s 333.91 M26prar 2001 2001 ANNUAL REPORT to the GOVERNMENTS OF CANADA, UNITED STATES, SASKATCHEWAN AND MONTANA TATE DOCUMENTS COLLECTION DEC 0 V 2002 MONTANA STATE LIBRARY 1515 E. 6th AVE. "^LENA, MONTANA 59620 by the POPLAR RIVER BILATERAL MONITORING COMMITTEE COVERING CALENDAR YEAR 2001 RIVER October 2002 MONTANA STATE LIBRARY 3 0864 1001 6672 0 2001 ANNUAL REPORT to the GOVERNMENTS OF CANADA, UNITED STATES, SASKATCHEWAN, AND MONTANA by the POPLAR RIVER BILATERAL MONITORING COMMITTEE COVERING CALENDAR YEAR 2001 October 2002 Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee Department of State Washington, D.C., United States Governor's Office State of Montana Helena, Montana, United States Ladies and Gentlemen: Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada Herein is tiae 2 1 st Annual Report of the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee. This report discusses the Committee activities of 2001 and presents the proposed schedule for the year 2002. During 2001, the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee continued to fulfil the responsibilities assigned by the governments under the Poplar River Cooperative Monitoring Agreement dated September 23, 1980. Through exchange of Diplomatic Notes in March 1987, July 1992, and July 1997, the Arrangement was extended. The Monitoring Committee requested another extension through 2007. The enclosed report summarizes current water-quality conditions and compares them to guidelines for specific parameter values that were developed by the International Joint Commission imder the 1977 Reference fi-om Canada and the United States. After evaluation of the monitoring information for 2001, the Committee finds that the measured conditions meet the recommended objectives. The Committee notes that the flow-weighted concentration of total dissolved solids in streamflow in the East Poplar River at the International Boundary remains close to the long-term objective of 1,000 milligrams per litre, but did not exceed the objective in 2001. Based on UC recommendations, the United States was entitled to an on-demand release of 370 dam^ (300 acre-feet) fi-om Cookson Reservoir in 2001. A volume of 385 dam^ (312 acre-feet) was delivered to the United States during this period. In addition, most daily flows in 2001 met or exceeded the minimimi flow recommended by the UC. During 2001, monitoring continued in accordance with Technical Monitoring Schedules outlined in the 1 992 Annual Report of the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee. Yours sincerely. Robert Davis Chairman, United States SectifJh Richard Kellow Chairman, Canadian Section Chairman, United States SectifJh Chairman, Canadian Section Japk^tults Chuck Bosgoed / Member. United States Section Member. Canadian Section Chuck Bosgoed Member, Canadian Section TABLE OF CONTENTS Highlights for 2001 iii 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Committee Activities 2 2.1 Membership 2 2.2 Meetings 2 2.3 Review of Water-Quality Objectives 3 2.4 Data Exchange .....4 3.0 Water and Air: Monitoring and Interpretations 6 3.1 Poplar River Power Station Operation 6 3.2 East Poplar River 6 3.2.1 Streamflow 6 3.2.2 Apportionment 7 3.2.3 Minimum Flows 7 3.2.4 On-Demand Release 8 3.2.5 Water Quality 9 3.2.5.1 Total Dissolved Solids 10 3.2.5.2 Boron 14 3.2.5.3 Other Water-Quality Variables 17 3.3 Groundwater 19 3.3.1 Operations 19 3.3.2 Ground- Water Monitoring 21 3.3.2.1 Saskatchewan 21 3.3.2.2 Montana 25 3.3.3 Ground-Water Quality 27 3.3.3.1 Saskatchewan 27 3.3.3.2 Montana 31 3.4 Cookson Reservoir 32 3.4.1 Storage 32 3.4.2 Water Quality 34 3.5 Air Quality 34 3.6 Quality Control 34 3.6.1 Streamflow 34 3.6.2 Water Quality 35 ANNEXES 1 .0 Poplar River Cooperative Monitoring Arrangement, Canada-United States Al 2.0 Poplar River Cooperative Monitoring Arrangement, Technical Monitoring Schedules, 2001, Canada-United States A2 3.0 Recommended Flow Apportionment in the Poplar River Basin A3 4.0 Metric Conversion Factors A4 TABLES Table 2. 1 Water-Quality Objectives 5 Table 3. 1 Recommended Water-Quality Objectives and Excursions, 2001 Sampling Program, East Poplar River at International Boimdary 18 Table 3.2 Water-Quality Statistics for Water Pumped from Supplementary Water Supply Project Wells 27 Table 3.3 Water-Quality Statistics for Water Pumped from Salinity Confrol Project Wells Sampled at the Discharge Pipe 28 Table 3.4 Cookson Reservoir Storage Statistics for 2001 32 Table 3.5 Sfreamflow Measurement Results for July 16, 2001 35 Table 3.6 East Poplar River Joint Water-Quality Sample Results for August 14, 2001 36 FIGURES Figure 3.1 Discharge during 2001 as Compared with the Median Discharge from 1931-2000 for the Poplar River at International Boundary 6 Figure 3.2 Flow Hydrograph of the East Poplar River at International Boundary 8 Figure 3.3 Cumulative Volume Hydrograph of On-Demand Release 9 Figure 3.4 TDS Concenfration for 2001 Grab Samples from East Poplar River at International Boundary 1 1 Figure 3.5 Three-Month Moving Flow- Weighted TDS Concenfration for East Poplar River at International Boundary 1 1 Figure 3.6 Five- Year Moving Flow- Weighted TDS Concenfration for East Poplar River at International Boimdary 13 Figure 3.7 Daily TDS Concenfration, 1990 to 2001, East Poplar River at International Boimdary 13 Figure 3.8 Boron Concenfration for 2001 Grab Samples from East Poplar River at International Boundary 15 Figure 3.9 Three-Month Moving Flow-Weighted Boron Concenfration for East Poplar River at International Boimdary 15 Figure 3.10 Five- Year Moving Flow- Weighted Boron Concenfration for East Poplar River at International Boundary 16 Figure 3.11 Daily Boron Concentration, 1 990 to 2001 , East Poplar River at International Boundary 16 Figure 3.12 Supplementary Water Supply 19 Figure 3.13 Pumpagefrom Salinity Confrol Project 21 Figure 3.14 Drawdown for Hart Seam Aquifer as of December 2001 23 Figure 3.15 Cone of Depression in the Empress Sands Due to the Salinity Confrol Project as of December 2001 24 Figure 3.16 Hydrograph of Selected Wells: Fort Union-Hart Coal Aquifers 25 Figure 3.17 Hydrograph of Selected Wells: Alluvium and Fox Hills Aquifers 26 Figure 3.18 Total Dissolved Solids in Samples from Montana Wells 31 Figure 3.19 Cookson Reservoir Daily Mean Water Levels for 200 1 and Median Daily Water Levels, 1981-1991 33 HIGHLIGHTS FOR 2001 The Poplar River Power Station completed its eighteenth full year of operation in 2001. The two 300-megawatt coal-fired units generated 4,354,900 gross megawatt hours (MW/h) of electricity. The average capacity factors for Units No. 1 and 2 were 74.6 percent and 88.4 percent, respectively. The capacity factors are based on the maximum generating rating of 305 MW/h for both Unit No. 1 and Unit No. 2. Monitoring information collected in both Canada and the United States during 2001 was exchanged in the spring of 2002. In general, the sampling locations, fi-equency of collection, and parameters met the requirements identified in the 2001 Technical Monitoring Schedules set forth in the 2000 annual