which is unlikely to occur;
• the receiving watercourse was assumed to have the 7Q10 low flow event for the entire May to October period; • the model used 100 different simulations (years) but an actual effects monitoring program will not have this level of statistical power because the Baseline Case datasets for these four watercourses contain far fewer than 100; and • when water samples were below detection limits, largely for the 1999 (cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, and thallium) and 2003 (cadmium and cobalt), it was assumed that the concentration of that water quality variable was actually half of its detection limit. This means that the assumed concentrations were often above guideline values simply because their actual concentrations were not detectable.
The residual (after mitigation) effects of the Project on surface water quality via the operation of impoundments are assessed as insignificant in the LSA and the RSA.
Water quality of the end-pit lakes and any receiving watercourses downstream of the end-pit lakes will provide no direct benefit of loss to surface water quality resources in the LSA. While all of the end-pit lakes proposed for the Project will likely have groundwater as their major source of water and almost all of the most of the end-pit lakes proposed for the Project will likely be meromictic, water quality of the end-pit lakes proposed for the Project will likely be suitable for aquatic life. The residual effects of the Project on surface water quality in the end-pit lakes as a result of their design, construction, and management are assessed as insignificant.
CVM has been in operation for over 30 years. During this time they have successfully developed and operated surface water management systems. With mitigation, monitoring and adaptive management the MW and YT Project is predicted to have an insignificant impact on watercourses in the local and regional study area.
CVM has been in operation for over 30 years. During this time they have successfully developed and operated surface water management systems. With mitigation, monitoring and adaptive management the MW and YT Project will have an insignificant impact on watercourses in the local and regional study area.
March 2008 A-44 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.8.12 Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Land Use The effects of the MW and YT Mine Extension Project on traditional land use are discussed in Section E.12 and Consultants Report #12 (CR# 12).
First Nations people, or those of aboriginal heritage, and their ancestors have made use of the Foothills area of Alberta for the last 10,000 years. Under Treaty with the Crown and the Government of Canada, these First Nations’ uses were enshrined as the right to collect, hunt, fish, and trap for food on Crown land, as well as other traditional uses such as ceremonies and burials. Based on recent Supreme Court decisions, before certain developments may proceed in Alberta, proponents must ensure that consultation is undertaken with First Nations groups on lands where existing Treaty or constitutional rights may be infringed by development activities.
Commitments were made during earlier CVM consultation programs to ensure potentially affected Aboriginal community representatives were kept up-to-date on mine development activities. This included current mine operations and tours of potential extension areas.
In order to identify potentially affected First Nations groups, a draft version of the CVM “Aboriginal Consultation Program” was produced on June 6, 2006 and forwarded to the staff of Alberta Environment for review and discussion. At a June 19, 2006 meeting between representatives of CVRI and Cindy Elliot, Manager, Aboriginal Relations, Central Region for Alberta Environment (AENV), the CVM Aboriginal consultation program was discussed and a list of eight potentially affected First Nations groups was established. Based on this program, consultation and TLU studies were initiated in late July 2006 when information about the proposed mine extensions was sent to each potentially affected group. Bi-monthly updates on the progress of the consultation program were provided in July, September, and November 2007.
Consultations and TLU studies were initiated with several Treaty 6 First Nations, including the Alexis First Nation, Paul First Nation, O’Chiese First Nation, and Sunchild First Nation. In addition, societies representing non-treaty First Nations in the area are being consulted, including the Foothills Ojibway Society, Nakcowinewak Nation, Aseniwuche Winewak Nation of Canada, and the Mountain Cree (Smallboy) Camp (officially members of the Ermineskin Cree First Nation).
To date, substantial contact regarding CVM’s proposed extensions has been made with all identified potentially affected First Nations groups. The precise course of the discussions has differed with each group depending on the development of their own consultation and traditional use programs, and level of interest in the area. Communications have involved various mailouts, meetings, tours, open houses, campouts, and TUS field studies. One group has indicated no concern with the proposed extension area, and traditional use studies have been completed by the other seven parties for the MW and YT extension areas. Discussions regarding First Nations concerns with the development and possible mitigation strategies are on-going, and will be finalized on a group-by-group basis.
March 2008 A-45 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.8.13 Vegetation, Wetlands and Biodiversity The effects of the MW and YT Mine Extension Project on vegetation traditional land use are discussed in Section E.12 and Consultants Report #12 (CR# 12).
As part of the assessment, a list of VECs has been identified for the Project. VECs were selected based on consultation, investigation of past reports, and expert opinion, to address the potential impacts on vegetation and wetland resources resulting from the Project. Project VECs are:
• wetlands and riparian areas; • AWISC wetlands of limited distribution; • Peatlands; • patterned fens; • rare plants; • rare plant potential; • economic forests; • old growth forests; • non-native and invasive species; • traditional use plants; • ecosite phases of restricted distribution; • biodiversity; and • seed bank.
In total, 366 plant species were found in the LSA: 239 of these were vascular plants, and the other 127 were non-vascular plants (lichens, mosses, liverworts, and hornworts). Upland vegetative communities (ecosites b1 through f6, g2 and h1) occupy 1502 ha, or 80%, of the YT LSA, 2730 ha, or 77%, of the MW LSA, and 4232 ha, or 78%, of the total LSA. Wetland vegetative communities (ecosites l1 through m3) occupy 59 ha, or 3%, of the YT area, 676 ha, or 19%, of the MW area, and 735 ha, or 14%, of the LSA. Wetlands are not as common in the YT area.
The main effects of the project on upland vegetation in the LSA are losses of 309.6 ha of ecosite phase e1, 98.4 ha of ecosite phase e2, and 72.5 ha of e3. A total of 78.1 ha of lowland ecosite phases k, l, and m (bog, poor fen, rich fen) will be affected by the Project. It is anticipated that approximately 10.6 ha of marsh (ecosite n, Lower Foothills Natural Subregion) will be created around end pit lake margins. It is also anticipated that approximately 64 ha of open water will be created after reclamation. Depending on the final details of post-reclamation topography numerous small wetlands may also be created. It is also possible that some end pit lakes will not develop extensive areas of deep water but will remain shallow (<3 m), increasing the amount of marsh.
