ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING COMMITTEE - 2020 Public Meeting Posters PERMIT 107517
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
PERMIT 107517 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING COMMITTEE 2020 Public Meeting Posters
Highlights from 2019
Westslope Cutthroat Trout—Evaluation of Cause
Abundances of Westslope Cutthroat Trout in the
upper Fording River above Josephine Falls declined
significantly between fall 2017 and fall 2019.
An evaluation of cause process was initiated to
understand the most likely causes of the decline
with that process concluding in late 2020.
Adaptive Management Surface Water
• Teck’s Adaptive Management Plan (AMP) and Quality Monitoring
related annual reports outline the activities to
reduce key uncertainties (KUs), what has been • The chemistry of mine-influenced waters of the
learned, and the next steps for reducing KUs and Elk Valley is generally well understood.
evaluating management questions (MQs). • In 2019, water quality at order stations met permit
• The AMP response framework outlines the process
for notification, confirmation, investigation, and
limits 100% of the time and at compliance points
96% of the time.
Calcite Monitoring Local Aquatic
adjustments to monitoring and management Teck • Monitoring is demonstrating modest increases in Effects Monitoring
takes when triggers or unexpected conditions are
identified. Groundwater Monitoring calcite formation over time.
• LAEMPs assess site-specific conditions by
• Spawning habitat suitability is potentially being monitoring on a more frequent and localized basis
• Current and long-term continuous improvement goals • 17 new monitoring wells were drilled in 2019 to fill reduced by calcite concretion.
were collaboratively developed by Teck and KNC. than the Regional Aquatic Effects Monitoring
gaps in the regional monitoring network to better
understand groundwater in the Elk Valley. 16 wells
• Teck is exploring alternatives for calcite Program (RAEMP).
management, including further prevention and • A LAEMP is initiated in response to local-area
are anticipated to be drilled in 2020.
Tributary Management • Site-Specific Groundwater Monitoring Programs:
remediation. effects, uncertainties in the potential for effects
monitoring for each of the five operations to
• Antiscalant addition is anticipated to be in place on at a local level, or change in water management
The Tributary Management Plan is intended to ten streams by the end of 2021. (e.g., operation of a water treatment facility).
support protection and rehabilitation of tributaries in identify and monitor mine-related substances in
the Elk Valley. groundwater and associated transport pathways. • A calcite remediation pilot project is anticipated to • Monitoring occurs as required until sufficient
occur in 2021. data have been collected to address the study
• Regional Groundwater Monitoring Program:
questions; concerns no longer exist; or relevant
Human Health monitoring in 12 study areas to understand
potential regional groundwater and associated Regional Aquatic
monitoring can be incorporated into the RAEMP.
Risk Assessment pathways of mine-related substances.
Effects Monitoring
• Drinking Water Sampling Program: Teck Koocanusa Monitoring
• It is required by Permit 107517. samples private and municipal drinking water
wells to assess against British Columbia Approved Results of the RAEMP indicate that there are mine • Order constituents met permitted limits in
• It is a collaborative effort between Ktunaxa Nation related influences on water quality, calcite, sediment,
Drinking Water Quality Guidelines for mine-related Koocanusa Reservoir in 2019.
Council, BC Interior Health Authority, BC Ministry of and benthic invertebrate endpoints, most of which
Environment, and Teck. substances. To request to have your well sampled • Concentrations of selenium in fish muscle and
under the program, please contact Teck’s Social are within the range of what is expected.
ovaries were comparable to previous years.
• The work is inclusive, grounded, and reciprocal. Responsibility office toll-free at 1-855-806-6854.
580,000 600,000 620,000 640,000 660,000 680,000 700,000
The Environmental
5,600,000
5,600,000
Elk
Monitoring Committee
R
ive
r
5,580,000
5,580,000
Fording River
Why does this committee exist?
The Environmental Monitoring Committee (also called the EMC) is Fording
5,560,000
5,560,000
River
required by Permit 107517. The permit was issued to Teck in November
Fo
rd
2014 by the BC Ministry of Environment under the Environmental
ing
Ri
Management Act.
ve
Greenhills
r
What does this committee do? Elkford
Ford
5,540,000
5,540,000
#
ing
R
Line
The purpose of the EMC is to strengthen Teck’s aquatic environment
iver
Creek
monitoring programs required under Permit 107517. The committee
does this by reviewing Teck’s monitoring submissions that are required
by the permit and providing technical advice and Indigenous
5,520,000
5,520,000
Knowledge advice.
Who sits on this committee? Sparwood
#
Elkview
In 2019 and 2020, there were nine members on the EMC:
Michel Creek
Crowsnest Pass
5,500,000
5,500,000
#
• one independent aquatic scientist
r
Rive
Elk
• two representatives from the BC Ministry of Environment
Fernie
• one representative from the BC Ministry of Energy & Mines Cranbrook
# # Coal
Mountain
• one representative from the BC Interior Health Authority
5,480,000
5,480,000
• two representatives from the Ktunaxa Nation Council
•two representatives from Teck
Elko
#
5,460,000
5,460,000
Koocanusa, Lake
5,440,000
5,440,000
Figure
580,000 a. Permit 107517
600,000 boundary. 620,000 640,000 660,000 680,000 700,000
± Legend
# Communities
Surface Water Quality
In 2019, the Fording River Operations compliance Despite active water treatment, the Line Creek
point (FR_FRCP1) continued to show non- Operations compliance point (LC_LCDSSLCC)
compliances of selenium (Figure d), nitrate, and continues to demonstrate regular nitrate non-
sulphate. The chemistry of the Fording River at this compliances (Figure e). There were two selenium
location is complicated by the proximity of mine- non-compliances at the Line Creek Operations
influenced Cataract Creek and a seasonal lack of compliance point in 2019, but these occurred when
The chemistry of mine-influenced waters in the Elk mixing within the mainstem. the water treatment facility was temporarily shut
Valley is generally well understood. down for maintenance and repairs.
Key uncertainties remain about the impacts related 700
to nickel concentrations and about places such as 600
Selenium (µg/L)
wetlands and sedimentation ponds with organo- 500
selenium—forms of selenium that can rapidly enter 400
the food chain. 300
200
In 2019, selenium, nitrate, and sulphate continued 100
to increase in specific locations such as the outfall
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
of Clode Pond and Line Creek Operations Dry Creek
(Figure a). Figure b. A water flea (Daphnia magna). FR_FRCP1 Measured Total Selenium Daily Maximum Permit 107517 Daily Maximum Limit
FR_FRCP1 Measured Total Selenium Monthly Average Permit 107517 Monthly Average Limit
Four acute toxicity test failures were reported
Figure d. Selenium concentrations at the Fording River Operations compliance point in 2019.
in 2019:
• One water flea test failure was reported at 12
Cataract Creek and the cause was attributed to 10
calcite precipitation on the test subjects.
Nitrate (mg/L)
8
• Three rainbow trout test failures were associated 6
with flocculant dosing problems in Goddard Creek 4
sedimentation pond.