report. The recorded volume of the Poplar River at International Boundary fi-om March 1 to May 31, 2001 was 4,790 dam'' (3,880 acre-feet). Based on International Joint Commission (IJC) recom- mendations and the assumption that the recorded flow is the natural flow, the United States was entitled to a minimvim discharge on the East Poplar River of 0.057 cubic metres per second (m^/s) (2.0 cubic feet per second (ftVs)) for the period June 1, 2001 to August 31, 2001 and 0.028 m^/s (1.0 ft^/s) for the period September 1, 2001 to May 31, 2002. The minimum flow of 0.028 m^/s (1.0 ft^/s) for the period January 1 to May 31, 2001 had previously been determined on the basis of the Poplar River flow volume for March 1 to May 31, 2000. Except for August 7, 1 1, and 12, daily flows in 2001 met or exceeded the minimum flow recommended by the IJC. In addition to the minimum flow, the IJC apportionment recommendation entitles the United States to an on-demand release to be delivered on the East Poplar River during the twelve-month period commencing June 1. Based on the runoff volume of 2,080 dam^ (1,690 acre-feet) recorded at the Poplar River at International Boundary gauging station for March 1 through May 31, 2000, the United States was entifled to an additional release of 370 dam'' (300 acre-feet) fi-om Cookson Reservoir during the succeeding twelve-month period commencing June 1, 2000. Montana requested this release to be made between May 1 and May 31, 2001. A volume of 385 dam^ (312 acre-feet), in addition to the minimum flow, was delivered during this period. The 2001 five-year total dissolved solids (TDS) flow- weighted concentrations were below the long-term objective of 1,000 milligrams per litre (mg/L). The maximum monthly value calculated in 2001 was 948 mg/L, which was less than in 2000. Boron concentrations for 2001 continued to remain well below the long-term objective of 2.5 mg/L. lU 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee was authorized for an initial period of five years by the Governments of Canada and the United States under the Poplar River Cooperative Monitoring Arrangement dated September 23, 1980. A copy of the Arrangement is attached to this report as Annex 1. Through exchange of Diplomatic Notes, the Arrangement was extended in March 1987, July 1992, and July 1997. The current extension expires in March 2002. A more detailed account of the historical background of the Monitoring Arrangement is contained in the 1990 Annual Report of the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee. The Committee oversees monitoring programs designed to evaluate the potential for transboundary impacts fi-om SaskPower's (formerly Saskatchewan Power Corporation) coal-fired thermal generating station and ancillary operations near Coronach, Saskatchewan. Monitoring is conducted in Canada and the United States at or near the International Boundary for quantity and quality of surface and ground water and for air quality. Participants fi-om both countries, including Federal, State and Provincial agencies, are involved in monitoring. The Committee submits an annual report to Governments which summarizes the monitoring results, evaluates apparent trends, and compares the data to objectives or standards recommended by the hitemational Joint Commission (IJC) to Governments, or relevant State, Provincial, or Federal standards. The Committee reports to Governments on a calendar year basis. The Committee is also responsible for drawing to the attention of Governments definitive changes in monitored parameters which may require immediate attention. A responsibility of the Committee is to review the adequacy of the monitoring programs in both countries and make recommendations to Governments on the Technical Monitoring Schedules. The Schedules are updated annually for new and discontinued programs and for modifications in sampling frequencies, parameter lists, and analytical techniques of ongoing programs. The Technical Monitoring Schedules listed in the annual report (Annex 2) are given for the forthcoming year. The Committee will continue to review and propose changes to the Technical Monitoring Schedules as information requirements change. 2.0 COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES 2.1 Membership The Committee is composed of representatives of the Governments of the United States of America and Canada, the State Government of Montana, and the Provincial Government of Saskatchewan, hi addition to the representatives of Governments, two ex-officio members serve as local representatives for the State of Montana and Province of Saskatchewan. During 2001, the members of the Committee included: Mr. R. Davis, U.S. Geological Survey, United States representative and Cochair; Mr. R. Kellow, Environment Canada, Canadian representative and Cochair; Mr. J. Stults, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Montana representative; Mr. C. Bosgoed, Saskatchewan Environment, Saskatchewan representative; Mr. C.W. Tande, Daniels County Commissioner, Montana local ex-officio representative; and Mr. J.R. Totten, Reeve, R.M. of Hart Butte, Saskatchewan local ex-officio representative. 2.2 Meetin2s The Committee met on August 28, 2001, in Helena, Montana. Delegated representatives of Governments, with the exception of the two ex-officio members from Montana and Saskatchewan, attended the meeting. In addition to Committee members, several technical advisors representing Federal, State, and Provincial agencies participated in the meeting. During the meeting, the Committee reviewed the operational status of the Poplar River Power Station and associated coal-mining activities; examined data collected in 2000 including surface-water quality and quantity, grotmd-water quality and quantity, and air quality; established the Technical Monitoring Schedules for the year 2002; and discussed proposed changes in water-quality objectives and the possibility of replacing the flow- weighting method currently used to compute total dissolved solids and boron. 2.3 Review of Water-Quality Objectives The International Joint Commission in its Report to Governments, titled "Water-Quality in the Poplar River Basin", recommended that the Committee "periodically review the water-quality objectives with the overall Basin context and recommend new and revised objectives as appropriate", hi 1991, an action item from the annual Committee meeting set in motion the review and revision of the water-quality objectives. In 1993, the Conmiittee approved changes in water-quality objectives recommended by the subcommittee that was formed in 1992 to review the objectives. The Committee also discussed the water-quality objectives for 5-year and 3-month flow-weighted concentrations for total dissolved solids and boron. Although the Committee agreed that calculation procedures to determine flow-weighted concentrations are time consuming and probably scientifically questionable, no consensus was reached on alternative objectives or procedures. In 1997, the Committee agreed to suspend the monitoring and reporting of several parameters. The parameters affected were: dissolved aluminum, un-ionized ammonia, total chromium, dissolved copper, mercury in fish tissues, fecal coliform, and total coliform. The Committee also agreed to other minor revisions for clarification purposes. For example, changing the designation for pH from "natural" to "ambient". In 1 999, the Committee replaced the term "discontinued" with "suspended" in Table 2. 