Qualitative Occupational Hygiene Exposure Assessment Hangingstone Expansion Plant, South of Fort Mcmurray, Alberta

REPORT Qualitative Occupational Hygiene Exposure Assessment Hangingstone Expansion Plant, South of Fort McMurray, Alberta

Submitted to: Japan Canada Oil Sands Limited Suite 2300, 639 - 5 Avenue SW Calgary, AB T2P 0M9 Tel: (587) 960-4679 Email: [email protected]

Submitted by: Golder Associates Ltd. 102, 2535 - 3rd Avenue S.E. Calgary, Alberta, T2A 7W5 Canada

+1 403 299 5600

1895166

September 27, 2018

September 27, 2018 1895166

Distribution List One e-copy: Japan Canada Oil Sands Limited

One e-copy: GolderAssociates Ltd.

September 27, 2018 1895166

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1

2.0 BACKGROUND ...... 1

3.0 SCOPE OF WORK ...... 1

3.1 Review of Occupational Hygiene Practices ...... 2

3.2 Development of Similar Exposure Groups and Occupational Hygiene Risk Register ...... 2

4.0 STANDARDS OF PRACTICE AND PERFORMANCE ...... 2

5.0 METHODOLOGY ...... 3

5.1 Basic Characterization ...... 3

5.2 Exposure Assessment ...... 3

5.2.1 Similar Exposure Groups ...... 3

5.2.2 Exposure Profiles ...... 3

5.2.3 Occupational Exposure Risks ...... 3

6.0 BASIC CHARACTERIZATION AND EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT ...... 4

6.1 General Site Description ...... 4

6.2 Similar Exposure Groups ...... 5

6.2.1 Water Treatment Operators ...... 5 6.2.1.1 Bulk Chemical Handling ...... 6 6.2.1.2 Caustic Truck Unloading ...... 6 6.2.1.3 Acid Truck Unloading ...... 7

6.2.2 Production Operators ...... 8 6.2.2.1 Bulk Chemical Handling ...... 8 6.2.2.2 Laboratory Analysis...... 9 6.2.2.3 Hydrocarbon Sampling ...... 9 6.2.2.4 Free Water Knock-Out Drum Sampling ...... 9

6.2.3 Well Pad Operators ...... 10 6.2.3.1 Well Pad Bitumen Sample Testing ...... 10

6.2.4 Tank Farm Operators ...... 11

6.2.5 Laboratory Technician ...... 11

September 27, 2018 1895166

6.2.6 Maintenance Workers ...... 11

6.3 Hazardous Chemical Handling ...... 12

7.0 DISCUSSION ...... 13

8.0 KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 13

8.1 Baseline Worker Exposure Sampling ...... 13

8.1.1 Water Treatment Operators ...... 14

8.1.2 Production Operators ...... 14

8.1.3 Well Pad Operators ...... 14

8.1.4 Tank Farm Operators ...... 15

8.1.5 Laboratory Technician ...... 15

8.1.6 Maintenance Workers ...... 15

8.2 General Site Wide Recommendations ...... 16

8.2.1 Noise Management Program ...... 16

8.2.2 Respiratory Code of Practice ...... 16

8.2.3 Baseline NORM Sampling ...... 17

9.0 LIMITATIONS ...... 17

10.0 CLOSURE ...... 17

FIGURES Figure 1: Industrial Hygiene Risk Matrix ...... 4

APPENDICES APPENDIX A Chemical Risk Rating Spreadsheet

iii

September 27, 2018 1895166

1.0 INTRODUCTION At the request of Japan Canada Oil Sands Limited (JACOS), Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) conducted a qualitative occupational hygiene exposure assessment (QOHEA) at the Hangingstone Expansion Plant (the Site) located on the JACOS Hangingstone lease, approximately 50 kilometres south of Fort McMurray, Alberta. The objective of the assessment was to characterize potential worker exposure to chemical and physical hazards at the new facility.

The assessment was conducted by Dave Ayriss, Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH) on April 10 and 11, 2018. 2.0 BACKGROUND A comprehensive occupational hygiene (OH) program is the embodiment of the resources, practices and procedures required for the anticipation, identification, assessment and control of chemical, physical and biological agents in the workplace. Key elements of a successful workplace OH program include the following:  development of similar exposure groups (SEGs) based on worker locations, job titles/descriptions and estimated contaminant airborne concentrations, relative to applicable occupational exposure limits;  grouping of similarly exposed workers based on contaminant exposure, frequency, duration and severity of consequences from exposure;  implementation of validated and statistically representative exposure assessment strategies through qualitative and quantitative risk assessment processes;  establishment of agent-specific control processes and procedures to address incidents of potential worker overexposure;  development of control and protection programs that address and formalize workplace-specific hazards and their control;  integration with occupational health, maintenance and engineering programs, and safety management systems; and  establishment of adequate human and material resources, including training, to ensure continued program development and implementation. 3.0 SCOPE OF WORK The QOHEA was conducted based on the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) model for the assessment and management of occupational exposures. Golder’s scope of work for the QOHEA included the following:  conducting a Basic Characterization and Exposure Assessment;  prioritizing and consolidating the information collected in the Basic Characterization and Exposure Assessment steps in a written report; and  developing a proposed sampling strategy for selected chemical contaminant exposures. Golder’s scope of work is best described under two discrete activities. The first activity included the review of current occupational hygiene and health (OH&H) practices at the Site and is presented in Section 3.1. The second activity included the development of SEGs and the OH Risk Register and is presented in Section 3.2.

September 27, 2018 1895166

3.1 Review of Occupational Hygiene Practices The review of OH&H practices at the Site was limited to the following activities:  A walk-through assessment of the Site including the Water Laboratory, Well Pads, Production Treatment/Water De-Oiling Building, Diluent Pump House, Tank Farm, Steam Generation Building, Solids Handling Building, Water Treatment Building, Automotive Shop, Warehouse, Wash Bay, and Maintenance Shop to identify unit operations and work activities that may result in potential worker exposure to hazardous agents and are therefore subject to qualitative and quantitative assessment and associated control systems.  Assessment of engineering, administrative and personal protective equipment (PPE) controls currently in place in order to determine their efficacy of current control programs.  A review of the adequacy and appropriateness of OH&H policies and programs relative to the Hangingstone Expansion facility hazard profile, and applicable legislative requirements.  Interviews with the Site personnel to assess the level of integration of safety activities with occupational health and safety programs.  Key findings and recommendations from this portion of the scope of work are discussed in Section 8.0. 3.2 Development of Similar Exposure Groups and Occupational Hygiene Risk Register The scope of work for this portion of the project was limited to conducting a qualitative risk assessment of work areas throughout the Site to review job tasks, controls, estimate worker exposures, development of an agent specific risk register and SEG to define an annual quantitative sampling schedule (where applicable). With the exception of the collection of baseline respirable particulate and crystalline silica personal air samples, no sampling was conducted as part of this initial assessment. 4.0 STANDARDS OF PRACTICE AND PERFORMANCE All OH work completed at the Site is understood to be implemented following practices and procedures that are consistent with recognized good OH practice and the recommendations of the following agencies:  Alberta Occupational Health and Safety Act, Regulation and Code (2009);  The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH);  The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH);  The American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA); and,  Oil and gas industry organizations and advisory groups. These standards of practice and performance served as benchmarks for the OH review and program development reported herein.