2
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Figure c. A rainbow trout fry. LC_LCDSSLCC Measured Nitrate (NO3) Daily Maximum Permit 107517 Daily Maximum Limit
LC_LCDSSLCC Measured Nitrate (NO3) Monthly Average Permit 107517 Monthly Average Limit
80 Figure e. Nitrate concentrations at the Line Creek Operations compliance point in 2019.
70
60 100%
50
Selenium (µg/L)
40 Teck is required to monitor water 80%
30 quality at 102 locations in the Elk
20 Valley and in Koocanusa Reservoir. 60%
10
These locations include 8 compliance
0 40%
Jan-18 Apr-18 Jul-18 Oct-18 Jan-19 Apr-19 Jul-19 Oct-19 Jan-20 Apr-20 Jul-20 points and 7 order stations.
LC_DCDS EVWQP Level 1 Benchmark Dry Creek Site Performance Objective (LC_DCDS)
In 2019, water quality at order stations 20%
Figure a. LCO Dry Creek total selenium concentrations January 2018 to August 2020 met permit limits 100% of the time
and at compliance points 96% of 0%
Order Stations Compliance Points
You can access Teck’s 2019 annual reports here: https://www.teck.com/responsibility/sustainability-topics/water/water-quality- the time. 2016 2017 2018 2019
in-the-elk-valley/research-and-monitoring-reports/ Figure f. Compliance over time at order stations and
compliance points.
Groundwater Recharge from
Precipitation
Mine Site
Recharge from
Precipitation
Groundwater
Working Group
Monitoring Programs (GWG)
Flow from Waste Rock
Upland
Groundwater
Colluvium
Mist
Mountain
Formation Waste Rock
The Groundwater Working
Tributary
Coal Valley Fill Colluvium Group (GWG) supports the
Seams Potential Recharge from Groundwater
Sources Mountain Creeks
Groundwater Recharge
Flow from
Upland
Environmental Monitoring
Groundwater monitoring programs are conducted Process Plant from Losing Tributary
and Groundwater Flow
Groundwater
Committee with hydrogeology
to understand how mine-related substances are Upland Groundwater to Main Stem
expertise. Membership of this
influencing aquifers close to mining operations. 17 new monitoring wells were drilled Discharge to Creeks
and Valley Flanks
Alluvial Fan
group includes representatives
Flow through
Mine-related substances can infiltrate the ground in 2019 to fill gaps in the regional Fractured
Sedimentary
Settling Pond
Potential Transport
Flow through
Local Recharge Fractured
from Main Sedimentary from Teck Coal Limited, the
Bedrock
from mine sources, can reach aquifers in the valley monitoring network to better (minor) Colluvium Pathways of Mine-
Related Constituents
Stem Bedrock
(minor) Ktunaxa Nation Council, Ministry
bottom that are sources of drinking water, and can understand groundwater in the Elk Till
to Valley-bottom
(bedrock is minor)
Flood Plain Till
of Environment and Climate
influence surface water that interacts with these Change Strategy, Interior
aquifers. Surface water influenced by mine-related
Valley. 16 wells are anticipated to be
Water Table Health, and external consultants
substances can also interact with the groundwater. drilled in 2020. (qualified professionals).
Aquifers in Valley Bottoms are the Fluvial/
Twelve study areas are identified in the Regional Primary Potential Pathway for Discharge to Glaciofluvial
The GWG helps steer the
Groundwater Monitoring Program; these areas have
Site-Specific Groundwater Monitoring Regional Transport of Mine-related
Constituents in Groundwater
River
Potential for
Down-valley Flow continued development of
been identified as important to understand regional Programs: monitoring for each of Due to Underflow
Component Teck’s groundwater monitoring
groundwater pathways of mine-related substances. the five operations to identify and programs.
Groundwater quality is compared to screening
monitor mine-related substances in
criteria focused on mine-related substances groundwater and associated transport Thrust
Majority of Receptors for
Fault
(nitrate, sulphate, dissolved cadmium, and dissolved pathways. Groundwater in Valley-
bottom (aquatic, drinking
water, livestock, wildlife)
selenium). Figure a. Pathways for mining
Regional Groundwater Monitoring Upland
Setting
Valley Bottom Setting
Upland
Setting
influences on groundwater.
The Sparwood Area Supporting Study was Program: monitoring in 12 study areas
conducted in 2019 to improve understanding of
surface water influence on drinking water wells in
to understand potential regional FRO Study Area #8 Legend
groundwater and associated pathways
Green - Below primary screening criteria
Yellow - Above at least one of the primary
Sparwood. Green - Below primary screening criteria
Yellow - Above at least one of the primary Study Area #1
screening criteria
Blue - Above at least one of the
of mine-related substances.
secondary screening criteria
screening criteria H
! Communities Paved Surface
Blue - Above at least one of the
secondary screening criteria
The 2019 groundwater evaluations enhanced Teck’s
Permit Boundary Railway
River
River
GHO
ng
Study Areas
Fordi
Drinking Water Sampling Program:
ng
understanding of groundwater transport pathways
Fordi
of mine-related substances and results were similar Teck samples private and municipal
Study Area #4
EVO
to previous years.
drinking water wells to assess against Study Area #12
British Columbia Approved Drinking Study Area #3
Study Area #2 H Sparwood
!
Water Quality Guidelines for mine-
Elk R
Primary Screening Criteria Nitrate as N (mg/L) Study Area #9
Elkford
er iv
CSR Aquatic Life 400.00 H
!
related substances. To request to CSR Irrigation Watering
CSR Livestock Watering
n/a
100.00
have your well sampled under the CSR Drinking Water 10.00
Sulphate (mg/L)
M
Primary Screening Criteria
ic
LCO
he
lC
Elk River
program, please contact Teck’s Social 1280 - 4290
re
ek
CSR Aquatic Life
Elk
Riv
er
CSR Irrigation Watering n/a
Responsibility office toll-free at
Corbin Creek
CSR Livestock Watering 1000.00
Pit Creek
Corbin
South
CSR Drinking Water 500.00
Study Area #10
1-855-806-6854.
Study Area #11
Primary Screening Criteria Selenium (μg/L) ek
Cre
Line
CSR Aquatic Life 20.00
Study Area #5
CSR Irrigation Watering 20.00 CMO
CSR Livestock Watering 30.00
Michel Creek
CSR Drinking Water 10.00 Study Area #6
Secondary Screening Criteria Selenium (μg/L)
Guideline for Canadian Drinking 10.00
Water Quality
Study Area #7
You can access Teck’s 2019 annual reports here: https://www. Site Performance Objective
(Fording River)
20.00
teck.com/responsibility/sustainability-topics/water/water- Compliance Point (Fording River) 30.00
quality-in-the-elk-valley/research-and-monitoring-reports/
2019 Regional Ground Water Monitoring Program Results
±
H ar
m
er
C re e
Figure b. Groundwater results
` from 2019.
k
Har m
er Creek
Study Areas 1-7
C reek
Dry
^
±
The maps and map data are provided ‘as is’ Permit Boundary FacilityLocations Railway
without any guarantee, representation, condition or 0 1 2 4
warranty of any kind, either express, implied, or
Study Areas Paved Surface
Kilometers 2019 Regional Ground Water Monitoring Program Results
statutory. Teck Resources Limited assumes no H
! Communities
liability with respect to any reliance the user places
Stream
Study Areas 8-12
in the maps and map data, and the user assumes
the entire risk as to the truth, accuracy, currency, or
completeness of the information contained in the
Meters
EVO
Projection: UTM 11N
Datum: NAD83
The maps and map data are provided ‘as is’
without any guarantee, representation, condition or
Permit Boundary
Study Areas
`
^ FacilityLocations Railway
Paved Surface
0 0.5 1
Kilometers
maps and map data.