1 . The Committee decided this year to suspend the monitoring of dissolved mercury and total copper. This decision to suspend these parameters was based on data indicating concentrations or levels well below or within the objectives. Current objectives approved by the Committee are listed in Table 2. 1 . Another responsibility of the Committee has included an ongoing exchange of data acquired through the monitoring programs. Exchanged data and reports are available for public viewing at the agencies of the participating governments or from Committee members. 2.4 Data Exchange The Committee is responsible for assuring exchange of data between governments. The exchange of monitoring information was initiated in the first quarter of 1981 and was an expansion of the informal quarterly exchange program initiated between the United States and Canada in 1976. Until 1991, data were exchanged on a quarterly basis. At the request of the Committee, the United States and Canada agreed to replace the quarterly exchange of data with an annual exchange effective at the beginning of the 1992 calendar year. Henceforth, data will be exchanged once each year as soon after the end of the calendar year as possible. However, unusual conditions or anomalous information will be reported and exchanged whenever warranted. No unusual conditions occurred during 2001 which warranted special reporting. Table 2.1 Water-Quality Objectives Parameter Present Objective Recommendation New Objective Boron - total 3.5/2.5' Continue as is ~ re-evaluate To be determined TDS 1500/1000' Continue as is - re-evaluate To be determined Aluminum, dissolved 0.1 Suspend* ... Ammonia, un-ionized 0.02 Suspend* — Cadmium, total 0.0012 Continue as is 0.0012 Chromium, total 0.05 Suspend* .„ Copper, dissolved 0.005 Suspend* — Copper, total 1 Suspend* ... Fluoride, dissolved 1.5 Continue as is 1.5 1 Lead, total 0.03 Continue as is 0.03 Mercury, dissolved 0.0002 Suspend* ._ Mercury, fish (mg/kg) 0.5 Suspend* ... Nitrate 10 Continue as is 10 Oxygen, dissolved 4.0/5.0^ Objective applies only during open water 4.0/5.0^ SAR (units) 10 Continue as is 10 Sulfate, dissolved 800 Continue as is 800 Zinc, total 0.03 Continue as is 0.03 Water temperature (C) 30.0^ Continue as is 30.0^ pH (units) 6.5^ Continue 6.5^ Coliform(no./100mL) Fecal 2000 Suspend* ... Total 20000 Suspend* Units in mg/L excqjt as noted. 1 . Five-year average of flow-weighted concentrations (March to October) should be <2.5 boron, < 1 ,000 TDS. Three-month average of flow-weighted concentration should be <3.5 boron and <1500 TDS. 2. 5.0 (minimum April 10 to May 1 5), 4.0 (minimum remainder of year - Fish Spawning). 3 . Natural temperature (April 1 0 to May 1 5 ), <30 degree Celsius (remainder of year) 4. Less than 0.5 pH units above ambient, minimum pH=6.5. •Suspended after review of historic data found sample concentrations consistently below the objective. 3.0 WATER AND AIR: MONITORING AND INTERPRETATIONS 3.1 Poplar River Power Station Operation In 2001, the two 300-megawatt coal-fired units generated 4,354,900 gross megawatt hours (MW/h) of electricity. The average capacity factors for Unit No. 1 and 2 were 74.6 percent and 88.4 percent, respectively. The capacity factors are based on the maximum generating rating of 305 MW/h for both Unit No. 1 and Unit No. 2. 3.2 East Poplar River 3.2.1 Streamflow Streamflow in the Poplar River basin was below normal in 2001. The March to October recorded flow of the Poplar River at International Boundary, an indicator of natural flow in the basin, was 5,540 cubic decametres (dam^) (4,490 acre-feet), which was 55 percent of the 1931 to 2000 median seasonal flow. A comparison of 2001 monthly mean discharge with the 1931-2000 median discharge is shown in Figure 3.1. O ■ -Median of Monthly Mean Discharge for 1931-2000 -O^ Monthly Mean Discharge for 2001 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 40 35 1 o I I 25 I 30 20 I o 15^. 10 Oct Figure 3.1 Discharge during 2001 as Compared with the Median Discharge from 1931-2000 for the Poplar River at International Boundary. The 2001 recorded flow volume of the East Poplar River at International Boundary was 2,510 dam'' (2,030 acre-feet). This volume is 80 percent of the median annual flow since the completion of Morrison Dam in 1975. 3.2.2 Apportionment In 1976 the International Souris-Red Rivers Engineering Board, through its Poplar River Task Force, completed an investigation and made a recommendation to the Governments of Canada and the United States regarding the apportionment of waters of the Poplar River basin. Although not officially adopted by the two countries, the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee has adhered to the Apportion- ment Recommendations in each of its annual reports. Annex 3 contains the apportiorunent recommendation. 3.2.3 Minimum Flows The recorded volume of the Poplar River at International Boundary from March 1 to May 31, 2001 was 4,790 dam"' (3,880 acre-feet). Based on IJC recommendations and the assumption that the recorded flow is the natural flow, the United States was entitled to a minimum discharge on the East Poplar River of 0.057 cubic metres per second (m''/s) (2.0 cubic feet per second (ft^/s)) for the period June 1, 2001 to August 31, 2001 and 0.028 m^/s (1.0 ft^/s) for the period September 1, 2001 to May 31, 2002. The minimum flow for the period January 1 to May 31, 2001 was 0.028 m^/s (1.0 ft''/s), determined on the basis of the Poplar River flow volume for March 1 to May 31, 2000. A hydrograph for the East Poplar River at International Boimdary and the minimum flow as recommended by the IJC are shown in Figure 3.2. Daily flows during 2001 met or exceeded the minimum flow recommended by the IJC throughout the year except for August 7, 1 1, and 12, when daily flows fell slightly below the recommended minimum. 0.01 ><>>c c-s raoaatt O O $ S Z Z Q 9 CO »^ O) r* 2001 Figure 3.2 Flow Hydrograph of the East Poplar River at International Boundary. 3.2.4 On-Demand Release In addition to the minimum flow, the IJC apportionment recommendation entitles Montana to an on- demand release to be delivered on the East Poplar River during the twelve-month period commencing June 1. Based on the runoff volume of 2,080 dam^ (1,690 acre-feet) recorded at the Poplar River at International Boundary gauging station during the March 1 to May 31, 2000 period, Montana was entitled to an additional release of 370 dam^ (300 acre-feet) from Cookson Reservoir during the succeeding twelve-month period commencing June 1 , 2000. Montana requested this release to be made between May 1 and May 31, 2001. A volume of 385 dam^ (312 acre-feet), in addition to the minimum flow, was delivered during this period. A hydrograph showing cumulative volume of the on-demand release request and on-demand release delivery made at the East Poplar River at International Boundary is shown in Figure 3.3 450 S 400 i 350 300 O 250 200 1 100 ■ 350 -On-Demand Release Delivery ■On-Demand Release Request 2001 Figure 3.3 Cumulative Volume Hydrograph of On-Demand Release. 