Eight of the vascular plant species identified in the LSA were on the Alberta Rare Plant Tracking and Watch Lists (Gould 2006), with a total of 10 occurrences. Fourteen rare bryophytes were found during the field survey, with a total of 20 occurrences within the LSA. In addition, two
March 2008 A-46 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project rare lichen species were found on two occurrences. No rare plant communities according to ANHIC’s Ecological Communities Tracking and Watch List (Allen, 2007) were found within the LSA.
Two separate land classifications were combined to create a 20-class land classification (LC20) coverage for use in the assessment of cumulative effects. Uplands occupy about 255,000 ha of the RSA, or about 96% and wetlands occupy 11,000 ha. The most common land class is conifer forest with 50-70% crown closure, followed by conifer forest with greater than 70% crown closure.
Initially, reclaimed ecosite phases will have a different understory species composition compared to naturally occurring phases, due to the initial application of the soil stabilizing seed mix. With time, planted trees are predicted to exert an influence on the understory microclimate conditions and ecosystem function, and as the canopy closes, the coverage of native species will increase. The increase of native species abundance has been observed on existing CVM reclaimed sites.
Environmental effects on vegetation and wetland resources were assessed after accounting for relevant mitigation measures (Section A.9.13). Mitigation and monitoring methods and approaches towards re-establishing pre-development land capability will be employed at all stages of the Project to minimize and, where possible, prevent Project effects. These methods will be implemented in conjunction with the Project Reclamation Plan, and priority effort will be given to the VECs. With mitigation the effects of the project on vegetation, wetlands and rare plants will be insignificant.
A.8.14 Wildlife The effects of the MW and YT Project on wildlife, including ungulates, small mammals, avifauna, amphibians, are discussed in Section E.14 and Consultants Report #14 (CR# 14).
The VEC’s chosen for assessment of the project effects include:
• ungulates (moose, deer and elk); • small mammals; • breeding birds and raptors; and • amphibians.
Thirty-two habitat types were identified for the LSA habitats were derived from ecosite phase coverage. Twenty-five habitats dominated by lodgepole pine-black spruce / labrador tea (38%) and various fen types (19%) occurred in MW. Twenty-six habitats dominated by lodgepole pine / tall bilberry (30%), and lodgepole pine-black spruce / labrador tea (18%) occurred in YT. Mixed wood habitats comprised about 10% of the YT but were barely represented in MW (1%). Cutblocks in various types of pine habitat represented about 16% of MW but were not present in YT. Hard surface right-of-ways comprised 4.0 % and 1.7% of YT and MW respectively. A total of 1,344 ha of wildlife habitat will be disturbed by the MW and YT Project. Of this 40% will occur in MW and 60% will occur in YT.
March 2008 A-47 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A number of field surveys were undertaken to assist with identifying wildlife resources in the area. These included:
• winter ungulate aerial survey; • pellet-group counts; • winter snow-tracking surveys; • small mammal trapping; • bird surveys; and • amphibian survey.
The aerial survey indicated that elk were the most abundant ungulate (133) observed during the winter air survey, followed by white-tailed deer (110), moose (64), and mule deer (9). Relative abundance as expressed by density (uncorrected for visibility bias) was: elk (0.32 /km²), white- tailed deer (0.26/km²), moose (0.15/km²), and mule deer (0.02/km²).
Observations recorded during the monthly ground surveys of Coal Valley Mine, West Extension and the South Block indicated that the elk was the most abundant ungulate at CVM (57% of observations), followed by white-tailed deer (36%) and mule deer (7%). No moose were observed on these surveys.
Seven species of small mammals and 26 individuals were caught on MW in 2004 during 1908 trap-nights. Capture success was 1.36% and the corrected catch effort was 1.43 animals per 100 trap-nights (TN). The masked shrew was the most abundant small mammal captured in MW. It was most abundant in Treed Poor Fen habitat but was also found in Pine / Bilberry and Pine / Bilberry 2-6m cutblock in MW. The southern red-backed vole was the second most abundant small mammal in MW and the most abundant in YT. It was found in all habitats in MW and all habitats except Treed Rich Fen in YT.
Snowshoe hare was the most abundant small mammal in MW measured by winter track counts. They were most abundant in lodgepole pine - black spruce / labrador tea habitat and 2-6 m cutblocks in the same habitat as well as black spruce-lodgepole pine / labrador tea habitats. No incidental observations of snowshoe hare were made on YT however snow track counts indicated they were reasonably abundant. They were most abundant on the YT in lodgepole pine - black spruce / labrador tea 2-6 m cutblocks. Tracks of snowshoe hare were observed in planted pine reclamation at CVM.
During the MW 2004 breeding bird survey, 446 individual birds representing 32 species were counted. Higher number of birds (513 individuals) and twice the number of species (60) were recorded on YT during the 2006 breeding bird survey. In the MW LSA, four bird species were classed as abundant, 14 were common, four were uncommon and 10 were very uncommon. In the YT LSA, six bird species were classed as abundant, 12 were common, 11 were uncommon and 14 were very uncommon. The Yellow-rumped Warbler, Ruby-crowned Kinglet, Swainson’s Thrush and Dark-eyed Junco were abundant in the MW and YT LSAs. The Chipping Sparrow and Varied Thrush were abundant in the YT LSA and common in the MW LSA. Seven species occurred exclusively on MW while 20 species occurred exclusively on YT.