September 27, 2018 1895166

5.0 METHODOLOGY 5.1 Basic Characterization The purpose of the Basic Characterization task was to collect and organize available information on the workplace activities, workforce, and workplace contaminants. The following data was collected and reviewed:  Workplace characterization: process/operation description and site layout.  Workforce characterization: job and tasks descriptions, job and task analysis, number of workers, work shifts.  Characterization of workplace contaminants: identification of potential workplace contaminants (from the chemical inventory and information on safety data sheets (SDS)), health effects data, occupational exposure limits; past assessments and results.  Characterization of workplace physical hazards: noise, vibration, ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.  Characterization of existing controls. Key findings and recommendations from this portion of the scope of work are discussed in Section 8.0. 5.2 Exposure Assessment 5.2.1 Similar Exposure Groups In most workplaces, it is difficult to measure exposures for every worker, and even if these assessments were possible, daily measurements are seldom possible. One strategy for meeting these challenges is to assemble workers believed to have similar exposures into groups. The qualitative and quantitative characterization of the exposure of one or a few in the group is then considered “representative” of the exposures of everyone in the group. This grouping of workers into “similar exposure groups” allows limited resources to be allocated so that all of the exposures present in a particular workplace can be characterized.

A Similar Exposure Group (SEG) is defined as a group of workers having the same general exposure profile for the agent(s) being studied because of the similarity and frequency of the tasks they perform, the materials and processes with which they work, and the similarity of the way they perform those tasks. 5.2.2 Exposure Profiles Exposure profiles were defined for each SEG and judgements were made about the acceptability of the exposure profiles. The judgements were based on the interpretation of available qualitative and quantitative data, including:  Exposure characteristics such as frequency, duration, variability, etc.  Exposure rating based on monitoring data, exposure modelling tools and/or surrogate data.  Uncertainty of exposure judgment. 5.2.3 Occupational Exposure Risks Occupational exposure risks were determined for each SEG with the combined outcome of two components:  Health Effects Rating (HER) - The health effects of toxic materials were rated based on toxicological data and health effects information that is usually found in a Safety Data Sheet (SDS) and other occupational toxicology references. HER is a rating classification between 0 (lower hazard effects) and 4 (highest hazard effects).

September 27, 2018 1895166

 Exposure rating (ER) - The potential and/or actual occupational exposures were rated. ER is a rating estimating the potential for exposure, with classifications between 0 (lower exposure) and 4 (highest exposure). ER can be either a qualitative or quantitative rating.

These two components were then used to assess potential occupational exposure risks at the Site. Figure 1 presents the Industrial Hygiene Risk Assessment Matrix. Using the risk matrix, Golder was able to assign one of the following risk ratings for the tasks and chemicals handled for each SEG: Very High Risk, High Risk, Moderate Risk, Low Risk, or Trivial Risk. These risk ratings for the tasks and chemicals handled at the Site are provided in Appendix A.

4 Low Moderate High Very High Very High

Rating 3 Low Moderate High High Very High

2 Low Moderate Moderate High High Effects 1 Trivial Low Moderate Moderate Moderate

Health 0 Trivial Trivial Low Low Low

0 1 2 3 4

Exposure Rating

Figure 1: Industrial Hygiene Risk Matrix 6.0 BASIC CHARACTERIZATION AND EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 6.1 General Site Description The Hangingstone Expansion Plant is a steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) facility with a 20,000 barrels per day capacity (with the capacity to expand to 30,000 barrels per day) and includes a Central Processing Facility, multiple well pads with associated gathering lines, pipelines, utilities and infrastructure. It is a joint project between JACOS having a participating interest of 75% and acting as the operator and NEXEN Energy ULC (a wholly owned subsidiary of CNOOC Limited) with a participating interest of 25%. JACOS started injecting steam (steam circulation mode) into the wells at the end of April 2017 and started operations of bitumen production in August 2017.

September 27, 2018 1895166

The Expansion Plant consists of the following areas:  Administration Building (including Automotive Shop, Warehouse, Wash Bay, and Maintenance Shop);  Well Pads (total of six);  Production Treat/Water-De-Oil Building (BU-101);  Diluent Pump House;  Steam Gen Building (BU-201);  Solids Handling Building (BU-205);  Water Treatment Building (BU-401); and  Tank Farm. 6.2 Similar Exposure Groups There are approximately 40 full-time JACOS employees, including office workers, and approximately 30 contractors working at the site. Workers generally work 12-hour shifts. Based on the QOHEA conducted at the Site, the following SEG’s were identified:  Water Treatment Operators;  Production Operators;  Well Pad Operators;  Tank Farm Operators;  Maintenance Workers;  Laboratory Technicians; and  Management and Administrators. Based on a review of the work tasks performed by the Management and Administrators, Golder has excluded these SEGs from the assessment due to the low potential for exposure to hazardous contaminants.  A summary of the activities for each identified SEG is provided in the following sections. Golder’s review of the chemicals associated with these activities is provided in Appendix A. 6.2.1 Water Treatment Operators The Water Treatment Operator’s primary responsibility is to ensure the safe and reliable operation of the Water Treating Building (BU-401). Some general duties include conducting planned, preventative, predictive and emergency maintenance tasks, troubleshooting equipment malfunctions and breakdowns, collecting water samples and basic laboratory analysis. High noise levels were noted in the Water Treatment Building at the time of the QOHEA.

Based on Golder’s assessment, several tasks were identified that have the potential for worker exposure to hazardous contaminants; these tasks are discussed briefly below.

September 27, 2018 1895166

6.2.1.1 Bulk Chemical Handling A couple of large chemical totes were observed inside of BU-401 at the time of the assessment and it was reported that Water Treatment Operators are required to decant chemicals into storage containers for use inside of the building. Based on the potential for a chemical upset inside of BU-401, the majority of operational equipment is surrounded with commercial grade chemical safety curtains. Full chemical protective suits and full- face and half-mask respirators with combination organic vapour/P-100 cartridges were observed inside the building and are reportedly used by Operators during bulk chemical handling.