3.2.5 Water Quality The 1981 report by the IJC to Governments recommended: For the March to October period, the maximum flow-weighted concentrations should not exceed 3.5 milligrams per litre (mg/L) for boron and 1500 mg/L for IDS for any three consecutive months in the East Poplar River at the International Boundary. For the March to October period, the long-term average of flow-weighted concentrations should be 2.5 mg/L or less for boron, and 1000 mg/L or less for TDS in the East Poplar River at the International Boundary. For the period prior to 1982, three-month moving flow-weighted concentration (FWC) for boron and total dissolved solids (TDS) was calculated solely from monthly monitoring results. Since the beginning of 1982, the USGS has monitored specific conductance daily in the East Poplar River at the International Boundary, making it possible to derive boron and TDS concentration using a linear regression relationship with specific conductance. Thus, the three-month FWC for boron and TDS for the period 1982 to 2001 was calculated from both the results of monthly monitoring (grab samples 10 collected by both Canada and the United States) and the statistical analysis of daily specific conductance readings collected by the USGS. The Bilateral Monitoring Committee adopted the approach that, for the ptirpose of comparison with the proposed IJC long-term objectives, the boron and TDS data are best plotted as a five-year moving FWC which is advanced one month at a time. Prior to 1 988, long-term averages were calculated for a five-year period in which 2.5 years preceded and 2.5 years followed each plotted point. Beginning in 1988, the FWC was calculated fi"om the five-year period preceding each plotted point. For example, the FWC for December 2001 is calculated fi-om data generated over the period December 1995 to December 2001. The calculations are based on the results of samples collected throughout the year, and are not restricted to only those collected during the months bracketing the period of irrigation (March to October) each year. 3.2.5.1 Total Dissolved Solids TDS is inversely related to streamflow at the International Boundary station. During periods of high runoff such as spring fi-eshet, TDS decreases as the proportion of streamflow derived fi-om ground water decreases. Conversely, during times of low streamflow (late summer, winter) the contribution of ground water to streamflow is proportionally greater. Because ground water has a higher ionic strength than the surface water entering the river, the TDS of the stream increases markedly during low flow conditions. TDS grab-sample data collected by Environment Canada and the USGS in 2001 are shown in Figure 3.4. The TDS ranged fi"om 881 mg/L on March 23 and May 30 to 1,055 mg/L on January 26. The proposed short-term objective for TDS is 1,500 mg/L. A time plot of the three-month moving FWC for TDS is presented in Figure 3.5. 11 Figure 3.4: TDS Concentration for 2001 Grab Samples from East Poplar River at International Boundary 1100 ^,_^ 1050 !> fc. 1000 «] s 5 950 •g ■^ 900 (!j o 850 ?! o 1- 800 «> mfih 750 ♦ 1030 ♦ 1030 ♦ 986 ♦ 965 ♦ 978 ♦ ddd ♦ 968 ♦ 929 ♦934 ♦ 881 ♦ 881 Figure 3.5: Three-Month Moving Flow-Weighted TDS Concentration for East Poplar River at International Boundary 1600 12 The TDS objective has not been exceeded during the period of record. On inspection of the plot, it is apparent that the three-month moving FWC has been increasing gradually, year by year, up until the spring runoff of 1997, when an exceptionally heavy snowmelt contributed sufficient water of low ionic strength to the river and the reservoir to dilute the accumulated salts built up in the system. Dissolved- solids concentrations in 2001 decreased from January through the spring runoff period and then gradually increased through December to near the concentration observed at the beginning of 2001 . The five-year moving FWC for TDS (Figure 3.6) did not exceed the long-term objective of 1,000 mg/L in 2001 . The maximum monthly value calculated in 2001 was 948 mg/L, which is less than the previous year maximum monthly value of 972 mg/L. The daily TDS values, as generated by linear regression from the daily specific-conductance readings, from January 1990 through December 2001 are shown in Figure 3.7. The data show an abrupt drop in TDS corresponding to the snowmelt runoff occurring during the spring of each year. Note: There were no daily conductance data from September 13-30, 2001 and from October 1-24, 2001, inclusive. Therefore, the monthly representation samples used for September and October 2001 were the means calculated based on the recorded partial data for these two months. No gaps or voids werefilled. The relationship between TDS and specific conductance applied to data collected from 1975 to 2001 is as follows: TDS = (0.626 X specific conductance) + 31.542 (R^ = 0.85, n = 555) 13 1200 1000 ^ 800 ^ 600 ffl 400 200 Figure 3.6: Five- Year l\^oving Flow-Weighted TDS Concentration for East Poplar River at International Boundary / ong Ten nO iject ve r V/— ^ ^ /■ ~\. [L rv*" fJ= ^ iO' ^* ^ ^ ^ ;&' ^ %<* <^ ^ 4> cs'i qO o*^ c?' >?>o vji.o ^<^o >,*o ^*o ^j^o v?.o v?.o >,*o ^>o ^*o ^*o ^*o v,*<^ ^*^ >,*o >j>o ^^ />' / / / / / /^' / /■- ^ ^ o^ o|» Jp ^ J' rf> ftA j^A jj* jj% jjQ j^ jp jp j^N »N ^ ^1^ >j» ^<^ ^^ >j!.<^ 5^ ^*<> >s» ^ ^>» ^,^<^ >j» ^,^<> vj^ ^^o Nt> ^^o vj> ^*o >j» ^<,r /^ /■ ^<» / 14 3.2.5.2 Boron Figure 3.8 shows that during 2001, boron concentrations in the East Poplar River at International Boundary varied from 1.32 (May 30) to 2.01 mg/L (December 10). The three-month moving FWC for boron for the period of record is shown in Figure 3.9. The short-term objective of 3.5 mg/L has not been exceeded over the period 1975 to 2001. It can be seen that the data derived from grab samples and that derived from regression with specific conductance are similar, with the highs and lows in some degree of correspondence. This suggests that the regression generation of boron and TDS values is, in general terms, a valid procedure despite problems which arise from attempting to generate representative concenfration and flow data for an entire month, based on a limited number of samples. The five-year moving FWC for boron displayed in Figure 3.10 remained well below the long-term objective of 2.5 mg/L. From mid- 1993 to the end of the data period there is a distinct drop in the computed boron concentrations. It is apparent that TDS is better-correlated with specific conductance than is boron. Boron is a relatively minor ion, and does not in itself contribute to a large degree to