March 2008 A-48 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Two groups of raptors are present on MW and YT. The diurnal raptors are represented by true hawks, falcons, eagles and soaring hawks and are active during daylight hours. Nocturnal raptors are represented by owls which are primarily active at night. The Northern Harrier, Bald Eagle, Cooper’s Hawk, Northern Goshawk, and Red-tailed Hawk, were present on or near MW. On the YT LSA the Northern Goshawk and Red-tailed Hawk were identified as possibly breeding and nine other raptor species were identified as migrants. Owl surveys indicated that three Barred Owls, two Great Gray Owls, and three Boreal Owls included YT as part of their home range.
Wood frogs and western toads were present on the YT and MW LSAs and at CVM. Boreal chorus frogs were not found on either the MW or YT. They were heard calling from roadside ditches, permanent ponds and shallow grassy pools on the Coal Valley Mine.
Industrial impacts on wildlife can be classed as direct or indirect. Direct impacts involve mortality by increased vehicular collisions; mortality by increased legal and illegal hunting through provision of new access. Indirect impacts include disturbance and habitat loss due to construction and operating phases. Indirect impacts can be divided into three categories; habitat change, creation of barriers, and harassment resulting in habitat alienation or death.
With mitigation the overall impact to wildlife resources will be insignificant. This assessment is based on the following vegetation response after reclamation:
• grassland vegetation will likely take five years to establish after initial disturbance; • trees are typically planted two-four years after the initial seed mix and after eight (pine) - 14 (spruce) years are expected to be two m high and begin to provide hiding cover for ungulates, i.e., 10-18 years after initial seeding. It is assumed that shrubs will be planted at the same time as trees; • most areas planted to trees will have crown closure by 25 years after initial seeding, average tree height will be >five m, understory vegetation will change to respond to altered light regime and native species adapted to understory conditions will begin to ingress and dominate; • marsh vegetation dominated by sedges and rushes (ecosite n1) around lake margins will be mature after 25 years; and • forested stands will begin to resemble ecosites with an understory of Hairy Wild Rye and Labrador Tea / feather moss at 50 years. More open areas including less densely planted forests and areas left as meadows will have higher cover and diversity of plant species and native graminoids will increasingly dominate open areas.
A variety of wildlife have been documented using undisturbed and reclaimed habitat associated with coal leases during and after the mining phase. Wildlife have colonized new habitat created by reclamation of coal mines. Activity associated with mining is predictable and focused allowing animals to habituate to this level of human activity and thus colonize the reclaimed landscape. The Mineral Surface Lease associated with CVM has provided a secure environment for wildlife and is instrumental in maintaining regional ungulate populations especially in the Critical Wildlife Habitat associated with the Lovett Ridge. Initial displacement of the existing
March 2008 A-49 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
wildlife community on the MW and YT LSA by active mining will be followed quickly by colonization of species appropriate to the stage of succession reached by the regenerated plant community. Because the development is relatively narrow and small in area, species representative of the initially undisturbed habitats are expected to continue to be represented in the final landscape. Designing complexity into the landscape (lakes, ponds, wetlands, variety in vegetation communities and topography) is expected to support wildlife diversity.
It is likely that over time, wildlife will adjust to the initial displacement and disturbance by colonizing newly available habitat and incorporating it into their daily and seasonal activities. Species composition will be similar, but changed, in response to the addition of lakes, ponds and other habitat features into the final landscape. Species composition of the wildlife communities will change over time in response to vegetation development and maturation.
The residual impact ratings assume that human recreation and access is managed to provide security for wildlife especially in the vicinity of the Lovett Ridge, structural complexity is established in reclaimed forest types, deciduous shrubs are incorporated into the reclaimed landscape, and industrial development in the region promotes best management practices that ensure long term viable wildlife populations.
A.8.15 Greenhouse Gas and Climate Change The effects of the MW and YT Mine Extension Project on greenhouse gas and climate change are discussed in Section E.15.
A greenhouse gas (GHG) is any gas that contributes to potential climate change. Common GHGs include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). GHGs absorb heat radiated by the earth and subsequently warm the atmosphere, leading to what is commonly known as the greenhouse effect.
Estimates of GHG emissions from the Project were calculated using industry experience and United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) emission factors. Expected GHG emissions (CO2e (t/yr)) for the construction, operational and decommissioning phases of the Project are:
• Construction – 3787 • Operational - 70,007 • Decommissioning - 3787
CVRI will develop a GHG Management plan that will incorporate a process of continuous improvement throughout the life of the Project and will contain elements that are consistent with the Province of Alberta’s GHG emissions reduction plan, Albertans and Climate Changes; Taking Action, (2002).
CVRI’s Project GHG management plan will include the following approaches:
• optimization of energy efficiency during Project design and operations; • best practices as the standard for all phases of the Project;
March 2008 A-50 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• equipment purchasing decisions made with consideration of continuous improvement principles, energy efficiency, appropriate equipment sizing, and improving technology (particularly, mine fleet emissions and combustion technologies); • rigorous equipment maintenance and replacement procedures; • training programs for operations personnel with a focus on reviewing plant energy use trends and identifying opportunities for improvement; • implementation of a GHG monitoring and reporting program to measure and compare against the GHG management plan and to identify gaps and opportunities for further improvement; • establishment of continuous improvement targets for the reduction of GHG emissions as part of the business planning cycle; • trading of GHG offsets, if necessary; and • contributing to the Climate Change and Emissions Management Fund, if necessary.
Climate change is of interest because of the potential effects it may have on sensitive stages or elements of the Project. Changes in climatic conditions (temperature, precipitation, and wind) may affect Project construction (e.g. delays due to inclement weather), operations (e.g. energy use, flooding, air dispersion, and other environmental components), and decommissioning and reclamation activities (e.g. efforts to restore the land for use). The next step of the assessment is to identify project impact considerations to possible future climate scenarios. To predict future climate scenarios, global climate models (GCMs) and regional climate models are used. These GCMs usually takes months or years to run. Some complex GCMs take into consideration interactions between the atmosphere, ocean, sea ice and land, atmospheric chemistry, carbon cycles, and possible future GHG emissions scenario. Even with the best information available to date, GCM predictions are still limited by many factors such as a large number of meteorological variables, large spatial and temporal scales, and many possible future global emissions scenarios.