Safe Work Procedure (SWP) #0500 titled Chemical Handling was provided to Golder for review during the QOHEA. SWP #0500 outlines the minimum requirements for handling chemical products at site. These products include chemicals such as paints, herbicides, pesticides, corrosion inhibitors, biocides and inhibitors. The SWP does not cover the handling of hazardous chemicals specifically used at the Expansion Plant. The JACOS Risk Ranking for Chemical Handling is considered to be medium.

Some of the hazards related to chemical handling include, are not limited to:  chemical burns to the skin or eyes;  worker exposure by inhalation to vapours or dusts;  chemical or dust explosion;  chemical or dust fire; and  environmental contamination. Personal protective equipment (PPE) required for the safe handling of chemicals at the Site includes standard JACOS PPE and any additional PPE specified on the respective chemical’s safety data sheet (SDS).

The potential for worker exposure during tasks related to the handling of these chemicals is considered to be moderate. Golder’s overall risk rating for tasks associated with chemical handling is considered to be high. Golder’s review of these chemicals is provided in Appendix A. 6.2.1.2 Caustic Truck Unloading One of the responsibilities of the Water Treatment Operators is to assist with the safe unloading of bulk shipments of caustic soda from tank trucks to caustic storage tank C04-TK-471. Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) #4100 titled Caustic Truck Unloading was provided to Golder for review during the QOHEA. The JACOS Risk Ranking for Caustic Truck Unloading is considered to be high.

Some of the hazards related to caustic truck unloading include, are not limited to:  Pressurized fluids-spray;  Spill of product/exposure to product;  Exposure to hazardous/toxic chemicals;  Residual fluids – splash;  Tripping hazards;  Slippery surfaces/conditions;

September 27, 2018 1895166

 Unloading product into wrong tank;  Over filling tank;  Static electricity;  Hose failure;  Noise;  Body positioning – ergonomics;  Opening/closing valves;  Over-pressuring tank/vessel. PPE required for caustic truck unloading at the Site includes standard JACOS PPE, face shield/chemical goggles, chemical-resistant rubber boots and gloves, chemical-resistant suit, and a MSHA/NIOSH approved full-face air purifying respirator with fume cartridge.

The potential for worker exposure during tasks related to caustic truck unloading is considered to be high. Golder’s overall risk rating for tasks associated with caustic truck unloading is considered to be high. Golder’s review of these chemicals in provided in Appendix A. 6.2.1.3 Acid Truck Unloading Water Treatment Operators are also responsible for assisting with the safe unloading of bulk shipments of hydrochloric acid to storage tank C04-TK-434. Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) #4102 titled Acid Truck Unloading was provided to Golder for review during the QOHEA. The JACOS Risk Ranking for Caustic Truck Unloading is considered to be high.

Some of the hazards related to acid truck unloading include, are not limited to:  pressurized fluids-spray;  spill of product/exposure to product;  exposure to hazardous/toxic chemicals;  residual fluids – splash;  tripping hazards;  slippery surfaces/conditions;  unloading product into wrong tank;  over filling tank;  static electricity;  hose failure;  noise;  body positioning – ergonomics;  opening/closing valves (strain, loss of balance); and  over-pressuring tank/vessel. 7

September 27, 2018 1895166

PPE required for acid truck unloading at the Site includes standard JACOS PPE, chemical-resistant rubber boots and gloves, chemical-resistant suit and a MSHA/NIOSH approved full-face air purifying respirator with fume cartridge.

The potential for worker exposure during tasks related to acid truck unloading is considered to be high. Golder’s overall risk rating for tasks associated with acid truck unloading is considered to be high. Golder’s review of these chemicals is provided in Appendix A. 6.2.2 Production Operators The Production Operator’s primary responsibility is to ensure the safe and reliable operation of the Production Treat/Water-De Oil Building (BU-101). Some general duties include conducting planned, preventative, predictive and emergency maintenance tasks, troubleshooting equipment malfunctions and breakdowns, collecting bitumen samples and laboratory analysis. High noise levels were noted in the Production Treat/Water-De Oil Building at the time of the QOHEA.

Based on Golder’s assessment, several tasks were identified that have the potential for worker exposure to contaminants; these tasks are discussed briefly below. 6.2.2.1 Bulk Chemical Handling A number of large chemical totes were observed inside of BU-101 at the time of the assessment, including varsol, glycol, and bitumen. Several of the totes were observed directly outside of the Oil Laboratory. Operators are required to decant the various chemicals into appropriate storage containers and are reportedly used primarily for laboratory analysis.

Some of the hazards related to chemical handling include, are not limited to:  chemical burns to the skin or eyes;  worker exposure by inhalation to vapours or dusts;  chemical or dust explosion;  chemical or dust fire; and  environmental contamination. PPE required for bulk chemical handling at the Site includes standard JACOS PPE and any additional PPE specified on the respective chemical’s safety data sheet (SDS).

September 27, 2018 1895166

6.2.2.2 Laboratory Analysis Several routine laboratory analysis are conducted on bitumen samples in the Oil Laboratory inside of BU-101 by Operators throughout their shifts. The Oil Laboratory contains a laboratory fume hood where a number of the tests are reportedly conducted. The chemicals that are used in the Oil Laboratory are in limited quantities and most are pre-packaged in single use containers to limit the physical handling of the chemicals. Worker overexposure by inhalation to the laboratory chemicals is considered to be low. The overall risk rating for this task is estimated at low. Golder’s review of these chemicals in provided in Appendix A. 6.2.2.3 Hydrocarbon Sampling Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) #0221 titled Hydrocarbon Sampling was provided to Golder for review during the QOHEA. SOP #0221 outlines the minimum requirements for the safe sampling of hydrocarbons at the Site. The JACOS Risk Ranking for Chemical Handling is considered to be medium.

Some of the potential hazards related to hydrocarbon sampling include, are not limited to:  hot fluids-burns;  pressurized fluids-spray;  spill of product/exposure to product;  exposure to benzene;  exposure to hydrocarbon fumes;  exposure to hydrogen sulphide;  working at height;  opening/closing valves;  slippery surfaces/conditions; and  exposure to flammable fluids. PPE required for the safe sampling of hydrocarbons includes standard JACOS PPE, face shield, fall protection (if required), heat resistant gloves, and a four-head personal gas monitor.

The potential for worker exposure during tasks related to hydrocarbon sampling is considered to be moderate. Golder’s overall risk rating for tasks associated with hydrocarbon sampling is considered to be moderate. Golder’s review of these chemicals is provided in Appendix A. 6.2.2.4 Free Water Knock-Out Drum Sampling Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) #2105 titled FWKO Drum Sampling was provided to Golder for review during the QOHEA. SOP #2105 outlines the minimum requirements for the safe sampling of free water knock-out vessels C02-V-210/214. The JACOS Risk Ranking for Chemical Handling is considered to be medium.