the total load of dissolved constituents in the water. Accordingly, it appears likely that the standard deviation of dissolved boron (relative to the long-term mean boron concentration) may be greater than that of the major cations (sodium, potassium, and magnesium) and anions (sulphate, bicarbonate, and chloride) around their respective long-term mean concenfrations. Daily boron concenfrations for the period January 1990 through December 2001 are shown in Figure 3.11. The relationship between boron and specific conductance applied to data collected from 1975 to 2001 is as follows: boron = (0.0012 x specific conductance) - 0.034 (R^ = 0.58, n = 555) 15 Figure 3.8: Boron Concentration for 2001 Grab Samples from East Poplar River at International Boundary 2.2 » 1.99 -<> 2.01 ^1.8 -§- ♦ 1.65 S 1.6 ♦ 1.83 » 1 7A ♦ 1.85 ♦ 1.86 ♦ 1.77 ♦ 1.72 I 1.4 1.2 ♦ 1.43 ♦ 1.48 ♦ 1.32 0.8 ^ Figure 3.9: Three-Month Moving Flow-Weighted Boron Concentration for East Poplar River at International Boundary 16 Figure 3.10: Five-Year Moving Flow-Weighted Boron Concentration for East Poplar River at International Boundary 2.5 & 1.5 0.5 L jng- Ten 1 01 >jec ive r y— ■^ ^, . Vw_ — r^ p~ / ^ - sf >/ ^*0 ^-2?^ >,^0 v,*^ ^*0 v,*^ ^*^ >,*<> >?^0 >;e.O v,*0 >,*^ v,*0 v,# ^-zJ^ v.-J.^ ^-2.^ >,*<> ^^^ ^^^ >,*<> v,*0 ^,*0 ^^^ >,*<> >,*<> ^^O Figure 3.11: Daily Boron Concentration, 1990 to 2001; East Poplar River at international Boundary (regression-deri\«d data) 0.00 J" J^P Ji^ ^ <#> ^ ^ ^ <§> ^ ^ ^ # pN o^ jJV 17 3.2.5.3 Other Water-Quality Variables Table 3.1 contains the multipurpose water-quality objectives for the East Poplar River at hitemational Boundary, recommended by the International Poplar River Water Quality Board to the IJC. The table shows the number of samples collected for each parameter and the number of times over the course of the year that the objectives were exceeded. In the table, multiple replicate samples collected during the annual quality control exercise are treated as a single sample, but where an objective was exceeded in a replicate sample, this is charged against the single sample noted. As the table shows, all parameters were within the appropriate objectives. 18 Table 3.1 Recommended Water-Quality Objectives and Excursions, East Poplar River at International Boundary (units in mg/L, 2001 Sampling Program, except as otherwise noted) Parameter Objective No. of Samples Excursions USA Canada Objectives recommended by IJC to Governments 1 Boron - dissolved 3.5/2.5 (1) 6 6 0 Total Dissolved Solids 1,500/1,000(1) 6 6 0 Objectives recommended by Poplar River Board to the IJC 1 Cadmium - total 0.0012 2 6 0 Fluoride - dissolved 1.5 6 6 0 Lead - total 0.03 2 6 0 Nitrate (as N) 10.0 6 6 0 Oxygen - dissolved 4.0/5.0 (2) 6 6 0 Sodium adsorption ratio 10.0 6 5 0 Sulphate - dissolved 800.0 6 6 0 Zinc -total 0.03 1 6 0 Water temperature (Celsius) 30.0 (3) 6 6 0 pH (pH units) 6.5(4) 6 6 0 ( 1 ) Three-month average of flow-weighted concentrations should be <3.5 mg/L boron and oo>o>a>o>aio>5Qo ccccccccccccccccccccccc Figure 3.16 Hydrograph of Selected Wells - Fort Union-Hart Coal Aquifers 26 The potentiometric surface in the Fox Hills/Hell Creek artesian aquifer (well 1 1) has shown very little fluctuation or change throughout the 23-year (1979-2001) monitoring period. Water levels in monitoring wells (5, 8, 10, 23, and 24) that penetrate the alluvial and/or outwash aquifer show considerable fluctuation due to seasonal and/or pumping changes; however, they rose during the period 1996 to 1998 and leveled off during 1999, 2000, and 2001. Hydrographs of selected alluvial wells (10, 23, and 24) and Fox Hills well (11) are shown in Figure 3.17. Hydrograph of Selected Wells Alluvium and Fox Hills Aquifers -3- 2430 — ^ \ ii ^ : 1 1 ; ; 1 : T ■ ■ : 1 : : i ! ; : : 1 ; : 1 ; ; : 1 : ; 1 ; ; i ; I : : : jpF ■ ■ i • ft f\l AJ \f\il^ : 1 : ! i : ! : ■ : 1 : ; 1 ; = i ■ : :: ^i\ ii :x r lli i 1 : 1 : : j ; i 1 '• • j ji: :* M \ : ; ; : : : i i '. Mi • yv/ 1 ^f^ ^ S^ >^ y >^ slv nLli- > •] ft 7t y( li^ ; i :!:! = ; I : ' : : I i uMlw ^ I /| " : ■ i Hi Hiiiii ir 1 • V M i' I 1 1 s r- ? ' ! ^ I ' = 1 ' ; i N 0 s s s I 1 ! -Wall 10 -Well 11 -Wall 23 -Well 24 Figure 3.17 Hydrograph of Selected Wells - Alluvium and Fox Hills Aquifers 27 3.3.3 Ground-Water Quality 3.3.3.1 Saskatchewan The water quality from the Supplementary Supply Project discharge points has been consistent with no trends indicated. A summary of the more frequently tested parameters during 2001 is provided in Table 3.2. Statistical averages of the results since 1992 are included in this table. Table 3.2 Water-Quality Statistics for Water Pumped from Supplementary Water Supply Project Wells* 2001 Average 1992 - 2001 Average pH (unit) 8.1 7.9 Conductivity ()aS/cm) 1,423 1,310 Total Dissolved Solids 997 903 Total Suspended Solids 3.5 10.3 Boron 1.2 1.2 Sodium 199 177 Cyanide (p-g/L) <2 <2 Iron 0.15 0.24 Manganese 0.04 0.1 Mercury ()U,g/L) <0.1 <0.1 Calcium 71 72 Magnesium 51 53 Sulfate 250 271 Nitrate 0.059 0.10 ♦All units in mg/L, unless otherwise noted. Sampled at Site "C3" on Giratd Creek. 28 Average water-quality results from the common discharge point for the Salinity Control Project for 2001, plus an average of the 1992-2001 results, are provided in Table 3.3. Results have remained relatively consistent since 1992. Table 3.3 Water-Quality Statistics for Water Pumped from Salinity Control Project Wells Sampled at the Discharge Pipe"* 2001 Average 1992-2001 Average pH (units) 7.6 7.4 Conductivity (^S/cm) 1,361 1,406 Total Dissolved Solids 943 976 Boron 1.5 1.6 Calcium 87 101 Magnesium 57 60 Sodium 148 147 Potassium 7.0 7.4 Arsenic ()J.g/L) 0.2 5.7 Aluminum <0.10 0.07 Barium 0.03 0.03 Cadmium <0.001 <0.001 Iron 3.6 4.1 Manganese 0.13 0.14 Molybdenum <0.005 0.002 Strontium 1.5 1.8 Vanadium <0.006 0.003 Uranium (|lg/L) <0.5 <0.1 Mercury (|lg/L) <0.05 0.11 Sulfate 270 308 Chloride 6.4 6.1 Nitrate 0.171 0.13 *AII concentrations in mg/L, unless otherwise noted. 29 Ground-water quality in the vicinity of the ash lagoons can potentially be affected by leachate movement through the ash lagoon liner systems. The piezometers listed in the Technical Monitoring Schedules are used to assess leachate movement and calculate seepage rates. Piezometric water level, boron, and chloride are the chosen indicator parameters to assess leachate movement. The ground- water monitoring program was expanded in 1994 as a result of Ash Lagoon #3 South construction. In total, 20 new pneumatic piezometers and 28 new standpipe piezometers were completed within their target zones. Testing of these piezometers began in 1995. The limited data so far do not show any unusual or unexpected values. Piezometers C867A, C868A and C871A are completed immediately above the liner system, within the ash stack of Ash Lagoon #1. The 2001 monitoring results continue to suggest confirmation of the trend first observed in 1993 that the boron concentration decreases with depth within the ash stack. The effect of ash thickness on leachate quality is, however, not completely understood. The