Barrow and Yu (2005), in co-operation with AENV, looked at various GCM projections from the scientific community and examined how these predictions may translate to situations in Alberta. They presented some possible climate scenarios in their report “Climate Scenarios for Alberta (Prairie Adaptation Research Collaborative, May 2005)”. The climate scenario for the Edmonton region was selected as this climate scenario was the closest region, with the following changes predicted:
• Annual Mean Temperature +1.1°C • Annual Precipitation (mm) +6.0 mm • Growing Degree Days Index (DD5) 23.4% • Annual Moisture Index (AMI) 18.8%
March 2008 A-51 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Overall, the predicted change in climate is expected to have an insignificant effect on the Project. Prediction confidence is very high based on the quality of baseline data, confidence in analytical techniques, confidence in the numerous mitigation practices and technologies available, and the relatively short life of the Project.
A.8.16 Land and Resource Use The Land and Resource Use assessment provides an overview of land and resource use policies, management plans and leases pertaining to the land and resource use in the MW and YT areas. In addition, it describes unique sites, special features and recreation facilities in the area as well as existing commercial and recreational land and resource use activities.
The Coal Development Policy includes a land classification system that considers environmental sensitivity, alternate land uses, potential coal resources and infrastructure. The MW and YT areas are within Category 4, which allows “development permitted under normal approval procedures”.
The Project is located in an area covered by the Coal Branch Sub-Regional Integrated Resource Plan (1990). There are two zoning levels that have been determined through the IRP for the MW and YT development areas; Zone 2 (Critical Wildlife) and Zone 5 (Multiple Use). The intent of Zone 2 is to protect specific fish and wildlife populations by protecting aquatic and terrestrial habitat crucial to the maintenance of those populations. The intent of Zone 5 is to provide for the management and development of the full range of available resources, while meeting long-term objectives for watershed management and environmental protection.
Coal mining is considered compatible within the Zone 5 areas. Mining is also permitted under certain circumstance with appropriate conditions and controls within Zone 2.
Over the last several years industrial development in the region has increased significantly. In addition to coal mining there is oil and gas development, forestry, sand and gravel operations, and public roadways and utilities. CVM is currently discussing development plans with companies that fall within the proposed mine footprint and may be impacted by the mining activities.
There are also a number of non-industrial land uses in the area that focus on traditional use, camping, tourism and recreation. As part of the public consultation program CVM has undertaken discussions with many of the non-industrial users that may be impacted by the proposed development. Results of the ongoing discussions are included in Section G. CVM intends to continue to work with the public to ensure that their concerns are addressed.
The proposed haulroad connecting Pit 29 and YT will pass close to the existing Coalspur PRA. CVM anticipates that the operation of coal haul trucks could interfere with campers at the site. Temporary closure or the relocation of the site may be required. The Coalspur PRA is now managed and operated by West Fraser. In a 2006 Recreation Survey conducted by Hinton Wood Products (Hinton Wood Products 2006) it was found that there was limited use of the Coalspur campground.
March 2008 A-52 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
Two communities are located in close proximity to the proposed mine extension. The community of Mercoal is directly east of the MW area and the community of Coalspur is located immediately east of the YT area. Potential impacts to these communities have been considered in the environmental assessments (Section E).
CVRI is working with land users that may be impacted by the project. Mitigation measures will be implemented as required (Section A.9.16).
A.9 MITIGATION AND MONITORING This section provides a complete summary of the mitigation and monitoring that have been proposed by CVRI to neutralize or eliminate the environmental effects of the Project.
A.9.1 Air Quality A.9.1.1 Mitigation CVRI will undertake the following mitigation measures:
• continuation of existing dust suppression techniques including watering haul roads; and, • ensuring vehicles are serviced in order to minimize combustion emissions
A.9.1.2 Monitoring CVRI will conduct the following as part of its monitoring program:
• tracking issues reported by the public with respect to air quality. This will be done as part of the ongoing stakeholder consultation program.
A.9.2 Fisheries A.9.2.1 Mitigation CVRI will undertake the following mitigation measures:
• all defined watercourse crossings will be designed, and constructed to meet or exceed the regulatory requirements for approval under the provincial Water Act and federal Fisheries Act; • minimize the instream footprint of all haulroad crossings to ensure that the productive capacity of streams is maintained or improved; • habitat compensation measures will be identified and implemented at specific sites as needed, in consultation with Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD), and stakeholders, in order to ensure “no net loss” (NNL) of habitat productivity; • utilize standard practices that have been proven to be effective measures to mitigate potential adverse effects during instream construction associated with watercourse crossings;
March 2008 A-53 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• consider sensitive periods during construction planning by either planning construction to avoid these periods or implementation of site specific mitigation (i.e. redd surveys, fish salvage, sediment monitoring); • implement sediment and erosion controls prior to work and maintain them during the work phase until the site has been stabilized; • implement measures to minimize introduction of deleterious substances during construction including cleaning, servicing, and fuelling of equipment well away from water bodies; • revegetation of disturbed areas around crossing sites; • upon reclamation of crossings, streambed and stream banks should be restored to match pre-disturbance condition as close as possible; • restore of diversion channels to have a similar grade and channel dimensions as the pre- disturbance channel; • design and construct diversion channels so that physical habitat characteristics in the new channel are similar to the pre-disturbance channel in terms of size, habitat composition, substrate and cover; • reclaim of riparian areas to be similar to pre-disturbance condition and revegetation of the areas with rapid establishing species and native species; • remove previously impassable culvert (logging road) located on CHT1 near the confluence with Chance Creek to accommodate fish passage thereby providing access to previously inaccessible habitat; • maintain downstream flows; and • conduct a fish rescue and release (fish salvage) on water bodies occupied by fish to relocate fish that become stranded when flows are diverted.