Some of the potential hazards related to FWKO drum sampling include, are not limited to:  hot fluids-burns;  pressurized fluids-spray;

September 27, 2018 1895166

 residual fluids – splash;  exposure to hazardous/toxic chemicals;  hot piping;  slippery surfaces/conditions;  spill of product/exposure to product;  opening/closing valves:  exposure to benzene;  exposure to hydrogen sulphide; and  exposure to hydrocarbon fumes. PPE required for FWKO drum sampling includes standard JACOS PPE, face shield, and heat resistant gloves, and a four-head personal gas monitor.

The potential for worker exposure during tasks related to FWKO drum sampling is considered to be moderate. Golder’s overall risk rating for tasks associated with FWKO drum sampling is considered to be moderate. Golder’s review of these chemicals is provided in Appendix A. 6.2.3 Well Pad Operators Well Pad Operator’s primary responsibility is to ensure the safe and reliable operation of the well pads. There are a total of six well pads currently at the Expansion Plant. Each well pad has an associated Production Pump Building where demulsifiers are added and bitumen samples are collected. High noise levels were noted in the Production Pump Buildings at the time of the QOHEA.

Based on Golder’s assessment, one specific task was identified that has the potential for worker exposure to contaminants discussed briefly below. 6.2.3.1 Well Pad Bitumen Sample Testing Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) #2146 titled Well Pad Bitumen Sample Testing was provided to Golder for review during the QOHEA. SOP #2146 outlines the minimum requirements for the safe testing method of well pad bitumen samples. The JACOS Risk Ranking for well pad bitumen sample testing is considered to be medium.

Some of the potential hazards related to well pad bitumen sample testing include, are not limited to:  hot fluids-burns;  pressurized fluids-spray;  residual fluids – splash;  exposure to hydrocarbon fumes;  exposure to benzene;  exposure to hydrogen sulphide;  exposure to flammable fluids

September 27, 2018 1895166

 opening/closing valves;  tripping hazards;  slippery surfaces/conditions;  rotating equipment;  over-filling tank/vessel;  congested work area;  line plugging;  sharp edges – cut injury; hose failure; and  body positioning – ergonomics. In addition to bitumen, Well Pad Operators have the potential to be exposed to varsol, reverse demulsifier, demulsifier and knock-out drops during this work task.

PPE required for well pad bitumen sample testing includes standard JACOS PPE, half-mask respirator, and rubber gloves. 6.2.4 Tank Farm Operators Tank Farm Operators are responsible for the operation of the Tank Farm, including routine inspections of pumps, motors, piping, and the collection of bitumen samples. The Tank Farm consists of a Skim Tank, Surge Tank, De- Oiled Produced Water Tank, two Dilbit storage tanks, an Off Spec tank, and a Diluent Tank.

Tank Farm Operators have the potential to be exposed to bitumen during sample collection. 6.2.5 Laboratory Technician Golder reviewed the available SOPs and MSDS related to the analytical procedures that are conducted by the Operators and the Laboratory Technician. It is Golder’s understanding that the laboratory tests occur daily and typically take a full shift to conduct. Golder understands that the majority of the analytical tests are conducted on water and bitumen in one of the laboratory fume hoods. Tests on water samples include measuring pH, turbidity, and hardness, whereas, test on bitumen samples include density and viscosity. Personal protective equipment worn by the Laboratory Technician includes lab coat, safety glasses, and chemical protective gloves. Reportedly, a half-mask respirator with organic vapour cartridges is occasionally worn in the lab during specific tests.

The chemicals that are used are in the analytical procedures are in limited quantities and most are pre-packaged in single use containers to limit the physical handling of the chemicals. Worker overexposure by inhalation to the laboratory chemicals is considered to be low. The overall risk rating for this task is estimated to be low. Golder’s review of these chemicals is provided in Appendix A. 6.2.6 Maintenance Workers Maintenance workers are responsible to fix and maintain mechanical equipment, machines, and vehicles used onsite. There are approximately six Maintenance Workers who work in the Maintenance Shop and Automotive Shop area attached to the main Administration Building. There are a number of chemicals that are used in the Maintenance Shop and Automotive Shop including oils and greases, paints, and parts washing de-greasers. Some minor sand blasting of various components is required from time to time; however, the sand blasting is

September 27, 2018 1895166

conducted inside of a sealed Mod-U-Blast blast cabinet. Reportedly, no welding is conducted in the Maintenance Shop and is contracted out to a welding contractor, if required.  Golder reviewed the types of oils and lubricants that are typically in use in the Maintenance Shop and Automotive Shops. It is Golder’s understanding that Maintenance Workers may come in contact with several types of oils and lubricants while collecting samples and changing oil and filters. However, these activities are conducted infrequently and are typically of short duration. It is not likely that workers have the potential to be overexposed to oil mist or hydrocarbons by inhalation during their daily activities.  Worker overexposure by inhalation to chemicals in the Maintenance Shop and Automotive Shops are considered to be low. The overall risk rating for this task is estimated to be low. However, worker exposure to oil mists and hydrocarbons by inhalation may occur during major equipment maintenance. Golder recommends that major equipment repairs and maintenance activities are observed to determine if oil mist exposure is a concern during these types of activities. Workers should also be aware of the dermal exposure potential when completing tasks with oils and lubricants. Workers should wear chemical resistant gloves at a minimum, as outlined in the SDS for each type of oil and lubricant.

Golder’s review of these chemicals is provided in Appendix A. 6.3 Hazardous Chemical Handling SWP #0511 titled Hazardous Chemical Handling was provided to Golder for review during the QOHEA. SWP #0511 outlines the minimum requirements for handling hazardous chemicals at site. Some of the activities listed in SWP #0511 includes transportation of hazardous materials, storage of hazardous materials/wastes, handling of hazardous materials and disposal of hazardous materials.

Plant operations require the handling, storage and use of a wide variety of process treatment chemicals. These products include chemicals such as Treatment Chemicals (demulsifiers, friction reducers, surfactants and pad breakers that may contain methyl alcohol, isopropanol surfactants, glycols, alkylated phenol formaldehyde resins, and aromatic hydrocarbons), Corrosion Inhibitors (which may contain amines, methyl alcohol, surfactants, sulphites and isopropanol), Biocides (which may contain formaldehyde, methyl alcohol, isopropanol, gluten aldehyde, glycols, quaternary ammoniums and other unspecified surfactants and components), Oxygen Scavengers (which may contain sulphites, methyl alcohol, glycol, and isopropanol), and Scale Inhibitors (containing phosphorates, usually low in pH).

There are a number of operations at site than involve hazardous chemical handling, including but not limited to:  Well Head Operations – many wellhead operations require injection of treatment chemicals into the lines  Compressor Operations – odorizing chemicals, mercaptans, are injected into the product pipeline  Tank Storage – used for storage of treatment or corrosion chemicals so they can be added to process lines  Chemical Metering Pumps  Manual handling of treating chemicals  Use of miscellaneous chemicals such as pesticides, paints, thinners and solvents The JACOS Risk Ranking for Hazardous Chemical Handling at the Expansion Plant is considered to be medium.