chemistry of water immediately above the liner systems is therefore expected to differ fi-om the surface water of the lagoons. Meaningful information is only available from piezometers installed within Ash Lagoon #1 where ash has been deposited for many years. New piezometers C886A, C887A, C890A and C893 A have been completed above the liner system of new Ash Lagoon #3 South and are now being monitored. Monitoring of these piezometers in 2001 supports the theory that boron levels decrease with depth within the ash stacks. Future monitoring of all piezometers completed above the lagoon liner systems will continue with the piirpose of confirming the boron trend noted above and to improve the understanding of leachate quality and flow fi-om the ash lagoons. The piezometric surface measurements for the oxidized till continue to show the presence of a ground- water mound beneath the ash lagoons. The mound extends from the west side of the Polishing Pond to the east side of Ash Lagoon No. 2. Isolated ground-water mounds have developed within the area of the oxidized ground-water mound. Piezometers located in the oxidized till suggest limited leachate activity. No seepage activity is evident in the unoxidized till. 30 The greatest changes in chloride and boron concentrations within the oxidized till have occurred where piezometric levels have changed the most. Although increasing water levels do not automatically suggest that the water affecting the piezometers is leachate, changing piezometric levels do suggest ground-water movement. Oxidized till piezometers C868B and C869B located in the middle of the lagoons, between Ash Lagoon No. 1 and No.2, have shown increased piezometric levels but no chemical information to suggest leachate influence. On the west side of the Polishing Pond, the boron levels have changed only slightly in the oxidized till piezometers C728A and C728D, where the chloride levels have changed more significantly. The chloride level for C728A has decreased from 403 mg/L in 1983 to 253 mg/L in 2001. The chloride level for C728D has increased from 185 mg/L in 1983 to 397 mg/L in 2001. Although these piezometers are close in proximity and installed at the same level, they are being influenced by different water. Chloride results for C728A suggest initial seepage and it is to be expected that over time the same observation will be seen in C728D. The piezometric surface of the Empress Gravel indicates a regional flow from northwest to southeast below Morrison Dam. As a general observation. Empress piezometers respond to changing reservoir levels. Results for the Empress layer do not indicate seepage activity with the majority of the analyses showing little real change in boron or chloride results. Sand lens piezometers C712B, C766 and C767 are located between the Polishing Pond and the cooling water canal. C767 is located on the top of dyke G and C766 and C712B are located at the toe of dyke G. These piezometers have historically been of interest as the sand lens provides a preferential pathway for leachate migration of boron concentrations. C766 shows an increasing frend up to October 1988 with a peak of 43.0 mg/L in 1995 April. Since 1995 the boron levels have declined modestly and have remained between 25 and 38 mg/L. Up to April 1988 the boron concenfration for C767 was increasing and peaked at 49.4 mg/L. Since this peak the boron concenfration steadily decreased to the end of 1991 where it leveled off near 5 mg/L and has since remained with one exception, a concenfration of 1 1 .7 mg/L in October 2000. Piezometer C712B has been monitored for several years. Historically, boron levels were below 1 mg/L. From 1992 to 2001, boron levels have remained relatively steady around between 12 and 20 mg/L. 31 3.3.3.2 Montana Samples were collected from monitoring wells 7, 16, and 24 during 2001. Well 7 is completed in Hart Coal, well 16 is completed in the Fort Union Formation, and well 24 is completed in alluvium. No significant changes in TDS were observed in monitoring wells. Changes in total dissolved solids with time for the above wells are shown in Figure 3.18. Total Dissolved Solids Figure 3.18 Total Dissolved Solids in Samples from Montana Wells. 32 3.4 Cookson Reservoir 3.4.1 Storage On January 1, 2001, Cookson Reservoir storage was 33,000 dam^ or 76% of the full supply volume. The 2001 maximum, minimum, and period elevations and volumes are shown in Table 3.4. Inflows into the reservoir were below normal in 2001. A release was initiated in May to meet the recommended Poplar River basin demand release for the 2000-2001 apportionment year. No releases were required to maintain the recommended apportionment target flow at the International Boundary for the remainder of the year. In addition to runoff, reservoir levels were augmented by ground-water pumping. Wells in the abandoned west block mine site supplied 5,307 dam^ to Girard Creek. It is estimated that approximately 70% of this flow volume reached Cookson Reservoir. Wells in the soil salinity project area supplied 819 dam^ Table 3.4 Cookson Reservoir Storage Statistics for 2001 Date Elevation (m) Contents"" ■'*""''^ (dam^ January 1 (Minimum) 751.57 33,000 April 16 (Maximum) 752.65 40,720 December 3 1 751.65 33,520 Full Supply Level 753.00 43,410 33 The Poplar River Power Station is dependent on water from Cookson Reservoir for cooling. Power plant operation is not adversely affected until reservoir levels drop below 749.0 metres. The dead storage level for cooling water used in the generation process is 745.0 metres. The 2001 recorded levels and associated operating levels are shown in Figure 3.19. 2001 Cookson Rassrvoir Dally Mean Witw Laval* Full Supply 1 evel (^, _ — 20( 1 o o ON ■2 o , ro vo o d NO ON •^ '"' "^ ON Ptt > o O o V >n fS On) U cS s o o o o es ^ (N o d 00 00 U1 00 VO ON oi « "^ U "^ On Q. o o o o V On m 04 '-' og 00 ^ eu >> >. U .A .a hJ u z 1 5 f s of 12 u "3 S t o 1 Oi t .2 1 c .2 s i, 00 (U X) -a o P O '•B c g o M S ^ Oi u B n la 08 o 3 •T3 to S •a tfl Si 08 1 1 2 13 1 2 o OS 3 1 2 X ^ a. 3 g o. H Pn QQ H 0, U tL, hJ z U 00 00 N H o. ANNEX 1 POPLAR RIVER COOPERATIVE MONITORING ARRANGEMENT CANADA-UNITED STATES Al -1 September 23, 1980 POPLAR RIVER COOPERATIVE MONITORING ARRANGEMENT I. PURPOSE This Arrangement will provide for the exchange of data collected as described in the attached Technical Monitoring Schedules in water-quality, water quantity and air quality monitoring programs being conducted in Canada and the United States at or near the International Boundary in response to SaskPower development. This Arrangement will also provide for the dissemination of the data in each coimtry and will assure its comparability and assist in its technical interpretation. The Arrangement will replace and expand upon the quarterly information exchange program instituted between Canada and the United States in 1976. n. PARTICIPATING GOVERNMENTS Governments and government agencies participating in the Arrangement are: Government of Canada: Environment Canada Government of the Province of