Scale: 1:180,000 0 1,800 3,600 7,200
Date: Q1, 2018
warranty of any kind, either express, implied, or
statutory. Teck Resources Limited assumes no
liability with respect to any reliance the user places
H
! Communities
Stream
in the maps and map data, and the user assumes
the entire risk as to the truth, accuracy, currency, or
Projection: UTM 11N
completeness of the information contained in the
Meters Datum: NAD83
Document Path: \\teckcominco\CGO\Groups\TCGIS\Data\Projects\AnnualWaterReporting\Map\ProgramResultsKeyAreas1-7.mxd
Calcite Monitoring
Calcite Index Value
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0
• Monitoring is
Regional Calcite Significance No calcite
observed
Significant
concretion
demonstrating modest Monitoring By December 2024, Teck must Highest possible
level; streambed
Highest level observed
increases in calcite achieve calcite concretion (CIc)
in reference streams fully concreted
Calcite index levels (Figure a) score of ≤ 0.5 in the mainstem
formation over time. were monitored in 78 reaches in and tributaries, meaning that 50%
Figure b. The range of calcite index values and what
• Spawning habitat 2019, down from 117 in 2018. of rocks within a reach will not be they mean.
The number of sampling locations Figure c. Calcite antiscalant dosing skid on lower
suitability is potentially stuck to the stream bed. Greenhills Creek.
differ between years because of
being reduced by changes to sampling programs. By December of 2029, Teck must
calcite concretion. Data suggest an increasing trend achieve a total calcite index (CI) Calcite Mitigation
• Teck is exploring in levels of calcite formation and of ≤ 0.5 in the mainstem and
concretion in both tributary and tributaries. CI is generally < 0.5 In an attempt to prevent further calcite formation,
alternatives for calcite mainstem reaches, and in both in non-mine influenced reference Teck has been applying antiscalant to lower
management, including mine-exposed and reference tributaries (Figure b). Greenhills Creek since 2017 (Figure c).
further prevention (non-mine exposed) reaches.
Studies are ongoing at Greenhills Creek to
and remediation.
Mining results in elevated Calcite Index (CI) evaluate how well antiscalant chemicals prevent
calcite formation, and to determine if there are
• Antiscalant addition calcite development. There is
some evidence that levels are CI = calcite index (total) = CIp+ CIc environmental effects of their use.
is anticipated to be in
place on ten streams increasing in mine-influenced CIpres= number of pebbles with calcite
Other studies are focused on inducing calcite
and non-mine influenced reaches number of pebbles counted
by the end of 2021. since the 2013 flood (which
precipitation in controlled environments (i.e., to get it
CIconc= sum of pebble concretion scores to precipitate out where it can be collected before it
• A calcite remediation is believed to have caused number of pebbles counted gets to the river).
pilot project is aggressive erosion of calcite).
Figure d. Westslope Cutthroat Trout redd (circled) in
Monitoring is ongoing annually. Concretion scores:
anticipated to occur Alexander Creek, July 13, 2019.
in 2021.
0 = not concreted Spawning Habitat
1 = partially concreted but removable
2 = immovable Suitability 16
Spawning-period data collected in 2018 and 2019
Fording and Elk Rivers Tributaries 8
(Figure e) demonstrated a possible relationship
Number of Redds
100% 100% between spawning suitability and calcite concretion.
90% 4
Percent of Sites Surveyed
90%
Percent of Sites Surveyed
80% 80% Data obtained so far suggests that spawning
70% 70% 2
potential is lower when calcite concretion is >0.5.
60% 60% 1
50% 50%
This relationship will be further evaluated in 2020
40% 40% and 2021. 0
30% 30% 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
20% 20% Calcite Concretion
10% 10% 2018 2019
0% 0%
0-0.5 0.51-1.0 1.01-1.5 1.51-2.0 2.01-2.5 2.51-3.0 0-0.5 0.51-1.0 1.01-1.5 1.51-2.0 2.01-2.5 2.51-3.0
Calcite Index Calcite Index You can access Teck’s 2019 annual reports here: https://www. Figure e. Relationship between spawning potential and
teck.com/responsibility/sustainability-topics/water/water- calcite concretion.
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
quality-in-the-elk-valley/research-and-monitoring-reports/
Figure a. Variation in calcite index values among years in the mainstem and tributaries.
100,000 100
Regional Aquatic Effects
Abundance (# of individuals)
80
10,000
60
% EPT
Monitoring Program 1,000
40
20
100 0
RG_HACKUS
RG_HACKDS
RG_HACKUS
RG_HACKDS
RG_MICOMP
RG_MICOMP
RG_CORCK
RG_CORCK
T RG_ALUSM
T RG_ALUSM
RG_MIUCO
RG_MIDCO
RG_MIUCO
RG_MIDCO
RG_MIDGA
RG_MIDBO
RG_MIDGA
RG_MIDBO
RG_MIDER
RG_MIDER
RG_MIDAG
RG_MIDAG
RG_MIULE
RG_MIULE
RG_GRDS
RG_GRDS
RG_BOCK
RG_BOCK
RG_AGCK
RG_AGCK
RG_ERCK
RG_ERCK
RG_BACK
RG_BACK
RG_GATE
RG_GATE
RG_EL19
RG_EL19
RG_MI25
RG_MI25
Results from the Regional Aquatic Effects Amphibians
Monitoring Program (RAEMP)
RG_LE1
RG_LE1
RG_MI5
RG_MI3
RG_MI2
RG_MI5
RG_MI3
RG_MI2
Periphyton Benthic Invertebrates Birds Fish
indicate that there
(algae and bacteria) (smallare mine-related influences on water quality, calcite, sediment,
insects)
M
M
M
M
M
M
T
T
T
T
and benthic invertebrate endpoints, most of which are within the range of what Reference Mine−exposed 2017 2018 2019 Normal Ranges as Percentiles of
Reference Areas from 2012 to 2019
Site Specific Normal Ranges
from Regression Models
Notes: M = Main Stem; T = Tributary
is expected. Figure a. Abundance of benthic invertebrates in MU4 Figure b. Percent EPT of benthic invertebrates in MU4
2017 to 2019. 2017 to 2019.