September 27, 2018 1895166

7.0 DISCUSSION Each organization/company defines what type of risk level is an acceptable risk for them (e.g., Trivial to Low Risk and/or Moderate Risk) and what is an unacceptable risk (e.g., Moderate to High and/or Very High risk). Whenever a definite decision cannot be made about the acceptability or unacceptability of the occupational exposure risks, more information should be gathered; collecting baseline or additional samples (as described below) can assist in having more detailed information to make better risk-based decisions.

It is recommended that all exposure groups that fall into the Very High and High Risk ratings, as well as some selected Moderate Risks with Health Effects Rating (HER) of 3 or 4, have airborne contaminant and physical monitoring for the following reasons:  Confirm the qualitative risk ratings.  Document the exposures (for compliance or occupational health/medicine, or epidemiological studies purposes).  Assist in the justification and/or selection of exposure controls. In some instances, the best option is not to sample but to go directly to controlling exposures that are classified as unacceptable. It is recommended that control measures be implemented for Very High and High risks. The following traditional hierarchy of controls can be used:  Engineering controls: elimination, substitution, process change, industrial ventilation (general ventilation and local exhaust ventilation), etc.  Administrative controls: safe work procedures, training and education, commitment from top management, involvement from workers and supervisor, hazard communication, program implementation (e.g., hearing conservation program, respiratory protection program), etc.  Personal protective equipment: respiratory protection, chemical-resistant gloves for skin protection, hearing protection etc.  The final step in the QOHEA is the periodic reassessment of the entire QOHEA. The periodicity for this reassessment can be based on process or layout changes, additions of new chemicals, increase/decreased production levels, or can be conducted annually. 8.0 KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the QOHEA conducted at the Hangingstone Expansion Plant on April 10 and 11, 2018, Golder provides the following key findings and recommendations for the Site: 8.1 Baseline Worker Exposure Sampling To establish a baseline for potential worker exposures at the Site, Golder provides the following recommendations for baseline worker exposure sampling for each specific SEG in the following sections.

The majority of the tasks in the following sections were determined to have a risk rating of moderate or high in Appendix A. For tasks that were determined to have a risk rating of trivial or low, Golder has not recommended occupational exposure sampling. However, JACOS may choose to conduct sampling for these tasks to verify that worker exposure to the identified chemicals is low. If JACOS chooses to conduct occupational sampling then sampling periods should be chosen when there is the highest potential for worker exposure.

September 27, 2018 1895166

8.1.1 Water Treatment Operators Water Treatment Operators have the potential to be exposed to paints, herbicides, pesticides, corrosion inhibitors, biocides, inhibitors, caustic soda and hydrochloric acid. To establish potential worker exposures to these chemicals, it is recommended that at a minimum, task-based sampling be performed on Water Treatment Operators during Caustic Truck Unloading (sodium hydroxide) and Acid Truck Unloading (hydrochloric acid) activities. Baseline sampling should be conducted to establish if the current respiratory protection required for these task are sufficient to prevent worker exposure during these activities.

Due to the potential for Water Treatment Operators to be exposed to dust at the facility, it is recommended that baseline air samples be collected for respirable particulate and crystalline silica. Baseline sampling for respirable particulate and crystalline silica was conducted at the Site by Golder on April 11, 2018 (Golder report titled “Baseline Respirable Particulate and Crystalline Silica”, dated May 18, 2018). The result of the baseline sampling for respirable particulate and crystalline silica collected from a Water Treatment Operator was low and below the analytical detection limit.

In addition to the above baseline air sampling, it is recommended that baseline personal noise dosimetry be performed on representative workers in this SEG. 8.1.2 Production Operators Production Operators have the potential to be exposed to airborne chemicals during bulk chemical handling, hydrocarbon sampling, free water knock-out sampling and limited laboratory analysis. To establish potential worker exposures to these chemicals, it is recommended that at a minimum, task-based sampling for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) and total hydrocarbons (as n-hexane) be performed on Production Operators during hydrocarbon sampling and free water knock-out sampling. Full-shift sampling for BTEX and total hydrocarbons should also be collected.

Due to the potential for Production Operators to be exposed to dust at the facility, it is recommended that baseline air samples be collected for respirable particulate and crystalline silica. Baseline sampling for respirable particulate and crystalline silica was conducted at the Site by Golder on April 11, 2018 (Golder report titled “Baseline Respirable Particulate and Crystalline Silica”, dated May 18, 2018. It should be noted that the baseline sampling for respirable particulate and crystalline silica did not include a Production Operator; therefore, JACOS should consider collecting baseline air samples for respirable particulate and crystalline silica from a Production Operator to ensure that results are low for this SEG.

In addition to the above baseline air sampling, it is recommended that baseline personal noise dosimetry be performed on representative workers in this SEG. 8.1.3 Well Pad Operators Well Pad Operators have the potential to be exposed to airborne chemicals such as demulsifiers and bitumen. To establish potential worker exposures to these chemicals, it is recommended that at a minimum, task-based sampling for BTEX and total hydrocarbons (as n-hexane) be performed on Well Pad Operators during sample collection. Full-shift sampling for BTEX and total hydrocarbons should also be collected.

Due to the potential for Well Pad Operators to be exposed to dust at the facility, it is recommended that baseline air samples be collected for respirable particulate and crystalline silica. Baseline sampling for respirable particulate and crystalline silica was conducted at the Site by Golder on April 11, 2018 (Golder report titled “Baseline Respirable Particulate and Crystalline Silica”, dated May 18, 2018. The result of the baseline sampling

September 27, 2018 1895166

for respirable particulate and crystalline silica collected from a Well Pad Operator was low and below the analytical detection limit.

In addition to the above baseline air sampling, it is recommended that baseline personal noise dosimetry be performed on representative workers in this SEG. 8.1.4 Tank Farm Operators Tank Farm Operators have the potential to be exposed to airborne chemicals during bitumen sampling. To establish potential worker exposures to these chemicals, it is recommended that at a minimum, task-based sampling for BTEX and total hydrocarbons (as n-hexane) be performed on Tank Farm Operators during bitumen sampling. Full-shift sampling for BTEX and total hydrocarbons should also be collected.