A.9.2.2 Monitoring As part of the monitoring program CVRI will:
• regular compliance monitoring of impoundments as well as effects monitoring for surface water quality in natural watercourses, both upstream and downstream of Project activities; • monitor flows and TSS at all settling ponds; • conduct regular inspections of all drainage works; • conduct long term monitoring of flow in Mercoal Creek and Chance Creek to document critical low flow conditions during pit filling periods and to define the need for any bypass pumping to maintain in-stream flows; • expand the existing CVM aquatics monitoring program to include additional benthic macroinvertebrate sample sites; and • monitor channel stability, vegetative success, and success of habitat enhancement measures in the diversion channels.
March 2008 A-54 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.9.3 Groundwater A.9.3.1 Mitigation CVRI will undertake the following mitigation measures: • Completion of mining and pit dewatering activities will allow groundwater levels to return to near pre-mining levels • CVM will provide replacement water supply to local residents if the existing water wells are affected by mining activities.
A.9.3.2 Monitoring CVRI’s monitoring program will include:
• Monitoring of shallow groundwater conditions as required in the AEPEA approval, • on-going monitoring of water chemistry in selected springs in order to provide long-term information on effects on water chemistry, • on-going monitoring of water levels and water chemistry in selected monitoring wells extending from the original mining operations through Mercoal East Phase 2 and West Extension, • monitoring the existing wells in Mercoal; and, • monitoring of the Steeper and Coalspur Spring.
A.9.4 Historical Resources A.9.4.1 Mitigation Recommendations for mitigation are subject to review by Alberta Tourism, Parks, Recreation and Culture. Only after thorough review and acceptance of mitigation measures will CVRI be given approval to go ahead with the proposed development.
CVRI commits to the following
• complete a HRIA on any new area proposed for development, • follow mitigation measures as agreed upon with ATPRC; and, • obtain clearance from ATRPC prior to undertaking any new development.
A.9.4.2 Monitoring If a historical resource is encountered during mining CVM will stop work in the area until ATPRC has been notified and the appropriate mitigation measures put in place.
A.9.5 Human Health A.9.5.1 Mitigation Mitigation of potential health effects due to the project relies on appropriate mitigation of impacts to Air Quality (Section E.1.5), Surface Water Quality (Section E.11.5) and Groundwater (Section E.3.5).
March 2008 A-55 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.9.5.2 Monitoring CVRI currently monitors surface water and groundwater quality in the area. If any issues arise from existing monitoring programs or concerns raised from local stakeholders CVM intends to initiate the appropriate mitigation measures to ensure the mining operations do not pose an additional risk to human health.
A.9.6 Hydrology A.9.6.1 Mitigation CVRI will undertake the following mitigation measures:
• directing runoff from active mining areas, spoil piles and roads to settling ponds or retention and clean-out areas for sediment settling treatment, if necessary, before release to external watersheds. Settling ponds reduce or control the impact of the mining operation on downstream sediment concentrations and reduce downstream peak flows. Settling ponds will be sized and designed according to the latest sizing methodology and flocculant treatment technology and based on the extensive operating performance information from the existing mine operations; • diverting as much natural undisturbed area runoff around mine activities as practical in order to minimize changes to natural runoff patterns and minimize water management and sediment control measures (size and number) within the active mine areas; • planning and laying out facilities to minimize drainage diversions and runoff interception, for example, by locating roads along drainage divides, where possible, and by maintaining natural vegetated buffers between active mine areas and undisturbed streams; • incorporating flow and erosion control measures, such as ditch check structures, natural depressions or low areas to create cleanouts (for runoff and sediment retention). Allow depressions or cleanouts to de-water by a combination of evaporation and exfiltration, wherever possible; • filtering sediments by seepage through natural and constructed materials and possibly through local wetland areas if isolated, where practical; • installing haul road berms to contain road runoff and direct it to designated runoff control works (e.g. ponds, ditches, depressions or cleanouts); • training personnel to minimize disturbances and use and maintain drainage controls; and • conducting ongoing monitoring, operations and maintenance as outlined in the water management plan with periodic reviews and adjustments, as required.
A.9.6.2 Monitoring CVRI’s monitoring program will include: • Continuation of monitoring programs already in place at the existing mine. This will include flow and TSS monitoring at all settling ponds, regular inspections of all drainage works and upstream and downstream water quality sampling. • to document the effect of mine operations on flow regimes, long term monitoring of flow on Mercoal Creek at the Pembina Road crossing station is in place now and will continue.
March 2008 A-56 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A similar long term station on Chance Creek is proposed to be established. These flow monitoring sites will be used to document critical low flow conditions during pit filling periods and to define the need for any bypass pumping to maintain in-stream flows.
A.9.7 Mammalian Carnivores A.9.7.1 Mitigation CVRI will undertake the following mitigation:
• selected native trees and shrubs such as alder and willow will be planted; • downed woody debris (stumps) will be maximized through direct placement of top-soil and associated slash and stumps; • as many residual forest patches as possible will be maintained and connected to core areas; • a 30 metre buffer zone of undisturbed natural habitat will be maintained along well developed riparian corridors; • plant coniferous trees at higher stem densities (>180 stems per acre); • continue to maintain hunting and firearm restrictions on the reclaimed mine including after mining has ceased and until hiding cover on the mines is equivalent to that of natural closed forest cover types.; and • maintain haul truck and regular vehicle speeds of <70 kph.