30
Exp
Ref
25
20
Se (mg/kg dw)
Surface water Sediment Groundwater Benchmark (muscle equivalent based on ovary EC10; 15.5
(creeks, rivers, lakes) (creek, river, (wells) Periphyton Benthic Invertebrates Birds Amphibians Fish 15
18
lake bottoms) (algae and bacteria) (small insects)
16
10 14
Muscle Se (mg/kg dw)
12
10
The general objective of the RAEMP is to monitor, Were any identified changes unexpected 5 BC Se Guideline (Muscle; 4 mg/kg dw)
8
assess, and interpret indicators of aquatic ecosystem (i.e., inconsistent with model predictions or 6
4
0
condition related to mine operations, and to inform general expectations)? 2 BC Se Guideline (Muscle; 4 mg/kg dw)
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Fall
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
Spring
RG_FHSpring
Spring
Spring
RG_EL20Spring
Spring
RG_EL19Spring
Spring
Spring
RG_EL1Spring
Spring
Spring
Season: 0
adaptive management. Specific objectives of the Yes—the selenium in benthic invertebrate tissue
RG_ELELKO
RG_BULL
RG_FO23
RG_MICOMP
18 '18 '06 '12 '09 '12 '15 '18 '06 '09 '12 '18 '06 '09 '12 '15 '18 '15 '18 '12 '18 '12 '12 '15 '18 '06 '15 '18 '06 '09 '12 '15 '18 '06 '09 '12 '12 '12 '18
Year:
RAEMP were framed as questions to guide data concentrations at LCO Dry Creek, Greenhills Creek,
RG_ RG_ AL4 M
B M C
UFR Line Creek LFR UER Harmer Grave
Cr. Cr.
MER UMC LMC LER
U O C
analysis and interpretation, and were developed Thompson Creek, Harmer Creek, Grave Creek, and L
L
Y
I
R
collaboratively with the EMC. The questions of the water BodieSediment
Surface Creek were higher than expected.
Groundwater Figure c: Selenium Concentrations in Westslope Cutthroat Trout Muscle Samples Collected in Lotic Habitats,
Reference Mine-Exposed 2006 to 2018
n/a MU2 MU3 MU4 MU5
2018 to 2020 RAEMP include: (creeks, rivers, lakes) (creek, river, (wells) Figure 27: Selenium Concentrations in Westslope Cutthroat Trout Muscle Samples Collected in Lotic Habitats, 2006 to 2018
lake bottoms)
Does the weight of evidence indicate the 18
Note: Grey shading represent the upper and lower limits of the normal range defined as the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles of the reference area data from the Regional Aquatic Environmental Monitoring Program (RAEMP).
16Fording River; LFR - Lower Fording River; UER - Upper Elk River; MER - Middle Elk River; UMC - Upper Michel Creek; LMC - Lower Michel Creek; LER - Lower Elk River 80
UFR - Upper
90
Has there been a change in condition since unexpected changes are mine-related? 14 70
Interim Screening Benchmark (29.3 mg/kg dw)
Muscle Se (mg/kg dw)
Ovary Se (mg/kg dw)
12 BC Se Guideline (Ovary; 11 mg/kg dw)
previous monitoring cycles with respect to fish 60
Level 1 Benchmark (EVWQP; 18 mg/kg dw)
In most cases, yes. However, there are challenges 10 50
and benthic invertebrate population/community 8 40
in separating mine-related impacts from habitat- 6 30
indicators, water quality, sediment quality, 4 20
related effects. A lot of work was done in this cycle 2 BC Se Guideline (Muscle; 4 mg/kg dw)
calcite, and/or tissue selenium concentrations? 0
10
to better understand habitat effects—see the grey 0
RG_EL20
RG_EL19
RG_ELELKO
RG_FH
RG_EL1
RG_BULL
RG_FO23
RG_MICOMP
RG_EL20
RG_EL19
RG_ELELKO
RG_FH
RG_BULL
RG_FO23
RG_MICOMP
RG_EL1
Changes in condition since previous monitoring boxes in Figure b.
cycles were observed throughout the Elk River
watershed in all endpoints for which data were What does the weight of evidence indicate about n/a MU2 MU3 MU4 MU5 n/a MU2 MU3 MU4 MU5
available; however, most unexpected changes related current or future ecosystem conditions in each Reference Mine-Exposed Reference Mine-Exposed
primarily to benthic invertebrate metrics. Most management unit and regionally, considering the Figure
90 d: Selenium Concentrations in Mountain Whitefish Collected in October 2018
Figure 28: Selenium Concentrations in Mountain Whitefish Collected in October
effects to BIC were observed in relative abundance observed type, magnitude, spatial extent, and/or 80
70
Interim Screening Benchmark (29.3 mg/kg dw) 2018
metrics (example - % EPT). Total abundance rate of change?
Ovary Se (mg/kg dw)
60 BC Se Guideline (Ovary; 11 mg/kg dw)
Note: Grey shading represent the upper and lower limits of the normal range defined as the 2.5th and 97.5th
Level 1 Benchmark (EVWQP; 18 mg/kg dw)
metrics and taxon richness tended to be within At a regional scale, the upper Fording River (MU1)
50
Additional studies were added to the RAEMP
40
•Redside Shiner Selenium Toxicity Study
percentiles of reference area, Regional Aquatic Environmental Monitoring Program (RAEMP).
site-specific normal ranges except in more highly in 2018 through 2020 to support regional
30
•Mountain Whitefish Selenium Toxicity Study
shows the greatest magnitude and spatial extent 20
mine-influenced tributaries (see Figure a). understanding where the EMC had identified gaps.
10
of change due to declines in WCT populations and 0 •Sediment Toxicity Supporting Study
Reports for the following studies will be included
changes in benthic invertebrate communities. There
RG_EL20
RG_EL19
RG_ELELKO
RG_FH
RG_EL1
RG_BULL
RG_FO23
RG_MICOMP
in the RAEMP report and will be available on Teck’s •Lentic Area Supporting Study (including an
are localized changes in some MUs and changes in
website once they are finalized (early 2021): Amphibian Occurrence and Distribution Study)
benthic invertebrate community in MU4 (Michel n/a MU2 MU3 MU4 MU5
Creek downstream of CMO) which are thought to be •Columbia Spotted Frog Selenium
Reference
Toxicity Study
Mine-Exposed
•Nutrient Study
related to nickel.
Figure 28: Selenium Concentrations in Mountain Whitefish Collected in October
2018
Note: Grey shading represent the upper and lower limits of the normal range defined as the 2.5th and 97.5th
Local Aquatic
Effects Monitoring
Figure a. A stonefly Figure b. A caddisfly Figure c. A mayfly
Fording River Greenhills Coal Mountain Line Creek— Line Creek
Local aquatic ffects
programs (LAEMPs)
Operations Operations Operations Dry Creek Operations
assess site-specific Objective is to assess the before Objective is to assess conditions Objective is to assess the Objective is to assess the potential Objective is to assess the
and after conditions associated within a localized area cause of changes to benthic effects of Phase II Project of LCO conditions downstream of the
conditions by with the active water treatment downstream of the GHO west invertebrate communities and on Dry Creek, Grace Creek, and active water treatment facility.
monitoring on a in the Fording River. spoil development and Cougar the chronic toxicity test results. Unnamed Creek.
more frequent and Pit extension. •Addition of the advanced
•Active water treatment facility •This is the first reporting •Nitrate is exceeding effects oxidation process (AOP) to the
localized basis than delayed to 2021. •Focus is on the Elk River side year for the Coal Mountain benchmarks and is expected to active water treatment facility
the Regional Aquatic channel, which recedes annually Operations LAEMP. surpass the Level 3 benchmark has reduced selenium in benthic
•Nitrate concentrations were
Effects Monitoring above the Level 1 and 2 when the Elk River reaches base •Water management (i.e., pit (50% effects) during 2020. This invertebrate and fish tissue to
Program (RAEMP). flow levels. increase occurred sooner than pre-treatment concentrations
benchmarks at most mining- dewatering) strongly affects
projected. (or better).
influenced monitoring stations •Mine-influenced tributaries water quality.