Due to the potential for Tank Farm Operators to be exposed to dust at the facility, it is recommended that baseline air samples be collected for respirable particulate and crystalline silica. Baseline sampling for respirable particulate and crystalline silica was conducted at the Site by Golder on April 11, 2018 (Golder report titled “Baseline Respirable Particulate and Crystalline Silica”, dated May 18, 2018. It should be noted that the baseline sampling for respirable particulate and crystalline silica did not include a Tank Farm Operator; therefore, JACOS should consider collecting baseline air samples for respirable particulate and crystalline silica from a Tank Farm Operator to ensure that results are low for this SEG. 8.1.5 Laboratory Technician Laboratory Technicians have the potential to be exposed to airborne chemicals during water and bitumen testing. To establish potential worker exposures to these chemicals, it is recommended that at a minimum, full-shift air sampling for acids, BTEX and total hydrocarbons (as n-hexane) be performed on Laboratory Technicians during typical analytical procedures.

In addition to the above airborne sampling, JACOS should consider testing the laboratory fume hoods used in the various laboratories to ensure that the air flow measurements meet the recommended guidelines for fume hoods published by the American Conference of Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). 8.1.6 Maintenance Workers Maintenance Workers are in contact with a number of chemicals used in the Maintenance Shop and Automotive Shop including oils and greases, paints, and parts washing de-greasers. It is Golder’s understanding that Maintenance Workers may come in contact with several types of oils and lubricants while collecting samples and changing oil and filters. However, these activities are conducted infrequently and are typically of short duration. It is not likely that workers have the potential to be overexposed to airborne contaminants by inhalation during their daily activities. No recommendations for baseline air sampling for Maintenance Workers are provided at this time.

Due to the potential for Maintenance Workers to be exposed to dust at the facility, it is recommended that baseline air samples be collected for respirable particulate and crystalline silica. Baseline sampling for respirable particulate and crystalline silica was conducted at the Site by Golder on April 11, 2018 (Golder report titled “Baseline Respirable Particulate and Crystalline Silica”, dated May 18, 2018. The result of the baseline sampling for respirable particulate and crystalline silica collected from a Maintenance Worker was low and below the analytical detection limit.

It is recommended that baseline personal noise dosimetry be performed on representative workers in this SEG.

September 27, 2018 1895166

8.2 General Site Wide Recommendations 8.2.1 Noise Management Program If workers at the Site are exposed to noise levels greater than 85 dBA during their work shift, a noise management program must be developed and implemented (if not already in place). At the time of the QOHEA, Golder did not verify whether or not a formal noise management program exists for the Site. The noise management program should include the following: a) a plan to educate workers in the hazards of exposure to excess noise and to train workers in the correct use of control measures and hearing protection; b) the methods and procedures to be used when measuring or monitoring worker exposure to noise; c) the posting of suitable warning signs in any work area where the noise level exceeds 85 dBA; d) the methods of noise control to be used; e) the selection, use and maintenance of hearing protection devices to be worn by workers; f) the requirements for audiometric testing and the maintenance of test records; g) an annual review of the policies and procedures to address

i) the effectiveness of the education and training plan,

ii) the need for further noise measurement, and

iii) the adequacy of noise control measures. 8.2.2 Respiratory Code of Practice If RPE is to be used at a worksite, a written code of practice must be developed for that site (if not already in place). At the time of the QOHEA, Golder did not verify whether or not a formal respiratory code of program exists for the Site. This code of practice should include the following: a) roles and responsibilities; b) hazard assessment; c) procedures for the selection of the appropriate type of respirator and cartridges or filters, if required, for the hazard present; d) procedures for the proper use of the RPE selected; e) procedures for the proper storage and maintenance of the RPE selected, including replacement schedules; f) fit-testing procedures; and g) training requirements.

Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Standard Z94.4-02, Selection, Use, and Care of Respirators, sets out the requirements for the proper selection, use and care of respirators, and for the administration of an effective respiratory protection program in the workplace.

September 27, 2018 1895166

8.2.3 Baseline NORM Sampling JACOS may want to consider collecting a baseline measurements for naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) during future plant turnaround activities. NORM sampling should include the assessment of the inner surfaces of tanks and vessels that are cleaned as part of turnaround activities to assess for potential NORM contamination. 9.0 LIMITATIONS This report is prepared for the sole use of Japan Canada Oil Sands Limited. The findings of this report are based on conditions and practices as they were observed at the time of the assessment only. No assurance is made regarding changes in conditions or practices subsequent to the time of the assessment.

Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it, are the responsibility of the third party.

The data reported and the findings, observations and conclusions expressed in this report are limited by the scope of work. The scope of work was defined by the request of the client, the time and budgetary constraints imposed by the client, and availability of access to the property.

Because of the limitations stated above, the findings, observations and conclusions expressed by Golder in this report are not, and should not be, considered an opinion concerning compliance of any past or present owner or operator of the site with any federal, provincial or local laws or regulations.

No warranty or guarantee, whether expressed or implied, is made with respect to the data or the reported findings, observations, and conclusions, which are based solely upon site conditions in existence at the time of investigation.

Golder will not be responsible for any real or perceived decrease in a property value, its saleability or ability to gain financing through the reporting of information in this report.

Golder’s assessment reports present professional opinions and findings of a scientific and technical nature. While attempts were made to relate the data and findings to applicable environmental laws and regulations, the report shall not be construed to offer legal opinion or representations as to the requirements of, nor compliance with, environmental laws, rules, regulations or policies of federal, provincial, or local governmental agencies. Any use of the assessment report constitutes acceptance of the limits of Golder’s liability. 10.0 CLOSURE We trust this report meets your needs for a Qualitative Occupational Hygiene Exposure Assessment. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (403) 299-5600 or [email protected]. We look forward to working with you in the future.

September 27, 2018 1895166

Signature Page

Golder Associates Ltd.

Dave Ayriss, B.Sc., CIH, CRSP Ben MacDonald, B.Sc., CIH Associate/Senior Occupational Hygienist Occupational Hygienist

DA/BM/tt

Golder and the G logo are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation

https://golderassociates.sharepoint.com/sites/23429g/deliverables/qohea/1895166_rpt_jacos_oea_april_2018.docx September 27, 2018 1895166

APPENDIX A Chemical Risk Rating Spreadsheet

1895166 Appendix A - Chemical Risk Rating Spreadsheet September 2018

Ingredients Risk Rating Exposure Limits

HER as Physical Health Qualitative Task Product Name Product Use Assigned TLV-TWA TLV-STEL/C AB OEL-TWA AB OEL-STEL/C Product State Chemical Name CAS No. % Effects Exposure Risk Rating Rating (HER) Rating (ER) ppm mg/m3 ppm mg/m3 ppm mg/m3 ppm mg/m3 Amine 3 Monoethylamine 74-89-5 40 3 2 High 3 - 6 - 3 - 6 - Anti-Foam (ChemTreat SD2383) Liquid Evaporator Antifoam N/A N/A NA 0 2 Low ------Dispersing Agent, Scale Anti-Scalant (ChemGuard 5264) 3 Liquid Proprietary Acrylic Acid Polymer NA 30-60 3 0 Low ------control Sodium Chloride 7647-14-5 0-2 3 2 High ------Caustic Soda, Liquid, 10-50% 3 Liquid Water Treatment Sodium Hydroxide 1310-73-2 10-50 3 2 High - - - 2/C - - - 2/C