A.9.7.2 Monitoring CVRI’s monitoring program will include: • monitor the effectiveness of measures designed to increase understory cover (downed woody debris, shrubs, tree density) on reclaimed mine lands for marten and lynx. Design a program that includes establishment of specific targets; • monitor snag density in an attempt to achieve snag volumes of 10 m3/ha; • monitor response of marten and lynx to existing and planned mine land reclamation using winter tracking techniques; • monitor the effectiveness of establishing and maintaining hiding cover for grizzly bears near mine edges and adjacent to main roads; • monitor and study specific use of the existing CVM and planned mine extensions by grizzly bears. Investigate the extent to which existing mines in the region serve as attractive forage sources for grizzlies, and study implications for subregional mortality. Consider non-intrusive methods including DNA hair snagging; and • monitor lynx and marten response to habitat fragmentation associated with mountain pine beetle salvage, clearcut timber harvest, surface coal mining and petroleum development.
March 2008 A-57 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.9.8 Noise A.9.8.1 Mitigation CVRI will undertake the following mitigation measures:
• 25 m spoil pile between the mine pits and the receptors when mining activity is nearest to the receptors in the MW pit and YT Pit 160; • 5 m berm along the haulroad nearest to the Community of Coalspur; • 7 m berm surrounding Pit 150 in YT; and • notify local residence of the blasting schedule when activities are nearest to the receptors.
The baseline L90 noise levels at both Mercoal and Coalspur were relatively low. This means that mining and haul truck noise will be distinctly audible at the nearby receptor locations most of the time. As such, CVM will undertake the following mitigation measures:
• pile leftover materials from haul road construction such that a noise berm is created between the road and adjacent receptors; • maintain the haul road such that the surface is smooth with minimal ruts; • ensure the mining equipment is equipped with the highest grade of engine exhaust silencers available as recommended by the manufacturer; and • pile excess spoil material between noise sources and receptors whenever possible.
A.9.8.2 Monitoring CVRI will investigate all noise complaints from the local communities and initiate mitigation measures as required.
A.9.9 Socio-economic A.9.9.1 Mitigation and Monitoring CVRI will undertake the following mitigation measures:
• consideration of inherent advantages of vendors located in or near operating areas when contracting for goods and services; • choice of vendor will not be unduly influenced by factors of size or national prominence; • establish apprenticeship programs to encourage local employment; and • continued participation in community involvement initiatives.
A.9.10 Soils A.9.10.1 Mitigation All CVRI will undertake the following mitigation measures:
• utilize direct placement of surface soil whenever practical; • minimize overall disturbance;
March 2008 A-58 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• implement erosion control measures once coversoil has been replaced; • provide rough surfaces with topographical diversity in order to provide ecological diversity and minimize large homogeneous areas; • design post-mine landscapes, minesoils and vegetation to meet end land use goals based on the regional resource management plan; • salvage suitable coversoil required to achieve equivalent capability; • avoid salvaging soil unsuitable for reclamation; • build terraced, rolling, ridged, and hummocky surface forms in order to reduce overland flow rates and distance which will reduce erosion potential; and • establish a fast growing initial grass cover to reduce potential for erosion.
A.9.10.2 Monitoring CVRI’s monitoring program will include:
• conduct sampling of areas recontoured with overburden salvaged from areas over the Mynheer coal seam to determine presence of sodic spoil material; and, • monitor reclaimed areas for erosion.
A.9.11 Surface Water Quality A.9.11.1 Mitigation CVRI will undertake the following mitigation measures:
• minimization of the time interval between clearing/grubbing and subsequent earthworks, particularly at or in the vicinity of watercourses or in areas susceptible to erosion; • installation of surface runoff collection and treatment systems to control groundwater seepage from road cuts and surface runoff from disturbed areas. Surface runoff will be directed to settling impoundments for removal of settleable solids; • slope grading and stabilization techniques will be adopted. Slopes will be contoured to produce moderate slope angles to reduce erosion risk. Other stabilization techniques used to control erosion include: ditching above the cutslope to channel surface runoff away from the cutslope, leaving buffer (vegetation) strips between the construction site and a watercourse, placing large rock rip rap to stabilize slopes; • temporary measures to control erosion before a vegetation cover is re-established, including: diversion ditches, drainage control, check dams, sediment ponds, sumps and mulches; • progressive mining and reclamation to reduce the amount of disturbed area at any given time. During reclamation, permanent plant cover and revegetation will be established. Soil erosion will be reduced by minimizing the time that reclaimed surfaces are left bare; • whenever possible, construction activities in close proximity to watercourses will be carried out during periods of relatively low surface runoff in late fall, winter and early spring (from October to April). A 30 m buffer (vegetation) strip will be left between construction sites and watercourses except at stream crossings and diversions;
March 2008 A-59 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• the design and construction of all stream crossings will be done in compliance with the Alberta Code of Practice for Watercourse Crossings and associated guidelines. This means that all stream crossings constructed by the Project will meet regulatory requirements for protection of fish resources and aquatic habitat; this will also effectively mitigate against effects on surface water quality; • where necessary, interim erosion/sediment control measures will be utilized until long- term protection can be effectively implemented; • the use of explosives with less slurry, where possible, to reduce the amount of nitrogen compounds released; • increase of blasting efficiency, including decreased amplitude and increased frequency of blasts to decrease the amount of nitrogen which can escape to the environment; and • minimization of water contact with explosives. Nitrogen compounds found in explosives are water soluble and water control activities (dewatering of pit areas, use of diversion ditches and interceptor ditches) will ensure the driest conditions possible for mining and blasting operations; • Water from pit dewatering operations will be directed to settling impoundments for treatment prior to discharge of surface waters. In impoundments, pit water will mix with surface runoff. If necessary, flocculants will be used to enhance the rate of settlement of suspended solids. Impoundment discharges will be subject to conditions in the EPEA approval; • all mine water will be treated prior to its release in to the receiving waters to reduce sediment and chemical loading impacts. The mine wastewater treatment program similar to the one currently in use at existing mines will be established to minimize downstream siltation and minimize downstream effects on surface water quality; • an adaptive management approach to water treatment has been used in existing mines and will be used for this Project as well. The water management system design and maintenance have been consistently improved using best available technology which has resulted in significant increases in waste water treatment efficiency; and • release of water pollutants from the site such as oil and grease is controlled. With the installation of oil booms on the impoundments and immediate containment of oil in the event of a spill, there is little danger of these materials contaminating surface waters. Components of the water handling system will be designed according to the governmental specification and the systems will be operated in accordance with regulatory approval requirements.