A LAEMP is initiated in in the Fording River. flowing into the side channel •Nitrate effects are being confirmed •Almost all tissue concentrations
•The benthic invertebrate by chronic toxicity test results.
response to local-area •Continued decrease in mayflies show elevated and increasing community is impacted in were below the Level 1
effects, uncertainties within the same 4 km section concentrations of various mine- Corbin Creek and in near- •Selenium tissue concentrations are benchmark in Line Creek.
of the Fording River as previous related constituents. stream Michel Creek. elevated in benthic invertebrates •Nutrient concentrations and
in the potential for and fish, and are highest in the
effects at a local level, years, plus a new decline in •Some side channel pools are fed •There is significant and productivity have not increased
sensitive benthic invertebrates, by groundwater, remain wetted vicinity of the sediment pond with water treatment.
or change in water increasing calcite formation in discharge channel; however, the
including mayflies, in the upper all year, and are used by juvenile Corbin Creek. Calcite is low in •There has been no significant
management (e.g., watershed. fish for overwintering. benthic invertebrate community
Michel Creek with a decrease has not changed. impact of the treatment
operation of a water •Specific cause of mayfly decline •One section of the side channel in 2019 compared to historical process on dissolved oxygen,
treatment facility). still under investigation. Both remains wetted year-round values.
•Selenium bioaccumulation and water temperature, or other
linkages to sediment ponds
habitat- and mining-related due to flows from Thompson •Nickel is the likely cause water quality parameters.
was investigated in 2020.
Monitoring occurs factors appear to be important; Creek and shows elevated of effects to the benthic Consequently, a bypass of the
as required until the degree to which habitat concentrations of mine-related invertebrate community based sediment ponds was completed,
variations are attributed to constituents.
sufficient data have on toxicity test results to date. which is expected to reduce
mining continues to be a •Impact on biota is minimal at
been collected to •Teck identified that the BC selenium concentration in benthic
question that EMC members this time.
address the study Water Quality Guideline for invertebrates and fish.
are interested in understanding.
questions; concerns •Sampling program was reduced nickel was not protective of •Dry Creek is currently under
•Surveys were conducted in 2020 to focus on remaining benthic invertebrates. Teck a structured decision making
no longer exist; or to delineate areas of the uncertainties. proactively developed an (SDM) process to develop a
relevant monitoring Fording River that dry during interim screening value to water management plan. The
can be incorporated low-flow periods. Drying support nickel treatment SDM process is a regulatory You can access Teck’s 2019 annual
alone was unlikely to impact process outside the scope of reports here: https://www.teck.com/
into the RAEMP. summer benthic invertebrate
considerations, and BC is
responsibility/sustainability-topics/
working on updating its water the Environmental Monitoring
communities. water/water-quality-in-the-elk-valley/
quality guideline for nickel. Committee (EMC) that will
research-and-monitoring-reports/
eventually be integrated with
Permit 107517.
Koocanusa Reservoir Water Quality
Concentrations of order constituents (cadmium, Concentrations of other parameters of potential
Monitoring
nitrate, selenium, and sulphate) in Koocanusa concern were all below provincial water quality
Reservoir met the permitted limits at the order station, guidelines with one exception of zinc during freshet.
RG_DSELK (EMS: E300230) in 2019 (Figure b).
0.25
600,000 610,000 620,000 630,000 640,000 650,000 660,000 670,000
Cadmium (µg/L)
RG_WARDB !
? The Koocanusa Reservoir, created 0.15
Flath by the Libby Dam in Montana
Wardner ! |
ÿ
93 ea
E dC 0.1
(Figure
r ee
k a), straddles the border
5,470,000
5,470,000
between Canada and the United
E
0.05
ek e
E
States and lies within the Ktunaxa
Sand Cr
E
|
ÿ
93
|
ÿ
Territory. The reservoir was
3
Sand Creek 0
Elko ! Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan
created by damming of the
E
) Elko Dam
"
5,460,000
5,460,000
(
!
RG_DSELK Cadmium Daily Measurement Permit 107517 Monthly Average Limit
S
"
!
(
RG_SC Kootenay River in the 1970s. RG_DSELK Cadmium Monthly Average
er
Riv
(
!
RG_KERRRD !
?! E
k
S
".
.
!
.
!
El
.
!
.
!
3.5
Sediment Quality
RG_TN
5,450,000
5,450,000
(
!
(
!
Koocanusa
?
!
3
Reservoir (!
! ( RG_ELKMOUTH
Nitrate (µg/L)
S!
"( RG_ER 2.5
RG_DSELK ! |
ÿ
Concentrations of a number
? Elk River
93 2
G
ol
d
re
E
C
ek
RG_GRASMERE "
?
!S.!
!
!!
.
.
!..
RG_T4
of metals and PAHs were 1.5
5,440,000
5,440,000
RG_USGOLD
?
! significantly higher downstream 1
S RG_GC
" of the Elk River compared to 0.5
Gold Creek
upstream and elevated above 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan
screening levels; however, no
5,430,000
5,430,000
RG_BORDER !
? CANADA
RG_DSELK Nitrate Nitrogen (NO3) Daily Measurement Permit 107517 Monthly Average Limit
International Boundary (LIBBOR)
(
!
. RFNSO
! U N I T E D S T AT E S O F A M E R I C A substances exceeded Severe RG_DSELK Nitrate Nitrogen (NO3) Monthly Average
. RFMSO
Effects Levels. These trends are
!
RFYO !
.
. RFMU
RFDO !
.
!
. RFTON
!
similar to previous years. 2
5,420,000
5,420,000
. RTFO
!
Selenium (µg/L)
1.5
Eureka
!
!
.
RFBL
Figure a. Map of the Koocanusa 1
Reservoir and photo of typical
5,410,000
5,410,000
spring conditions at RG_DSELK. 0.5
|
ÿ
93
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan
5,400,000
5,400,000
RG_DSELK Total Selenium Daily Measurement Permit 107517 Monthly Average Limit
RG_DSELK Total Selenium Monthly Average
Koocanusa
Reservoir
350
5,390,000
5,390,000
300
Sulphate (µg/L)
250
200
. TMSP
!
150
5,380,000
5,380,000
. TMBB
!
TMNB 100
!
.
TMSB !
. 50
0
TMBA !
.
!
. TMWA Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan
RG_DSELK Sulphate (as SO4) Daily Measurement
5,370,000
5,370,000
Forebay (LIBFB)
TMJA !
.
(
! Permit 107517 Monthly Average Limit
RG_DSELK Sulphate (as SO4) Monthly Average
!
. TMCA
Figure b. Daily and monthly average total selenium, nitrate-N, sulphate, and dissolved cadmium concentrations recorded
Libby Dam
600,000 ! 610,000 620,000 630,000 640,000 650,000 660,000 670,000
at the order station (E300230) in 2019.