Water Treatment Water 7732-18-5 50-60 0 1 Trivial ------Caustic Soda, Liquid, 50% 3 Liquid Water Treatment Sodium Hydroxide 1310-73-2 50-60 3 2 High - - - 2/C - - - 2/C

Hydrochloric Acid, 30-50% 3 Liquid Water Treatment Hydrogen Chloride Anhydrous 7664-93-9 51-100 3 2 High - 0.2 - - - 1 - 3

Nalco Lytes 8105 (De-oil Polymer) 0 Liquid Coagulant N/A N/A N/A 0 1 Trivial ------

Stoddard Solvent 8052-41-3 100 1 2 Moderate 100 100 Ethyl Benzene 100-41-4 0.1-0.5 1 2 Moderate 20 20 Production Naphthalene 91-20-3 0.1-0.5 1 2 Moderate 10 10 Varsol 3139 1 Liquid Solvent Nonane 111-84-2 1.0-5.0 1 2 Moderate 200 200 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 95-63-6 1.0-5.0 1 2 Moderate 25 25 Xylenes 1330-20-7 0.1-0.9 1 2 Moderate 100 150 100 150 Poly (Triethanolamine) 68938-70-5 30-60 2 2 Moderate Production/Well Heads Clar 16644W (Reverse) 2 Revers Emulsion Breaker Ethylene Glycol 107-21-1 10-30 2 2 Moderate - - - 100 - - - 100 Amine Monoethanolamine 74-89-5 >99.5 3 2 High 3 - 6 - 3 - 6 - Tetrasodium Ethylenediaminetetra Acetate (EDTA, 64-02-8 40 2 2 Moderate Tetrasodium) Trisodium Nitroacetate 5064-31-3 1-5 2 2 Moderate Kem Guard 6000 2 Liquid Chelant Sodium Hydroxide 1310-73-2 1-5 2 2 Moderate - - - 2/C - - - 2/C

Sodium Glycolate 2836-32-0 1-5 2 2 Moderate Sodium Hydrogensulphite 7631-90-5 30-44 2 2 Moderate 5 5 Steam Generation Kem Guard Cl6100 2 Liquid Oxygen Scavenger Cobalt 7440-48-4 0.1 2 2 Moderate

Calcium Hydroxide 1305-62-0 90-100 3 2 High

Magnesium Oxide 1309-48-4 1-4 3 2 High 10 10 Hydrated Lime 3 Solid Water Treatment Magnesium Hydroxide 1309-42-8 1-4 3 2 High Calcium Carbonate 1317-65-3 1-4 3 2 High Calcium Oxide 1305-78-8 0.1-2 3 2 High Silica, Crystalline, Quartz 14808-60-7 0.1-2 3 2 High 0.025 0.025 Magnesium Oxide 1309-48-4 94-98 2 2 Moderate 10 10 Steam Generation Magnesium Oxide 2 Solid Water Treatment Oxides of Calcium, Iron, Aluminum and Silicon Mixture 2-6 2 2 Moderate

Fuel Gas Skid Methanol 2 Liquid Solvent Methanol 67-56-1 98-100 2 2 Moderate 250 250

Heavy Catalytic Reformed Naphtha 64741-68-0 10-30 1 2 Moderate

Light Aromatic Naptha 64742-95-6 10-30 1 2 Moderate 200 Methanol 67-56-1 10-30 2 2 Moderate 200 250 200 Wells EMBR18085A (Demul) 2 Liquid Emulsion Breaker Xylene 1330-20-7 5-10 1 2 Moderate 100 150 100 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 95-63-6 5-10 1 2 Moderate 25 25 Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 0.1-1 1 2 Moderate 20 20 Cumene 98-82-8 0.1-1 1 2 Moderate 50 50 Naphthalene 91-20-3 0.1-1 1 2 Moderate 10 10