A.9.11.2 Monitoring CVRI’s monitoring program will include:
• monitoring of Project impoundments; and • monitoring for surface water quality in natural watercourses, both upstream and downstream of Project activities.
March 2008 A-60 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
A.9.12 Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Land Use A.9.12.1 Mitigation CVRI will undertake the following mitigation measures:
• continue to consult with traditional land users to ensure their concerns are addressed; • continue to update AENV on the progress of consultation with potentially affected First Nations groups; • negotiate, on a case by case basis, the avoidance of ceremonial areas, specific plant species, graves, and other areas; and • undertake further discussions with First Nations groups on specific impacts and mitigation measures following the submission of additional final reports on traditional use studies.
A.9.12.2 Monitoring CVRI intends to continue to consult with the communities regarding future development plans.
A.9.13 Vegetation, Wetlands and Biodiversity A.9.13.1 Mitigation CVRI will undertake the following mitigation measures:
• culverts will be placed in all wetlands that will be divided by roads to ensure that that water flow to wetlands outside of the PDA will not be affected; • avoid mine development in the patterned portions of the fen complex, and where possible, maintain a 100 m buffer zone; • where possible, individuals of all rare plant species found within the PDA will be transplanted to suitable habitats that will not be affected by development; • confirm that the three rare plant species located near the PDA do not extend into the PDA; • ensure that all rare plants found outside the proposed footprint will not be affected by the Project without implementing additional mitigation measures; • conduct surveys in ecosites with high rare plant potential (e2 and e3); • all merchantable timber will be salvaged; • select areas are will be planted with lodgepole pine and white spruce seedlings 2 to 4 years after seeding reclaimed lands; • evaluate requirement to plant mixed species including some aspen if post-reclamation observations do not detect natural aspen ingress; • continuation of current weed control program; • utilization of approved revegetation species that are compatible with the intended end land use;
March 2008 A-61 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• equipment arriving from offsite will be steam cleaned to remove dirt and vegetative material before accessing the PDA; • five miles of the north end of MW will be preserved as a source for traditional plants; • where possible, the reclamation contouring will include long shallow slopes in order to create the potential for the development of f ecosites, which are a transitional ecosite in rich, mesic to subhygric environments; • an adaptive approach to reclamation will be used to take advantage of opportunities present on the post-mining contoured lands for establishment of a variety of plant communities; • native shrub (willow, alder) and deciduous trees (aspen) will be planted where possible to provide structural diversity to the reclaimed stands as well as browse for wildlife; • continue with the initial revegetation efforts that include the seeding of quickly establishing graminoids and legumes to provide erosion control. Site contouring and successive revegetation (graminoid, forb, shrub and tree planting) should be planned with a focus on forest (and wetland) communities; • increased planting densities and closer spacing of trees will be implemented in some areas as part of the revegetation plan to promote native species ingress; • in areas where there is poor survival of seedlings, fill planting will be performed if target stocking densities are in jeopardy; • direct soil placement will be performed as much as possible; • stockpiled soil should will be seeded with suitable species mix to ensure long term stability of the piles reducing erosion and reducing potential for weed establishment; • areas with high biodiversity will be identified and the surface soil considered for salvage and direct placement, particularly in the YT area; and • when available, coarse woody debris will be used to amend soils to provide mycorrhizal and microbial inoculum.
A.9.13.2 Monitoring CVRI’s monitoring program will include:
• after closure wetlands adjacent to roads will be monitored for a period of one year (spring and fall) to ensure restoration of water flow; • reclaimed wetlands will be monitored to ensure successful establishment; • monitoring locations will be established prior to development so that during operations water flow will be monitored to ensure that water flow and flow patterns are being maintained; • transplanted rare plants will be monitored for two growing seasons to ensure transplant success and to allow for adaptive reclamation management practices; • Mountain pine beetle outbreak in the region will be monitored and if it exceeds expectations, regional mitigation might require alteration of the tree species selection and or timing and density of planting;
March 2008 A-62 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• regeneration surveys on reclaimed lands will be conducted to ensure that the planted trees meet stocking densities and performance expectations; • regular site inspections will be conducted to identify if invasive species are getting established; and • post reclamation studies similar to those completed on existing CVM reclaimed sites will be conducted to assess reclamation success and allow for adaptive management.
• transplanted rare plants will be monitored for two growing seasons to ensure transplant success and to allow for adaptive reclamation management practices; • Mountain pine beetle outbreak in the region will be monitored and if it exceeds expectations, regional mitigation might require alteration of the tree species selection and or timing and density of planting; • regeneration surveys on reclaimed lands will be conducted to ensure that the planted trees meet stocking densities and performance expectations; • regular site inspections will be conducted to identify if invasive species are getting established; and • post reclamation studies similar to those completed on existing CVM reclaimed sites will be conducted to assess reclamation success and allow for adaptive management.