LEGEND Sampling Locations in Koocanusa Reservoir,
?
! Permitted Water Quality Station 2019
?
! Order Water Quality Station and Large-volume Suspended Sediment Location
Koocanusa Reservoir
Monitoring
Order constituents
met permitted limits
in Koocanusa Reservoir
in 2019. Figure d. Redside Shiner
Concentrations of
selenium in fish muscle Fish fish are relatively tolerant to selenium exposure,
while the results of the Northern Pikeminnow
and ovaries were work suggest that observed concentrations in
Selenium concentrations in fish muscle samples ovaries decline as eggs mature—understanding
comparable to previous were within previously measured ranges. Mean the concentrations in mature eggs is an important
years. concentrations of selenium in fish ovaries of the next step for assessing their sensitivity. Additional
Redside Shiner and Peamouth Chub were above the reporting on these studies will be provided in 2020
provincial guideline for the protection of aquatic and 2021, respectively.
100 life in 2019 (Figure c) with individual fish of other
Selenium Concentration (µg/g dw)
90
80
species also above all benchmarks (i.e., Northern
Pikeminnow, 11 of 92 or 12%).
70
60
What’s next?
50 EPA 2016 Guideline In addition, a single Westslope Cutthroat Trout
40 BCMOE Guideline
The current BC provincial guideline for selenium
was above the provincial egg/ovary threshold.
30
in water is 2 µg/L, while the US national criteria
20 Concentrations in Redside Shiner, Peamouth Chub,
10 for selenium in water is 1.5 µg/L in lake systems.
and Northern Pikeminnow, however, were similar
0 Since site-specific factors can influence the
upstream and downstream of the Elk River. Results
n=6
n=5
n=10
n=10
n=11
n=10
n=3
n=10
n=10
n=10
applicability of provincial or national guidelines,
from 2019 sampling suggest that ovary maturation
Apr-15 Apr-16 Apr-18 Apr-15 Apr-16 Apr-18 Apr-15 Apr-16 Apr-18 May-18
BC ENV and Montana DEQ are developing a site-
Sand Creek Elk River Gold Creek Tenmile Creek is an important factor in interpreting selenium
(US) specific selenium objective for Koocanusa by the
concentrations with concentrations decreasing as
Redside Shiner end of 2020. ENV and DEQ, working with many
ovaries mature. Future monitoring will include this
40 other partners and stakeholders, have collected
metric to support interpretation.
and compiled data for the reservoir over the last
Selenium Concentration (µg/g dw)
35
30
To assess the potential for adverse effects on the five years to inform the development of the site-
25 EPA 2016 Guideline
Redside Shiner due to benchmark exceedances in specific objective. BC and Montana will continue
BCMOE Guideline
20
ovaries, a Redside Shiner recruitment study began to share current information and results, and to
15
in 2018. Results to date suggest that abundances meet with partners, stakeholders, and the public
10
are lower downstream of the Elk River compared to through engagement and consultation forums
5
upstream; however, high proportions of young of such as the Koocanusa Reservoir Monitoring and
0
year were found in both areas, indicating recruitment Research Working Group.
n=10
n=10
n=10
n=10
n=10
n=10
n=10
n=10
n=20
n=15
n=10
n=15
n=10
n=10
n=10
n=10
n=10
Apr-14 Apr-15 Apr-16 Apr-18 Apr-14 Apr-15 Apr-16 Apr-18 Apr-14 Apr-15 Apr-16 Apr-18 May-08 May-13 May-18 May-18 May-13
(i.e., successful reproduction).
Sand Creek Elk River Gold Creek Tobacco Rexford Tenmile McGillivray
River
(US)
(US) Creek
(US)
(US) Other studies to assess the potential for adverse
Peamouth Chub effects on fish reproduction due to selenium
You can access Teck’s 2019 annual reports here: https://www.
exposure include selenium sensitivity studies for the teck.com/responsibility/sustainability-topics/water/water-
Figure c. Concentration of selenium in ovaries of the Redside Shiner and Peamouth Chub; red lines denote relevant Redside Shiner and Northern Pikeminnow. Results quality-in-the-elk-valley/research-and-monitoring-reports/
benchmarks for the protection of aquatic life (i.e., fish reproduction). to date for the Redside Shiner study indicate these644,000 649,000 654,000 659,000 664,000 669,000 674,000
Grave Lake
Tributary Management Plan
5,525,000
5,525,000
5,565,000
A L B E R TA
G
ra
ve
E
C
re
Fording
ek
River Harmer Pond
Operations
E
iv e r
639,000 644,000 649,000 654,000 659,000 664,000 669,000
5,520,000
5,520,000
5,560,000
Elk
Ha
E lk R
E
rm
R
Six Mile Creek
iv er
The Tributary
er C
e k
r ee
C re Forsyth Cr
F eek
k
k
Br r ee
Management Plan is
5,570,000
5,570,000
E
lf C k
Wo Balm er Cree
E
k
ee
E
Cr
intended to support
w
ek
illo
Cre
W
de re e
k Greenhills Fennelon Creek
Wa
u g ar C Operations
Co
protection and
5,555,000
k
e Cree
am Cumm ings C
5,515,000
5,515,000
N o -N e k
e ree
Cr k
on reek
rehabilitation of
E
e ls sk C
ck Lea
Mi
E
Alexander Cre ek
ek Goddard Creek
5,565,000
5,565,000
tributaries in the
Cre
E
ram
Wolf Otto Creek (Cossarini Creek)
E
Elkview
A L B E R TA
Elk Valley.