1 of 3 1895166 Appendix A - Chemical Risk Rating Spreadsheet September 2018

Ingredients Risk Rating Exposure Limits

HER as Physical Health Qualitative Task Product Name Product Use Assigned TLV-TWA TLV-STEL/C AB OEL-TWA AB OEL-STEL/C Product State Chemical Name CAS No. % Effects Exposure Risk Rating Rating (HER) Rating (ER) ppm mg/m3 ppm mg/m3 ppm mg/m3 ppm mg/m3 Sodium Hydroxide 2.0N 3 Liquid Sodium Hydroxide 1310-73-2 <50 3 1 Moderate 2/C 2/C Hydrochloric Acid, 50% 3 Liquid Hydrochloric Acid 7647-01-0 50 3 1 Moderate 2/C Potassium Iodide-Iodate N/63 (0.0158N) 1 Liquid Potassium Iodide 7681-11-0 1-2.5 1 1 Low 0.01 Xylenes, Regent 3 Liquid Xylenes 1330-20-7 90-100 3 1 Moderate 100 100 Indicator, Calcium Magnesium 1 Liquid Propionic Acid 79-09-4 1-5 1 1 Low 10 10 Chloroform 67-66-3 <2-5 2 1 Moderate 10 10 Conductivity Standard, 2000UMHOS@25 2 Liquid Potassium Chloride 7447-40-7 <2-5 2 1 Moderate Disodium EDTA, Dihydrate 6381-92-6 2.69 1 1 Low Titrant, High Hardness 1 Liquid Sodium Hydroxide 1310-73-2 0.4 1 1 Low 2/C 2/C Magnesium Chloride, Hexahydrate 7791-18-6 0.07 1 1 Low Indicator, Methyl Purple 1 Liquid Isopropyl Alcohol (2-Propanol) 67-63-0 15 1 1 Low 200 Indicator, Phenolphtalein 2 Solid Phenolphthalein 77-09-8 100 2 1 Moderate Potassium Chromate 7789-00-6 5 2 1 Moderate 0.05 Indicator, Potassium Chromate 2 Liquid Silver Nitrate 7761-88-8 0.0008 0.01 Sodium Hydroxide 1310-73-2 0.2 1 1 Low 2/C 2/C Titrant, Low Hardness 1 Liquid Disodium EDTA, Dihydrate 6381-92-6 0.1 1 1 Low Silica, Solution Standard 50 ppm 0 Liquid Silica, Amorphous 7631-86-9 0.1 0 1 Trivial 10 10 Sodium Hypochlorite 3 Liquid Sodium Hypochlorite 7681-52-9 4-7 3 1 Moderate Laboratory Lab Chemicals 1,4-Butanecarboxylic Acid 124049 60-90 Indicator, Sulfite Acid Starch 1 Solid 1 1 Low Sulfamic Acid 5329146 0.25 Sulphuric Acid 3 Liquid Sulfuric Acid 7664-93-9 95-98 3 1 Moderate 0.2 1 Silver Nitrate 3 Solid Silver Nitrate 7761-88-8 100 3 1 Moderate 0.01 0.01 Molybdic Acid 7782-91-4 5-15 3 1 Moderate 10 10 Molybdate3+ Reagent Solution 3 Liquid Sulfuric Acid 7664-93-9 5-15 0.2 1 Citric Acid Reagent Solution 1 Liquid Citric Acid 77-92-9 10-20 1 1 Low CDTA Reagent 2 Solid 1,2-Cyclohexanediaminetetraacetic acid 125572-95-4 100 2 1 Moderate Sodium Bisulfite 7631-90-5 60-100 2 1 Moderate 5 5 Amino Acid Reagent 2 1-Amino-2-Naphthol-4-Sulfonic Acid 116-63-2 1-5 Sodium Sulfite 7757-83-7 11-5 Ammonium Hydroxide 1336-21-6 15-40 3 1 Moderate 25 35 Calcium Magnesium Buffer 3 Liquid Ammonium Chloride 12125-02-9 5-10 2 1 Low 10 20 Hexamethylene Tetramine 100-97-0 1-5 Chlorophosphonazo 0 Liquid Chlorophosphonazo-III 1914-99-4 >98 0 0 Trivial Tetrachloroethylene, Lab Grade 2 Liquid Tetrachloroethylene 127-18-4 100 2 1 Moderate 25 100 Buffer, pH 4 Buffer, pH 7 Buffer, pH 10 Duron SAE 30 1 Liquid Lubricating Oil (petroleum), C20-C50 72623-85-9 95 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Enduratex, Synthetic EP220 1 Liquid Gear Oil (petroleum), C20-C50 72623-85-9 95 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Hydrex AW 32 1 Liquid Lubricating Oil (petroleum), C15-C-30 72623-86-0 60 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Liquid Distillates (petroleum), Paraffinic 64742-54-7 30 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Hydrex MV 32 1 Liquid Lubricating Oil (petroleum), C15-C-30 72623-86-0 60 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Liquid Distillates (petroleum), Paraffinic 64742-54-7 30 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Hydrex AW 68 1 Liquid Lubricating Oil (petroleum), C15-C-30 72623-86-0 60 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Liquid Distillates (petroleum), Paraffinic 64742-54-7 30 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Industrial Turboflo, R&O 68 1 Liquid Lubricating Oil (petroleum), C20-C50 72623-85-9 95 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Oils Lubricating Oil (petroleum), C15-C-30 72623-86-0 60 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Hydrex AW 46 1 Liquid Distillates (petroleum), Paraffinic 64742-54-7 30 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Traxon 75W90 Synthetic 1 Liquid Lubricating Oil (petroleum), C15-C30 72623-86-0 50 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Oil and Grease Enduratex, Synthetic EP 460 1 Liquid Gear Oil (petroleum), C20-C50 72623-85-9 95 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Duron-E Synthetic 5W30 1 Liquid Lubricating Oil (petroleum), C20-C50 72623-85-9 95 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Synduro SHB 68 1 Liquid Lubricating Oil (petroleum), C15-C30 72623-86-0 50 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Supreme 5W20 1 Liquid Lubricating Oil (petroleum), C15-C30 72623-86-0 50 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Supreme 5W30 1 Liquid Lubricating Oil (petroleum), C15-C30 72623-86-0 50 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 5W40, Duron-E Synthetic 1 Liquid Distillates (petroleum), Paraffinic 64742-54-7 70 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Benzenesulfonic Acid, Mono-C16-C24 70024-69-0 1-5 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Grease, Peerless, LLG 1 Semi-Solid Sulfonic Acids 61789-86-4 1-5 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Calcium Dodecylbenzenesulphonate 26264-06-2 1-5 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Grease Paraffin Oils 8012-95-1 70-90 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Grease, EP Precision, Synthetic 1 Semi-Solid Lubricating Oils (petroleum), C20-C50 72623-85-9 30-50 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10 Distillates (petroleum), Paraffinic 64742-65-0 10-20 1 1 Low 5 10 5 10

2 of 3 1895166 Appendix A - Chemical Risk Rating Spreadsheet September 2018

Ingredients Risk Rating Exposure Limits

HER as Physical Health Qualitative Task Product Name Product Use Assigned TLV-TWA TLV-STEL/C AB OEL-TWA AB OEL-STEL/C Product State Chemical Name CAS No. % Effects Exposure Risk Rating Rating (HER) Rating (ER) ppm mg/m3 ppm mg/m3 ppm mg/m3 ppm mg/m3 Duster, Precision Aerosol, LPS 1 Gas 1 1 Low Duster Duster, Air, Lloyds 1 Gas 1 1 Low 1 1 Low Penetrant, Hi Perf Moovit 1 Gas Penetrant 1 1 Low Penetrating Oil, Loctite 1 Gas 1 1 Low Oil, Air Tool, Kleen Flo 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Lubricant, WD-40, Aerosol 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Lubricant, O-Ring 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Lubricant, Anti Seize, Nickel Liquid Lubricant 1 1 Low Lubricant, Sealant, Valve 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Lubricant, Loctite 8070 HD, Anti-Seize 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Lubricant, Antic Seize Grade 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Cleaners/Degreasers/Lubri Cleaner, Degreaser, Non-Toxic/Corrosive 1 Liquid 1 1 Low cants Degreaser, Citrus Aerosol 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Cleaner, Lectra Clean II 1 Liquid Cleaner/Degreaser 1 1 Low Degreaser, Slap Shot, Aerosol 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Degreaser, Brakleen, Chlorinated Aerosol 2 Liquid Tetrachloroethylene 127-18-4 90-100 2 1 Moderate 25 100 25 100 Adhesive, Thread Locker, Loctite 271 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Adhesive Adhesive, Thread Locker, Loctite 243 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Sealant, Epoxy Stick 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Sealant, Thread, Heavy Duty 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Sealant Sealant, Hylomar 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Sealant, Thread Pipe, Swak 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Fluid, Layout, Permatex 1 Liquid 1 1 Low Fluid, Tapping, New Rapid Tap 1 Liquid Miscellaneous 1 1 Low Tester, Smoke Detector 1 Gas 1 1 Low Notes: HER - Health Effects Rating CAS - Chemical Abstract Number TLV-TWA - ACGIH Threshold Limit Value - Time Weighted Average TLV-STEL/C - ACGIH Threshold Limit Value - Short Term Exposure Limit/Ceiling Limit AB-OEL-TWA - Alberta Occupational Exposure Limit, Time Weighted Average AB-OEL-STEL/C - Alberta Occupational Exposure Limit, Short Term Exposure Limit/Ceiling Limit

3 of 3

golder.com