A.9.14 Wildlife A.9.14.1 Mitigation CVRI will undertake the following mitigation measures:
• undertake reclamation activities that specifically enhance wildlife use of the reclaimed area. Specifically provide diverse vegetation communities and complex arrangements of vegetation and landscape features, • maintain as much undisturbed habitat as possible during mining will help to enhance the wildlife diversity of the reclaimed sites, • avoid disturbing wetland habitats as much as possible particularly during haul road placement, • where possible vegetation clearing should be planned for outside of the May to July breeding season, • if raptor nests are found during operations, mitigation measures will be developed to address the specific situation, • continue with the existing CVM wildlife management, • remove carrion from haul roads to reduce raptor mortality, • use of raptor-safe power line configurations for distribution lines to minimize chances of raptor electrocution, • focus reclamation on establishing ecosystem function and initiating soil microbial activity. Wherever possible, direct haul placement techniques will be used,
March 2008 A-63 Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Section A – Project Introduction Mine Extension Project
• reclamation seed mix will be composed of several species of grasses and several species of legumes to provide foraging diversity for small mammals, ungulates, and selected bird species. Reclamation activities will initially establish a cover vegetation of grasses and legumes to prevent erosion and initiate soil development. Trees and shrubs will additionally be planted at the appropriate time, • planting of willow, and other deciduous shrubs in selected areas to provide additional hiding cover and browsing opportunities for ungulates • plan upland grasslands for south-facing aspects so that winter forage opportunities are created for elk and deer, • plant a variety of mixed wood and coniferous forest types would establish forest complexity for ungulates and other wildlife, • identify opportunities to develop a number of fishless ponds with shallow edges (<1 m) and emergent vegetation suitable for amphibian breeding and waterfowl nesting; • reduce line of site and promote movement of wildlife across reclaimed areas by using variable contouring of dump slopes • break continuous pit disturbances at intervals by “land bridges” or by variable slope angles as is currently done on the Coal Valley Mine; and, • establish where possible specialized habitat features such as snags, rock outcrops, cliffs and mineral licks.
A.9.14.2 Monitoring CVRI’s monitoring program will include:
• human use of reclaimed areas and develop an access management plan, • timber removal by the FMA holder so that mining and forest harvesting can be coordinated so they do not result in simultaneous removal of mature tree cover and the creation of overly large open disturbances, • response of ungulates to reclamation of the MW and YT Project and other Coal Valley Mine projects.
March 2008 A-64
Tp. 54 ³ I ² 748
Yates Pinedale Edson Tp. 53 Obed
Mine
r ³ e ² v Ansell i 16 R Obed a Bickerdike sc Marlboro ba ha od R At cLe iver Tp. 52 M
Tp. 51
³
Hinton Weald ² ³ ² 47 40
Entrance E
r
i
t h
Tp. 50 R er i iv ve R r
as r r a b m Yellowhead E Tp. 49 Tower Robb
Mercoal Coalspur West Gregg Mercoal River Tp. 48 Mine Robb Trend Miette r e Hotsprings v Luscar i R Sterco Mine a in Luscar Foothills b em Tp. 47 Coal P Lovettville
Proposed Valley
Overland Mine
³ Cadomin Haul Road ² 40
Jasper Tp. 46 National Cheviot Mine Park
Mountain Park Tp. 45 Rg. 24 Rg. 23 Rg. 22 Rg. 21 Rg. 20 Rg. 19 Rg. 18 Rg. 17 Rg. 16 W5M
Legend Proposed Mercoal West Development Proposed Yellowhead Tower Development Existing Coal Valley Mine Areas Other Mines Highway Minor Road Railway Area of Detail 05 10 20
Edmonton Kilometres
PROJECT: Calgary Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Mine Extension Project
TITLE: DRAWN: PS FIGURE: Lethbridge CHECKED: KY Project Location DATE: Feb 11/08 A.1.0-1 PROJECT: 05-171 E E E E E E 23 E 24 E 19 20 21 22 E23 E E I R 23 R 22 R 22 R 21 W5
F e l to n
C re e k
E E E E E E 16 15 14 E13 E 18 17 15 E 14 E 13 E 18
Ch an ce C re Mc ek Ca rde ll Cr eek
E E E E E E E E 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 E 11 E 12 E7
E E E E E E E E 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 E2 E 1 E 6
Ja ck Tp 49
Tp 48
E E E E E 33 34 35 36 31 E 32 E 33 E 34 E 35 E 36 E 31
M cL e L o os d t C re
R ek
E E
i E E E v E E E E E E ³ 28 er 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 ² 30 40
Merco al Cr P! k eek e Mercoal re C
gg re G E E E E E E E E 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 E23 E 24 E19
Eu
n
k ic
e e
e
r
C C
r
e
s e
k
u
p m
E E E E E
a E E E
16 15 13 18 17 16 15 E14 E 13 E 18 W
Legend PROJECT: Proposed Mercoal West Footprint Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Mercoal West Proposed Mine Permit Boundary Mine Extension Project Yellowhead Tower Proposed Mine Permit Boundary 00.5 1 2 TITLE: FIGURE: Kilometres DRAWN: PS Existing Coal Valley Mine Permit Boundary CHECKED: KY Mercoal East Pit Mercoal West Development Area DATE: Feb 4/08 A.1.0-2 PROJECT: 05-151 R 22 R 21 W5
E E I 21 22 E23 E 24 E 19 E 20 E 21 E 22 E 23
F e l to n
C r Robb e e P! k
E E 16 15 E14 E13 E 18 E 17 E 16 E 15 E 14
Ch an ce C re ek
E E 9 10 E 11 E 12 E 7 E8 E 9 E 10 E 11
E E E E E ³ 4 3 2 E1 E6 E5E 4 3² 2 47 J ac ks on Dragline C re Tp 49 Walk Road ek r e iv R Tp 48 as rr ba Em
E E 33 E 34 E35 E 36 E 31 E 32 E 33 E 34 35
P! Coalspur
L os t C Haul re ek Road Pit 29
E E28 E 27 E 26 E 25 E 30 E29 E 28 E27 26
Legend PROJECT: Proposed Yellowhead Tower Footprint Mercoal West and Yellowhead Tower Yellowhead Tower Proposed Mine Permit Boundary Mine Extension Project Mercoal West Proposed Mine Permit Boundary 00.45 0.9 1.8 TITLE: FIGURE: Existing Coal Valley Mine Permit Boundary Kilometres DRAWN: PS CHECKED: KY 2006 Proposed Pit Yellowhead Tower Development Area DATE: Feb 4/08 A.1.0-3 PROJECT: 05-171