Saskatchewan: Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management Government of the United States of America: United States Geological Survey Government of the State of Montana: Executive Office m. POPLAR RIVER MONITORING COMMITTEE: TERMS OF REFERENCE A binational committee called the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee will be established to carry out responsibilities assigned to it under this Arrangement. The Committee will operate in accordance with the following terms of reference: Al-2 A. Membership The Committee will be composed of four representatives, one from each of the participating Governments. It will be jointly chaired by the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States. There will be a Canadian Section and a United States Section. The participating Governments will notify each other of any changes in membership on the Committee. Co-chairpersons may by mutual agreement invite agency technical experts to participate in the work of the Committee. The Governor of the State of Montana may also appoint a chief elective official of local government to participate as an ex-officio member of the Committee in its technical deliberations. The Saskatchewan Minister of the Environment may also appoint a similar local representative. B. Functions of the Committee The role of the Committee will be to fulfil the purpose of the Arrangement by ensuring the exchange of monitored data in accordance with the attached Technical Monitoring Schedules, and its collation and technical interpretation in reports to Governments on implementation of the Arrangement. In addition, the Committee will review the existing monitoring systems to ensure their adequacy and may recommend to the Canadian and United States Governments any modifications to improve the Technical Monitoring Schedules. 1. Information Exchange Each Co-chairperson will be responsible for transmitting to his counterpart Co-chairperson on a regular, and not less than quarterly basis, the data provided by the cooperative monitoring agencies in accordance with the Technical Monitoring Schedules. Al -3 2. Reports (a) The Committee will prepare a joint Annual Report to the participating governments, and may at any time prepare joint Special Reports. (b) Annual Reports will i) summarize the main activities of the Committee in the year under Report and the data which has been exchanged under the Arrangement; ii) draw to the attention of the participating governments any definitive changes in the monitored parameters, based on collation and technical interpretation of exchanged data (i.e. the utilization of summary, statistical and other appropriate techniques); iii) draw to the attention of the participating governments any recommendations regarding the adequacy or redundancy of any scheduled monitoring operations and any proposals regarding modifications to the Technical Monitoring Schedules, based on a continuing review of the monitoring programs including analytical methods to ensure their comparability. (c) Special Reports may, at any time, draw to the attention of participating governments definitive changes in monitored parameters which may require immediate attention. (d) Preparation of Reports Reports will be prepared following consultation with all committee members and will be signed by all Committee members. Reports will be separately forwarded by the Committee Co-chairmen to the participating governments. All annual and special reports will be so distributed. Al -4 3. Activities of Canadian and United States Sections The Canadian and United States section will be separately responsible for: (a) dissemination of information within their respective countries, and the arrangement of any discussion required with local elected officials; (b) verification that monitoring operations are being carried out in accordance with the Technical Monitoring Schedules by cooperating monitoring agencies; (c) receipt and collation of monitored data generated by the cooperating monitoring agencies in their respective countries as specified in the Technical Monitoring Schedules; (d) if necessary, drawing to the attention of the appropriate government in their respective coimtries any failiire to comply with a scheduled monitoring fimction on the part of any cooperating agency under the jurisdiction of that government, and requesting that appropriate corrective action be taken. IV. PROVISION OF DATA In order to ensure that the Committee is able to carry out the terms of this Arrangement, the participating governments will use their best efforts to have cooperating monitoring agencies, in their respective jurisdictions provide on an ongoing basis all scheduled monitored data for which they are responsible. V. TERMS OF THE ARRANGEMENT The Arrangement will be effective for an initial term of five years and may be amended by agreement of the participating governments. It will be subject to review at the end of the initial term and will be renewed thereafter for as long as it is required by the participating governments. Al -5 ANNEX 2 POPLAR RIVER COOPERATIVE MONITORING ARRANGEMENT TECHNICAL MONITORING SCHEDULES 2001 CANADA-UNITED STATES A2-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREAMBLE A2 - 3 CANADA STREAMFLOW MONITORING A2 - 5 SURFACE-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING A2 - 7 GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETERS TO MONITOR POTENTIAL DRAWDOWN DUE TO COAL SEAM DEWATERING NEAR THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY A2- 1 0 GROUND- WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORING - POWER STATION AREA A2 - 1 2 GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORING - ASH LAGOON AREA WATER LEVEL A2 - 14 WATER QUALITY A2 - 17 AMBIENT AIR-QUALITY MONITORING A2 - 22 UNITED STATES STREAMFLOW MONITORING A2 - 25 SURFACE-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING A2 - 27 GROUND-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING A2 - 29 GROUND-WATER LEVELS TO MONITOR POTENTL\L DRAWDOWN DUE TO COAL SEAM DEWATERING A2 - 3 1 A2-2 PREAMBLE The Technical Monitoring Schedule lists those water quantity, water-quality and air quality monitoring locations and parameters which form the basis for information exchange and reporting to Governments. The structure of the Committee responsible for ensuring the exchange takes place is described in the Poplar River Cooperative Monitoring Arrangement. The monitoring locations and parameters listed herein have been reviewed by the Poplar River Bilateral Monitoring Committee and represent the basic technical information needed to identify any definitive changes in water quantity, water-quality and air quality at the International Boundary. The Schedule was initially submitted to Governments for approval as an attachment to the 1981 report to Governments. Changes in the sampling locations and parameters may be made by Governments based on the recommendations of the Committee. Significant additional information is being collected by agencies on both sides of the