E
ee
k Bi ngay
Cree k e k Operations
Cr E re
n tC
uc
o
d
E
ps
Fording ue
Aq
om
5,550,000
River
Th
E
E
Operations Lladnar C Sparwood
E
E reek
E
The Tributary Management
5,510,000
5,510,000
Cro Bodie Creek
ssin
gC
5,560,000
5,560,000
r ee
k k
Plan is intended to guide Teck’s
e
E
Cre
Elk
e
E
Low Gate Creek
R
E
iv er
environmental management of k
C re ek
ee
Cr
F k
tributaries Eand their approach to Br r ee
Creek
lf C
Wo
Lladna r Creek
Miligan
k
ee
5,545,000
E
E
mine planning. The overall goal of
Cr
k
South Pit
C re e
w
ek
illo
Cre
W
de ek Greenhills
Wa Cre
E
the Tributary Management Plan
s on
ga r Operations
C ou
5,555,000
5,555,000
ek
Erick
C re
am e
5,505,000
5,505,000
No-N k
was developed
Elkford with the EMC and on
C r ee
reek
E
Josephine e ls sk C Low
ck Lea er
Falls Mi Al e
is as follows:
Boivin Creek
E
x an
Elk
ek de
Cre rC
E
ram
Llad n a
Wolf ree
R
k
k
iv er
ee
E
E
Cr
Creek
To protect and rehabilitate
r
ek
k
r
5,540,000
e
Fi
Cr
l Cree
Gra
n
so
c
ek
tributaries of the Elk River
r
Cre
eC
p
ve
om
do
5,550,000
5,550,000
na
Tor
Th
r ee
Ri
E
Miche
E
k
Un
watershed on a priority and
k
El
n
Cro to a m
ssin M i ed
5,500,000
5,500,000
gC E ch Tr
feasibility basis to benefit fish,
ree
k Transmission Cre el i bu
ek Cr ta
E
ee ry
k
aquatic-dependent wildlife, and
E
E
E
vegetation, recognizing biological,
5,535,000
E Line Creek r
E el e
he
5,545,000
5,545,000
Fordi ng
social, and economic values, and
Operations
W
We
ek
t le
Lit
e
ige
Cr
Ktunaxa worldview. Wheeler Creek
Rive r
rt C
e
in
E
M
r ee
k
Elkford
Josephine
5,495,000
5,495,000
E Falls
Hosmer
All the tributaries
ive that flow into
r Boivin Creek
Snowslide Creek
Elk
ElkR
E
So
R
u
the Fording River, Michel Creek,
th
iv er
Li
ne
E
5,530,000
ek Cr k
5,540,000
5,540,000
re ee ee
Gra
and the Elk River are included in Lin
eC E k
on
Cr
c
ek rb
eC
E Cre
a do Ca
E
Torn
the plan. The mainstem of the
r ee
Teep
k
E
k
ee
Cr
ee C
Fording River, Michel Creek, and û lé E
Br
reek
E
Ma
the Elk River are not considered rt e
n
5,490,000
5,490,000
Cr
e ek
to be tributaries and are managed E
ek
5,535,000
5,535,000
E
5,525,000
C re
Line Creek
according to the EVWQP and Andy Good Creek
Fordin
Operations
ch
We
TCGIS
Lea
ige
g River
Permit 107517.
rt C
ree
644,000 649,000 654,000 659,000 664,000 669,000 Corbin Creek
k
k Corbin
Er r ee
ive a yC
Br
Figure 1 . DRAFT
ElkR
Legend So
u th
Li
Water Flow Direction Management Units Tributaries of Upper Elk, ne Coal
5,530,000
5,530,000
5,485,000
5,485,000
ek Cr
E
re ee Mountain
MU_Name Upper Fording, Lower Fording Lin
eC E k
Operations
Falls E
G
(MU1/2/3)
E
7 MU-1
Teep
Community
E
k
! ee
Cr
ee C
û lé
Waterbody MU-2 Br
reek
Streams MU-3
Michel Creek Upstream
Teck Coal Mine Operation MU-4
MU-5
5,525,000
5,525,000
Provincial Boundary
1:150,000 TCGIS
639,000 644,000 649,000 654,000 659,000 664,000 669,000
644,000 649,000 654,000 659,000 664,000 669,000 674,000
Legend Figure 1 . DRAFTTributary Management Plan
The 2018 update of the Tributary Management Plan recent monitoring data. Much of the discussion
was submitted to the Director of ENV on February focused around the Fording River (MU1) where
28, 2019. The 2018 TMP was not accepted for tributary habitat has been lost to mining and lost
reasons laid out in a decision letter (dated December connectivity in the past 50 years. The tool outputs
23, 2019) which directed Teck to complete a also indicated that MU1 tributaries were of high
Teck has been developing the Tributary Management The EMC helped guide the development of the TMP number of revisions and updates to the TMP. priority for protection regionally.
Plan with the EMC since 2016, and submitted the Prioritization Tool—a set of metrics which can be
first plan in 2017. This plan was accepted by the used to help guide Teck’s management decisions The EMC continued to discuss the TMP in 2019 and The 2019 Tributary Management Plan was
Director in February 2018 with conditions for the regarding tributaries. reviewed the updated prioritization tool with more submitted July 31, 2020.
2018 plan. EMC discussion and advice on the 2018
plan reflected differing perspectives. Tributary Tributary Option1 Final Rationale for MU Rank ENV FLNR KNC IS Teck
Catchment Section MU Final MU Rank From Adjusted Adjusted Category Adjuted Adjusted
Objective: 1. Biological name Rank Tool MU Rank MU Rank MU Rank MU Rank
Metric Metric Type Score Definition Potential protection option (unimpacted tributary sections)
Sub-Objective: Habitat quantity Ewin Creek 207.4 km Protection 1 Highest priority primarily 1 1 1 Category 1 4
of tributary based on large size of 1
Fish habitat currently connected to Scoring metric A normalized habitat value in relation to the greatest potential length of connected (entire tributary
mainstem (value in km) fish-habitat in dataset. tributary)
Formula: Score = (connected habitat for Stream X / max potential connected habitat
for all streams) * 3 Chauncey 102.4 km Protection 2 Large tributary size with 4 2 2 Category 4 2
Creek of tributary high habitat potential 1
Total current stream length Scoring metric A normalized value in relation to the greatest tributary stream length in dataset. (entire following barrier removal
(value in km) Formula: Score = (stream length for Stream X / max stream length for all streams) * 3 tributary)
Current riparian habitat amount Scoring metric A normalized value in relation to the % of the stream length (on both sides) that is Henretta 69.9 km of Protection 3 Important overwintering 3 3 3 Category 3 1
(value in % tributary length) buffered with riparian habitat. Creek tributary habitat in Henretta Lake 1
upstream
Formula: Score = (% of stream length with riparian habitat for Stream X) * 3 of mine
Current wetland habitat presence Flag metric Yes—Wetland habitat is present within the tributary catchment. footprint
No—Wetland habitat is absent or unreported within the tributary catchment. Upstream 78.0 km of Protection 4 Henretta prioritized 2 4 4 Category 2 3
Fording tributary before upstream Fording 1
Total historical fish habitat Information A continuous value of the length of fish habitat available in 1980s.
River upstream River since Henretta Lake
(value in km) metric of mine provides overwintering
Total historical stream length Information A continuous value of the stream length available in 1980s. footprint habitat
(value in km) metric LCO Dry 20.5 km of Protection 5 Smaller size and only 1 1 2 Category 4 1
Percentage current stream length Information A continuous value ranging from 0-100% to reflect current conditions within the system. Creek tributary high elevation compared 1
with perennial flow (value in %) metric (East to other four tributary
Tributary) sections
Percentage historical stream length Information A continuous value ranging from 0-100% to reflect historical (pre-disturbance) conditions
with perennial flow (value in %) metric within the system. Potential rehabilitation options (impacted tributary sections and unimpacted tributary sections with anthropogenic barriers)
Current number of riparian habitat Information A continuous value of the number of discrete patches of riparian habitat present within the Henretta 6.7 km Connectivity 1 Provides improved passage 1 1 2 Category 4 1
patches (value in # of patches) metric tributary catchment. Creek within mine Rehabilitation for multiple WCT life stages 1
footprint to important overwintering
Sub-Objective: Habitat quality—water chemistry habitat in Henretta Lake
Current Hazard Quotient (HQ) for Scoring metric A normalized continuous score based on the maximum monthly Hazard Quotient value for Chauncey Barrier in Connectivity 2 Provides improved passage 7 2 1 Category 1 2
water quality constituents (Selenium, Selenium, Nitrate-N, Sulphate, and dissolved Cadmium. If the HQ value is 1.0, then the following formula was applied. tributary to unimpacted habitat
Cadmium) (HQ value) Formula: Score = - (((Maximum monthly HQ for Stream X / Maximum monthly HQ for all
Henretta 6.7 km Habitat 3 Provides improvements to 5 9 4 Category 6 1
streams) * 3) - 3)
Creek within mine Rehabilitation important overwintering 1
Current benthic EPT richness Scoring metric A normalized value in relation to the greatest possible EPT richness according to the Lowest footprint habitat in Henretta Lake
(# of species) Practical Level (LPL) of taxonomy. If the EPT richness value is >12.8, a value of 3.0 is given; if and riparian habitat
the EPT richness value isHuman Health 2015 • A work plan for a human health risk assessment
was reviewed by the EMC and approved by ENV.