International Boundary, primarily for project management or basin-wide baseline data purposes. This additional information is usually available upon request fi"om the collecting agency and forms part of the pool of technical information which may be drawn upon by Governments for specific study purposes. Examples of additional information are water quantity, water-quality, ground-water and air quality data collected at points in the Poplar River basin not of direct concern to the Committee. In addition, supplemental information on parameters such as vegetation, soils, fish and waterfowl populations and aquatic vegetation is also being collected on either a routine or specific studies basis by various agencies. A2-3 POPLAR RIVER COOPERATIVE MONITORING ARRANGEMENT TECHNICAL MONITORING SCHEDULES 2001 CANADA A2-4 STREAMFLOW MONITORING Daily mean discharge or levels and instantaneous monthly extremes as normally published in surface water data publications. Responsible Agency: Environment Canada No. on Map Station No. Station Name 1* 11AE003 (06178500) East Poplar River at International Boundary 2 11AE013*** Cookson Reservoir near Coronach 3 11AE015*** Girard Creek near Coronach Cookson Reservoir 4 11AE014*** East Poplar River above Cookson Reservoir 5 Fife Lake Overflow** 6* 1 1 AE008 (06178000) Poplar River at International Boundary * - International gauging station ** - Miscellaneous measurements of outflow to be made by Sask Water during periods of outflow only. *** - Sask Water took over the monitoring responsibility effective July 1/92. A2-5 Fife Lake \ Rockglen ^ ^ -^ v- Coronach i 3^ 1 r ^\ H Cookson \ ^^^ Reservoir ) ) ^^^\^ \ NV ^2 CANADA \^ T UNITED STATES \. Coal pY- ^ r ( / — ^^~-_-— ^^'^ ""^"^Vg^ \ \ / -^2:^ )/ 1 \J Scobey 0 5 10 1 ' ' 15 KILOMETERS 1 1 1 0 5 10 MILES HYDROMETRIC GAUGING STATIONS (CANADA) A2-6 SURFACE-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING Sampling Locations Responsible Agency: Environment Canada No. on Map Station No. Station Name 1 00SA11AE0008 East Poplar River at International Boundary Responsible Agency: Saskatchewan Environment Data collected by: Sask Power No. on Map Station No. Station Name 2 12386 Discontinued East Poplar River at Culvert Immediately below Cookson Reservoir 3 12368 Cookson Reservoir near Dam 4 12377 Discontinued Upper End of Cookson Reservoir at Highway 36 5 12412 Discontinued Girard Creek at Coronach, Reservoir Outflow 6 7904 Fife Lake Outflow A2-7 PARAMETERS Responsim^Agency^Environnie^ ENVIRODAT* Code Analytical Method Sampling Frequency Station No. 6 10151 Alkalinity-phenolphthalem Potentiometric Titration BM 10111 Alkalinity-total Potentiometric Titration BM 13102 Aluminum-dissolved AA-Direct BM 13302 Aluminum-extracted AA-Direct BM 07540 Ammonia-total Automated Colourimetric BM 33108 Arsenic-dissolved ICAP-hydride BM 56001 Barium-total AA-Direct BM 06201 Bicaibonates Calculated BM 05211 Boron-dissolved ICAP BM 95360 Bromoxynil Gas Chromatography BM 48002 Cadmium-total AA Solvent Extraction BM 20103 Calcium AA-Direct BM 06104 Caibon-dissolved organic Automated IR Detection BM 06901 Carbon-particulate Elemental Analyzer BM 06002 Carbon-total organic Calculated BM 06301 Caiix>nates Calculated BM 17206 Chloride Automated Colourimetric BM 06717 Chlorophyll a Spectiophotometric BM 24003 Chromium-total AA-Solvent Extraction BM 27002 Cobalt-total AA-Solvent Extraction BM 36012 Coliform-fecal Membrane Filtration BM 36002 Coliforai-total Membrane Filtration BM 02021 Colour Comparator BM 02041 Conductivity Wheatstone Bridge BM 06610 Cyanide Automated UV-Colourimetric BM 09117 Fluoride-dissolved Electrometric BM 06401 Free Carbon Dioxide Calculated BM 10602 Hardness Calculated BM 17811 Hexachlorobenzene Gas Chromatography BM 08501 Hydroxide Calculated BM 26104 Iron-dissolved AA-Direct BM 82002 Lead-total AA-Solvent Extraction BM 12102 Magnesium AA-Direct BM 25104 Manganese-dissolved AA-Direct BM 07901 N-particulate Elemental Analyzer BM 07651 N-total dissolved Automated UV Colourimetric BM 10401 NFR Gravimetric BM 28002 Nickel-total AA-Solvent Extraction BM 07110 Nitrate/Nitrite Colourimetric BM 07603 Nitrogen-total Calculated BM 10650 Non-Caibonate Hardness Calculated BM 18XXX Organo Chlorines Gas Chromatography BM 08101 Oxygen-dissolved Winkler m 15901 P-particulate Calculated BM 15465 P-total dissolved Automated Colourimetric BM 185XX Phenoxy Herbicides Gas Chromatography BM 15423 Phosphonis-total Colourimetric (TRAACS) BM 19103 Potassium Flame Emission BM 11250 Percent Sodium Calculated BM 011201 SAR Calculated BM 00210 Sanitation Index Calculated BM 34108 Selenium-dissolved ICAP-hydride BM 14108 Silica Automated Colourimetric BM 11103 Sodium Flame Emission BM 00211 Stability Index Calculated BM 16306 Sulphate Automated Colourimetric BM 00201 TDS Calculated BM 02061 Temperature Digital Thermometer BM 02073 Turbidity Nephelometry BM 23002 Vanadium- total AA-Solvent Extraction BM 30005 Zinc-total AA-Solvent Extraction BM 10301 PH Electrometric BM 92111 Uranium Fluomelric MC • - Computer Storage and Retrieval System ~ Environment Canada AA - Atomic Absorption IR - Infrared NFR - Nonfilterable Residue MC - Monthly Composite ICAP - Inductively Coupled Argon Plasma. UV - Ultraviolet BM - Bimonthly (Alternate months sampled by USGS) A2-8 \.___ F/fe W^ ) \ ^.. X ^Yx'-^'^^ rl V^ \ Hi (^1 v \ Rockglen ^ '^ -^ \ \,_^ "^^-^ \ _ -^^ \1 1 \ a \ V Coronach "i / \Va\ >c \ W Cookson \ 1 ^^"^^ \ ^^^ Reservoir ) 5T „ CANADA V^^ ^^^^v-L^ UNITED STATES ^ l6 / " / \ Coal „pV.^ ■•^ Xj / ( ^— —-^.^^ C^fX \ ^— ~\^_______^«e "^^ 1 ^ \ N^^ J LEGEND —25^ y A SASKATCHEWAN ENVIRONMENT AND \1 Scobey RESOURCE MANAGEMENT J V^D ■ ENVIRONMENT CANADA 1 ^ 0 5 10 1 1 1 15KILOME1 1 ■ERS 1 1 0 5 10 MILES SURFACE-WATER-QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS (CANADA) A2-9 GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETERS TO MONITOR POTENTIAL DRAWDOWN DUE TO COAL-SEAM DEWATERING NEAR THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY Responsible Agency: Sask Water* Measurement Frequency: Quarterly Piezometer Location Tip of Screen Perforation Zone Number Elevation (m) (depth in metres) 52 NW 14-1-27 W3 738.43 43 - 49 (in coal) 506A SW 4-1-27 W3 748.27 81 -82 (in coal) 507 SW 6-1-26 W3 725.27 34 - 35 (in coal) 509 NWl 1-1-27 W3 725.82 76 - 77 (in coal) 510 NW 1-1-28 W3 769.34 28 - 29 (in layered coal and clay) * Data Collected by: SaskPower A2-10 15 KILOMETERS GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETERS TO MONITOR POTENTIAL DRAWDOWN DUE TO COAL-SEAM DEWATERING A2-11 GROUND-WATER PIEZOMETER MONITORING - POPLAR RIVER POWER STATION AREA SPC Piezometer Number Completion Formation C525 Empress C526 Empress C527 Empress C528 Oxidized C539 Empress C540 Empress C737 Empress C739 Empress C740 Empress C741 Empress C743 Empress C746 Mottled Till C747 Mottled Till C748 Mottled Till C756 Empress Water levels measured quarterly SPC Piezometer Number Completion Formation C739 Empress Samples collected annually A2-12 (0 g oi b 2 lij < § D. "" lU u ± S > Q^ UJ E O o ^2 Q. S O D. Q i ^ u 9 O >< lU o n CO LU O LU