Risk Assessment • Wild food samples donated by KNC for analysis.
The work underway
2016 • A human health risk assessment was completed and reviewed by the EMC.
• EMC members concerned that potential health risks to Ktunaxa citizens
An HHRA is It is a collaborative effort between were not adequately addressed.
required by Ktunaxa Nation Council, for this HHRA is
Permit 107517 BC Interior Health Authority, inclusive, grounded,
BC Ministry of Environment, and reciprocal.
Teck.
• Wild food samples donated
A human health risk assessment (HHRA) determines With respect to fish consumption, the BC Ministry
2017 by KNC for analysis.
the potential risks to human health posed by certain of Environment and the BC Ministry of Health
substances. It considers how toxic the substance is, recommend the following screening values to
how much of the substance humans are exposed to, protect human health: (see page 156 in https://
and how often. www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/air-land-
water/water/waterquality/water-quality-guidelines/
This risk assessment will focus on mining-related approved-wqgs/bc_moe_se_wqg.pdf)
substances found in the water, sediment, fish, wild
plants, and wild game in the Elk Valley. • high fish intake: 7.3 µg/g dw 2018 • Teck, KNC, IHA, and ENV launched a dedicated
workgroup committed to resolving concerns.
This risk assessment will evaluate the risk to human • moderate fish intake: 14.5 µg/g dw
health based on the diet of valley residents and the • low fish intake: 75 µg/g dw
Ktunaxa practice of sukiⱡ ik naⱡsa (eating well). • Workgroup members worked to increase their collective understanding of the
However, exceeding a screening value only means technical aspects of human health risk assessments in general, and the unique
This risk assessment will tell us which mining-related that a detailed evaluation of human health risk challenges of this risk assessment in particular.
substances in the Elk Valley could be a concern for should be conducted. To adequately assess human • KNC launched an expanded diet study to understand preferred consumption
human health and should be investigated
more deeply.
health risk in an area, all exposure pathways must be
evaluated. This is what the Elk Valley HHRA will do.
2019 rates of Ktunaxa citizens.
• Teck launched a wild game sample donation program for local hunters.
There are no fish consumption advisories in place for
the Elk Valley at this time. • Wild foods samples donated by KNC and local hunters for analysis.
• Workgroup members collaborate on the various inputs to the risk assessment
by sharing knowledge, expertise, and resources.
2020 • KNC worked with Ktunaxa citizens to develop a conceptual site model that
reflects Ktunaxa lifeways.
• KNC completed the Ktunaxa Diet Study Expansion.
• Wild foods samples donated by KNC for analysis.
• Teck re-launched its wild game sample donation program for local hunters.
2021 • An updated human health risk assessment is expected
to be completed and submitted to ENV by mid-year.Westslope Cutthroat Trout
HAN1
Fish HAN2
Handling C&H1 Climate &
ALL LIFE STAGES
PER1
Hydrology
Eggs
— Evaluation of Cause —
PER2
Periphyton
TSS1 Total Suspended
PER3
Sediment
MAC1
Macrophytes EUT1
Eutrophication
Alevins PRD1
Predation
RMP1
Ramping
7000 HAB1 Habitat
Availability
Abundances of 6000
Fish Passage FP1
CTX1
Cyanobacteria
Westslope Cutthroat ICE1 Fry
CTX2 / Cyanotoxins
Number of Fish > 200 mm
FEEDING LIFE STAGES
5000
Trout declined Water Temp
& Ice
ICE2
ICE3
CHN1
Channel
Dewatering
significantly between 4000 FAV1 Events
Food FAV2 WQ1
fall 2017 and fall 2019. Availability FAV3
WQ2 Water Quality
3000 Juveniles
GRW1
An evaluation of cause Poaching
POA1
GRW2 Groundwater
2000 MAC2
process was initiated NOI1
Noise
to understand the 1000 SEW1
NOI2
Sewage Adults CDS1
most likely causes of CDS2
Coal Dust in
Sediment
0 CAL4
the decline with that 2012 2013 2014 2017 2019
CAL2 IND1 Industrial
Calcite
process concluding in Count Estimate
CAL5
Chemicals
late 2020. Figure a. Adult Westslope Cutthroat Trout snorkel counts and associated CAL1 Spawning Adults
DIS1 Unauthorized
Discharges
population estimates for the Upper Fording River. From Cope , S. 2020. Upper INF1
CAL3
Fording River Westslope Cutthroat Trout Population Monitoring Project. INF2
Infectious
INF3 Disease
INF4
The Issue infectious disease, predation), and those that may INF5
be human-activity related but just not mining
Figure b. Proposed impact hypotheses to be considered in the evaluation of cause process.
(e.g., poaching). The study team is considering the
Westslope Cutthroat Trout is the only fish species individual and combined effects of these various
in the Fording River upstream of Josephine Falls. potential causes.
The species is Listed as Special Concern in BC.
Monitoring in fall of 2019 (Figure a) found that
Ongoing Monitoring
abundance of adults and sub-adults had declined The Evaluation of and Analysis
significantly from previous sampling in 2017. Teck
immediately implemented an evaluation of cause Cause Process The study team (which includes Teck and several
process to determine likely causes. Follow-up external subject-matter experts) has enhanced
monitoring in 2020 has confirmed the low counts. The evaluation of cause is the process used to the monitoring of the WCT population in the upper
investigate, evaluate, and report on the reasons for Fording River with activities such as: (1) remote
the Westslope Cutthroat Trout population decline. operated vehicle surveys of Henretta Lake; (2)
Impact Hypotheses The process, which is led by Teck and several spawning surveys (completed in May); (3) snorkel
external subject-matter experts, has had input from surveys (completed in July and September);
The study team (which includes Teck and several government representatives and an independent (4) angling survey (August); (5) recruitment survey
subject-matter experts) has identified a number of scientist through various committees. The subject- (September); (6) continued operation of PIT tag
potential causes of the population decline (Figure b). matter experts are developing individual reports arrays to track fish movements.
The potential causes include those related to mining on each of the potential stressors and impact
(e.g., fish handling, ramping and channel dewatering, hypotheses (see Figure b). The evaluation of cause A population model is being developed and it will
calcite, water quality, coal dust in sediment), those process is anticipated to conclude in late 2020 and support the evaluation of cause process, as well as
Figure c. Snorkeler counting fish.
that may be more natural (e.g., climate related final reports of findings are expected to be available anticipated mitigation and restoration activities.
variations in water temperature and flow volumes, early 2021.You can also read
